The utility of three military colleges, funded undergrad degrees; Officer trg & the need for a degre

[Cui]

Fair enough. I simply put much less faith into a degree that you i guess. I know too many people with degrees who have the analytical/critical skills that would only rival a 5-year old.

Thanks for you perspective.

Despite what one might see on television and in movies, not all universities are a cesspool of alcohol and sex. A majority of us university students are very hard working and diligent in our studies.

Like everything else, the public tend to associate groups of people with the few minorities that have distinguished themselves by less than glamorous means. 

 

[Towards_the_gap]

I disagree, the Inf O with an English degree still has much more developed analytical/critical thinking skills then without the degree, having been a PD, that is one of the most aspects of the job.  The PM course would give you to tools and the processes/best practices to be more effective in the job but is not structured to give one critical thinking skills.  A mbr with a PM course without the psot secondary background could efficiently execute the mechanics of project management but would not be able to apply the same level of mental rigor that someone with a degree could.

If degrees are so important than how is it the British Army has survived so long NOT requiring degrees of it's officer applicants?

 

[Cui]

This whole thread reminds me of these comics:

http://terminallance.com/2010/06/25/terminal-lance-46-educated-leadership/

http://pvtmurphy.com/strips/full/111-Quick-mind.jpg

 

[aesop081]

Despite what one might see on television and in movies,

Despite what you might think, i am not basing my opinion on what i have seen on TV and in movies.

 

[ballz]

I disagree, the Inf O with an English degree still has much more developed analytical/critical thinking skills then without the degree, having been a PD, that is one of the most aspects of the job.  The PM course would give you to tools and the processes/best practices to be more effective in the job but is not structured to give one critical thinking skills.  A mbr with a PM course without the psot secondary background could efficiently execute the mechanics of project management but would not be able to apply the same level of mental rigor that someone with a degree could.

Those are two huge, wide-sweeping blanket statements. The amount of weight you put in a university degree is frightening.

I'm done my degree in 11 days, and four years later the product coming out of my graduating class is pretty much the same as they were when they came in, just more in debt and for the most part more mature after ageing 4-5 years. There are enough threads talking about the standards and process of post-secondary education that show it's lost it's knack for forcing people to think harder. There is little to no "critical analysis" required to obtain a Bachelor's degree any more. For four years just show up for class, go home and memorize the examples and definitions, and then regurgitate it. As long as you keep paying tuition, you will get the degree. My grade 12 math class was harder than any course I've done in university, including "higher level" mathematics courses.

I have said this before about the instructors I've had so far in the CF, most of whom did not have a degree, and at least one only had grade 10. They were way sharper and more able to "critically analyse" something than any of my university peers or profs. The reason? Probably because they made it to where they were based on merit, not on credentialism. I would hire any of them as a manager before 98% of the people in my business class.

A majority of us university students are very hard working and diligent in our studies.

Debatable, depends mostly on their program. In my experience, most people really just remain hard-working "enough," but they are under the impression that they are near their limit because they haven't actually experienced any real hardship or been pushed near their limit before. This is why if you ask almost any student, they think they are in the hardest and most time-consuming program, doing the hardest classes, with the most assignments, and the worst profs. Most of them still manage to drink two nights a week, so it's not that time-consuming.

 

[Drag]

If degrees are so important than how is it the British Army has survived so long NOT requiring degrees of it's officer applicants?

I am by no means an expert on the British Army and most of my knowledge comes from a crse I did with a few Royal Sigs officers and discussions with them.  However, I was under the impression that 80-90% of pers attending Sandhurst do have degrees (comparable to the CF when you take into account CFR, OCTP, COTP).  As well, I would be curious how far one can advance in the British Army without a degree, since the graduates of their Tech Staff College (senior Capts) get Masters Degrees.

As I said before, jobs at the tactical level, a degree is not required however once you more from the tactical level they become essential.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

I am by no means an expert on the British Army and most of my knowledge comes from a crse I did with a few Royal Sigs officers and discussions with them.  However, I was under the impression that 80-90% of pers attending Sandhurst do have degrees (comparable to the CF when you take into account CFR, OCTP, COTP).  As well, I would be curious how far one can advance in the British Army without a degree, since the graduates of their Tech Staff College (senior Capts) get Masters Degrees.

As I said before, jobs at the tactical level, a degree is not required however once you more from the tactical level they become essential.

