Changes to AROTC?

abrownlths said:
I think this is completely fair. My major is Aerospace Engineering, which as a side note the OML classifies as "Space Travel", and the fact that other people in my battalion are weighted higher due to their communications major I think is complete nonsense. I hope the program changes and for the better.
Click to expand...

...and unlike JCleppe (who is one of the most knowledgeable posters on this board), I almost completely disagree. I wouldn't mind them throwing out GPA altogether. You either graduated or you didn't, how's that?

As I've said before, and there are exceptions, but I've been in law enforcement for nearly (3) decades and I can say without hesitation that leaders are born and not made. You either got it or you don't and having a 4.0 GPA in any course of study doesn't make you a better leader. Our current leader of the free world graduated from Harvard and Columbia and he has proven an Ivy school education is nearly worthless when it comes to developing leadership skills.
 
Dilemma

NorwichDad said:
This is from last week, Under Secretary of the Army, Brad Carson visits Fort Knox. He did not get to see the gold.

At Cadet Command, Brig. Gen. Peggy Combs indicated a similar issue, with very few changes having been made in the Cadet Command business model, since 1916. She said cadet command staff is also looking at ways to leverage technology, and build more flexibility into the way it conducts business.

Carson asked for more information about the Order of Merit List used for Cadet career placement. He questioned why a student as state school with a 3.5 GPA, would be rated higher than a student from an Ivy League school with a 3.0 GPA.

Combs explained that while the GPA is currently the single most important factor for Cadet placement on the Order of Merit List, she hopes to change that next year. She said the GPA would still be important, but other cognitive tests such as the Miller Analogy test, the Collegiate Learning Assessment (CLA+), and the Graduate Record Exam, will be used in 2016, as part of a pilot program. The statistics from the pilot program will be compared with the previous standards to see how much, if any, difference the new standards have on where a Cadet ends up on the Order of Merit List.

Combs told Carson that more emphasis is being placed on students who study science, technology, engineering and math subjects.


http://www.army.mil/article/130326/...eadership_programs_to_Under_Secretary_Carson/
Click to expand...

MAT, GRE, CLA are not assessments to measure leadership and adaptability, which seem to be the buzz words of what the military says it needs going forward. More quantitative evaluations will not determine who has these skills; there is a misplaced dependence on this type of testing as well as the need to understand the difference between quantitative and qualitative evaluations.
 
abrownlths said:
I think this is completely fair. My major is Aerospace Engineering, which as a side note the OML classifies as "Space Travel", and the fact that other people in my battalion are weighted higher due to their communications major I think is complete nonsense. I hope the program changes and for the better.
Click to expand...

By using yourself as an example, you lost your creditability and made your argument weaker. You sound like you are whining. There are certain instances where using personal example can strengthen the argument, but this is not the case.

Which major is more compatible with Infantry branch? I would say good communcation skill is an essential tool for officers (we are supposed to lead soldiers. Leading requires human interaction). Who should have better communication skills - aerospace engineering major or communications major?
 
paradoxer said:
MAT, GRE, CLA are not assessments to measure leadership and adaptability, which seem to be the buzz words of what the military says it needs going forward. More quantitative evaluations will not determine who has these skills; there is a misplaced dependence on this type of testing as well as the need to understand the difference between quantitative and qualitative evaluations.
Click to expand...

But making an qualitative evaluations on leadership abilities of serveral thousands cadets is impossible. What do we do, rely on PMS evaluations, but how do we standardize how PMS evaluate? Performance in leadership positions during camps is too subjective as it still comes down to opinions of several cadre members. I am sure there is no favoritism at cadet camps.

Don't forget the officer accession process is massive and process is designed to process 2LTs not generals. Of course some of those 2LTs will eventually become generals and cadets without required leadership abilitites will evenutally get weeded out.
 
Ok, I am not real thrilled about moving emphasis from GPA to testing. But that's my own bias since my son has a very strong GPA but has never been a very strong tester.

But my real concern is this -- the Army seems to be shifting to a larger reserve force and fewer AD commissions. That means that a much larger portion of graduates will need to find civilian employment right after graduation rather than four or more years down the road. At the same time, they are making it harder for cadets to do the things that make finding a civilian job easier (or in some cases, possible). In many career fields, it's a big disadvantage to not have summer employment and internships. Add that to a scenario where someone may not even be truly available for employment in a permanent job until a year after graduation due to later BOLC dates and job marketability is really impacted.

