Naval Academy had highest number of nominations on record

Discussion in 'Academy/Military News' started by Just_A_Mom, Sep 14, 2010.

  1. Just_A_Mom

    Just_A_Mom Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2006
    Messages:
    4,826
    Likes Received:
    2
    http://www.navytimes.com/news/2010/09/ap-naval-academy-most-nominations-091310/

    It sounds like they really hustled the Congressmen and increased recruiting in underserved geographic areas.
     
  2. Whistle Pig

    Whistle Pig Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2006
    Messages:
    1,634
    Likes Received:
    1
    yes, they hustled ...and if BGOs are to be believed (I do), this is not great news nor any indication of growing "popularity" of the vision of a career in the Navy or Marine Corp among the nation's youth. rather, it's a sad symptom of USNA's misguided efforts to socially engineer its applicant/appointment pools. And one of the outcomes is precisely as predicted ...a whole bunch of Mids being separated from the Yard. 40 in week one, reportedly with another several hundred being targeted.

    Now, it might be easy to conclude that these are ill-equipped or capable individuals? Not necessarily. That shoe remains to drop, altho recent Youtube antics censored by USNA lend evidence to the reality that there are increasingly young men and women appointed and attending who've little or no idea nor respect for the gift they've been given vs. the position they've earned. To the contrary, it might be concluded that the social engineering efforts have taken yet another new turn ...eliminate a bunch of non-diversity Mids that the %s might look even "better."

    And ironically, it now increasingly seems the reason for the recently dismissed Supe was not so much having a "slush fund" ...all admirals have these funds ...but rather that he had to ramp up the funding streams thru some creative financial management in order to meet his minority mandates.

    And the Dean's point of "most applications" is so grossly and intentionally misleading, even if it is factual, because it indicates relativity to previous years when there were no overt attempts to "recruit" applicants via schmoozing nominators and visiting candidates who meet "special needs" of the Navy. The entire process and design are apples and oranges.

    Ah, what tangled webs we weave when we practice to deceive ...

    It wil be interesting to see how the new Supe continues to address what remains the obvious and sad mandate to max minority attendance, no matter the cost in funds, reputation, and life and limb down the road. PC continues to ride rampant over all that makes sense.
     
  3. aglages

    aglages Parent

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2009
    Messages:
    2,680
    Likes Received:
    4
    While I have certainly been outspoken in my affirmative action beliefs on this forum it may be time to leave the class of 2014 behind and give the new Superintendent a chance to improve the "system". Let's hope that a changing of the guard will result in the best legally possible candidates being chosen/enrolled.
     
  4. MakeItHappen

    MakeItHappen Member

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2010
    Messages:
    157
    Likes Received:
    0

    Blah, blah, blah. Many conclusory opinions without facts or links. :welcome:
     
  5. Just_A_Mom

    Just_A_Mom Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2006
    Messages:
    4,826
    Likes Received:
    2
    LOL - It's more like - "I am not a bigot, but don't accept nominations from 'those' Congressional districts". Same old double speak. yawn.
     
  6. Pima

    Pima Parent

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2007
    Messages:
    12,809
    Likes Received:
    954
    In the end of the day, you can get apptd to any SA, that does not guarantee you will graduate, statistically 25% will not graduate. Every cadet will need to make it academically right?

    Who cares if every MOC slate is filled? The highest WCS score wins! So, the MOC can fill their slate, but that doesn't mean they will all get apptd. Seriously, MOC A places 2 more candidates on their slate, WHOOPEE, the candidate's WCS score is the make or break. Just because they have a nom does not mean they will get an apptmt. It doesn't even mean they will be placed on the NWL.

    I did not notice that they said more apptmts, they announced that they had more noms.

    Am I the only one who actually sees the difference?
     
  7. agolson

    agolson Eagle43

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Messages:
    133
    Likes Received:
    1
    Please help me to understand. I thought nominations were limited by congress. So many for MOC, so many for presidential, so many for superintedents, etc. I thought in any given year the nominations were limited to about 6500 - 7000 per academy. Confused.
     
