Florida Geo-Pref

[bippoptl]

You are correct. They do not see actual scores in the panel. All they have to go by is "qualified" (70-84.9) and "well qualified" (85-100). They don't even have a "rank" of who scored better...just those 2 descriptions to go by.

unless you know the guy at the panels looking at the list i dont believe that. why even bother giving me a score then? thats seriously the stupidest thing ive ever heard.

and just as an example...besides me, 4 of my friends all put down NY on their geo prefs..me, and 1 other friend who scored a 99 got picked. and the rest scored lower then us. doesnt sound random to me...the faa isnt that stupid. they arent gonna choose an 85 over a 100.

 

[nathanw]

You are correct. They do not see actual scores in the panel. All they have to go by is "qualified" (70-84.9) and "well qualified" (85-100). They don't even have a "rank" of who scored better...just those 2 descriptions to go by.

Not true at all. They DO see your score, and everyone is ranked accordingly. This has been confirmed.

 

[bippoptl]

Not true at all. They DO see your score, and everyone is ranked accordingly. This has been confirmed.

i think there are only a handfull of us who realize how stupid it is to think that an 85 and a 100 are the same. but i guess if i had an 85 i would want to think that too

 

[emiliot]

You are correct. They do not see actual scores in the panel. All they have to go by is "qualified" (70-84.9) and "well qualified" (85-100). They don't even have a "rank" of who scored better...just those 2 descriptions to go by.

Where are you getting your info from homeslice? This does not make any sense. My comment was an opinion and stated as such. Your comment was a statement but not backed by any source. Not attacking you just curious as to where you received this info.

 

[FM_Weasel]

i think there are only a handfull of us who realize how stupid it is to think that an 85 and a 100 are the same. but i guess if i had an 85 i would want to think that too

That's fine. The FAA says one thing.. And a bunch of random people from the internet declare something else, without sources. The truth is obviously as clear as you're making it out to be. Kudos.

Here's one supporting doc. I'll look for more

http://www.hf.faa.gov/docs/508/docs/cami/0224.pdf

 

[bippoptl]

That's fine. The FAA says one thing.. And a bunch of random people from the internet declare something else, without sources. The truth is obviously as clear as you're making it out to be. Kudos.

Here's one supporting doc. I'll look for more

http://www.hf.faa.gov/docs/508/docs/cami/0224.pdf

the only thing that document showed was, besides many pages of usless data, that they put people on two seperate lists...thanks for that awesome info

 

[FM_Weasel]

The phrase: "The FAA does not currently use a strict top down approach, rather it uses a category grouping method" is very telling to me. It indicates that they only consider the two group concept.

Edit: Furthermore, it's more substantial than any other info I've seen posted in regards to the scores being considered individually. And if the only backup for those opinions is "someone told me over the phone," that's laughable.

 

[bippoptl]

The phrase: "The FAA does not currently use a strict top down approach, rather it uses a category grouping method" is very telling to me. It indicates that they only consider the two group concept.

Edit: Furthermore, it's more substantial than any other info I've seen posted in regards to the scores being considered individually. And if the only backup for those opinions is "someone told me over the phone," that's laughable.

that doesnt mean they dont use the scores at all...the lists could be done in score order, but its not "strict" because they dont HAVE to take the 100 over the 99. maybe the 99 is closer the facility.

but tell me then....if the score means absoultely NOTHING why give us one????? we should just be qualified and well qualified

 

[FM_Weasel]

but tell me then....if the score means absoultely NOTHING why give us one????? we should just be qualified and well qualified

I'll have to concede your point there. I have no idea, and it doesn't make a bit of sense.

 

[bippoptl]

I'll have to concede your point there. I have no idea, and it doesn't make a bit of sense.

lol...honestly, i dont even think the FAA knows. i think the people at the panels just put blind folds on and then just point at the sheets

 

[PantherFlyer13]

lol...honestly, i dont even think the FAA knows. i think the people at the panels just put blind folds on and then just point at the sheets

At my beloved alma mater, Florida Tech, we like to refer to that as the Dartboard Scoring Method, which is apparently more commonly used than some would like to believe. Bulls eye!

