Posted on Jun 24, 2015
What would you do to improve professional military education (PME)?
12.5K
45
32
4
4
0
PME
Education
Responses: 11
8
8
0
Lt Col (Join to see) Good Question. I can think of several things.
1. (For the Army) we need to get back to basics, of Garrison Leadership. Much of how the Army Runs, and what leaders do when not in combat was stripped from the POIs, after 911, to ensure all the necessary and emerging issues and combat skills, TTPs, and lessons learned were covered. So, we dropped things like counseling, inspections, supply management, training management, maintenance, readiness etc... And some courses, like PLC (PLDC/PNCOC) were shortened to ensure all the leaders who needed could get through. Leaders need to be tactically sound, but they also need to be able to operate in the Garrison in order to be ready for the next operation. I believe this is underway.
2. I actually think Distance Learning (DL) has a place to cover general topics and background before one shows up for class. But going to PME is a essential, as in my view you best learning comes from your interactions with your peers in small groups. Straight DL is not good for PME.
3. Last, for the Army, on the Officer Side, I believe the courses (tiers are) are good, and at the Major and LTC level we intermingle with the other branches; so, all must be similar. But, I believe for MAJ school (CGSC/ILE) we need to go back to a selection board (like SSC, the war college) vs. everyone goes. As you rise through the ranks, I think selections for key schools is the right thing, and those selections are then tied to who is still competitive for promotions. For, the Army, in my window (95/96) the selection rate for CGSC was 50%. That meant, effectively, that if you did not get selected you were at risk of getting promoted, staying for 20, and would in likely hood never command a battalion. Those who were selected, were considered the chosen ones, and went from school to Battalion S-3 and XO jobs. And, unless they screwed up were likely going to be LTCs, and were the pool from where Battalion Commander selection was made. I think we screwed up when we went to universal ILE (everyone goes), and I believe we are back, or getting back to selection based schooling.
1. (For the Army) we need to get back to basics, of Garrison Leadership. Much of how the Army Runs, and what leaders do when not in combat was stripped from the POIs, after 911, to ensure all the necessary and emerging issues and combat skills, TTPs, and lessons learned were covered. So, we dropped things like counseling, inspections, supply management, training management, maintenance, readiness etc... And some courses, like PLC (PLDC/PNCOC) were shortened to ensure all the leaders who needed could get through. Leaders need to be tactically sound, but they also need to be able to operate in the Garrison in order to be ready for the next operation. I believe this is underway.
2. I actually think Distance Learning (DL) has a place to cover general topics and background before one shows up for class. But going to PME is a essential, as in my view you best learning comes from your interactions with your peers in small groups. Straight DL is not good for PME.
3. Last, for the Army, on the Officer Side, I believe the courses (tiers are) are good, and at the Major and LTC level we intermingle with the other branches; so, all must be similar. But, I believe for MAJ school (CGSC/ILE) we need to go back to a selection board (like SSC, the war college) vs. everyone goes. As you rise through the ranks, I think selections for key schools is the right thing, and those selections are then tied to who is still competitive for promotions. For, the Army, in my window (95/96) the selection rate for CGSC was 50%. That meant, effectively, that if you did not get selected you were at risk of getting promoted, staying for 20, and would in likely hood never command a battalion. Those who were selected, were considered the chosen ones, and went from school to Battalion S-3 and XO jobs. And, unless they screwed up were likely going to be LTCs, and were the pool from where Battalion Commander selection was made. I think we screwed up when we went to universal ILE (everyone goes), and I believe we are back, or getting back to selection based schooling.
(8)
(0)
SFC Jason Heritage
I completely agree, the way it is now to much is left on the individual to complete online on their own. We all know there are those that just click through to get through. Resident training is where our leaders on all sides will gain the most benefit from training.
(1)
(0)
COL Charles Williams
Maj (Join to see) - That is how Army ILE (CGSC) was... then it went to universal ILE... now I think we are swinging back to the 50% cut.
(1)
(0)
CSM Jennifer Dehorty
Spot on Sir! We tend to swing to extremes when it comes to PME; we are in a 'all or nothing' environment currently.
If we look at the items that are getting Commanders in trouble, just as you stated, supply management, etc. For the NCOs, basic counseling is a must. And not the 'check the block' stuff, but career development, crisis management, etc. It seems meaningless to survive deployment only to return stateside and lose Soldiers to poor risk management.
If we look at the items that are getting Commanders in trouble, just as you stated, supply management, etc. For the NCOs, basic counseling is a must. And not the 'check the block' stuff, but career development, crisis management, etc. It seems meaningless to survive deployment only to return stateside and lose Soldiers to poor risk management.
(1)
(0)
Lt Col Stephen Petzold
Interesting to see the Service differences. In the USAF our Maj school is Air Command and Staff College (ACSC) and there is a competitive selection to go in residence. If you do not get selected to go in residence you can still take it by distance learning, either in a seminar format or individually. So everyone can complete it, but you still have a competitive discrimination that is used in future promotions.
