Should the military push harder for its officers to pursue PhDs?

2016-05-10T10:41:15-04:00

Response by SSG Derrick L. Lewis MBA, C-HRM made May 10 at 2016 10:45 AM

2016-05-10T10:45:40-04:00

Maj Private RallyPoint Member ,
Absolutely. The military should push for ALL their members to pursue and maximize their educational worth and opportunities.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made May 10 at 2016 10:48 AM

2016-05-10T10:48:16-04:00

From the lower enlisted side, I would say yes. Continued education is a force multiplier, bringing new knowledge and experiences into the ranks at all levels. Whether it is a Private First Class studying for a bachelor's degree, or a Major going for their second doctorate, the pursuit of knowledge is seldom one that brings negative net gain.

In addition to encouraging mental agility and an ever-evolving thought process, the free schooling that is available in the military is a resource not enough people are taking advantage of.

Response by LTC Paul Labrador made May 10 at 2016 10:48 AM

2016-05-10T10:48:20-04:00

It depends. A PhD is not always necessary for what even senior leaders do. However, it should be a discriminator.

Response by Col Rebecca Lorraine made May 10 at 2016 10:48 AM

2016-05-10T10:48:42-04:00

I don't think so. PhD is really a specialist degree. A worker that is well rounded should be graduate level work with complentary PME. Leadership is not taught through degrees, but through role models and practice.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made May 10 at 2016 11:07 AM

2016-05-10T11:07:27-04:00

They should allow the use of tuition assistance for PhD classes.

Response by SSgt Alvar Lam made May 10 at 2016 11:18 AM

2016-05-10T11:18:05-04:00

No. When education gets pushed on military members, it tends to become an unwritten requirement for promotion, and when that happens, it often becomes another box to check. The result is a watering-down of the degree, as we have seen with both Bachelors and Masters degrees in the military; members become less interested in the quality of their degree and more interested in 'just getting it done'.

Response by SCPO Joshua I made May 10 at 2016 12:09 PM

2016-05-10T12:09:48-04:00

I don't see a Ph.D as necessary except possibly in rare cases. It's a very specialized degree where most military personnel tend to need to be more generalized in skill set.

What value does it bring to take someone out of rotation for the additional years it takes to achieve a Ph.D?

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made May 10 at 2016 1:34 PM

2016-05-10T13:34:41-04:00

Great question!

Initial thoughts: yes and no.

Yes: We should want senior leaders (colonels and generals) leading the Department of Defense (and their civilian counterparts) to be highly educated, capable of understanding complex data sets, and able to understand the environment in which they operate. Officers with PhDs in various fields (history, international relations, public policy, government, etc, etc) would probably be well-suited to such roles. All other things being held constant. To produce a cohort of PhD-holding senior officers, we'd need to rapidly change our promotion and retention policies to reward (versus penalize) higher education. Some partner Armies have policies where if an officer earns a masters degree or a PhD, they get promoted faster. Perhaps we could look at such a policy. The general thought now in the Army is that doing a PhD---generally as a major or LTC---guarantees non-promotion to O-6, as doing a PhD takes at least 3 years of full time study and an officer who does a PhD just doesn't have the volume of OERs to compete against peers. There are, of course, some senior officers with PhDs, but the data / discussion I've seen suggests these are the exception, not the rule. We'd probably want to wait until an officer finishes company command before sending them for a PhD (same logic as for functional area designation, we want quality officers in these special programs), so we'd need to ensure a process exists for promoting/retaining the investment. Perhaps we could waive MRD and promotion rules for PhDs, or mandate that they are promoted (as is done for Academy Professors). Maybe this would lead to an expansion of the Advanced Strategic Planning and Policy Program (SAMS' PhD program) which is currently limited to around 10-15 officers a year.

On the "no" response, perhaps resources would be better spent improving the quality of the Senior Service Schools (ie, war colleges) and equivalent programs at civilian institutes. Yes, by definition, all colonels have a masters degree from an SSC or equivalent, and while I haven't gone to the War College, a degree from an institution that mandates 100% attendance and graduates 100% of attendees might not be providing the type and quality of advanced schooling that is required for the senior leaders of a 2-million person organization (one could analyze US military strategic success in the last 25 years to reach a proxy conclusion about the quality of the study of strategy at the SSCs, but that's a different discussion). In addition to, or perhaps in place of, the SSCs, perhaps we could mandate officers attend a fully-funded civilian graduate school program (with tight controls on quality so that this doesn't become a "buy your masters degree here" sort of thing) at some point prior to promotion to colonel.