I won't get into a long, winding discussion on the merits\ touchstones\ etc for, or against.

No they do not. You're opinion only.

What I will say is D3, you're rather full of yourself as far as the capabilities of others that haven't reached your exalted level.

History is rife with 'book learners and degree holders' that were thrust into minor stress situations and balled it up completely because the parameters of that situation matched nothing that their flowcharts, project management models and professor's hypotheticals matched.

Military situations have also been turned by that simple farm boy using god given logic, guts and determination.

Suck back and reload a bit. Four years of University doesn't make you some sort of mental whiz.

I dealt with the highest level DFAIT person in Afghanistan, on a regular basis, where she wouldn't even speak to a ringknocker. Guess what, got more accomplished than the uni types did. No degree.

We're not all stupid for not attending your alma mater, or it's equivalent.

 

[Drag]

I'm done my degree in 11 days, and four years later the product coming out of my graduating class is pretty much the same as they were when they came in, just more in debt and for the most part more mature after ageing 4-5 years. There are enough threads talking about the standards and process of post-secondary education that show it's lost it's knack for forcing people to think harder. There is little to no "critical analysis" required to obtain a Bachelor's degree any more. For four years just show up for class, go home and memorize the examples and definitions, and then regurgitate it. As long as you keep paying tuition, you will get the degree. My grade 12 math class was harder than any course I've done in university, including "higher level" mathematics courses.

I have said this before about the instructors I've had so far in the CF, most of whom did not have a degree, and at least one only had grade 10. They were way sharper and more able to "critically analyse" something than any of my university peers or profs. The reason? Probably because they made it to where they were based on merit, not on credentialism. I would hire any of them as a manager before 98% of the people in my business class.

Debatable, depends mostly on their program. In my experience, most people really just remain hard-working "enough," but they are under the impression that they are near their limit because they haven't actually experienced any real hardship or been pushed near their limit before. This is why if you ask almost any student, they think they are in the hardest and most time-consuming program, doing the hardest classes, with the most assignments, and the worst profs. Most of them still manage to drink two nights a week, so it's not that time-consuming.

I would wait until I got some actual TI and actual experience in the CF before making some of the statements you've made as you have not had the chance of actually working with Sr NCOs long enough to know what skill sets you can expect an average Sgt/WO/MWO to have.  I am not trying to take anything away from your phase training instructors who are all extremely competent professionals at what they do. 

However, asking them run a long term business plan for a base (a jr Fin O Capt's job) is beyond their skill sets and expertise, seeing your profile however your classmates would be better suited for it.  Likewise, asking someone who has not done post secondary education to produce a staff paper for the Bde/Base/Wing Comd on a complex issue will not give you the same quality of work that someone with a post secondary education would produce.  Going to university you have gained skill sets that you may now take for granted but I am sure you will realize their importance as you actually start your career in the CF.

 

[Disenchantedsailor]

Here's my take as one of the non-degreed officers.  The majority of officers in the CF outside those with specific engineering requirements are holders of liberal arts degrees of one form or another. All this simply means is they are able to learn things. Not prepare them to be officers burdened with the responsibility of command, in fact I would submit that only experience and formal military training can prepare an officer to shoulder that burden.

Where a degree comes in handy is in the hallowed halls of the department (separate from the CF) where things of that nature seem to matter. On the CF side of the house we train our strategic leaders in military studies in Toronto (although arguably could be combined into one facility) where the officer has the option to turn it into a masters of war studies if they choose.  More operationally focussed to lead the institution than say an MBA. (although great for LOG Offrs)

But to make a blanket statement than an English major possesses critical analysis skills simply because they have a degree is insulting to those of us who manage to create operational and strategic staff work without a degree.  In fact not even tactical staff work is created in a bubble but more a product of many combat multipliers.

 

[blacktriangle]

I don't think the tax payer should be footing the bill for a degree as a part of Officer training. I don't think we need RMC either. Logical places to make cuts, IMO.

As for needing a degree...yes and no. I think some degrees are worthwhile, in some occupations.

I don't have a completed degree but I could hit the ground running today and be a competent officer with the proper training and mentoring.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Let me try make this a little clearer.


D3, your arse is sucking wind.

Do NOT try equate a degree to intelligence. You'll lose every time.

 

[aesop081]

I would wait until I got some actual TI

I have plenty so i hope it is OK if i comment further.

