Posted on Aug 13, 2015
Military Officers don't need a degree? What say you?
147K
628
303
51
49
2
Military Officers Don’t Need College Degrees
Military recruiters and top brass like to repeat the refrain that the average member of the armed forces is better educated than the average American. It’s true. According to the Defense Department, nearly 94% of enlisted personnel have a high-school diploma, while only 60% of Americans do. About 83% of officers have a bachelor’s degree, in comparison with 30% of the general population.
These statistics, though, involve a bit of self-selection: Most officers have a bachelor’s degree because becoming an officer generally requires one, though this prerequisite appears increasingly anachronistic.
For one thing, the requirement of a college degree is simply a box for officer candidates to check. It doesn’t matter to the armed forces where you went to school, what you studied, or how well you did—short of a minimal GPA level of about 2.5 out of 4.0.
Scholarships provided by the Reserve Officer Training Corps and military academies such as West Point and Annapolis may have more stringent criteria, but in general anyone with a four-year degree who can pass the basic background checks and physical requirements of the military may apply for Officer Candidate School.
Instead of mandating that officers have college degrees, the military should expand alternative avenues to officership. A few exceptions to the degree mandate already exist: Warrant officers or limited-duty officers—typically highly trained specialists in technical fields like avionics or equipment maintenance—have worked their way to officership. Their service is akin to apprenticeship, where useful knowledge is gained through practical experience, not textbook theory. Why not offer the same deal to other recruits?
Historically, a college degree signaled superior intelligence, critical reasoning and writing skills, and dedication. A degree holder could be expected to form logical, coherent arguments and effectively communicate ideas. But a college degree in 2015 no longer signals—let alone guarantees—much of anything.
According to a 2014 Lumina-Gallup poll, “just 11% of business leaders strongly agree that higher education institutions in this country are graduating students with the skills and competencies that their business needs, and 17% strongly disagree.” In a Chronicle for Higher Education survey published in March 2013, employers said that applicants with degrees lacked decision-making and problem-solving abilities, written and oral communication skills, adaptability, and even the capacity to manage multiple priorities.
Even more than in civilian environments, those are skills needed for war. If a college degree no longer confers them, then why should the armed forces require it at all? Beyond the usual arguments about the prohibitive cost for many high-school graduates unable to take on debt, a college degree isn’t needed to be successful. Peter Thiel, an accomplished tech businessman, offers a fellowship of $100,000 for aspiring entrepreneurs who want to skip college and build businesses instead. Companies started as a result now employ 200 people and have generated $200 million in economic activity, according to the fellowship.
Some may argue that obtaining a bachelor’s degree shows responsibility or maturity. Yet how much responsibility does a typical single, childless 22-year-old college senior have? Has he demonstrated greater responsibility than a 22-year-old corporal at the end of his first tour of duty? Has he even demonstrated greater responsibility than a 19-year-old private first class after six months of service?
The only mark of distinction that a college degree still indicates, perhaps, is dedication. It usually requires four or more years to achieve, and following through to the end suggests long-term commitment to a goal. Yet clearly, college and putting off the working world is not for everyone. In 2013, the six-year graduation rate in the U.S. was only 59%, according to the National Center for Education Statistics.
Commitment is certainly important to success in the military, but the armed forces already have a way to measure and test it: a four-year enlistment. If aspiring officers must demonstrate commitment and responsibility, completing a four-year enlistment should suffice. If they must prove raw intellectual aptitude, high scores on the military’s own General Classification Test should be enough. If they must have general knowledge and the ability to think and write coherently, an exam akin to the State Department’s Foreign Service Officer Test would work.
A combination of these could easily form a new path to an officer’s commission—and providing an alternative to the bachelor’s degree would produce an even more qualified officer corps.
http://www.wsj.com/article_email/military-officers-dont-need-college-degrees [login to see] -lMyQjAxMTI1NzE3MzMxNTM3Wj
Military recruiters and top brass like to repeat the refrain that the average member of the armed forces is better educated than the average American. It’s true. According to the Defense Department, nearly 94% of enlisted personnel have a high-school diploma, while only 60% of Americans do. About 83% of officers have a bachelor’s degree, in comparison with 30% of the general population.
