# Civilians at RMC



## loyalist (23 Jan 2006)

What do you think of civilians at RMC?

Personally, as much of a part of the "defence team" as civilians are, I don't think they have a place at RMC. Why?

When the CF employs civilians, such as PSP, It's usually a cheaper, more effiencent and generally producitve role they are put into. However, the civvie students at RMC are there to augment our sports teams. While it's good for RMC to have prestige in sports, I'd rather have a losing team made up of fellow cadets or reservists attending the college than a team of half civvies competeing in a league probably too large for an 1100-strong university.

The role of RMC is to train future officers, and, by definition, civvies are not bound to be officers. Why are they here? We have another university and a college in Kingston to accomodate those people. RMC is a CF institution, and ought to remain that way.


----------



## h3tacco (23 Jan 2006)

How many civies are at RMC? When I graduated ('00) there were no civie full time students and probably one or two talking courses in all four years. Are civie undergrads making up half of Varisity teams? I assume they live in town and just attend classes and then get RMC degrees? That just sounds wrong.


----------



## DVessey (23 Jan 2006)

civvies make up a large portion of many of the varsity teams, they live in town, and attend classes. I'm not sure if they actually go for degrees, or if they're just taking enough courses to be considered students. Anyhow, as far as I know, they don't get *the* "RMC Degree", they just get a regular degree like any other university.

I think it's quite ironic that RMC was entered into the Ontario University League to attempt to stand out more... I don't think that's quite worked out too well.


----------



## Fundy Gunner (23 Jan 2006)

Civilians at RMC??  What's wrong with that?  I have a friend that is doing a Master's degree through them.  Although he lives in New Brunswick, when he made a visit to meet his advisors he still had to take the stairs just like everyone else.  Oh and he had to wear a shirt and tie.  

Personally I don't see a problem with civilians studying at RMC.  Where else would you get the full support to do a Master's thesis in military history?  I'm pretty sure you can't find the same books or have the same support at any other university in Canada.


----------



## medicineman (23 Jan 2006)

I often wondered what the Queen's students think about the crossover courses that RMC/Queen's have and having RMC students wandering their campus - problably not quite the same (though they are pretty snotty!! ;D).  I went to UVic many years ago, back when Royal Roads was still a Military College and saw many cadets in classes there because of the crossover with Mil and Strat Studies and Oceanography between the two.  I know some of the UVic creatures were a little perturbed (most of the students were rather left leaning to say the least) but there was never alot of grief.  Can't say much for sports mind you, as they all played for their home schools, but I know the odd military person that was "enrolled" in RMC and Roads that were there to augment the sports teams.  To be honest, more prestige sports wise gives a little more visibility to the College, ergo more people might enroll.  When I worked at RMC, there were a few cadets there that were in fact recruited to play hockey from the CIAU and OHL - they actually did fairly decently my last year there, placing well in the Ontario/Quebec Region and beating West Point (for a change).  To be honest, I think you'll likely see this more often for a bit.

My $0.02.

MM


----------



## h3tacco (23 Jan 2006)

I don't see any problem with civie Master Students at RMC or even Queen and other student's taking undergrad courses at RMC. However, the undergrad RMC (CMR, RRMC)  degree has always been about more than just attending classes 5 days a week.


----------



## loyalist (24 Jan 2006)

Isn't the whole idea of RMC _to train officers_, though?

I have no problems with Master's students, as RMC posses certain...unique traits that make it really one of the only venues for doing a Master's in War Studies, and, more importantly, it contributed to the goals of national defence and national interest.

My point is, why should a professor's time, energy and class commitment be devoted to a student at a institution that id dedicated to training officers who isn't set to be an officer? Really, I think it's bad for college cohesion and is horribile for RMC's image as an elite military university.


----------



## medicineman (24 Jan 2006)

The idea of the place is to educate - full stop.  I as an NCO can go and get a degree there if I please with no intention or expectation of becoming an officer (I just pay for it).  It's no different than an officer cadet that chooses to go to a civilian school to get their education.  Difference is the networking they lose and the military atmosphere.