As a parent, it's a big paradigm shirt. A year ago it looked like my son was heading for a career in the military and we adjusted to that concept. He is still going full speed ahead for AD and that's great. But now the chance of having an unemployed college grad move back in with his parents after graduation is going up. :eek:
 
MemberLG said:
But making an qualitative evaluations on leadership abilities of serveral thousands cadets is impossible. What do we do, rely on PMS evaluations, but how do we standardize how PMS evaluate? Performance in leadership positions during camps is too subjective as it still comes down to opinions of several cadre members. I am sure there is no favoritism at cadet camps.

Don't forget the officer accession process is massive and process is designed to process 2LTs not generals. Of course some of those 2LTs will eventually become generals and cadets without required leadership abilitites will evenutally get weeded out.
Click to expand...

Totally agree, but don't think you are assessing for a certain skill set when you actually are not.
 
No flaming, just a curiosity question.

AFROTC has done this for decades,(I am betting every 4 star in the ADAF took it as a cadet) it is called the AFOQT. They still use the cgpa, but that % is lower than the AFOQT when it comes to the OML.

Why doesn't the Army create an exam like that?

Goaliedad,

I agree and disagree about leaders. Yes, part of it is what you describe as born, but the other part is learned. Hard to be a great leader when academically your degree leaves you in the dust behind others.
~ If the academic world did not matter, than why not just hold the OCS board for candidates with no college education?

I am not saying an underwater basket weaving major is less of a leader than the aerospace engineering major. I am saying that as our technological world changes, and understanding the platforms/systems, the ability to comprehend complex systems due to an academic background will make them a stronger leader.
~ Hard to be the respected leader when you are constantly asking the number two for guidance/training on how it works, especially if you are doing this in front of the troops.

OBTW, as most of you know my DS is an AF pilot. He would be what in the AF calls the basket weaving major (Govt and Politics). He was picked up for UPT because the AF uses not only the AFOQT, but TBAS too for rated OML. His scores were high enough that they said, the kid has the ability to succeed in pilot training.
~ I guess what I am saying is why is there the assumption that those in STEM are always going to score at the top? My DS is living proof. He had the brains to be an engineer (34 ACT), he just wanted to be the non-tech major cadet.

I wonder how many of the posters would like what AFROTC is doing now for the OML. The CoC ranking is being dropped in the % and they are raising the AFOQT %. I might be wrong, but also think the cgpa % was increased too.
~ Sooner or later, at least for the AF IMPO it is going to be more about how you look on paper from a statistical perspective than your people skills.
~~ Let's be honest, people skills are subjective CoC Whatever may love Cadet Smith and give him the highest marks. CoC Whatever is replaced by CoC Getitdone and now Cadet Jones is their golden child, Cadet Smith drops down to number 5.

That is how it works even in the corporate world. I have seen it done, we have all seen it done. The military is no different. The academic push removes that issue, or at least that is how the AF is seeing it now when it comes to ROTC OML.
 
Last edited:
now back to reality...It seems like there will be a formula to combine all….Hopefully….

GPA: Differing opinions of course...some can argue that grades are irrelevant / some can argue that they are the most important. For the OML. My son is going to a top school. It is ranked 14th in the Nation ahead of Brown, Cornell, Vanderbilt, Georgetown. His school curves the grading (and they are NOT division 1 sports, additionally they are known for NOT giving aid to applicants for ANYTHING other than academic merit ….in other words nothing to bring that curve down). My son’s B at his school may indeed be more ‘valuable’ than an A at Harvard(documented grade inflation) or a A at Southwestern State College of Beauty and Design. Comparing GPAs across schools is like comparing apples to organtuns. While I do think the minimum for commissioning may be low currently, a Pass=Play is simply not acceptable, an average/below average GPA is not going to make the cut off in this selective climate, nor should it . GPA will be and should be factored in, to an extent.


