Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I think para 4.G and 5 provide some of what you are looking for. Also there are links on the page to the detailed requirements for different job series, so you'll want to dive down deeper as well.
The key thing when talking about qualifications and Education vs Experience vs Combination of both is about meeting the minimum "are you qualified for this position?" question. Combination of Both is often used for someone who has some education and some experience but not enough of either to qualify on that alone. It's not meant to disqualify people, but to provide a third opportunity to qualify. If you qualify on education for example, then you qualify.
Here's the thing to keep in mind. Qualify is the minimum. It's like a gate. Once through it, you still have to be among the most qualified and your resume has to stand out in the hiring manager's mind to get called for an interview. Too many people get focused on "I exceeded the qualifications…" (not saying you personally, but many do in general) when there are probably a hundred others who exceeded as well. I get many resumes that pass the HR qualification gate but don't have the actual KSAs for the specific job, or at least their resume doesn't show that they do.
For example, the thing I tell college kids all the time is their resume has to stand out. I'm hiring scientists and engineers and I'll see a thousand resumes from new grads that all say the same thing. Esp some schools have such a set format that after reviewing a few I can guess which school someone is from by the style they write the resume. For new grads, don't tell me you took classes in X, Y, and Z. The other thousand did too. Show me where you stood out and did undergrad research, published a paper, presented at a conference, held a leadership position in your professional society, something, anything, to separate you from the masses.
For older employees, it's much like the private sector. Show examples of results and leadership. I know that especially in my area, we aren't looking for good scientists and engineers. We are looking for looking for those who can lead a team of good scientists and engineers if you're talking higher level jobs.
I think para 4.G and 5 provide some of what you are looking for. Also there are links on the page to the detailed requirements for different job series, so you'll want to dive down deeper as well.
Well I tried to read that until my eyes started to bleed. Did it actually answer the question somewhere?
I literally got my FIRST phone call for an site interview and have been applying for jobs on USA jobs for four years with a degree and veteran preference. Guess everyone is getting the hell out of dodge in the private sector and trying to snatch up fed jobs. People are sick of private sector abuse
I literally got my FIRST phone call for an site interview and have been applying for jobs on USA jobs for four years with a degree and veteran preference. Guess everyone is getting the hell out of dodge in the private sector and trying to snatch up fed jobs. People are sick of private sector abuse
Thanks, tiff, for the help, but I didn't really understand which paragraph/section you were referring to.
YOUR answer did help somewhat. I get that certain candidates can qualify on either experience or education. I'm still trying to get something definitive on whether one or the other is better. In writing, does OPM say somewhere that the qualifying questions are not "rated" -- and that some where, on some scoring scale, down the line -- that minimally qualifying on education is not better/worse than qualifying based on experience (or vice versa).
Why doesn't OPM say in the questionnaire then, that IF you qualify based on both -- just pick one, it doesn't matter which. Short of that, I presume it could matter which one you check off. THAT is the issue about which there's no clarity.
Well I tried to read that until my eyes started to bleed. Did it actually answer the question somewhere?
Yes.
4.g Interpreting minimum educational requirements
Title 5 U.S.C. 3308 permits the establishment of minimum educational requirements only when OPM has determined that the work cannot be performed by persons who do not possess the prescribed minimum education. This includes instances where it would not be cost-effective for an individual to acquire, through on-the-job training, the KSA's necessary for successful performance of the critical duties within a reasonable period of time. In addition, education is sometimes required by law for a position because of the impact on public health and safety or national security.
The same minimum educational requirements apply to all applicants and employees, including employees detailed to an occupational series with minimum educational requirements.
It is important to recognize that on rare occasions there may be applicants who may not meet exactly the educational requirements for a particular series, but who, in fact, may be demonstrably well qualified to perform the work in that series because of exceptional experience or a combination of education and experience. In such instances, a more comprehensive evaluation must be made of the applicant's entire background, with full consideration given to both education and experience. To be considered qualified, the applicant's work experience must reflect significant full performance-level accomplishment directly applicable to the position to be filled, and be verified by a panel of at least two persons who have professional standing in the field. Such verification is necessary to insure that the applicant's background is compared to the appropriate duties and responsibilities required at the full performance level in the occupation. It is important that the comparison be based on a correctly classified position description or on OPM position classification standards or grade level criteria.