Response by Lt Col Scott Shuttleworth made May 10 at 2016 2:04 PM

2016-05-10T14:04:45-04:00

I would say no with one caveat. Our scientists...if you are chosen as a scientists then yes...I think it is a good thing. At that point you need to be the specialist in your field, not the generalist. For the majority of military officers, not so much. A leadership degree is earned through years attending University of Hard Knocks.

Response by MAJ Michael Pauling made May 10 at 2016 2:06 PM

2016-05-10T14:06:25-04:00

lol so long gone are the days when a 4 Year Degree would open the door to being a Careerist Officer, who dutifully executes the mission requirements, keeping fully trained in all the specialities associated withe their Branch and uproots their family every 2-3 years to meet the military needs. So long are the days when a NCO, who stopped Civilain Education at High School Diploma and the same above. Sure push for PhD's then you will have trained a military wherever everyones knows they are as smart as everyone else based on the degree accomplishment. Maybe they will even be too smart to fight as they try and reason out the problem........................

Response by CPT Joseph K Murdock made May 10 at 2016 2:39 PM

2016-05-10T14:39:50-04:00

On whose dime and whose time? I say no on the basis being an officer can be tough enough on a career.

Response by COL Jean (John) F. B. made May 10 at 2016 3:16 PM

2016-05-10T15:16:49-04:00

Maj Private RallyPoint Member No ... The best education for a military officer is experience with troops. While having a PhD may be a good personal goal, I see no reason the military should push officers to achieve a PhD if it does not directly contribute to their duties/missions. My two Masters Degrees have not made an iota of difference in my effectiveness as an officer. In fact, obtaining them took away from time I could have spent becoming a better leader.

Response by TSgt Gwen Walcott made May 10 at 2016 3:40 PM

2016-05-10T15:40:58-04:00

Maybe for those who don't sped a career on High OpsTempo and work less than 60 hours per week; otherwise there is no time.
Besides, what labs are they supposed to be work/living in to accomplish in-depth research and analysis; never mind compiling data for their dissertation?

Response by MAJ Javier Rivera made May 10 at 2016 4:19 PM

2016-05-10T16:19:18-04:00

No. There are currently a handful of PhD coded positions around DoD and funded programs for those selected to the aforementioned. Anyone else should be a master of their war fighting trade (ground, air, maritime, amphibius, whatever the case might be). there is where leaders polishe their skills and earn their money! What a free PhD? Apply for a program!

Response by SMSgt Roy Dowdy made May 10 at 2016 4:35 PM

2016-05-10T16:35:35-04:00

Not necessarily, considering the cost of a legitimate PhD program at a brick and mortar institute, along the endless waste of millions thrown away on paper mill Masters program...the return on investment is considerably inconsequential.

Response by Capt Daniel Goodman made May 11 at 2016 8:32 AM

2016-05-11T08:32:46-04:00

You might all find of interest that genl Colin Powell I'm his autobiography explicitly said that after doing his master's he'd been asked by an advisor to stay for his PhD though he said no as he thought he wasnt a scholar which self deprecating remark I just personally found amazing of course in its modesty. The interesting thing is that thereafter he did the white house fellow program even more interestingly assigned to omb at his own request, which, as I'd read his account of his training in it, quite clearly functioned at essentially a PhD level!in any event, you know?

Response by Capt Daniel Goodman made May 11 at 2016 8:48 AM

2016-05-11T08:48:52-04:00

I just figured I'd offer though that while I do genuinely understand much of the prevailing sentiment that doctoral level is not in the view of many writing here necessary, I just figured I'd give a few thoughts if I might. When I went in, I found I had enough training to do what was expected of me from my Bach, though by no means enough, which was why I had to do grad level masters stuff, which, in all honesty, candidly, I obv wish I'd started much sooner, certainly as it'd have helped considerably, I think on retrospect. That being said, I don't deny that doctoral level training is highly specialized, however, genl Pershing many here might not know had a JD I think or was at minimum an attorney, that id read for certain, I believe. Also genl MacArthur in American Caesar by Manchester had a very serious profesnl library , and actually stalked out of a congrsnl hearing in one account in the book, declaiming that he was viewed as highly in his profession as the legislators and others questioning him, which I found interesting verbiage too describe the story. Many historical accounts of many officers I'd read of would describe nightly tutoring by senior mentors, freq acquired through conversation aside from assigned reading. Clinicians attorneys and chaplains need clinical doctorates, a JD and a DD respectively for the most part with many allied health clinicians often going doctoral level to be able to administer in clinical environments and as a means of opening doors, certainly . I fully realize that the command and staff or genl staff colleges or war colleges also either offer explicitly or function de facto as grad level programs whether masters or doctoral, as the case may be, by all means . Thay being said, the matter I think perhaps isn't so much a matter of specialty training as it might be one of being able to function at a comparable level among and or with or alongside senior civil servants, as well as open doors, generally. If one has such a degree, o don't deny that it can offer be in a basket weaving topic certainly, unless properly directed for intellectual growth that's all I'm trying to say many thanks.

