What's your take on this article and the premise that midshipmen aren't the Best and Brightest

Thank you for the feedback. I had never heard of this professor until today. I guess it just surprised me that someone could be so outwardly negative of his workplace while still employed there.

When we attended one of our local information sessions in our county, the presentation started with this: The reason for applying to the USNA is that you are willing to serve as an officer in an unrestricted line community. Anyone who is unwilling to do this should not consider this or any service academy.

I do know that there are many young men and women at the NA who may not be there for the "right" reasons. And while they may be the minority, they are there due to:

the free education
their parent(s) attended/or parents are pushing them
they are a varsity athlete (recruited, otherwise the NA would not have been on their radar)

I just hope that these men and women are aware of the incredible responsibility placed on them as they go out to serve their country.
 
Last edited:
This is absolutely the wrong mentality to come into this with. The military is a big machine, the Navy uses 3 different methods of accession to acquire its officers: the Naval Academy, ROTC, and OCS. Each has produced the best and worst officers. Having good grades and scores does not equate to being a good officer, it equates to being book smart. The Naval Academy is a prestigious institution because of its history and heritage, not because each of its graduates are better trained than those coming out of the other accession points.

I'm sorry. That came out as unfair toward NROTC. I guess it's just hard for me to put the two (NROTC and NA) on an equal playing field as far as the rigor and discipline that the NA inherently has. But yes, you are certainly correct in stating that they all have produced the best and worst officers.

DS was applying NROTC, but then ended up committing to NA. Personally, I would have preferred NROTC (for selfish reasons, i.e., less restrictions on him) and also because I feel that NROTC is the best of both worlds. We know of young men who received appointment to the NA, but chose NROTC instead.
 
I posted on a few of the older threads about Professor Fleming... I actually had him as a Prof while there. From what I remember he was an okay Prof with a pretty a large ego. He likes to push the envelope with odd and unorthodox discussions. I have heard this echoed from many current Mids and recent grads also who have had him. I had him for an upper level seminar, so all seniors, about to graduate and very small class (10 or so). So lots of interaction and discussion, friendly debate, etc. I think he thrives in that sort of enivornment. Teaching English to a bunch of Plebes who are fighting to stay awake, probably isn’t as great. And yes, he has tenure. He has been at USNA ~20 years or so.

USNA has to work within the confines of US Code, the Board of Trustees and also trying to meet the needs of the Operational Navy. Sure he has some valid points in his articles. USNA isn’t perfect, no institution is. The problem I have with his assertions of arguing USNA doesn’t admit the best and brightest. What does that even mean? I actually dislike that statement. A 1600 SAT doesn’t mean that someone can lead, fly an airplane in a combat zone or make difficult decisions at the helm of a ship. Are there some with questionable stats that get in, sure. Could they be a minority? Athlete? In some cases, yes to both. My class’s valedictorian at USNA was not well liked in the Brigade, was hated in the fleet and left after 5 years. Our anchor man was a CO (he was an athlete and NAPSter). Who stays for 20+ and thrives and those who don’t thrive is a total mixed bag once everyone hits the fleet.

Just like any college it’s about taking advantage of the opportunities. A mid can do the minimum and graduate. Well that is 4 years of doing the minimum which means they have some habits to change prior to hitting the fleet and often don’t realize how much those habits are now engrained. USNA has amazing opportunities in so many different facets of a Mid chooses to challenge them self.
 
Perhaps he has what it takes to be an officer in the Navy, but how can he be on the same playing field as an USNA graduate with regard to the rigor and training at the NA?
I beg to differ. Sure, there are great young officers coming out of the service academies, and yes, a lot of them have challenged themselves more academically and through extra-curriculars, but to say the entire service academy corps is another league above everyone else, I really don't think so. I'm not in the navy but I'll expand the topic a little because I think the same issues are still relatable to my branch - and to be honest, some of the kids I've seen come out of the academy are terrible leaders. Some of them are self-centered individuals who got to where they are in life due to their families' influence and/or wealth. I'm sure some cadets and parents on this forum will disagree with me because they can't swallow their pride. However, I currently work with about a half-dozen LT's in my unit that came from the academy, and I'd say at least half of them are exactly as described: selfish and arrogant.
 
Perhaps he has what it takes to be an officer in the Navy, but how can he be on the same playing field as an USNA graduate with regard to the rigor and training at the NA?
I beg to differ. Sure, there are great young officers coming out of the service academies, and yes, a lot of them have challenged themselves more academically and through extra-curriculars, but to say the entire service academy corps is another league above everyone else, I really don't think so. I'm not in the navy but I'll expand the topic a little because I think the same issues are still relatable to my branch - and to be honest, some of the kids I've seen come out of the academy are terrible leaders. Some of them are self-centered individuals who got to where they are in life due to their families' influence and/or wealth. I'm sure some cadets and parents on this forum will disagree with me because they can't swallow their pride. However, I currently work with about a half-dozen LT's in my unit that came from the academy, and I'd say at least half of them are exactly as described: selfish and arrogant.

I need an eye-roll emoji...found it. :rolleyes:
 
Lets be honest, if you want to find the smartest kids arounds, you will find them at MIT or equivalent colleges. None of the academies on the whole are going to be able to compete with them in terms of SAT scores or intelligence. That isnt to say the academy doesnt have very bright students. On the other hand, how many of the MIT kids are going be competitve to get into an academy. How many played Varsity sports, how many were in leadership position. The academies seem to be looking for overall person that will make a good officer. Being the smartest kid in your class isnt the best leader. As for atheletes, every school outside of the IVY and maybe MIT and such, have the same issues with lower level students who are great athletes. The schools are into that prestige so who cares if a minority of students are academically below average.
 