Course selection Major: I really like how goaliedad laid this out. We need to be careful to not be major-snobs. Engineering may be hard for some. Liberal Arts may be hard for some. I can tell you my son trying to learn Russian as a freshman in college will struggle with it more (and this will probably be more valuable to the army) than my engineer major son who loves the hands on engineering classes that he is taking (which will be full of info that will be outdated by the time he, himself, ever has to make any engineering decisions). I can definitely see the need for STEM majors for sure! However there is a need for all majors. I like how the Naval Academy encourages branch selection. If you are a rocket scientist you are going to be voluntold subs –so not much choice there(Certain branches need certain GPAs) . Otherwise, while the needs of the fleet and corps take precedence , you can choose what you want BUT you need to get yourself there. GPA alone wont cut it. My mid is thinking Marine –Ground (but still kicks Navy-Aviation around). Since he is leaning towards Marine Ground he is doing what it takes to get there (choosing summer trainings through MARSOT, qualifying E on pistol and rifle etc,). If one wants aviation they try to get into Power Flight for a training, and so on. The major should be part of a scoring system for some branch. (I said part not all) I think, however, OML should reflect slightly MORE of the training opportunities (air assault), involvement (ranger challenge) etc.


Standardized testing: I know I come from an outside perspective but there IS a place for standardized testing. Now I agree it should not be the end all be all. (Navy mid got a 36 on the math portion of his ACT and this is not reflective of his grades in advanced calc at school , my second son got a 35 composite and I am not sure how that will benefit the needs of the army). However, this is the ONE single standardized equation across the nation regardless of school, battalion, background etc. This is where we compare apples to apples. It should be part of a formula.
 
Last edited:
two more points

LEADERSHIP: Re Airforce Compared to Army, Pima, you have been at this so much longer that I have so I could be way off. It seems from my son who is a navy midshipman, interested in going marines so has been training with the army, that the three branches are very different in their leadership needs. He describes being a Navy Pilot as leading a couple of people and being in charge of million dollar equipment. Army (and marines ) is all about people, leading large groups of people. So though this son is a Mech E major he feels that his interpersonal skills are more important if he wants Marines. All leadership is not the same. But I would love to hear more about this because I personally have never served.


Ra-Ra FOR LIBERAL ARTS MAJORS!

http://webcache.googleusercontent.c...mil/100.2/ADA470803+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

Excerpt below:

The term "cultural awareness" serves as the new favorite Department of Defense buzzword but fails in its definition to adequately articulate the complexity of culture and the high level of cultural competence absolutely needed by operational commanders in the contemporary operating environment.

Failures in Iraq and Afghanistan have validated the US military's inability to grasp the impact of culture and its corresponding effects on operations.

Needed to have positive warfare outcomes is cultural awareness to include: cultural consideration, cultural awareness, cultural understanding, and cultural competence.

Operational commanders need to effectively orchestrate all available assets to exploit and integrate the human aspects of warfare against the cultural terrain. Religion, language skills, integration of special operations forces, and cultural immersion as a means to achieve cultural competence at the operational level of war.
 
Last edited:
We need to be careful to not be major-snobs.

I like that:thumb:

I believe the other thing mentioned within the past year was diversity. The army was wanting to give more scholarships to urban youths and start some ROTC programs in areas of the country that may not have any.

Diversity needs to just not apply to race or economical background, but also to majors. Not everyone that goes AD needs to be a STEM major, but that is how a lot of the changes appear the army wants. If you have STEM major X and you have a 2.5 gpa then we deem you more valuable to active duty than another person.

I agree with others, how they do the standardized testing will be interesting. I still believe you have to have military tactical training though. There is a thought process that is developed thru that training that can be applied in many different areas. Thus the reason many people like to hire veterans.
 
Vista123 said:
Standardized testing: I know I come from an outside perspective but there IS a place for standardized testing. Now I agree it should not be the end all be all. (Navy mid got a 36 on the math portion of his ACT and this is not reflective of his grades in advanced calc at school , my second son got a 35 composite and I am not sure how that will benefit the needs of the army). However, this is the ONE single standardized equation across the nation regardless of school, battalion, background etc. This is where we compare apples to apples. It should be part of a formula.
Click to expand...

I agree. Again this is why the AFOQT is part of their OML. Just like SFT ranking is a portion. Every cadet is on the same footing. It is apples against apples.

That being said, I also agree there needs to be the subjective portion. Let's face it being book smart does not mean you are people smart.

