Just so we can get everyones prognostic reasoning juices flowing, post your raw scores here. Be sure to indicate which test you took and your raw score. Good luck to all who tested!
Cheers!

HSCS 83
Cheers!

HSC-

99
103

HSCS- 88

Great job Shelly!

Good job DOC Hinson you did better than the HS1's aka rocks who took the HSC swe last year!

Were are the other HS1's too scared to post your scores.

Anyone comfortable posting estimated final multiples along with Raw scores on this board? I got this FM calculator off freds place posted by joe jester.

Since we don't have actual numbers (actual st. dev/ actual mean test score of May 08 HSC SWE) it really isn't giving us anything but a little better guess than raw scores compared. If we all use the same calculator with the same standard deviation and average test score it may provide a better projection of our final standings.

Also when the real st dev. and avg test scores are known and run through the "system" our rankings based on guesstimated FM's should remain relatively constant, FM's will change but our places should be pretty constant. Right? It is very likely that there is something I am failing to realize here that may make this suggestion crawl away and die...quietly.

I changed the avg test score to 90; left the std dev of 10.

My HSC Raw score 105; FM per calculator 143.93

http://www.tech-service.net/images/swe_final_multiple.xls

All the info needed can be found on peoplesoft under SWE PDE.

Bored and looking for something to do. Besides I left my rectal thermometer at the clinic.

quote:

Originally posted by hero44:
Were are the other HS1's too scared to post your scores.

Not everyone has their scores yet!

THanks for the link for figuring the final multiple!! I cant wait to try it out!

Well it seems there will be high scores than last year's HSC swe,Mrs Beck had a change of heart it seems, and EPM will promote HS's with high scores rather than the pitiful scores from last year's HSC SWE.

quote:

Originally posted by hero44:
Well it seems there will be high scores than last year's HSC swe,Mrs Beck had a change of heart it seems, and EPM will promote HS's with high scores rather than the pitiful scores from last year's HSC SWE.

Last HSC SWE was a real bear indeed. There were questions that blew my mind, obviously by my raw score. I studied hard and I had a raw score of 49. The year before an 88 (with very little study), this year a 105 (much more studying than the previous 2 years combined). How the test is written is a concern for the test writer but it should certainly be fair. I am not a course writer so I cannot attest to the rhyme or reason involved in question selection, only that it is typically based on all epme's and rate specific practical factors and accumulatively so. We can see that how the test is written does effect raw scores overall. You can study your arse off but if you study the wrong things, well, your numbers will reflect that, same as if you don't study at all. Although one question was specifically taken from the E-8 EPME and was sorta unfair (IMHO), (the Malcom Baldridge Award question), the rest of them were relative to the HSC job. Most of the questions just not really everyday, common working knowledge. It isn't that these types of questions do not come up in the clinic but it is the reason why we write all this stuff down in manuals. I think we were all just caught off guard and didn't go deep enough into the books. I know I was but the feeling coming out of it was relatively the same as all other SWE's.

As for your comment on last years HS1's being rocks well....

quote:

Originally posted by CGDoc2:

quote:

Originally posted by hero44:
Well it seems there will be high scores than last year's HSC swe,Mrs Beck had a change of heart it seems, and EPM will promote HS's with high scores rather than the pitiful scores from last year's HSC SWE.

Last HSC SWE was a real bear indeed. There were questions that blew my mind, obviously by my raw score. I studied hard and I had a raw score of 49. The year before an 88 (with very little study), this year a 105 (much more studying than the previous 2 years combined). How the test is written is a concern for the test writer but it should certainly be fair. I am not a course writer so I cannot attest to the rhyme or reason involved in question selection, only that it is typically based on all epme's and rate specific practical factors and accumulatively so. We can see that how the test is written does effect raw scores overall. You can study your arse off but if you study the wrong things, well, your numbers will reflect that, same as if you don't study at all. Although one question was specifically taken from the E-8 EPME and was sorta unfair (IMHO), (the Malcom Baldridge Award question), the rest of them were relative to the HSC job. Most of the questions just not really everyday, common working knowledge. It isn't that these types of questions do not come up in the clinic but it is the reason why we write all this stuff down in manuals. I think we were all just caught off guard and didn't go deep enough into the books. I know I was but the feeling coming out of it was relatively the same as all other SWE's.

