Bruce Fleming saga cont.

[Wishful]

But if Bruce got his wish & all the SA's closed, wouldn't he & all his civilian colleagues lose their tenure as well as their jobs?? Be careful what you wish for...Oh, that's right, he probably has a pension so no big deal... for him. He's the 1st. academic I've read about who doesn't support other academics..advocating places for academic employment closed. Too bad he doesn't work for a law school.

 

[Firstie2020]

I have a letter from the USNA Registrar (for tax purposes) that states the per year estimated cost of education for USNA for 2019 is $54,294 (including room and board) The official number becomes available in May. FWIW This is the same cost as attending our local state school for a non-resident (i.e., a student whose attendance has not been subsidized by state taxes).

"Cost of education for USNA"

Is this including the cost of the military training that is done at USNA?

 

[SCMids]

So many variables... Does it really cost the taxpayer $400,000 for a USNA education, or is that estimated value? Should the monthly stipend be included? After all, it is compensation, not scholarship money. Medical costs---what's the estimated value vs the real dollar cost to taxpayers? What about taxpayer subsidies given to civilian colleges? Is that cost added to the value of an ROTC education in these reports? After all, that is still a real cost to the taxpayer. How many civilian colleges have a yard patrol?

Can't speak for USNA, but below is a quote from the USAFA website.

https://www.academyadmissions.com/commitment/

"An Academy education is valued at more than $416,000, yet we offer it at no cost to our cadets. All that is required in return is your commitment to serve as an officer in the Air Force."

It doesn't matter how many variables there are if it is blatantly clear that the academies are far more expensive than OCS. Sure, the true cost of sending a person to the academy might be $416,000 +/- $100,000. It still doesn't matter. OCS is 32x cheaper, barely costing over $10,000 to produce one graduate. Unless you are arguing that the cost of producing a service academy graduate is $416,000 +/- $406,000, then there is no overlap between the costs of these two commissioning sources. OCS is cheaper every single time, and because that is the case, it does not matter if I cannot give you an exact true cost of sending someone to a service academy.

Your valuation of OCS is totally an apples to Antifreeze comparison. Some time ago when something like this ended up in print, the onion was peeled back a bit and the ack of comparability was astonishing. The Service Academy cost was the TOTAL PAYROLL FACILITY cost associated with USNA and the Naval Station since (of course), they were all there to support the Naval Academy. On the other hand, the OCS cost was just the cost of the actual OCS payroll and costs that could be shown to be OCS like King Hall itself. This leaves out lots of expenses that are not directly attributable to OCS such as Ney Hall (dining), the gym, pool, medical facilities, etc which are shared with the other activities in Newport. Admissions for USNA are included in the USNA cost while Admissions for OCS are part of Navy Recruiting Command and not easily connected. Of course, OCS is cheaper, it is twelve weeks as opposed to four years.

By the way, your comment that retention is lower is based on one sentence in an article with zero backup. I've seen many other analysis in the past that conflict with this which makes it appear that there is some cherry picked data. A fairly substantial number of officers are commissioned via the LDO program and they have very high retention rates - largely because they are much closer to retirement. Go ahead and give side by side specifics for OCS, ROTC and USNA and you'll see a different result. Also, in the vein of cherrypicking, there is a big difference between looking at 7 or 8 yrs after commissioning versus how many stay to 20 and beyond between USNA, OCS and ROTC.

It's interesting that you critique me for using an article that has "zero backup", yet you provide "zero backup" behind any of these statements.

Can't find any recent studies, but here's a quote from a study that was done in 2004 titled "An Analysis of the Effect of Commissioning Sources on Retention and Promotion of US Army Officers"

"We conclude that Academy graduates have the lowest retention rates, whereas OCS graduates have the highest
retention rates. Among male officers, retention rates are higher for ROTC graduates than for those with Direct Appointments;
among female officers retention rates are higher for Direct Appointments than ROTC graduates. The Promotion to O-4 Model
indicates that the effect of commissioning source is different within gender, race and marital status groups. The results of the
promotion to O-5 model contrasts with those of the O-4 models. Academy graduates are more likely to be promoted to
Lieutenant Colonel than those from other sources, followed by ROTC graduates and then Direct Appointments."

I guess it could be argued that a higher O-5 promotion rate is an indication that service academy grads that do stay in are performing better. But this might be mainly due to the fact that a person who is capable of gaining admission into a service academy is on average going to be better than a person who is capable of getting into ROTC/OCS. Thus, it is unclear if the service academy experience is causing officers to perform better during their field grade time, or if it is simply due to the average person who can get into a service academy being more qualified to be an officer than those who can only get into ROTC/OCS.

Would be interesting to see a more in-depth study that accounts for all of these variables.

