Downloaded 18 times
Navy advancement center
The document discusses the importance of advancement examinations in differentiating Navy candidates for promotion. It provides data on candidates' exam scores, performance marks, time in rate, and awards to demonstrate that without exams, there would be no clear way to choose which additional candidates should be advanced when more are needed to meet manning quotas. The document also lists some common errors made on exam answer sheets and in candidates' records that can negatively impact results or eligibility for advancement.
Navy advancement center
- 1. LCDR LeViness DirectorNCA Symposium
- 2. Why have advancementexaminations ?
- 3. No Exam -No Differentiating Candidates Note: Data Compiled from September 2008 Cycle 200, rating SO2. *Education points are also a factor in advancement, but none of the Sailors in this table had any education points. WITH Exam WITHOUT Exam WITH Exam WITHOUT Exam Exam Score Performance Mark Awards Time in Rate Passed-Not-Adv Factor 1 1 165.43 105.6 59.85 4.00 7.0 8.6 0.0 2 2 161.17 100.5 60.67 4.00 2.0 8.5 0.0 6 3 136.20 90.6 45.60 3.87 2.0 9.0 0.0 3 4 155.43 90.6 64.85 3.80 8.0 8.6 0.0 … … … … … … … … … 11 15 130.35 69.5 60.85 3.60 2.0 9.5 0.0 9 16 132.85 69.0 63.85 3.60 2.0 9.0 0.0 29 17 124.14 68.5 49.14 3.60 0.0 10.5 6.5 39 17 119.35 68.5 50.85 3.60 2.0 8.5 0.0 72 17 93.35 68.5 24.85 3.60 2.0 8.5 0.0 23 20 125.85 68.0 55.35 3.60 0.0 10.0 2.5 12 21 129.35 66.5 62.85 3.60 0.0 8.5 0.0 12 21 129.35 66.5 62.85 3.60 0.0 8.5 0.0 … … … … … … … … … 50 21 113.35 66.5 46.85 3.60 0.0 8.5 0.0 53 21 112.35 66.5 45.85 3.60 0.0 8.5 0.0 53 21 112.35 66.5 45.85 3.60 0.0 8.5 0.0 53 21 112.35 66.5 45.85 3.60 0.0 8.5 0.0 56 21 111.35 66.5 44.85 3.60 0.0 8.5 0.0 56 21 111.35 66.5 44.85 3.60 0.0 8.5 0.0 58 21 110.35 66.5 43.85 3.60 0.0 8.5 0.0 58 21 110.35 66.5 43.85 3.60 0.0 8.5 0.0 58 21 110.35 66.5 43.85 3.60 0.0 8.5 0.0 58 21 110.35 66.5 43.85 3.60 0.0 8.5 0.0 62 21 109.35 66.5 42.85 3.60 0.0 8.5 0.0 62 21 109.35 66.5 42.85 3.60 0.0 8.5 0.0 64 21 108.35 66.5 41.85 3.60 0.0 8.5 0.0 64 21 108.35 66.5 41.85 3.60 0.0 8.5 0.0 66 21 105.35 66.5 38.85 3.60 0.0 8.5 0.0 67 21 104.35 66.5 37.85 3.60 0.0 8.5 0.0 68 21 101.35 66.5 34.85 3.60 0.0 8.5 0.0 69 21 98.35 66.5 31.85 3.60 0.0 8.5 0.0 69 21 98.35 66.5 31.85 3.60 0.0 8.5 0.0 71 21 97.35 66.5 30.85 3.60 0.0 8.5 0.0 73 21 91.35 66.5 24.85 3.60 0.0 8.5 0.0 RANK FINAL MULTIPLE ADVANCEMENT FACTORS* This Sailor did not advance because his exam score was VERY LOW, but he would have advanced if exams were not a factor. Advancement cutoff line WITH exams factored in. Advancement cutoff line WITHOUT exams factored in. To satisfy the manning quota of 55, 17 more Sailors would be advanced if there were no exams. The other factors do not adequately differentiate (break ties) among candidates.
- 4. Navy- wide PerformanceMark Distribution (Sep 09)
- 5. EXAM ERRORS Errors:An error on a worksheet An error on an answer sheet information that does not match the Enlisted Master File Examples: Missing or incorrect PMA Overwriting bar-coded information with incorrect answer sheet bubbling Improper path of advancement Not meeting special rating requirements Incorrect SSN Name on Answer Sheet not matching EMF Insufficient Time-in-Rate Recording exam rate incorrectly (MM vice MMN entered on answer sheet) “ A” or “C” School Not Marked SELRES not providing service in paygrade Errors can lead to: Delayed results or advancements Improper processing LOSING OUT ON ADVANCEMENT
- 6. Navy Advancement Centeris on: Facebook NKO
- 7. Facebook As ofJune 2010 , 7,000 fans First medium to announce the release date/time of advancement result Broad subject matter questions/answers regarding NEAS Sailors utilize page to network Trivia questions are provided to educate Sailors
- 8.
Editor's Notes
- #3 Many reasons why you should think before you answer this question. If you look at the FMS breakdown the only factor that a Sailor can control. All other factors are controlled by outside forces (LPO, LCPO, DIVO, DHEAD, XO/CO) Second highest factor in the FMS with first being PMA Next slide reflects the discriminatory factor that the exam provides to the Navy
- #4 The above graph clearly reflects that without an examination the Navy would be unable to discriminate between the 56 th candidate and the 73 rd candidate. In today’s Navy where there are fewer advancements, without an examination how would you advance the top 50 Sailors from 1,000 when they all have maxed out in all the other factors in the FMS. Wanted to give you some food for thought for the next time someone screams about the exams.
- #6 We still have over 150 discrepancies from the March 2010 examination cycle. About 80% are a simple fix of PMA. Prior to the results being released you send in a letter (signed by CO or by direction) providing us the PMA. After the results are released (like now) then you have to send in the letter plus copies of all the evaluations that you computed the PMA. Which one is easier? Get on NEASOS and get them fixed
- #8 7,000 and growing strong. Hoping for 100,000 by the end of the year. About 24 hours prior to the release of advancement results on NEASOS and BOL we announce it on facebook. Reduces all the questions, “When will the results be released?” Now you know. We at NAC do not have any control of when until we receive the quotas. Questions on increments. How do we select the Sailors for the E-7 board selection? And many, many more questions. Over 600 posts in the first two days after the release of the March 2010 cycle results. Most of the posts were asking for help to find out the results since they were at places were they couldn’t get them (i.e. Iraq and Afghanistan, on leave, or on an Army base) The trivia questions can be used as POD notes.
- #9 Moved to NKO May 2010. Lots of tools and knowledge and with that you need to be careful. For example, exam statistics can be viewed in many different ways. When analyzing make sure you compare apples with apples. Even when you compare a carrier with another carrier or even at different exam cycles ensure that all the factors are the same. For instance, comparing cycles in 2007 and 2010 would not be the same since we had a major economic downturn and retention has increased and advancement quotas have decreased since there are less vacancies.