These statistics, though, involve a bit of self-selection: Most officers have a bachelor’s degree because becoming an officer generally requires one, though this prerequisite appears increasingly anachronistic.
For one thing, the requirement of a college degree is simply a box for officer candidates to check. It doesn’t matter to the armed forces where you went to school, what you studied, or how well you did—short of a minimal GPA level of about 2.5 out of 4.0.
Scholarships provided by the Reserve Officer Training Corps and military academies such as West Point and Annapolis may have more stringent criteria, but in general anyone with a four-year degree who can pass the basic background checks and physical requirements of the military may apply for Officer Candidate School.
Instead of mandating that officers have college degrees, the military should expand alternative avenues to officership. A few exceptions to the degree mandate already exist: Warrant officers or limited-duty officers—typically highly trained specialists in technical fields like avionics or equipment maintenance—have worked their way to officership. Their service is akin to apprenticeship, where useful knowledge is gained through practical experience, not textbook theory. Why not offer the same deal to other recruits?
Historically, a college degree signaled superior intelligence, critical reasoning and writing skills, and dedication. A degree holder could be expected to form logical, coherent arguments and effectively communicate ideas. But a college degree in 2015 no longer signals—let alone guarantees—much of anything.
According to a 2014 Lumina-Gallup poll, “just 11% of business leaders strongly agree that higher education institutions in this country are graduating students with the skills and competencies that their business needs, and 17% strongly disagree.” In a Chronicle for Higher Education survey published in March 2013, employers said that applicants with degrees lacked decision-making and problem-solving abilities, written and oral communication skills, adaptability, and even the capacity to manage multiple priorities.
Even more than in civilian environments, those are skills needed for war. If a college degree no longer confers them, then why should the armed forces require it at all? Beyond the usual arguments about the prohibitive cost for many high-school graduates unable to take on debt, a college degree isn’t needed to be successful. Peter Thiel, an accomplished tech businessman, offers a fellowship of $100,000 for aspiring entrepreneurs who want to skip college and build businesses instead. Companies started as a result now employ 200 people and have generated $200 million in economic activity, according to the fellowship.
Some may argue that obtaining a bachelor’s degree shows responsibility or maturity. Yet how much responsibility does a typical single, childless 22-year-old college senior have? Has he demonstrated greater responsibility than a 22-year-old corporal at the end of his first tour of duty? Has he even demonstrated greater responsibility than a 19-year-old private first class after six months of service?
The only mark of distinction that a college degree still indicates, perhaps, is dedication. It usually requires four or more years to achieve, and following through to the end suggests long-term commitment to a goal. Yet clearly, college and putting off the working world is not for everyone. In 2013, the six-year graduation rate in the U.S. was only 59%, according to the National Center for Education Statistics.
Commitment is certainly important to success in the military, but the armed forces already have a way to measure and test it: a four-year enlistment. If aspiring officers must demonstrate commitment and responsibility, completing a four-year enlistment should suffice. If they must prove raw intellectual aptitude, high scores on the military’s own General Classification Test should be enough. If they must have general knowledge and the ability to think and write coherently, an exam akin to the State Department’s Foreign Service Officer Test would work.
A combination of these could easily form a new path to an officer’s commission—and providing an alternative to the bachelor’s degree would produce an even more qualified officer corps.