As for your comment on last years HS1's being rocks well....

You should have made it off last years

You should have made it off last years[/QUOTE].

This is a prime example how final multiples are more important than raw scores. Raw scores are not meaningless but other factors are just as important and must be considered. I was #10 on this list based on raw scores. After the final multiples were calculated I dropped to 23. I dropped even further the year previous with a score of 88. I had less TIS, TIG, fewer award points. Going up against older HS1's who have had time to max out award points and gain an advantage on TIS and TIG simply by having been in longer. It is the experience factor that keeps the experience and knowledge (wisdom) at the top. I would rather have the experienced as my chief than the good test takin' book smart knucklehead. The latter can make clinic life hell. I am junior TIS/TIG in comparison to the average HSC test taker but slowly catching up.

This is why I suggested we use the calculator for an estimated final multiple with everyone using the same St. Dev and mean score. It will provide a better projection even if inaccurate with st dev and mean.

I think the last cut was 20 for HSC last year. Somebody correct me if I am wrong. Where did you end up on the list last year?

When using the calculator, into which column do we place our current information?

quote:

This is a prime example how final multiples are more important than raw scores. Raw scores are not meaningless but other factors are just as important and must be considered. I was #10 on this list based on raw scores. After the final multiples were calculated I dropped to 23. I dropped even further the year previous with a score of 88. I had less TIS, TIG, fewer award points. Going up against older HS1's who have had time to max out award points and gain an advantage on TIS and TIG simply by having been in longer. It is the experience factor that keeps the experience and knowledge (wisdom) at the top. I would rather have the experienced as my chief than the good test takin' book smart knucklehead. The latter can make clinic life hell. I am junior TIS/TIG in comparison to the average HSC test taker but slowly catching up.

This is why I suggested we use the calculator for an estimated final multiple with everyone using the same St. Dev and mean score. It will provide a better projection even if inaccurate with st dev and mean.

I think the last cut was 20 for HSC last year. Somebody correct me if I am wrong. Where did you end up on the list last year?

CGDOC2-
You bring up several good points many of which I struggled with earlier in my career WRT advancement and points. The single most important piece is your test score, you can make up for longevity points by writing just a few points better on the test because it carries so much more weight. Another option is to go to sea. There are so few HS's with sea time that those points can really set you apart if everything else (raw score, marks, awards,)is equal. This comes into play even more significantly when sitting for e-8 and e-9 as most everyone at that point gets great marks and is maxed out on awards and longevity.

Lastly your posts have more creadibility if you have your name on your profile vs. posting blindly Just my 2-cents.
Cheers!

CGDOC2-
You bring up several good points many of which I struggled with earlier in my career WRT advancement and points. The single most important piece is your test score, you can make up for longevity points by writing just a few points better on the test because it carries so much more weight. Another option is to go to sea. There are so few HS's with sea time that those points can really set you apart if everything else (raw score, marks, awards,)is equal. This comes into play even more significantly when sitting for e-8 and e-9 as most everyone at that point gets great marks and is maxed out on awards and longevity.

Lastly your posts have more creadibility if you have your name on your profile vs. posting blindly Just my 2-cents.
Cheers! [/QUOTE]

I am lucky enough to have some sea time, not as much as some, more than others. Yes, you are ultimately right and I will retract my blanket statement about the raw scores having equal weight with the other factors. You have joggled my memory and I recall reading something from a old crusty YN MCPO, maybe an SK, that explained in detail the same thing you mention. But from my personal experience having a score of 88 and dropping 23-24 places has to be explained by using all factors considered. 88 isn't too bad of a score (for a first go at HSC anyway). I think I placed somewhere in the top 10 on the raw list but final standing was in the mid 30's. That was with me testing as a 1st class with sea time, excellent marks, 6 awards pts and 2yrs TIG, about 7 yrs TIS. I think that with an 88 had I had 15 yrs TIS, 6 yrs TIG, maxed award points I would have surely been stickier on the list. Probably not enough to make the cut but surely a better final resting place. Had I had a 105 along with 15 yrs, well, I would have done pretty darn well. I hope my 105 will take me farther this one.

