As for the idea of a military education here are a few of my thoughts on what should be in the curriculum for Officer Candidates in the Army (The Navy and the Air Force will have different requirements due to the fundamental nature of what these officers do).
1. Leadership: Courses in Leadership should go beyond the basic "Principles of Leadership" that are constantly expounded on (these core values are kind of no brainers anyways). Courses in the leadership field should also be based on Psychological frameworks (The physiology and behaviour of soldiers in battle, the mental effects of military operations, the effects of battlefield stimuli upon a leaders troops; ie PTSD) Sociological frameworks (Small unit cohesion and bonding, vertical and horizontal relationships of soldiers within the group, the military culture in general) and Management frameworks (Adminstration of your units and soldiers, etc)
2. Introduction to Tactics and Operations: This group of courses should serve as an introduction to the bread and butter of a Professional Officer's career, winning battles for victory in wars with the endstate of preparing an Cadet mentally to successfully approach his technical training on commanding the basic group of his chosen trade (Ie: Platoon commanders course, etc). Rather then begin with bombarding Officer Cadets with a host of technical terms and formulaic schema (which I think are wrong anyways, but that's another topic for debate), students of all branches of the Army will be first taught the doctrine of our Land Forces and be given basic conceptual lessons on a "two level up" principle. Students will start learning about battalion level operations and tactics at a conceptual level. Once they begin to see the combined arms approach that battalion commanders must make, then more complicated methods can be taught as the lesson progresses down to the platoon and how it fights within the commanders intent.
3. Military History: This is essential to know who we are; the profession of arms is built upon the edifice of all that has come before us. However, it should be remembered that we are trying to produce Professional Military Officers here, not Military Historians. Simply teaching Cadets who, whats, and wheres of major historical conflict is useless. The effort should be made at teaching the Cadets to understand the thought processes that were involved in victory and defeat.
The main form of teaching this will be through the use of historic case studies; during the course the Cadets will constantly be challenged to evaluate the situation faced by historic commanders and ask themselves "what options does he have", "what are the limitations and contingencies that this commander face", and "why did he make the decision he made". I remember PBI explaining how he and his coursemates in Quantico were reading Thucydides; they were not reading it to learn that Athens declared war on Syracuse on Sicily or that Nicias was the commander of the Athenian contingent, but rather to understand, through a historical casestudy, the idea of a hegemonic power (Athens) launching a questionable offensive in another theater in order to gain a strategic advantage against its Spartan enemy. Thucydides Peloponnesian War is chalk full of useful lessons like this, that is why we still read it after 2,500 years. It is this kind of approach that allows to truly apply the empirical lessons of history and how to apply them to the military profession.
4. Military Law: Our unique military society is in part defined by our unique codes of discipline and administration that we live under. Professional Officers must understand these laws and regulations and how they serve both the Army and the society it protects. Lessons should look at the history and evolution of military law and its effect on the military culture as a whole.
5. Government and Society: Professional military officers must understand that their basic obligation as a professional is to master competence of the management of violence on behalf of the state. With that in mind, the obligations of an Officer towards the state and the population he serves must be reinforced. Topics such as civics, civil-military relations, The DND and NDHQ, and the role of the Military in Canada should be included to ensure that the Cadet has a clear picture of the profession he is undertaking.
6. Languages: French is required of our Officers, so naturally it could be included here. But this does not eliminate the opportunity for other Languages to be taught. Learning a variety of different languages will allow the Officer Corps as a whole to get a clearer "window" into the workings of other cultures. This is an essential ability when aimed towards a form of professional development, as a multi-fluent Officer Corps can understand the cultural, military, and contemporary texts that help to drive and define the actions taken by both our potential allies and our enemies.
7. Other Topics: It is important to offer other topics, potentially the ability to minor in, for Cadets to study, as the interdisciplinary nature of the Military Science or Art draws from all aspects of human society. As an example, Dr. Jonathan Shay has written two excellent books on the psychological effects of soldiers through a combination of his work with Vietnam Veterans suffering from PTSD and by using material from the Classical Greek epics of the Iliad and the Odyssey (They are Achilles in Vietnam and Odysseus in America; I highly recommend them both to any soldier). Obviously, a Cadet can pursue interests in History, Literature, Economics, etc, etc to broaden his horizons.
All these fit well under the conventional undergraduate career, however, they are specially directed towards building a professional military officer. Many of these topics will be covered under a PO check withing courses throughout the Phase Training of Military Officers, but I think it is vital to teach them in a rigorous academic setting in order to allow Cadets to contemplate on what they are learning and to provide research and written work to further develop their understanding of the issues. We must teach our Officers on how to think about all the important issues that they will deal with, not simply provide them with a "Technical Course" approach of filling the toilet with a gamut of information, checking the box once they pass a simple test, and flushing it down the drain for the next load of information; how does this set up our officers to critically think and understand issues that are related to the military profession?
Many of these courses will involve work outside of the conventional classroom setting using TEWT's, officer "tours", and visiting other places relevent to the course of study. Of course, these courses apply mainly to Officers who will be involved in the Combat Arms and the Combat Support Branches; those in more technical branches, after being given the basic fundamentals of what their Commission requires, can be transferred into a relevent specialist program (perhaps at a civilian university if required). As well, there should be a structure in place to give those who come into the program with a undergraduate degree an accelerated start, so as utilize the education they already have worked towards.
