*** I am taking OFF my moderator hat here... ***
Bookreader, I appreciate you bringing the current cadets perspective into this discussion. I think this is a good discussion to have. I'm an "old grad" of USAFA. And I, like many "old grads" look back on "when I was a cadet" and then try to compare it to today. As Bob Dylan said "...the times, they are a changing..." In my day, a violation of the honor code, first time, typically meant dismissal from the wing. We had three findings possible: no violation, violation, violation with recommendation for discretion. That was it. If found in violation, you were gone. If found in violation with a recommendation for discretion, then the commandant made the call to either let you remain or to remove you. MOST were removed. It was mandatory each week that doolies (think plebe's) read the results of ALL honor boards that week. Yes, honor was a big deal. You knew day-one that the code was there, you were trained during BCT what it was, and you swore to it before you started academics. After that, you were held to that standard. I find the cadets comment: "The Superintendent has to weigh the merits of someone who, if part of an ROTC program not subject to the same rigid Honor Code, might be a good officer, otherwise." disturbing. We're not speaking of an ROTC cadet and whether or not they're held to a specific standard; we're speaking about a USMA cadet that is held to a simple standard: "A cadet will not lie, cheat, steal, or tolerate those who do." How difficult is that to understand? IF USMA is going to hold that as the standard of conduct, then why are there so many "unless..." situations? I ask that of USAFA as well as our honor code (borrowed I'm sure from USMA when USAFA was new) is simple: "We will not lie, steal, or cheat, nor tolerate among us anyone who does." Why has that simple standard evolved to "except on the first offense, where we'll allow you to be on probation instead of separating you?" But I digress. (Old grad again)
Grades...I found it interesting that the current cadet wrote "I can attest to the fact that the current Dean’s policy is to separate cadets who fail the same class more than once." Uh, "more than once?" Again, "back in the day" if you failed a class you were GONE. The ONLY way to be saved was by the academic board determining that there was some mitigating factor. I was the beneficiary of such a mitigation; I failed a calculus class as a doolie...and sat before the board. They were ready to toss me out; my dreams shattered, until they realized that over the semester of 42 lessons (1 hour class each), I had 142 hours of one-on-one tutoring with my instructor! They decided I had gone over and above in trying to pass the class and I was allowed to "voluntarily give up my summer leave" and attend summer school: "pass the class and you move on, fail and you move out."
The comment about "near illiterate" cadets...sadly, I have seen several like that in my tenure as an ALO. I have seen candidates admitted to USAFA that, IMHO as an ALO, had no business being there. They weren't ready for it, their background wasn't adequate in preparation, their scores were nowhere near high enough. BUT...they were ranked athletes. Some did well, others did not make it through. Does this surprise me; the answer is no. Sadly, athletics have invaded the academies as they have college sports; they make money for the institution and are a source of "pride" and therefore, they must be treated accordingly. I doubt there's a major (think Division 1 at least) university, to include the SA's, that doesn't have a student body that whines, moans, and complains about the "special treatment" afforded "athletes." It's just the way it is. In some ways, I think at the SA's its cruel; to the athlete! Imagine being a football player, being highly regarded in high school, and a Division 1 school like USMA or USAFA or USNA comes calling and you end up there. You're 6'1" and 299lbs of lineman. You make varsity and you play four years. At the end of your senior year season, you're informed that you need to lose 85 pounds to meet the USAF standard of 6'1", 214 pounds. That's cruel and a disservice to the individual.
I greatly appreciate the cadets candor and his open discussion of his opinion. In the end, it is opinion. He takes several turns making declaratory comments about the Lt Col from the perspective of a cadet and not an officer in the room or "in the know" that aren't terribly credible to me. However, to be fair; I wasn't there either. I can only go on my experiences. I have seen cadets like he describes in his letter (the Lt Col) and I have "come down on them" as well. The difference is that a TAC officer does exercise "command authority" and an academic officer does not. However, something the cadet fails to realize is, the officer regardless of branch or assignment, holds a leadership position of authority and does have every right to "stand tall" a cadet, junior officer, NCO, etc., that is not meeting a standard. To be fair, that officer needs to know what the standards are before making such a call, but if he does, then he's perfectly within his rights and obligations as an officer to do the correct thing.
All in all, I found the letter from Lt Col Heffington to be very sad. I can relate to many of his points as I have seen them in my career of working with USAFA as an ALO. I can't speak to USMA as I'm not there. I can also relate to the perspective of the USMA cadet and his letter and I'm sure it also has merit. I think both are good discussion points and perspectives to contemplate.
Steve
USAFA ALO
USAFA '83
