Navy The Corpsman Advancement Exam is Awful

[Perrotfish]

So, I am trying to put together a review course for our corpsmen, as part of a project to raise their advancement exam scores. As a first step, I took an online practice advancement exam. As I am now a board certified physician and I was usually above average on my steps and ITEs, I was sure I would ace it, but I wanted to see what level they were working at.

I knew the answers to fewer than 10 questions (out of 56).

Here's the test, if you guys are interested, let me know how you do, and what you think of how we are educating our corpsmen:
http://www.proprofs.com/quiz-school/story.php?title=navedtra-14295-hospital-corpsman-practice-test

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[backrow]

In my (limited) experience it isn't always the rate specific stuff that gets them, it's the BMR stuff and the other stuff from the bibliography they publish that is "boring" and not fun to study (eg Who gets on/off a small boat first and where do they sit).

I'd also concentrate on the info that your corpsman don't spend time with such as the dental or lab side of things (where are my DT's... . )

But yes the tests are terrible, but everyone takes the same test so we can't put too much blame there

 

[Shikima]

So, I am trying to put together a review course for our corpsmen, as part of a project to raise their advancement exam scores. As a first step, I took an online practice advancement exam. As I am now a board certified physician and I was usually above average on my steps and ITEs, I was sure I would ace it, but I wanted to see what level they were working at.

I knew the answers to fewer than 10 questions (out of 56).

Here's the test, if you guys are interested, let me know how you do, and what you think of how we are educating our corpsmen:
http://www.proprofs.com/quiz-school/story.php?title=navedtra-14295-hospital-corpsman-practice-test

I remember studying and taking this exam so many moons back. I always felt the advancement exam was significantly lacking in knowledge with a concentration on areas that were very much unimportant. As you advance, it does convert from a "medical" model to an "administrative" model.

Make the E4 exam something similar to the CNA exam, E5 compared to the LPN exam and E6 equiv to the NCLEX. And chief? Well... it's chief. Not a whole hell of a lot you can do as they're the only senior enlisted approved by congress.

 

[Perrotfish]

But yes the tests are terrible, but everyone takes the same test so we can't put too much blame there

Fairness is definitely not the problem here. What I'm shocked at is that so little medical knowledge is on this test. However someone designing this test apparently thinks its very important for them to know who originates the order governing limited duty boards. This boggles my mind.

 

[backrow]

. However someone designing this test apparently thinks its very important for them to know who originates the order governing limited duty boards. This boggles my mind.

Remember they are testing questions that cover every single NEC and some corpsmen work very admin sided jobs (Aviation Med for example at many places) and corpsmen are many of the front line folks in the med board office so it would be important for that person to know that info.

I don't necessarily agree that all NECs should take the same test as why would, say, a dental hygienist need to know about that, but I'm not sure how they would change it.

I think you're on the right path, but definitely get the bibliography for the last test. I've seen some groups do jeopardy style games weekly in the AM as one learning tool.

 

[Shikima]

Less about instructions, more about health care.

 

[d2305]

Many of the questions on the test are administrative vs medical. There used to always be STD questions on every. EG is gonorrhea caused by gram negative or gram positive diplococcus or what are clue cells associated with. There was a Fraker study guide which was the best prep for the test. http://www.navyadvancement.com/assets/download/hmfraker.pdf May be dated.

 

[Shikima]

I was thinking... the exam would be fine if you're 0000. If you have a C school NEC, then you need to take the exam associated with that. Or have an exam data base, if you have more than one C school... for example, 0000/8404/8483, then the exam would comprise 1/3 questions from each category. Each exam would be unique and less likely to allow for cheating.

 

[backrow]

I was thinking... the exam would be fine if you're 0000. If you have a C school NEC, then you need to take the exam associated with that. Or have an exam data base, if you have more than one C school... for example, 0000/8404/8483, then the exam would comprise 1/3 questions from each category. Each exam would be unique and less likely to allow for cheating.

The problem is you would have to do that for every rate in the Navy. Could they do it, probably. Will they do it, doubt it.

It's somewhat like the tape test: is it perfect for everyone? Definitely not. Does it work on a macro scale? Absolutely.

 

[Shikima]

The problem is you would have to do that for every rate in the Navy. Could they do it, probably. Will they do it, doubt it.

It's somewhat like the tape test: is it perfect for everyone? Definitely not. Does it work on a macro scale? Absolutely.

No. no it doesn't work. And to say it will always be that way is pretty lazy. We've adopted this socially progressive movement but the educational standards are still stuck in the 1940s.

 

[backrow]

No. no it doesn't work. And to say it will always be that way is pretty lazy. We've adopted this socially progressive movement but the educational standards are still stuck in the 1940s.

