Choosing a major?

[Pima]

I agree I think the OP left the building...like Elvis

However, in the end of the day, I am willing to bet there is at least one AFROTC candidate on this site who is deciding whether to apply for a scholarship as a STEM or non-tech and this will help them to determine which path to consider.

 

[dunninla]

The one problem for this student is if they want to be in AFROTC, and commission, he doesn't have semesters/yrs to pull up the gpa if he sticks with it. He has 3 semesters, and a gpa of a 2.2, in your example, will mean he is not competitive for SFT.

Well, this highlights what is, in my not-so-humble-opinion, a severe flaw in the SFT selection process, and more broadly, the treatment of raw GPA for Army and Navy ROTC Order of Merit scores.

There is enough anecdotal experience out there to conclude that a 3.0 in Engineering is at least as impressive an academic achievement as a 3.4 in Sociology, or History, or English, or Psychology. However, we, nor the ROTC powers, need to rely upon anecdotal evidence. Every school publishes internally, and often externally, the GPA for each major. The website gradeinflation.com has enough points of data to paint a pretty clear picture of what a grade in STEM means vs. in Social Science vs. Arts/Humanities. Correction factors would be on the order of .3 or .4, not the 0.1 that I believe AFROTC uses, or the 0.05 that AROTC adds to a STEM major. This is setting aside the fact that raw GPA is used and there are no correction factors for a school with a student population of HS GPA 3.1/950 SAT vs. a school populated by an average of 3.9/1300 GPA achievers.

In the Army's case, at least they are transparent in publishing their Branching Goals... that is, that only 65% of any Branch, including those most sought after (Aviation/Infantry/Intelligence/Armor/Med Svcs) may come from the top half of the OML. The remaining 35% must come from the lower achievers in the bottom half of the OML. Why does the Army do this, as a matter of written policy? I don't know, but it is clear that pure merit is not the sole guiding principle. It actually makes a cadet at the 60% of the OML consider ways to get LOWER on the OML list so that he/she may be at the top of the bottom 50% and have a great shot at those more desirable Branches. Those in the 50%-70% or so are actually in something called the "Dead Zone" -- not enough merit to get the choice branches, but too much merit to get in the back door of the lower half OML slots into those branches.

 

[bjkuds]

I agree I think the OP left the building...like Elvis

However, in the end of the day, I am willing to bet there is at least one AFROTC candidate on this site who is deciding whether to apply for a scholarship as a STEM or non-tech and this will help them to determine which path to consider.

If nothing else I am collecting info to encourage my DS who is struggling ECE major. Lots of info in between the opinions

 

[Jcleppe]

Well, this highlights what is, in my not-so-humble-opinion, a severe flaw in the SFT selection process, and more broadly, the treatment of raw GPA for Army and Navy ROTC Order of Merit scores.

There is enough anecdotal experience out there to conclude that a 3.0 in Engineering is at least as impressive an academic achievement as a 3.4 in Sociology, or History, or English, or Psychology. However, we, nor the ROTC powers, need to rely upon anecdotal evidence. Every school publishes internally, and often externally, the GPA for each major. The website gradeinflation.com has enough points of data to paint a pretty clear picture of what a grade in STEM means vs. in Social Science vs. Arts/Humanities. Correction factors would be on the order of .3 or .4, not the 0.1 that I believe AFROTC uses, or the 0.05 that AROTC adds to a STEM major. This is setting aside the fact that raw GPA is used and there are no correction factors for a school with a student population of HS GPA 3.1/950 SAT vs. a school populated by an average of 3.9/1300 GPA achievers.

In the Army's case, at least they are transparent in publishing their Branching Goals... that is, that only 75% of any Branch, including those most sought after (Aviation/Infantry/Intelligence/Armor/Med Svcs) may come from the top half of the OML. The remaining 25% must come from the lower achievers in the bottom half of the OML. Why does the Army do this, as a matter of written policy? I don't know, but it is clear that pure merit is not the sole guiding principle. It actually makes a cadet at the 60% of the OML consider ways to get LOWER on the OML list so that he/she may be at the top of the bottom 50% and have a great shot at those more desirable Branches. Those in the 50%-70% or so are actually in something called the "Dead Zone" -- not enough merit to get the choice branches, but too much merit to get in the back door of the lower half OML slots into those branches.

Actually the limit for branching out of the top of the OML is 65%. They fill the branch to 50% and then add into that the ADSO's to fill up to a Max of 65%. The remainig slots are given from the bottom of the OML starting at the 50% mark as you stated.

I agree with you, it puts those cadets in the middle at a disadvantage. There are storys every year of cadets that secured a prime branch from the bottom of the OML while those higher on the list but in that dead zone miss out on those branch assignments.

