CGA Incoming class expected to be most diverse ever

I'm not in the service anymore, I'm no longer an officer, and quite frankly, no, she is not my concern. Nor in any practical sense is she the concern of any officer, in any way other than an abstract (protecting the public) or if she were to need a rescue (which I pray is never the case).


The question you may want to ask yourself as a parent of a kid who did not get in is this....


How did the Coast Guard Academy increase minorities that were the "best and brightest" by over 10%, but somehow didn't get the cross section of that "best and brightest" that doesn't require a "special program" to be retained?

Why? Because the TRUE best and brightest, regardless of their skin color, do not NEED a special program to be retained. Kids that do....don't belong. They are not the best, nor are they the brightest.....unless we drop standards and requirements to fit that mold.
 
Ladies and Gentlemen, this thread is bound to be a very controversial topic. Let's try to keep things civil.
 
I did mean concern for my daughter in the broader realm. And, I am done with this conversation. I simply meant to be supportive to other parents whose children did get in and keep them focused on their child's achievement rather than get bogged down in a discussion such as the one that is developing between you and me. Keep focused on the positive parents of Class of 2015. Our thoughts and prayers will be with you on June 27.
 
Their children will do fine, and not getting into an institution with a very very low acceptance rate does not say anything bad about the kids who were not accepted. I would be concerned, if I was a parent, that my extremely competitive kids was overlooked to play the "numbers game" and get the minority population (which apparently is not good at being retained) at the Coast Guard Academy up to 33%.

I didn't think Swab Summer was a breeze. It was TOUGH and there were MANY MANY times I thought about leaving. Let's say I had, but my black classmate didn't because someone stepped in, in an effort to retain him. How would that make me feel?

Why not just dumb down the entire program to make it easier for everyone? Are they hoping for a rise the percentage of the graduating class to have higher minority numbers? Start at 34%, see how many white kids we can get to leave while retaining minorities, graduate 40% minorities, write a press release, call Congressman Cummings for a pat on the back and something nice said on the floor of the House of Representatives....


I would LOVE a Corps of Cadets and service representative of the population it protects.... but the road there is not hand outs and bonus points to one race while denying it to another.

Maybe the programs aren't "only for minorities" and if that's the case, it's a poor quote by Rear Adm. Stosz, but if it's an accurate quote....the decline in the Corp of Cadets, and in 4 years the officer corps, is well on its way.
 
Folks, please keep in mind the purpose of these forums, which is to assist candidates and their families. Discussion of SA policies is legitimate. However, attacking other posters won't be tolerated.

Please keep the above in mind when you post. If in doubt, wait a day before posting.
 
I'm not sure if I'm going to comment again on this thread because none of us are going to change this new program here. While I remain unconvinced that programs like this are effective at any university, much less a school with the unique standards the CGA has, I think it's important to remember that (as far as I know) entrance standards have not been made easier for these minorities. These cadets also, I believe, will have to meet or exceed the minimum standards to advance and ultimately graduate from the Academy. The goals of these programs seem to be to better prepare this group for the rigors they will face as cadets and as officers.

It might be worthy of consideration to open programs like these to any individual who the Academy may feel needs them, regardless of race. I don't have too much a problem with the programs as they are described so long as my son faces the same entrance and advancement standards as everyone else AND that the CGA does not reduce its standards of excellence in order to get a certain population outcome. Any reduction of standards not only reduces the Guard's level of readiness, but is an insult to the very minorities they are hoping to support.
 
We'll see where it goes....


The reauthorization bill set them up for this.

Nothing major has happened in the last year.... how does minority percentage go from 24% to 33% in one year, without targeting?


And don't get me wrong, I'm fine with diversity. I just didn't see classmates by race. Does the new policy affect the way they will look at classmates? I like to think my classmates and I made it through, all together, going through the same less than fun experiences together. We can look each other in the eyes and know that.
 
I'll tell you what...I'll drop it. I'll just be a frumpy old alum some day saying "when I was a cadet....we didn't have two standards!" :wink:
 
Well, I'd like to say, for someone attending these programs, that it didn't seem hard to get in. The program was for minorities or first generation college students. Of which, I am not a minority, per say, as I am European American and my father had an Associates degree. The only sort of minority I am is in the sense that I had a dual citizenship with Germany up until age 18, and the fact that my cousins are mixed European/African American/Mexican American. As for the mentoring program, I have no idea what the requirements were.