[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]

Actually, my critique of you is that you’ve yet to articulate an original thought. I certainly disagree with your perspective, but you remind me of a Chinese national who I had as a political science professor. “You not know how to write, you copy!” He said this every time he assigned a paper.

The papers he received were like your comments — basic, unimpressive, and devoid of anything that taught him or the class anything new.

 

[Firstie2020]

Actually, my critique of you is that you’ve yet to articulate an original thought. I certainly disagree with your perspective, but you remind me of a Chinese national who I had as a political science professor. “You not know how to write, you copy!” He said this every time he assigned a paper.

The papers he received were like your comments — basic, unimpressive, and devoid of anything that taught him or the class anything new.

Would appreciate if you pointed out the flaws you see in my argument rather than saying what is essentially the equivalent of "You're wrong because I said so!". Time wasters for all of us.

 

[THParent]

Would appreciate if you pointed out the flaws you see in my argument rather than saying what is essentially the equivalent of "You're wrong because I said so!". Time wasters for all of us.

All of us? I'll decide what is a waste of my time, thank you.

 

[usna1985]

Firstie2020,

It appears you're a firstie at USMA. I'm curious as to the following:

Do you feel USMA is not providing you a superior education to prepare you to be a USA officer? I assume you think you would be equally or better prepared had you gone to a civilian school and attended OCS.

Do you think that the education USMA provides (and that you're currently accepting) is a waste of our (taxpayer) money?

If not, then what's your beef? If either/both of the above are true, I don't understand why you are staying at a school that you think isn't providing you a superior education and that you think is a waste of money. Unless you're there just because it IS free -- in which case, are you any better than those you're criticizing?

 

[NJDadofDSUSMA2024Hopeful]

@Firstie2020 as USNA1985 asked, I'd love to know your primary concerns. Do you just feel it's expensive vs. other sources? While in the abstract, every dollar matters, I'm sure anyone could find larger sources of waste in the overall ~ $700B military budget and the overall ~$2T total US budget. And it sounds like there's enough noise that it's hard to tell what is effective / high-ROI and what isn't. I do think the academies attract some overall different people to the mix, perhaps that wouldn't have sought commission from ROTC or OCS. One could question their commitment, but I think that's a reality and the value of that is hard to measure.
One other thing to point out: if ROTC is 8X and Academies are 4X, in total they are not 32X more expensive than OCS. They are more like 6X on average, depending on weighted average.

 

[Heatherg21]

I am perplexed. The taxpayers do fund the Academies, but they also fund public education, including higher education beyond k-12. And it not a small amount of taxpayer dollars. Public universities are subsidized by the tax payer. ROTC students attend those colleges and benefit from those funds.

 

[Old Navy BGO]

I am perplexed. The taxpayers do fund the Academies, but they also fund public education, including higher education beyond k-12. And it not a small amount of taxpayer dollars. Public universities are subsidized by the tax payer. ROTC students attend those colleges and benefit from those funds.

You are comparing Apples and Oranges. Sure, a part of my tax payment supports higher education, but not to the tune of $54-$150K per year for each individual (depends who you listen to on cost of a USNA education). There is no question that you can make a Ensign/2nd LT at a lower cost than running a 4 year service academy, and legitimate arguments can be made on the pros/cons on the whether the US model of Service Academy /ROTC/OCS model of officer accessions v. dedicated post-college training programs like Sandhurts are the best way to skin the cat.

 

[Heatherg21]

I am perplexed. The taxpayers do fund the Academies, but they also fund public education, including higher education beyond k-12. And it not a small amount of taxpayer dollars. Public universities are subsidized by the tax payer. ROTC students attend those colleges and benefit from those funds.

You are comparing Apples and Oranges. Sure, a part of my tax payment supports higher education, but not to the tune of $54-$150K per year for each individual (depends who you listen to on cost of a USNA education). There is no question that you can make a Ensign/2nd LT at a lower cost than running a 4 year service academy, and legitimate arguments can be made on the pros/cons on the whether the US model of Service Academy /ROTC/OCS model of officer accessions v. dedicated post-college training programs like Sandhurts are the best way to skin the cat.

good point.

 

[TheSavage44]

The guy has serious issues and should not be in a classroom filled with potential military officers. I'm so glad I never had him for any of my English classes.

 

[Chief2002]

It costs 4 times more to produce an officer at a service academy compared to through ROTC. It costs 8 times more to produce an officer through ROTC rather than OCS.

Is there any evidence that suggests service academy graduates are significantly better at their job than OCS officers? In order to justify paying 32x more money for something, there needs to be a significant difference between the two products. And even if there is a significant difference, it is questionable if it is worth spending so much money on a "luxury" product when there are other important things taxpayer dollars could be used for.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_Military_Academy_alumni

This page lists notable USMA grads. You'll notice that there aren't many people on the list who graduated within the last 40 years. Might suggest that USMA, and all of the service academies, no longer produce the same level of value for society that they used to. Graduating classes have gotten much bigger, while the number of notable graduates per year and shrunk significantly.

