What should happen when a student arrives at a school and he or she fails the APFT?

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 19 Jan 2014 04:59:52 -0500

What should happen to their PREVIOUS UNIT'S CHAIN OF COMMAND (who said he or she passed a test on their last evaluation)? What does that say about the student's previous UNIT? Should any of this be factored into separation boards (In Regards to Leadership)? Also consider failing by MINUTES and DOUBLE DIGIT Reps.Exclude profiles. What should happen to the student (not as important as the above questions)?

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 19 at 2014 6:11 AM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 19 Jan 2014 06:11:05 -0500

I came through in the surge era and schools were under huge pressure to produce graduates. Students that failed PT were retested at 30 day intervals until they passed. In schools that were very physically demanding, like my OCS company, this did the Soldier a disservice because he/she ended up washing out on something else (obstacle course, ruck march, etc) anyway. In schools that weren't, I didn't see any harm at all in this approach.

For non-physical schools, I advocate treating the APFT failure by the book: counsel, flag, notify the home unit, remedial PT, weight control program (if necessary), and retest. For physical schools, there is no reasonable alternative to sending the Soldier back.

There is another thread about the over emphasis on PT that goes into this in more detail. However, if the school has nothing to do with PT why would you send the Soldier back? Meanwhile, there were LTs at the MI officers course that were not strong readers, didn't speak or write standard English, and or had never used PowerPoint. None of those things are within the school's capability to remediate. They graduated anyway and I hung my head for the units that got stuck with them.

There is a connection between being a good military leader and physical fitness. That said, the connection is not 1:1. There is also a self-centeredness and an elitism/prejudice attached to being a PT stud that can cause some of them to be utter leadership failures.

We pick PT because it's easy to measure and relatively easy to improve. Is that a good enough reason to make it the only measuring stick of Soldier potential? I disagree.

[disclaimer: I have never come close to failing an APFT, but I was a competitive athlete before joining the service. I prefer to be judged by my actual job performance.]

Response by SFC Joe S. Davis Jr., MSM, DSL made Jan 19 at 2014 6:43 AM

SFC Joe S. Davis Jr., MSM, DSL — Sun, 19 Jan 2014 06:43:06 -0500

In my opinion, I think a student who fails a APFT, among entering a school, especially a NCOES school or Drill Sergeant should get counseled and dismissed.  The perception or intent should be a highly squared away Soldier to lead, train and mentor your subordinates. I went to Drill Sergeant School and Airborne School and it was either go/no-go criteria 1st time basics. Remember its not basic training or OCS the standards should be exceeded before you get there with at least 70% or higher.

Response by CW4 Patrick Ramsey made Jan 19 at 2014 7:11 AM

CW4 Patrick Ramsey — Sun, 19 Jan 2014 07:11:23 -0500

PT and all around fitness very impt be prepared

Response by SFC Michael Hasbun made Jan 19 at 2014 9:45 PM

SFC Michael Hasbun — Sun, 19 Jan 2014 21:45:26 -0500

They should receive a "Failed to meet course standards" 1059 and sent home. I'm pretty sure that's standard. As a matter of fact, I'm staring at an Army Directive from 2012 that states exactly that..

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 20 at 2014 8:38 AM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 20 Jan 2014 08:38:38 -0500

At a school they should be sent home. At the unit I think commanders should decide. The commander should decide how much effort should be put into getting this soldier to meet standards.

I have seen some outstanding Soldiers that struggled with PT I would not want us to throw away good soldiers who have issues that can be fixed to keep the bottom feeders who can run and push themselves up. The Army already has a surplus of moron PT studs.