Response by SrA Edward Vong made May 11 at 2016 8:53 AM

2016-05-11T08:53:40-04:00

In many cases, a PhD is not very necessary in the civilian world at all (unless one is getting into research and theory). An MD, JD, or MBA may be more applied for military officers (or enlisted). Other officers may chime in and help out as I was enlisted.

Response by LCDR Private RallyPoint Member made May 11 at 2016 9:21 AM

2016-05-11T09:21:14-04:00

Mixed feelings Jose-I made it to O-4 without a Masters, but I think there's an argument to be made that advanced postgraduate degrees are becoming part of the package. The problem is simple though-how do you give it value and then force officers to fund their own educations and find the time? Would we say an Infantry company commander with six deployments and a B.A. is less deserving of promotion to field grade than a CAPT with one deployment and an MBA? Should O-6 require a doctorate, or will that wait until flag rank? Ultimately, I think if we pushed for it, it would become an evaluation point, and eventually, a taxpayer burden.

I say we can do more to facilitate officers who seek continued professional development at their own expense, and refine already existing programs...isn't there a master's degree associated with O-5 and O-6 that attend Staff War College?

Response by Capt Private RallyPoint Member made May 12 at 2016 9:41 PM

2016-05-12T21:41:31-04:00

Sir,
No I don't think they should make it mandatory. They should let you use TA for it though. Or maybe allow it to be an assignment for certain officers if they choose to pursue one. I'd definitely go for one. However making it mandatory or count for promotion points is not the way to go. Too many people get worthless masters degrees from low quality schools. Let people pursue them of their own accord and then if the degree was worth it it will show through job performance in OPRs.

Response by Capt Daniel Goodman made Mar 19 at 2019 10:11 PM

2019-03-19T22:11:28-04:00

Guys, that's an interesting topic, I read a good deal of what's on here that others sent in on the thread, I just figured I'd add my two cents, for whatever my thoughts might be worth, OK? I entirely follow both sides of the topic, the pros and the cons, I think, within reason, certainly, however, here's what I think, honest...I don't deny the speciality aspect of doing a doctorate, I entirely get the rationale behind that view...in many instances, yeah, a masters with serious PME often suffices, I'd certainly admit that, however, for whatever it might be worth, there's a great deal to be said just for being at the top of the intellectual food chain, with no need for any further intellectual distractions from work, in terms of needing to fill in anymore checkmark blocks...I'm not saying that as filling in such blocks are, or should be, necessarily the be-all and/or end-all of human existence, I'm merely saying I spent God only knows how long on the whole paper chase thing, and had more than my fair share of it, good and bad, with oodles of aggravation and heartache along the way...I did mine in clinical allied health, which as I found out, led me to two relatively real truths, there are basically two truths involved, a Ph.D., Sc.D. or Doctor of Arts (D.A.), you typically need to beg for the time and/or opportunity to concentrate, whereas with a clinical doctorate, you pretty much buy the time to concentrate on it...I'm not necessarily saying everyone wanting to go doctoral is gonna find that to be true, then there's the whole wide wonderful world of aggravation trying for assistantships and fellowships...there's also the aggravation of trying to satisfy thesis and/or dissertation committees, as well as needing to get past oral and/or written qual exams, on the academic side, as well as the whole licensure exam, residency, fellowship, and board certification thing on the clinical side...believe me, I've had more than my share of all of it, a good deal of it bad, some good, though, ultimately, because of total perm disability, it got me essentially nowhere, despite my genuinely best efforts...I'm just saying that, if one can get it done, I still lean toward the desirability aspect of having it, I'm not saying all of you think my way, I entirely get that, as I'd said, I just figured I'd chime in with my two cents, such as they are...if any of you wanna chat about the whole thing more, I'd certainly be most interested in any thoughts...I obviously, as I'd tried to explain, certainly didn't say all that in the expectation that I'd be agreed with that, I just wanted to emphasize that, as well...hope that was all at least of some possible interest, if nothing else, OK?