Prep for Foreign Service Officer exam

[Schmedlap]

I'm taking the Foreign Service Officer exam in two weeks. Is there a way to prepare for this thing? It seems to be a potpourri of trivia, like Jeopardy, rather than an aptitude test or assessment of specific skills.

My impression is that it is just a quick check to verify that you read the news regularly, know basic facts and understand basic concepts related to economics and foreign affairs, and you are halfway compatible with a workforce of people whose focus is outside of our borders.

I did the practice test on the State Dept website - no issues there (though I think that one of their answers is incorrect). I generally don't spend too much time fretting over test prep - my preparation for the LSAT and GMAT consisted of purchasing the "for Dummies" book the day before each exam and things worked out okay. Unfortunately, I didn't see any "FSO Test for Dummies" book at B&N, so I'm going into this even more blind than with those previous tests.

[Abu Suleyman]

I haven't taken the test myself, but I have known many people who have. In general, almost all of them passed. While true that they are all top students, I don't think that the test is itself the screen out factor. Most didn't pass the oral exam.

[Old Eagle]

a great deal since I took it a hundred years ago. The State site is probably the best source of information. If there are any recent-select FSOs here, they can give specifics.

Back in the day, the written portion was an excuse to play Trivial Pursuit (r) with yourself, even if there was no hope or intent of passing. Full disclosure -- I was seriously considering leaving the military for the diplomatic corps, where my mother's side of the family was well established. AND, BOY, AM I GLAD I DIDN"T!!!! After service on four country teams, it became obvious to me that I was able to do all the diplomatic stuff the suits did, but I got to have all the fun that they didn't. And a couple of moments of unscheduled excitement.

As I understand it, the written test is still used as a "select out" process, while the interview portions are the "select in".

[John T. Fishel]

I've had two of my students take it and pass it in the last year, Neither of them were invited to take the oral exam! When I took it - back in the 70s - if you passed the written, you were automatically in the oral. If you passed the oral, then, you went through the security clearance and medical clearance process. (Back then hypertension was disqualifying.)

Cheers

JohnT

[Schmedlap]

Thanks for the feedback (comments on this thread, as well as those who emailed me).

I guess my remaining questions are...

If you "pass" the test, but do not get asked for an interview, then what does it mean to "pass"?

Are different career tracks more competitive in terms of what it takes to get an interview? When I signed up, I had to choose one of five career tracks (I forget all of them now, but consular and economic were two of them - I chose economic). I'm guessing consular is the most competitive???

Was I about right in that you really can't prepare for this? I mean, I read what was on the State Dept website, took the practice exam, got 95%+ of the questions right, but it seems like a trivia game more than anything else. How does one prepare for trivial pursuit? My old roommate, disgusted with his performance at the trivial pursuit board game, pledged to watch one history channel documentary per night via Netflix's instant streaming video. But that doesn't seem like the best way to go about this.

[John T. Fishel]

1. Trust that your "liberal" education was adequate.
2. Trust that your multiple guess test taking skills are well honed.

I like the way you pose the question about "passing" the exam. I guess that means there is passing and passing.

Consular and Administrative, in the past, were not among the most desired career patterns. Political and economic were the high prestige. Don't have a clue as to the fifth. Perhaps, P-M FSO can enlighten us on this and the other questions.

Cheers

JohnT

[jcustis]

To address your question, outside of reading the last five years of WSJ, WP, and NYT front pages, there is no specific way to prep.

I've passed it twice, with no special effort.

[John T. Fishel]

the other day and have an answer to what it means to pass the exam. The written exam is still the first critical hurdle. If you don't pass it you don't go on. The next step is new in the past decade - it is a board that looks at the exam, AND the other written materials the candidate submits and decides whether to invite the candidate for the oral assessment. After that it is the same as it used to be, although the anecdotal evidence suggests that more accomodations are made for medical conditions - including being blind.

Finally, an invite to the orals also depends to some extent on the cone selected. Political and Public Diplomacy are over subscribed so are very difficult to get into. There are shortages in the administative,management, economic and consular cones.

Cheers'

JohnT

[jcustis]

the other day and have an answer to what it means to pass the exam. The written exam is still the first critical hurdle. If you don't pass it you don't go on. The next step is new in the past decade - it is a board that looks at the exam, AND the other written materials the candidate submits and decides whether to invite the candidate for the oral assessment. After that it is the same as it used to be, although the anecdotal evidence suggests that more accomodations are made for medical conditions - including being blind.

Finally, an invite to the orals also depends to some extent on the cone selected. Political and Public Diplomacy are over subscribed so are very difficult to get into. There are shortages in the administative,management, economic and consular cones.