I disagree, it does work. Are we currently in a hurt for corpsmen at the upper levels that are better than what we have right now? I don't think so, there isn't some big gap along the lines. If you agree with that then the current testing system works fine. Is their room for improvement? Sure, but I don't think a multimillion dollar Navy-wide change is of such importance to take precedence over other areas right now.

If you go to NEC specific then you essentially have to say that a Corpsman can no longer work outside their NEC. Therefore that Rad Tech, or whatever NEC, is pretty much stuck in radiology and will have limited promotion (even more so than in an already very difficult promotion rate)

 

[Shikima]

I disagree, it does work. Are we currently in a hurt for corpsmen at the upper levels that are better than what we have right now? I don't think so, there isn't some big gap along the lines. If you agree with that then the current testing system works fine. Is their room for improvement? Sure, but I don't think a multimillion dollar Navy-wide change is of such importance to take precedence over other areas right now.

If you go to NEC specific then you essentially have to say that a Corpsman can no longer work outside their NEC. Therefore that Rad Tech, or whatever NEC, is pretty much stuck in radiology and will have limited promotion (even more so than in an already very difficult promotion rate)

Thus, you missed what I said about a large question bank which takes a percentage from all the areas they would have knowledge from. 2 NECs? 50/50... 4? 25/25/25/25. You end up with a better trained Corpsman.

 

[backrow]

Thus, you missed what I said about a large question bank which takes a percentage from all the areas they would have knowledge from. 2 NECs? 50/50... 4? 25/25/25/25. You end up with a better trained Corpsman.

No, I inderstood. What that would miss is the overall general knowledge that a corpsman needs for their overall career. It is the rare bird that stays completely within their NEC(s) for an entire career. And how about when they make Chief and get put in charge of some completely different area?

I think most people here would agree that it isn't the rate specific stuff that trips up most who should do well. It's the other "I'm in the Navy so I should know this" stuff and that is where they separate the average from above average sailor.

Now, I'm arguing in regards to the current system, want to argue that we should scrap tests all together and I wouldn't necessarily be opposed to that, but it would bring in other variables.

 

[Perrotfish]

No, I inderstood. What that would miss is the overall general knowledge that a corpsman needs for their overall career. It is the rare bird that stays completely within their NEC(s) for an entire career. And how about when they make Chief and get put in charge of some completely different area?

I think most people here would agree that it isn't the rate specific stuff that trips up most who should do well. It's the other "I'm in the Navy so I should know this" stuff and that is where they separate the average from above average sailor.

Now, I'm arguing in regards to the current system, want to argue that we should scrap tests all together and I wouldn't necessarily be opposed to that, but it would bring in other variables.

While I agree the corpsmen are as likely to suddenly be tasked to provide administrative support as they are to be suddenly tasked to provide semi-independent medical care, I disagree that both knowledge bases are equally important. The fact is that admin is a field where you have time to adapt. If you show up to your new admin job and have no idea what a limited duty board is, much less how to set up for one, you know what happens? You stay late, get yelled at, and maybe have to do ithings twice. Its fixable. A missed diagnosis, or a mis-dosed drug, can result in an unfixable outcome, and it can happen on your first day providing care. Administrative education is helpful, but medical education is necessary.

Maybe a civilian medical education should just need to run in parallel with the exam, rather than trying to teach medical education through the Navy. Want to make HM3? You have to be an EMT-B or an CNA. HM2? Associates in RT, LVN, or EMT-I. HM1? Bachelors in RT, Paramedic with a Bachelors, or Nurse. Just send them back to school with each promotion.

 

[Shikima]

While I agree the corpsmen are as likely to suddenly be tasked to provide administrative support as they are to be suddenly tasked to provide semi-independent medical care, I disagree that both knowledge bases are equally important. The fact is that admin is a field where you have time to adapt. If you show up to your new admin job and have no idea what a limited duty board is, much less how to set up for one, you know what happens? You stay late, get yelled at, and maybe have to do ithings twice. Its fixable. A missed diagnosis, or a mis-dosed drug, can result in an unfixable outcome, and it can happen on your first day providing care. Administrative education is helpful, but medical education is necessary.

Maybe a civilian medical education should just need to run in parallel with the exam, rather than trying to teach medical education through the Navy. Want to make HM3? You have to be an EMT-B or an CNA. HM2? Associates in RT, LVN, or EMT-I. HM1? Bachelors in RT, Paramedic with a Bachelors, or Nurse. Just send them back to school with each promotion.

I agree with what your intent is. The caveat would be IDC. Unless you talk about phasing this out completely and just have PAs.

 

[Perrotfish]

Follow up question. For the kind of corpsmen that score 80s on this thing, is it a year round study kind of thing? Or is this the kind of exam where even the people who do well really start studying a month before.

As I said I'm trying to develop a review course. I am trying to figure out what kind of timeline would be reasonable.