The reality is every cadet will have to take standardized tests as officers when it comes to training and PME. CGSC for O4s all take the same exams, regardless if it is in residence, seminar or correspondence. Pilots be it at one base or another take the same exam. It is no more college Prof A is the easy prof and B is the hard one. You all have the same bubble test.

Whatever they do, IMPHO it will be tweaked for the next few years and probably come 5 years from now it will be back to the original program :wink:

Yet, for good or for bad, there is nothing anyone can do, except start studying the tests that have been acknowledged by them. If you don't, them I am sorry, I have no pity for you if you score poorly because you have been warned.
~~~ AF fighter saying to FNGs....shut up and color. IOWs nobody is going to listen to your opinion because you are here to learn.

I do have pity for some because the key statement that I read was:
Combs told Carson that more emphasis is being placed on students who study science, technology, engineering and math subjects.
Click to expand...

AROTC was never like AF/NROTC, which relieved the gaming issue for scholarship and careers. It appears that they are following suit of their sister services.
~ Fair warning to 2019, but 17 and 18 non-tech are now in the HUH? Crap, OMG stage.
 
Pima said:
I agree. Again this is why the AFOQT is part of their OML. Just like SFT ranking is a portion. Every cadet is on the same footing. It is apples against apples.

That being said, I also agree there needs to be the subjective portion. Let's face it being book smart does not mean you are people smart.

The reality is every cadet will have to take standardized tests as officers when it comes to training and PME. CGSC for O4s all take the same exams, regardless if it is in residence, seminar or correspondence. Pilots be it at one base or another take the same exam. It is no more college Prof A is the easy prof and B is the hard one. You all have the same bubble test.

Whatever they do, IMPHO it will be tweaked for the next few years and probably come 5 years from now it will be back to the original program :wink:

Yet, for good or for bad, there is nothing anyone can do, except start studying the tests that have been acknowledged by them. If you don't, them I am sorry, I have no pity for you if you score poorly because you have been warned.
~~~ AF fighter saying to FNGs....shut up and color. IOWs nobody is going to listen to your opinion because you are here to learn.

I do have pity for some because the key statement that I read was:


AROTC was never like AF/NROTC, which relieved the gaming issue for scholarship and careers. It appears that they are following suit of their sister services.
~ Fair warning to 2019, but 17 and 18 non-tech are now in the HUH? Crap, OMG stage.
Click to expand...


I agree 100% with your entire post.

a couple of things...
1.) we know how to blow up bridges, it seems what we have to improve is US military's poor performance at recognizing and reacting to cultural differences in both our adversaries and our coalition partners. This has been a bigger hurdle. Common sense says this is why we need MORE liberal arts majors in the ARMY. The Army Mission...is that the SAME as the AF or Navy mission?

2.) There needs to be a subjective part. If you are being treated unfairly you will need to learn (for the rest of your like) how to turn it around or wade through it. Luckily the cadre changes frequently so there is always a second chance for a new first impression. but if you are ranked low wherever you go....that's a problem.
 
Vista,

I do not disagree at all with your DS's assessment. The fact is they will not be a 22 yr with 100-200 personnel members reporting to them. The reality for the AF pilots, that won't happen until 15 years in.
~ Squadron Command as an O5.

That being said, their path is also different than on the ground. Their pressure is there, one small mis-step, and their crew is dead. I hate to admit it, because my mind hates remembering it, but by the time Bullet had 3 yrs in the 111, we buried 6 aircrew members. His primary crew mate Capt. Cliff Massengill died in a crash when I was 9 mos pregnant with our DS. Bullet was pulled from the flight 8 hours early because he had to do some stupid check the square manpower personnel briefing. Yet, that was still not the worse memory. My worse memory was Bullet on the Green Ramp at Pope (82nd ALO) ready to jump when an F16 clipped a C130 on approach. Too many died that day. I still remember the call...honey, I am okay, I don't know when I will be home. Code for him saying there has been a crash...2 minutes later my neighbor (UH pilot) came to my door and informed me that he checked, the 3rd Brigade was all accounted for, not knowing Bullet called me.
~ A life is a life to me, and every leader takes those they are in charge of, be it 10 or 100 at the same level. They care and feel responsible for their careers.