 

[Johnsc81]

You are correct. They do not see actual scores in the panel. All they have to go by is "qualified" (70-84.9) and "well qualified" (85-100). They don't even have a "rank" of who scored better...just those 2 descriptions to go by.

This is actually true. The Chief of HR for the ATO came to my CTI school a while back. This question got raised, not once, but several times. Buy the end of the meeting she was getting pretty irritated that we did not seem to be getting it. At one point she said, look, I don't care what you have been told in the past, or have heard from "Sources" that is not how we do it. She said the the Numerical scores are mostly used for data collection and statistical analysis. They enter the scores directly into the Computer and that is what you see on ASAP, from that score the computer groups everyone into the different categories (Q WQ NQ). When your information is printed forthe boards , it only shows your category. The boards only see "Well Qualified" "Qualified" and "Not Qualified".

 

[homeslice702]

Ok, I have spoken with the person who actually is one of the top peeps in the panel selection process (she came to my school last spring) and she said that they only look at "qualified/well qualified." She was specifically asked if there is any way they see the numerical score and the answer was negative.

 

[homeslice702]

This is actually true. The Chief of HR for the ATO came to my CTI school a while back.... .

Did you go to ERAU?? The talk last spring?

 

[aviatorzz]

Did you go to ERAU?? The talk last spring?

I know you weren't talking to me, but I was there listening to that speech. I thought it was rather interesting. What was your take?

zz

 

[homeslice702]

I know you weren't talking to me, but I was there listening to that speech. I thought it was rather interesting. What was your take?

zz

I was glad I went to that talk because even though we were pretty much already told the same info from Alice, it was good to hear what the FAA actually does. I do remember the comment about the peeps who went for the master's degree...I felt bad for them when they were told that a master's degree in ATM does not set you above anyone with a bachelor's. So they basically went through all that extra time for almost nothing.

 

[homeslice702]

the only thing that document showed was, besides many pages of usless data, that they put people on two seperate lists...thanks for that awesome info

Man, I actually had to read that article for a class last year. Thanks for the memories lol :crazy:

 

[aviatorzz]

I was glad I went to that talk because even though we were pretty much already told the same info from Alice, it was good to hear what the FAA actually does. I do remember the comment about the peeps who went for the master's degree...I felt bad for them when they were told that a master's degree in ATM does not set you above anyone with a bachelor's. So they basically went through all that extra time for almost nothing.

Keep in mind though, that like myself who is just about done with my master's there, I came in with no ATC background (BA in psychology, minor in business). So having a school that provided a higher degree with only 36 credit hours to complete, and coming from Riddle made it a lot more attractive than just receiving a tech "degree" from a junior college or tech school.

On top of that, I want to eventually get my doctorate, and a masters is kinda needed as the next step to get it

zz

 

[homeslice702]

Keep in mind though, that like myself who is just about done with my master's there, I came in with no ATC background (BA in psychology, minor in business). So having a school that provided a higher degree with only 36 credit hours to complete, and coming from Riddle made it a lot more attractive than just receiving a tech "degree" from a junior college or tech school.

On top of that, I want to eventually get my doctorate, and a masters is kinda needed as the next step to get it

zz

Yea, that's why I said for "almost nothing" In your case then it makes sense if you wanna eventually get that PhD. I also came in with a BA, but it was aviation meteorology...so I already had the basic avt stuff. I debated about going for a master's, but it was an easy choice when I realized I only needed 8 classes to get the 2nd bachelor's. I already had enough of school for awhile anic:. Way down the road, I may go for a master's if I decide I want to teach after I finish my time w/ the FAA....but I'll determine that when the time comes.

 

[aviatorzz]

True. I think the other thing that I have found out doing a couple facility tours is those with higher education have a better chance of becoming a supervisor.

I would like to eventually move into mgmt in my later years at the main facility in DC and work there. Idk, thats a looooooong way off. I just received my geographic preference email lol.

zz