AROTC Class of 2014 Branching

I am hearing from an unverified source that some cadets that should have been accessed with this cohort were not.......hmmmmm.

I wonder how many more than in a previous years were not accessed.
 
Can anyone please explain what the "pre-branching" process of identification was? Maybe one of the other IV's that branched this year.

HorseHolder said:
  • The key element of this process is one additional piece of information gathered during preference submission. The cadets must state if they would like consideration during pre-branching for their first, top two, or top three branch preferences.
Click to expand...

I only recall selecting my branches and giving them to my HRA. Just wondering if I missed something or what?
 
I believe that's referring to the branching solely by preference with/without ADSO that happens before the branching model. The DABM plugs in a lot more than just preference.
 
dunninla said:
Two years ago a 20% for all cadets was a 30% for the AD component. I am going to guess that with fewer AD allocations this year, a 20% on the entire OML would translate to about 35% on teh AD OML. I think this would mean that some DMGs (top 20% of entire cohort) would not get first choice, without using ADSO, for MI and MSC, vs. getting those Branches without ADSO in 2011.

I'm starting to conclude that the new Branch model has taken some focus away from OML, and put more on the cadet who is willing to buy AD by committing to an additional three years of AD service.
Click to expand...

No offense, but in NO WAY do I feel my son or any other hard working senior bought AD by committing to three additional years. In fact, I think 7 years is a very long time and we advised my son to think long and hard before choosing to ADSO. When he returned from LDAC he had a fire for active duty he had never before had. He never thought he would go active duty because he is at a tough private school and is a math major floating at a 3.0 gpa. Junior year he opted to add an economics major. He had to bust his butt when he added the second major and knew his gpa would take a hit, but graduating with the math/Econ combo was worth it to him. He knew he would never get active duty with a 3.0. At LDAC he learned his math major was actually going to pay off and get him in a field he wanted to be in. All the nights his poli sci roommates went out partying and he was home studying were worth it. Finally, the Army had seen that STEM majors were quite valuable even if they didn't have a 4.0.
I know you didn't mean to offend anyone, but please don't say AD was bought. It was earned.
 
ADSO for Branch vs. Major for Branch

ADSO (Additional/Active Duty Service Obligation) for Branch is different than the Major for Branch program (Engineer to EN, Math to Signal?, Chemistry to CM).

The ADSO for branch is in fact 'paying for AD' with an additional AD commitment of 3 years than in the ROTC Contract to get a branch of choice. For most this is an AD commitment of 7 years rather than 4.

Taking the ADSO for Branch does not mean they worked any less toward their degree or ROTC training. It does result in cadets higher on the OML that did not choose the ADSO or have a Major aligned to a branch to not receive AD. That is a personal choice by the cadet to ADSO/or not for Branch.

It would be interesting to compare the number of ADSO for Branch for this year vs previous.
 
Last edited:
I don't feel my DD "bought" AD, but it does seem like her ADSO secured her 1st choice branch. MI was the one branch that she really, really wanted so it was worth it to her to sign for the additional service commitment. Hopefully she will still feel it was worth it eight or so years from now!

With as much money as the Army has invested in her education - and that of all the cadets - it seems to me to be a pretty fair trade-off to give some preference in accessions/branching to those who are willing to sign on for longer. There seemed to be an objective in this year's process to get ADSOs better distributed through the OML rather than clustered in the lower half, and it seems like that may have worked.
 
HorseHolder said:
I don't feel my DD "bought" AD, but it does seem like her ADSO secured her 1st choice branch. MI was the one branch that she really, really wanted so it was worth it to her to sign for the additional service commitment. Hopefully she will still feel it was worth it eight or so years from now!

With as much money as the Army has invested in her education - and that of all the cadets - it seems to me to be a pretty fair trade-off to give some preference in accessions/branching to those who are willing to sign on for longer. There seemed to be an objective in this year's process to get ADSOs better distributed through the OML rather than clustered in the lower half, and it seems like that may have worked.
Click to expand...

ADSOs are essentially a pound of flesh for "attempting" to get what someone truly desires. ADSOs aren't a bad thing (if you know what you're getting....really know what you're getting).

It's not about the money invested in your DD. In the end, the military will squeeze everything they can out of those ADSOs.

Just to give you an example, all of my ADSOs and concurrent ADSOs bring me to 13 years (currently at 9). It's worth it. I just hope your DD really knows what she's signing up for in the long run.

riroka said:
No offense, but in NO WAY do I feel my son or any other hard working senior bought AD by committing to three additional years. He knew he would never get active duty with a 3.0.
Click to expand...

Huh?
 
Last edited:
MabryPsyD said:
In the end, the military will squeeze everything they can out of those ADSOs.
Click to expand...

Will the military NOT squeeze everything they can out of the new officers who didn't ADSO for branch? Not being snarky, just trying to understand if the ADSO starts you down a different path from day one.

MabryPsyD said:
I just hope your DD really knows what she's signing up for in the long run.
Click to expand...