 

[notdeadyet]

May be a stupid question, but wouldn't a senior Corman with direct experience and having been all through this be better able to develop this kind of training?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Perrotfish]

May be a stupid question, but wouldn't a senior Corman with direct experience and having been all through this be better able to develop this kind of training?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If there was a chief or HM1 who wanted to make this their project I have no doubt they would do a better job at it than I am doing. Most of our senior enlisted, though, are already overburdened with admin, and also have families that want them home. I, on the other hand, am bored.

Also I figure its a good education. Its amazing how little I know about anything in the military, considering that I've been on active duty for 3 years.

 

[Shikima]

Follow up question. For the kind of corpsmen that score 80s on this thing, is it a year round study kind of thing? Or is this the kind of exam where even the people who do well really start studying a month before.

As I said I'm trying to develop a review course. I am trying to figure out what kind of timeline would be reasonable.

I got a 96 on it after studying 1 month for it. All I did was do the question booklet. Mind you, this was in the early 90s - I'm sure not a lot has changed.

 

[HeresMotrin2]

Finally something I can comment on. I have been lurking for a long time and this is my first post. I am not a Doctor.

So, I am trying to put together a review course for our corpsmen, as part of a project to raise their advancement exam scores. As a first step, I took an online practice advancement exam. As I am now a board certified physician and I was usually above average on my steps and ITEs, I was sure I would ace it, but I wanted to see what level they were working at.

I recommend you have them go through the Corpsman manual. There is a mini test for every chapter at the end of the book. A lot of the questions in the manual are repeated verbatim on the tests every year. You can find a copy here: http://www.navybmr.com/study material/NAVEDTRA 14295B.pdf

I also recommend working on test taking skills. Something like a SAT prep course can go a long way. Feel free to PM me if you have any questions.

In my (limited) experience it isn't always the rate specific stuff that gets them, it's the BMR stuff and the other stuff from the bibliography they publish that is "boring" and not fun to study (eg Who gets on/off a small boat first and where do they sit).

I'd also concentrate on the info that your corpsman don't spend time with such as the dental or lab side of things (where are my DT's... . )

But yes the tests are terrible, but everyone takes the same test so we can't put too much blame there

The exam is not the only factor in determining if a sailor advances and the BMR is a small portion of that score. For E4 and E5, the exam score only counts for 45% of the Final Multiple score. Other factors such as their Performance Mark Average (P, MP, EP) are also very important. For example, an EP sailor gets 32 more points than a P sailor in their final multiple score calculation. The test IS terrible. The questions are based on the bibs even if the bibs are out of date. This creates a situation where we have to know the "Test" answer for advancement purposes only and the real answer for patient care.

Make the E4 exam something similar to the CNA exam, E5 compared to the LPN exam and E6 equiv to the NCLEX. And chief? Well... it's chief. Not a whole hell of a lot you can do as they're the only senior enlisted approved by congress.

Good idea on paper, however you have to consider that some NEC's have almost no patient care. Think of biomed technicians. Do you want them to have to learn to be a nurse while also being able to fix your equipment? Will they have to rotate to a ward to get the experience to go with what they are learning for advancement? Which one would take priority?

Remember they are testing questions that cover every single NEC and some corpsmen work very admin sided jobs (Aviation Med for example at many places) and corpsmen are many of the front line folks in the med board office so it would be important for that person to know that info.

This is where we might have a problem that in my opinion exists because of Navy heritage and customs. It feels like, in the Navy, if you work in any medical field, you're a Corpsman. Jack of all trades, master of none. The other services separate their medical staff by MOS that all have different advancement cutting scores. Here is a page with a list of Army medical MOS' (Enlisted and Officer) : http://army.com/info/mos/MedicalServiceCorps

The problem is you would have to do that for every rate in the Navy. Could they do it, probably. Will they do it, doubt it.

TLDR : Traditon , Heritage etc. It is possible though.

I disagree, it does work. Are we currently in a hurt for corpsmen at the upper levels that are better than what we have right now?

How often do you see Chiefs actually working with their sailors? I have seen great ones moving AMALs with their guys and going on a patrol so that one of their guys could get a rest day. Most of them however, are usually nowhere to be found. My impression is they are out doing what they need to do to make the next rank.

Maybe a civilian medical education should just need to run in parallel with the exam, rather than trying to teach medical education through the Navy. Want to make HM3? You have to be an EMT-B or an CNA. HM2? Associates in RT, LVN, or EMT-I. HM1? Bachelors in RT, Paramedic with a Bachelors, or Nurse. Just send them back to school with each promotion.

That would be wonderful. Question: How would you differentiate enlisted and officer nurses? I might possible for a corpsman to get a BSN while working at a hospital IF the Navy works out something with a school that would allow them to do their clinical rotation at a Naval Hospital. Question is, do you automatically commission them?

--------------------------------------------------------------

This turned into a longer post than I estimated. Oh well. What are your thoughts?

