Service Academies Still Meeting Their Goal?

search the forums for comments made about this article when it was published in 2015
 
It’s an opinion piece, and the author is entitled to his opinions. Pieces like this have popped up regularly over the years.

He writes from a narrow personal perspective, which is true for him. I am certain we could find former military personnel who would recall that Captain Doe was the best officer they ever worked for, and he or she just happened to be a Service Academy grad.

The fact is, all commissioning sources produce spectacularly bad to spectacularly good officers, with many perfectly fine ones in the mid-range. We just hear more about the bad ones, because the press tends to print what sells.

There are several threads here on SAF about Dr. Fleming, who was recently removed from USNA. He played the role of a gadfly, which does have a place in our free and open society.

This article brings up nothing new.

The service academies are indeed bureaucratic institutions, but I believe they are still doing a pretty good job of producing performing junior officers, based on my own experience in uniform and what I have observed since I left active duty.

Having diverse commissioning sources brings diverse backgrounds to each crop of junior officers produced; I like that.

As to cost, my flu shot, according to my medical insurance statement, cost $105. Ridiculous. Apples and oranges, but government has never been known for operating thriftily.

For the record, the best leaders for whom I ever worked were ADM Chuck Larson and another Navy Captain. One was a USNA grad; one was not. It didn’t matter to me. The worst was a USNA grad; it didn’t matter.

You can’t control what other people say or think, but you can control what kind of officer you will be, if that is something you are contemplating, regardless of where you go to earn your butter bar.
 
CAPT MJ pretty much sums it up...it's an opinion, everyone has one, and because of men and women serving in the military, the writer has the opportunity to share his.

My initial thought was that anything citing Professor Fleming as authority is suspect-- and this guy certainly doesn't have the background or experience to have any real basis for his opinion. (I don't denigrate his service in any way, but a short enlistment in the Army really doesn't make someone an expert in Officer accessions programs).

That being said, I am not a blind follower of the party line and am the last person to say USNA or the other Service Academies are perfect. I suspect there is some truth to what Professor Fleming and other detractors have been saying, and on a recent visit, I observed changes that concern me. I recognize that part of it is being a disgruntled old grad whose class has the last "real plebe year", but there does appear to be a concerted effort to make USNA more like a real college in order to attract the "best and brightest" students. It's a kinder and gentler institution now than it was in the mid-1980's, which in turn was probably kinder and gentler than it was in the 30's when the leadership of our WWII greatest generation went through. Only time will tell if this approach will serve as well as the old approach, but I fear that losing tradition will make it harder to distinguish USNA (and other service academies), and in time raise more questions about whether maintaining Service Academies is important.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top