MM


----------



## Sf2 (24 Jan 2006)

Nothing against civics at RMC whatsoever.  When I was there 95-99, there were only a few taking some post-grad programs.  2nd or 3rd year they introducted the RMC/Queens x-over, where you could go take a women's studies class at Queens - yikes!!

Never saw a civi on a varsity team though, that must be a recent thing.


----------



## clasper (24 Jan 2006)

loyalist said:
			
		

> Isn't the whole idea of RMC _to train officers_, though?
> 
> I have no problems with Master's students, as RMC posses certain...unique traits that make it really one of the only venues for doing a Master's in War Studies, and, more importantly, it contributed to the goals of national defence and national interest.
> 
> My point is, why should a professor's time, energy and class commitment be devoted to a student at a institution that id dedicated to training officers who isn't set to be an officer? Really, I think it's bad for college cohesion and is horribile for RMC's image as an elite military university.


If the whole idea of RMC is to train officers, why is it accredited to award degrees?  Fact is, military graduates get two pieces of paper at the end- a commissioning scroll and an accredited degree.  A civilian can certainly attend the classroom aspect of the university (which is not really different from any other university) and get the degree.

In the fall of 96, I needed a couple of more courses to get my degree from Queen's, and then they went and moved one of my required courses to second semester.  So I went (as a civilian, even though I also happened to be a Cpl in the reserves) and took it at RMC in first semester and transferred the credit.  I even walked into class proudly wearing my Golden Party Armour (Queen's Engineering leather jacket) and the world didn't come to an end.  At the same time, an RMC student I knew accepted FRP after 3rd year, and came back as a civi the next year to finish his degree.

Due to the unique nature of the institution and the student body, there will never be that many civilians who wish to go to RMC, but there's no reason why they shouldn't be able to.


----------



## muffin (24 Jan 2006)

loyalist said:
			
		

> What do you think of civilians at RMC?
> 
> Personally, as much of a part of the "defence team" as civilians are, I don't think they have a place at RMC. Why?
> 
> ...



Hello - I work for RMC in the Continuing Studies Division - and the students you are referring to, come in through us. 

According to the RMC - DCS Admissions Reg 3.1 :
_
Individuals who have no affiliation with the Department of National Defence and who have successfully completed their high school studies or meet the general conditions for admission as mature students may also apply for admission and be accepted into an undergraduate programme of study at RMC, provided there is space available in the programme of their choice._

Is this case RMC has "scouted" individuals for the varsity teams, and they have enrolled to RMC through us. The students only take classes on the campus when there is space available, and otherwise take their courses via distance learning. 

I always find it interesting when a civilian student chooses to come to RMC, because he/she has heard it is a prestigious institution and desires to come here based on that merit alone. To me - that doesn't sound like a bad thing.

If the space is available I don't see any problem with letting them attend. They are not subsidized the same way Cadets, Reg/Res members are and pay substantially more for their courses than the Reservists/cadets do.

Is your issue that they are playing on the varsity teams?

Muffin
(A "cheaper yet efficient and more productive employee of DND" - though not PSP)


----------



## loyalist (24 Jan 2006)

I must say - I've heard some good arguments, and the description of how these regs work has definately given me a new perspective. My sticking point is really the doublethink employed by the people in charge: Killing RMC tradtions (as to make RMC more integrated with the CF), yet taking some of the 'military' out of it - further alienating it from the rest of the CF. I'm all in favour of reservists doing courses here - in fact, I think they shoudl wear their uniforms, too. If they're really trying to integrate the College, that's certainly a contribution. Students on loan from other universities? Sounds awesome. This is the acedemic side of RMC and a way to promote the College as a leading acedemic instituion. But anyone off the street? Just because space is availble, when there are people being refused space in the ROTP program? Come on now. Not to be arrogant, but most people have to work like hell to get into here - marks, tests, life skills, IAP and FYOP, yet anyone can walk in off the street and simply share the same instituion?