Likewise, asking someone who has not done post secondary education to produce a staff paper for the Bde/Base/Wing Comd on a complex issue will not give you the same quality of work that someone with a post secondary education would produce.

I have had many commissioned supervisors who could not compose a comprehensible email. My own work over the last few months, as a lowly WO, has produced documents that have gone at those levels and above. I wonder how i managed.

There are benefits to having a university education. I simply contend that the blanket system we currently use is unnecessary.

 

[Drag]

Let me try make this a little clearer.


D3, your arse is sucking wind.

Do NOT try equate a degree to intelligence. You'll lose every time.

I never said that having a degree is an indicator of superior intelligence (some of the most intelligent people I know have a high school education or less), having a degree, like any sort of other training, gives you certain skill sets which are much more difficult (even with natural aptitude) to develop without a post secondary education.  And those skill sets need to be developed for officers to be able to effectively operate beyond the tactical level. 

 

[aesop081]

.  And those skill sets need to be developed for officers to be able to effectively operate beyond the tactical level.

So what you are saying is that one cannot develop those skills in between the time they join and the time where they are placed in one of those positions ? They cannot do it in any other way than attending university and obtaining an undergraduate degree ?

Quite a few officers who work those levels who do not have degrees. I'm sure they developed the necessary skills somewhere. Then the CF gave them the requisite training.

One does not go from RMC straight to being a project manager in Ottawa.

And those skill sets need to be developed for officers to be able to effectively operate beyond the tactical level.

I personally know several "degree-less" NCMs who work at those levels/jobs. I'm quite sure they operate effectively.

 

[quadrapiper]

I never said that having a degree is an indicator of superior intelligence (some of the most intelligent people I know have a high school education or less), having a degree, like any sort of other training, gives you certain skill sets which are much more difficult (even with natural aptitude) to develop without a post secondary education.  And those skill sets need to be developed for officers to be able to effectively operate beyond the tactical level.

Let's say, for the sake of argument, that there's some benefit to certain of the skills sometimes associated with getting a bachelor's.

Is there a cheaper, more efficient way for the CF to equip new officers with those skills, than running them through a degree program? Without a doubt.

Perhaps a post-St Jean course, run at Kingston, for the initial "stuff," and an expansion of the OPME program, leading into whatever's on offer in Toronto?

D3 - what "above the tactical level" interactions are you talking about? "Me-wall" competitions with the Civil Service?

 

[ballz]

I would wait until I got some actual TI and actual experience in the CF before making some of the statements you've made as you have not had the chance of actually working with Sr NCOs long enough to know what skill sets you can expect an average Sgt/WO/MWO to have.  I am not trying to take anything away from your phase training instructors who are all extremely competent professionals at what they do. 

However, asking them run a long term business plan for a base (a jr Fin O Capt's job) is beyond their skill sets and expertise, seeing your profile however your classmates would be better suited for it.  Likewise, asking someone who has not done post secondary education to produce a staff paper for the Bde/Base/Wing Comd on a complex issue will not give you the same quality of work that someone with a post secondary education would produce.  Going to university you have gained skill sets that you may now take for granted but I am sure you will realize their importance as you actually start your career in the CF.

You're telling me to wait until I have TI before making that statement, but you are judging my entire graduating business class not having met any of them, yet I've known them for 4 years. That's a bit counter-intuitive don't you think?

My classmates would not be better suited to run a long term business plan for a base. Some of them haven't even learned the difference between profit and revenue yet, and I don't think they will in the next 11 days. I specified that I was talking about the instructors I have had for a reason, because I was talking about them, not "an average SNCO" (I have no idea whether they were below or above average, as you mentioned, not enough TI). I was comparing two groups of people that I actually have experience dealing with.

I wouldn't hire some of my peers to run for coffee, I would hire all my past instructors to do business/management type things in various industries because they have proven based on merit that they are competent leaders and can be trusted to get the job done. It wouldn't matter whether it was the combat arms, or if I owned an autobody shop, a kitchen, or a newspaper. The specifics are rather irrelevant, the business students have no experience/knowledge of any of those things either, and they sure didn't learn how to be leaders or managers from their 4 years at MUN, nor any "managerial skills." Some of them learned some accounting (like I said, there are still some that don't know the difference between profit and revenue), about half of them failed finance and most of them just managed to crawl across the finish line.

Going to university you have gained skill sets that you may now take for granted but I am sure you will realize their importance as you actually start your career in the CF.