Example:

I had a BN XO that was such a bad leader that he was holding the unit back and it was openly stated at BN CMD and Staff by a MSG (no one disagreed). The XO was a PT stud type A so the fact that he sucked didn't matter.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 20 at 2014 9:13 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 20 Jan 2014 09:13:44 -0500

Its too easy to pass a PT test and if you know its ahead you have plenty of time to do PT on your own to get ready for it if you need to. No hugs should be issued. Send them packing with their 1059 saying they failed APFT. If you are a leader and you fail a PT test I believe there should be immediate action. We are supposed to set the example. Now, I understand that things happen and people have a bad day but come on. The minimum standard is too easy to achieve.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 20 at 2014 9:15 AM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 20 Jan 2014 09:15:09 -0500

Check the TRADOC policy- I was the staff officer who wrote the TRADOC TASKORD last September I think. Bottom line- the fail, they get sent home (one retest allowed in 7-10 days I think). For a while they were allowed to graduate with "marginally achieved course standards." Check that it's not being grandfathered in- Current TRADOC policy is to return them to the unit with a "failed to meet course standards" AER. For PCS courses like CCC, it's a little different, but they still must leave the course.

Response by SSG Jeffery Haynes made Jan 20 at 2014 10:26 AM

SSG Jeffery Haynes — Mon, 20 Jan 2014 10:26:04 -0500

As a former WLC SGL, the students were tested on Day 2. If they failed the initial test, they were retested on Day 9. If they failed that test they were sent home, with a "failed to meet standards" 1059. As I recall, a letter was sent to the first GO in their chain of command as well notifying them of the students failure. Since WLC has gone to a 22 day POI, we've noticed that a lot of units are sending their "PT failures" to school so that they can process them for failing to meet standards out of the military. Those same Soldiers usually have trouble meeting 600-9 standards, so it's a double whammy. I feel senior NCOs and first line leaders are afraid of confrontation, so they have NCOES schools do their dirty work for them.

Response by 1SG(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 20 at 2014 10:31 AM

1SG(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 20 Jan 2014 10:31:06 -0500

The first thing that should happen is the soldier should be embarrassed. The minimum standards on the APFT are very low. Excluding injuries, if you don't pass, you might want to consider another line of work.

Response by CW4 Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 20 at 2014 10:44 AM

CW4 Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 20 Jan 2014 10:44:57 -0500

What is everyone's thought about attending on temporary profile? I was scheduled to attend WOAC and required emergency ankle surgery. I had to cancel due to regs stating no temporary profiles for PME. I can understand for a physical course such as Airborne or Ranger but academic course should be different. They should be able to look at each persons circumstance. I have never failed a PT test and never plan to.

Response by SGT(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 20 at 2014 11:06 AM

SGT(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 20 Jan 2014 11:06:15 -0500

When you say a minimum standard, that can be two very different results. If you have a soldier who scores a 180 that's passing at the very minimum. But, how do you feel about a soldier that scores a 259 and fails simply because they are not even close to being a "runner" and will never be one. If a soldier routinely scores between 250 and 270 and you know the effort is there but doesn't always "pass" PT should they be chaptered?

Response by Lt Col Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 20 at 2014 11:15 AM

Lt Col Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 20 Jan 2014 11:15:08 -0500

The issue is the recruiters, some are too driven to meet quotas that they sign up who ever they can to make the numbers look good. As a commander I have seen this several times where new recruits are brought in and fail to meet PT standards at basic or tech school and then I am left to discipline them. I held a meeting with all of our recruiters and told them to stop and make sure new recruits could pass the PT test and to not send me more problems. I had to get buy in from command as well to track recruit metrics and provide feedback to the recruiters when we see trends and issues.

Response by CSM Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 20 at 2014 11:33 AM

CSM Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 20 Jan 2014 11:33:41 -0500

Absolutely counseled, retested, recounseled, and if fails the retest dismissed to the unit with a failed to meet course standards 1059. Once back at their unit, they are immediately recommended for administrative reduction by a board or at a minimum have their promotable status revoked.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 20 at 2014 11:49 AM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 20 Jan 2014 11:49:05 -0500

Don't we still use the Pre-Execution Checklist? If they were unable to pass to standard, either the troop was not evaluated properly for the PEC, or a false report was submitted. Appropriate action should follow.

Response by CPL Jay Strickland made Jan 20 at 2014 1:15 PM

CPL Jay Strickland — Mon, 20 Jan 2014 13:15:53 -0500

If PT is a aspect of the school send him back with a fails to meet the standard( airborne, air assault, ranger). Also call the chain of command as someone likely faked his PT test results on previous tests.