Cheers'

JohnT

That right there is good information to know...I'll be bookmarking this thread for future reference.

[John T. Fishel]

that the info is avaliable at the Website. BTW admin and management are the same cone.

Finally, Jon, have you looked into the Diplomatic Security Service. they are recruiting Special Agents and veterans are exempt from the age limit of 36 years old (not to have reache 37). If interesteed look under DSS - they are recruiting now.

JohnT

[MattC86]

You will be fine.

I invested in a couple of books and stuff to prepare and found that the daily round-up of news sources (not necessarily SWJ's - sorry) was the most helpful. Save yourself the money - if you know the Constitution decently, you undoubtedly have the rest down.

The only stuff I didn't know was "leadership principles" which were common-sense enough to guess with success.

Matt

[Jesse9252]

Finally, Jon, have you looked into the Diplomatic Security Service. they are recruiting Special Agents and veterans are exempt from the age limit of 36 years old (not to have reache 37). If interesteed look under DSS - they are recruiting now.

Slightly off-topic, but I have looked into DSS as a possible post-military career. However, I've heard from some folks that they are a very troubled agency these days (see various PMC scandals in Iraq/Afghanistan) and not at all a fun place to work. Any perspective on this?

[John T. Fishel]

I have generally been underwhelmed by the RSOs I've run into. I'm sure there are good ones as well as bad. I'm also sure that knowing nothing else about an applicant, if the choice is between a mil guy and a non-mil guy I'll take the mil guy any time. Which says that we need more good people in the DSS. Like you guys!

Cheers

JohnT

[jcustis]

that the info is avaliable at the Website. BTW admin and management are the same cone.

Finally, Jon, have you looked into the Diplomatic Security Service. they are recruiting Special Agents and veterans are exempt from the age limit of 36 years old (not to have reache 37). If interesteed look under DSS - they are recruiting now.

JohnT

Hmmm, are veterans exempted to any age, or just 37, which is the special agent limit for most agencies?... I did apply with DSS many moons ago when I had a break in service and was pursuing a different path (even took my second FSO test then). I was offered a chance to continue the battery of evals and exams once my application was accepted, but I committed to returning to the USMC once the opportunity presented itself...haven't looked back, but I've still got the bug so to speak. When my 20 yeart mark draws near, I will have some serious life-changing decisions to make. Just gotta get the wife on board that her eldest will be okay going to school CONUS if we are overseas already.

if you know the Constitution decently, you undoubtedly have the rest down.

Excellent point. When I sat for the oral board the first time, my lack of familiarity with the Constitution and the Bill of Rights dashed my hopes, and I knew it as I fumbled through one very simple and direct question. Total FAIL. Too much Int. Relations and little US governance during my upper class years proved to be my undoing.

[John T. Fishel]

an AMU grad course on Comparative Politics and it's amazing how ignorant many of my students are about American politics and government! we really ought to have a good general knowledge about the Constituion we swear to defend both in the military and Foreign Service.

Cheers

JohnT

PS Jon, my reading of the DSS website is that they will take veterans 37 or older.

[Surferbeetle]

From the FP website: Exclusive: GAO report finds State Department language skills dangerously lacking

About a third of Foreign Service officers in jobs that require language skills don't have the proficiency required to do their jobs, hurting America's ability to advocate its interests around the world, according to a new report by the Government Accountability Office.

The report, which has not yet been released, but was obtained by The Cable, spells out the consequences of having a Foreign Service that in many cases can't communicate with local officials or populations, relies too heavily on local staff for critical functions, and can't respond to bad press when it appears in foreign languages.

Substandard skills were found in people holding 31 percent of the approximately 3,600 jobs that require a certain level of language proficiency, known as language-designated positions, up from 29 percent in 2005. In critically important regions such as the Near East and South and Central Asia, that number rises to 40 percent.

Kaykuri, a DLI grad comments:

I have a strong desire to serve abroad, always have, but I confess that I am leery of the whole process. Now that I have built something of a career in the private sector, I am exactly the kind of mid-level person Diplopundit talked about, that it seems DOS is incapable of hiring.

I apparently have to choose a career track first, with little info to go on and in which I will be stuck forever, then pass the exam and orals. For that I understand that I have to look forward to about 3 years of processing visa apps somewhere? Sign me up, baby.

[MattC86]

Honestly, surfer, after a long chat the other day with a former Marine who just became an FSO, "dangerously lacking" still serves to describe a whole lot of the State Department.

It's never good when a guy currently working at a place strongly dissuades you from (re-)applying. . .

Matt

[John T. Fishel]

All you young whippersnappers need to apply for the FS, get accepted, and change the ruddy culture!!!!! There certainly was a time when the FS drew people like Deane Hinton, Tom Pickering, Ed Corr, Ryan Crocker, and Dave Passage. It still has top quality folk like Anne Patterson in Colombia.

