While the corp of cadets at an SMC has a military structure and hierarchy, it is not "real" military. Military training and military obligations are handled via the ROTC programs just as they are at any other school. A lot of cadets chose SMC's, strange as that may sound, for reasons other than a military career.
commissioning rate
- Thread starter vamom
- Start date
While the corp of cadets at an SMC has a military structure and hierarchy, it is not "real" military. Military training and military obligations are handled via the ROTC programs just as they are at any other school. A lot of cadets chose SMC's, strange as that may sound, for reasons other than a military career.
Still not sure I agree completely but we may be down to semantics at this point. A lot of Seniors at SMC's have had no intention of persuing a comission. Many in my DS's class graduated on time, had completed four years of ROTC but were not on a "commissioning track" by their own chioce.
As for the other points of comparison, you will see many posts on many threads by many people a lot smarter than me and they all tell a similar story. The success of a cadet in ROTC is more a function of the cadet than anything else. A motivated cadet in a major that he/she enjoys while at a school and ROTC program that "fits" will do well. My DS loved VMI but it is not for everyone. I am sure the same can be said of Virginia Tech (for different reasons no doubt).
As an example, if you serach some of these threads for Army LDAC results, you will see top performers from schools and ROTC programs all over the country.
An interested student needs to take time to visit schools and talk to the major players (academic departments, ROTC units, current cadets, etc.). VMI has a program for overnight visits and I am sure most SMC's have the same. The overnight really sealed the deal for my DS. I am sure it went the other way for some.
vamom
5-Year Member
- Joined
- Feb 16, 2011
- Messages
- 413
All great points and yes, I think that for most students there would be pros and cons for each SMC and deep and thourogh investigagtion would be the only way to really determine which one would be the best fit for that student's career goals. In addition to commissioning rate, there is also the GPA of the incoming class to compare, the GPA of the graduating class to compare, the graduation rate, etc. So commissioning rate is by far not the only factor to be looked at when making these important decisions. Thanks to all who rang in on the subject!
The commissioning rate comparison appears on VTCC's site here: http://www.vt.edu/spotlight/achievement/2012-12-24-corps/alumni-gallery.html
However, they list only 78 commissioned in Spring 2012 here:
http://www.vtnews.vt.edu/awards/students/vtcc-spring2012commission.html
While the total VTCC membership was 1074 in the Fall 2012 here: http://www.vtcc.vt.edu/Prospect/FAQ.php
There are complicating factors in class attrition and possibly some Fall commissions. However, it's hard to see how those 78 commissioned in Spring 2012 could be part of an overall 80% commissioning rate.
However, they list only 78 commissioned in Spring 2012 here:
http://www.vtnews.vt.edu/awards/students/vtcc-spring2012commission.html
While the total VTCC membership was 1074 in the Fall 2012 here: http://www.vtcc.vt.edu/Prospect/FAQ.php
There are complicating factors in class attrition and possibly some Fall commissions. However, it's hard to see how those 78 commissioned in Spring 2012 could be part of an overall 80% commissioning rate.
Commissioning rates at SMCs -
VAMOM - I believe the last post on this subject reveals the fact Va Tech is not presenting its statistics factually -
"There are complicating factors in class attrition and possibly some Fall commissions. However, it's hard to see how those 78 commissioned in Spring 2012 could be part of an overall 80% commissioning rate."
And this is the issue I pointed out in an earlier post. VMI and The Citadel do publish accurate both the percentage and actual numbers of commissioning seniors each year. As noted, anyone can find these by going to their websites and looking at the profiles of their graduating classes. The difference in these schools and other SMCs is that their % commissioning is measured against the entire undergraduate population vs some confusing mix of seniors in the other SMCs Corps of Cadets. The Va Tech 80% of its seniors accepting commissions could only be true if by the senior year, most of its Cadets not on scholarship have dropped out of its Corps of Cadets. Most all of the undergraduates at VMI and The Citadel must be in their Corps of Cadets to attend these colleges and all must take ROTC regardless of whether they intend to enter the military service on graduation. These two schools do publish accurate numbers of commissioning seniors. You will not find the same transparancy at other SMCs. End of discussion.
VAMOM - I believe the last post on this subject reveals the fact Va Tech is not presenting its statistics factually -
"There are complicating factors in class attrition and possibly some Fall commissions. However, it's hard to see how those 78 commissioned in Spring 2012 could be part of an overall 80% commissioning rate."
