Character Review Committee

So if I follow your logic, a hypothetical candidate that saw his friend getting bullied and pushed into a fight with another kid. this candidate steps into try and break up that fight when teachers come up they just see three students in a scrum. Candidate pleads his case and has witnesses, but because the school has a ZERO tolerance policy with fighting, the candidate gets in school suspension.

You think that this candidate should not be eligible to go to USNA because he did not lead a "monastic life" at high school? Why would we want to exclude this candidate just because he has fighting and in school suspension on his record?

Before you say "No school would ever give a teenager in school suspension for trying to help another student" it most absolutely has happened at a public school near me, and I'm sure it has happened at others.
"The mission of the United States Naval Academy is to develop midshipmen morally, mentally and physically and to imbue them with the highest ideals of duty, honor, and loyalty in order to provide graduates who are dedicated to a career of naval service and have potential for future development in mind and character to assume the highest responsibilities of command, citizenship and government. The overall curriculum supports the moral and mental preparation of midshipmen and provides them with the skills and knowledge they will meet to be successful as junior officers in the United States Navy and Marine Corps."
 
"The mission of the United States Naval Academy is to develop midshipmen morally, mentally and physically and to imbue them with the highest ideals of duty, honor, and loyalty in order to provide graduates who are dedicated to a career of naval service and have potential for future development in mind and character to assume the highest responsibilities of command, citizenship and government. The overall curriculum supports the moral and mental preparation of midshipmen and provides them with the skills and knowledge they will meet to be successful as junior officers in the United States Navy and Marine Corps."
Develop is the key word.

It’s unrealistic to expect kids to have spotless records in high school. Especially when all schools handle discipline differently.

My son had a perfect record in high school. Never got into trouble, perfect attendance. I am shocked because I lived in detention. A committee certainly would have rejected me. 🤣
 
Develop is the key word.

It’s unrealistic to expect kids to have spotless records in high school. Especially when all schools handle discipline differently.

My son had a perfect record in high school. Never got into trouble, perfect attendance. I am shocked because I lived in detention. A committee certainly would have rejected me. 🤣
Develop: to bring out the capabilities or possibilities of; bring to a more advanced or effective state

Why would the Academy roll the dice on someone with character issues when there are plenty of candidates in the pool without character issues to choose from?
 
Develop: to bring out the capabilities or possibilities of; bring to a more advanced or effective state

Why would the Academy roll the dice on someone with character issues when there are plenty of candidates in the pool without character issues to choose from?
Because the world is not made out of two colors.
 
Develop: to bring out the capabilities or possibilities of; bring to a more advanced or effective state

Why would the Academy roll the dice on someone with character issues when there are plenty of candidates in the pool without character issues to choose from?
It’s a competition.

Should a SA take a top scored candidate nationally that got suspended for a day for a fight, or a lesser candidate that didn’t?

I trust the SAs can whip candidates into shape with behavioral issues.
 
This is obviously personal and emotional for you, so I don't see the reason to take it much farther however I will add this. I would consider the situation you spoke of more of an outlier, and not generally would I would think should disqualify a candidate from a service academy. I will ask though, where do we draw the line? The process at Annapolis is already subjectivity stacked on top of subjectivity. Is an infraction for fighting ok, but a suspension for talking back to a teacher not? What about alcohol, or police contact, etc? Why is one candidates sin ok, and another candidates not?
Not emotional or personal actually. Just find your puritan considerations for high school aged kids to be pure as the driven snow to be unrealistic if the job of USNA is to generate well rounded leaders. And as others have already said. This is why they have the committee review
 
Not emotional or personal actually. Just find your puritan considerations for high school aged kids to be pure as the driven snow to be unrealistic if the job of USNA is to generate well rounded leaders. And as others have already said. This is why they have the committee review
Could have fooled me. And as to your statement, I don’t consider avoiding marks in your permanent academic or police record to be puritan at all. If you want a mid six figure education for free, then you should be the best of the best.
 
It’s a competition.

Should a SA take a top scored candidate nationally that got suspended for a day for a fight, or a lesser candidate that didn’t?

I trust the SAs can whip candidates into shape with behavioral issues.
I remember well over half of my school’s entire student body got suspended for a day during my senior year because they staged a massive walk-out protest for 1 class period. I don’t recall anybody’s college stuff getting messed up due to this event
 
Not emotional or personal actually. Just find your puritan considerations for high school aged kids to be pure as the driven snow to be unrealistic if the job of USNA is to generate well rounded leaders. And as others have already said. This is why they have the committee review
Maybe? There have been certainly been times when DoD have modified the standards, but with the SAs they have a large pool to pull from. So yes things like this can be disqualifying.

I could have never gotten into an SA. I’m very happy that the scrutiny people now face didn’t exist when I entered my field. And as someone who has to deal with the fact that many of the best can’t be hired into my arena I find frustrating. And it scares me. The qualifications that would make you good at my job are pretty much a non-starter (hacking, breaking into stuff.) Our adversaries don’t care if you smoked weed and aren’t getting ATOS.

