Getting rid of Annapolis & West Point?

[MasterBates]

If anyone noticed, the Army is VERY ROTC Heavy, and the Marines are the most OCS heavy, at least for the FY in question.

Also, just looking at the USN OCS/ROTC/Academy numbers next to each other, USN OCS was slightly higher at 23.2% then CanoeU at 19.5% anf ROTC at 18.3% (schol and non schol combined).

They don't add up to 100% because this also has direct acession/appointment types in there (Docs, Chaps, Chops, and other staff pukes) who did not go to USNA/ROTC/OCS.

 

[picklesuit]

so is coming from the "unknown" catagory mean that I just show up at A pool in a set of purchased dress whites?

That's classified...

 

[The Renegade]

Caveat emptor: I haven't gone myself. I'm PME complete up to Command and Staff via correspondence and seminar and have a civilian masters' that I got going part-time.

However, the answer is: a little of both.

PME in general goes from a trade school level, and sometimes high-school level, in the junior enlisted ranks, to AA/BS level for staff NCOs and company-grade (O-1 to O-3) to a low-end masters' at the majors' level, to higher-level thought with a technical flavor at the ltcol level. As you progress, there's less of the "how" and more of the "why."

I think the war colleges are important. A civilian school just isn't going to spend a lot of time on the technical aspects of how wars are commanded and fought. They may have solid programs in military history and theory, but I don't think that many, and certainly not enough to accept the numbers we're talking about, are capable of giving the type of instruction the military needs.

There might very well be room to go more joint and reduce redundancy, but I think professional war colleges are important. That said, the fellowships to civilian programs are important, and might even merit expansion, but they can't completely supplant the in-house programs.

As far as the academy thing, I'm an NROTC guy, but they have to stay. History and tradition are important, for one. They have a lot of cachet and attract a lot of high-quality applicants, as well. The popularity of the military ebbs and flows, but the academies can be counted upon to produce a nucleus of qualified officers with standardized training.

Good points! Like I said, the Academy thing will not fly (tradition and such) but the war college thing, I believe there is something to be explored. Not advocating for a total disband of the institution, but a hybrid of that and civilian higher education institutions (PhD). Company executives, CEOs and the like may not provide much insight on military tactics, but could provide a good mix of input on the management side of the house (budgeting, manpower allocation, supply equipment management, etc.).

Just saying a mix of military and civilians is good for sound input from civilian counterparts. Plus, at that flag officer level, many of their duties are similar to a CEO. So keep it (war colleges), but lets find a way to mix it up a bit, I believe, would be a good thing.

 

[Uncle Fester]

No one does, and it'd be impossible to say if it's true or not, because you're trying to assign objective numbers to a subjective measurement; i.e., is the additional cost of the Academies worth what we get? There's no way to do that, no matter how hard you try to invent a metric that does.

So if it's strictly about cutting costs, OCS is the easiest to turn on and off. Not the best idea, but the easiest, and in DoD, that usually wins the day.

 

[Flash]

The academies provide a 'guaranteed' source of officers for the military. They are not subject to the whims of civilian universities like NROTC's are and they give those who otherwise might not have the opportunity an excellent college education, unlike OCS.

You also have to look at it from a larger context. The academies are the only institutions that provide a completely free education to who qualifies. They certainly pull in people who would not consider a military career otherwise and ensure that the military takes a full cross-section of this country's citizens as its future leaders. It also involves Congress, the Presidnet and the Vice President in the decision making process as well, which in the bigger context is important.

We are not the only country that believes in the importance of military colleges, from Britain to Brazil most major militaries around the world has academies and war colleges. While they may not go about it the same way as we do, Sandhurst is only a year for most officers who attend but that goes in line with them not requiring a college degree become an officer, there must be some good to it if so many invest the money.

What I consider most important though is that the academies and the war colleges provide a 'home' for the military when it comes to the studyof war, military theory and leadership. We cannot depend on civilian institutions to maintain the same focus and determination to study the intricaciesof military theory and leadership as we can military colleges. They would be subject to the whims and limitations of institutions whose main purpose in life would not be to produce military leaders but to just teach. The military's higher institutions of learning provide an anchor and a safe home for the those who study the 'art of war' and how to lead our military into battle. You can't put a dollar figure on that, and like so many things money is not everything.

 

[MIDNJAC]

I was an NROTC type, but I think USNA is an institution that the Navy will be well served to maintain. For a service that values tradition, as well as a professionally educated Officer Corps, this seems to be a fundamental building block to those things. I'm not saying that my NROTC experience didn't prepare me for commissioned life, but in all honesty, I think these first couple of years would have been a much bigger adjustment had I started out in another community (non-aviation). I don't know that one commissioning source really makes better JO's than another in those first couple of years, but having friends/peers with a little bit more experience in their backgrounds (speaking to USNA or priors here) would probably have been beneficial had I been in a ship's wardroom. But since I have never walked a day since commissioning in black shoes, I can't say this with any authority of course

 

[TurnandBurn55]

The academies provide a 'guaranteed' source of officers for the military. They are not subject to the whims of civilian universities like NROTC's are and they give those who otherwise might not have the opportunity an excellent college education, unlike OCS.

You also have to look at it from a larger context. The academies are the only institutions that provide a completely free education to who qualifies.

Please elaborate. I'm familiar with a lot of people who have received free educations on NROTC scholarships (VA Tech would be an excellent example).... however, I'm unfamiliar with anyone who was given a scholarship and subsequently lost at at the "whim of civilian university". Perhaps you'd be willing to provide an example??

