The QEP Awaits

After maybe seven rounds of edits and a bit of starting from scratch, my PNs have finally been submitted to the QEP for review. I don't even want to look at those six narratives anymore. One part of me is sick of reading those things and combing over every word, every comma, and every other semantic option I came across. Another part of me is too scared to look back at those things because I fear I may catch an error that I had failed to catch in all of my previous rounds of proofreading. Maybe that's just a random streak of OCD wreaking havoc on my psyche. But it doesn't matter. Everything's out of my hands now.

There are six PNs that candidates have to write. The prompts for five of the PNs were the same as last year's. The sixth one was like the one that was given last year, but it had an addition. Instead of simply addressing why you chose your specific career track, you had to address "what you brought" to that track. So that PN required a substantial rewrite.

Unlike previous years, I had a few other candidates look over my PNs. And to tell the truth, I'm very glad I did. They picked up on little things to make my writing stronger and found ways for me to economize my speech. Even though my academic training may be in mass communications and my professional background is in TESOL, I was amazed by how much the other candidates were able to improve my writing. I am beyond grateful for their assistance and hope that I was able to help them strengthen their own PNs as well.

One of the more common complaints I hear from people who receive bad news regarding their QEP results is that "they had really high test scores" or "really good narratives." While that can indeed be frustrating (especially with a lack of feedback), I think a lot of candidates fail to remember that the QEP is not simply an FSOT score review or a PN review, but rather a "total candidate" review. So the BEX will look at your FSOT scores, your FSOT essay, your PNs, your self-declared foreign language abilities, your work history, your academic background, your special skills/awards/decorations, your affiliations/organizations, State's hiring projections and State's anticipated need for new FSOs in your particular career track.

What does this mean? Well, for one thing, it can mean that all sorts of purportedly well qualified candidates don't make the cut. You might have gotten a 185/10 on the FSOT, but your PNs were substandard. Or maybe you rocked the PNs, but don't have a lot of professional experience and barely scraped by the FSOT with a 155/6. But really, if a low FSOT score is what it takes to fail the QEP, then why would State even establish the 154/6 cutoff to begin with? Similarly, if a high FSOT score is what it takes to pass the QEP, then why bother asking those candidates to send PNs? See how irrational these excuses are?

Anyway, for me, I think I have a better-than-even shot at passing the QEP. The FSOT application materials asked me to list all my jobs that I've held for the past 10 years. I've been gainfully employed for that entire time in jobs that have skills that are easily transferable to FSOs, so that should be worth something. I have a master's degree and a doctorate--the highest degrees you can get. That should be worth something too. I can speak a hard Asian language--likely an asset found in only a few candidates. And most importantly, my PNs were good enough to advance me past this stage last year. So why wouldn't I make it this year too, especially considering how I've further improved those very same PNs? Unless the budgetary situation is really screwed up or State's need for Consular officers has waned, I think I am in the clear.

Next up is two months of radio silence. Around the third or fourth week of January, I will either be setting up an OA study group or counting down the long and lonely months to Candidacy #5. Let's hope the latter never comes to fruition.