My Current Qualifications

<p>Not even God understands how the admissions board makes their decisions.</p>

<p>I know how the admissions board makes their decisions. See the have this giant dartboard scattered with the names of the candidates. Then everytime they get board in the office and decide to play paintball they remove the names that get covered in paint, as they would not look good. Therefore if your name is left at the end you win, congratulations. HA!</p>

<p>And yes Zaphod you did miss that. I said it. Because I had a presidential, but I also had one from the Secretary of the Navy.</p>

<p>Happy 666 everyone. Hope all is well.</p>

<p>Can you expand/expound a bit on the "nomination" process and working to "influence" that? We've wondered how much or how little to work at connecting those dots, asking for favor, etc. Or can playing politics harm a candidate's possibility?</p>

<p>Really welcome really sound advice re: this one.</p>

<p>Our darlin' daughter managed to get a Presidential nomination and one from our congresswoman, despite the fact that this district is incredibly competitive (we were told 217 applications for nomination, ouch!) She did not have to play politics, but she did spend a lot of time completing the application package. The essay is probably a large factor, as well as letters of recommendation from teachers, coaches, etc...It can't hurt to make contact with a coach from your sport at the academy. It may help to have someone looking for your application from the other end.</p>

<p>So select the people who will be writing recommendations carefully; if they can't be counted on to submit them in a timely manner, select someone else. Be sure to choose people who understand and appreciate the commitment necessary to attend a service academy. DD had to avoid her more left-leaning instructors because they did not support her decision.</p>

<p>Other than that, just keep doing what you are doing. Good luck!</p>

<p>It is sad but true that politics will have at least SOME bearing in the nomination process because you're dealing with politicians, who make liability lawyers look respectable. </p>

<p><dives for="" cover="" as="" bill="" chucks="" his="" shoe...=""> ;)</dives></p>

<p>The most important thing influencing the nomination process (aside from the raw data of grades, ECA's, etc.) is coming across to the congresscritter as being EXTREMELY motivated, COMPLETELY dedicated, and COMPLETELY SINCERE about wanting to attend your choice of Academy. In that regard, contacting the MOC, doing well at the interview(s), taking every opportunity to park yourself in front of him/her (or more likely, his or her designated STAFFER) to express your interest and commitment is really important.</p>

<p>Getting recommendations from as many respectable people as possible (especially if they are known to or by the congresscritter) is also helpful.</p>

<p>Now, the "dangerous" parts are twofold: First, you really don't want to come across as a smack. That might hurt your chances. (Of course, treating these political vermin like the gods they aren't might stroke their ego. Who knows?). Second, beware partisan wrangling of any kind. You are there to request a nomination, and to present your case as to why YOU deserve it more than the next schmuck. Stick to that if your MOC is of a different political persuation than you are. The sad fact is that the dirtbag has the power and you don't.</p>

<p>So, do well in school, do sports, do ECA's. Present your case with confidence, and ensure that you express to them not just your desire, but your COMMITMENT to attend the Academy.</p>

<p>Now, some political animals (like my father), might even go a bit further. I have no idea if campaign contributions, shall we say, "help". I'm not making accusations, but we ARE talking about POLITICIANS, here. Also, if you know anyone who knows SOMEBODY, arrange a meeting to request a recommendation from THEM. This is VERY much like a standard job interview when you see multiple people: you have to sell yourself to each.</p>

<p>In my case, my dad worked at WPIX in New York. He was dear friends with Donna Hannover, who of course married Rudy Giuliani, who was the US District Attorney at the time. HE wrote me a recommendation. My dad got letters of recommendation from the President of WPIX (show me a politician who isn't worried about what the president of his local TV station thinks of him). George Steinbrenner (sound weird? - He made his millions in SHIPPING) wrote one for me. Etc.</p>

<p>Now, do you NEED such high-powered names? NO. You can get principals, former job bosses, coaches, and the like. Maybe you CAN go to your mayor and ask for an interview and a recommendation. The question is, how far are you willing to go to get the nomination without going sleazy (which won't work)?</p>

<p>Before you panic, don't. THOUSANDS of perfectly normal people get nominations every year. You can get one, too.</p>

<p>Just want to add to the above concerning nominations.</p>

<p>The more the better!! If you have more than one, you are also in more than one candidate 'pool.' Say, for example, you have the Congressional nomination, and the NROTC nomination. If your congressman's quota is filled, or you aren't ranked high enough to get one from him, the board can turn to your NROTC nomination and give you that one.</p>