 

[insanebikerboy]

Please elaborate. I'm familiar with a lot of people who have received free educations on NROTC scholarships (VA Tech would be an excellent example).... however, I'm unfamiliar with anyone who was given a scholarship and subsequently lost at at the "whim of civilian university". Perhaps you'd be willing to provide an example??

The way I read what Flash wrote was that a college can ultimately boot a ROTC program off campus if they so choose, thereby removing potential scholarships/commissions. The Academies, however, will always be around providing that sure source of fresh O-1's.

 

[Kyoowashugi]

...subsequently lost at at the "whim of civilian university". Perhaps you'd be willing to provide an example??

My unit, in the not-so-distant past, used to have a four-story building on campus with a small-arms range in the basement, training sims, a gym, etc. Now, that building is a subsidiary engineering building that no one uses, and the unit spaces consist of six tiny offices and a couple of storage closets in the basement of one of the oldest buildings on campus. We've had PT logs vandalized by hippies, protesters at functions, and a general "go away" feeling from the school administration. It's been changing for the better recently, but you don't get that kind of sentiment at a military academy.

 

[D_Rob]

I always thought that the Land Grant colleges couldn't kick ROTC off campus since the government gave them the land and part of the deal was they had to help in the production of the military officer corps. On the other hand private colleges can do what they want.

 

[Flash]

Please elaborate. I'm familiar with a lot of people who have received free educations on NROTC scholarships (VA Tech would be an excellent example).... however, I'm unfamiliar with anyone who was given a scholarship and subsequently lost at at the "whim of civilian university". Perhaps you'd be willing to provide an example??

I was thinking of when some colleges kicked ROTC out during Vietnam. If it happened in the past it can happen again.

Pretty much what is said here:

The way I read what Flash wrote was that a college can ultimately boot a ROTC program off campus if they so choose, thereby removing potential scholarships/commissions. The Academies, however, will always be around providing that sure source of fresh O-1's.

And this is another excellent example.

My unit, in the not-so-distant past, used to have a four-story building on campus with a small-arms range in the basement, training sims, a gym, etc. Now, that building is a subsidiary engineering building that no one uses........

ROTC is just another program/department at most schools, not a central reason for being.

 

[Daisy]

We've had PT logs vandalized by hippies, protesters at functions, and a general "go away" feeling from the school administration.

Off topic - My son's high school had "hippie day" recently and my son wore one of his brother's NROTC t-shirts that day.

Also off topic - It has been my observation (and through conversations with (N)ROTC mids and cadets) that most of the animosity to (N)ROTC on college campuses emanates from faculty, administration or outside special interest groups. Most other students are passively supportive or generally apathetic.

I'm hoping that as these faculties and admins age and die off the younger replacements will have a more reasoned view of (N)ROTC. Sadly though, that's not much help in the present.

 

[DanMa1156]

As far as numbers go, in terms of retention, from what I've studied and what that NPS report would lead you to determine is that USNA grads stay in the Navy longer, but as far as the Marines, their multitude of commissioning sources really causes some stir - but it's not all commissioning source to take into account either. You also have to keep in mind quality spread. My labor prof is showing us this study he is doing and it's really interesting and extensive. In short, he took a look at USMC Commissioning Programs (PLC, OCCs, NROTC, USNA, and prior enlisted who were commissioned in another program, the name slips me now.) He also only looked at ground Marines and not aviation ones. If you look at trends in performance at TBS, the priors were typically higher ranked and did the best at TBS. USNA and NROTC guys fared similarly, and the PLC and OCCs faired the worst. Then, he took a look at the quality spread and came up with trends of dissatisfaction based on the rates at which people leave. In the end, getting what job you want in the USMC really seems to matter - infantry, artillery, and a 3rd but I forget what ground job stayed in the longest. Priors stayed in typically only for their 20 years and almost none past that - so by LTCOL and COL almost all are gone. USNA guys leave the lower ranks at the highest rates, and he found that is typically attributed to to outside job opportunites that present themselves. By the time you get to Colonel and the Flag ranks, USNA and NROTC guys really seem to take over and are by and large the ones leaving at the lowest rates. There's a lot more to it, but it was a very interesting study. So the conundrum of USNA is that its education and connections are very valuable to the civilian world where opportunity presents itself to their graduates more often. However, in the highest ranks, they also appear to advance the most along with their NROTC counterparts and stay in the longest. Does that suggest a "good ol' boy's club" for advancement was my question, and he said he was still trying to figure out a way to evaluate that, but I would tend to think that by and large most of you would agree that's probably not the case...

 

[Uncle Fester]

The myth of the "Boat School Good Ol' Boys Network" is a persistent but unfounded rumor. It just doesn't exist. It ain't Skull and Bones. I wish I did have a secret network of information and influence to tap into, but it either doesn't exist or they forgot to send me the password. The only thing being a Boat Schooler has ever got me is persistent letters from the Alumni Association asking for money.

 

[DanMa1156]

The myth of the "Boat School Good Ol' Boys Network" is a persistent but unfounded rumor. It just doesn't exist. It ain't Skull and Bones. I wish I did have a secret network of information and influence to tap into, but it either doesn't exist or they forgot to send me the password. The only thing being a Boat Schooler has ever got me is persistent letters from the Alumni Association asking for money.

Which, since it doesn't exist, is probably why it is so hard to quantify.