  8. Mongo

    Mongo Banned

    Joined:
    May 3, 2010
    Messages:
    1,444
    Likes Received:
    0
    You are correct. However, historically, congressional nominations have hovered right around the 6000 mark. When the Academy was directed to target diversity, they looked at the congressional districts that were underrepresented and increased the 'recruiting' effort in these targeted districts. The implication is that the 600 increase in MOC nominations is from these previously underrepresented districts and indicitive of the success of their efforts. Apparently, there are those who feel that instead, the Academy should target those districts where highly qualified candidates are falling over themselves.
     
  9. aglages

    aglages Parent

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2009
    Messages:
    2,680
    Likes Received:
    4
    Interesting. I have been reading these race/admissions threads for quite some time and have yet to read a post by anyone who suggested what is apparent to you. How about a link to one of the posts by "those who feel that instead, the Academy should target those districts where highly qualified candidates are falling over themselves"?
     
  10. Pima

    Pima Parent

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2007
    Messages:
    12,809
    Likes Received:
    954
    Agolson, if you read the OP's post they had 6600 noms, so yes, you are correct in your assumption. However, MOC's are not required to submit a full slate.

    What this article is stating is that this past yr the MOC's were submmitting more candidates on their slates.

    What does this mean? Everything and nothing. Why? Because the quote is the actual article.

    1. There is no evidence that the MOC's did not lower their stds and place a non-qual candidate (3 Q) on the slate, whereas, the yrs before they had required mins for the nom consideration. In essence, all they did was rack and stack the top 10 regardless if the USNA would deem them competitive ~ triple Q.

    2. Getting a nom does not and will not ever mean you are going to get appointed. Yes, you need the nom, but it is the WCS that determines who gets appointed. Highest WCS wins!

    3. It does not discuss if this is an MOC matter. In some states the MOC's "talk" that means they will not duplicate a candidate on their slates. If more MOC's have taken this course for 14 that means they will have more noms. It doesn't mean there is a higher % of an apptmt, because Candidate A on the multi nom system would still win due to WCS, which means Candidate B will win it from another source. It doesn't mean anything more or less

    4. Great, you get in. Life is wonderful, however, people tend to forge how hard it is to STAY. 25% of any incoming class will not receive an SA commissioning, it may be due to physical, mental or academic, but that is the reality. Nothing in this article illustrates that their stats are any different.

    Instead of saying they are recruiting in under served areas, where no place in this article states that, we should be reading it for what it is. MOC's maxed out their slates, but the USNA had the same amount of appointments. This is a bad economy, and students who never thought of going into the military are re-thinking this option. More people in the mix, and you can easily see how they can max out the slate, yet that means squat to the candidate waiting for the BFE.

    When Navy Times states that they had a much higher apptmt rate for under served gepgraphical areas than we can take the leap of recruitment. Until then, this is all fluff and PR.
     
    Last edited: Sep 15, 2010
  11. Mongo

    Mongo Banned

    Joined:
    May 3, 2010
    Messages:
    1,444
    Likes Received:
    0
    USNA Admissions has an extremely limited budget, the majority of which is utilized by midshipmen returning home during break for OP Info. Three years ago, the focus was changed to almost solely targeting underrepresented areas. Those who don't like this, by default, unless they express an opinion otherwise, are seeking a return to the old ways where the rich got richer and the poor got poorer.

    The following is a good indepth article of USNA's efforts. Dean Latta explaining to the Transportation Subcommittee investigating CGA shortcomings, how USNA is increasing diversity applications:

    https://www.usna.com/SSLPage.aspx?pid=8188



    Anyone who has followed the entire effort knows that the 10% increase in nominations is a major milestone of success.
     
  12. AcademyFriend1

    AcademyFriend1 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2010
    Messages:
    202
    Likes Received:
    1
    What was the referenced YouTube controversy?
     
  13. QT314

    QT314 New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2010
    Messages:
    3
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'm not 100% sure if I'm correct as to which YouTube video they are referring to, but my guess is the one that is titled "Real Mids of USNA". I inadvertently watched this when I was watching various USNA videos and was extremely disheartened after watching this video. I was hoping that it wasn't real. If it is, then the academy has some very serious issues to deal with if this is a sample of what they considered "the best and brightest". It most definitely reflects very poorly for the academy if it is real. Someone please tell me that it isn't.
     