If it is something where PT is not an issue say satellite controllers school put him in special population PT and otherwise continue training him.

Response by MSG Bo Mikel made Jan 20 at 2014 1:23 PM

MSG Bo Mikel — Mon, 20 Jan 2014 13:23:38 -0500

I PERSONALLY FEEL THAT PT IS A MEASURE OF PERSONAL HEALTH AND SHOULD BE LEFT AT THAT, HAD A E-5 IN THE STAN THAT WAS PUT ON A PEDESTOOL BECAUSE HE COULD MAX HE APFT IN 30 SECONDS FOR THE FIRST TWO EVENTS AND 12 MINS FOR THE RUN....BUT WHEN WE DREW FIRE HE RAN AWAY AND HID BEHIND A WALL AND HAD TO BE RETRIEVED SO I THINK THER IS TO MUCH PUT ON PT

Response by CMC Robert Young made Jan 20 at 2014 2:56 PM

CMC Robert Young — Mon, 20 Jan 2014 14:56:09 -0500

Sir, in the Coast Guard at any advanced school there is weigh in and PT assessment. Members failing either are usually returned to their units immediately. My CPOA class lost three members to PT standards and my Boat Force Command Cadre class lost one to weight..... not a great way to start the course.

Failures are frowned on for the member, and likewise for the unit to have sent the member without proper screening. The member always receives written counseling, and the command can count on feedback from higher for allowing it. It doesn't reflect well on anybody concerned.

It's an important issue because it is a minimum standard. If the member is attending advanced military education, how can we be assured of their success if they are not meeting minimum participation standards?

Response by SSG Robert Edwards made Jan 21 at 2014 5:25 AM

SSG Robert Edwards — Tue, 21 Jan 2014 05:25:39 -0500

Failing the APFT is no indicator that the individual cannot perform their jobs, if that were the case. then they should be discharged from the service as unfit for duty 4F. How long do you think we would be short on personnel then. If a person fails the APFT, then the individuals previous command failed to ensure the individual was physically fit for duty. Remedial PT twice a day, motivational pushup during breaks. If you return the individual to their unit, what is the loss in dollars to the unit and to the service.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 21 at 2014 7:54 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 21 Jan 2014 07:54:10 -0500

I don't think that they should be automatically dropped, maybe the student was sick that day. They should be given a second chance and then if they fail the retest, they should be dropped from the course and reflected on a 1059.

As for a reflections on chain of command, I think that it doesn't necessarily reflect directly upon them. Everyone knows that in order to succeed at keeping fit it takes more than the PT the Army makes you do, you have to take the initiative and do pt on your own time as well.

I think that PT is extremely important, without it, I think that almost the entirety of the military would be grossly overweight.

Response by SSG Robert Edwards made Jan 21 at 2014 10:33 AM

SSG Robert Edwards — Tue, 21 Jan 2014 10:33:02 -0500

You can fault anyone you wish, but the problem also lies with those administering the test at the school. How many student fail because of different testing standards, attitude of the testers. Sending a person away at the start of the school is detrimental to all, do like the pathfinders. If you are not fit, maps in order etc, you don't graduate with the torch. If the individual continues to screw up then can them.

Response by CPT Aaron Kletzing made Jan 21 at 2014 10:43 AM

CPT Aaron Kletzing — Tue, 21 Jan 2014 10:43:26 -0500

There's absolutely no excuse for showing up for a school and failing the PT test. Passing the PT test by the minimums is really not that hard anyway. But failing to prepare for school in such a fundamental way is a no go. You should be counseled and dismissed, regardless of your rank. We have way too many excellent service members who will prep sufficiently to spend resources on someone who disrespects our profession by failing the PT test that he/she often knows is coming a long way out.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 21 at 2014 12:31 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 21 Jan 2014 12:31:30 -0500

My two cents will fall in line with the majority of the
other NCOs in this discussion. I agree with them that they should be dismissed
from the course or reinstate the PreReq to attend the school on 0 day at a
minimum. The Army Physical Fitness Test is too easy for a Soldiers let alone
NCOs going to leadership school to fail to achieve 60%. I for one as a private
was scared to death to fail or only achieving 60% on my PT test due the repercussions
that my team/squad leaders would have for me to ensure that I would max all
events the next time. Heaven forbid I failed at PLDC I would have never been
able to attend another school until I PCSd. The leader is a leader for a
reason, if he cannot lead from the front and set the example for his soldiers
to follow due to poor performance on a APFT at a school he should not be in
charge of Soldiers and relieved of his position as 1SG Rink stated.

