Debate for the Day

[USNA69]

Well, I still think we're mixing some apples and oranges here -- but let me try it this way, using the USNA catalog data.


I'm still at a loss to figure out how any of that has to do with an assumption that somehow one of those MOC's slates of nominations somehow came up short on the qualification end and thus, they missed out.

The MOC staffers at our Academy Day say when they are "under" their five, they get an extra appointment the next year.

So, I'm still not getting the "if-then" statement that, in the example above, somehow Wyoming doesn't have enough "qualified" applicants to fill Wyoming's quota.

We are definitely mixing apples and oranges but we kinda know how many oranges to subtract out of the crate.

All MOC appointments only account for 55% or so of the total student body. The remaining are from alternate sources, 300 or so from Presidential nominatins, a couple of hundred directly from the fleet, and a few more sources, but the vast majority from the national pool. Bottom line is there is about a national average 8:1 midshipman to MOC ratio. Since these national pool appointments are based solely on individual merit, their inclusion will increase the ratio above 5:1 and can be an indicator of the competitiveness of the district. A very broad generalization would be that areas beginning with the ratio of 10 or so to 1 and up would be the indicator for a very competitive district.

 

[RaptorDad2013]

I'm with you there -- but it would seem that the catalog data would be by state of residence of all midshipmen -- if from the fleet, perhaps the state from which they entered, recruited athletes the same, while Presidentials from where Mom or Dad might be stationed when they enter, etc. The fleet and Presidentials might skew the count in those states with a heavy Navy influence. After all, it would seem a Presidential appointment of a son/daughter from the Naval service would reflect the state where the application was made, not necessarily where that applicant might say they were "from" (ie, home of record). (As an air force brat, I spent my first three high school years in England only to graduate in Illinois)

The "broad generalization" is probably true, but I guess I was thinking of the "oranges" -- those factors other than just the current crop of senior high school "civilian" graduates, especially that 55 percent coming from MOC's -- that would affect that 10:1 ratio.

Good discussion.

 

[USNA69]

To further confuse the fruit picking, sometimes we pick a particular fruit that has the characteristics of each and we don't know if it is an apple or an orange. The military junior, in addition to his Presidential nomination, will apply to either his permanent resident or his current military resident MOC, depending upon whether his parents have established residency at their latest military posting. Then, in order to have the absolute best candidate mix for that particular class, the Admissions Office may grant him either a Presidential or a Congressional, depending on which best works for the overall class mix. It is so confusing that Congress has demanded, after all the dust has settled, an accounting of whom each quota is counted against.

 

[trailsendmt]

I am from a small (although not in size) western state. The largest city is slightly more than 100K. There are over 150 class C schools most of which have a student body of less than 100 kids for 9 -12. Our school currently has around 75 kids (this includes exchange students, which supprisingly enough we have around 3 to 5 of each year). My son graduated in a class of 16. Is some respects for Service Academies applications, it can be beneficial. Although for sports the school only offers football for boys (8 man for our school, 6 man for a great many that are much smaller), volleyball for girls, basketball and track for both, it is pretty unusual for someone not to make the varsity team by the time they are a Jr. or Sr. They also have a lot of opportunites to take leadership positions in student government, etc. However, there is virtually no opportunity to take AP classes or a broad variety of classes (especially foreign language classes, spanish is all that is offered at our school). You only get the basics. So on paper, kids from bigger schools have much more impressive accademic credentials. Often times my S only had 5 or 6 kids in a class (physics, advanced math) so his basic education foundation is very strong. My point is that in a straight national pool kids from very small schools might get overlooked. We currently have 2 kids from our school attending academys and we had another attend in the late 1990's. My S was only ranked 5th in his class (5/16 does not look very impressive) and could easily have been shoved to the bottom of the pile in a national pool (the other attendee was ranked 1st in his class/year behind my S). So far at his academy my S has maintained a gpa of over 3.50 so he is obviously capable of doing the work and is on the football team. I can understand how kids from bigger and competitive districts feel the current system is unfair, but so would a national pool for more rural applicants.

 

[RaptorDad2013]

Trailsend points out again the slippery slope of assuming "qualified" has to do with numbers of people (ie, highly populated states produce more "qualified" applicants than available nominations). That assertion is obviously "correct" on its face, but applies to, or affects, an individual applicant only when you mix in the senators and the state of residence.

On its face, applicants from Alaska, Montana and Wyoming will, as has been stated previously, get a "greater chance for nomination" because of that dynamic. Come from Kentucky, with 6 representatives, and the chances lessen. Come from Virginia (11 reps) or New Jersey (13) and your only consolation may be that you're not from California, with 53 representatives plus Boxer and Feinstein!

As to "fairness," it is in the eye of the beholder, also previously noted!

 

[USNA69]

IYou only get the basics. So on paper, kids from bigger schools have much more impressive accademic credentials.......... My point is that in a straight national pool kids from very small schools might get overlooked............... I can understand how kids from bigger and competitive districts feel the current system is unfair, but so would a national pool for more rural applicants.

My point exactly. The national pool applicants are coming from a few very affluent population centers. Candidates, who have had the advantages of these areas should outperform the kid who has to get up every morning, feed the stock, and then drive an hour each way to school and back. The Academy has, in the past, been a gateway for first generation college families with kids attuned to the general Navy enlisted population. A poster on another thread last night mentioned the snobishness of ringknockers. I am afraid that it is going to get worse.

 

[USNA69]

From the Greystone Prep-Discussion of Letter thread:

Gentlemen; I hate to say this but I knew several "Ringknockers" in my day that were absolute pompus asses.

When Academy appointments reflect the true demographics of the United States and more importantly, the demographics of the sailors they will lead, this is not as big a problem as it is as when the Academy appointments favor highly affluent population centers as it does now.