And also, I wouldn't say they've lowered the standards to welcome some of these "minorities." I had several Varsity Letters, a nice leadership position in JROTC, hours of community service, a 30 on the ACT, and did phenomenal on my interview. Hope this helped any.
 
http://www.theday.com/article/20101001/NWS09/310019860/-1/NWS

Buried in the annual Coast Guard authorization act passed this week (fm Oct 2010 article) by Congress is wording that would strike from the U.S. Code the statement that all appointments to the Coast Guard Academy "shall be made without regard to the sex, race, color or religious beliefs of an applicant."
Click to expand...

Welcome to the reality of the 21st century. And EmptySea is correct. No one here is going to change anything including the attitudes of those who don't particularly care for it.
 
Blah....I don't care. Just don't come to me flashing a ring saying "I made it, with some help from Mr. Mentor".
 
while i get why the academy would set something up like this...it still is disheartening to think that they would make exceptions and whatnot for URM. This is a military academy...they work as a single unit. if one has trouble adjusting, they should have trust and comfortability in their fellow shipmates to help them out. its a new and tough experience for all who are about to enter swab summer, they should all experience it together the same way- thats what the military is all about: uniformity, equality, putting everyone at the same bottom level when you start out. The swabs should work their way to the top together, not with some having the benefit of getting an early start. Thats just not fair no matter what the case be. It just doesnt make sense...:confused:
 
Diversity Initiatives

1.When women were first entering the engineering, professional schools, & other areas of commerce (and I trust the Service Academies), it wasn't unusual for them to be the subject of further scrutiny when they convened to dialogue about their experience. It must be part of our DNA to begin to suspect the worse and disparage the intentions when we are not part of the discussion.
2.Some of our greatest innovations come from the diversity/intersection/convergence of ideas. You remember the Einstein quote, "We can't solve the problems of today with the same type of thinking that helped to get us here." It's been shown increased performance when their is diversity. So why wouldn't we not only want to recruit but also retain a diverse talent pool?
3.Do you really think the Holy Grail is being disseminated in a short program right before R-DAY? THINK.
4.But an interesting thing happened in this discussion. It slowly transformed from announcement of the class composition and diversity initiatives to a dialogue incorporating "double standards", "reverse discrimination", "dumb down", " not fair", special needs, etc. Reminds me of 40 years ago. Notice the associations and assumptions that were made in your comments. You've already made those attributions (to those participants) which only reflects why such programs are necessary. Shame on you! Now I really think LineInTheSand was very skillful in crafting this subterfuge; I just wouldn't want to be in a crowded theater with you--Would you be the one screaming "Fire"?
5. At the risk of protesting to much, I really think we must practice some of that critical thinking we aspire to impart on our young cadets.
From The Medici Effect:
What are associative barriers?
Take a moment to consider the following situation:5 Susan is twenty-eight years old, single, outspoken, and very bright. She majored in biology and minored in public policy. As a student, she was deeply concerned with issues of sustainable development, global warming, and overfishing, and is politically active. Which statement is most likely to be true?

A. Susan is an office manager.
B. Susan is an office manager and is active in the environmental movement.

If you answered B, you are in good company; most people would give that answer. But the correct answer is A. If you are confused about this, consider another analogous question. Which statement is more probable?

A. An apple is green.
B. An apple is green and expensive.

This time the answer is apparent; clearly it is more likely that an apple is just green than that it is both green and expensive. The two questions are similar, but expressed in different ways. Yet we tend to make a mistake in the first case but not in the second. Why? The key difference between the two presentations is that in the first case our mind quickly makes a number of associations. Key words, such as sustainable development, global warming, and overfishing, are all associated with the environment. In most instances it would make sense to infer that Susan is active in the environmental movement. Therefore we are more likely to make assumptions about who Susan is as a person, rather than maintain a mind open to possibilities. These connections happen automatically and subconsciously. The effect is subtle, but very powerful.
 
AzurAngel said:
Which statement is most likely to be true?

A. Susan is an office manager.
B. Susan is an office manager and is active in the environmental movement.

If you answered B, you are in good company; most people would give that answer.
Click to expand...

If that's true, then most people are just bad at math. If statement B is true, then statement A must be true, so the probability that A is true is at least as high as B, regardless of the correlation of Susan's characteristics to the additional constraint imposed in B.