And this is the issue I pointed out in an earlier post. VMI and The Citadel do publish accurate both the percentage and actual numbers of commissioning seniors each year. As noted, anyone can find these by going to their websites and looking at the profiles of their graduating classes. The difference in these schools and other SMCs is that their % commissioning is measured against the entire undergraduate population vs some confusing mix of seniors in the other SMCs Corps of Cadets. The Va Tech 80% of its seniors accepting commissions could only be true if by the senior year, most of its Cadets not on scholarship have dropped out of its Corps of Cadets. Most all of the undergraduates at VMI and The Citadel must be in their Corps of Cadets to attend these colleges and all must take ROTC regardless of whether they intend to enter the military service on graduation. These two schools do publish accurate numbers of commissioning seniors. You will not find the same transparancy at other SMCs. End of discussion.
NorwichDad
10-Year Member
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2010
- Messages
- 1,351
Some good points here
With regard to cadets dropping out. All sorts of personal reasons from physical to legal to academic. Another big factor in not commissioning is that the desires and goals of a 17 year old are not always the same when they reach 21. I think the SMCs do an excellent job. Its just that many of the cadets paths change as they get older.
Most of all, success or failure in ROTC is more with the individual than with the institution.
With regard to cadets dropping out. All sorts of personal reasons from physical to legal to academic. Another big factor in not commissioning is that the desires and goals of a 17 year old are not always the same when they reach 21. I think the SMCs do an excellent job. Its just that many of the cadets paths change as they get older.
Most of all, success or failure in ROTC is more with the individual than with the institution.
valid point, at VaTech and TAMU the commissioning percentage appears inflated since it only counts those in the Corps of Cadets not the overall senior class and as mentioned above by Senior year only those interested in going in the military have remained in the program as opposed to VMI and The Citadel where all cadets are in ROTC; this is doubtless true for all ROTC detachments in the country. A more fair comparison might be the overall percentage of graduates that are commissioned from each school, VaTech graduated about 5,000 last year so the 78 is about 1.5%, TAMU is probably about the same. Norwich and North Georgia have a larger percentage of students in the Corps of Cadets but they dont publish any numbers so I would have no idea how many they commission or what percent of their cadets get commissioned. Perhaps raw numbers are a more accurate guage of how many get commissioned.
pathnottaken
5-Year Member
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2013
- Messages
- 189
This is an interesting thread. It is a great object lesson in effective communications. (Almost as fun as “How to make a peanut butter and jelly sandwich” –see Norwich FLC video) The question could be “How well does the SMC’s prepare cadets for commissioning?” “If a cadet makes it through four years and wants to commission what are their chances?” Or it could be “How well do the various SMC’s screen candidates for commissioning?” “Do they let cadets know honestly, early and often if they will or will not make it?” Or it could be “What type of kids go to the various and how serious are they about commissioning?”
All of these questions are really unknowable, but people ask them anyway. The data analysis needed to determine each of these would be different and the break-down of the raw data would be extremely important. Any result would then be confounded by many other factors that one did not consider or did include. The only way to honestly answer any of these questions would be to create at 100 sets of clones (one for each SMC -100X.) Each set of clones would need to vary greatly from the others in terms of skills and desires. Send the clones to school for four years and then compare the result of the various SMC (this will separate the Environment (SMC) from genetics (Indivuals.)
So long story shortened: +1 the Norwichdad “Most of all, success or failure in ROTC is more with the individual than with the institution.”
Find a SMC that you can commit yourself to, commit yourself to it every day for the next four years, and you will be happy and do well.
All of these questions are really unknowable, but people ask them anyway. The data analysis needed to determine each of these would be different and the break-down of the raw data would be extremely important. Any result would then be confounded by many other factors that one did not consider or did include. The only way to honestly answer any of these questions would be to create at 100 sets of clones (one for each SMC -100X.) Each set of clones would need to vary greatly from the others in terms of skills and desires. Send the clones to school for four years and then compare the result of the various SMC (this will separate the Environment (SMC) from genetics (Indivuals.)
So long story shortened: +1 the Norwichdad “Most of all, success or failure in ROTC is more with the individual than with the institution.”
Find a SMC that you can commit yourself to, commit yourself to it every day for the next four years, and you will be happy and do well.
The more I look, the more it seems apparent that VTCC makes a point of this. That's why it's interesting to me. My son and I visited both VTCC and TAMU, evaluating both to be equivalent for ROTC and academic opportunities. He's at TAMU, is doing great, has great opportunities, and has the same level of commissioning "guarantee" from AROTC there that he would have from VT. I do remember some marketing comparisons with TAMU from his VTCC interviewer; this would probably be normal. When it comes down to hard numbers, though, that's where it gets interesting for me. VAMOM has suggested that prospective students ought to take these statistical differences seriously.
From several sources (I didn't write them down), TAMU's own site claims commissioning percentage rates in the 30s. Not inflated. Interestingly, VAMOM's link stated that TAMU commissioned 185 out of 2100 in one spring term, which would be about the same rate as VTCC's 78 from a Corps less than half the size. However, I found a slide deck from TAMU's commandant stating that the number was actually eighty-five (i.e. spelled out in words) and not 185. So, it may be true that VTCC's commissioning rate is significantly higher than the others, but that means little without understanding why.