BTW, didn't you see my picture on my profile? I thought that would be enough to lend credibility to my posts. lol.

quote:

Originally posted by CGDoc2:
CGDOC2-
You bring up several good points many of which I struggled with earlier in my career WRT advancement and points. The single most important piece is your test score, you can make up for longevity points by writing just a few points better on the test because it carries so much more weight. Another option is to go to sea. There are so few HS's with sea time that those points can really set you apart if everything else (raw score, marks, awards,)is equal. This comes into play even more significantly when sitting for e-8 and e-9 as most everyone at that point gets great marks and is maxed out on awards and longevity.

Lastly your posts have more creadibility if you have your name on your profile vs. posting blindly Just my 2-cents.
Cheers!

I am lucky enough to have some sea time, not as much as some, more than others. Yes, you are ultimately right and I will retract my blanket statement about the raw scores having equal weight with the other factors. You have joggled my memory and I recall reading something from a old crusty YN MCPO, maybe an SK, that explained in detail the same thing you mention. But from my personal experience having a score of 88 and dropping 23-24 places has to be explained by using all factors considered. 88 isn't too bad of a score (for a first go at HSC anyway). I think I placed somewhere in the top 10 on the raw list but final standing was in the mid 30's. That was with me testing as a 1st class with sea time, excellent marks, 6 awards pts and 2yrs TIG, about 7 yrs TIS. I think that with an 88 had I had 15 yrs TIS, 6 yrs TIG, maxed award points I would have surely been stickier on the list. Probably not enough to make the cut but surely a better final resting place. Had I had a 105 along with 15 yrs, well, I would have done pretty darn well. I hope my 105 will take me farther this one.

BTW, didn't you see my picture on my profile? I thought that would be enough to lend credibility to my posts. lol.[/QUOTE]Put in your warrant package, just dont get advice from akwaman who has a negative view about med warrants, shame on you Phil.

[/QUOTE]Put in your warrant package, just dont get advice from akwaman who has a negative view about med warrants, shame on you Phil.[/QUOTE]

Umm....I think Phil would agree that your credibility is lacking as well.

Hero44-
My name appears on those posts and allows you to take shots across my bow calling me out by name. My ramblings about going warrant are my opinions on the matter which were solicited. The whole purpose of these forums is to seek opinions, advice,and engage in open discussion on the topics. My views may differ from yours but they still bear more weight as they are associated with a name and profile. If you are going to take shots in here man-up and post a profile so we all know who owns your comments.
Cheers!

quote:

Originally posted by akwaman:
Hero44-
My name appears on those posts and allows you to take shots across my bow calling me out by name. My ramblings about going warrant are my opinions on the matter which were solicited. The whole purpose of these forums is to seek opinions, advice,and engage in open discussion on the topics. My views may differ from yours but they still bear more weight as they are associated with a name and profile. If you are going to take shots in here man-up and post a profile so we all know who owns your comments.
Cheers!

They dont bear weight Phil, I'm sorry that you couldn't make the board, and settle for the enlisted side.

Hero-
I didn't make board because I had no desire to put in a package. I feel strongly that my oportunities for job satisfaction are greater in the enlisted ranks. You clearly have strong feelings about going CWO. Thats what makes this organization so great; we can each chose a different path which we believe serves us best. Just because I don't feel being a CWO suits me doesent mean we cant engage in a civil and open discussion on the topic. Please dont be sorry for me I'm happy with my descision to stay enlisted and it's in no way "settling". At the end of the day we're wearing the same shade of blue so don't get your undergarments in a wad over such trivial issues.
Cheers!