Junior ROTC cuts

So far this year:
  • 4 students from the local high school have received appointments to the various service academies
  • All 4 were on the same varsity sport team
  • 3 of the 4 are JROTC cadets
  • 2 of the 3 cadets are dependents of military retirees
  • the one non JROTC cadet has a brother currently at a service academy
  • 2 are recruited athletes

It looks like all four will end up at different academies!

Besides this public school being one of the best in the state both academically and athletically, it is also in a military community. The student body, the teachers, and the local community all support the cadets and the cadets in turn do a lot to support the school and community.

I think it is because of the military community that there are so many appointments every year.
 
Yes we did patent, but you know the joke about NJ now right?

Everybody born in NY moves to NJ, and because they move to NJ, everyone born in NJ moves to PA, so really NJ is the New New York, and PA is the NEW NEW JERSEY.

goldenlion,

I don't know what state you are from, and part of that will play IMPO the appointment process. If you come from a state like NC where the MOCs don't talk, these applicants could have up to 6 noms (Pres., VP., 3 MOCs, and JROTC) compared to a state where they talk, bringing it down to 4 at best, be even so, that is better than the non-military family applicant where they would have 3 (VP, MOC and JROTC).

6 slates is better than 4 or 3 because it means you have 6 times to win. Granted it doesn't mean that there aren't those candidates with 6 noms that don't get appointed, but it does mean you have more tries before you hit the NWL.

I would go with you about the JROTC need except for the stats you stated about the 4 who won the appointments.

1. 2 were recruited athletes. JROTC or not they would still be there not because of JROTC, but because of the sport they played. They were "blue chip"

2. All 4 play on the same team. If 2 are coming off as LOAs, and the other 2 play on that team, I am guessing this team is a power house. As varsity players they will illustrate leadership in their resume and this will be a factor.

I.E. Captain of state Champion FB team.

Granted they will also place their JROTC leadership, so for the 2 non-LOA this would make an impact too.

3. 1 of them was not JROTC, the question I have to get more info is was that candidate an LOA or non-LOA.

If they were a non-LOA, and now you remove the 2 that were appointed because they were recruited to play sports at the SA, you are down to 1 JROTC cadet that was appointed, and 1 non-JROTC. Using that info, you can't leap to it giving better chances for appointment.

If the 1 LOA was not JROTC, than it does illustrate the point that 2 "traditional" appointees were both JROTC.

4. I believe you meant to say 2 of 4 appointees, not 2 of 3 were military dependents.

Again, where does this lone 1 non-JROTC fall? Military dependents of retirees get the Presidential nom.

JROTC is a great program, but you finished up with the school is one of the top in the state academically. PAR is 60%, EC is 20%. SA and ROTC programs want the "whole" package, not just the book smart kid, but they also want that smart kid. This is why they request the school profile.

I agree when you live in a military community the support is there for programs like this, however, homeowners and parents will always come down to two things when deciding what to cut and what to keep.

1. Will it be academically advantageous to keep this, and drop Latin or Chinese or whatever?
2. How will it impact my taxes? I am a retired AF wife, kids go to the only AICE(Cambridge program) HS in the county (25% are military kids)...a program where they must test to be accepted if they are crossing school lines and no bus transportation...like a magnet.

I have a choice raise my taxes to pay for JROTC and AICE or maintain my tax rate and drop one. Which do I choose? AICE of course. The avg home buyer is not going to purchase because one school offers JROTC and the other doesn't. They purchase because one school is academically better than the other and programs like Cambridge is a selling point.

Use yourself as an example, your youngest is in JROTC now, but in 3 yrs from now they will graduate HS, will you still feel this way if it means losing a course requirement teacher and increasing class size or increasing your taxes by 500 a yr to keep both? No kids in public school now.

The avg person will say keep my tax rate at where is now, keep the class size, and cut JROTC. That is what the school board will hear at their public forums.

AF has stated they will not fight for JROTC at any school, and it is at the discretion of their district.

As I have stated it has value, but this argument really isn't with the AF it is with your county. They will be the only ones to save the program. I am sure there is an argument to be made, but IMPO to state 4 kids from the HS were appointed, and 2 of them were recruited athletes, 1 wasn't JROTC, and some were military dependents is not the route I would go.

I know JROTC, like NHS does many volunteer hours in the community, they see life differently when their spending a Saturday working at Habitat for Humanity. I know that for some they take it believing it is an easy A elective, but find a home in this program. They stick with it and enlist. They become better students because now they have a career motivator for their first time. They can also enter at a higher rank, or at least Bullet's cousin did yrs ago. I would look at that to defend keeping JROTC. How the services will have stronger applicants in every level...SA, college, and enlistment. How just like Spanish III, it broadens their perspective of life.

If your community wants it, it will remain, but the fact is like anything in life everybody has a tipping point between want and need.
 
A couple of small items. A "recruited athlete" is not necessarily a "blue chip". They recruit many more than they bluechip.