5. Crediting Combinations of Education and Experience
Education and experience can be combined to meet the minimum qualification requirements, as allowed in the applicable standard. To combine education and experience, determine the applicant's total qualifying experience as a percentage of the experience required for the grade level. Then determine the applicant's education as a percentage of the education required for the grade level. Finally, add the two percentages. The total percentage must equal at least 100 percent to qualify an applicant for that grade level. The group coverage standards contain examples of how to combine education and experience. Note that only graduate education in excess of the amount required for the next lower grade level can be combined with the appropriate level of experience to qualify applicants for positions at grades GS-9 and GS-11. For example, if a school's requirement for 1 year of graduate study is 18 semester hours, only graduate education beyond the first 18 semester hours or 27 quarter hours can be combined with GS-7 level experience to qualify for a GS-9 level position. Thus, 9 semester hours of graduate education and 6 months of GS-7 level experience cannot be combined to qualify for a GS-9 position.
Quote:
Originally Posted by selhars
Good luck!
If it did. I didn't see it.
Thanks, tiff, for the help, but I didn't really understand which paragraph/section you were referring to.
YOUR answer did help somewhat. I get that certain candidates can qualify on either experience or education. I'm still trying to get something definitive on whether one or the other is better. In writing, does OPM say somewhere that the qualifying questions are not "rated" -- and that some where, on some scoring scale, down the line -- that minimally qualifying on education is not better/worse than qualifying based on experience (or vice versa).
Why doesn't OPM say in the questionnaire then, that IF you qualify based on both -- just pick one, it doesn't matter which. Short of that, I presume it could matter which one you check off. THAT is the issue about which there's no clarity.
Don't overthink it. Qualifying means you passed the gate. Nothing more. Nothing less. The answer which is better to pick is whichever one you have that meets the qualification standard. It's meant to actually allow MORE people to qualify, not less. For example (and I'm totally making this numbers up), a job calls for a BS degree in atomic basketweaving OR 4 years experience as a atomic basketweaver OR combination of education and experience. If you have a BS in atomic basketweaving you meet the minimum qualifications. If you have 4 years as an atomic basketweaver, then you meet them. But let's say you went to school for only two years so you don't have a degree. And you've only been an atomic basketweaver for 3 years, so you don't have 4 years experience. So they essentially say you have 50% of a degree and 75% of the experience means you have 125% of the requirement, so you meet the minimum qualification. On the other hand, let's say you do have a BS in atomic basketweaving you've been doing it for 25 years. You still meet the minimum requirement. At this point, they don't care that you exceed it, they just care that you meet the minimum so you go in the qualified pile.
Now the total experience and your other attributes will come into play later when the hiring official reads your resume and compares you to the actual duties vs what other candidates have. But that's later in the hiring process.
Education alone is not a requirement for jobs except those that typically require education to learn such as scientists, engineers, doctors, lawyers. Most jobs don't have specific education requirements because historically they hired high school graduates at entry level and you learned on the job over a period of years before moving up. But that is changing for higher level jobs because the jobs are getting more complex and the competition is getting stiffer.
For example (and I'm totally making this numbers up), a job calls for a BS degree in atomic basketweaving OR 4 years experience as a atomic basketweaver OR combination of education and experience.
Thanks so much!
So in your example you're saying if a person has a Master's DegreeAND20 years' experience... it makes absolutely no difference -- anywhere, at any time, for any scoring -- and at no time has anything to do with being rated "qualified" vs. "highly" or "best" qualified to be referred -- which option you pick -- education or experience?
That's what you're saying?
IF so, why can't OPM make that plain -- on the application questionnaire -- so people can read that and have the explanation clear right there when they're answering the question?
Why doesn't the questionnaire say then that if you have more than the minimum it doesn't matter whether you pick education or experience? I don't get why that's not explained. (You know, given how they're quick to say everything has to be "fair and transparent," and all.)
Thanks so much!
So in your example you're saying if a person has a Master's DegreeAND20 years' experience... it makes absolutely no difference -- anywhere, at any time, for any scoring -- and at no time has anything to do with being rated "qualified" vs. "highly" or "best" qualified to be referred -- which option you pick -- education or experience?
You're conflating two things -- meeting qualifications which is a gate and being among the best qualified which is an interpretation. If for example, it's an engineer position, do you have the knowledge to be an engineer. Yes or No. If the answer is "no" then they don't look any further. If "yes" then it's like any other job -- do you have the right knowledge, skills, experience, for that specific job and how do you compare to others who applied.
Now am I going to say that no person, anywhere, at any time for any purpose won't do something different? Of course not. Someone is bound to do something at some time out of order. You're trying to put too fine an edge on a simple question.
The real point is pick whichever puts you in the best light and work on ensuring your resume shines.
You yourself say “pick the one that puts you in the best light.” And that is my question: which one……education or experience……puts a candidate with more than the minimum qualifications in the best light?
Or perhaps I should ask YOU if YOU have more than the minimum education and experience required, which would you pick: education or experience, to qualify YOU for the position? What would you recommend a family member pick: education or experience?
Also being very knowledgeable about these things, why do you think it is not explained in the questionnaire itself? Wouldn’t that be more fair and transparent?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
