What should I do?

#1
psycometric test resault ,you have passed no failed ,yea passed

My son went for his psycometric test today and after was called into a office with 2 other lads and told they had passed and where given a letter with name address ect on saying well done you where successful ect on passing psycometric test.

Son came home was really chuffed as you can imagine as he has wanted to follow in dads,granddads and great granddads foot steps since he was young.

Anyway 1 hr later he gets a call to say sorry we got it wrong and you failed ,the guy said he was borderline on his maths and that if he had been one point lower it would have brought down his total score.
anyway son was really upset and so did`nt take in all he said so he returned to the office with father in tow.

when they arrived the women at reception was very rude because they had came in the back door instead of the front ,anyway son was called into a office with a warrent officer and father went in with him ,said yea what can i do for you his attiude was also very rude ,he said son had passed all 4 sections of the psycometric test but was borderline for the department he wanted to join WEM ,when asked could he join as a AB he was told no ,when asked to see his score mark for his test was told no your not allowed to.
when asked how son was told he had passed then told he had failed but then told he had passed all four sections the warrent office just said he had made a mistake when looking at the boxes ,father said that was pretty bad for a WO and to raise some hopes but then destroy them an hr later he just was like yea well so what now piss off ,get out my office.
like i say he was very rude.

but i can`t understand how some ones passes each section of the psycometric test but still fail.
CAN ANYONE PLEASE EXPLAIN
 
M

mclark84

Guest
#2
This does seem really bad to me and I have had recent problems with my application at the AFCO I applied. I personally can't see how if he passed all sections of the test that he could not join as an AB in a relevant department, he may not have had a high enough score for an officer but a pass is a pass surely. I would change AFCO's if I was your son, you are allowed to do that and they can't say no. The new AFCO may tell you different from the one you are at and be more helpful. It's not the end though because he can take it again I know it must feel like crap for now but he can take it in a year and in the mean time practice the tests and get fitter which is always a plus for the Royal Navy.
 

Ninja_Stoker

War Hero
Moderator
#3
Obviously there's always several sides to a story & rather than enter into who said what & who was rude to whom or attempt to defend anyone viewed from a single perspective, it is probably better to write a letter of complaint if you feel aggrieved, briefly outlining the facts, to the Area Recruiting Manager at the local AFCO for further investigation. It will certainly not help the situation commenting further, suffice to say there are video cameras throughout the AFCO for security purposes which will doubless provide the necessary evidence if required.

If your son is 18 or over then he needs to sign & send the letter himself as we cannot disclose or enter into detailed discourse with third parties, even if they are immediate family, either by letter or in person.

With regard Recruiting Test scores, the only way to view the answer sheet and the marks are if the applicant sumbmits a subject access request under the data protection act, in accordance with service protocol.

To give a theory of what may have happened with regard the scores, the answers are either right or wrong however unlike the Army, the test is manually marked and because of the scope for error, the '120 question' answer sheet must be manually cross-checked. This can be where human errors occur.

For ET(WE), the modern equivalent of WEM, the test scores required can be viewed in the public domain in the reference book, hosted on the RN website, for Naval Personnel Management, under "Entry Standards": Reference Library

The anomalies of the scoring system are such that for ET(WE) there is a minimum "all-up" score which must be met as well as minimum part scores in three out of the four sections (Reasoning, Literacy, Numeracy & Mechanical Comprehension).

It is possible to reach the all-up minimum score, but to underscore in one (or more) of the part sections, which results in a fail. For example, Each section has 30 questions, so if you got three sections totally correct (scoring 90), plus 15 correct in numeracy, the all-up score is adequate (105/120) but the part score in numeracy is an overall fail. Conversely you could score zero in Reasoning (as there is no part score) and a total of 42 overall, passing each of the minimum part-scores, but have an all-up figure that's still 30 marks short of a pass.

In short, the system is complex and to compund the issue the minimum all-up scores are constantly revised & frequently changed by each indiviual Requirements Manager.