 

[DrMetal]

the exam score only counts for 45% of the Final Multiple score. Other factors such as their Performance Mark Average (P, MP, EP)

First: 45% is a large chunk. If my advancement as an officer depended (to the tune of 45%) on a test score, I damn well would study for that test and knock it out of the park.
Second: I don't think it's 45%, I think it's a larger percentage. The corpsman rating is the largest in the Navy; they need an objective way to break out all of the E-5 and below, and so I think they're putting more weight on the test these days. The problem with the whole P/MP/EP eval system is that it's entirely subjective. Have written hundreds of them, I know what kind of bullsht goes into them.....and I've seen plenty of HMs (my own) with great evals, from a ship's CO, who did not advance because they did poorly on the test.

The test is easy, they have all of the questions, there's no trickery involved. The problem is, some are not motivated to study, and that's their own fault. You can be the best "leader" in the world--call yourself Abraham Lincoln---you can't force someone to crack a book. Those who do have the will to study, do well and advance (and that's the way it should be).

 

[HeresMotrin2]

First: 45% is a large chunk. If my advancement as an officer depended (to the tune of 45%) on a test score, I damn well would study for that test and knock it out of the park.

Agreed. To me that's the easy part. It doesn't mean that I think it's a good system. Physician analogy: Should a Cardiologist be tested on knowledge that is only relevant to Neurosurgeons, Orthopedic and General Surgeons? That's how the test feels like.

I don't think it's 45%, I think it's a larger percentage.

It's not. It would be nice if it were a larger percentage. I have met sailors that have scored 100% on the test but did not advance due to the other factors. If interested, please see below.

The problem is, some are not motivated to study, and that's their own fault.

True. Some don't need to study much and are able to score in the 97th or 98th percentile (Myself included). Some study for hours every day, but are unable to get a good score. Not everyone is good at studying. Some enlisted because they did not want to go to college and don't know how to take tests which is why I suggested to OP that SAT prep could be a good thing for his/her sailors. It's not necessarily their fault.

 

[DrMetal]

Agreed. To me that's the easy part. It doesn't mean that I think it's a good system. Physician analogy: Should a Cardiologist be tested on knowledge that is only relevant to Neurosurgeons, Orthopedic and General Surgeons? That's how the test feels like.



It's not. It would be nice if it were a larger percentage. I have met sailors that have scored 100% on the test but did not advance due to the other factors. If interested, please see below.

True. Some don't need to study much and are able to score in the 97th or 98th percentile (Myself included). Some study for hours every day, but are unable to get a good score. Not everyone is good at studying. Some enlisted because they did not want to go to college and don't know how to take tests which is why I suggested to OP that SAT prep could be a good thing for his/her sailors. It's not necessarily their fault.

It is their fault if they insist on watching every comic book movie ever made, instead of cracking a pub and studying. If you're smart enough to become a corpsman, you're smart enough to advance yourself (to at leat E-6). An SAT prep course would be great for the SAT...oh btw theyre readily available via Navy College...but again, you cant force your sailors to take advantage of the opportunities they're already afforded. They need to take that action themselves.

 

[HeresMotrin2]

It is their fault if they insist on watching every comic book movie ever made, instead of cracking a pub and studying. If you're smart enough to become a corpsman, you're smart enough to advance yourself (to at leat E-6). An SAT prep course would be great for the SAT...oh btw theyre readily available via Navy College...but again, you cant force your sailors to take advantage of the opportunities they're already afforded. They need to take that action themselves.

Fine. Be a "Leader" and call yourself Abraham Lincoln. When things do not go your way blame the sailors. That's the way the Navy seems to work anyhow. I came here because OP seems like he wants to help his juniors and I wanted to provide some info. I'll just stop here unless someone has questions.

 

[Shikima]

I guess you failed to read my suggestions on how to approach multiple NECs. So much for 'attention to details'.

 

[HeresMotrin2]

I guess you failed to read my suggestions on how to approach multiple NECs. So much for 'attention to details'.

I didn't miss it. I can think of a few ways to make it work and I can think of even more reasons why big Navy would say it can't be done. I feel like I have offended some people here so I'll just leave it at that.

 

[DrMetal]

I didn't miss it. I can think of a few ways to make it work and I can think of even more reasons why big Navy would say it can't be done. I feel like I have offended some people here so I'll just leave it at that.

You haven't offended anyone.

Here's the bottom line with respect to corpsman (or any enlisted) advancement: the individual needs to put in the effort. No amount of leadership (good or bad....barring extreme examples) is going to sway the outcome much. If you allow your guys ample time to study, you provide ample opportunities to get good evals (give them challenging duties, tasks, etc)....then you've done your job as a leader. The rest is up to the individual. If the individual chooses to not study or to royally F-up his/her job, then said individual will not advance....and that's not your fault....move on to the next problem.