Items 2, 5 and 6, if true, would be the ones of legitimate concern to prospective students. Again, I think my own kid will be just fine at TAMU .
From several sources (I didn't write them down), TAMU's own site claims commissioning percentage rates in the 30s. Not inflated. Interestingly, VAMOM's link stated that TAMU commissioned 185 out of 2100 in one spring term, which would be about the same rate as VTCC's 78 from a Corps less than half the size. However, I found a slide deck from TAMU's commandant stating that the number was actually eighty-five (i.e. spelled out in words) and not 185. So, it may be true that VTCC's commissioning rate is significantly higher than the others, but that means little without understanding why.
- Are there differences in yearly attrition rates?
- Is VTCC getting better percentages for Navy, Marines and Air Force, where active duty commissions are not "guaranteed" for an SMC?
- Aggie Band members have to be in TAMU's Corps; does that have an effect? Although it must be noted, the present commandant was in the band and also commissioned from TAMU.
- Is TAMU more encouraging of DNC than VTCC is for citizen-leader?
- Do TAMU (and the other SMCs) turn people off military service more than does VTCC?
- Does VTCC encourage academic success more than TAMU and the other SMCs?
- VTCC is around half the size of TAMU's Corps and (I think) the other SMCs. Will VTCC's commissioning percentage decrease as it grows larger?
Items 2, 5 and 6, if true, would be the ones of legitimate concern to prospective students. Again, I think my own kid will be just fine at TAMU .
Last edited:
To the poster above, your question/point #2 - from what I understand, the guaranete from an SMC - is ONLY within the Dept of Army,if the cadet receives recommendation from military science prof - then they are guaraneteed a commission - but for army- that commission could be active duty, reserve, or national guard. At least this is what I have come to understand - for we are a navy family, my son is a senior on navy 4yr scholarship at vmi - so my knowledge and information is limited. If a student is interested in military service/career, I have no doubt that any rotc program will help them prepare. I agree with above posters, posting raw numbers of graduating class and commissioning number from that class gives a clearer picture of %. Antedoctely I know that once a student finishes 2 yrs within a program, there are usually clear camps - those commissioning and those not. Even at VMI, this holds true during our tenure - but at a SMC a cadet must take 4 yrs of military training classes - I believe there is a name for some kind of leadership designation they receive - but others could clarify.
I believe its important for a student, as best they know themselves at that point, select a college that helps them prepare to be a productive member of society - no matter what path they choose. larrys mom
I believe its important for a student, as best they know themselves at that point, select a college that helps them prepare to be a productive member of society - no matter what path they choose. larrys mom
NorwichDad
10-Year Member
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2010
- Messages
- 1,351
10 USC § 2111a - Support for senior military colleges
See section 1E
(a) Detail of Officers To Serve as Commandant or Assistant Commandant of Cadets.—
(1) Upon the request of a senior military college, the Secretary of Defense may detail an officer on the active-duty list to serve as Commandant of Cadets at that college or (in the case of a college with an Assistant Commandant of Cadets) detail an officer on the active-duty list to serve as Assistant Commandant of Cadets at that college (but not both).
(2) In the case of an officer detailed as Commandant of Cadets, the officer may, upon the request of the college, be assigned from among the Professor of Military Science, the Professor of Naval Science (if any), and the Professor of Aerospace Science (if any) at that college or may be in addition to any other officer detailed to that college in support of the program.
(3) In the case of an officer detailed as Assistant Commandant of Cadets, the officer may, upon the request of the college, be assigned from among officers otherwise detailed to duty at that college in support of the program or may be in addition to any other officer detailed to that college in support of the program.
(b) Designation of Officers as Tactical Officers.— Upon the request of a senior military college, the Secretary of Defense may authorize officers (other than officers covered by subsection (a)) who are detailed to duty as instructors at that college to act simultaneously as tactical officers (with or without compensation) for the Corps of Cadets at that college.
(c) Detail of Officers.— The Secretary of a military department shall designate officers for detail to the program at a senior military college in accordance with criteria provided by the college. An officer may not be detailed to a senior military college without the approval of that college.
(d) Termination or Reduction of Program Prohibited.— The Secretary of Defense and the Secretaries of the military departments may not take or authorize any action to terminate or reduce a unit of the Senior Reserve Officers’ Training Corps at a senior military college unless the termination or reduction is specifically requested by the college.
(e) Assignment to Active Duty.—
(1) The Secretary of the Army shall ensure that a graduate of a senior military college who desires to serve as a commissioned officer on active duty upon graduation from the college, who is medically and physically qualified for active duty, and who is recommended for such duty by the professor of military science at the college, shall be assigned to active duty.
(2) Nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit the Secretary of the Army from requiring a member of the program who graduates from a senior military college to serve on active duty.