----------



## medicineman (24 Jan 2006)

I sympathize with you a bit - I worked at the college for 3 years and have seen things change alot.  The fact that non-ROTP/UTPNCM students can enroll there has actually broadened the base of what the college can and in fact does teach and it gets it into the light of day so that the rest of the country's academic institutions and prospective students don't just see it as a "Baby Killer Factory".

I almost had to say something about the "elite military university" quote but was rushed in my last post.  In particular the "elite" part.  Luckily, the verbal safety went to S instead of A.  As I said, I worked there for a number of years and in fact had the pleasure of working for some of the "kids" not long after they graduated.  A word of advice - think it if you like, but if you act like that, your soldiers will follow you anywhere, but only out of idle curiosity.  Alot of young men and women have thought themselves as elite and really got the pillars knocked out from under them when they got out in the real world.  The people I'm alluding to didn't fall into that category.

Good luck and have fun the rest of your time there.

MM


----------



## 3rd Herd (24 Jan 2006)

loyalist said:
			
		

> I must say - I've heard some good arguments, and the description of how these regs work has definately given me a new perspective. My sticking point is really the doublethink employed by the people in charge: Killing RMC tradtions (as to make RMC more integrated with the CF), yet taking some of the 'military' out of it - further alienating it from the rest of the CF. I'm all in favour of reservists doing courses here - in fact, I think they shoudl wear their uniforms, too. If they're really trying to integrate the College, that's certainly a contribution. Students on loan from other universities? Sounds awesome. This is the acedemic side of RMC and a way to promote the College as a leading acedemic instituion. But anyone off the street? Just because space is availble, when there are people being refused space in the ROTP program? Come on now. Not to be arrogant, but most people have to work like hell to get into here - marks, tests, life skills, IAP and FYOP, yet anyone can walk in off the street and simply share the same instituion?



Let me see Loyalist where shall I start? At the post secondary level contractions such as 'I've' and 'I'm' are defiantly frowned upon in written work. Next at the post secondary level you are expected to be able to spell; academic not acedemic, should  not shoudl, double think not doublethink.The grade fours I teach are at least intelligent enough to use a spell checker or since I understand you recently had a power outage a dictionary. I will not even start to get into your comma usage, sentence fragments and abbreviation usage. So far your post has me wondering how you got in considering the aforementioned errors on your part. "killing RMC( Royal Military College you mean) tradition(yes I corrected your spelling again) as to make RMC(now that I have introduced the abbreviation earlier it can be used here)more intergrated with the CF. What are you talking about? Tradition is a corner stone of the military and in particular the Canadian Armed Forces. You know I could sit here all night and finish correcting your butchering of the Queen's english but I think I have made my point. To some that have responded they seem to agree that you will mature as most officer cadets are expected too. In your circumstance  that will not be necessary since you are obviously not up to academic scratch you shall be washed out shortly. Oh and please do not come walking in off the street to my civilian university, students here are well written.
Choo
just another x grunt


----------



## loyalist (25 Jan 2006)

> double think not doublethink



My apologies for my quick typing. While we're being nasty, though, "doublethink" is term from 1984. Perhaps during the course of the studies you had to get your university degree, you should have gained enough knowledge of modern literature to recognize such a term.



> To some that have responded they seem to agree that you will mature as most officer cadets are expected too. In your circumstance  that will not be necessary since you are obviously not up to academic scratch you shall be washed out shortly.



Perhaps you, of all people, should take a class in logic and learn that it is poor method to take a quickly typed, informal web-forum entry and somehow relate that to poor academics. Perhaps a course in _maturity_ would do the trick as well. Getting personal on a web-forum is both childish and counter-porductive.

