Occupation Evaluation System

The ACE evaluation system for occupations has three major components: the selection of evaluators, the materials required for evaluation, and the procedures and guidelines evaluators use in reaching decisions and making recommendations.

Selection of Evaluators

Nominations for evaluators are requested from postsecondary institutions, professional and disciplinary societies, education associations, and regional accrediting associations.

The criteria for selection of evaluators are as follows:

• The area of an evaluator's competence will closely approximate the area of the training to be evaluated.
• Preference will be given to candidates with five or more years of postsecondary teaching or administrative experience, including curriculum development.
• Preference will be given to candidates who are generally receptive to the recognition of learning that occurs in a variety of settings.

An evaluator candidate is interviewed by a staff member to determine whether the individual meets the selection criteria.

An effort is also made to obtain a diverse geographic representation on the team. Subject-matter specialists represent a variety of postsecondary institutional types.

Materials Required for Evaluation

In order to make a recommendation, evaluators must first identify the skills, competencies, and knowledge associated with a given occupation specialty. The materials relevant to the evaluation are made available to staff members and evaluators by the military services. Materials include:

• Army — the official Army MOS manual, which describes the duties and qualifications for each MOS; technical manuals, field manuals, and other publications used by enlisted soldiers and warrant officers in the day-to-day performance of their duties and by enlisted soldiers to prepare for their MOS evaluation tests; enlisted MOS skill-level evaluation tests; and study guides that outline the proficiency requirements for each enlisted MOS skill level.
• Navy — the official Navy manuals that describe the duties and qualifications for each occupation; the Bibliography for Advancement Study, rate training manuals, and other publications used by Navy enlisted men and women in the day-to-day performance of their duties and to prepare for their advancement examinations; and the advancement examination.
• Coast Guard — the official Coast Guard manuals that describe the duties and qualifications for each occupation; rate training manuals and other publications used by Coast Guard enlisted men and women in the day-to-day performance of their duties and to prepare for their advancement examinations; and the advancement examination.
• Marine Corps — the official MOS manual that describes the duties and qualifications for each MOS, individual training standards manuals, and the Maintenance Training Management and Evaluation Program (MATMEP) task list.

The Evaluation Process

Evaluators identify the skills, competencies, and knowledge required of warrant officers who are qualified in a given occupation specialty and relate that demonstrated learning to the same attributes acquired by students who have completed a comparable postsecondary course or curriculum. Because the evaluations are based on a comparison of learning outcomes, the amount of time a given enlisted man or woman may have spent acquiring occupational proficiency is not taken into consideration. The emphasis is on translating the learning demonstrated through occupational proficiency into terms used in formal civilian postsecondary education systems to recognize the same learning. This reflects the belief of the Commission that the value of learning is not dependent on where or how the learning occurs.

Evaluation teams are assigned three tasks in the evaluation process:

• To identify the learning represented by proficiency in the occupation by reviewing the written materials and by observing servicemembers performing their occupation and interviewing them and their supervisors;
• To prepare a description of the duties, skills, competencies, and knowledge required for each specialty; and
• To make recommendations for each specialty based on discussion and consensus.

Throughout the evaluation process, evaluators exercise professional judgment in applying the evaluative criteria and procedures. This position reflects the Commission's belief that sound educational evaluation is more dependent on professional judgment and expertise than on rigid application of criteria.

The Commission continually reviews its criteria and procedures. Evaluators are encouraged to provide feedback and recommendations for consideration by the Commission.