Navy Enlisted Advancement System (NEAS) - Amdo

1 3 February 2003 navy Advancement Center1 navy Enlisted Advancement System (NEAS)Last update: December 20073 February 2003 navy Advancement Center2 Presentation Topics Purpose of Advancement exams Exams development and administration Final Multiple Score Factors Profile sheet - What does it mean? What you should do to prepare for Advancement Recent and future changes3 February 2003 navy Advancement Center3 Questions What five factors make up the Final Multiple Score (FMS) for E-4 to E-6 candidates? Is the FMS different for E-7 candidates? What percentage of E-7 candidates are selected to be board eligible? What factor has the largest percentage of the FMS for E-4 to E-6 candidates? What number of occupational & PMK questions are on each exam?3 February 2003 navy Advancement Center4 Purpose of Advancement ExaminationsThe Advancement -in-rate examination is a tool used, as part of the Final Multiple Score, to help rank order qualified candidates on the basis of rating and professional military knowledge at the next higher February 2003 navy Advancement Center5 Qualifying to Take the Exam CO recommendation Meet minimum time in rate (TIR) requirement Proper Path of Advancement Requirements must be met for STRIKERS/GENDETS -Meet minimum requirements for rating ( citizenship, security clearance, and training) - Counseled by their Career Development Team (CDT) after the CREO/REGA message is released (about 60 days prior to exam)

2 - Must receive approval by the ECM, if required by the CREO/REGA message, prior to the date of February 2003 navy Advancement Center6 What do you mean, there is a discrepancy? Discrepancies: An error on a worksheet An error on an answer sheetOr 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) Errors can lead to: Delayed results or advancements Improper processing LOSING OUT ON ADVANCEMENT3 February 2003 navy Advancement Center7 Written by CPOs (E-7 to E-9) NETPDTC hosts an Advancement Exam Development Conference for each rating on a 2-year cycle.

3 At least 6 Fleet SMEs from the respective rating are invited to attend. Recent fleet experience From ratings (BM, SH, etc.) or From rating communities (EMN, AWA, etc.) Advancement exams are designed to test rating and professional military experience and knowledgeExam Development Facts3 February 2003 navy Advancement Center8 Exam Development Facts Exams consist of 200questionsOccupational + Professional MilitaryKnowledge (PMK)E7 100100E611585E513565E4150503 February 2003 navy Advancement Center9 Advancement exams test on occupational (rate) and professional military knowledge (PMK) information Exams test the most important topics for the rate Every question must be supported by a reference Occupational Standards, Naval Standards, or Competencies pertaining to the rating are used to validate questionsMore Exam Development Facts3 February 2003 navy Advancement Center10 Advancement ExamDevelopment Scope of the Master Reference , edit, and improve exam banks and 14 examinations (2 years) new Advancement Exam Strategy Guide (AESG) EVERY ONE TO TWO YEARS3 February 2003 navy Advancement Center11 Exam Scoring Approaches to exam scoring: Criterion-referenced(schoolhouses) Norm-referenced( navy Advancement exams)3 February 2003 navy Advancement Center120102030405060708090100 Standard Score Example Raw score.

4 0to 200 Raw scores are converted to standard scores Standard score: 20to 80 Average of all raw scores is assigned standard score 500 100 200 Standard ScoreRaw Score3 February 2003 navy Advancement Center13 Myth MYTH:Scoring the maximum 80 points on the exams means you aced the exam. FACT:It simply means you performed better than all or almost all of the other candidates taking the same exam. FACT:80 represents the highest standard score attained for a group of candidates taking the same examination (the best raw score may have been a 175).3 February 2003 navy Advancement Center14 Final Multiple Score (FMS)The Final Multiple Score (FMS) method looks at the whole person E-4/5/6 Performance Experience ( service in paygrade, awards, and PNA points) Exam Score (standard score) E-7 Performance Exam Score (standard score)3 February 2003 navy Advancement Center15 Old FMS ChartMAX PTS AND % FACTOR EXAM PAYGRADE COMPUTATION E-4/5 E-6 Performance Mark Average (PMA) E-4/5 E-6 PMA X 60 156 PMA X 60 130 84 (36%) 110 ( ) Standard Score (SS) ALL SS 80 (34%) 80 (30%) Passed Not Advanced (PNA) Points E-4/5/6 2 X PNA Pts From Last 5 Exam Cycles 30 (13%) 30 (11%) Service in Paygrade (SIPG) E-4/5 E-6 2 X SIPG + 15 2 X SIPG + 19 30 (13%) 34 (13%) Awards (AWD)

5 E4/5/6 Values in Advancement Manual 10 (4%) 12 ( ) Max FMS Possible ALL 234 (100%) 266 (100%) 3 February 2003 navy Advancement Center16-10%0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%13579 11131517192123252729313335373941C Y C L E SCONTRIBUTION TO FMS P M AS SL O SS I P GA W DP N AContribution to VarianceNote: FMS formula change at Cycle 155; FMS formula change at Cycle 108 SEP 852 111 MAR 863 112 SEP 864 115 MAR 875 116 SEP 876 119 MAR 887 120 SEP 888 123 MAR 899 124 SEP 8910 127 MAR 9011 128 SEP 9012 131 MAR 9113 132 SEP 9114 135 MAR 9215 136 SEP 9216 139 MAR 9317 140 SEP 9318 143 MAR 9419 144 SEP 9420 147 MAR 9521 148 SEP 9522 151 MAR 96 23 152 SEP 9624 155 MAR 9725 156 SEP 9726 159 MAR 9827 160 SEP 9828 163 MAR 9929 164 SEP 9930 167 MAR 0031 168 SEP 00 *32 171 MAR 0133 172 SEP 0134 175 MAR 0235 176 SEP 0236 179 MAR 0337 180 SEP 0338 183 MAR 0439 184 SEP 0440 187 MAR 0541 188 SEP 0542 191 MAR 06 FMS Factors (E-6 USN/R)

