Arbour Report - Recommendation #29: Future of Military Colleges

[TacticalTea]

I've weighed in before on the Sandhurst model, having passed out as a 'Non-Graduate'.

It works very well except that, should you wish to pursue a degree subsequently, you will likely not be successful in having the military support you through this endeavour. What this results in is a two tiered system where the graduates tend to do better career - wise because: education box ticked. Non-graduates can therefore find themselves somewhat ghettoized into non-command type staff and training roles after approximately the rank of Major. I should emphasize that the majority of graduates enter RMAS having paid for their degree out of their own pockets. Very few are sponsored for 'In Service' degrees at civilian universities.

Interestingly, I recently attended a 40th reunion of my RMAS intake (oh gawd, has it really been that long?) and very few of those I passed out with seem to have progressed beyond the rank of Colonel. On the other hand several Officers I know, who were graduates, retired as one, two, three, and even one four, star.

The lack of degree acheivement opportunities also has an impact on retention. For example, seeing the writing on the wall, one of the reasons that I decided to leave the British Army, after 8+ years, was to pursue a degree. I'm not up to speed on what they do these days in the UK, so this might have all changed by now.

Having said that, if the CAF adopted a Sandhurst approach I assume that it could leverage our existing ILP system to help support those who wish to progress their educational qualifications to gain a degree, in due course, during their careers.

Indeed, that is the issue I foresee with that system as well.

I believe it can be worked around, if found necessary, by ensuring that officers are supported to enroll in part-time continuous education. In essence, I nod to your last paragraph.

 

[SupersonicMax]

Indeed, that is the issue I foresee with that system as well.

I believe it can be worked around, if found necessary, by ensuring that officers are supported to enroll in part-time continuous education. In essence, I nod to your last paragraph.

The issue with continued education is that seldom are people given the time to actually complete courses. It is often done on their own time, at the expense of work-life balance, one of the current major dissatisfiers.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

The issue with continued education is that seldom are people given the time to actually complete courses. It is often done on their own time, at the expense of work-life balance, one of the current major dissatisfiers.

You mean like everyone else has to do??

 

[daftandbarmy]

You mean like everyone else has to do??

The whole of the Militia enters the chat

 

[TacticalTea]

The issue with continued education is that seldom are people given the time to actually complete courses. It is often done on their own time, at the expense of work-life balance, one of the current major dissatisfiers.

Indeed, that much is not lost on me.

I'm trying to think of / find out how this could be best managed.

 

[Blackadder1916]

I've weighed in before on the Sandhurst model, having passed out as a 'Non-Graduate'.

. . . What this results in is a two tiered system where the graduates tend to do better career - wise because: education box ticked. Non-graduates can therefore find themselves somewhat ghettoized into non-command type staff and training roles after approximately the rank of Major. . . .

Is it only graduation from university that is the leg up or is a "public school" education an important criteria?

Are too many Army officers privately educated?

The BBC has found almost half of the latest Army officer cadets went to private schools.

www.bbc.com

Are too many Army officers privately educated?​

Nearly half of the British Army's latest intake of officer cadets were privately educated, the BBC has found.

A Freedom of Information request has revealed 49% of those who entered the Royal Military Academy at Sandhurst in January came from fee-paying schools.

The Sutton Trust, which aims to improve social mobility, said those at the top of the armed forces were seven times more likely to go to private schools.

The Army said it was "increasing our outreach to those in state education".

I'm channeling ERC's reference in another thread about "non-U" and "U".

 

[daftandbarmy]

Is it only graduation from university that is the leg up or is a "public school" education an important criteria?

Good question...

I have no objective data to judge, of course, but the big educational hurdle for anyone in the UK are the 'A' Levels. You have to do well at those to even make it in to Sandhurst, I believe. Two A levels seems to be the average, three is unusual, and I impressed the hell out of them when I turned up with four 'A level equivalencies', which were the courses I managed to complete for first year credits at community college in BC before I came over. I got the impression that the UK's A level process is somewhat more arduous than first year community college in Canada though, so I felt something of a fraud

If you happen to have attended a posh 'public school' it can help a bit at the start, I think, because: boarding school life. But I saw Eton graduates treated the same as the rest of us when it came to being able to demonstrate high levels of competency in training/ leadership. For example, I recall one particular Officer Cadet heading for my regiment, whose father was a LGen and who had been to Weillington, got the boot half way through training.

Paradoxically, even though we tend to think of the British as really class conscious, at Sandhurst I certainly saw nothing like the favouritism I experienced when I went through Phase 2 & 3 Infantry at Gagetown before I attended RMAS.

Mil Coll vs. RESO/DEO, or Franco vs. Anglo Officer Cadets... if you were Mill Coll or Franco, you had a much better chance of passing even if you were garbage.

 

[SupersonicMax]

You mean like everyone else has to do??

