Should basic training be required for all officers (ROTC, OCS, etc)

They should not experience it, just to say they've experienced it, especially if they know they are "only visiting" the world of an enlisted Soldier....could easily lend to the idea of enlisted Soldier feeling patronized. An officer will not have the same struggles as an enlisted Soldier, they just wont, we shelter (for lack of a better term) many of out young officers to protect them from harming themselves....if you want to know how it is to serve as an enlisted Soldier, volunteer to serve as one, then go to the other side. There have been many very successful Officers after having served as an enlisted Soldier first.

I would think that OCS, OTS, ROTC or service Academy would be more than sufficient.

My view is, LT, that if you want to have a better understanding of your soldiers, talk to them. Ask about their experiences. A willingness to identify with those you command, I believe, is more so a choice than anything else.

Having been through Basic Training, I got a lot out of it and I think that officers who have never been fail to understand what it is like to be a private. I think it is important to understand what it is like to be at that worker level and a 2LT can never do that - you are starting as management. Understanding what it is like to be at the bottom lets you relate to them when you are in charge, not to mention he respect you garner. Too many officers are not interested in what it is like to be the guy who has to receive the orders or stand out in the freezing cold while the officers or NCOs make their decisions.

When I got off of AD, my first boss started me off on a drafting board even though I had an engineering degree for exactly the same reason. How can you supervise if you don't understand what it is like to be the worker?

I wouldn't make it mandatory, but I certainly would highly encourage Basic Training.

They all have some type of indoc training. If you are suggesting they attend enlisted boot-camp I would say not, first it would be a waste of time and money and second they already have a system to indoc officers per their commissioning source. If you want to make that indoc more physical or intense than change the system. Boot-camp is their for the person to learn how to function as a member of a team and to achieve success together. You make an officer part of that team being yelled at by E-6's you are teaching the rest of the enlisted entry level members the wrong lesson.

I have done both, and I think the indoctrination, as mentioned in some of the other posts, is sufficient at OTS to accomplish those tasks. I like MSgt (Join to see)'s input on having new officers shadow junior enlisted troops to have a better understanding of their impact on the mission and what has to be accomplished on the lowest level.

I think that humility and a genuine interest in getting to know your troops and their needs is sufficient to make those connections.

No, but I had a commander once that made all the in coming officers shadow and airman on all three shifts. He stated this was for his future leaders to better understand what impact decisions they made had to the lowest levels.

No. The Pre-Commissioning education programs (ROTC, USMA) are evidence-based, time-tested programs that are effective at preparing men and women to enter the Army as 2LTs.

Those who enter via OCS have the benefit of having gone through Basic Training, as do those who have Prior Service and return to college and re-enter the Army via ROTC, or those who are selected to participate in the USMA preparatory program and go on to graduate from West Point.

As one who completed an Enlistment and then returned to college and earned my Commission through ROTC, I do believe my Basic Training experience was beneficial, and personally, I would never trade my experience for anything in the World, but the additional bit of credibility it gives you with your Enlisted Soldiers only goes so far. If anything, the stated or perceived benefits an Officer gains from this experience are overblown.

When I was enlisted, I trained with the UK Royal Marines...their officers did all the enlisted training and then did additional officer training.

I strongly believe my enlisted time makes me a better officer, and think it would probably do the same for every other officer.

That being said, when I consider the cost in time and dollars, I don't think it would be worth it to the DOD. Also, I think military officers do well, so our system appears to work.

No...You want better understanding. Talk to them...Assume nothing.


Good question though.

I think there's value in it. I don't claim that BCT gave me any great insight into the life of an enlisted Soldier, but I would certainly do it again. My experience in BCT instilled discipline, motivation, and gave me a base to build upon when I began ROTC. In short, it helped me transition from a civilian to a Soldier. I don't feel our commissioning sources accomplish this.

Based upon comparison with neighboring programs, I went to one of the better ROTC programs available. However, basic skills like wearing the uniform properly, customs and courtesies, and basic Soldier skills were typically taught by senior Cadets in my ROTC program. This resulted in a good amount of jackassery going on, typically because the senior Cadets hadn't been trained properly themselves. Furthermore, from what I understand today's LDAC is a joke. Cadets no longer go to the field and now do land navigation with a buddy. None of this is going to produce disciplined and resilient leaders. If it were up to me all Soldiers in our Army would attend BCT, even the Direct Commission Docs and Dentists.