(f) Senior Military Colleges.— The senior military colleges are the following:
(1) Texas A&M University.
(2) Norwich University.
(3) The Virginia Military Institute.
(4) The Citadel.
(5) Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University.
(6) North Georgia College and State University.
See section 1E
(a) Detail of Officers To Serve as Commandant or Assistant Commandant of Cadets.—
(1) Upon the request of a senior military college, the Secretary of Defense may detail an officer on the active-duty list to serve as Commandant of Cadets at that college or (in the case of a college with an Assistant Commandant of Cadets) detail an officer on the active-duty list to serve as Assistant Commandant of Cadets at that college (but not both).
(2) In the case of an officer detailed as Commandant of Cadets, the officer may, upon the request of the college, be assigned from among the Professor of Military Science, the Professor of Naval Science (if any), and the Professor of Aerospace Science (if any) at that college or may be in addition to any other officer detailed to that college in support of the program.
(3) In the case of an officer detailed as Assistant Commandant of Cadets, the officer may, upon the request of the college, be assigned from among officers otherwise detailed to duty at that college in support of the program or may be in addition to any other officer detailed to that college in support of the program.
(b) Designation of Officers as Tactical Officers.— Upon the request of a senior military college, the Secretary of Defense may authorize officers (other than officers covered by subsection (a)) who are detailed to duty as instructors at that college to act simultaneously as tactical officers (with or without compensation) for the Corps of Cadets at that college.
(c) Detail of Officers.— The Secretary of a military department shall designate officers for detail to the program at a senior military college in accordance with criteria provided by the college. An officer may not be detailed to a senior military college without the approval of that college.
(d) Termination or Reduction of Program Prohibited.— The Secretary of Defense and the Secretaries of the military departments may not take or authorize any action to terminate or reduce a unit of the Senior Reserve Officers’ Training Corps at a senior military college unless the termination or reduction is specifically requested by the college.
(e) Assignment to Active Duty.—
(1) The Secretary of the Army shall ensure that a graduate of a senior military college who desires to serve as a commissioned officer on active duty upon graduation from the college, who is medically and physically qualified for active duty, and who is recommended for such duty by the professor of military science at the college, shall be assigned to active duty.
(2) Nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit the Secretary of the Army from requiring a member of the program who graduates from a senior military college to serve on active duty.
(f) Senior Military Colleges.— The senior military colleges are the following:
(1) Texas A&M University.
(2) Norwich University.
(3) The Virginia Military Institute.
(4) The Citadel.
(5) Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University.
(6) North Georgia College and State University.
NorwichDad
10-Year Member
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2010
- Messages
- 1,351
My question for this
I have heard (assumption it was true) that this was created as a "payback" for some SMCs to admit women in 1970s. Does anyone know if that is true?
I have heard (assumption it was true) that this was created as a "payback" for some SMCs to admit women in 1970s. Does anyone know if that is true?
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2008
- Messages
- 3,059
I believe the reverse is true- this was enacted around 1994 during the Lawsuit against VMI (and The Citadel in a related case) and it was the result of the Sec Army threatening to pull the ROTC program from VMI & forbidding asigned AD personnel from performing the functions of Commandant or Tactical Staff. In response the Congress stepped in with that law preventing the Army from coercive action against those two schools.
NorwichDad
10-Year Member
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2010
- Messages
- 1,351
Yes I just read that. It is amazing that this was less than 20 years ago. Then again the country has changed for the better on a lot things in my lifetime.
Another change coming is a growing reliance on drones, robots and machines. I guess I watched the Terminator movies too much over the years. I think we cant give too much power to the machines but that is for another thread.
for the record that bill was introduced by then Congressman Steve Buyer,
R-4th District Indiana (The Citadel '80). Insofar as the provision that any SMC cadet desiring a commission be granted one do not believe that is still true, commissioning slots are based on the number of cadets enrolled in a detachment which is why The Citadel, TAMU and VMI are far ahead of all other colleges in commissioning of Officers; unfortunately with budget cuts and the ongoing military drawdown these slots are being reduced. The Citadel was originally allocated 104 Army commissions this school year, it has now been reduced to 92 and cadets are having scholarships and contracts revoked for almost any disciplinary action including serious traffic violations.
R-4th District Indiana (The Citadel '80). Insofar as the provision that any SMC cadet desiring a commission be granted one do not believe that is still true, commissioning slots are based on the number of cadets enrolled in a detachment which is why The Citadel, TAMU and VMI are far ahead of all other colleges in commissioning of Officers; unfortunately with budget cuts and the ongoing military drawdown these slots are being reduced. The Citadel was originally allocated 104 Army commissions this school year, it has now been reduced to 92 and cadets are having scholarships and contracts revoked for almost any disciplinary action including serious traffic violations.