Posted on Feb 8, 2020
Should the promotion points earned from passing your ACFT be scaled according to your score?
17.8K
16
5
3
3
0
So I read somewhere online that the Army is thinking about a GO/NO GO for the new PT test. Basically if you get a go, you get points, a no go gets you zero. But if you get a go you get the same amount of points no matter what your score is. I don't think that is fair or going to make people better. Except for the few who are overachievers, the rest will just do the minimum to get the max points. Now in the article they talked about making military class worth more like Ranger School or make expert on weapons more points. For most MOS that won't work because like my MOS I go once every two years to the range. That will not be fair for everyone and no one will care to do their best on the PT test except for the few like me. So think it should be if you max it you get the max points like 180 for SGT promotion, if you get 450-499 you get 160, 400-449 140, and so on. This will still push people to work harder and make it fair across the board for each MOS. The three minimum level are still in play. If you can do the lowest required amount for your MOS, then reclass or get kicked out after the second attempt. The whole point of this test is to make us more fit for combat. So if I am gold and do the minimum, then how do you expect me to do the work of an infantryman if he goes down. Because the believe is he should be at 80 percent of the max which after talking the test once I am at 87 or higher in every event. Please let me know what you think about this and if you agree that this should be the new standard for promotions?
Posted in these groups: 
ACFT
ACFT
Posted 5 y ago
Responses: 4
5
5
0
Don't believe what you read when the Army times reports on "possible changes" to anything. I can't tell you how many times I've seen the SGT/SSG promotion system change and how many more times the Army said they would change it one way but went another. This ACFT concept has been talked about for almost a decade now. It has been announced to take effect and delayed twice so far. As sure as I'm standing here, the ACFT will not fully replace the APFT in October as scheduled.
Now, as to why. This is something that I've pointed out since the Army started talking about a gender neutral PT test - it would not be fair to females. If the Army simply replaces the APFT with the ACFT it would disadvantage females and the same female veterans groups who lobbied and sued to allow females into combat arms would again sue because women receive lower promotion points and be less competitive for promotion than their male counterparts in the same MOS's. Which is a very valid point, and also a very valid EO complaint.
So, what are the options? Is there already a functioning example of a working solution? Indeed, there is. The Marines solved this same dilemma by keeping both the APFT and the ACFT (their versions of them). The combat test is a gender neutral pass/fail and the PT test is a scaled scored event.
That's one solution, keep both tests. The other solution is to remove the APFT completely, keep the ACFT as a go/no go event and remove all the PT score points from promotion points altogether. But that would disincentive APFT and the Army likes physical fitness.
Over the next year or two you will most likely hear the new SMA voice his opinion on some of these matters and you'll see changes because some of his views are different from the last SMA who really pushed the ACFT progress. It might not even be until the next SMA is appointed until we settle on an actual ACFT policy.
Now, as to why. This is something that I've pointed out since the Army started talking about a gender neutral PT test - it would not be fair to females. If the Army simply replaces the APFT with the ACFT it would disadvantage females and the same female veterans groups who lobbied and sued to allow females into combat arms would again sue because women receive lower promotion points and be less competitive for promotion than their male counterparts in the same MOS's. Which is a very valid point, and also a very valid EO complaint.
So, what are the options? Is there already a functioning example of a working solution? Indeed, there is. The Marines solved this same dilemma by keeping both the APFT and the ACFT (their versions of them). The combat test is a gender neutral pass/fail and the PT test is a scaled scored event.
That's one solution, keep both tests. The other solution is to remove the APFT completely, keep the ACFT as a go/no go event and remove all the PT score points from promotion points altogether. But that would disincentive APFT and the Army likes physical fitness.
Over the next year or two you will most likely hear the new SMA voice his opinion on some of these matters and you'll see changes because some of his views are different from the last SMA who really pushed the ACFT progress. It might not even be until the next SMA is appointed until we settle on an actual ACFT policy.
(5)
(0)
5
5
0
You read somewhere? Look until it comes down fro DA then it isn't happening, and once they make a decision it won't matter what anyone thinks about it. Hope they have a forum on it for input before they do make decision.
(5)
(0)
2
2
0
I think it should be scaled. Those who perform at a higher level should have an advantage.
(2)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google