http://www.wsj.com/article_email/military-officers-dont-need-college-degrees [login to see] -lMyQjAxMTI1NzE3MzMxNTM3Wj
Officers
Education
Rank
Bachelors Degree
Commission
Posted 9 y ago
Responses: 126
2
2
0
As one of those WO's I also have an MS, so I don't hold to that notion that a degree is not required for officers. I can't speak for all WO's, but most I know have a AA or something equivalent. As for the average 19 year old, or 22 year old that the author went after, versus the ROTC student the ROTC will learn through his course structure, and be developed to lead, will have to lead formations, classes, and other things during their time in school, far different from our average 19 year old PFC or 22 year old. Now, not only has this new officer learned something more advanced that they bring to the table, but they have shown they can learn and adapt. Does that mean every person with a degree can lead, we know this is not the case, every officer has to be molded. Some will be great, and some I am sorry to say will be given the "Atlas" rating.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
I retired last year, 35 years service, 13 enlisted and 22 as an Officer, NO degree. Commissioned through the Navy's Limited Duty Officer Program. A hot topic to be sure with many viewpoints. I DO NOT take away anything for someone who worked for their degree, a special salute to those that did it while on active duty. Having a degree is becoming much more important during the selection process and I had senior LDO Captains (O6) tell me that NOT having it cost me selection to O6. I am certainly biased by my situation, however, I can state that after serving 22 years as an Officer, I was as capable and in many cases more than those with degrees in what matters most, competence in my core expertise, mission execution, leadership abilities and the experience of having been an enlisted Sailor. My former father in law retired as a Navy Captain with 30 years, his Major? Botany !!!!! Certainly the other coursework and "college experience" added to his skills and abilities, however, I find it laughable that his degree helped in in any meaningful way as a Surface Warfare Officer. The Navy Chief Warrant Officer and Limited Duty Officer programs were always intended as an opportunity for the best of the best in the technical community to obtain a commission and use those technical skills as technical SME's and managers.
(2)
(0)
TSgt Joshua Copeland
There was once a Commander of Air Combat Command (all Fighter Aircraft assigned CONUS) who's major in college was Entomology. Lots of pilots have degrees in physically educations because it is easier to get a high GPA (one of the factors for getting picked up for a rated billet).
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
I don't agree with this. I believe Military Officers should have degrees. I'm not sure where their statistical data comes the truth is that more employers are requiring higher education even for jobs previously held by people with High School Diplomas. Have we not seen the dumbing down of America in the civilian sector through changes in school curriculum? Curriculum standards should not be lowered so that one size fits all. Our core courses of Math and Science need to be improved on. The idea that argument that some cannot afford a higher education and this should be a reason to lower the standards is ridiculous. The subculture of propping up those who cannot meet the standard in our population and the idea that everyone should get an award needs to end.
I know many of you out there are the same as me proud of the struggles you had to go through to achieve what you've earned. Our struggles make us who we are, build character and maturity.
Now having a BA or BS isn't a huge thing because the education requirements for employment are rising not decreasing.
http://www.careerbuilder.com/share/aboutus/pressreleasesdetail.aspx?sd=3%2F20%2F2014&id=pr813&ed=12%2F31%2F2014
I know many of you out there are the same as me proud of the struggles you had to go through to achieve what you've earned. Our struggles make us who we are, build character and maturity.
Now having a BA or BS isn't a huge thing because the education requirements for employment are rising not decreasing.
http://www.careerbuilder.com/share/aboutus/pressreleasesdetail.aspx?sd=3%2F20%2F2014&id=pr813&ed=12%2F31%2F2014
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
I think a college degree for officers really should be a requirement. It sets and example for the enlisted and encourages them to aspire to get an education themselves.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
There are other great ways to gain skills, we should add them to what we do, (if we don't do it already) not take away the degree requirement. I would actually like to see it increased to add a 2 year degree requirement for E9 and WO3, If we want to slim the force and maintain the best, we need to pick out the self motivators and driven people, I believe this would be one way to help. I understand college is not for everyone, but neither is leadership.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
So the point of this article was what to prove that the military is recruiting properly? That is all that it shows. Of COURSE Officers should have a degree. Of COURSE only the specialty MOS (DR, Lawyer etc) are going to practice in what their degree is), however it is nothing new. My very last LT before I left to come recruiting had a degree in Political Science I believe, but he was a Branch Detailed Infantry Officer for a Year and then he was going to is Branch of AG. He was smart as a whip and very good to work with because he wanted to learn. If you take the requirement of the degree from those Officers and just throw the door open to some of the Privates that I have had to deal with over the years....mercy. That is all I can say. It is not that their degree is something that makes them leaders (I believe I read that in another post), it is just something that shows that they have put that time in, in advance. It shows that they were willing to get a little understanding that they were going to give a LOT.