Response by SSG Rafael Rodriguez made Jan 21 at 2014 12:58 PM

SSG Rafael Rodriguez — Tue, 21 Jan 2014 12:58:52 -0500

In response to Cpt. Patrick B.
The unit has failed the Soldier attending the school, Soldier has to pass an APFT and weight(not marginal either) to standards before even being considered to attend any army school, if Soldier does not pass then he is placed in a PT program by his PLT SGT and also red flagged(no schools, re-up or promotions) until deficiencies are corrected, there's NO excuse for Soldier's being sent to schools in that condition.

Response by CPT Mike M. made Jan 23 at 2014 6:58 AM

CPT Mike M. — Thu, 23 Jan 2014 06:58:02 -0500

Don't think anything should necessarily happen to the chain of command. There's a lot that can happen that's outside their control. Potentially the person did pass but barely then maybe took leave en route to the school and never worked out and/or ate like crazy, maybe the school is somewhere that has completely different climate conditions than the Soldier's original duty station that put a barely passing individual into the fail zone. Bottom line, I know we're held accountable as leaders but there are things that are flat out, out of our control and the individual's got to take ownership for their actions.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 24 at 2014 4:39 AM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 24 Jan 2014 04:39:38 -0500

Great question as this seems to have become a more frequent issue within the NCOES and OES.

Any Soldier that arrives and fails to meet the course standards should receive a "failed to meet course standards" DA 1059 and sent home at his/her unit's expense. Regardless of whether it was by "single" or "double" digits. We are professionals and leaders and the inability to meet the minimum standard for the APFT is unacceptable.

The Soldier's Commander and/or First Sergeant should receive a Letter of Concern for validating a school candidate that does not meet the course standards. Unless something has changed recently, one or both had to sign at least a MFR stating the Soldier demonstrated the ability to meet/exceed the standard.

Would suggest that there is no way a "failed to meet course standards" DA 1059 could not make a Soldier be considered for review by a separation board. An adverse DA 1059 is the equivalent to an adverse NCOER/OER.

All leaders are expected to lead from the front. That doesn't mean everyone has to be a 300+ on the APFT, but you have to be capable of exceeding the minimum on a daily basis.

Response by 1SG Michael Blount made Jan 24 at 2014 8:07 AM

1SG Michael Blount — Fri, 24 Jan 2014 08:07:26 -0500

That individual should be returned from whence s/he came. I would add, however, the following: (1) Contact that unit's leadership and advise them of precisely what happened (or didn't happen). Get the facts to the leadership before the Soldier has a chance to cook up a story. (2) Track failures on a unit basis to see if there's some sort of systemic problem going on. In other words - if Soldiers from A Co 123 Bn are consistently failing the opening APFT at WLC, then there's more likely a problem with the unit's training program or APFT administration than there is with the Soldier him/herself.

Response by SPC Gary Basom made Jan 25 at 2014 4:01 AM

SPC Gary Basom — Sat, 25 Jan 2014 04:01:54 -0500

I'd rather see the pull up being an alternate to the pushup. But that's just me sir. I came into the service when the pull up was being replaced by the pushup.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 25 at 2014 4:43 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 25 Jan 2014 04:43:30 -0500

I am firm believer of second chances, and retests...to an extent of course. Sit the Soldier down, talk to them and explain the consequences of failing. If the Soldier doesn't believe they can pass the retest, send them back to his/her unit, but if they sincerely believe they can, give them a retest. After the first minute, or the first mile of an APFT you can almost tell who isn't going to make the cut.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 25 at 2014 3:13 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 25 Jan 2014 15:13:29 -0500

