New Cadet BBQ

D_Hudson said:
"Corrective PT" as you probably think of it no longer happens according to my NC. They are only allowed to make you do what they are willing to do themselves. That is, "drop and give me 20" means you do the 20 with them. It is a disincentive for capricious hazing, but also means less incentive to "correct."
Click to expand...
That has been the standard for awhile now. The new rules, first introduced for 2016, limit corrective PT to 5 reps or 45 seconds of pushups (with similar restrictions on other exercises). There is not less incentive to correct, there is more fear of getting a hazing board.

D_Hudson said:
What I am trying to figure out is why a current USMA cadet is on here making critical comments of a training decision by his/her CoC (not that I totally disagree with the sentiments). What would the commandant say if he logged on to see these remarks? I think that is highly unprofessional. Let the "old farts" bellyache. Less negative implications for future USMA cadets viewing this forum for information and less prospect of career implications. IMO. You are free to do what you want.
Click to expand...

Most of what I have contributed to this thread is factual information from inside of Beast, some of which parents and the other random posters in this thread could not find on the USMA Facebook page, etc. The comments I have made have all and probably will continue to be made in front of the Commandant. We went through a similar discussion with General Clark during the train up for CBT, and I have observed similar conversations between him and other cadets several times. :rolleyes:
 
LineInTheSand said:
Yeah, I have no idea who Copyrighted the photos (because I came along after they have been taken down).

That said, photos are not PII and are not protected by the Privacy Act. I'm sorry to say this, but the identities of the rank and file Army are not protected. Yes, some small communities do often protect their member's identities, like Special Forces, but that is not the case here.

If you ask an Army public affairs officer if an identifiable shot of a service member is protected they should (but probably won't) laugh at you.
Click to expand...

I seldom ask PAO for legal advice.
 
LineInTheSand said:
Just remember, Beast, Swab Summer, Plebe Summer or another other summer.... is not about training your son to be a leader.... not yet.

If academies could break them down, train them to follow and train them to lead in 7 weeks.... we could save a lot of money but ditching the remaining 4 years. That first summer is about making a united (at least somewhat) group that can survive a school year and learn along the way.
Click to expand...

It most certainly is about training our sons and daughters to lead. Not only training the cadre to lead but also training the new cadets. I told my two younger brothers and son who went to USMA and another son who went to USNA that they will see all types of leaderships styles their first year there. Good ones, bad ones, ones that make you want to rebel, ones that make you want to follow, leadership that works in tight situations, leadership that works in a more laid back environment. Listen, follow, remember, take notes. Incorporate into your own personal leadership style those characteristics of the best leaders you had. West Point is all about leadership, from day one. Some learn those lessons better than others.
 
D_Hudson said:
What I am trying to figure out is why a current USMA cadet is on here making critical comments of a training decision by his/her CoC (not that I totally disagree with the sentiments). What would the commandant say if he logged on to see these remarks? I think that is highly unprofessional. Let the "old farts" bellyache. Less negative implications for future USMA cadets viewing this forum for information and less prospect of career implications. IMO. You are free to do what you want.
Click to expand...

The previous Comm was a member. Don't know how often he logged on, but he did post few times.
 
Back in the day we used to have to memorize Schofield's Definition of Discipline. I used to have a poster of this until my USNA mid put it up on his wall. Fantastic guidance:

The discipline which makes the soldiers of a free country reliable in battle is not to be gained by harsh or tyrannical treatment. On the contrary, such treatment is far more likely to destroy than to make an army. It is possible to impart instructions and to give commands in such a manner and in such a tone of voice as to inspire in the soldier no feeling but and intense desire to obey, while the opposite manner and tone of voice cannot fail to excite strong resentment and a desire to disobey. The one mode or other of dealing with subordinates springs from a corresponding spirit in the breast of the commander. He who feels the respect which is due others cannot fail to inspire in them regard for himself; while he who feels, and hence manifests, disrespect toward other, especially his inferiors, cannot fail to inspire hatred against himself.
 
scoutpilot said:
And yet he's totally right. Must sting a bit...
Click to expand...

General approach to lawyers....They're there for advice.... and that is all. It's sometimes good advice but not generally needed.

Your JAG would give you the same advice I gave you.... but maybe that's because I used to be a FOIA officer.

Of course, I always appreciate federal employees who hide behind fake protections... "but I'm a super secret GS-7!"
 
BenTherr said:
I missed a golden opportunity.

"I seldom ask PAO for legal advice, but when I do, they say JAG is right down the hall."
Click to expand...

I hope they didn't have to remind you what legal offices are there for TOO many times.
 
Couple of thoughts on this (already extremely muddled) thread:

FlyBoy1993 said:
I never thought Beast was for attrition. The freaking application process itself does that.
Click to expand...

I never understood CBT to be focused on attrition. It did enforce a standard of performance/behavior that created attrition as a side effect. But if it was suitably rigorous yet miraculously 100% made it, I have never seen any indication that would be viewed as a problem.

BigBear said:
Could someone please explain to me how:
1. Corrective PT takes away from other military training?
2. Why corrective pt is a bad thing, especially when there are some new cadets who are severely underprepared physically? Beast or not, they will still have to pass all their DPE classes...

And for the record, 2015 did get mess hall hamburgers and hot dogs after the cbt I challenge. We did not get fall out or candy, and we did not stay for long because we had to finish cleaning for our first SAMI
Click to expand...