  14. pjnavy82

    pjnavy82 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2010
    Messages:
    50
    Likes Received:
    0
    "Bruce Latta told the academy's Board of Visitors on Monday that members of Congress nominated more than 6,600 students interested in attending the school."

    An easy way to do this is to encourage the Nom sources to coordinate so that each candidate is only given one nomination. I know for a fact this done. DS was given a Pres. Nom (and appt.) to AFA, but subsequently was not even interviewed by the two senators for nom to AFA because they knew he already had the Appt. He was also told by his BGO (who sat on both senator's boards) that if he got a Nom to USNA, it would only be from one or the other, but not both (because they coordinate).

    PJ
     
  15. aglages

    aglages Parent

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2009
    Messages:
    2,680
    Likes Received:
    4
    Which poster said that they didn't like the USNA targeting underrepresented areas for recruiting purposes? Again, I have seen plenty of posters that are unhappy with the "supposed" double track admissions standards used recently by the USNA, but NONE that have ever posted anything that would support either your first statement (quoted above) or the latest variation. You are not really suggesting that anyone that does not like what has "supposedly" been occurring with recent USNA admissions boards is also opposed to the USNA spending it's recruiting dollars pursuing qualified applicants in underrepresented areas....are you? Two separate subjects/opinions and somewhat disingenuous of you to attempt to make one synonymous with the other.
     
  16. Mongo

    Mongo Banned

    Joined:
    May 3, 2010
    Messages:
    1,444
    Likes Received:
    0
    Do you read the threads prior to posting on them? See Post # 2 almost in it's entirety:
    etc etc I am realitively certain WP was replying to the first post on this thread.
     
  17. aglages

    aglages Parent

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2009
    Messages:
    2,680
    Likes Received:
    4
    See post #3 (immediately following post #2) for an answer to your question.
    Clearly I believe that WP has issues with the qualifications and selection of those the USNA has enrolled during it's pursuit of diversity as opposed to an issue of marketing and recruiting qualified applicants from underrepresented areas. I'm sure he'll eventually clarify his position for you.
     
  18. Mongo

    Mongo Banned

    Joined:
    May 3, 2010
    Messages:
    1,444
    Likes Received:
    0
    I can hardly wait.
     
  19. Mongo

    Mongo Banned

    Joined:
    May 3, 2010
    Messages:
    1,444
    Likes Received:
    0
    The odds of this proving detrimental to both the candidates and the Academy's goal to pick the most qualified is much much greater than the odds of it assisting more qualified to obtain appointments. Overall, not a good procedure.
     
    Last edited: Sep 16, 2010
  20. Farleigh85

    Farleigh85 Member

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2010
    Messages:
    60
    Likes Received:
    1
    The deeply-rooted biases of the busy-body social engineer are disclosed with this tired and well-worn invocation of a supposed class struggle between supposed “haves” and “have-nots.”

    The notion rests on the ridiculous assumption that certain arbitrary groupings of people are not represented at Academies in perfect proportion to their numbers to society at large because people (the haves) who do not bear the same skin tint or surnames of those arbitrary groupings (the have-nots) have conspired to deprive them of that right. Now, it’s cast in terms of rich and poor, but we’re really talking skin tint and surnames. A black candidate from a wealthy family is considered a “have-not” by skin color alone, and will be favored over a white candidate from a poor family who is—by default—considered a “have.” A Hispanic surname held by a trout-belly white candidate with Irish red hair is also considered a “have not” purely by accident of birth. And I believe that this illogical and counterproductive attempt to achieve supposed social equality by arbitrary measure is justified by the social engineers because it makes them feel self-righteous in their attempts to force on others the social engineers’ personal convictions of how other people should behave and the choices other people should make.

    By application of Occam’s famous razor, the simpler explanation is the preferred explanation. The simpler explanation for a dearth of candidates from certain arbitrary skin tins or surname groupings is that they self-select out. They have less real interest in attending the academies. This is the same reason why white candidates, particularly those with southern cultural backgrounds, tend to compete for appointments in disproportionately high numbers. They self-select IN.

    I am so tired of social engineers who seemongly spend every walking moment creating and nurturing the victim group mentality, spreading the poison of social unrest, and accusing their critics of racism--or worse.
     

Share This Page