Lingering Questions Regarding Slots

[A1Janitor]

The Evaluator ALO can't tell a candidate much of anything other than:

a) I submitted my evaluation
b) I haven't submitted my evaluation yet

That's it. Once it's received by USAFA, the admissions folks go over it in detail...do the comments match the grades? Do the grades match the candidate? Does it make sense? Are there "ANY" questions unanswered or any "my spidey sense is tingling" or "something just doesn't feel right..." moments by the reviewer? If there are ANY of those, it's "rejected" and returned to the ALO for a redo. Not the interview, the write-up.

Once it's "acceptable to admissions (and that ONLY means that the numbers align with the comments), then you'll see it processed and you'll get the green check. Not until.

Steve
USAFA ALO
USAFA '83

I was wondering about this - and not related to OP.

What if my son did an interview and he was cocky, or defensive, etc? Could that evaluation cause a pause in process?

I thought of this after something my son said when I asked him about the food being better at USNA during cvw. He dismissed that and said food can be good or bad any day. He then told me how he was invited by a mid that was hosting cvw candidates when he was a squad leader. He said a candidate came across as a know it all, and was trying to compare his high school stats with my son. He handled it appropriately- but said the candidate left a very bad impression with him.

 

[flieger83]

"What if my son did an interview and he was cocky, or defensive, etc? Could that evaluation cause a pause in process?"
Would it "pause" the process? No. Could it negatively impact the score in one of the evaluation sections? Maybe.

To "ME" I would be asking: "Why is the candidate like this?" Nervous I understand, but cocky/defensive? If I sensed that, I would ask more probing questions to see his/her reaction...what response do I get from them? I've interviewed hundreds of candidates and some have "come across" as cocky, initially. Deeper into the interview I learned they were just very confident, very poised, and very sure of themselves. Okay, that's not a bad thing.

Defensive? I can't say I've had too many of those. Why would they be defensive during an interview? If they were, I'd be asking myself "did I ask something, say something, that is causing this?" I don't expect defensiveness.

Of course, that's just me.

 

[sky1123]

Thank you all for sharing your insights even on Christmas Day!

I’m very thankful for the replies I’ve received; many of them have been extremely valuable. This thread is getting quite long, but I’ve noticed this has been on loop:

OP: “There are recruits…” followed by other context and main question
A: Stop blaming the recruits!
OP: I am not blaming the recruits. Would have been same post with scholars.
A: You must not be as competitive, then.
OP: Yes, that’s possible. But would there have been a chance to compete before being sent to the NWL? Could this have something to do with the lasting red mark? This is my question.
A: Don’t infer, just wait.

If you don’t earn an appointment, it will be because your admission profile wasn’t good enough, so stop blaming your prospective failure to earn an appointment on athletes.

I have no intention of blaming anyone. To reiterate, I would have made the same post if there were scholar-appointees in my area. The mention of recruits is only the context to let you know that there are appointees in my district.

You are completely right, my WCS could most definitely be subpar. But my question was about the process itself.

 

[Capt MJ]

Thank you all for sharing your insights even on Christmas Day!

I’m very thankful for the replies I’ve received; many of them have been extremely valuable. This thread is getting quite long, but I’ve noticed this has been on loop:

OP: “There are recruits…” followed by other context and main question
A: Stop blaming the recruits!
OP: I am not blaming the recruits. Would have been same post with scholars.
A: You must not be as competitive, then.
OP: Yes, that’s possible. But would there have been a chance to compete before being sent to the NWL? Could this have something to do with the lasting red mark? This is my question.
A: Don’t infer, just wait.


I have no intention of blaming anyone. To reiterate, I would have made the same post if there were scholar-appointees in my area. The mention of recruits is only the context to let you know that there are appointees in my district.

You are completely right, my WCS could most definitely be subpar. But my question was about the process itself.

I hope one of your takeaways is LOAs and/or athletic commitments are not the equivalent of actual appointments. If you sensed a pattern in responses (a “loop”), it was likely because experienced posters sensed a fundamental building block of understanding was not aligned well and tried from several angles to help align that block, when they saw “looping” from your perspective. Two loops not intersecting in compete understanding. The joys of clear communication in a flat medium devoid of eye contact, body language and vocal tone.

You may see several actual appointees from your District. They may or may not include the “committed athletes,” particularly if they go to USAFAPS.

Their appointments may be charged to a variety of nom sources. You will not know where. They are not likely to know either.

You are still in play on your specific slate, possibly the NWL down the road, presumably the VP nom and any other nom you applied for, plus any other nom USAFA might pull out if its small bag of nom authorities they control.

There is no action you need to take. You are under consideration until USAFA gives you a decision. This process can go until April, but occasionally beyond into May and June, if an actual waitlist is used at the tail end of class building.

 

[Korab]

Thank you all for sharing your insights even on Christmas Day!

I’m very thankful for the replies I’ve received; many of them have been extremely valuable. This thread is getting quite long, but I’ve noticed this has been on loop:

OP: “There are recruits…” followed by other context and main question
A: Stop blaming the recruits!
OP: I am not blaming the recruits. Would have been same post with scholars.
A: You must not be as competitive, then.
OP: Yes, that’s possible. But would there have been a chance to compete before being sent to the NWL? Could this have something to do with the lasting red mark? This is my question.
A: Don’t infer, just wait.


I have no intention of blaming anyone. To reiterate, I would have made the same post if there were scholar-appointees in my area. The mention of recruits is only the context to let you know that there are appointees in my district.

You are completely right, my WCS could most definitely be subpar. But my question was about the process itself.

That’s exactly what you’re doing - building the excuse in your head and on paper now for a prospective failure. You’ve been told over and over how it works, and you continue to obfuscate. Just say thank you and move on.

 

[sky1123]

I hope one of your takeaways is LOAs and/or athletic commitments are not the equivalent of actual appointments. If you sensed a pattern in responses (a “loop”), it was likely because experienced posters sensed a fundamental building block of understanding was not aligned well and tried from several angles to help align that block, when they saw “looping” from your perspective. Two loops not intersecting in compete understanding. The joys of clear communication in a flat medium devoid of eye contact, body language and vocal tone.

You may see several actual appointees from your District. They may or may not include the “committed athletes,” particularly if they go to USAFAPS.

Their appointments may be charged to a variety of nom sources. You will not know where. They are not likely to know either.

You are still in play on your specific slate, possibly the NWL down the road, presumably the VP nom and any other nom you applied for, plus any other nom USAFA might pull out if its small bag of nom authorities they control.

There is no action you need to take. You are under consideration until USAFA gives you a decision. This process can go until April, but occasionally beyond into May and June, if an actual waitlist is used at the tail end of class building.

According to “banana logic” (named by Capt MJ), I guess the answer to my question about how to use a surplus of bananas is that I don’t know how many bananas there really are.
Genuinely, thank you for your replies throughout this thread and for appreciating my banana lore, Capt MJ. Happy Holidays!

 

[A1Janitor]

According to “banana logic” (named by Capt MJ), I guess the answer to my question about how to use a surplus of bananas is that I don’t know how many bananas there really are.
Genuinely, thank you for your replies throughout this thread and for appreciating my banana lore, Capt MJ. Happy Holidays!

The amount of bananas are set by law. Some districts get more bananas than other districts. You never know year to year how many bananas a district will get, until i day.

If you search the forums, you will see some congressional districts get 10. It has been reported here that some high schools get more than two. It all depends on the strength of the candidate, the strength of the competition, and the needs of the military.