quote:

Originally posted by jv:
Snufkin - I assume you're talking about the written test on 4/23.

I just took it too, although it was my first time, so I have no idea what to think. I don't feel like I breezed through it, or failed miserably.

I thought the biographical section was a pain in the ass. I guess after taking the test a few times, you know what to expect and can prep your answers. But I felt rushed in that section.

The really hard part, though, is waiting until July for the results ...

Yep, this past Saturday! Last year's text was a lot longer due to an actual lunch break and two written essays. This time around, I think they changed it around in order to not give an advantage to those of us who weren't taking it again.

Agreed with you about the bio section - they make the lines you have to write on so small. After 15 minutes of writing, my hand started to cramp up! For me, the worst part was that some of the questions were so general or broad, it was hard in the short period of time to remember a specific example of it.

quote:

Last year's text was a lot longer due to an actual lunch break and two written essays.

How nauseating. Sounds like a positive change, and since it's probably cheaper they might continue it. I was thrilled when our group got out at about 1:15 p.m.

quote:

For me, the worst part was that some of the questions were so general or broad, it was hard in the short period of time to remember a specific example of it.

Agree totally. I wish I could post some examples of the inane, asinine stuff they asked. But I don't want to get myself disqualified!

The other thing that bugged me was the fact that they sometimes asked what was essentially the same question two or three times. Oh well ... all in all it wasn't too bad. It was maybe the first standardized test I've ever taken where I didn't feel like my life somehow depended on passing!

I read on another message board that there seemed to be fewer test takers this year. Any truth to that in your view? I was in the LA area, and there were maybe 80 people at my site. But then again, there must be 10 sites or so in LA.

I'm glad to see others still pluggin at it.

I retook the test as well. Although I'm currently finishing up security clearance, I don't think my last oral score is high enough to get my a spot.

I felt much more confident about the written this time. Of course, last time I was sure I failed and I passed so I don't know how to take my feelings.

I'm glad to hear that you say they dropped an essay question. I really thought they did, but I wasn't sure. They changed the general knowledge test a bit as well so that you had certain questions based upon the cone you selected. I don't think that made it any easier or harder though.

The biographical section is probably both the easiest and most annoying. Although I was a good test taker and filled in the blanks where required, I'm pretty convinced they don't even check that. I think it is just a way to curb people from blindly answering super positive about everything.

I think I rocked the English section.

Hopefully, I passed and can get a fall assessment scheduled. The good thing is that if I get a good score this time, I'll already have most of the security done so I can breeze through that. I switched to Public Diplomacy for this shot.

Good luck to both of you.

p.s. Oh...as far as numbers go. At my exam I heard the moderators say that they had half show up. We had about 60 present. I think half is pretty typical though. Last year about 19,000 took the test. 4,000 passed the written and I think around 300 or so passed the oral assessment. My assessors told me that to make me feel better about passing...but not really.

skobb,
fingers crossed for you! (good luck that is)...
i'm just wondering if anyone knows if there is a similar procedure for british/irish foreign service positions - or if anyone has experience of the system outside the US???
its thursday and i'm going through my weekly i-wanna-change-jobs/careers mood...

Thanks Kiki,

I don't know the specifics, but I am certain there must be a similar program for British and Irish citizens. After all, they also have consulates around the world and they must be staffed. Try this link to get you started.

I think there was probably 30 people total at my exam, which is a much smaller community than LA.

quote:

I felt much more confident about the written this time. Of course, last time I was sure I failed and I passed so I don't know how to take my feelings.

That was my experience last year! This time around (especially after getting pounded in the Orals), I felt much more relaxed about the exam. But for all I know, they may not pass me this time. Especially because I am stubborn and continue to stick to the Political Cone, which requires the highest score.

Did those of you who took the exam use either of these books?

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=378&item=4535075485&rd=1&ssPageName=WD1V

https://actrs19.act.org/app/fswesg/fswesg

UnspecifiedGender,

I did download the FSWE official study guide and go through it. I took the practice test and when I scored it found that I pretty much got my ass handed to me. Was it useful? Hard to say. I guess it is useful in the sense that it lets you see what the format is like and a general feel for the questions.

I've heard that the Arco guide is a bit out of date and is actually quite a bit harder than the real thing. I didn't actually use it though so I couldn't say.

Your best prep is to read a quality newspaper everyday and good magazines like 'Time' and 'The Economist.' I read a lot of books on U.S. and world history, politics and government. Even books like "U.S. History for Dummies" can be a great way to refresh on the basics.

I would highly recommend learning the ins and outs of the Constitution as much as possible.


Did you take the FSWE on April 23? If not, you've got plenty of time to prepare for next year's.

I used the FSWE offical guide too. I'm not sure I'd say it was all that helpful, but for $15 it might be worth it. It at least prepares you for the format of the questions and the style of the test.

The test is so general that it's hard to "substantively" prepare. That is, unless you want to read a few dozen thick books on world history, US and foreign politics, management theory, economics, law, and geography. Some people do, but I decided to more or less wing it.

Another approach is to bone up on your weakest areas. The study guide has a list of recommended books, and you could just pick a few. I second the recommendation about the constitution. You're guaranteed at least a few questions about which amendment says what.

You can download their recommended reading list. I believe, in theory, if you read all of the books you would have the answers to all of the questions. Early in the process I thought I would try to read as many as possible. I think I got through 2 or 3. There are over 90 on the list. Many of the books are very dry, textbooks.

Thanks u2. Nope didn't do it this year...2006's my year. I did however just come back from the library with the Constitution in hand.

I think one of the reasons I found the Constitution part challenging is that I couldn't find a good study guide to it. It's easy to find the actual U.S. Constitution, but I couldn't find a good resource for dumbing it down.

Ultimately, the written exam is just a screening process. The oral assessment is the true test.

quote:

Originally posted by skobb:
I think one of the reasons I found the Constitution part challenging is that I couldn't find a good study guide to it. It's easy to find the actual U.S. Constitution, but I couldn't find a good resource for dumbing it down.

Don't know if it's of value as of yet. But it's called 'The Constitution and the States: the Framing and Adoption of the Federal Constitution' by Patrick Conley. We shall see.

quote:

Originally posted by skobb:
I think one of the reasons I found the Constitution part challenging is that I couldn't find a good study guide to it.

Skobb, I recommend three years of law school for that. It'll only cost you $100,000 and it's guaranteed to confuse you even more.

Actually, never mind.

A word of advice on the Con Law books: Get something as apolitical and basic as possible. Constitutional interpretation is obviously a very politicized field. Something like this is pretty good. The annotations are the most important part.

UG: The book you got sounds interesting, but it might only focus on the articles (i.e., the main text). Make sure you're up to speed on the amendments too.

quote:

Originally posted by jv:
Make sure you're up to speed on the amendments too.

Will do...