ROTC vs SA Difference?

How West Point beats the Ivy League.

A case can be made...
particularity if you factory in student debt and % of graduates who are employed after graduation

West Point excels in most measures. It graduates 80% of its students in four years. It is fourth in winners of Rhodes scholarships since 1923 (ahead of Stanford), sixth in Marshalls since 1982 (ahead of Columbia and Cornell) and fourth in Trumans since 1992 (ahead of Princeton and Duke). This year 4 out of 37 Gates scholars, who earn a full ride to study at the University of Cambridge in England, graduated from the service academies. The Gates roster includes four Yale grads, one from Harvard and none from Princeton.

http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2009/0824/colleges-09-education-west-point-america-best-college.html
 
A case can be made...
particularity if you factory in student debt and % of graduates who are employed after graduation

West Point excels in most measures. It graduates 80% of its students in four years. It is fourth in winners of Rhodes scholarships since 1923 (ahead of Stanford), sixth in Marshalls since 1982 (ahead of Columbia and Cornell) and fourth in Trumans since 1992 (ahead of Princeton and Duke). This year 4 out of 37 Gates scholars, who earn a full ride to study at the University of Cambridge in England, graduated from the service academies. The Gates roster includes four Yale grads, one from Harvard and none from Princeton.

http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2009/0824/colleges-09-education-west-point-america-best-college.html

I'm in the wrong place to argue against West Point, and I certainly wouldn't say it is anything but an excellent school, but I have never read any reviews that put it in the same class as the top 10 or 15 colleges/universities.
 
I'm in the wrong place to argue against West Point, and I certainly wouldn't say it is anything but an excellent school, but I have never read any reviews that put it in the same class as the top 10 or 15 colleges/universities.

Forbes list put it #1. :smile:
 
Forbes list put it #1. :smile:

It's high on Forbes list because of the lack of debt and graduation rates. No doubt it is one of the best schools in the nation, but is it the best? Ehh I would venture to say MIT and Stanford (and a few others) are better particularly because of their sciences and research.
 
I'm in the wrong place to argue against West Point, and I certainly wouldn't say it is anything but an excellent school, but I have never read any reviews that put it in the same class as the top 10 or 15 colleges/universities.

You probably weren't reading the lists very closely. In most cases, the lists are broken down by the highest degree offered. Thus, all the Ivies will be in a different category, because they offer doctoral degrees.

You have to look at the criteria. Often, measures of how those top schools are ranked rely heavily on things WP doesn't qualify for (research dollars, etc.).

The other question is, what makes a "great school"? What makes your examples, say MIT, a better undergraduate institution? What does a student get after four years of education at MIT that they don't get out of USMA? Or USNA? Given that the Rhodes Foundation has offered a Rhodes Scholarship to more USMA cadets than they have to MIT or Stanford or Duke or any school except the top 3 Ivies. Obviously at least one respected organization in the business of evaluating the educational product of universities find USMA to most certainly be among the "top 10 or 15 schools."

Perhaps you should answer the question from the other side...why do you believe USMA is NOT among the top 10 or 15 schools?
 
It's high on Forbes list because of the lack of debt and graduation rates. No doubt it is one of the best schools in the nation, but is it the best? Ehh I would venture to say MIT and Stanford (and a few others) are better particularly because of their sciences and research.

That's a hard comparison. The Princeton Review lists it as #14 among national liberal arts colleges. I don't know why they would call it a LA college. :confused:
 
You probably weren't reading the lists very closely. In most cases, the lists are broken down by the highest degree offered. Thus, all the Ivies will be in a different category, because they offer doctoral degrees.

You have to look at the criteria. Often, measures of how those top schools are ranked rely heavily on things WP doesn't qualify for (research dollars, etc.).

The other question is, what makes a "great school"? What makes your examples, say MIT, a better undergraduate institution? What does a student get after four years of education at MIT that they don't get out of USMA? Or USNA? Given that the Rhodes Foundation has offered a Rhodes Scholarship to more USMA cadets than they have to MIT or Stanford or Duke or any school except the top 3 Ivies. Obviously at least one respected organization in the business of evaluating the educational product of universities find USMA to most certainly be among the "top 10 or 15 schools."

Perhaps you should answer the question from the other side...why do you believe USMA is NOT among the top 10 or 15 schools?

US News also has it 14 among National Liberal Arts Schools. It also has it ranked very highly in the engineering departments for colleges that don't offer doctorates. However, that is sort of a backhanded compliment because all of the top engineering schools offer doctorates.

USMA doesn't have the world's best professors and the world's best facilities, like some of the other top schools do, but that takes nothing at all away from the students. There are other reasons that some of the top students in the country go to the Service Academies, and those young men and women are the reason so many award winners come from the USMA.
 
