I wonder why that is. So one would actually have MORE career choices by joining NROTC than going to the academy? Initially, in one's career that would seem to be the case.USNA69 said:All medically qualified USNA grads must be unrestricted line officers; surface, aviation, special warfare, subs, or USMC. ROTC grads have all these options in addition to restricted line which is supply, CEC, intelligence, etc.
Loophole said:If you transfer to USNA after a year of NROTC, do you have to start as a first year student?
The Academy stresses combat specialties and leadership and has always assumed it could get better support specialties from civilian colleges that teach that sort of things. Business schools for supply types, civil engineering for CEC officers, etc. It makes perfect sense for ROTC students at colleges which offer these degrees, pursue them and then pursure the same specialty after being commissioned. Actually I was really surprised with the AFA thread discussing computer specialists. I would think there would be civilian colleges much more adept at training these officers.Just_A_Mom said:I wonder why that is. So one would actually have MORE career choices by joining NROTC than going to the academy? Initially, in one's career that would seem to be the case.
However, one should look beyond their initial assignment and think about how they want to spend their careers. Almost half their career will be on shore duty. The more senior they become, the less chances that these shore duty billets will be directly in operational support of their warfare specialty. One should pick up a secondary specialty. One of the more common is working in NavAir, NavSea, or NavSub as appropriate, in systems development and procurement. An engineering degree would bode one well in this environment. An advanced engineering degree would bode well in this environment and the Navy is much more prone to grant post graduate study to those with undergraduate technical degrees.Whistle Pig said:And as the USNA reminds in its admissions info, there is NO CONNECTION (with a few exceptions in nukes and chemistry) between major areas and later USN assignments.
Don't exaggerate. Class of 2010 is the "worst" I have seen and it is 40% humanities. The remaining 60%, if I remember correctly, is pretty much evenly split between technology and engineering.Whistle Pig said:Of course you're right. Still over half of USNA mids now pursue liberal arts majors no matter that they all receive B.S. degrees.
Hmm....I'm not sure where you getting this info, as we haven't selected majors yet...USNA69 said:Class of 2010 is the "worst" I have seen and it is 40% humanities. The remaining 60%, if I remember correctly, is pretty much evenly split between technology and engineering.
WP, This forum supports the US Naval Academy. Instead of creating our own definitions, we would all communicate better if we used standard USNA terminology. From the USNA 2005-2006 catalog, page 60, Majors Program paragraph:Whistle Pig said:What you call "technical" degrees including chem, econ, math, general science, the Academy includes in their "Division of Math and Science."
You call them technical, I call them liberal arts students. While neither of us is, dare I say, "technically" correct,
After a lifetime of military service, working with officers from all branches of life and all different majors, I consider my observations more than "speculation." To what military background do you attribute the knowledge and experience to so label it?Whistle Pig said:Into the future speculation is just that.