<p>I really keeps gives you a leg-up in the game and a considerably higher chance if you have more than one nominating source.</p>

<p>I have similar q's as WPig. I have read various suggestions on this forum concerning MOC noms. Some say "get to know the MOC's staff". Others like beachmom indicate that one should just follow the procedure as indicated. Does anyone have some concrete ideas what a candidate can do to rise to the top for consideration for a MOC Nom? I was told by some of our local school authorities that we should "nudge" local politicians for some inside help. I do not believe that is very honorable, but I assume the local school offical is trying to help because they have BTDT. I am feeling usless because I don't know how to help advise my son. Thanks for you collective patience toward us 2011 newbies!</p>

<p>Zaphod - you type faster than us motals can think!!!</p>

<p>Fastest 5 fingers on the planet! ;)</p>

<p>(I never learned to type. I peck.)</p>

<p>
[quote]
Can you expand/expound a bit on the "nomination" process and working to "influence" that? We've wondered how much or how little to work at connecting those dots, asking for favor, etc. Or can playing politics harm a candidate's possibility?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>There was a lot posted on this last year, but some of it is worth repeating here. Based on your question, I would like to raise a yellow flag of CAUTION with the process- as soundly as I can.</p>

<p>To state things simply: being less than honest and above-board about EVERYTHING connected with the application process- including nominations- will only bite you in the @$$. </p>

<p>Remember above all else, you are entering into a place that values "honor," "truth," "integrity." To present anything short of that will not only harm your candidate's possiblity, but in my opinion, will stop the application process dead in its tracks. Playing politics simply has no place in process, and while some may try, and some even slip through the cracks, most will be "found"...don't let that be you.</p>

<p>Keep in mind you will most likely NOT be interviewed by your MOC- most, if not all, have a committee that will conduct interviews and make their recommendations as to who gets offered what. The MOCs place a lot of faith in the nomination committees they put together- which they hand-select to do just that. </p>

<p>Second, I highly doubt anyone on the committee (if you are even privy as to who they are ahead of time) will be interested in any influence mom or dad or aunt or uncle (or whomever else you might have hiding in the shadows) have to pull some strings in your favor. </p>

<p>Truth is, THEY are the ones sitting in the drivers seat, and most will not only be savy to any game-playing, but will be turned off by the attempt. They could care less about who you know (or who the other candidates know for that matter, for inevitably someone else will know someone bigger-better-and with more influence than your ace). </p>

<p>What WILL impress them to select you are solid grades, good SATs, leadership skills, motivation, committment, gut-wrenching DESIRE and any other expereinces that demonstrate your integerity that you can bring to the table. ALL of your effort needs to be on that- what you can and will bring to the table- period. </p>

<p>This is NOT about connecting the dots, or asking favors, or playing politics. Its ALL about putting your very best forward and trusting that the system works.</p>

<p>Please re-read the nomination section in Smallwoods book- if it is sound advice you are seeking, you will find it there. There are comments from people that have sat on the MOC's nomination committees that will steer you in the right direction.</p>

<p>As always, honesty is the best policy- in all matters connected with this process- so let honesty be your guide. </p>

<p>As hard as it is, trust that the system works. </p>

<p>Best of luck!</p>

<p>I have to echo Navy2010's comments. Based on our experience, politics NEVER came into play. My son received a nomination form a senator who is quite liberal. He, in contrast, is extremely conservative. Also honesty IS your best policy. One misrepresentation may be the straw that breaks the camel's back. Why take that risk?</p>

<p>I'll weigh in on the 'how to influence your politician' too.</p>

<p>In our case, our local Congressman is as conservative as we are. But they did NOT think too highly of alot of politics coming into play over the nomination process. Our daughter made a point of introducing herself to the Congressman's person in charge of nominations in her freshman year - simply to say : "Hello - I plan on applying to the Naval Academy and I want you to now I'm coming back in a few years." She did this on her own. Then when the office staff changed in early Junior year of high school, she went back in and did the same thing. The advantage was that come the County-wide Academy interest night - where young people from all over came to check out the booths from all the Academies/ROTC, etc....the lady recognized my child. I specifically asked the lady if things like volunteering to intern in the office, or doing any kind of help for the Congressman helps ones' chances for consideration - not so much because we wanted to do this - but because I was really curious to know if this was something that people try. The lady explained that in reality - the Congressman and his Staff have VERY LITTLE to do with the nomination process from their office. They bring in a Nomination Board of Military People who review all the applications, plan the interviews, make the recommendations to the Congressman and then the Congressman signs the paperwork. It's not that the congressman is disinterested in the young people....it is so that the qualified people who know and understand what to look for in selecting a pool of candidates from his district to nominate for the Service Academies make the decision .... and this means there is a fair and equal shot at this process and eliminates any hint of favoritism.</p>