Edited to correct grammatical error
 
Last edited:
#4
well i still don`t understand it ,he PASSED all 4 sections so that = a pass

I would understand if he had passed 3 sections and failed one section then yea a possible fail.
but not when you pass all 4.
so the way i am seeing it ,is like this example...

min pass rate say for a section is 30 marks
You need a min 120marks pass rate to join ,so that = passing all 4 sections ,if you score higher then the min 30marks for each section then of course your over all pass rate is higher which i do agree you need for certain jobs in the RN.

so if you pass 3 sections on the min 30marks and then fail the fourth section with say 25marks your total would be 115marks which would be a fail in total.

BUT

if you score say 40marks in 3 sections (passing them) and only 25marks in one (failing in one) you would still pass as your over all score is 145marks which is over the min 120 marks pass rate to join.

A pass even at the min 120marks is a pass and should still entitle you to join the RN even at the lowest rate of AB ,you can`t say pass rate is min 120marks but you need 175marks min to join because if that is the case the test should be set at a higher pass rate in total.

I have written a letter of complaint.
 
Last edited:
#5
I don't know anyone who has ever achieved a score of 120% in any exam, or even 145%. Maths is obviously not your forte, so please don't give any advice to your son. I think perhaps you are a little confused. I hope that you have not used the same logic in your letter of complaint that you have on here to strenghten your case (if you have one).
 

Ninja_Stoker

War Hero
Moderator
#6
Basically, 120 correct = 100% which is a pass for all trades.

It is possible to meet & "pass" the minimum part scores in each of the four sections, but not reach the all-up total required & therefore fail unfortunately.
 
#8
You could just do what my mum did and wear a low cut top, miniskirt and heels. I don't remember having to do any tests. I don't even have any GCSEs and they let me join as a pilot.
 
#9
Just to back up what NS said Molly. The score for branches differ, but the test is the same for every branch. The total score is 120 (30 in each section). So you could easily core enough in 3 sections to get the total score required for a branch, but get below the minimum in one section, meaning that you have failed. Likewise you can get the part scores required for a branch but not the total also meaning you have failed. All test papers are check marked and this should stop what happened to your son happening. However sometimes in smaller offices there may not be anyone to check them straight away. So this could have happened in the case of your son. it shouldn't happen but lets be honest sometimes mistakes are made. Whoever dealt with you on your return to the office, should have treated you like anyone one else and been polite and dealt with your worries. As NS stated obviously we do not know the full circumstances to this case, but if you feel you have an honest grievance then put it in writting to the Area manager, who will investigate the circumstances and reply to you directly.

Hope this helps and that you feel you get statisfaction from the Royal Navy Careers Service

Regards

Supermario
 
#10
Yea but, no but. You are Vicky pollard and I claim my fiver.
FFS! Here we go again with the angry mum whose likkle darling's too thick/sick to get in.
Easy solution. Sign him up as a Bootneck, no exams and all the crayons a fcukwit could ever need.

As for the WO swearing, he probably thought that your son's generations of Naval genes would be able to stand a more robust door/arse interface suggestion.
 
Last edited:

Ninja_Stoker

War Hero
Moderator
#13
For the Booties amongst us: Whilst highly improbable, a candidate could score 103 out of 120 correct & fail for Royal Marine. Equally improbable, but theoretically possible, a person could score 38 out of 120, failing for all trades except all Officer specialisations.
 
Last edited:
#14
Hi

This is my first post on this forum and i'm looking for some advice about my Royal Navy recruitment process.

I won't say exactly what the is problem I have had but I believe personally I have been unfairly treated by my AFCO.

I would like to take this further and i'm not sure who I can contact? , that is perhaps above the AFCO that would handle the problem I am having.

Does anybody have any advice of what I could do?
 

Ninja_Stoker

War Hero
Moderator
#15
ShipAhoy! said:
What should I do?

Hi

This is my first post on this forum and i'm looking for some advice about my Royal Navy recruitment process.