No, they should not be required to attend IET. As stated by others, there are already programs in place to teach cadets/candidates the basics of their military branch. It is not required to enable Officers to relate to the Soldiers with whom they serve.

If you want to know what it is like to be a junior enlisted person I am sure your unit could arrange a Spur Ride or similar event to give you a "day in the life " experience. If you are think Officers need a more solid tactical base, just find a good NCO and ask him for help developing your proficiency at 10-level tasks. I am sure he/she will help you out.

I am not sure because perhaps the training at OCS would be sufficient.

I think so. I think that it would make them better leaders. They would know what their soldiers had been through.

Having gone to basic training (1982) and WOBC, I would say overall WOBC was harder both mentally and physically. Today's BT's, are to soft and really this would be a waste of time and money. A good percentage that come to us straight out of basic and AIT shortly thereafter lack the resolve to pass a PT test, or stay with in HT&WT. So what would you gain going to enlisted basic? Not much really.

No. In general new officers come into the Air Force with adequate knowledge and discipline to succeed in their first assignment, which is normally a training school. As a pilot training instructor, I taught students from USAFA, AFROTC, and OTS. After about 8 weeks of training you couldn't tell the difference. The AF Academy and prior enlisted service guys (no female pilots when I taught) had a bit of a head start on understanding the military in general so they handled the stress better for the first few weeks. Everybody else caught up quickly.

I went through ROTC in the 60s. We had academic class two days a week plus a 1.5 hour drill each week for two years; then, academic class three days a week and the same drill during our junior and senior years; and had a 28-day "summer camp" between junior and senior year of college. Summer camp included academics and half a day of physical activity, drill and ceremonies, sports, etc. We went to the range to qualify with the pistol and M16. We had to pass the AF PT test (no snickers from the ground component folks, please). Also got an indoctrination flight in a trainer aircraft (T-33). We lived in dormitories and had inspections. I roomed with a guy from Texas A&M. We quickly struck a deal, I taught him how to wear an AF uniform (the A&M Corps of Cadets wore Army uniforms) and he made sure the room would pass inspection. The only thing we missed out on was having a MTI yelling at us for days and days. Not sure that was all that big of a loss. Overall it was a learning experience.

Having been on both sides of the coin (enlist 8 years, officer 12) I can say that a Soldier needs to learn to lead from the ground up. The most pure leadership position is that infantry team leader who says follow me as he assaults an enemy BP. The higher up one goes the more tone becomes a manager of resources. Great staff officers often find themselves in leadership positions, as a reward for great staff work and management, for which they are unsuited for. The absolute best officers I ever worked with were all prior enlisted West Pointers. A prior enlisted officer knows what it is to follow and lead as a matter of practical real world experience.

I'll start by stating that all members of the Canadian Armed Forces attend some form of basic military qualification that teaches the essential information and combat skills that will be required just to exist as a member of the CAF (regardless of branch or trade/occupation). There are different forms of basic: a regular force version that runs for 16-weeks, a stripped down 4-week version for the reserves, and an officer variant of each course that has the same skill sets but adds leadership and mentoring training. However, even recruit officers are given the same training and, to a degree, treatment as their non-commissioned colleagues. The instructors are non-commissioned members (usually MCpls and SGTs) and can be expected to train the officers just as efficiently and well as non-commissioned recruits, especially with an eye towards the fact that each of the officer recruits may one day be in command of their former instructor.

The "Common Ground" concept makes sense at first glance, however 3-4 months out of a 4 year enlistment is such a small part of what enlisted do, the benefits wouldn't be there.

There is already A LOT of mirroring going on between the two programs, however they are tailored for the specific needs of the Officer/Enlisted. In reality, OCS is the officer boot camp. There are both 3~ months long, they are both followed by combat training (MCT/SOI vs TBS) and then by MOS schools.

What would an officer gain by going through bootcamp? Then compare it to how we would have to adjust OCS once the assumption is made that everyone went through bootcamp. I can't say the exact overlap, but it's sizable in just basic Marine Skills.

I have also done both but I would not go back and do enlisted bootcamp again nor would I go through Chief's initiation twice (crossing the line in the same bucket). NSI and spending two years full time in college all day long but the other activities were once in a lifetime.

I loved Basic Training. It was extremely helpful in understanding how all Soldiers get started and a bit of what it's like to be enlisted. Now that I'm on "the dark side" it has helped me bond with my Soldiers that we have at least something in common with each other. This is especially true for new Privates in my platoon. It humanizes me a bit.