<p>I agree w/ PeskeMom.
We knew the district office manager for Senator. Prior to interview, applications, etc., we mentioned to him that application would be forthcoming and please keep an "eye" out for it.
He said that he would, BUT that the recommendations came from the nominations committee and that he had very little, i.e. none, input into the matter.
In fact, Son did not receive the nomination from this Senator but from the other one.<br>
I second getting as many as possible, Son also received nomination from our Congressman.</p>

<p>Unless your contacts are extremely high level, i.e. BIG contributor or Senator is a personal friend, I don't think politics enters into the nomination process. [That is, truly personal connections may earn you a spot on the list if you are otherwise qualified.] I don't think a lack of connections keeps you off the list.</p>

<p>Letters of recommendation should be managed more than you think. Most people don't really know what to write. They want to be helpful though. So, we gave each person some "talking points" to use in their letters and, in at least one case as I recall, the writer asked us to read and edit his letter prior to signing. We did and he was very happy w/ the result. </p>

<p>Re politics. It can't hurt to some degree. Son had opportunity to work for a Democratic Congressman or a Republican state legislator. We chose the Republican, who wrote letters of recommendation to our Republican Senators and Congressman. Couldn't have hurt.</p>

<p>For the record:</p>

<p>As you may have guessed, I'm pretty damned Conservative (though I wasn't back then). I got my nomination from a Liberal MOC. Never once during the conversation were politics brought up.</p>

<p>What 3106 said above is PARAMOUNT: Honesty is CRUCIAL. They have plenty of people from which to choose, so don't think you're smarter than everyone else. Go in, state your case, and let the chips fall. You'll be better off.</p>

<p>As for influences, I simply brought up the point because we all know human nature. In my case, the staffers did the actual selection and the MOC approved them. Others may follow the route Peskemom described. You've got to get the lay of the minefield YOU have to traverse and plant your feet accordingly. Did all those recommendations I got help? I have no idea, but for sure they didn't hurt. Certainly a nice thing to have in case a tie has to be broken between you and someone else.</p>

<p>Hey, no one said this was going to be easy. ;)</p>

<p>Thanks. This lends genuine perspective, really valuable insight.</p>

<p>It's interesting to note the quick digression (and one would think a disparate point) to the notion of dishonesty, as though it's synonymous with political influence. And perhaps that in itself should be enough reason to have concern about my earlier question.</p>

<p>So political influence quickly connotes being less than honest, somehow dishonorable. One would think it might be just the opposite, i.e. that we and others of importance in their circle should be in personal communication with our representatives to ensure that they know what we think, why, and what we believe merits their favor. (I know, nice idea but not reality unless we're interested in supporting the next campaign.)</p>

<p>As my grad school advisor chronically reminded me (of his perspective, at least), EVERYTHING is politics. And of course, no matter how much we'd like to believe in and pursue what we think is the high road, as though this was an objective process, that would seem to be a little naive. While much of the appointment process, thankfully, is seemingly objective ... test scores, activities, physical fitness, gpa's, medical exams, and more, all of that is for naught in the absence of that political nomination. Necessary but insufficient. </p>

<p>While I don't know the orgins of all this, I suspect geographical diversity would be the overt claim. Cynical observation might suggest that it allows for enlisting political support and involvement among those who determine how much funding is granted. It may not be mere coincidence that the USCGA is low on the funding totempole among the academies, where individual student merit rules the admissions process.</p>

<p>But not here to argue the merits of the system (ok, that's maybe a little fib ;-) ) that which is; but rather to get some "objective" reality checks on what seems to be essentially "subjective" to the process... UNLESS one gets the nomination. (We wanna party with you guys and gals!) lol </p>

<p>Do we have any failed nominee-seekers in our midst, to glean their perpsective? </p>