A more useful comparison would be:

Susan is twenty-eight years old, single, outspoken, and very bright. She majored in biology and minored in public policy. As a student, she was deeply concerned with issues of sustainable development, global warming, and overfishing, and is politically active.

Karen is very bright.

Which of them is more likely to be active in the environmental movement?​

With the question is asked this way, you can now have a legitimate debate about any correlation between Susan's listed traits and being active in the environmental movement.

It does not advance the debate when logic is misused to confuse the issue.
 
AzurAngel said:
Notice the associations and assumptions that were made in your comments. You've already made those attributions (to those participants) which only reflects why such programs are necessary. Shame on you!
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, the USCGA beat him to it when they created the special program.
 
Packer said:
Unfortunately, the USCGA beat him to it when they created the special program.
Click to expand...


Good point Packer.

"The only thing that should be sorted is laundry"...not cadets from their fellow cadets. Let them stand together, learn together and SUCCEED together. And yes, sometimes they need to (and DO!) fail together. Failure is an opportunity to learn and improve, and if all obstacles are cleared, the learning often is compromised! The academy has a wonderful system of mentorship and guidance in place already...all the cadets need to do is ask for help. Our best and brightest may never have had to ask for help before, but they are certainly bright enough to humble themselves to go and ask for it.

I may take flack for it, but my personal opinion is that CGA should hold the bar high for ALL cadets and let them reach for it TOGETHER with their classmates. Offer ALL cadets the same enrichment opportunities. It is then that you will see those who desire to succeed and those who don't./won't or can't.
 
AzurAngel said:
1.When women were first entering the engineering, professional schools, & other areas of commerce (and I trust the Service Academies), it wasn't unusual for them to be the subject of further scrutiny when they convened to dialogue about their experience. It must be part of our DNA to begin to suspect the worse and disparage the intentions when we are not part of the discussion.
2.Some of our greatest innovations come from the diversity/intersection/convergence of ideas. You remember the Einstein quote, "We can't solve the problems of today with the same type of thinking that helped to get us here." It's been shown increased performance when their is diversity. So why wouldn't we not only want to recruit but also retain a diverse talent pool?
3.Do you really think the Holy Grail is being disseminated in a short program right before R-DAY? THINK.
4.But an interesting thing happened in this discussion. It slowly transformed from announcement of the class composition and diversity initiatives to a dialogue incorporating "double standards", "reverse discrimination", "dumb down", " not fair", special needs, etc. Reminds me of 40 years ago. Notice the associations and assumptions that were made in your comments. You've already made those attributions (to those participants) which only reflects why such programs are necessary. Shame on you! Now I really think LineInTheSand was very skillful in crafting this subterfuge; I just wouldn't want to be in a crowded theater with you--Would you be the one screaming "Fire"?
5. At the risk of protesting to much, I really think we must practice some of that critical thinking we aspire to impart on our young cadets.
Click to expand...

In response to:
1) The example you provided with respect to women dealt with stereotypes, prejudices, and societal forces in general. I do not think this applies to our conversation here. What we are discussing is the new program the academy has made available to minority students, what its purpose is, and whether it is fair to other cadets in the Class of 2015 if it gives other cadets an advantage.
2) I don't think any of us are questioning the value of diversity in our society today. We are discussing whether the program created for minority swabs is fair to the rest of the constituent class. I'll assume you got a bit off track from your argument here and didn't mean to presume that we do not value diversity.
3) No, I don't think the 'holy grail' is at stake here, but the ethics of the program and its purpose is worth further discussion. John Mill was a great proponent of sharing opinions in the public forum, even if those opinions are determined to be wrong, for they will eventually help to reveal the truth.
4) As far as I have seen in this thread, most if not all of the arguments made were of logical construction and none were hateful or targeted to 'put-down' minorities. I don't know where you got the idea that LITS started some kind of war on minorities, he even said:
LineInTheSand said:
And don't get me wrong, I'm fine with diversity. I just didn't see classmates by race. Does the new policy affect the way they will look at classmates? I like to think my classmates and I made it through, all together, going through the same less than fun experiences together. We can look each other in the eyes and know that.
Click to expand...

In essence, I perceive the main claim here is that achieving a greater minority enrollment or retention for its own sake should not be a concern in forming a class. All that should matter is creating a class of the best-qualified individuals, regardless of racial background (equality principle). The number of minorities or majorities shouldn't matter. What matters is that there is a diversity of sorts, that they are the best qualified for being further developed into leaders of character and later as commissioned officers in the United States Coast Guard. They have to work toward their goals, and they have to work toward them together.

