Appointment Process

WooHoo!

Thanks so much for the update, prest477! The anticipation is overwhelming...BEST of luck to everyone! :thumb:
 
prest477 said:
i went on an overnight visit this past thursday. at the admissions briefing, the officer stated that they will start mailing letters out on the 22nd so that they may be delivered on or around the 26th.
Click to expand...


Just the BFEs?
 
prthaler said:
and I believe some QNS letters that are at the end of the NWL that are highly probable not to receive an appointment.
Click to expand...

You were there for an overnight visit so I am assuming you have an LOE. Did they tell you anything about the candidates with LOEs?
 
dcarmy17 said:
You were there for an overnight visit so I am assuming you have an LOE. Did they tell you anything about the candidates with LOEs?
Click to expand...

I did not have an overnight visit nor an LOE, but I am in contact with my Rd quite frequently and he has emailed me about when offers would be coming out. For a majority Congressional and Senatorial slot winners as well as people under special circumstances will be receiving the BFE's on February 26th-March 1st.These people usually have LOE's. An LOE has nothing to do with the appointment process other than tell you that you are a very strong candidate. Good luck, we are all on pins and needles!
 
Thanks for the info!

February 26, I will be ambushing my mailman!!!!


This wait sucks... They should have kept with rolling admissions :frown:
 
Hummmm

Interesting info, thanks for sharing. I guess we'll just have to wait until Feb 26 when the flood gates open.

Good Luck, really!

Push Hard, Press Forward
 
QNS

Armydaughter,

There is no ryme or reason, they will trickle out of WP admissions as they sift through the selection process. And as stated, appointments could go out till June. You may have some people who don't take the offer, some will get hurt and so forth. Keep the candle burning for the mailman.

I do have a sneeking feeling there is a stack of appointments already to be sent out at the end of the month.

Push Hard, Press Forward

Push Hard, Press Forward
 
tug_boat said:
WIT84, I have a link to WP break down of Class of 2016 that will answer your questions. It show "Class Composition" and how WCS is tallied. There are no quotas when making up SA classes or reflection of demographics. If that were the case, classes would be 51% women. However, they do try to reflect leadership in the Army. West Point is designed to develop First Line Officers. So they seek candidates that are well rounded and want to have a career in the Army.

http://www.westpoint.edu/bov/siteassets/meeting minutes/Signed Meeting Minutes 20120614.pdf

Push Hard, Press Forward
Click to expand...

Tugboat,

Thank you for sharing the link, there is some pretty interesting detail on Page 12 as it pertains to the prior class demographics. With the elimination of rolling admissions should be interesting to see how these stats change over the next couple of years.

I do have one follow on question - At the bottom of page 12 there is a asterisk that defines fully qualified and one of the criteria is a nomination -I assume this is a competitive or principal nomination correct?
 
Last edited:
WIT84

I think it’s for both.

It is interesting to see and understand class comp and realize the “specialty” categorizes are not that significant. Such as: athletics and minorities. I think you’ll see the graduation rate increase because of the competitiveness and dedication of the cadets. Of course the attrition rate will still be there. I have a buddy whose DS is in his first year at AFA. They started out with a class of 1053. Now down to low 900. He was telling how disappointed his DS was with his fellow classmates throwing in the towel early. Many didn’t return after Thanksgiving or Christmas break.

In the past with rolling admission, it encouraged applicants to complete their files early and LOAs encouraged sought after candidates to follow through and complete their files. In my opinion, Class of 2017 will be similar to 2016. The only difference is that WP admissions has all 3000 (approximately) 3Q’d files at hand to choose from. This will allow for a more competitive selection process. (Last year stated on SAF 1200 were left on the NWL to later receive, QNS.)

This will also be inline with keeping the Cadet Corp at 4400 at graduation. The competition will increase, however, the SA will have the best of the best to choose from.

Push Hard, Press Forward
 
Remember that Feb 26 is the start of the appointment process. Many will go out that day but appointments will be offered (on a decreasing scale) all the way to late May as medical waivers are approved or dissapproved, people turn-down appointments (opening-up slots), people get in trouble (arrests, DUIs etc.), have major injuries, do dumb things etc. Plus the selection of people from the NWL is not done in one day.
Therefore, all is not lost if you are not in the first batch of offers.
 
WIT84 said:
Tugboat,

Thank you for sharing the link, there is some pretty interesting detail on Page 12 as it pertains to the prior class demographics. With the elimination of rolling admissions should be interesting to see how these stats change over the next couple of years.

I do have one follow on question - At the bottom of page 12 there is a asterisk that defines fully qualified and one of the criteria is a nomination -I assume this is a competitive or principal nomination correct?
Click to expand...

That means ANY nomination.

With a MOC nom you just have to be on the slate of 10 to have a nomination, you don't have to be the principle or slot winner.

To receive an appointment, a candidate must be fully qualified (3Q'd) and have a nomination.

BUT - just because you are fully qualified with a nom does not guarantee an appointment. It is just the minimum qualification.
Non slot winners will be placed on the NWL.
 
tug boat,

In the link you provided, it had a table that listed how each appointment was "charged."

