# Education levels in the  army?



## Colin Parkinson (10 Nov 2006)

One thing I have picked from talking to left-wing anti’s (besides a headache and maybe head lice…) is a general contempt of military personal regarding them as uneducated robots who will do whatever they have been indoctrinated with (The irony is lost on them) They refuse to consider that military personal in the Cdn military are generally intelligent, with diverse views and by the evidence on this forum, not shy about expressing them. I guess this reality does not fit the left’s world view and would erode the base of their logic  

Now I know it is pretty standard even in my day to require grade 12 for a private soldier, and preference for a university degree for Officers. Can anyone tell/guess at the percentage of OR’s NCO and Officers that hold degrees. I suspect that many of the Staff Officers hold degrees and possibly Masters degrees. I also suspect that most of the degrees held are in more serious fields as opposed to the B of A’s “fluffy” degrees many of the left hold.


----------



## Teflon (10 Nov 2006)

> They refuse to consider that military personal in the Cdn military are generally intelligent, with diverse views and by the evidence on this forum, not shy about expressing them. I guess this reality does not fit the left’s world view and would erode the base of their logic



Part of the problem with them is many confuse Education with intelligence,... One of the overall dumbest people I know has a PhD, ask that person a question in their field and BAM you will have your answer but anything else - world events, social issues, history, common sense and you will get blank stares or some of the most assine and unfounded comments.  Don't get me wrong, education is a big and good thing but all the knowledge in the world doesn't mean much if it is combined with an utter lack of common sense and the ability to apply the knowledge in a practical appilcation.

To many "only high school" = Dummy when the world provides ample examples of higher education taking and producing it own fair share

 ???


----------



## Kunu (10 Nov 2006)

I realize I'm new to the CF, but I'd even go as far as saying that the level of _intelligence _in the military is definately higher than mainstream society.  This assertion coming mainly from discussions with other university students and and even fellow employees at a rather prestigious company I worked for.  My (few so far) CF experiences have just seemed to reinforce that more and more.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (10 Nov 2006)

Teflon
I fully agree with you on education vs intelligence, having worked with a few PHD's...

I guess I should specify that the purpose of my post is to gather ammo for rebuttal to these people, where I can say: in actually fact the numbers of staff officers holding Masters is roughly X% and the requirements for OR's is X


----------



## IrishCanuck (10 Nov 2006)

I agree with everything you said except for the BA "fluffy" degree comment.

It takes all kinds to build a society.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (10 Nov 2006)

Deleted in the interests of harmony


----------



## IrishCanuck (10 Nov 2006)

If you feel that science is the only discipline worth studying than I suppose most things in the world could be "fluffy".


----------



## Teflon (10 Nov 2006)

Please lets not hyjack this thread with "my BA is bigger then yours" OK guys

Start a new thread if you want to argue the value various degrees etc.


----------



## cplcaldwell (10 Nov 2006)

Some time ago, In JF Dunigan's "How to Make War" I came across a statement that it had been found that the best combat arms soldier has a slightly higher than average IQ.

There are various ways to categorize IQ but one way is this;

*Category I* > 125
*Category II *110 - 125
*Category IIIA *100 - 110
*Category IIIB *90-100
*Category IV *<~90

Apparently, at least the US military has been tracking this for nearly a century. They found that to get an Army that functions well (i.e. WINS) they need to take in about 65% of their recruits in the Categories I to III area. This generally equates to an IQ of 92 or higher. 

Generally this rates about 20 some odd percent of new recruits in Cat II, IIIA or IIIB each. Only about 2% of Army recruits are in Class IV. Also about 3 or 4 % come from Cat I (I guess those are they guys they want for WO!)

Interestingly, in the General Population, about 60% of Black Americans and 30% of White Americans fall in the Cat IV (Below 92 IQ level).

So Armies, if at least the Americans are an example, are generally made up of intelligent people. _Remember Intelligence is the ability to learn, reason and plan, not add a bunch of letters after a name...._

(_Go easy_ I know that it looks inflammatory, but the figures for Black folks are often cited as lower because of cultural biases in the test and perhaps because the higher levels of poverty in Black Americans limit their chances at stimulating early education.).I am not suggesting one racial group is not as smart as another.

Oh and by the bye, you Navy and Air types don't get too puffy, the numbers are similar for your Services....

Oh yeah, my citation, http://www.dod.mil/prhome/poprep98/html/overview.html, Executive Summary and Chapter 2 in particular search the document at the URL for "AFQT" there's a nice little blurb there....


----------



## cplcaldwell (10 Nov 2006)

> Interestingly, in the General Population, about 60% of Black Americans and 30% of White Americans fall in the Cat IV (Below 92 IQ level).



I think, bit of a WAG here, that the "General Population" includes a _few_ socialist politicians and possibly _some_ members of the press


----------



## Bobby Rico (11 Nov 2006)

I don't think it's fair to judge someone's intelligence based on education level, whether they have a BA or Masters or some other degree in something.  There are plenty of clueless degree holders in the world, and plenty of intelligent people who are high school drop outs.  I'd like to believe that the military is representational of the entire spectrum (within a confined limit of course- I doubt there are many complete imbiciles in the army, at the same time I doubt there are any nuclear physicists huckin' around a rifle and living in bivouacs for a living).


----------



## Michael OLeary (11 Nov 2006)

cplcaldwell said:
			
		

> Interestingly, in the General Population, about 60% of Black Americans and 30% of White Americans fall in the Cat IV (Below 92 IQ level).



cplcaldwell,

Please present your sources for this.


----------



## GAP (11 Nov 2006)

I believe these are them



> Oh yeah, my citation, http://www.dod.mil/prhome/poprep98/html/overview.html, Executive Summary and Chapter 2 in particular search the document at the URL for "AFQT" there's a nice little blurb there


----------



## exsemjingo (11 Nov 2006)

cplcaldwell said:
			
		

> Apparently, at least the US military has been tracking this for nearly a century. They found that to get an Army that functions well (i.e. WINS) they need to take in about 65% of their recruits in the Categories I to III area. This generally equates to an IQ of 92 or higher.
> 
> Generally this rates about 20 some odd percent of new recruits in Cat II, IIIA or IIIB each. Only about 2% of Army recruits are in Class IV. Also about 3 or 4 % come from Cat I (I guess those are they guys they want for WO!)
> 
> ...



Hold up now, the racial differences here reflect on the quality of the data, not the subjects.  The discrepancy suggests some kind of bias towards "white" Americans in the testing criteria.  This does not have to be intentional, only present.  
It seems the intelligence test makes too many assumptions on education.  Maybe the questions focused on subjects that "whites" would be more inclined to have exposure to?  We would have to see the test in order to tell.
Also, breaking percentages down to categories limits the kind of specifics that can be preformed on the data.  We should be discussing averages and bell curves, not nominal categories.
Speaking of categories, what is the definition of "white" and "black"?  Immigration and racial integration over the past 100 years has changed what these designations mean.  They are not really useful anymore, even from a strictly statistical view.  Politics aside, these are bad statistics.

The study speaks for itself.


----------

