USNA OOM ranking question

More mids get As today than in my day. I can't remember anyone who had a 4.0 -- even the brightest guys and gals. Cs, Ds and even Fs were routine, even for those who studied really hard. ...

I don't know if grading is easier, kids are smarter, and/or the academic help program is better. Probably all of the above.

When I entered USNA there were no Letter Grades - it was the Numeric 4.0 System that existed Navy Wide for Enlisted Evaluations, Officer Fitness Reports, Naval Academy Grading, etc, etc. The minimum Passing Grade was 2.5. Superintendent's List was 3.3 IIRC - Stars.

We all Marched to and from Class.


Tecumseh was "The God of 2.5."

While there, the Academy Changed to No Marching to Class and Letter Grades. A Dean's List was added at 3.4 and that became the new requirement for Stars.

Virtually all of us saw and increase in our GPA - it certainly was easier to get an "A" than a 4.0.

PS One F and you were out! (Previously one Less Than 2.5 and you were gone.)
PPS Attrition Rate was 1 out of 3 up until the 1970s... much lower since the 1980s.
 
Last edited:
PPS Attrition Rate was 1 out of 3 up until the 1970s... much lower since the 1980s.
The class of 78 was the largest class to enter USNA with approx 1600 on I Day. June week 1978 saw under a thousand graduate.
As was previously said, there were plenty of C's, D's and even F's at that time. I can't tell you the average GPA but a 2.72 was well in the upper half academically.
 
OOM includes academic grades, PE grades, conduct (demerits), military performance, and I think the PRT is figured in somehow. You could be straight A’s in academic classes, but a fat misconduct hit can knock you down several places. Someone who is all about the books but doesn’t contribute in company may get a low performance grade.

I think “aptitude” is the current term for military performance.

Here’s the link to the USNA instruction, something to read while you’re pondering.

How is military performance graded? Is this based on how one does in officer leadership classes or more like how one performs on marches, etc.?
 
How is military performance graded? Is this based on how one does in officer leadership classes or more like how one performs on marches, etc.?
Did you read through the link provided, dig into the notes and tables of how the components are weighted?

Most of the graded evolutions are straightforward. For military aptitude, sloppy watchstanding, failure to learn plebe knowledge, frequently failed uniform and room inspections, etc., add up to a professional reputation in the company, and the company will assign a letter grade. Squared-away mids will earn better military aptitude than the train-wreck mids.
 
For what it is worth, gpa matters to my plebe but the grade he was happiest to receive an ‘A’ in was aptitude.

From what I understand upperclassmen leadership and training staff decide those scores.

Also, MIDS is a genius system where midshipmen can see everything relative to them. Grades, classes, LRECs, positive and negative remarks and demerits. Summer trainings etc. Very handy apparently.
 
How is military performance graded?

The short answer is “subjectively.” Your CO can do whatever he or she pleases with no rhyme or reason.

the long answer: I’ve had two B aptitude semesters and one A aptitude. One B and the A were with identical rankings from peers and upperclass. The other B was actually the semester where my peers and upperclass ranked me the best, and I excelled in all measurable professional examinations. Go figure.

The other short answer: Of course, always strive for an A, but it really doesn’t matter. A “B” checks all the boxes for study abroad, service selection, exchange programs, etc. The only difference is a silver star instead of a gold star on your pocket.
 
Back
Top