(0)
(0)
7
7
0
I've actually been giving this A LOT of thought over the last few weeks.
It's my belief that at the end of our initial service (approximately 4 years), and completing the associated PME (usually NCO and equivalent Officer level), the service member should have the requisite "credits" for a College Level degree. I'll focus on the enlisted side for a moment, because it is easier to explain, but I "believe" that the Officer side would scale as well.
It takes 60~ Credits to get an AA/AS/AAS and 120~ for a BA/BS. That includes all general education level credits. Over the course of 4~ years, our PME should provide enough ACE qualifying courses to provide a Degree in "Leadership" or at least a Focus/Major in "Leadership" when the requisite general education credits are attained (Math, English, etc).
As a Marine, I was required to take courses like Fundamentals of Marine Corps Leadership, Corporals Course, Sergeants Course, SNCO Course, among others. I believe the Army and other branches have similar level PME, just named other things. Why can't these courses be accredited by ACE and appear on our JST? (I believe many are now).
We also have the Marine Corps University, and there are other University level courses out there offering programs in such things like Information Management, or even the Service Academies. We have entire Commands dedicated to Training & EDUCATION. Let's put our money where our mouth is, and actually generate certificates, and diplomas.
The student would still need to prove things like Technical Writing (often covered by an MOS School, or a DANTES), basic writing (Covered by a CLEP or a college course), and would have to apply to a college to get a degree, but... if we make it easy to get a degree because we are sending them to schools that are actively giving them one... maybe, just maybe we'll have more people take advantage of it.
It's my belief that at the end of our initial service (approximately 4 years), and completing the associated PME (usually NCO and equivalent Officer level), the service member should have the requisite "credits" for a College Level degree. I'll focus on the enlisted side for a moment, because it is easier to explain, but I "believe" that the Officer side would scale as well.
It takes 60~ Credits to get an AA/AS/AAS and 120~ for a BA/BS. That includes all general education level credits. Over the course of 4~ years, our PME should provide enough ACE qualifying courses to provide a Degree in "Leadership" or at least a Focus/Major in "Leadership" when the requisite general education credits are attained (Math, English, etc).
As a Marine, I was required to take courses like Fundamentals of Marine Corps Leadership, Corporals Course, Sergeants Course, SNCO Course, among others. I believe the Army and other branches have similar level PME, just named other things. Why can't these courses be accredited by ACE and appear on our JST? (I believe many are now).
We also have the Marine Corps University, and there are other University level courses out there offering programs in such things like Information Management, or even the Service Academies. We have entire Commands dedicated to Training & EDUCATION. Let's put our money where our mouth is, and actually generate certificates, and diplomas.
The student would still need to prove things like Technical Writing (often covered by an MOS School, or a DANTES), basic writing (Covered by a CLEP or a college course), and would have to apply to a college to get a degree, but... if we make it easy to get a degree because we are sending them to schools that are actively giving them one... maybe, just maybe we'll have more people take advantage of it.
(7)
(0)
TSgt (Join to see)
I would get rid of it it has no value. SNCO teach more about what the AirForce needs than any professional military education. And it will save money
(0)
(0)
Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS
TSgt (Join to see) Is that directed at the original post or this thread in particular?
(0)
(0)
Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS
2ndLt Matthew Johnson As an example, and using AMU since you brought it up.
Student goes to AMU and completes General Education requirements. The student submits a Transcript Request from them to MCU. MCU reviews the AMU and JST/SMARTS transcript. If the student has enough credits for a "Leadership Degree" it is awarded by MCU (as opposed to AMU). AMU is essentially a "Partner school" (in this example).
If you do the same thing with the Service Academies however, the "prestige" of being a X Academy Graduate (even if it is via "off campus"), what is that worth on a resume?
Student goes to AMU and completes General Education requirements. The student submits a Transcript Request from them to MCU. MCU reviews the AMU and JST/SMARTS transcript. If the student has enough credits for a "Leadership Degree" it is awarded by MCU (as opposed to AMU). AMU is essentially a "Partner school" (in this example).
If you do the same thing with the Service Academies however, the "prestige" of being a X Academy Graduate (even if it is via "off campus"), what is that worth on a resume?
(0)
(0)
Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS
2ndLt Matthew Johnson I absolutely concur that part of the prestige is the rarity, but some of that is the Logistical realities involved. They can only support so many physical students.
But... The question as posed was how would I improve PME. I'd leverage it to make it as relevant as possible to Civilian Education, which means "aligning" it with Certificate or Degree programs. We have the tools to do that. Willingness is another issue.
But... The question as posed was how would I improve PME. I'd leverage it to make it as relevant as possible to Civilian Education, which means "aligning" it with Certificate or Degree programs. We have the tools to do that. Willingness is another issue.
(0)
(0)
3
3
0
All schools need to be in residence. Putting your young SrA in the barracks with their peers is a must if you want bonding and real involvement with their peers. I also like the ideas of joint service leadership courses.
(3)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google