In our area JROTC does a heck of a lot more than NHS. NHS is a box to check on your resume and that is it. This is my son's experience and was my experience a lot of years ago. I know there are others that will have had different experiences but I wouldn't put JROTC and NHS in the same league.
 
Packer, please do not misinterpret my NHS comment. JROTC does a lot more than NHS. 100% agreement.

My position is this:

JROTC ends tomorrow at the HS. SA's will not hold it against the candidate for not being in JROTC if the school does not offer it. They will hold against the candidate for not being in NHS (academically they should be in it for PAR)

Now both JROTC and NHS do volunteer hours, thus, if the school drops JROTC, keeps NHS the applicant will not be dinged against candidates that are in JROTC.

JROTC is a great program, I can't stress that enough. I am stating that there are other ECs that can pick up that loss which does not cost the school a dime, nor AF. BSA/GSA are great examples.

NHS President, Class President, Debate President, etc also illustrate leadership.

The 4 illustrated all were on the same athletic team, hence we should agree that square of athletics are equal, remove the blue chip issue. 1 was not JROTC, were they BSA Eagle? Were they Class President? Or was that it just athletics? If so, would you say JROTC mattered so much to pay for it as a tax payer?

Schools that have 180 or 10-20% of the school enrolled don't cut a program like this size silly nilly. They cut because they have a deficit. It is a bottom line fiscal issue. Or at least the way goldenlion is stating it with how the community supports JROTC.

A fiscal cut has to be made within the school district. Remove the emotion, make it dollar and cents, your county must cut they have 3 options.

1. Academic classes, Spanish III, resulting in larger class sizes
2. Athletic program...girls soccer (just pulling a 2nd tier)
3. JROTC

All cost the exact same amount you have a child in all 3, 1 has to go, which do you take? The school board no matter which choice they make will create upheaval and anger. The question for them is what will be the best for the majority of students and their district.

Let's also assume your DD is on a state champion team, where she and her team mates can be recruited to play for UVA or even smaller schools with merit, she and 2 other girls are in JROTC, the rest are not. Should they lose out because of the 3 in JROTC?

That's the point, the school is shutting it down to save money, not political. It is business.
 
Last edited:
Pima, I don't disagree. It is typically a financial decision and a choice has to be made as to what programs are the most important. Many schools don't have JROTC and it is not held against kids. If your school does have JROTC and you don't participate it also is not held against you. It does offer an opportunity for leadership development that is not seen in very many programs including athletics.

NHS is off topic but it is a bit of a pet peeve of mine. I can not see why colleges, SA's atc even consider it. If you have good grades and fill out an application you are in and get to check a box. Seems like double counting grades if you ask me. JMPO.
 
Packer said:
Pima, I don't disagree. It is typically a financial decision and a choice has to be made as to what programs are the most important. Many schools don't have JROTC and it is not held against kids. If your school does have JROTC and you don't participate it also is not held against you. It does offer an opportunity for leadership development that is not seen in very many programs including athletics.

NHS is off topic but it is a bit of a pet peeve of mine. I can not see why colleges, SA's atc even consider it. If you have good grades and fill out an application you are in and get to check a box. Seems like double counting grades if you ask me. JMPO.
Click to expand...

I do agree about the level of participation a student puts in with NHS, most seem to just get accepted and then check the box on the application without really participating fully in what NHS has to offer, of course some participate heavily and become part of the leadership. JROTC usually has a higher rate of participation among it's members.

I wonder if the application process for NHS is the same at all schools. At my son's high school the application included many sections that showed the applicants community service, leadership, academics, and outside activities. It took being very well rounded in all these to be accepted, academics was just a part of the equation. There were applicants that had much higher GPA's then my son that applied and did not get accepted, in fact my son's GPA was at the exact minimum required though he was very active in school, community and service which made up for it. Sort of a WPS perspective in the application. I wonder if this is why ROTC looks so favorably towards NHS.

I do agree with you about the participation aspect.
 
Jcleppe,

Our DS was inducted as a sophomore. It was basically have this gpa, pay the fee and you are in NHS. Close friend had a DD same age, same school district, different HS not eligible. She could not apply until jr. yr in hs and the cgpa was different. Key thing here is same school district, just different schools.

We moved after DS graduated to another state. DD had a higher cgpa than DS, invited to apply to NHS, but never inducted. She graduated Magna, AICE/Cambridge, all AP and IBs offered. Higher gpa weighted and unweighted than him.

The new school had a selection board consisting of administrators and teachers. She didn't make the cut, ECs at the school was the issue, she moved as a jr. It was not just a cgpa.

OBTW, the old school where she was 1st eligible had a higher cgpa..3.8 for sophs, the new school was 3.6, only jrs could be inducted. No SRs.
 
NHS does vary by school. At my son's school you must have a 3.5 gpa and fill out a multiple page application (that seems only to be a formality) and pay the dues. You can not be inducted until the spring of your junior year (April I believe). Therefore these kids are only a member for their senior year.
 