My DS sat in his class, during a CVW last Fall. For what it's worth, Bruce was not on his soapbox that day.
I read a couple of Bruce's diatribes, and I too was incensed by a couple of his points.
Nevertheless, I will defend his right to make them.

If USNA wanted to fire him, they would. I don't believe that he has tenure (Not sure of that, though).
The fact that they don't (fire him), speaks volumes (at least to me) that they are fair in their assessment of his value as a professor, in spite of these annual re-hashed diatribes.

If you ask 50 Mids what they think of him, 25 will tell you they loathe him, and 25 will tell you that he's the best professor there.
I have never met the guy, but my DS said that he got the feeling that this man truly cares about the Mids he is teaching, and it's not "just a job" for him. Even though my DS is only 18 years old, I value his opinion in these matters and I like the fact that he has an open mind.
Okay, I had something to do with that, I know.
Fleming has tenure and recently, he has been in trouble for an unrelated issue and tenure is probably saving his job.
 
As for atheletes, every school outside of the IVY and maybe MIT and such, have the same issues with lower level students who are great athletes. The schools are into that prestige so who cares if a minority of students are academically below average.
I like that you think that the Ivies don't bring in lower level students for their athletic ability. A very good friend of mine and former at sea roommate through some "interesting" deployments was a hockey recruit at Hah-vud. He will freely admit that he would have never gotten near the front door except for his hockey ability.
 
I'll comment from our son's perspective as he was a bit dismayed initially at the general academic rigor at West Point and the level of preparedness of many of the cadets around him his Plebe year. A colonel explained to him that the SAs value a combination of brains, brawn, and leadership somewhat equally. Only about one third of the incoming class is selected for academics; the other 2/3rds are chosen for other equally shiny traits. All are academically capable, but only that third is what you might label as “scholarly.” Our son eventually found that the brain trust is there, but he had to seek it out freshman year. Once he was fully into his major, he was fully tapped in to it and is no longer disappointed. And, he has learned to value those other critical “equally shiny” traits in his band of brothers very highly. The corps needs a balance of all of them in a way civilian colleges do not as their missions differ.
 
Discipline doesn't come from living it 24x7. Physical strength doesn't come from doing it at an academy, it comes from just doing it. Academics is academics. All (Marines at least) go through the same initial training school once on active duty. Some folks think NROTC students can make better leaders because they know how to deal with very different folks. They have already done it. As USMCGrunt said (I think) good officers come from all the commissioning paths.... as well as bad officers.
 
;) Ha! Assuming that's a reference to another thread, please don't do that to me! I was sent to the woodshed for that one. :D
 
As for atheletes, every school outside of the IVY and maybe MIT and such, have the same issues with lower level students who are great athletes. The schools are into that prestige so who cares if a minority of students are academically below average.
I like that you think that the Ivies don't bring in lower level students for their athletic ability. A very good friend of mine and former at sea roommate through some "interesting" deployments was a hockey recruit at Hah-vud. He will freely admit that he would have never gotten near the front door except for his hockey ability.
I am sure they do and but they place limitations based on GPA or SAT scores. I cant remember what the limiations are, but my son was looking to play college baseball and I was looking at Ivy while doing research on the schools he was looking to play for and the policies places on the Ivys prevent the schools from bringing in any good athelte. They like Stanford will accept an athlete that maybe has a 3.0 GPA (for example) which compared to the rest of school is way below average, but isnt too bad compared to most other schools. Did some research and the Ivys use an Academic Index in which they score every potential athlete. They typically dont accept anyone below a certain rating.
 
Well, I think the takeaway here is this. No matter where you go - SA, Ivy, Big 10, Small Liberal Arts - there will always be outliers.

And there will always be critics.

Thank you for your feedback. This is an eye opening forum and one where I have learned a lot.
 
I am old enough to remember the "old days" when people were more disciplined and basic was tough etc.,etc.

Well as much as I like to complain and talk about how it was in My Day( just ask my sons LOL), that does not mean a hill of beans to the young men and women planning on serving our country as Commissioned Officers.

I heard or read on another thread that a service academy is first and foremost a "Leadership Laboratory".

They need to learn to lead and manage the servicemen and women of Today.

That is why it is important that they learn to lead a cross section of America as it is Today( Not in My Day).

If a service academy consisted of a group of only motivated, disciplined ,physically fit and squared away cadets , they would not learn how to lead the Soldiers and Sailors of Today.


My son will begin his 47 month Lab Experience in July at USMA . I believe if he does his part, it will afford him the opportunity to learn to adapt and overcome the obstacles he encounters and give him the skills necessary to lead "Todays" Soldiers.
 
I'm sorry. That came out as unfair toward NROTC. I guess it's just hard for me to put the two (NROTC and NA) on an equal playing field as far as the rigor and discipline that the NA inherently has. But yes, you are certainly correct in stating that they all have produced the best and worst officers.

DS was applying NROTC, but then ended up committing to NA. Personally, I would have preferred NROTC (for selfish reasons, i.e., less restrictions on him) and also because I feel that NROTC is the best of both worlds. We know of young men who received appointment to the NA, but chose NROTC instead.

Thank you for apologizing, because when I read your first post I was about to get pretty huffy. I was about to debate the rigors of USNA compared to an SMC, but I will leave that one alone. My DD is in her second year at VMI. She is on a Marine scholarship, and I would absolutely debate the Marines DO pick THE best and the brightest......instead of the best out of ten (or less in some areas), on a slate. USNA has it’s hands tied. USNA cannot just stack all the applications in the nation and pick the 1,100 best.....while NROTC and the other branches can. And they do.

So please, do not think your kid is any more elite than a ROTC student. My NROTC-MO won her scholarship competing against thousands across the nation. Your kid beat the nine other kids in your district. And yep - they will hold the exact same rank.
 
Back
Top