Perhaps industry can ask why the academy tolerates a 30% academic attrition rate whereas the other SAs have a 2% academic attrition rate? I think 2024 is down to 180 mids from 280? The mids I have spoken to are mostly attending USMMA as they were not selected at the other academies and USMMA also has a much higher percentage getting things like flight slots and spec war as their first choice with little to no competition.
new supe here is—for better or for worse— cutting down on the attrition rate. The debate here is that we are compromising the end product. ‘25 started with around 300 and were down below 200 already and we’re going to sea for the second time, so more attrition is to be expected. The attrition rate is honestly its own topic for another thread.
Agreed that attrition could be its own topic but it is relevant to the argument that industry isn’t getting enough able bodies on to commercial vessels. From the outside observer, the supe - for better or worse - seems to be addressing DEi policies and not academic attrition but this tri will be her first “mass extinction event” since taking the helm. In general the attrition rate at the other federal SAs is higher for discipline issues and lower for academics - USMMA could go a long way by doing a value analysis of kicking out so many vice having a generally longer program for everyone. What would the cost be for every mid to have a 4.5-5yr plan vice the cost of kicking out 1/3 with zero return on investment. Telling mids/parents that “D’s get Degrees“ is not producing graduates with a quality education. If you are in 25 - good luck - stay safe.
How much attrition is there once 2nd sailing begins? I thought you are locked into a commitment once you start junior year like at other SAs.
Yeah we sign a document similar to what the other service academies sign at the beginning of 2/C year (Although with zero fanfare, I literally signed mine in between classes, so idk what’s so special about the other academies.)
Maybe a new academic provost will do a deep dive into the perplexing and yet accepted high attrition rate of USMMA. Students and those supporting them work their a**es off to secure an appointment to KP; you'd think more would be done by the Academy to then actually keep them there. It's a significant waste of time, money, and energy for all interested parties to remain in this detrimental pattern. Tenured professors are a key point-they don't have to care. Some discussion has been made to extend the 4 year program to 5 in order to accommodate the coursework plus sea year crunch, and it would potentially allow Mids to graduate with a MBA. No idea if that would ever happen but it seems in the best interest of KP's future not to mention the maritime industry to make some serious adjustments to the Academy's training model.
If 5 yrs are needed because 4yrs are not enough then how is an MBA going to fit?
I agree with your point and was trying to advance it further. As a USNA grad who later earned an MBA, I know that the years of service and then entering private industry were pretty important to me better understanding the MBA curriculum and getting more out of it.
How does the mariner shortage have anything to do with how "hard" KP is? Once you graduate and go to the fleet a license is a license regardless of if or where you went to school. If you fail at KP you can easily transfer to another school or hawsepipe to get your license.
A detrimental red flag? This is basically hyperbole. Is it unconventional to do an MBA following college graduation? Probably these days yes. Red flag? Definitely not.
Okay and 4 years ago there were very few job prospects aboard ships for new deck or engine grads. Choice was mostly to sail unlicensed or go shoreside. Companies employed us as ABs and there were better opportunities ashore. Any time soon? Try another few years. Like from 2014 to 2017 in the recent history.
You could certainly sit in a room with academics and corporate professionals who would tell you that this isn't the case. That would be the case for a professional or executive MBA; however, a traditional MBA can be done after an undergrad degree in an unrelated major (i.e. Math, History, English Literature) to prepare for a career in banking/finance/consulting/etc. Your post is highly misleading honestly.
You can write that as many times as you want but that doesn’t make it true. (Speaking about traditional MBA programs here.) Broad trend among corporate professionals is to pursue professional/executive “weekend MBA” programs rather than full time programs. This is due to massive opportunity cost of losing 2 years of income while earning a degree that is seemingly declining in value. These days a full time MBA makes more sense for a college grad looking to make a career in business from a different major.
I'm not advocating to stop the grind once accepted; the pedal has to remain fully pressed in order to get that coveted USMMA diploma. I have a Mid there, and (I'm almost afraid to say it) is doing well in the academics. The context is this...I have a close family member who attended another FSA, and this person would tell you that her Academy does more to keep accepted cadets there once admitted. The environment at KP doesn't seem to do that with their Mids/Plebes. I get that there are a myriad of factors that go into a USMMA student being dis-enrolled or setback, but again, knowing folks who have attended other FSAs, there still seems to be a difference. Why is that? Is KP admitting students who can't handle the pressure cooker? Is it because of faculty deficiencies in teaching, or that they don't really care if a student stays or goes?