Why is SSD being pushed on soldiers?

CW3 Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 20 Oct 2017 05:35:58 -0400

There seems to be a huge push in the ARMY today pushing SSD on soldiers. At what point is it no longer "self" development but rather some larger scheme to waste everyone involved's time - specifically disinterested leaders forcing irrelevant training on disinterested joes because of some downward pressure from CoC?

I can only speak for maintenance related MOS stuff, but it's literally brain dead click through training. There is little to no development being done, and it's a huge time burden for no benefit. How do you as a leader stomach forcing subordinates to endure this? Why are SSD completion rates being looked at within commands, and why are Commanders being evaluated by them?

Are there MOS where there is actually useful content in SSD?

TL:DR if Joe doesn't want to do it, let him ETS.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 20 at 2017 8:41 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 20 Oct 2017 08:41:24 -0400

it seems as thou its a way for them to keep us pre-occupied between NCOES schools. I sure as hell didn't learn much from my SSDs. In fact I know that most of us just skip right thru it and get it done. Some even get paid for it.

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 20 at 2017 11:14 AM

SPC Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 20 Oct 2017 11:14:50 -0400

I already completed my SSD1 Chief, and I don't really remember it beyond the clicking. Some of the stuff I remember because I learned it in training or I was interested in it but the rest of it, all gone.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 20 at 2017 12:44 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 20 Oct 2017 12:44:58 -0400

SSD I was nothing but stuff that I learned in Basic Training in 1998. I don't know why they don't just keep it in the respective management course (because you can't teach leadership imo).

Response by SGT David T. made Oct 20 at 2017 3:33 PM

SGT David T. — Fri, 20 Oct 2017 15:33:38 -0400

My guess is the training suffered from a resources problem. When I first heard of SSD, it sounded like a great idea. Unfortunately, as happens all too often, resource constraints hinder the actual execution. I saw something similar when I was on an OJT assignment to an AIT school when I was an intern. The leadership really wanted to improve the training and make it meaningful, but they were severely limited by resources which limited their ability implement their plans. So this, like so many other things turns into a check the block scenario.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 20 at 2017 9:40 PM

MSG Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 20 Oct 2017 21:40:30 -0400

Because SSD is now counted in Unit Metrics, and Metrics runs the shows

Response by SGM Erik Marquez made Oct 20 at 2017 10:04 PM

SGM Erik Marquez — Fri, 20 Oct 2017 22:04:19 -0400

Chief your not t wrong, but not all right either.
SSD and NCOES is set to provide a consist, and common level of knowledge.
If your "joe" is finding it "brain dead" simple, Congrats, you did well training them. Facts are, if that is the level set for that SSD course its because it was found to be knowledge lacking across the force in that peer group.
Now thats the TRADOC answer, the book answer . Reality might be, the course was built in a vacuum and it is not relative to current Sm taking the course,,, that does happen. Sometimes its a location thing where your units has already moved on to the "new" parts tracking system and the SSD course is still referencing the old system 75% of the force is still using.
Or worse, the POI took so long to write and then get approved and fielded, it is just plain out of date.
This is a time tested failure seen way back to the SQT days when Sm were tested on equipment still technically part of the MOS, but no active duty unit had seen that radio, Anti tank missile system, test equipment or sustainment software in years... but darned if you had better now know it if you wanted to score high and get permitted.

All that and it begs the question... at least two other service still ling testing to promotion I thing, air force and Navy
so Af and Navy guys (gender immaterial) when you take your "test" for the next rate, is it relevant to the system, equipment, boat, radio, weapon system you use NOW, or is it sometimes a "thing" you have never seen, or not used in your unit since you got there, or worse, outdated and no longer in use at all?
If the AF and Navy can make the testing process work..... then the Army needs to do some cross training