WarriorScholar
Member
- Joined
- May 21, 2022
- Messages
- 13
That's great news for your DD! I am sure she will excel. Has she chosen a major? I was on the faculty at USAFA and can reliably say they have a phenomenal faculty. One of the things all the academies excel at is teaching their faculty to actually teach. I know this seems somewhat counterintuitive, but through my master's and PhD I never once took a formal course in 'how to teach.' However, when I arrived at USAFA to join DFPS (Poli Sci Dept.) as a young officer, the first thing I did was take the new instructor course. It was phenomenal and I used the skills I learned in that course to inform the balance of my career as a professor. So, with an emphasis on teaching and a program for developing those skills in new instructors--along with regular, continuing development for all faculty--your DD will assuredly receive a solid education. The downside of USAFA's academic program, perhaps more than other like institutions, is that a good number of the military faculty have only a master's and some from not the best schools (there were a number of officers on faculty during my time there and since who had online master's degrees. There is nothing wrong with that, but said programs are regarded by many in the business of higher-ed as being less effective in driving personal intellectual development. From my perspective, I think online courses probably make you work harder as a grad student, as there is nowhere to hide if you did not do the reading, since you still must post to a discussion to effectively participate and earn a grade.) It is a function of 'big-Air Force's' emphasis on operational assignments and less so on educational development--though I sense this is really starting to change, as the AF is realizing this opposition to educational development (PhDs, think-tank fellowships, education with industry) has locked a number of their flag officers (generals) out of some of the more choice Joint assignments.
As an aside (meaning this is my personal editorial) that will be more consequential if your DD remains for a career and aspires to senior rank:
--When I served as a Congressional Aide in the late 2000s (2008 to 2010), handling national security/foreign affairs matters for a Member of Congress, I was almost stunned by the opinion of many Members of Congress and senior Committee staff concerning the lack of educational and intellectual development the Air Force seemed to cultivate among its generals, and that was worrisome because the Senate and House Armed Services Committees have an outsized influence on which generals are placed in particular Joint billets. In the minds of many dedicated and well-informed folks, it was as if the AF had a 'reverence for ignorance' when it came to sending their best officers to graduate school, etc. This was in conflict with the Army/Navy/Marine Corps (and even more so, the USCG) approach to sending the best back to school to prepare them for the most consequential roles. Why? Think of it this way: most of the senior White House staff, cabinet secretaries, deputies, and legislators have top-notch graduate/legal/medical degrees; those are the folks the generals and admirals have to wrangle with when it comes to the development of policy, plans, programs, and budgets. In order to earn both the respect of the other folks 'in the room' and be able to engage in professional debates and discussions on matters such as US foreign policy and its desired outcomes, one has to have the same 'tools' as the rest of the folks in that dialogue. In the world of senior national leadership, this 'union card' comes in the form a prestigious graduate degree. While it does not make it right--or even an effective Heuristic--it is the way it is. And it is the same standard our adversaries apply to the issue. Many, if not most, foreign diplomats and senior defense staff have either an American, German, or British graduate degree. So, all of this is a long-winded way of pointing out why that approach is important--and the AF is finally coming to understand that fact, too. Ok, enough of that. (my apologies)
On the positive side of the ledger, many of those same instructors who don't have the most prestigious degrees instead have tremendous practical experience in their field that is of equal value. So, for what it is worth, simply know that going into it. It is a minor matter, but certainly nothing that will deprive her of a quality education; USAFA is still far ahead of most state institutions in the education it provides--and as I remind certain pugnacious members of my faculty at the college where I am president, "a PhD does not mean everything...it is only proof of your research skills and not your teaching abilities." Your best faculty are always your best PEOPLE, not necessarily your best academics. So, take it all with a grain of salt. Like I wrote at the outset, USAFA's faculty is phenomenal. While USMA, USNA, USCGA, Norwich, VMI tend to have more PhDs from top-line programs, that isn't the whole story. USAFA has plenty of academic-superstar PhDs and researchers. But better yet, they have an extremely well developed and prepared faculty. I think, in general, USAFA's faculty is more prepared to offer the practical, nuts-and-bolts education that many college-aged students crave and a young officer can put directly to use after graduation.
Bottom-line: USAFA is a great education.
Simply some thoughts.
As an aside (meaning this is my personal editorial) that will be more consequential if your DD remains for a career and aspires to senior rank:
--When I served as a Congressional Aide in the late 2000s (2008 to 2010), handling national security/foreign affairs matters for a Member of Congress, I was almost stunned by the opinion of many Members of Congress and senior Committee staff concerning the lack of educational and intellectual development the Air Force seemed to cultivate among its generals, and that was worrisome because the Senate and House Armed Services Committees have an outsized influence on which generals are placed in particular Joint billets. In the minds of many dedicated and well-informed folks, it was as if the AF had a 'reverence for ignorance' when it came to sending their best officers to graduate school, etc. This was in conflict with the Army/Navy/Marine Corps (and even more so, the USCG) approach to sending the best back to school to prepare them for the most consequential roles. Why? Think of it this way: most of the senior White House staff, cabinet secretaries, deputies, and legislators have top-notch graduate/legal/medical degrees; those are the folks the generals and admirals have to wrangle with when it comes to the development of policy, plans, programs, and budgets. In order to earn both the respect of the other folks 'in the room' and be able to engage in professional debates and discussions on matters such as US foreign policy and its desired outcomes, one has to have the same 'tools' as the rest of the folks in that dialogue. In the world of senior national leadership, this 'union card' comes in the form a prestigious graduate degree. While it does not make it right--or even an effective Heuristic--it is the way it is. And it is the same standard our adversaries apply to the issue. Many, if not most, foreign diplomats and senior defense staff have either an American, German, or British graduate degree. So, all of this is a long-winded way of pointing out why that approach is important--and the AF is finally coming to understand that fact, too. Ok, enough of that. (my apologies)
On the positive side of the ledger, many of those same instructors who don't have the most prestigious degrees instead have tremendous practical experience in their field that is of equal value. So, for what it is worth, simply know that going into it. It is a minor matter, but certainly nothing that will deprive her of a quality education; USAFA is still far ahead of most state institutions in the education it provides--and as I remind certain pugnacious members of my faculty at the college where I am president, "a PhD does not mean everything...it is only proof of your research skills and not your teaching abilities." Your best faculty are always your best PEOPLE, not necessarily your best academics. So, take it all with a grain of salt. Like I wrote at the outset, USAFA's faculty is phenomenal. While USMA, USNA, USCGA, Norwich, VMI tend to have more PhDs from top-line programs, that isn't the whole story. USAFA has plenty of academic-superstar PhDs and researchers. But better yet, they have an extremely well developed and prepared faculty. I think, in general, USAFA's faculty is more prepared to offer the practical, nuts-and-bolts education that many college-aged students crave and a young officer can put directly to use after graduation.
Bottom-line: USAFA is a great education.
Simply some thoughts.
DD and I visited Norwich last October. She will be USAFA 2026 but here were our impressions....beautiful campus, personalized tour (she got to meet with the Head of the Civil Engineering Dept.), very generous aid, and amazingly efficient communications. Minor downsides...the remote location (for DD, but I loved it!) and DD did not like that there were civilian students on campus. She decided she wanted "all in" military and that's what she's going to ge