Then the article goes on to talk about the fact that the military has more diploma'd people. Umm YEAH, because that is what is required. It is not rocket science it is just that we want people that can figure a LITTLE bit out. You do not have to be the smartest, but your GT DOES have to be reasonable.
BLUF - YES Officers need to continue getting 4yr degrees to stand out there. They naturally have to be taught the REAL Army stuff once they get to the line. However that is because this is not taught in school That is what crusty. old line dogs are for. People that write stuff in the Wall Street Journal should preface their articles with "I am just going to try and piss some people off, I am not saying that this is the way that I think it should be, BUT..."
Then the article goes on to talk about the fact that the military has more diploma'd people. Umm YEAH, because that is what is required. It is not rocket science it is just that we want people that can figure a LITTLE bit out. You do not have to be the smartest, but your GT DOES have to be reasonable.
BLUF - YES Officers need to continue getting 4yr degrees to stand out there. They naturally have to be taught the REAL Army stuff once they get to the line. However that is because this is not taught in school That is what crusty. old line dogs are for. People that write stuff in the Wall Street Journal should preface their articles with "I am just going to try and piss some people off, I am not saying that this is the way that I think it should be, BUT..."
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
I can see what the thought process is -- "We have sophisticated programs and systems and a degree in Liberal Arts won't help." I agree there are a lot of applications that won't particularly require a college degree. I think private enterprise has heard that and have started tailoring their new schools are creating curriculum that respond to the need. For instance, Drone operators schools are popping up like mushrooms after rains -- because they've correctly detected a need not being met by traditional colleges and universities (except for U. N. Dakota). We know the USAF cannot keep drone operators, so clearly this might be time for a re-visit.
Having said that, you also need to understand that there are some things learned through the University process that can't be replicated. Those four (or more) years in an academic setting are valuable in developing the next generation of leaders and we need those Liberal Arts guys because we always have plenty of "straight ahead warriors."
I think the real question is "Hey, how come I don't get paid as much as that Captain I work with? -- we do the same job." Well, this is a concern, but the better answer is to create a more equitable pay system, like the old "Technical" ranks for people who were technicians. I can't forecast where this will be going as we automate our forces. I think that will simply clarify over time in accordance with the dictates of the technology we chase.
Stay in school.
Having said that, you also need to understand that there are some things learned through the University process that can't be replicated. Those four (or more) years in an academic setting are valuable in developing the next generation of leaders and we need those Liberal Arts guys because we always have plenty of "straight ahead warriors."
I think the real question is "Hey, how come I don't get paid as much as that Captain I work with? -- we do the same job." Well, this is a concern, but the better answer is to create a more equitable pay system, like the old "Technical" ranks for people who were technicians. I can't forecast where this will be going as we automate our forces. I think that will simply clarify over time in accordance with the dictates of the technology we chase.
Stay in school.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
SFC A.M. Drake I think that requiring a degree to be an officer is elitist. I think that those who have proven their leadership should be moved into the officer corps. I do not think having a degree translates to having leadership skills. There are of course exceptions. The Naval Academy, The Air Force Academy, The United States Military Academy, Virginia Military Institute, The Citadel, and schools that specifically are designed for producing military leaders are the obvious exceptions. Beyond that, I think that working your way up to officer status would be a better method of selecting leaders.
This is a universal problem. Qualified and deserving candidates are overlooked for a job position because they cannot show the sheepskin that proves they are qualified. When I was in the Navy, I served with great officers, and not so great officers. The problem with young officers is that they have authority, with no experience. That is across the board. No school, even a military school can prepare an officer candidate for what they will face when the bullets start coming down range. No simulation can prepare a person for seeing the man next to them torn open by a enemy fire. No amount of drills can prepare someone for a ship being ripped open by a missile. The drills can give them the training to respond, but until they are under live conditions, no person knows how they will respond. Candidates need to be thoroughly vetted. Take an enlisted person E-6, years of experience, with a track record for making good decisions, and several forward deployments. That person may be better qualified to lead than a person who just graduated from college. Everything should be on a case by case basis, but I think that the military as a whole should consider promoting enlisted who can show they are worthy to officers.