I personally don't think this program should be a huge concern, and it's the Reauthorization bill at work. Let's hope it works for the betterment of the Coast Guard.

-Andrew
 
@ AzurAngel

I understand the point you're trying to make however this is a great difference.

If I said "they've increased minority acceptance by 33% AND created a program to help kids, they must have created it for that minority" sure, you could point a finger.

I said however that they've increased minority numbers by 33% in one year. There is a program FOR MINORITIES to help them. How can an extra 100 minorities suddenly qualify for a CGA class unless either they are being recruited or the standards are lower. If the standards AREN'T lower, then why was the Coast Guard Academy motivated to create a program specifically for minorities to increase retention?

Finally, I trust very little of what Congress does as having the interest of the Coast Guard in mind, and that includes the reauthorization bill. By the good work of the Coast Guard Congressional Affairs, even worse stuff wasn't included in the bill. No, Congressmen and Senators have one thing on their minds, votes...and keeping their jobs. Certainly not the long term ramifications of their decisions on a 222 year old service. :rolleyes:
 
it's too bad...

I think that it's too bad that my DS was reverse discriminated against so that quotas could be filled. I guess the USCGA budget may get an increase next year!

What happened to the holistic approach? I guess that the holistic approach is only if you meet the criteria that the diversity program is looking for. I wish that someone would have the cajones to just come out and said they were going to increase the minority and that white males were going to be a thing of the past...or at least until they need the familiar type of leadership that has gotten the USCG to this point...it's only been what? a couple hundred years of success?

In my opinion, my son, like many other fine American young men and women were not permitted a fair and equal opportunity to this academy because of his race, gender and possibly his religion (& sexual preference.)

Communication from the USCGA as very poor, he couldn't even get an appointment for an interview...heck, he could barely get a response from his Liason at CGA. He would call and was made to feel that he was bothering her.

He did what he needed to do to apply and keep the faith that he would get a fair shot at it, but when the short and sweet letter arrived a couple months ago it left us all with a thousand questions...all beginning with "WHY". The letter didn't actually give any type of reason other than 4,500+ applicants and it was very competitive.

As a leader you should always seek feedback and how you can improve...they didn't even offer this. Sad. An organization paid for by taxpayers should at least spend a few minutes providing information back to the candidate...after all, each candidate spend countless hours working on their essays, requesting letters of recommendation from very important people in their live, compiling many hours of leadership and community based service within areas of their life that is important to them, keeping their grades at a high level while trying to take advanced courses, continuing to stay involved and enjoy their senior year in high school all while checking the mail box everyday...keeping their hopes up, only to have them dashed with an un-gratifying rejection letter.

If you are going to let them down, at least give them something to work with regarding areas to make improvement to have a chance for the next year. It takes too much work to try to get in when you don't even know if the playing field is level.

He did what he needed to do to secure his future...unfortunately the USCGA didn't see him as Cadet material...too bad as that was all he wanted to do. Serve his country with humanitarian type missions and work at it for a long career. He's squared away and very intelligent. Good thing that the US Navy has a STA21 program as well as other programs where he can become an officer without all of the head games of the "New" USCGA.

Remember what happened when the marketing geniuses at Coca Cola brought out "New Coke". Perhaps someday the USCGA will bring out "Old CGA"...it'll just be too late for the CG to take advantage of and benefit from the talents and abilities that my DS would provide.

The USCG will get what it sows...a diverse leadership corps...i guess that's OK...it's just the Coast Guard.
 
1EagleDad said:
it'll just be too late for the CG to take advantage of and benefit from the talents and abilities that my DS would provide.

The USCG will get what it sows...a diverse leadership corps...i guess that's OK...it's just the Coast Guard.
Click to expand...

The CGA accepts something like, what, 11% of its applicants? He's got plenty of company in pursuing a "Plan B." There are other ways to become an officer in the Coast Guard. He can apply to USCGA again, if he wants, or he can try OCS when the time comes. There is also the Maritime Graduate program if he attends any of the Maritime Academies, and some of the SMCs have a program where you'd attend a much shorter OCS than the traditional officer candidate.

http://www.gocoastguard.com/find-yo...rtunities/programs/direct-commission-programs
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top