Under Presidential, it had Pres (A) and Pres (R). Do the A and R stand for Active and Reserve? Active and Retired?

Anybody out there know?

Thanks!
 
MaineGrad86 said:
tug boat,

In the link you provided, it had a table that listed how each appointment was "charged."

Under Presidential, it had Pres (A) and Pres (R). Do the A and R stand for Active and Reserve? Active and Retired?

Anybody out there know?

Thanks!
Click to expand...

It stands for active and retired.
 
hmza said:
It stands for active and retired.
Click to expand...

A follow-up then, if I may:

Do the Presidential nominees compete in one pool and appointments conferred by the WCS, or are there quotas/goals for Active v. Retired?

Essentially my question is do Active duty folks get special status - Where an "active" candidate with a lower WCS gets an appointment over a "retired" candidate with a better one?

Thanks!
 
MaineGrad86 said:
A follow-up then, if I may:

Do the Presidential nominees compete in one pool and appointments conferred by the WCS, or are there quotas/goals for Active v. Retired?

Essentially my question is do Active duty folks get special status - Where an "active" candidate with a lower WCS gets an appointment over a "retired" candidate with a better one?

Thanks!
Click to expand...

Everyone that applies and is eligible for a Presidential nomination will receive one. I believe after that the candidates, on this slate, compete against each other using WCS of which we will never know. Keep in mind many of these candidates, who may have high WCS, may have other noms from which they receive their appointments. If that is the case their appointment is not charged against Pres. noms. The table shows the candidates whose appointments came from Pres. noms. I read somewhere that from a past year there were around 950 candidates with Pres. noms.
I do not think Active duty gets special status unless someone on the board knows them via parent. It would be terrific if it was just candidate number and WCS that the admissions board saw...

DS has Pres. nom (retired), and congressional nom. Have no idea if he is principal on congressional slate as congresswoman retired and said she would not be available to make calls as in previous years. As for senators, DS did not make one senator's slate and the other senator will not tell us yea or nay even though DS has been in contact with senatorial staffer that was in charge. We are hoping he will be getting a call in 10 days or so :confused: but that is probably just wishful thinking!:smile:
 
tug_boat said:
I think you’ll see the graduation rate increase because of the competitiveness and dedication of the cadets. Of course the attrition rate will still be there. I have a buddy whose DS is in his first year at AFA. They started out with a class of 1053. Now down to low 900.
Click to expand...
I'm having difficulty following your logic. If smaller classes (more competitive candidates) = increased graduation rates; how do you explain the USAFA class of 2016 (the smallest and therefor most competitive USAFA class in many years)? Is it possible that this theory will work better at WP than other SAs?
tug_boat said:
In the past with rolling admission, it encouraged applicants to complete their files early and LOAs encouraged sought after candidates to follow through and complete their files. In my opinion, Class of 2017 will be similar to 2016. The only difference is that WP admissions has all 3000 (approximately) 3Q’d files at hand to choose from. This will allow for a more competitive selection process.
Click to expand...
Again, I'm having difficulty following this reasoning. If during previous years LOAs were given to the candidates that were the "most sought after" candidates, aren't these candidates still at the top of the 3000 3qd candidate list? Unless you're suggesting that the candidates that in previous years were the most sought after and received LOAs, are now not going to complete the application process and won't be on the list. I'm not sure how not issuing LOAs either helps competitiveness or increases the likelihood of WP recruiting the "best of the best".

My personal opinion is that this "new" method of selecting the class is ALL about ensuring the class size meets the mandated target number. Again....JMPO.
 
aglages said:
My personal opinion is that this "new" method of selecting the class is ALL about ensuring the class size meets the mandated target number. Again....JMPO.
Click to expand...

Director of Admissions addressed the changes in a briefing last spring.... Several key drivers:

- USMA moving back down to authorized strength due to RIF'ish Army needs

- Larger & better qualified applicant pool with several factors driving that sea change. Comment from either Admissions or BTD one: Many cadets admitted in earlier classes would not have made the cut in the current applicant pools. This has been a trend for several years.

- Aligning timing better with the competing colleges to remove that as a barrier in the decision process. (Later initial notification, but longer acceptance window. Specifically, acceptance cutoff will after key competition announces their acceptances)

I've not compared current windows/approach exactly to her comments, but they seem in alignment.

There is not a scheme to get rid of cadets, but they did give very direct input even then that USMA was going to enforce Academic/physical/military standards more strictly to make sure slots were free for those who really wanted to be there. (Almost exact quote). Which was shortly followed by Firsties & USMAPS behavioral separations. And multiple wave of APFT & academic separations this AY.

So my read is the current admissions approach was set months ago and is unrelated to the current budget crunch. It is directly related to future needs of the army, and that is surfacing in many areas.

Even the much bemoaned 2016 CBT was impacted by needs of the Army.... training was directly adjusted based on external input. Ex: '16 cadets trained with Grenades like a regular soldier did in basic.
 
aglages

aglages,
Please do not take anything post here to your local corner coffee shop.



Push Hard, Press Forward
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top