I have served in the military for almost 17 years. I have always passed a PT test no matter what the circumstances were. I am still in the top 10% when it comes to physical fitness within my BN. I find it ridiculous that a fresh 19-24 year old kid can't out PT me. I believe it comes from the lax standards enforcement we have become accustomed to over the last 14 years. I hold my Soldiers to the standard everyday and push them to exceed at everything they do. I just don't see the same coming from the leadership anymore.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 25 at 2014 3:15 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 25 Jan 2014 15:15:13 -0500

A couple co-workers and I were having a similar conversation to this recently... We were discussing that fact that we have all seen numerous times soldiers who are overweight or that cannot pass a PT test sent on deployment with a severe lack of training (mainly referring to our experience with Reserve and National Guard soldiers). This is mainly because they had been flagged and not allowed to attend training prior to the mobilization.

Where as no I do not believe that a soldier who cannot pass a simple PT test or Height/Weight/Body fat should be allowed to attend NCOES or other schools that are seen as a privilege to those who earn it. However, if someone is good enough to fill a slot of the deployment do we not owe it to them to at ensure that they are adequately trained and prepared to provide the necessary support to their peers, leaders, and unit as a whole?!

This may or may not be off the actual topic but I felt it was at least relevant. :-) Stepping down off my soap box now...

Response by CW2 Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 25 at 2014 3:25 PM

CW2 Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 25 Jan 2014 15:25:52 -0500

My first thoughts are the Soldier should be counseled and sent home. The squad leader should also be counseled for recommending that soldier for school and not ensuring their soldier meets the minimun standard. If you are failing as a leader to get your soldiers to the standard, then it needs to be documented. I know there are soldiers that don't care and don't put forth the effort to get to the standard, but those soldiers should not be the ones recommended for those schools.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 25 at 2014 3:41 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 25 Jan 2014 15:41:07 -0500

NCOES schools don't play around when it comes to passing a PT Test and height & weight requirement. They enforce the regulations and unis know that. My personal opinion is if you can't pass a PT test in any given day you should not be in the military.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 25 at 2014 3:45 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 25 Jan 2014 15:45:18 -0500

Sir if you are in an NCOES school now and fail the PT test or either bust tape you get a retest if you fail that you are going home no questions asked

Response by SFC John Brooks made Feb 5 at 2014 7:57 PM

SFC John Brooks — Wed, 05 Feb 2014 19:57:52 -0500

I was that student in March 2013. I knew I had problems with my push-ups due to carpal tunnel syndrome, but I never failed them on a PT test, even the 3 I took in preparation for attending WLC.

The PT Test was scheduled during the first week of class. Our Small Group Leaders had us do a couple of push-ups the day prior to the PT test just to evaluate our position and technique because of the new policies and the fact that they were getting a lot of failures on that part of the APFT. When I did mine, they pointed out that none of the push-ups I did would count on the test. I didn't understand because they were the same as I'd always done. They took a video of me doing a few more push-ups and played it back for me, and I was appalled. It was obvious that my body wasn't coming up as a single unit and I wouldn't count them either. They helped me correct my stance, but it wasn't enough to pass the test the next day, I failed by 9 push-ups and I was not at all happy with myself. Fortunately, the policy was that I would get another chance in a week, though I could no longer get higher than a 60% for the academic grade of the PT test nor be an honor graduate or make Commandant's List . I worked on correct push-ups for the entire week, injuring myself in the process. The 1SG called me into his office 3 times to see if I wanted to take a medical drop and start the course over next cycle, but I told him that In my opinion, If I couldn't pass the PT test, I had no right to be there.

Obviously, I passed the PT test and even managed to have a superior overall GPA on my 1059, but it was definitely a sobering experience.

Do I hold my unit or leadership at the time responsible? No, as I was raised in the Army knowing that my physical fitness was my responsibility all along. I wish my deficiency had been treated more harshly before WLC so that I could have made the necessary changes ahead of time, but I also knew I probably should have asked for that critique as well.

Response by SGT(P) Private RallyPoint Member made May 7 at 2014 5:59 PM

SGT(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 07 May 2014 17:59:17 -0400

I had OJT so I'm not real familiar with the requirements for graduating AIT. Isn't passing an APFT at 60-60-60 a requirement for graduation?