We did two tours with the Army (82nd and CGSC). My level of respect for the Army is limitless. Our cousin was also Army...he was medically discharged, and it about killed him to leave the military. This country impo takes the Army for granted, and worse yet as a wife of a military member, they have no clue how the wives are insanely the epitome of OMG. She is the strongest person I have ever met. She holds hands with the young wives and comforts them on their 1st deployment. She never allows her DH see her cry. Her kids never think that Dad is in danger. She moves to the pit holes of America (Bliss and Polk aren't the top 10,000 cities to live in. She does it all with a smile, while her DH is gone 12 months, or even if he is home, his duty day is not AF. 8-4, it is 6-6. JMPO.

The Army impo has taken a lot of hits in the early 2000s. They were seen by Rumsfeld as cumbersome and too big for rapid response compared to sister services. They were not his favorite child.

Now back on topic. I am still at a wonder why the heartburn, minus the MSIII/IVs. It is going to happen and we can beaaaccch until the sunsets on the moon :shake: but they made their decision.

The best thing to do now IMPO is to start guiding cadets on the fact that if they are poor test takers, go to Barnes and Noble and buy study guides.
 
Last edited:
I run a technical and executive recruiting firm.

The Army is playing catch-up and competing with the private sector. American business prefers data analytical problem solving types as its workforce and leaders..

I wish I could do standardized testing legally. As it is, I have to make judgement based on which schools they go to and what major they chose. That's really unfair, but I have to choose which pond to fish from. I'm sure it will not be perfect, but I think the Army is moving the correct direction and hopefully will continuously improve rather than stagnate based on tradition.
 
Vista123 said:
a couple of things...
1.) we know how to blow up bridges, it seems what we have to improve is US military's poor performance at recognizing and reacting to cultural differences in both our adversaries and our coalition partners. This has been a bigger hurdle. Common sense says this is why we need MORE liberal arts majors in the ARMY. The Army Mission...is that the SAME as the AF or Navy mission?
Click to expand...

What is Army's mission? It seems like it is no longer go fight and win a war, but while winning a war accommodate cultural differences of our adversaries and accommdate our coalition partners. My opinion, some of our coalition partners have taken advantage of the perception of that we don't work well with others to hide their inability to work with us. My proposition is that the Army is not organized and equipped to handle "non-kinetic" missions that being given to us. I know that I am old in age and in thinking to believe that most Infantry soldiers still join the Army to possibly for our country and most of their training is focused (or should be) on how to shot, communicate, and move. But because suddenly we gave them some cultrual sensitive training, we expect them to be a police, cultural ambassdors, nation bulidersm and etc. When a kid tells me that he wants to join the Army to help people, I tell him, wrong organization join the Peace Corps.
 
What is Army's mission? It seems like it is no longer go fight and win a war, but while winning a war accommodate cultural differences of our adversaries and accommdate our coalition partners. My opinion, some of our coalition partners have taken advantage of the perception of that we don't work well with others to hide their inability to work with us. My proposition is that the Army is not organized and equipped to handle "non-kinetic" missions that being given to us. I know that I am old in age and in thinking to believe that most Infantry soldiers still join the Army to possibly for our country and most of their training is focused (or should be) on how to shot, communicate, and move. But because suddenly we gave them some cultrual sensitive training, we expect them to be a police, cultural ambassdors, nation bulidersm and etc. When a kid tells me that he wants to join the Army to help people, I tell him, wrong organization join the Peace Corps.

These exact thoughts have been going through my head recently. Well said.
 
MemberLG said:
What is Army's mission? It seems like it is no longer go fight and win a war, but while winning a war accommodate cultural differences of our adversaries and accommdate our coalition partners. My opinion, some of our coalition partners have taken advantage of the perception of that we don't work well with others to hide their inability to work with us. My proposition is that the Army is not organized and equipped to handle "non-kinetic" missions that being given to us. I know that I am old in age and in thinking to believe that most Infantry soldiers still join the Army to possibly for our country and most of their training is focused (or should be) on how to shot, communicate, and move. But because suddenly we gave them some cultrual sensitive training, we expect them to be a police, cultural ambassdors, nation bulidersm and etc. When a kid tells me that he wants to join the Army to help people, I tell him, wrong organization join the Peace Corps.
Click to expand...


To drift further off topic....

I am not disagreeing with you MemberLG at all, but it seems to me to win, preparation for and understanding of the culture is required (at least past WWll).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top