6 3 February 2003 navy Advancement Center17 Changes for August/September2007 Increase Performance Mark Average (PMA) Reduce Service in Paygrade and Pass Not Advanced Factors by One Half Maintain experience (SIPG) at a reduced number of factor points Maintain sustained superior performance (PNA) at a reduced number of factor Performance Mark Average (Performance/CO s Recommendation) Standard Score (Knowledge) Service in Paygrade (Career Rating Experience) Pass Not Advanced Points (Sustained Superior Performance) Awards (Experience/Performance) Total Points%PTS%PTSELEMENTE-6 MAXE-4/5 MAXFMSCURRENT7% MAXE-4/5 MAXINCREASE PMA and HALF SIPG & PNA Note: Does not reflect E-7 FMS change3 February 2003 navy Advancement Center18 New FMS ChartMAX PTS AND % FACTOR EXAM PAYGRADE COMPUTATION E-4/5 E-6 Performance Mark Average (PMA) E-4/5 E-6 PMA X 80 230 PMA X 80 204 90 (43%) 116 ( ) Standard Score (SS) ALL SS 80 (38%) 80 ( ) Pass Not Advanced (PNA) E-4/5/6 PNA Pts From Last 5 Exam Cycles 15 (7%) 15 (6%) Service In Paygrade (SIPG) E-4/5 E-6 SIPG + SIPG + 15 (7%) 17 (7%) Awards (AWD) E4/5/6 Values in Advancement Manual 10 (5%) 12 (5%) Max FMS Possible ALL 210 (100%) 240 (100%) Note: Note.

7 Does not reflect E-7 FMS change3 February 2003 navy Advancement Center19 Study Results Rank ordering from Mar 06 rating exams Note differences in rank ordering for Sailors with high PMA Most Sailors with high PMA increased in ranking compared to the current ranking3 February 2003 navy Advancement Center20340 CANDIDATES 37 SELECTEES (9 Candidates W/ PMA not shown)Rankings for SH13 February 2003 navy Advancement Center21 Changes (Cont d) Change in PMA Formula: from current: (12 pt difference between EP & MP or MP & P) E-4/5 = (PMA x 60) - 156 E-6 = (PMA x 60) 130 to new: (16 pt difference between EP & MP or MP & P) E-4/5 = (PMA x 80) - 230 E-6 = (PMA x 80) 2043 February 2003 navy Advancement Center22 Old E-7 FMS(Maximum possible points) Examination standard score:8060% Performance:52 40%Total Possible132 100% 3 February 2003 navy Advancement Center23 Increases the difference between an EP and MP or MP and P from pts to 10 E-7 50/50 (MP)PROPOSED PTSCURRENT (SP) (PR) (P) (EP)3 February 2003 navy Advancement Center24E-7 50/50 FMS Computations132(100%)80(60%)52 (40%)MAX PTS AND %SSPMA x 50 - 120 NEWCOMPUTATION160(100%)Max FMS Possible80(50%)SSStandard Score (SS)80 (50%)PMA x 13 Performance Mark Average (PMA)MAX PTS AND %OLD COMPUTATION FACTOR3 February 2003 navy Advancement Center25E-7 50/50 Rankings For BUC291 CANDIDATES 176 60/40 SBE 177 50/50 (1 TIE)(NOTE: GOLD indicates SBE and.)

8 Indicates data not shown.)CURRENT 160 161 183 107 108 109 119 120 126 143 203 227 248 189 233 RANKCURRENT PROPOSEDSSPMA2518 104 115 116 117 137 138 149 150 166 167 172 201 221 225 230 238 263

9 102 103 RANKCURRENT PROPOSEDSSPMA126 113 114 130 147 148 157 170 176 177 199 207 215 219 229 105 106 118 181 182 217 131 164 165 171 179 208 209 268 RANKCURRENT PROPOSEDSSPMA8699 168 175 184 185 186 178 142 151 222 232 235 269 211 121 122 123 127 133 144 145 173 174 192 213 214 228 236 249 253 254 255 273 251 132 139 140 141 180 RANKCURRENT PROPOSEDSSPMA157 190 191 202 212 216 226 231 234 246 247 252 258 259 264 271 274 281 188 200 220 237 262 284 210 155 156 163

10 169 197 198 250 257 261 266 267 275 276 277 279 282 283 285 286 270 287 280 288 289 290 291 RANK3 February 2003 navy Advancement Center26E-7 50/50 Rankings For DCC477 CANDIDATES 284 SBE(NOTE: GOLD indicates SBE and .. indicates data not shown.)CURRENT PROPOSEDSSPMA21 102 136 197