<p>Again, thanks for thoughtful responses. They help to edify, guide novice nomination-seekers. We'll keep plugging for sure. The end would certainly justify the effort. Go Navy! Beat Army!!</p>

<p>The reason the nominations are required is most likely a throwback to when there was a real concern that the President could control the Officer Corps and turn it into a Personal Guard, thus threatening the use of the military in an overthrow. By ensuring that the majority of appointees to the Service Academies are nominated by MOC's, you retain a balance of power. Not entirely a bad idea, if you ask me.</p>

<p>As for honesty/dishonesty. My recommendations and activities were entirely above-board. The old story stands: Smoke 'em if you got 'em. Where it can become dishonest is when one tries to replace individual qualifications with politics.</p>

<p>Additionally, the issue of honesty is not limited to greasing the skids with the MOC. Some kids go into these things and put up one hell of a show, get the nomination, get the appointment, then drop out after a week because they "didn't understand what it was all about". Right. :rolleyes:</p>

<p>THAT probably occurs more than the grease-the-skids kind. Still, I'm cynical of ANY politician, especially these days, when so few are worth anything more than scorn.</p>

<p>Could not agree more. One way of looking at this is it boils down to a matter of trust. And that can be problemmatic, perhaps?</p>

<p>Really, it's not a matter of what I might think, prefer, desire. It's just trying to determine how much or how little one should consider the political model and its realities of the nomination in working to guide and assist one's worthiest of candidates, with no desire to embelish, exaggerate, or mislead.</p>

<p>I guess one just works to "smoke 'em" and pray.</p>

<p>Son's experience mirrored 3106. In fact, it was clearly stated in all three of the MOC instructions that only 3 references be included in the packet and that the packet had to be complete to be considered. Any additional references mailed to the MOC office would not be included in the information forwarded to the board. Two of the MOC's even stated who the references needed to be from: Principal, guidance counselor or college advisor, Math/science instructor, and one other: coach, employer, church or member of the community. This system pretty much leveled the field.</p>

<p>As far as "managing" the letters of recommendation, I personally would stay clear of this tactic. You need to think long and hard about who you ask, and use individuals who truly know you rather than those who you think or your parents think might "get you the farthest". At most, I would only provide a copy of your resume, if requested. Let the writer write, that is why you asked them…</p>

<p>In most circles, a letter of recommendation that is reviewed by the subject prior to being submitted is no longer valid…isn’t this about honor and trust rather than “getting in”</p>

<p>As I was once told, you have to be elected before you can make a difference. You can get up and make your point if you want, but you might not get elected and that is fine. Many, many fine, honorable people have made their point and not been elected. Its the ones that are elected that are in a position to make a difference.</p>

<p>The fact is that most people do not have a clue what to write. One of the letters--we saw it afterwards--was simple: along the lines of he's a great kid. If I was on an admissions board and saw that I would think: Okay. But we have a 100 "great kids." The writer, though well-intentioned did not have the time or energy--understandable--to really write in depth.</p>

<p>On the other hand, if you think that letters of recommendation are not crafted--not dishonestly-- to include comments that are meaningful to the admissions board, I think that may be naive. Even as murky as it is, you [parent] and applicant have a far better idea of what the board is looking for than do friends.</p>

<p>The signer is still responsible for signing the letter. This person simply thanked us for including certain phrases he would not have thought of, e.g. leadership qualities, definition of our relationship [between son and him], why, based on his observations, he would make a fine naval officer.</p>

<p>The letters are just one component. Applicant still has to have the other qualities.
Application is a marathon, you are well-advised to use every resource available to you.</p>

<p>Our experience: During our son's junior year, a Capt., a 1958 grad of GCA & interviewer on the nomination board, highly involved with admissions, came to our home to speak with my son about his interest in CGA. During the discussion, my son ask about letters of recommendation and who should do them & what should they say. He said that his daughter had been accepted to the academy & that he found out later, when he starting working with admissions, that the letter that stood out the most for her, was the most simple. A letter written by her boss, who she'd worked for at a local ice cream shop all through high school. It talked about the daily life of a kid this boss "knew" & worked with. She's had the letters from family friends, who were Captains & Commanders. A boss at an ice cream shop ended up being the one they truly looked at. I don't know if this is much help but its one of those stories that kinda stuck with me.</p>