The United States Army uses both subjective and objective evaluation methods when assessing the performance of duties and potential for future service in the Officer Evaluation Report (OER). Males and females proportionally receive the same objective ratings, but on the surface, it is difficult to determine whether subjective ratings are equal. This paper seeks to examine the different ways success is described in each gender and how the OER follows or deviates from these trends. Upon examination of narratives written on the evaluation reports, many of the same words are used to describe success of males and females in the narratives written by their raters. The similarities amongst the reports suggest that the narratives follow a standardized format which may devalue their purpose of providing individualized feedback to the officer and to promotion boards.
Latent Lyme disease resulting in chronic arthritis and early career termination in a United States Army Officer: Corrigendum