US News also has it 14 among National Liberal Arts Schools. It also has it ranked very highly in the engineering departments for colleges that don't offer doctorates. However, that is sort of a backhanded compliment because all of the top engineering schools offer doctorates.

USMA doesn't have the world's best professors and the world's best facilities, like some of the other top schools do, but that takes nothing at all away from the students. There are other reasons that some of the top students in the country go to the Service Academies, and those young men and women are the reason so many award winners come from the USMA.

What makes the "world's best professors" for the undergraduate level? Remember we're comparing undergraduate institutions here, not what the institutions offer at the graduate and doctoral level.

Tell me about the facilities. What do you know about them? What makes an undergraduate facility world class? How do the facilities at USMA compare to those at Stanford or MIT for their undergraduates?

You make a lot of proclamations about what you think USMA does and doesn't offer compared to the schools you've grown up thinking are "the best." But what metrics are you using to compare them, beyond preconceived notions?
 
What makes the "world's best professors" for the undergraduate level? Remember we're comparing undergraduate institutions here, not what the institutions offer at the graduate and doctoral level.

Tell me about the facilities. What do you know about them? What makes an undergraduate facility world class? How do the facilities at USMA compare to those at Stanford or MIT for their undergraduates?

You make a lot of proclamations about what you think USMA does and doesn't offer compared to the schools you've grown up thinking are "the best." But what metrics are you using to compare them, beyond preconceived notions?

Are you trying to be serious or just silly? You obviously know nothing about these schools, and are just being difficult. I am 45, have attended some of those schools, and know lots of other people who have. You questioned rankings, and when we shared them with you, you still ignored them. You hang your hat on a forbes article, which, if you read it, included a number of negative opinions of the USMA, and in the end ranked them highly because of their high graduation rate, high employment after school, and 0 cost, which of course, goes hand in hand with attending one of them.
 
Are you trying to be serious or just silly? You obviously know nothing about these schools, and are just being difficult. I am 45, have attended some of those schools, and know lots of other people who have.

And you obviously know nothing about USMA, so be careful in your proclamations.

Why avoid answering the questions? I am going to guess it's because you read them and had that pang of thought that goes something like "Dang...I actually don't know anything about how Stanford's facilities for undergrad students compare to USMA's" and thus avoided answering.

You've attended "some of these schools" so I'm sure you can tell us what makes their undergraduate education so clearly better.

You're right, I haven't been to Stanford. My intimate knowledge extends only to USAFA, USMA, MIT, Yale, Harvard, Georgetown, and Rice University.

So, now that we've established that....care to answer the questions? Remember, we're discussing undergraduate education here.
 
Last edited:
I bow to your much greater knowledge. The USMA is a much better school than any of those other schools. The facilities are better than at MIT and Stanford , heck throw in Cal Tech, all combined. The instructors are better than those at any of those other schools. Happy?

Just remember, the quality of the student has nothing to do with the quality of the school, you get out of any school only as much as you are willing to put in. The students at any of the SA's are a different breed than most of the students at the more traditional colleges. Most are there for much more than an education, they have made a life choice, and feel a SA is the best way to get there. That is why they do so well in some of those scholarships that were mentioned earlier. Of course, if you took those same students and put them elsewhere, my guess is, they would succeed there too.
 
The reason to post on this is to help guide students into making the right decision for them. Lets please restrict ourselves to providing information without all the emotion. This topic has developed into a Yankees-Red Sox argument.
 
Marist College ROTC said:
The reason to post on this is to help guide students into making the right decision for them. Lets please restrict ourselves to providing information without all the emotion. This topic has developed into a Yankees-Red Sox argument.

Thank you.
 
I am 45, have attended some of those schools, and know lots of other people who have. You questioned rankings, and when we shared them with you, you still ignored them. .
I don't think Scoutpilot is being silly. I attended a HYPSM, my nephew attended USNA and is now at MIT, and I too know lots of people who have been to these schools, including some that actually are a closer match to USMA... the top Liberal Arts colleges like Williams, Amherst, Swarthmore, Pomona, etc.

Scoutpilot makes a legitimate point about teaching focus. The more Ph.D. focused the University, the less professorial 1-1 interaction, mentoring, and actual face time undergraduates get. This is especially so during the first two years, which to me are the most critical in shapeing a student's habits, aspirations and skills.