But the SAs? Yeah they have a pile of Puritans to pull from. So why wouldn’t they?
 
Last edited:
But the SAs? Yeah they have a pile of Puritans to pull from. So why wouldn’t they?
One possible reason could be the law.

Some districts can have ten top candidates nominated. .

Another district might have one great candidate that got into a fight, and no other good candidates. So they need to do their due diligence to send it to the committee to make sure it’s a good fit, and not a potential problem.
 
Lots of angst from a certain poster that is accusing another one of having a personal involvement in this topic.

I personally trust the admissions process at the Academies to make well reasoned, deliberate decisions while operating within the structures imposed by statute.
It’s easy to have rose-colored glasses when you have 2 children in a service academy. I can assure you, if you had the experience that our family had (and many other families in our area) dealing with Annapolis, you wouldn’t be quite so cheery. But not to worry, these white trash Marines probably won’t be polluting the Severn and showing up at your country club anytime soon. I guess grinding it out in a state school with all the other dirty undesirables will just have to extend into another generation. On the bright side, DS can look forward to the real competition at TBS.
 
Develop: to bring out the capabilities or possibilities of; bring to a more advanced or effective state

Why would the Academy roll the dice on someone with character issues when there are plenty of candidates in the pool without character issues to choose from?
I taught high school and raised our two kids as teens. Believe me plenty of kids made bad choices and didn’t get caught to have it on their high school records.

A snowwhite high school discipline record doesn’t mean they were perfect or of moral character necessarily.
 
Last edited:
But the SAs? Yeah they have a pile of Puritans to pull from. So why wouldn’t they?
For reasons I stated above and honestly because there is something to be learned from one’s mistakes. Much more so than from success.

Making mistakes, facing consequences, accepting the responsibility of your actions is character building to be sure. It can be humbling and formative.
 
Last edited:
It’s easy to have rose-colored glasses when you have 2 children in a service academy. I can assure you, if you had the experience that our family had (and many other families in our area) dealing with Annapolis, you wouldn’t be quite so cheery. But not to worry, these white trash Marines probably won’t be polluting the Severn and showing up at your country club anytime soon. I guess grinding it out in a state school with all the other dirty undesirables will just have to extend into another generation. On the bright side, DS can look forward to the real competition at TBS.
I understand your frustration as we’ve dealt with same level of stress last year, probably not to the extent that you have. The only suggestion is to plan ahead and think outside the box. That competition in the district wasn’t created overnight, you knew about it and you should’ve planned ahead. 3-4 years ahead I would say. See my other comment to you about the alternative nominations. At the end it becomes a simple number game of odds.
 
For reasons I stated above and honestly because there is something to be learned from one’s mistakes. Much more so than from success.

Making mistakes, facing consequences, accepting the responsibility of your actions is character building to be sure. It can be humbling and formative.
Oh totally agree! Failing/making mistakes is pretty critical to becoming a human.

Was just responding to the upstream poster as to why they might only fish in certain ponds. Sorry for any ambiguity.
 
One possible reason could be the law.

Some districts can have ten top candidates nominated. .

Another district might have one great candidate that got into a fight, and no other good candidates. So they need to do their due diligence to send it to the committee to make sure it’s a good fit, and not a potential problem.
This is an interesting point. The desire to have military officers that represent all aspects of American society, especially geographically, prevail. That small congressional district that rarely sends a candidate may need this process to gain representation. It is a much debated topic on whether that makes sense in this era and quickly dovetails into a critique of the advantages of the nom process itself. (USCGA adamantly defends that a nom requirement would hamper their mission.)

Thinking from a different angle, I also wonder if a secondary justification for a character review committee is the desire for the academy to be competitive in D1 athletics. The star athlete with an infraction is still attractive to the school, maybe more than the monk.
 
It’s easy to have rose-colored glasses when you have 2 children in a service academy. I can assure you, if you had the experience that our family had (and many other families in our area) dealing with Annapolis, you wouldn’t be quite so cheery. But not to worry, these white trash Marines probably won’t be polluting the Severn and showing up at your country club anytime soon. I guess grinding it out in a state school with all the other dirty undesirables will just have to extend into another generation. On the bright side, DS can look forward to the real competition at TBS.
I don't have any skin in the game as my DS had no interest in a SA and is one of the Mids at a "state school with all of the other dirty undesirables" as you say.

I do wonder if you, and others that feel the same way, have the same beliefs when it comes to DoDMERB's qualifications. Should a SA be able to give waivers for disqualifying medical conditions that a candidate has? As you have said, there are lots of Mids who don't need waivers. Should any candidates with any disqualifying conditions be pulled from the pile because they didn't make the cut? Waivers are really doing the same thing that a character review committee is doing just for medical conditions rather than character.
 
I wouldn’t be too surprised if something like a speeding ticket or two might initiate the committee as well since those involve dealing with the police and courts.
 
Back
Top