Clerical Officer Campaign 2016

doc11

Areas wrote: »

I went through the CO competition last year and it was so obvious when we had the supervised tests that there were some people who had gotten the first tests done for them. They were far more nervous, weren't sure what to expect, one lady didn't even know how to log on. There's no point in getting someone else to go the tests for you because in the long run you'll just get caught out.

I disagree if you get someone who excels at these tests you'll be ranked highly and at the supervised test all you need to do is pass and not necessarily get a high score. There's no getting caught out unless you fail.

Addle

Do you not have to show consistency?

relative1

doc11 wrote: »

I disagree if you get someone who excels at these tests you'll be ranked highly and at the supervised test all you need to do is pass and not necessarily get a high score. There's no getting caught out unless you fail.

You get ranked on your results from the stage 2 supervised tests and that is your position for the rest of the campaign. If there is a large discrepancy between your stage 1 and stage 2 results you may be disqualified for cheating

Areas

I just don't see the point of getting someone else to do the test for you.

relative1

doc11 wrote: »

I disagree if you get someone who excels at these tests you'll be ranked highly and at the supervised test all you need to do is pass and not necessarily get a high score. There's no getting caught out unless you fail.

You get ranked on your results from the stage 2 supervised tests and that is your position for the rest of the campaign. If there is a large discrepancy between your stage 1 and stage 2 results you may be disqualified for cheating

relative1

doc11 wrote: »

I disagree if you get someone who excels at these tests you'll be ranked highly and at the supervised test all you need to do is pass and not necessarily get a high score. There's no getting caught out unless you fail.

You get ranked on your results from the stage 2 supervised tests and that is your position for the rest of the campaign. If there is a large discrepancy between your stage 1 and stage 2 results you may be disqualified for cheating

relative1

doc11 wrote: »

I disagree if you get someone who excels at these tests you'll be ranked highly and at the supervised test all you need to do is pass and not necessarily get a high score. There's no getting caught out unless you fail.

You get ranked on your results from the stage 2 supervised tests and that is your position for the rest of the campaign. If there is a large discrepancy between your stage 1 and stage 2 results you may be disqualified for cheating

doc11

relative1 wrote: »

You get ranked on your results from the stage 2 supervised tests and that is your position for the rest of the campaign. If there is a large discrepancy between your stage 1 and stage 2 results you may be disqualified for cheating

you get ranked within your group at stage 2, if you're in the top tier after stage1 you'll stay there no matter how bad your scores are(i.e just pass).Say the top 100 after stage1 get called to supervised test no matter how bad you do in test you'll still be ranked in the top 100 as long as you pass. "disqualified for cheating" good luck trying to prove that. Your results from stage1 have far more bearing on your position for the campaign then stage 2.

mandik

Does anyone know if we're better off doing the self assesment tests or the practice tests for the junior management?

Addle

doc11 wrote: »

you get ranked within your group at stage 2, if you're in the top tier after stage1 you'll stay there no matter how bad your scores are(i.e just pass).Say the top 100 after stage1 get called to supervised test no matter how bad you do in test you'll still be ranked in the top 100 as long as you pass. "disqualified for cheating" good luck trying to prove that. Your results from stage1 have far more bearing on your position for the campaign then stage 2.

So you can only go up the order of merit if candidates ahead of you fail?

deseil

doc11 wrote: »

Areas wrote: »

I went through the CO competition last year and it was so obvious when we had the supervised tests that there were some people who had gotten the first tests done for them. They were far more nervous, weren't sure what to expect, one lady didn't even know how to log on. There's no point in getting someone else to go the tests for you because in the long run you'll just get caught out.

I disagree if you get someone who excels at these tests you'll be ranked highly and at the supervised test all you need to do is pass and not necessarily get a high score. There's no getting caught out unless you fail.

But you ll be a cheat!

Guffy

deseil wrote: »

But you ll be a cheat!