Except it is not a criteria for everyone else to keep their job.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

To keep or to go higher?

 

[Grimey]

Drives me crazy to have some fairly specialist knowledge but somehow a random consultant with no relevant experience can write a report that gets taken with more weight than whatever recommendation I come up with.

A personal anecdote akin to that. After RIMPAC 2010 we had to change out the stbd cruise in PH. OPDEF followed by LOGREQ to Esquimalt for the spare 570KF and change out kit. We got challenged on the kit. F4 Eng or some such: “Can you use the USN’s change out kit. We’re sure they have one in Pearl.” Me: WT absolute F.

Lesson learned was that ashore engineering expertise can turn into ‘random consultants’ when they’ve been away from the practice too long.

 

[SupersonicMax]

To keep or to go higher?

To keep. Many people that joined under the CEOTP were threatened with not getting TOS if they didn’t complete their degree within 9 years.

 

[daftandbarmy]

A personal anecdote akin to that. After RIMPAC 2010 we had to change out the stbd cruise in PH. OPDEF followed by LOGREQ to Esquimalt for the spare 570KF and change out kit. We got challenged on the kit. F4 Eng or some such: “Can you use the USN’s change out kit. We’re sure they have one in Pearl.” Me: WT absolute F.

Lesson learned was that ashore engineering expertise can turn into ‘random consultants’ when they’ve been away from the practice too long.

"An expert is an ordinary fellow from another town." Mark Twain

 

[rmc_wannabe]

A personal anecdote akin to that. After RIMPAC 2010 we had to change out the stbd cruise in PH. OPDEF followed by LOGREQ to Esquimalt for the spare 570KF and change out kit. We got challenged on the kit. F4 Eng or some such: “Can you use the USN’s change out kit. We’re sure they have one in Pearl.” Me: WT absolute F.

Lesson learned was that ashore engineering expertise can turn into ‘random consultants’ when they’ve been away from the practice too long.

I feel I have lost a lot in translation, but, is this an exasperation akin to "We don't use the same parts!" ?

 

[Grimey]

I feel I have lost a lot in translation, but, is this an exasperation akin to "We don't use the same parts!" ?

It is. Also, It’s (or rather was) frustration with our betters who think we do who should know better.

 

[Good2Golf]

It is. Also, It’s (or rather was) frustration with our betters who think we do who should know better.

…and they’d also be the ones to quickly step back behind the curtain if you did use local, unapproved STE to Re&Re the power pack and things didn’t go 100% right.

 

[kev994]

To keep. Many people that joined under the CEOTP were threatened with not getting TOS if they didn’t complete their degree within 9 years.

What ever happened to that “on the bus/ off the bus” threat, I haven’t heard it in a few years. I do recall when BPSOs were pointing out to people failing RMC that you had ~9 years to get your degree but a ~7 year commitment wink wink

 

[TacticalTea]

Indeed, that much is not lost on me.

I'm trying to think of / find out how this could be best managed.

Going back on this topic;

A little bird tells me Staff College graduation does not even necessarily count as an MA anymore. You only receive your Master's if you attended the residential phase. As such, it shouldn't require a BA, and a single-year RMC program should provide a sufficient academic base upon which to erect this tower of knowledge.

Thus the only remaining hurdle is that MAs count for too many points in the assessment process for senior officers. The obvious solution is to simply... not.

Not count them as so valuable. It amounts to credentialism anyway.

In essence, there would be two paths; either you show up with a BA and go to RMC for a year, or show up with nothing, spend two years as an NCM, then go to RMC for a year. This would ensure candidates are at least somewhat older and hopefully more mature, as well as either more educated or more accustomed to the ways of the military.

The BA isn't a hindrance to obtaining the job if your Command team assesses that you're officer material, but giving an advantage to those holding BAs provides the CAF's officer cadre with an overall more scientific, liberal education-based thinking process.

I maintain, as stated elsewhere, that a degreed job need not be an officer job if it would never foreseeably hold command.

Tell me if I'm an ignorant fool and couldn't be more wrong; I'm all ears.

 

[McG]

A little bird tells me Staff College graduation does not even necessarily count as an MA anymore.

In never did. The masters is additional work on top of the staff college, and it was not necessary to complete staff college. I have not heard anything about it no longer being an option, but I have heard it is an option offered only to those who attend in person.

 

[dapaterson]

Correct. JCSP DL graduates in 2014 (I believe) were the last to have any real chance at a Master's.

 

[brihard]

Correct. JCSP DL graduates in 2014 (I believe) were the last to have any real chance at a Master's.

Don’t see why that has to be the case… Colleague of mine has an MA is War Studies from RMC completed entirely online. Granted she picked away at it over several years, but anyway, it was delivered entirely by distance. If JCSP DL doesn’t have a Master’s option is that purely a matter of the institution lacking the will to make it possible?