I don't know if DD really knows what she is signing up for in the long run. How many 21-22 year olds fresh out of college and embarking on their first career do? Hopefully her ROTC experience has been decent preparation for what comes next. Beyond that, it seems to me she has done what due diligence she can and been thoughtful in her decisions. Hopefully this path will take her where she wants to go.
 
HorseHolder said:
Will the military NOT squeeze everything they can out of the new officers who didn't ADSO for branch? Not being snarky, just trying to understand if the ADSO starts you down a different path from day one.
Click to expand...

You're not being snarky. That's a legit question.

At the end of 3-4 years with a non ADSO officer, the Army asks "what can we offer you to stay for another 3-4 years? Schools? Duty station of choice?"

At the end of 3-4 years with an ADSO officer, the Army states "we have you for another 3-4 years...these are your options."

I'm being facetious, but that's kinda the general stance.
 
For non STEM, ADSO for branch, what are the requirements other than the additional 3 years?
 
DS graduated in December 2012 and was part of the the FY13 cohort for accessions branching. Thank goodness he didn't have to deal with the process this year. He was DMG and placed in the top 11% and was able to procure an infantry slot without ADSO. He did opt to use his ADSO for duty station and will PCS in a couple of months to Italy.
 
Our DD is at VT, and she just came home for break, she was talking to me how big of a day it was at VT for branching. (She has many friends posting their insignia). She was amazed at it all, but she asked me what does a silver disc/button with nothing on it mean?

So can someone tell me. The only thing I could think of was from a ribbons perspective is it meant to differentiate somehow, i.e. with clusters on the ribbon for AD, it has been awarded more than once.

I said I would ask here, so I am asking. She didn't want to offend any of her friends...some have the silver button, and some didn't.

Her friends all got AD, 1 is going MI, 1 is going Tanks, 1 is going Chemical (?), 1 aviation, and 1 going to EOD.
~~~~ Take that with a grain of salt, for multiple reasons. 1. we are AF. 2. She is not in ROTC ----it might be they said that they got something else, but their career goal is XYZ.
 
A silver dot is the Cadet rank insignia. There are a whole bunch of hearts stars and horseshoes, clovers and blue moons ROTC uses internally for Cadet ranks within a battalion. The silver dot (black/subdued when worn on ACUs) is the only "real" Cadet rank as far as the Army is concerned. This is the insignia cadets wear whenever they go to train with big Army or drill with their NG/Reserve units.
 
mbitr said:
A silver dot is the Cadet rank insignia. There are a whole bunch of hearts stars and horseshoes, clovers and blue moons ROTC uses internally for Cadet ranks within a battalion. The silver dot (black/subdued when worn on ACUs) is the only "real" Cadet rank as far as the Army is concerned. This is the insignia cadets wear whenever they go to train with big Army or drill with their NG/Reserve units.
Click to expand...


My son wore this when he did CTLT this past summer.
 
Pima said:
Our DD is at VT, and she just came home for break, she was talking to me how big of a day it was at VT for branching. (She has many friends posting their insignia). She was amazed at it all, but she asked me what does a silver disc/button with nothing on it mean?

So can someone tell me. The only thing I could think of was from a ribbons perspective is it meant to differentiate somehow, i.e. with clusters on the ribbon for AD, it has been awarded more than once.

I said I would ask here, so I am asking. She didn't want to offend any of her friends...some have the silver button, and some didn't.

Her friends all got AD, 1 is going MI, 1 is going Tanks, 1 is going Chemical (?), 1 aviation, and 1 going to EOD.
~~~~ Take that with a grain of salt, for multiple reasons. 1. we are AF. 2. She is not in ROTC ----it might be they said that they got something else, but their career goal is XYZ.
Click to expand...

The dot you see is officially called a pip and denotes a cadet 2LT which is the standard rank for an MS4 and is the only rank officially recognized in the Army. There are a myriad of other ROTC ranks and ribbons but that is the one used when cadets are at real Army training.
 
Thanks. That is interesting it can of sounds like I have heard in the Army when they will say selected O4,5,6, etc. In the AF they don't do that at all. You are what you are until you pin on your new rank.
 
The Army does not reconize the "rank" of "cadet 2LT" per se. The Army recognizes one rank for ROTC per the regulation: "Cadet." All cadets are held to be the same regardless of merit badges or collar charms. The CCR defines the pip rank insignia, but that reg does not apply to the Army.

MS I = MS IV in Army rank structure, and that rank is "cadet."
 
scoutpilot said:
The Army does not reconize the "rank" of "cadet 2LT" per se. The Army recognizes one rank for ROTC per the regulation: "Cadet." All cadets are held to be the same regardless of merit badges or collar charms. The CCR defines the pip rank insignia, but that reg does not apply to the Army.

MS I = MS IV in Army rank structure, and that rank is "cadet."
Click to expand...

Pretty much, instead of us walking around as fuzzies (E-1) they gave us a stupid dot which from a distance could be mistaken for SPC or LTC....

Yup, MS year doesn't matter, all wear the dot and it only denotes cadet.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top