While it might seem like a good idea, it is very risky for a cadet to try and game the system to be in the prime lower OML slot. There are too many factors that can come into play with that plan, even riskier now that AD may be harder to get.

There is probably no easy way to make the system seem fair to everyone, they have helped a bit by adding up to 1 point to the OMS for some Engineering majors. While GPA is the highest single % there is still 60% that comes from everything else which counts for a lot.

My son's GPA was well below the average of the top 10%, it was all the other factors that helped him reach that mark.

I would assume that most cadets will still try to place as high as they can on the OML, if they fail to make their goal then luck will come into play if the end up at that golden 51% mark.

You really want to hear something confusing, I should tell you how my son finally ended up with Aviation after originally branching MI.

Isn't ROTC Fun.

 

[patentesq]

PS. Patentesq, you forgot one reason why for Chinese, he has an asset that native speakers will not have when he enters the corporate world...a TS clearance. I know, I know, not everyone wants to work in the contracting or govt world, but if we are honest, a job is a job, and that clearance gives him an edge TS clearances are not cheap, nor can they be done in a matter of days, it takes months. If the UN or State Dept needs an interpreter and has to choose between the native speaker with no TS or the TS with a degree in Chinese, they will probably take the TS candidate.

Good point.

 

[dunninla]

^ right, 65% not 75% from the top half of the OML ...

That "golden 51%" (odd choice of words... "tin"?)... creates an odd situation in which the cadet goes to the PMS and says... "would the Colonel mind scoring this cadet just a little lower in the PMS evaluation? This cadet is trying to get from 51% OML (active duty) to 48%, and this cadet needs the Colonel's help! If the COL just reduce the score he gave this cadet from 7/10 to 6/10, that would do the trick... doesn't the COL remember when this cadet was ten minutes late for Ranger Challenge two years ago?"

 

[Jcleppe]

^ right, 65% not 75% from the top half of the OML ...

That "golden 51%" (odd choice of words... "tin"?)... creates an odd situation in which the cadet goes to the PMS and says... "would the Colonel mind scoring this cadet just a little lower in the PMS evaluation? This cadet is trying to get from 51% OML (active duty) to 48%, and this cadet needs the Colonel's help! If the COL just reduce the score he gave this cadet from 7/10 to 6/10, that would do the trick... doesn't the COL remember when this cadet was ten minutes late for Ranger Challenge two years ago?"

"tin" ??

I would certainly not want to be that cadet after he ask's his/her PMS that question.

 

[Aglahad]

^ right, 65% not 75% from the top half of the OML ...

That "golden 51%" (odd choice of words... "tin"?)... creates an odd situation in which the cadet goes to the PMS and says... "would the Colonel mind scoring this cadet just a little lower in the PMS evaluation? This cadet is trying to get from 51% OML (active duty) to 48%, and this cadet needs the Colonel's help! If the COL just reduce the score he gave this cadet from 7/10 to 6/10, that would do the trick... doesn't the COL remember when this cadet was ten minutes late for Ranger Challenge two years ago?"

I know some cadets who purposely did a little worse on their APFT and GPA because they thought they were hovering around the ~45%. Crazy? Ya I think it's a little extreme, however they ended up getting what they wanted.

 

[dunninla]

^ not crazy. Rational. You create a game that rewards a person for being ranked lower, they'll figure out how to get ranked lower.

 

[Aglahad]

I get the rationale, but at what point do you cut off the slacking. Too many lost points on the APFT or purposely bombing a test could drop you lower than you really want (not including a PMS view of the sudden drops and his subsequent.= evaluations). In all honestly they will get AD anyways in the 40th percentile and we all get paid the same regardless of branch. Does it REALLY matter that much? The explanation for the whole gradso thing at LDAC was a mediocre deal at best if you aren't trying for a career in the military and post choice really doesn't matter in the long run. Why not do your best and see where the chips fall instead of trying to beat the system.

 

[DukeFool]

Thank you all for your opinions! Sorry about ditching for about a week. Wanted to spend some time with my family members after exhausting myself on school and work. Just to clear some things up on my objectives I really have a strong desire in flying so I have a large interest in learning how planes fly and how things can be improved to make planes fly faster. Although my intended university has Aerospace engineering, I'm choosing Mechanical for the fact that I don't want to pigeon hole myself in a special niche. To clear things about not being able to see myself 40 years in the future as an engineer, I just want to say that was out of frustration in not being able to understand college chemistry. After taking that class and reflecting over my learning style, I now know that I wasn't focused enough to understand such precise tasks and will look to improve next semester when I take calculus-based physics. As a young person with so many future goals in life with becoming an officer in the military as a strong goal, I can't see myself being an engineer in 40 years but I wouldn't be against it.

My latest question is to those in the AFROTC community. Are there any advice you can share for one that will be competing for a rated slot? I know that GPA has a factor, but what are some other things that one must excel in to get a rated slot? I will most likely be a non-scholarship cadet if that is a factor.