I can only hope that's true. The profs that know me well enough and have had these discussions with me have even admitted that four years doing a business degree was a complete waste of my time, even the one that tried to argue I am a more "enlightened mind" now. I used logic/problem solving skills to solve anything they've thrown at me, even the "theory" stuff that you're apparently not supposed to be able to know without studying it, but they never actually challenged that and enhanced it. It's a long-winded detour to get into, but I've taken it before.

I'll be the first to admit, I certainly wasn't ready to be an officer in the CF when I was 18, I wasn't even close to mature enough (some will argue I'm still not, and hey, I haven't made it through Phase training yet so they might be right ), but there were much more productive things the CF could have had me doing for 4 years. Even if they got rid of the degree requirement and just said "you have to be 23 to join as an officer" I probably would have spent four years marking time as a civilian and gained more valuable experiences than I did at university, such as travelling, real work experience (I would have most likely done a trade or something) with real people and real bosses, etc.

 

[Drag]

So what you are saying is that one cannot develop those skills in between the time they join and the time where they are placed in one of those positions ? They cannot do it in any other way than attending university and obtaining an undergraduate degree ?

Quite a few officers who work those levels who do not have degrees. I'm sure they developed the necessary skills somewhere. Then the CF gave them the requisite training.

One does not go from RMC straight to being a project manager in Ottawa.

Are there alternative ways to develop those skill sets, sure there are. It is the old argument of whether to load the training up front or deliver it "just in time."  Could you hold off post secondary education until the mbr needs it (Sr Capt, Jr Maj)?  You could but it would be much less cost effective to pay the mbr as a Capt/Maj to get a degree or equivalent training than as an ROTP OCdt  or expect them to apply with degrees (DEOs).  For the CF to establish a military specific training separate from the existing university/MilCol stem would be a waste of limited resources imo.  Wrt civilian institutions, the respective provincial governments already foot 50-80% of the tuition bill through subsidies to the universities.

 

[McG]

I am by no means an expert on the British Army and most of my knowledge comes from a crse I did with a few Royal Sigs officers and discussions with them.  However, I was under the impression that 80-90% of pers attending Sandhurst do have degrees (comparable to the CF when you take into account CFR, OCTP, COTP).  As well, I would be curious how far one can advance in the British Army without a degree, since the graduates of their Tech Staff College (senior Capts) get Masters Degrees.

The UK educational system is also quite different.  In North America, a master's degree is a post graduate degree requiring enrollees to have first attained a bachelor's degree.  In thee UK, both bachelor's degrees and Master's degrees exist as distinct undergraduate programmes.

So what you are saying is that one cannot develop those skills in between the time they join and the time where they are placed in one of those positions ?

Next to all the other required training & education, where would it fit in if it was done later? Would we give all Captains 3-4 years on ATL to get an undergraduate degree?

Perhaps we've come to a point where there is no requirement for RMC to have undergraduate programs.  All ROTP could be done through civie U's, without the overhead of the campus, and RMC could focus on post-grad, military related programs. 

I see two other options.  We could do away with ROTP and only hire DEOs. 

Alternately, as the "owner" of RMC, we could introduce more control over the programmes in order to deliver a better product along tighter timelines.  There are legitimate complaints that not all degrees are equal, that individuals can slide through without attaining the critical thinking skills necessary, and that undergraduate education standards are slipping across the country.  Why not use RMC to deliver a professional degree that addresses these concerns in a three year programme?  Currently, BMASc is offered exclusively as a distance learn programme - it should be the primary degree for any ROTP student not required by occupation to take specific technical degree (eg. BEng). 

 

[Drag]

I have plenty so i hope it is OK if i comment further.


I have had many commissioned supervisors who could not compose a comprehensible email. My own work over the last few months, as a lowly WO, has produced documents that have gone at those levels and above. I wonder how i managed.

There are benefits to having a university education. I simply contend that the blanket system we currently use is unnecessary.

I've seen examples of both (offrs that could not write coherent minutes of a meeting) as well I know an ex CWO who is a better writer in both official languages then most Capts and Majs, however, generally my experience has been that mbrs with degrees produce better staff work.

 

[aesop081]

Would we give all Captains 3-4 years on ATL to get an undergraduate degree?

Quite clearly, i would not as i don't believe that an undergraduate degree is a requirement for all officers.

We already manage to put Captains on ATL for year-long courses required for various technical and project jobs, so the career framework to do ATL education already exists.