Po-Mil FSO, your comments would really be helpful here.

Cheers

JohnT

[Old Eagle]

I haven't read the GAO report, but I can't wait to see it.

So what exactly might the report mean? And how might it be fixed? Should every FSO be required to be a language sponge? There are many of them out there in the State Dept and in the military. In my last assignment, I was clearly the best linguist on the country team. Second best was the political officer, who had previous assignments in China, Saudi Arabia, and South Africa. So he spoke Chinese, Arabic and Afrikaans in addition to German. How cool is that? Most of the other officers had similar shotgun careers, with varying degrees of proficiency in a host of strange languages.

The Army takes a totally different approach to developing soldier-statesmen. Army FAOs are developed as regional experts, focusing on the political, economic, cultural, language strauctures of a particular region. Once language proficiency is achieved, the first language is often used as a "springboard" to related languages -- romance, Slavic, Germanic, etc. The potential downside of that system is that steady-state proficiency requirements may not suffice in the next crisis de jour. The other downside of the Army system is that when I was up to my elbows in Southeast Europe, the Army passed over 3 premier Yugo specialist O-4s, and the best O-5 available. Guess we showed them. Although I am a firm believer in the Army system, maybe somebody at State has a better idea.

Now, if the GAO shoe fits, ya gotta ask how many military officers and NCOs are serving in jobs where they lack the requisite language skills. Damn! That shoe hurts when it's on the other foot.

[Pol-Mil FSO]

I have ambivalent views about the attractiveness of the Foreign Service as a career. On some days I would say that it has been a great opportunity to go places, do things, and witness history that I would never have gotten in any private sector job. On other days I would say that coping with the bureaucractic BS and a dysfunctional foreign service culture just isn't worth it. After 22 years, the main reason I stick around is because I want my sons to live in a prosperous and powerful country - I thus see my job as using my modest talent and experience to contribute to "empire maintenance."

Although my view may be skewed by my focus on Latin America, I think the GAO criticism of State Department language capability is overblown. Lack of language skills is a big problem in Iraq and Afghanistan, but that is due to the wartime pressure of trying to annually staff a large number of slots - the Department quickly blew through its pool of Arabic speakers and never had many Pashto and Dari speakers for historical reasons. I do not think it has been a problem in other areas of the world, at least for political and economic officer positions. At times it has admittedly been a different story for consular and management officers, junior officers, and diplomatic security special agents, among others, because these groups have not been given the emphasis nor resources to develop sufficient language capability. Finally, as noted in another post, the State Department language capability, with all of its failings, is superior to that of any other USG agency overseas.

The Foreign Service downsides that almost always grab the attention of FSOs with prior military service are 1) the lack of leadership skills or even training and 2) the blatant careerist mentality of most FSOs. FSOs are recruited based on their individual achievements and generally rewarded for their analytic ability and written and verbal skills. "Taking care of the troops" is not in the Foreign Service vocabulary. Secretary Powell and Deputy Secretary Armitage tried to change this by, among other things, instituting mandatory leadership training at every rank but the Foreign Service Institute turned this initiative into "touchy-feely" courses that have little to do with real leadership. And among the two cones that provide the majority of career ambassadors - the political and economic cones - FSOs typically rise to senior ranks without ever being in charge of more that a dozen persons. In many instances, we see "successful" Ambassadors who do a great job of managing the Washington bureaucracy and relations with the host country while presiding over an Embassy that has poor morale.

The careerist mentality is also very disconcerting to persons used to the military but it is ingrained in the Foreign Service culture in large part because of the peculiar assignment process that place FSOs in direct competition with their peers to gain career-enhancing postings. For the most ambitious FSOs (especially prevalent in the political cone) it is not unusual to start trying to line up a subsequent job even as they arrive in their current job.
Some assignments will have 30 or more bidders on the position; the frontrunners are those who can obtain support from senior officers and form alliances in the geographic and functional bureaus that control assignments in embassies overseas. (The personnel bureau in the State Department doesn't truly make assignments - it merely ratifies decisions made in the bureaus. For example, the European Affairs Bureau decides who will be selected to the Political Counselor job and other Political Officer positions in in Embassy Paris.)

A final thought - I would have to be characterized as an "old fart" because I am not impressed by new FSOs who complain about the requirement to do at least one tour as a vice consul or do other things that they consider to be beneath their experience level. I see what I consider to be many self-centered and ill-disciplined individuals among those joining the Foreign Service these days. If it was up to me, I would not let anyone become an FSO unless they had prior experience in the U.S. Armed Forces, Peace Corps, or AmeriCorps.