It is really difficult to compare the educational "output", if you will, between HYPSM, or the top LACs, with the Service Academies. Different mission, but a broad based critical thinking education certainly one component of the Academies' mission. However, the Academies go further, and many would say, further in a more relevant way. The Academies focus on character development, and leadership development, in a way impossible for any other institution other than say, a religious one. The Academies develop the whole person, wheras the others focus solely on intellectual development. This last component really makes comparing the educational outcomes, or shall we say educationsl quality, for students of the Academies and other schools... impossible.

an excerpt from the Mission of the USMA: "The Academy provides a superb four-year education which focuses on the leader development of cadets in the academic, military, and physical domains, all underwritten by adherence to a code of honor. "
 
Last edited:
The reason to post on this is to help guide students into making the right decision for them. Lets please restrict ourselves to providing information without all the emotion. This topic has developed into a Yankees-Red Sox argument.

Thank you for bringing us back from the brink.

If one of my sons was accepted into MIT and West Point, I would try and have him decide what was the most important thing for him. If he knew without a doubt he wanted to join the Army after college and make that his career, I would say that's easy, West Point. If he wanted to be the best engineer he could be, and thought he might want to join the Army afterwards, or if he definitely wanted the Army but also wanted to enjoy a more traditional college life, then MIT it is. The rest is much more gray, but I think you can succeed in both the Army as well as in life afterwards attending either school, and going the ROTC route if you attend MIT.

Of course if you don't work your butt off at either school you won't succeed.
 
I think what should be considered; and is probably most important; isn't what Forbes, US World, Princeton Review, or any other review thinks of the academy. What matters most is what EMPLOYERS think of your education. After all; once the dust settles, more than half of officers; ROTC/OTS/Academy; will not make the military a career. They will get out and go to work in the private sector.

In this regard, the academies are considered very prestigious among Fortune 500 companies. Even the "Cal-Poly" website says:
Cal Poly’s College of Engineering program ranked second among public engineering programs, bested only by the U.S. Military Academy, for schools whose highest degree is a bachelor’s or a master’s.
This is the same with many employer's view on education. The military academies; all of them; are considered very prestigious and most employers are extremely impressed with such a degree. Why? 2 reason. 1) The curriculum is indeed rigorous and challenging along with many of the ivy/prestigious schools. 2) The graduates have the discipline of a minimum of 9 years of military service. They stuck it out. They aren't quitters. (This is also the same reason many companies like ex-military in general).

Now the emphasis is on engineering. In that concentration, the military academies definitely stand out among most colleges in the country. For the student with a different major; e.g. behavioral science, math, history, english, management, etc... I believe you will find that an academy education will stand up there with the same degree major from harvard, yale, princeton, etc...

Equally as important, is that in today's world, a graduate degree is becoming more common. And once you get a graduate degree, where you went for your undergraduate is almost irrelevant. For those not interested in the military, I've been counseling them for years if they intend on going to grad school, don't go into debt with your undergrad. Go to State-U or wherever you can go cheap and save your money, loans, scholarships, or whatever for the more expensive "Better" grad school. I.e. Is it better to have an undergrad from Harvard and a grad degree from the University of South Dakota; or the same exact degrees in reverse? Undergrad from the University of South Dakota and the grad degree from Harvard?

There are a lot of officers getting their graduate degrees. When the time comes to go out into the civilian world, the employers will look more at my son's PhD from RAND than they will his BS from the air force academy. Same if you were an ROTC grad from Rice, Purdue, UCLA, Harvard, etc...
 
I guess we went down the rabbit hole.

Harvard, Yale, Stanford, Princeton, UPenn and MIT all have ROTC, along with Columbia to boot.

dunninla said:
However, the Academies go further, and many would say, further in a more relevant way. The Academies focus on character development, and leadership development, in a way impossible for any other institution other than say, a religious one. The Academies develop the whole person, wheras the others focus solely on intellectual development. This last component really makes comparing the educational outcomes, or shall we say educationsl quality, for students of the Academies and other schools... impossible.

We are on a ROTC forum. I need to be sure that your premise, as a ROTC parent is in line with that post.

Are you saying to ROTC candidates, cadets, AD ROTC grads and parents that ROTC does not develop character and leadership at HYSPPM?

Or the "The Academies develop the whole person, whereas the others focus solely on intellectual development. "

I don't think that is what you meant.

Dunninla, you post just shot your AROTC child. Read your post.

Maybe I am reading your post wrong. JMPO.
 
^ no, that's not what my post referred to. My post was very narrow.

The discussion I responded to was between ScoutPilot and Moosetache about the quality of professors at the Academies vs. top ranked research universities, and whether the two can even be compared ...I wasn't referring to ROTC + University, which is of course a broader discussion.
 
The reason to post on this is to help guide students into making the right decision for them. Lets please restrict ourselves to providing information without all the emotion. This topic has developed into a Yankees-Red Sox argument.

Red Sox Suck! As a life-long Yankee fan (27 championships and counting), just saying..... :shake:
 
Back
Top