I won't say exactly what the is problem I have had but I believe personally I have been unfairly treated by my AFCO.

I would like to take this further and i'm not sure who I can contact? , that is perhaps above the AFCO that would handle the problem I am having.

Does anybody have any advice of what I could do?​


If you are unhappy with the way in which your AFCO has treated you, you should ideally complain to your Careers Adviser in writing, briefly outlining the cause for complaint.

In the event the complaint is regarding your Careers Adviser, you should write to the Area Recruiting Manager, at the same address. (The Area Manager covers several AFCOs in your region).

If the Area Recruiting Manager cannot satisfy your grounds for complaint the letter will be forwarded to Captain Naval Recruiting in Portsmouth for further investigation. [/quote]






Edited to add deleted quotation
 
Last edited:
#16
Oh the dilema. Another one who reckons that he has been treated unfairly by the Navy, perhaps because they didn't get what they wanted. How can we help if we don't know what your problem is. PM me if you want.
 
#17
well seing as no one knows what it is they dont know which would be the best way to go about it.
if it is medical, test failure, waiting times. then to be quite honest there is nothing you can realy do about it
 

Ninja_Stoker

War Hero
Moderator
#20
Post two on this thread by former forum member 'mclark84', may perhaps provide a clue.

He was the chap that posted this yesterday:

Originally Posted by [B said:
mclark84[/B]] Hi all,

I am just posting this to see what people think and give some advice.

I first went into an AFCO in Feb 2010 and applied to be a Logistics Officer.

I took my RT Test in April 2010 and went for my AIB in March 2011 which I failed.

I then replied as a Writer and was told that I had a 10-12 month wait a month ago and have recently taken my PJFT a second time.

I recently contacted my AFCO to find out what was happening and this is the response in emails what was said.

Hi, ....
Yes I have now received your pass for the PJFT run.
We are now waiting for our head quarters to tell us to start interviewing people how have applied for Logs Personnel (writers). The waiting time from application date (21/03/2011) is 18 months to start training at present (if all stages passed). The HQ will call forward when it is estimated to be under 12 months to joining. You will then be interviewed. The HQ will be introducing a 1 week compulsory pre joining course which will replace the rating preparation course. This will be allocated by HQ.
I will contact you as soon as HQ call you forward. It is now a waiting game but I will be contacting you.

I replied with;

Dear .......

Sorry to keep bothering you but I thought my application date started when I first took the RT Test back last April in 2010?

I thought you said that it was estimated that I had a 10-12 month wait about a month ago?

Thanks


They replied;

,

Unfortunately the computer (sorry to blame it) will take the date you were made an applicant for WTR. This is out of my hands and it will not let me put your application date the date you took the test. The waiting times are also changing monthly but they could also come down because when we are contacting candidates with joining dates 25% are withdrawing their applications. This is happening within all job roles. I hope this helps you understand the current situation.




To be honest this has made me angry. Now I know I originally applied as a Logistic's Officer and that I failed at the AIB but this just seems stupid to me that they can't take the whole recruitment process that I have been through and give me a short wait time than 18 months. If he has started my application from fresh I could be waiting longer than 18 months as I know the waiting times are forever getting longer. Please can someone give me some advice as I am seriously considering just jacking this all in, I want to join the Royal Navy but I can't put up with another 18 months wait when I have already been waiting 15 months for nothing.
But didn't like the response (below) so asked to have his account deleted.

Ninja_Stoker said:
The frustration is appreciated however it could be deemed unfair if an 'AIB fail' should entitle someone to queue jump those already waiting in an alternative Ratings trade.

The waiting time for each trade is usually governed by the time the Recruiting Test is passed for that particular trade under normal circumstances.

If you change trades, the waiting time is usually governed by the waiting time from the date you opted for that trade.

If it were done any other way, for example if someone had been waiting 2 years for AET (currently a 3 year wait) then opted for MA (currently an 18 month wait) then they would be bleating about not being given 6 months back-pay.
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

New Posts

Top