Now when it comes to those graduating the academies, I think that they should continue receiving their commissions, but I think that they should have to do two years after graduation as a cadet in the field. By that I mean upon graduation, let them go to their first duty station, but instead of throwing them into a leadership position put them in a mentor ship position where they work as an aid to a mid ranking officer. That way they are close enough to the bottom to see how things happen, but close enough to the top to see how the decisions of leaders effect the unit as a whole.
LTC Stephen F. SGT (Join to see) SSG James J. Palmer IV aka "JP4" GySgt Wayne A. Ekblad
This is a universal problem. Qualified and deserving candidates are overlooked for a job position because they cannot show the sheepskin that proves they are qualified. When I was in the Navy, I served with great officers, and not so great officers. The problem with young officers is that they have authority, with no experience. That is across the board. No school, even a military school can prepare an officer candidate for what they will face when the bullets start coming down range. No simulation can prepare a person for seeing the man next to them torn open by a enemy fire. No amount of drills can prepare someone for a ship being ripped open by a missile. The drills can give them the training to respond, but until they are under live conditions, no person knows how they will respond. Candidates need to be thoroughly vetted. Take an enlisted person E-6, years of experience, with a track record for making good decisions, and several forward deployments. That person may be better qualified to lead than a person who just graduated from college. Everything should be on a case by case basis, but I think that the military as a whole should consider promoting enlisted who can show they are worthy to officers.
Now when it comes to those graduating the academies, I think that they should continue receiving their commissions, but I think that they should have to do two years after graduation as a cadet in the field. By that I mean upon graduation, let them go to their first duty station, but instead of throwing them into a leadership position put them in a mentor ship position where they work as an aid to a mid ranking officer. That way they are close enough to the bottom to see how things happen, but close enough to the top to see how the decisions of leaders effect the unit as a whole.
LTC Stephen F. SGT (Join to see) SSG James J. Palmer IV aka "JP4" GySgt Wayne A. Ekblad
(2)
(0)
MAJ Ronnie Reams
That is cool, my Dad was a Naval Aviator, Line Officer. He was passed over 3 times for Captain in 1972 because the Navy did not want a Captain with a HS education. His only college was early in 1942 when the Navy made him a 2d Class and sent him to some courses at Randolph Macon and U of GA before he went to NAS Pensacola.
(1)
(0)
PO2 Peter Klein
Other than specific skills such as law and medicine, a degree shows an employer that the holder of the degree has the drive, determination and stick-to-it-ness to finish something they start and goal is not immediate.
(1)
(0)
Capt (Join to see)
If you're a really good leader and you don't want to get a degree you can always promote on the enlisted side. Chiefs and sergeant majors get a lot of say when it comes to organizational issues.
(1)
(0)
2
2
0
2
2
0
I don't think the degree itself is the requirement, but more so the drive needed to complete a degree and pursue the goal. I think the hoops you need to jump through to earn a commission, whether through the academies, ROTC or through OCS, requires a focus and drive. It also requires a certain level of writing ability, networking outside your organization as well as solving the various issues that always crop up with the paperwork instead of throwing up your hands and simply saying its S1's fault.
I will say without a doubt the expectations placed on officers is far greater than that placed on NCOs, even senior NCOs. As a SFC I didn't think there was going to be much difference between my rank and that of a commissioned officer, and for the LT ranks I was mostly correct. Once you get promoted to CPT and beyond though, the scope of your responsibilities changes greatly and an even greater change is the expectation of you from your seniors, subordinates and peers.
If as a former NCO I spent my time executing instead of planning then the whole organization suffers from a lack of a cohesive long term plan and it just reacts to requirements and fills in training time without a planned end state.
I will say without a doubt the expectations placed on officers is far greater than that placed on NCOs, even senior NCOs. As a SFC I didn't think there was going to be much difference between my rank and that of a commissioned officer, and for the LT ranks I was mostly correct. Once you get promoted to CPT and beyond though, the scope of your responsibilities changes greatly and an even greater change is the expectation of you from your seniors, subordinates and peers.
If as a former NCO I spent my time executing instead of planning then the whole organization suffers from a lack of a cohesive long term plan and it just reacts to requirements and fills in training time without a planned end state.
(2)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google