Packer said:
NHS does vary by school. At my son's school you must have a 3.5 gpa and fill out a multiple page application (that seems only to be a formality) and pay the dues. You can not be inducted until the spring of your junior year (April I believe). Therefore these kids are only a member for their senior year.
Click to expand...

Wow, i had no idea it varied so much from school to school.

At my son's school a CGPA of 3.7 was required to apply. The GPA was only used as a benchmark, the criteria for acceptance was based on what I previously posted. Only about 20% of those that applied were accepted, they could apply at the end of the first semester of their sophomore year and were inducted in the spring of the same sophomore year. They could apply up to the second semester of their junior year.

I agree with you Packer, since every school seems to differ in their program it would seem to me that ROTC should not put as much weight on NHS as they do.

Sorry to keep adding to this subject, it is interesting though.
 
The problem for JROTC is like NHS, it varies school by school.

Some JROTC programs are seen as easy A's, some are true developmental programs for ROTC/SA.

This issue that NHS requires 3.7, and another requires 3.5 also goes back to the fact that nationally we do not have a weight/pt scale either. A 3.7 gpa on a 10 pt scale may be the same as a 3.5 on a 7 pt scale.

The problem truly is there is no national line that all must pass. Use the SAT/ACT as a comparative. That is national, the student from NC will be graded on the same level as the student from WA. It is equivalent. The score tells the college nationally among your peers you are this %. Some kids have test anxiety, I accept and respect that, but it strengthens my defense that we need a national scale. Look at colleges and SAs they re-weight applicants cgpa because there is no national.

The student from NC will take a different GateWay test. Counties and schools will have different tests and NHS criteria than any student from Washington.

We allowed this to occur. We pay tax dollars for the dept of education, and for what? A child applying to TAMU from either of these states will have TAMU pay people to re-weight everything to their stds. If every state had a national gateway test, and every state required the same weight/scale, it would be easier for applicants to understand the process.

How many times have you read chance me, my cgpa is X.yZ? Only for posters to respond out of what?

Imagine if these kids took a test like the Ohio or California as a soph, PSAT as a jr. They would know where they rank nationally, not just the state, and more importantly the idiotic banners of School of Excellence would mean more.

I get NHS being a pet peeve, but honestly, the same can be said for JROTC. Until we demand a national level it is all BS.
 
Our schools AFJROTC unit received word that there were budget cuts coming from AFJROTC headquarters several months ago. The school has roughly 300 Cadets go through the program each year which is equal to about 1/4 of the student body. The unit holds honors/distinguished unit awards for multiple years.

Some kids probably enroll thinking it's an easy A at our school and those kids usually only stick around for one semester. The kids that do stick around take things more seriously and seek out the leadership opportunities both during the school year and over the summer.

DS has been in JROTC for 4 years now and has held multiple leadership positions including unit commander. This semester, he is bascially serving as student instructor. Aside from swimming and marching band it's probably the only program available to all students where they can escape the school sports politics that plague our community.

As far as NHS at our school, it's pretty much fill out a form and pay the dues, they really don't do much around there. DS was "invited" to apply for NHS and was only given one day to turn the forms in with no exceptions. It was impossible to get all the information they wanted completed in less than 24 hours so we didn't turn it in.

Reading all the responses one can definitely see that there is a lot of variation from school to school.
 
Pima said:
I get NHS being a pet peeve, but honestly, the same can be said for JROTC. Until we demand a national level it is all BS.
Click to expand...

I mostly agree but I don't think they get much in the way of points for just being in JROTC. They get points for what they do in JROTC.

On the BS part, by the time the fed gets done with the national approach it will be so deep we will all need hip boots.
 
Packer said:
On the BS part, by the time the fed gets done with the national approach it will be so deep we will all need hip boots.
Click to expand...

I thought we were already at the hip waders, I was preparing myself for up to our necks.

I think one problem with our educational system on the national level is everytime a President comes in they start their own program to "correct" the last President's agenda. By the time it goes down the pipeline and gets to the teachers where they can actually show real results we have a new leader, and we start it all over again. If you even look at Clinton and Bush it was a drastic change from the Goals 2000 to the No Child Left Behind. Throw in governors and their own agendas it becomes a maze that no rational person can grasp unless they spend hours in studying the system.

I will say I had hope yrs ago because the Education Dept came out with a program called National certification. Teachers typically are certified by the state, and those requirements vary, but if they became nationally certified they could go anywhere. In our last county, the school system even gave raises for the teachers that passed the nationals. To me that is a great thing, every teacher in the nation all would have to take the exact same test.
 
Pima said:
I think one problem with our educational system on the national level is everytime a President comes in they start their own program to "correct" the last President's agenda. By the time it goes down the pipeline and gets to the teachers where they can actually show real results we have a new leader, and we start it all over again. If you even look at Clinton and Bush it was a drastic change from the Goals 2000 to the No Child Left Behind. Throw in governors and their own agendas it becomes a maze that no rational person can grasp unless they spend hours in studying the system.
Click to expand...
Agree, and that is why I don't have much hope of it improving. Political solutions are often not solutions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top