My read (and I'm way out of my lane as well) is that beast type PT is a team building exercise when done right. IE: mutually hard thing that the group goes through, but survives. And sets a tone of seriousness. And improves conditioning, and, and and.....

Ex: DS was (and is) a pushup/situp machine. Can largely crank them out longer than cadre/black hats are interested in dishing it out. So the smart (and crafty) squad leader switches to leg lifts. One of the unwritten rules DS saw was the cadre did the same PT the new cadets did. And this squad leader could do leg lifts for 5 minutes and none of the new cadets could. So she found a way to stretch the cadets even if well prepared.

And by DS's accounts, they did PT for everything. Get a letter, do PT. Boot untied, do PT. Ad Nauseum. But they all did it, even the squad leader. Except for the profile rangers, but that's a different discussion. And this seems to be fairly consistent across 2013-2015 experiences from cadets I've heard talk about it.

So DS did not care for his CBT squad leaders, but he respected them. And learned from them. Same for the super strict 1SG in the AY. He made plebe life suck, but set a standard of performance that made later life in the scramble company trivial. And carried through into RA training outside of USMA.

So correctional PT? You'll probably get challenged by some, remember your required plebe "knowledge".

But general smokage as a group to team build, or to provide incentive for improved performance? Not sure anyone would challenge that.

Look at competitive MIAD tryouts. AASLT under the right set of black hats. Sapper, other harder schools. Nothing wrong with making something hard to make sure everyone there is 100% committed. And really wants it.

And that's where I see the softening standards are a legit concern to be raised by the grads & earlier cadets. It's allowing candidates without the fire & fight to make it in, and through CBT.

My read is that they are the same ones that fall out later in many cases. But can't prove that, though the cadets sure think it's the case.
 
A few random thoughts as the discussion (and a nicely civil one, I might add) rolls on...

The heart of the argument is a schism among those who've experienced Beast, those who haven't, and those whose reason for interest in the subject is still undetermined (the lattermost because certain folks don't answer the question).

People from all those groups are coming down on both sides of the argument. Beast will always change. Some of it is good (our cadre were not forced to let us eat, which helped me lose 27 lbs in Beast...that was a good change, as starvation adds no value). Some of it is bad (lack of discipline and valuable hardships like physical correction). The pendulum swings, and lately it seems to have swung too far.

The leadership will NEVER say Beast was too easy. They ran it. Of course they stand by it. Every senior officer and CSM who oversaw it will say it was done right, no matter what the criticism of it.

I don't know that I could feel right watching a good NCO smoke a soldier for an infraction if I had to think to myself "USMA thought I was so delicate that I could only do five push-ups."

Beast is about followership as much as leadership. I'll be interested to see what kind of followership this class exhibits.
 
MemberLG said:
For me it appears that this unquantifiable and unique standard is getting keep pushed back and increases the chance of adverse impact. A New cadet reports to West Point physically unprepared. No problem, he just reported, he got 4 years to meet the Army standard. At what point do we decide he is not going to meet the standard or are we going to accept 180 on the APFT. No big deal, he branched whatever branch that is not known for physical requirements. I disagree as any 2LT to score 180 is not acceptable regardless what future job he might have. At what point do we introduce stress to officers wanna be, if not during Beast, when? Not everybody goes to Ranger School. I don't know how tough BOLC is?

So at what point will cadets get introduced to physical and mental challenges for their development?
Click to expand...

Totally with you on this, but will comment: Any cadet who makes it through CBT but is struggling with APFT will get significant special attention. With good reason, it drags the company down, etc. And his team leader will indirectly get special attention.

And it has big impact on their physical grade, and thus drags down CPS/Rank.

And there is usually correlation with struggling physically and mil performance.

Stuck with STAP, no IAD's.

Which is why I get impatient when the inevitable "what's the lowest passing score on the CFA" questions pop up. If a candidate is asking that, they are headed for a very tough ride even if USMA softens the physical standards in CBT.

Also, it's really a shame that the white book is no longer publicly available. It really outlines the (old?) USMA physical approach, and I see the method to the madness. And can see why some serving officers would raise concern due to lower standards if they are allowed to slide during the AY.
 
A note from one of the parents' message groups re the NCs in the photos in Central Area with the candy bars:

Parent commented on NC daughter's smile in picture. Daughter replied that "The Comm tells me to smile, I smile!".
 
mmb5 said:
A note from one of the parents' message groups re the NCs in the photos in Central Area with the candy bars:

Parent commented on NC daughter's smile in picture. Daughter replied that "The Comm tells me to smile, I smile!".
Click to expand...

If I was a new cadet, I'd smile and eat all the candy I could. It's not them or their participation in the "BBQ" anyone is trying to criticize.
 
hawk said:
...
Personally, my read from the peanut gallery is that physical standards for acceptance need a revisit. Just too much empirical evidence that those that struggle with CFA also struggle physically during CBT. And APFT during AY. And Mil Movement. And CFT. And during their MIAD, assuming they get to go. More likely to become profile rangers, etc. This is based on having some visibility to cadets in our state, along with DS experience with platoon & teammates...
Click to expand...

I disagree that the standards need to be changed (I think that is what you were implying). I think West Point has to rely on inconsistent test administrators from across the country. These administrators many times have personal relationships with the candidates or are unfamiliar with the exercises or do not understand how to apply the standard. When the field force was a 450 person army of reserve officers who held the PAEs in central locations with multiple graders grading in a public setting, you could count on more uniformity to the scores being an accurate assesment of a candidate's physical potential. Not so sure now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top