An employed cheat


I kid. Hope he's to thick to pass the supervised test

LunarSea

gufc21 wrote: »

An employed cheat


I kid. Hope he's to thick to pass the supervised test

Tee hee

(I know it was probably auto"correct")

doc11

gufc21 wrote: »

An employed cheat


I kid. Hope he's to thick to pass the supervised test

who's he?. To think that everyone that cheats gets caught is laughable. 37/80 pass is easy, basic English and basic math for a basic job. The problem is the ranking

Creol1

ando88 wrote: »

i was in the DCC building today, saw around 150 applications for the clerical positions. Two different shelves (one for dcc employees and other for members of the public)

I answered honestly and truthfully, fingers crossed I will at least get an interview

Wow, that's nothing. They'll be taking on a lot of people, so if that's the extent of people who have applied, those of us who applied should have a pretty good chance; I think Fingal CoCo's panel for COs is about 60/70 people.

Creol1

By the way, does previous public sector work count in terms of increments for new entrants to local government positions?

Technocentral

Creol1 wrote:

By the way, does previous public sector work count in terms of increments for new entrants to local government positions?

It would if it's equivalent eg previous co or eo work.

Jay Pentatonic

Creol1 wrote: »

Definitely not normal. Are you sure this is the 2016 campaign for civil service COs as advertised on publicjobs.ie?

It's just that there are lots of CO jobs advertised separately.

Yeah sorry just realised I posted in the wrong thread. It's the temp CO position I'm going for, so I'm guessing there's some differences in the competition or something

Creol1

Jay1989 wrote: »

Yeah sorry just realised I posted in the wrong thread. It's the temp CO position I'm going for, so I'm guessing there's some differences in the competition or something

There are; they are similar to an extent (they both have the situational judgement, etc.), but the TCO tests don't include the numerical, verbal or error-checking assessments.

Noreenee1

Did u apply either to strongly agree or strongly disagree or did u go down the middle a lot with agree or disagree

Sprog 4

Noreenee1 wrote: »

Did u apply either to strongly agree or strongly disagree or did u go down the middle a lot with agree or disagree

Strongly disagreed. With everything.

Guffy

Now part A is over.

Am i right in thinking, there is no real right or wrong answer to the questions? Its purely just a case of catagorising you for different roles within the civil service.

doc11

gufc21 wrote: »

Now part A is over.

Am i right in thinking, there is no real right or wrong answer to the questions? Its purely just a case of catagorising you for different roles within the civil service.

no they're scored just like part B

Noreenee1

Strongly agreed and strongly disagreed to everything
Do think it's best to strongly agree and strongly disagree rather than to just agree or disagree to some parts, someone said to me if u put down that u strongly agree and strongly disagreeing to everything they might think u r too argumentative what u think

Noreenee1

Is there anyone that has done the questionnaire Part A before and they strongly agreed or strongly disagreed to everything and got through to part b

LunarSea

Noreenee1 wrote: »

Strongly agreed and strongly disagreed to everything
Do think it's best to strongly agree and strongly disagree rather than to just agree or disagree to some parts, someone said to me if u put down that u strongly agree and strongly disagreeing to everything they might think u r too argumentative what u think

It's too hard to say as some of the answers had a very clear reason to strongly agree/disagree while others didn't.

Also you mave have strongly agreed/disagreed to them and gone for completely the opposite of what they want.

Saysay19

Part B

Friday July 8th to Thursday July 14th!

Verbal Reasoning and Numerical Reasoning

😟😟😟

LunarSea

Err, WTF is the numerical reasoning meant to be?

Just did the examples - unfamiliar, specific terminology (that relates to yur knowledge of the topic, not your numerical reasoning), tabs that change position when you click on them. The answers have almost nothing to do numerical reasoning, they're more to do with how you can get a lucky click on the right tab quick enough.

Way to change the damn format up and wait to let us know the week of the test. This has nothing in common with the previous examples :mad:

Ilyana 2.0

Well I crashed and burned in those practice tests. Not too hopeful about the real thing.

Areas

Ilyana 2.0 wrote: »

Well I crashed and burned in those practice tests. Not too hopeful about the real thing.

Keep practicing, maybe once you get familiar with the style of questions they might get easier