Response by SSG Robin Rushlo made May 7 at 2014 5:59 PM

SSG Robin Rushlo — Wed, 07 May 2014 17:59:49 -0400

I know when we left AIT before you got your unit assignment you had to pass APFT.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 4 at 2015 3:18 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 04 Mar 2015 15:18:49 -0500

I would want to know why they failed and how close they were to failing on their last APFT. I can think of half a dozen reasons that someone who is barely passing could fail after traveling to attend a military school. They could have picked up a stomach bug or other sickness, they may not be used to the elevation, they could still be suffering from jetlag/not sleeping properly, they may have been dieting heavily in preparation for the school and lost muscle mass...

I would want to understand the reason they failed first, the next question I would ask myself is will they likely be able to pass the APFT by the time the course is over?

If the student can complete the training and pass their APFT by the end of the course, I would be inclined to give them the additional attention they require. If I believed they probably would not be able to pass by the end of the course, I would send them home right away.

Response by SSG(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 4 at 2017 7:55 AM

SSG(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 04 Sep 2017 07:55:52 -0400

Did the Solider pass the 90/60/30 day APFT prior to arrival of their PME? If so, then what is the underlying issue/cause for them to fail at the school house? Its unfortunate that SM's fail at their PME either way the SM career is pretty much a NO GO.

Response by MSG Thomas Currie made Mar 31 at 2023 7:56 PM

MSG Thomas Currie — Fri, 31 Mar 2023 19:56:52 -0400

Interesting that RP has drug this thread out of the depths of history, shaken off some of the dust, and posted it as a "Recent Discussion" although there do not appear to be any new comments.

Almost all the comments over the last 9 years completely ignored MAJ Private RallyPoint Member's original question: "What should happen to their previous unit's chain of command?"

Yes the soldier who fails the PT test at the school has a lot of the fault -- but he (or she) does NOT have all the fault.

His unit selected him for the school without ensuring that he met standards.
His unit specifically certified that he had demonstrated meeting the standards.
His unit failed to prepare him to attend the school.

Clearly there were a number of leadership failures at his previous unit -- the questions that I see are
- How do we identify what mistakes were actually made and who made those mistakes?
- What does the chain of command need to do to correct/prevent those mistakes?

It is not as simple as just saying his unit screwed up. IF we really want to fix the problem, we have to identify the problem on a case by case basis.

Was this service member 'selected' for the school because the unit got an allocation at the last minute or because the unit got an allocation they didn't want but had to send someone anyway. I've seen both happen, sometimes both even happen together. It's not an excuse for either the unit or the soldier but it can put the unit in a no-win situation. What does the unit do when they are about to conduct a major training event and "higher" suddenly calls to say "We need you to send someone to this school before Monday" -- is the unit really going to send their best soldier? (We all know the answer to that.)

Was this a soldier who normally just barely passes the PT test? Was this a unit where the PT test standard isn't well understood or isn't properly applied. Let's face it, some PT test events have a certain amount of judgement in the standard. Does anyone doubt that there are some units that are more lenient counting reps than others?

These are all leadership failures -- but they are different failures by different leaders -- that require different solutions... and I'm sure there are other mistakes that occur from time to time.

So, yes, soldiers failing the entrance requirements at schools is a problem and it often shows some sort of failure at the soldier's unit, but there isn't any good one-size-fits-all solution. Sure, the Army could require each soldier's battalion commander to personally certify the soldier's fitness, then relieve any battalion commander whose soldier fails the PT test. That would very quickly put an end to soldiers failing that PT test at schools, but I honestly think that cure would be worse than the disease.

I suppose schools could forward the "Failed to meet course standards" 1059 to the responsible Division or Brigade and the Army could require the soldier's entire chain of command to investigate and respond, but I doubt those responses would tell us the real story. Maybe DA could stand up its own investigative office to look into each instance of a soldier failing school entry requirements.

Complex problems require complex solutions, but sometimes the problem just isn't worth the effort required to solve it.