Should NCO rank progression and commissioning be tied to educational degrees?

No, rank progression should not be tied strictly to the completion of educational degrees frankly for either the NCO or the commissioned side. Now that said, I am not including PME in that discussion as it does have its own place in rank progression for both sides. Your job performance, PME and skill set mastery should be the primary evaluators for you rank progression. Your secondary factors should include peer recommendations/evaluations, board performance and then your "outside initiatives" which is where you could include factors like degree attainment but don't make the degree a primary. Degrees can be used as differentiators but in the end all it really says it that you were capable comprehending material, doing assignments and taking test successfully. In the military, you already have to do that for your job.

On the officer side, too many good CGO's get pushed out because they don't go an get that outside masters degree before going up for O-4. They don't get it, because they're focused on doing the job and being a leader to their troops. Lot's of O-3's get passed over because their "peers" focused on checking all the boxes and getting that degree, all while their units suffered or they put themselves in a position where they were not required to be leaders, which is oxymoronic for officers, and could focus solely on their own professional development. This lead to many great leaders walking away from the military only to leave the ranks with officers tasting their sips of a leadership as an O-4 instead of as an O-1 or O-2. While some might not see this as an issue, I can tell it is a massive one. O-1's and O-2's can be much more easily molded and easily replaced. They also have more checks and balances around them. An O-4 who is a bad leader is much harder to fix and/or replace.

I saw too many times in my career, on both the enlisted and officer side, folks rushing to get a degree by any means possible just to get points for their promotion board or to get into OCS/OTS or ROTC. And what good is a degree that you received from one of the "Pay for an A" schools to you or the military? And don't anyone out here act like they've never heard of those schools before. They're all over every base through the education centers. I'd see troops rush to get a degree in some BS skill set just to check a box. Yes, officers did the same thing! The big difference is that the expectation was for us to get a Masters degree in something instead of an Associates or Bachelor's, which we already had. If you are going to make a degree a requirement, you'll need to make sure that the degree is in something that also benefits that branch. Degrees in philosophy, basket weaving or poetry don't correlate to an MOS, AFSC or Rate on active duty. Maybe basket weaving for the SERE folks, but that is a stretch.

I think that officers have too much paperwork and organizational items and they don't have enough time with there juniors or with the regular enlisted folks. When my husband died in West Germany in 1988, I had no idea who his Captain or other officers were. It was like steering a small sailboat in a ferocious storm with 2 small children and being blind-folded as well. We had no home stateside of our own to go to, it took months to process the benefits and months to get the correct death certificate. The people in Pentagon actually sent someone else's death certificate to me by mistake the first time. That wasn't professional or ethical and it meant waiting even longer to get his insurance money and death benefits for us so we could buy our first home.

CSM from what I have researched and have gotten answers from old timers, I do believe that the technical ranks should be brought back but as for the rest of your post this sounds like to me (in a lack of better terms) 'someone had an idea'. I have been to 2 duty stations been in thr army now 5 years and in all the time I've been in E6s have always been out for themselves and not helping their squad/platoon (i understand that for the job of the E5's at the same time when an E5 cant find something or doesnt know how, who do they ask? The next higher rank). Now there are some exceptions but it's rare. I have the feeling that if this is implemented then it will just make the E6s worse. But at the same time the army already allows green to gold. I don't know how that works too well as I have no ambition to become an officer. But if some enlisted wants to become an officer there's always that option and it's not harped on. I will also say CSM that idea will most likely make retention SIGNIFICANTLY drop amongst all of the army.

I have met many in my active and active reserve duty who were very good technicians, but who did not desire or were not up to leading others. I too believe the higher specialist rankings should be restored to acknowledge their value and hopefully help with retention. Likewise for officers, continuing education is useful to remain current. But there are “natural” leaders of troops whose advancement should be on merit (I.e performance) even if they lack certain education certificates.

Definitely college will enhance the type of nco, but I deeply believe that if the system brings back an SQT test of some kind, that by itself will ensure that our soldiers have a knowledge NCO, with the appropriate expertise at his or hers current pay grade. War demands our best, not everyone is equipped to get the mission accomplished under duress. That’s why we trained as we fight, so it becomes a reaction, hopefully in the right direction. NCOs are needed, well trained and capable of looking out for his soldiers at all times.

As a SPC 4 with a HS diploma equivalent, I turned down OCS, I was the company clerk. I ran my company. Education may or may not produce wisdom.

CSM, I have seen both, and came in with an Associate- all the Army wanted to do was send me to OCS, If you're a grunt, what does a mechanical engineering degree do for you, What does it do for your leadership, and technical skills? After my time- my degree meant squat for the civilian world because I was trained to be a supervisor/leader- Accountants don't have such slots until you reach the CFO level of a company. If you going to force them a degree- then you will lose a ton of mid-grade NCO's to OCS. Better pay, better living conditions, etc, why let them take the seed of the Corps?

CSM Everroad to answer your question it depends on the service and what they are looking for I know CWO's and LDO's (Limited Duty Officer) in the Navy that have various levels of degrees from AA to Doctorate, but they are looking for that when being considered for the next rank and dependent on the job. For a CWO to be considered you have to be a Chief Petty Officer (E7) or above with 14-20 yrs. for CWO2 (E7/E8 applicants) and Master Chief Petty officer (E9) with 14–22 yrs. for CWO3 (E9 applicants) and LDO E6 maybe E7 8-14 yrs. for LDO ENS (Non-NUC applicants) and 8-16 yrs. for LDO ENS (NUC applicants). First Class Petty Officers who wish to apply for LDO must have taken the CPO exam in January of the year the application is due to NPC and be selection board eligible. The current year exam "profile sheet" must accompany the application.

Personal opinion NO. I have known too many people who were great test takers but incompetent. Need a mix

My first reaction, "who the hell wants to be an officer?"