This is a web forum, and not an academic document, also typed on very worn keyboards during breaks between classes. Your need to attack my grammar, not my argument, somehow does not convey a calm and educated academic mindset which you have accused me of lacking. I'm hoping people worked hard to get into the ROTP program to become officers, not to go to RMC. It's just a school, like any other university. In the end, your scroll is the same as mine.




> I'm hoping people worked hard to get into the ROTP program to become officers, not to go to RMC. It's just a school, like any other university. In the end, your scroll is the same as mine.
> 
> People are refused ROTP not due to space, but because they lack the requirements to become an officer.
> 
> Oh by the way, life skills, marks, test etc....what do you think students in high school have to do to go to a normal uni? RMC is not that special guys...really.



Point taken, but, I suppose that this will have to be an agreement to disagree. RMC should be representing the CF, and using civilians to augment our varsity teams (referred to as _representative teams_ in French) is really betraying the point of having a varsity team in the first place.

This is not a tirade against the civilians at RMC or civilian university ROTP. This is simply a way to bring up points I have heard around the campus to discuss informally. In my opinion, RMC is more of an academic institution than anything else, and civilians do bring a new perspective to classes. However, I do also think that aside from exchanges with other universities, students attending here should have some affiliation with the CF whether reserves, ROTP, RETP or some other form.


----------



## 3rd Herd (25 Jan 2006)

Okay Loyalist have it your way.
First off if you had bothered to do some proper research of this site you will find several topic threads on the preferred method of communicating on this site. It is hard to follow your argument if every second word is misspelled. Not only in this post but by rough count in just about every post you made. Oh by the way that also includes your profile information. Next you keep offering your opinion which is either based on "I've said that I've heard  all kinds of stories " or,Still, I've heard  that they're" . Now as to your experience which according to your profile "is some time in the cadets" and a very recent entry into RMC. Yet you feel you have an enough practical and academic background to offer opinions. Most of us here base our opinions on either years of personal experience or years of academic success. And if we do not have that are resourcefull enough to find sources that will support our opinion. Now judging by your posts you have been counselled several times by your peers and you have refused to either take their advice or you offer a litany of excuses. I will not embarrass you further by cutting and pasting all of them in this reply. Suffice to say you have not seemed to have accomplished much in the way of anything. Am I being a little harsh on you? You are most certainly right there. As I find it very offensive in the ways you have managed to embarrass some of the RMC students I have come to know both in the real world and on this site. Given all of the aforementioned and having been a member of the Canadian Armed Forces , having being involved in the cadet movement for as many years as you are old I wonder if my tax dollars in your case are being properly used on a person "who isn't set to be an officer? Really" It is my sincerest hope that one of your more experienced peers fullfills your desire to give you "some drill training in your local parking lot."


----------



## loyalist (27 Jan 2006)

It appears that I've been misinterpreted. Opinions expressed in this thread have come from a variety of people - _including non-cadets._ I am by no means a ring-knocker. Civvie U people are no better or worse, NCMs will always be the backbone of the army, and senority/experience will always take precdence. Unfortunately, My opinion that RMC is a _military college_ and is fundamentally different in the way it should offer courses has, unfortunately, led to plainly personal attacks, a tracing of my posting history, and a consturction that I claim to be speaking for all of RMC and in a very arrogant manner. Some good points countering my argument have been made (as was the whole point of putting it up on a discussion board), however, even though I'm apparently "arrogant", ludicrously self-righteous attacks from an imagined intellectual pedestal have been made. In the future, I'd reccomend that those who feel the need to use the internet as a tool to troll do so through the "Private Message" option. For these reasons, I'm requesting this thread be closed before any more misunderstanding or animosity arises.

Thanks to all contributors.


----------



## Michael OLeary (27 Jan 2006)

Loyalist, I would suggest that you are caught by having a relatively narrow view based on limited expereince and what you have been told by a select group, all associated with a single training institution. I am sure you will be able to revisit this once you have gained wider experience with other parts of the CF, and your views may, in time, shift.

For now, this is going nowhere, and is locked.


----------