You’re basically asking for the return on investment for the USNA and others. My response is this- you really don’t recognize the value of something until it is really needed. Take just the recent movie Midway- lots of shining stars from the USNA that saved this country. If in a major conflict we survive because of a single USNA graduate I would say you cannot put a price rage on it and it was worth it.

Additionally you have to ask yourself, how do you measure success? Is it Political fame, Corporate notoriety, Military rank, Scientific accomplishment...? We have an all volunteer service and have set up Academies to support leading these men in addition to other sources. We require a time frame for payment that WE deemed appropriate. I spent 20 years sacrificing for this great nation in our Naval Submarine Force. So when I say that price was easily paid by their service I mean we set the conditions and they met them.

OCS officers are like enlisted men and women. You can’t guarantee how many will be appointed each year. The USNA and ROTC can better do that I believe.

The real problem I believe is the retention not the cost of the source. The real price is in qualified officers leaving the service. The time and effort to get an Aviator, Nuc Sub, SWO etc... is the real cost! The time, cost and effort in qualifying these officer once they hit the fleet dwarfs the cost of the education. But people seem to only focus on the education part. Our focus should be on that part of the equation in my opinion.

 

[SCMids]

Would appreciate if you pointed out the flaws you see in my argument rather than saying what is essentially the equivalent of "You're wrong because I said so!". Time wasters for all of us.

Pay attention. I said very clearly that you haven’t articulated an original thought. That’s not even close to “because I said so.” Interestingly, that retort isn’t original either. Cut and paste will get you in trouble in college.

 

[LongAgoPlebe]

The Naval Academy’s War With a Professor Who Sends Shirtless Pics, Offends Women and Minorities—and Somehow Came Out on Top - Washingtonian

The US Merit Systems Protection Board—the judicial dustbin where the United States does battle with employees it wants to fire—is one building no bureaucrat ever wants to see. The jig may well be up by the time you arrive: Terminating a civil servant is so comically burdensome that the very fact...

www.washingtonian.com

Quite a lot more background and nuance to the publicized and disputed events. It sounds to me a lot like both "sides" have lost sight of the mission and are more interested in fighting one another.

 

[Dr. Strange Love]

The Naval Academy’s War With a Professor Who Sends Shirtless Pics, Offends Women and Minorities—and Somehow Came Out on Top - Washingtonian

The US Merit Systems Protection Board—the judicial dustbin where the United States does battle with employees it wants to fire—is one building no bureaucrat ever wants to see. The jig may well be up by the time you arrive: Terminating a civil servant is so comically burdensome that the very fact...

www.washingtonian.com

Quite a lot more background and nuance to the publicized and disputed events. It sounds to me a lot like both "sides" have lost sight of the mission and are more interested in fighting one another.

.
I don’t know .... I was fixated on the leading picture in the link to the WaPo article that shows Fleming in front of a “Bookshelf Abomination”. I will take a stab and say these bookshelves are in his home.

Yes, I am a bookcase snob too .... The quality of those shelves, or lack thereof, turned my stomach.
.

 

[NavyHoops]

I saw the picture and just couldn’t.

 

[THParent]

.
I don’t know .... I was fixated on the leading picture in the link to the WaPo article that shows Fleming in front of a “Bookshelf Abomination”. I will take a stab and say these bookshelves are in his home.

Yes, I am a bookcase snob too .... The quality of those shelves, or lack thereof, turned my stomach.
.

I completely agree. Those bookshelves don't even qualify as proper bookshelves. I noticed that right off, but thought I was just being my curmudgeonly self.

 

[justdoit19]

I was more curious about his family picture. Never thought about him having a family.

Interesting that all the pictures were ‘supplied by BF’, so I’m sure he picked his fav’s.

Couldn’t stomach it for long. And the articles was too long and uninteresting to me...

 

[usna1985]

Washingtonian is not known for their hard-hitting journalism (they were, after all, the ones who published the James Webb article years ago). The article was about Fleming, yet no one apparently thought to ask him the key question: "If you are so unhappy with/at USNA, why do you stay?" I would have been interested to read his response.

 

[A1Janitor]

Washingtonian is not known for their hard-hitting journalism (they were, after all, the ones who published the James Webb article years ago). The article was about Fleming, yet no one apparently thought to ask him the key question: "If you are so unhappy with/at USNA, why do you stay?" I would have been interested to read his response.

He would smugly reply that it gives him the platform.

I am thankful my son won’t have to take him.