What would you change about current NCOES schools?

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 29 Oct 2013 15:30:54 -0400

Being an ANCOC (now Senior Leader's Course) graduate myself (Feb 2003), I find myself looking back at what I learned. As an officer I look at some of things that are missing that I never considered important when I was wearing hard stripes.

One thing I would change in the current ALC/SLC course are:

1 - Classes on the NCO and Officer relationship

2 - The MDMP process for SSG and above (Future Battle Staff NCOs)

3 - Classes taught by officers (?) (Similar to NCOs teaching officers in OCS/OBC)

Any thoughts?

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 29 at 2013 3:38 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 29 Oct 2013 15:38:15 -0400

Given the fact that there isn't a First Sergeant Course anymore, I think we should focus on that level of leadership education at the SLC level. At least under my SLC POI (74D), we were all hungry to learn more but we were only given a few hour blocks of instructions.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 29 at 2013 3:56 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 29 Oct 2013 15:56:27 -0400

Honestly, sir, I don't think we need more classroom instruction. Skills can be introduced at NCOES schools but for the most part, they are not. If you're getting the kind of experience that one needs to become an effective leader, 90% of what you "learn" at NCOES is a refresher of what you've already learned. What we need is for senior Soldiers (NCO and officer alike) to take younger Soldiers under their wing and teach them, mentor them, coach them until the junior Soldier can take the senior's place. As my 1SG told me, our job is to train our replacement. If we all do that, the Soldiers that want the opportunity to serve a higher levels will have it.

As for the current curriculum of NCOES, I think it needs to be more scenario based and it should require more problem solving and outside the box thinking. We will not get where we need to go by just memorizing what the book says to do.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 27 at 2014 1:35 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 27 Jan 2014 13:35:26 -0500

What I would change is the relevance of the information being taught. I've completed BNCOC and ANCOC, learned a lot of good information but it was pretty useless. For my MOS we were required to complete 6 weeks of Cisco training, I'm glad I got the training but i've never used what was taught. I've taken Unix Administrator twice but never really used it. The rest of the course was mainly theory, theory is good but what good is it if you've never had the opportunity to practice what you've learned? Perfect case and point i've taken Server 2k3 about 3 times, an Active Directory course once all theory. When it came down to it I could answer your questions about the courses but couldn't put it into practice.

Response by CSM Michael Poll made Feb 19 at 2014 9:31 PM

CSM Michael Poll — Wed, 19 Feb 2014 21:31:23 -0500

I would ditch the online training portion and make it all classroom and field. On line is not a guage of a Soldiers ability, eyes on training is.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 15 at 2014 8:40 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 15 Aug 2014 08:40:46 -0400

DO not require a CC prior to entry into the class....

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 15 at 2014 10:06 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 15 Aug 2014 10:06:54 -0400

I think the change needed is the redundancy. ALC-CC or SSD-2 had several aspects of it that were covered in the ALC Residency course. Writing in the Military, SHARP and EO, etc. While I see the importance of these classes, they are taught in other realms. Eliminating those from one side or another, or in some instances even both, would allow for more time in residency to cover the course work or to go more in depth, or on the online side, allow for other classes that we do not get in other areas of work.

Response by SGT Richard H. made Aug 15 at 2014 11:16 AM

SGT Richard H. — Fri, 15 Aug 2014 11:16:24 -0400

I think that the biggest thing I would change, looking back on PLDC, has already changed with the advent of WLC (correct me if I'm wrong), which is to make it MOS (or at least branch) specific. We all (branches) do things difeently, so leadership takes different skills/methods

Response by CSM Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 25 at 2014 3:22 PM

CSM Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 25 Aug 2014 15:22:47 -0400

CSM,

The SSD training is seriously broken and desperately needs corrected. I have been the CSM at my new Battalion since April and that is the common complaint from my Soldiers when I visit my companies. The site freezes or is down too often, the help-desk doesn’t answer their calls or questions, CAC issues at home and MAC compatibility problems were my biggest complaints.

Distance Learning is cost effective and thus will always be a part of NCOES. I don’t know about you but I took the Non-resident USASMA phase and found it frustrating. If I could change anything about that it would be to set it up like the Officers ILE with a two week Phase I, DL Phase II, and a two week Phase III. I would have learned more if it was set up that way.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 20 at 2014 3:50 AM

MSG Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 20 Dec 2014 03:50:46 -0500

I think it should be easier to drop an NCO/Soldier from the course and a lot more time should be spent in the field.

If my job as an NCO is to train Soldiers from the rigors of combat, then why am I not receiving more instruction in the field? I was one of very few infantrymen in my WLC classroom and while the field instruction was VERY simplistic, many of the non-combat MOS NCO's with me just did not understand what was going on during a battle drill. Obviously we were not expected to be tacticians, but just to operate at a level of what I consider to be basic knowledge. They should give us another two days, at minimum, in the field. From sunrise to sundown teach these battle drills to the standard, coach, delegate and follow up with the class before they are evaluated so a leader can learn to think critically during a critical time instead of going through the motions. I did enjoy the academic part of the course and learning more about the garrison environment.

I think it should be easier to drop an NCO/Soldier from the course for a few reasons. My Team/Squad leaders set the example for me as a young Soldier every single day and there was no question about how high the standards were. I emulate that to my Soldiers, and they know I come to work every day ready to show them the standard and hold the standard. I watched an entire classroom of students in WLC complain about having to counsel soldiers, check barracks rooms, teach classes to subordinates, etc. Most of those people showed up to the course on time, did the bare minimum and walked away from there with their certificate. This makes me sick to think that these people are allowed to lead and mentor Soldiers. Personally, I don't think they deserve the stripes if they wont commit to the lifestyle yet they will pass this course by barely applying themselves. If these types of people are going to get short-timers syndrome at an NCOES why is the Army wasting the time on them? I'm not trying to act like I am gods gift to leadership, but I would never let myself drop to that level. Soldiers deserve better leadership than that.