 

[Pima]

Scholarship or not having a scholarship plays no impact at all in the decision making process, it is called "masked", in other words the selection board does not have a clue at all if you have one or not.

As far as the process to get to a rated slot, the 1st thing you MUST accomplish is to be selected for SFT. Approx. 55% LY of all C200/250's were selected.

The selection process will include:
CGPA (1st 3 sems...fall/spring fresh yr, fall soph)
~~~ Tech students get an edge over non-tech. Traditionally 3.0 for STEM, and 3.2/3.3 for non-tech are the avg gpas.
PFT
SAT/AFOQT
Commander's rec.

Upon completion of SFT, even non-scholarship cadets will become "contracted" cadets.

The SFT will now become part of the rated board equation, so how you perform there will impact your OML (akin to WCS for scholarships). Points are awarded for how you ranked at SFT. DG, top 1%, 10%, 20%, 30%, 50% and below. Higher you rank the more points.

Rated board like the SFT board has a mathematical formula
RSS-20% -commander's rank, 2 out of 20, 5 out of 15, etc.
CGPA-10%
PFT-15%
SFT-15%
PCSM-40%

PCSM = Pilot Candidate Selection Method...this is where you take the TBAS and the score will count for that portion, only rated candidates take the TBAS, otherwise it will be your AFOQT that will be substituted for non-rated, but not sure if the formula is the same.

If you have any private flight hours, you are allowed to add those hours for additional points.

From there you will get a total score, and above a certain line you get UPT, below you don't. Within that above a certain score you are eligible for ENJJPT, below and you will go to the traditional UPT bases.

Rated boards occur before non-rated, because if you are not selected you will meet the non-rated for your AFSC.

Last yr for many, many dets, all that applied got rated, some had about 75% selected, this is why it is also important to talk to the det and ask the questions, such as what was the avg gpa for those selected. What was the % that were selected...it varies school to school.

However, make sure you also ask the % that go to SFT because there will be no rated board for you if you don't go to SFT.

For ex:
University A may state 100% were selected out of 15 that applied with the avg cgpa of 3.0 for tech. Sounds great, right?

Now what if University A had only 40% selected for SFT out of the original 100? So, in essence SFT is your big hurdle.

Now take College B and they state 85% were selected out of 20, =17, but they had a 60% selection rate for SFT. Chances are higher that you will clear that hurdle.

It is a numbers game, and it would be a lie to say you have X chance if you don't understand how the system works and believe that all you need to do is carry a certain gpa, and do well on the PFT.

Good luck.
.

 

[Packer]

Good luck. Remember that studying engineering does not mean you will be an engineer. Chemistry was/is a tough class. It is meant to be a weed out class for engineers. Physics is also a weed out class but I did better in that class than chemistry. I recall the second test in physics had an average score of 45% with a class high in the mid 50% range. Fortunately the class was graded on a curve.

 

[pv123]

My husband is a raptor pilot, active duty for 21 years. Out of the hundreds of AF pilots I have known over the years, they have received their UPT slot with the craziest of majors, ie. business management, Italian, History, political science, communications. Majors don't seem to add up to be a huge factor

 

[Pima]

pv123,

This is true, you can have any major and succeed in the AF flying world, EXCEPT the AF does have a caveat...you can not attend Test Pilot School (TPS) unless you hold a degree in engineering.

For some that dream of being assigned to Edwards to test the new planes before they go into the system or NASA, is their ultimate dream and why they want to go AF.

Clarification, I would never say go this path just for that dream, because before you even have that option you have a lot of hurdles to clear. In other words if you are only going into engineering to do this or think that it will give you a better chance, I would say think about it because if you can't make it through engineering and do not get selected for SFT it is all over.

The 4 yrs you have in college will be the real last taste of freedom to pursue something you love, because if you go rated it will be 11 yrs in the AF, at least.

Use our non-tech DS as an example. He will report May 2012 to UPT base, but will be on casual status until fall (IFS), and than UPT classes start Jan. 2013. UPT is 1 yr long, graduation would be Jan 2014...20 months in. This is when his real clock will start. He will be in until Jan 2024 at the very least, or in essence 12 yrs.

He has no regrets about selecting his major, but he entered knowing it was an uphill climb for that major was non-tech and aimed always for at least a 3.4 gpa, and 98 PFT. He was honest about his situation.

I am sure if he didn't get UPT he probably would have regretted it, and that is a question DukeFool will need to ask himself. If the UPT pipeline slows down to a drip, will he live with the what if I went tech question? If he can answer he will not regret it, and be happy with plan B, he will know his academic career path, if it is yes, he will have his answer too.

The further you get into the system the more the picture becomes clearer.