Have we missed the mark on NCO education?

SGM Erik Marquez — Wed, 08 Feb 2017 21:36:48 -0500

Response by SGM Erik Marquez made Feb 8 at 2017 9:42 PM

SGM Erik Marquez — Wed, 08 Feb 2017 21:42:34 -0500

Are we wasting time and resources with what we offer for our Non Commissioned Officers?

For training it is said it should be "Tough, Realistic and challenging" to be considered worthwhile.
Here are the thoughts of three NCO's in Senior Leaders Course, Fort Benning TODAY.
"Dude, Im here for this crap right now.. regardless of what anyone tells you, there's no hard tests, nobody fails, and your off at 1300 every day.. complete waist of time."

"What a waste, taught noting, learned nothing, and no thinking required"

"Stupid, the instructors teaching us are barely literate and teaching us "writing" what a joke."

Officers go to schools and are taught by professors and credentialed folks,,leaving with certifications ,degrees and titles.
NCO's leave schooling with credit cards maxed out from clubbing and free time.

Response by MGySgt Rick Tyrrell made Feb 8 at 2017 10:05 PM

MGySgt Rick Tyrrell — Wed, 08 Feb 2017 22:05:10 -0500

No, we did not miss the mark we have forgotten how to teach. The years of war have made wanting to learn difficult due basic leadership skills have diminished and our leadership does not know where to begin

Response by SFC George Smith made Feb 8 at 2017 10:39 PM

SFC George Smith — Wed, 08 Feb 2017 22:39:10 -0500

The Old schools of Basic leadership needs to be brought back and the fundamentals of leadership and patrolling and Land-navigation needs to be brought back...
the Kinder gentler military needs to shoved up the Cupcakes and Snowflakes 4th POC...
Get Back to fundamentals and Kick ass training...

Response by SSG Waldo Yamada made Feb 8 at 2017 10:42 PM

SSG Waldo Yamada — Wed, 08 Feb 2017 22:42:30 -0500

I've been in NCLDP before wlc. I think I got into the program while phasing out phase. We should encourage correspondence course like running. Although walking is discouraged it's allowed.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 9 at 2017 3:19 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 09 Feb 2017 03:19:23 -0500

The problem is what we are training. WLC was just basic training for Sergeants. I learned almost nothing I got something out of the hour on counseling's and NCOERs and that was about it 17 days of wasted time. ALC was better but there was still to much time on basic tasks. like we had a block of instruction on fingerprinting. If you don't know how to do that by ALC you probably don't need to learn it there.

Response by CSM Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 9 at 2017 8:44 AM

CSM Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 09 Feb 2017 08:44:21 -0500

I believe we are missing the mark. The first problem is we 'select' NCOs as instructors and send the to a short course and now they're capable to teach? Last time I checked in order to be a certified teacher you need a Bachelor's degree and at least a couple of semesters of student teaching. Our instructors are set up for failure from the start. Also, the requirements to get accepted into the teaching program were not overly difficult, but stringent with a lot of people not getting in (from my experiences in college anyway.

The curriculum notwithstanding, there is a lot of wasted time in the Army professional education classes (this goes for the Officer side as well). Things could be sped up if they wanted to be, but that would mean that not everyone would pass. So I think the real question is, what is the point of the courses? Is it to actually teach our soldiers something, or it is just a check the block like "sure, we 'professionally develop' our soldiers?"

Response by SSG(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 9 at 2017 9:19 AM

SSG(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 09 Feb 2017 09:19:27 -0500

It's a two-pronged failure. The first prong is that NCOs are not prepared to be NCOs when they are Specialists. They go to the promotion board, get recommended, and when they make points (or the points drop) they are Joe Specialist one day, and then Sergeant the next, with no further training or preparation until BLC. They are immediately expected to be awesome NCOs right from the get-go, and most usually fail at that, because the system failed THEM. What should be done, IMHO is that Specialists who get recommended for promotion be immediately lateralled to Corporal, and start having NCO responsibilities and on the job training (OJT) with a seasoned NCO. This provides them an introduction to leadership, and takes them out of their peer comfort zone, and makes them start thinking and acting like NCOs. You cannot take a junior enlisted Soldier, pin stripes on him, and then expect leadership excellence right off the bat. It's unreasonable expectation and sets the Soldier up for failure when s/he fails to lead properly, because s/he does not understand what is expected.

The second prong is that the Army training that is out there has become check the block because it is old, tired, and everyone sees the same powerpoint slides over and over again, no matter what unit one goes to, because everyone downloads the same material found by using Google. Relatedly, the massive amounts of 350-1 training required each quarter and year takes away from the primary mission and MOS training/OJT time. So Soldiers click through online courses, not absorbing, or even looking at the material presented, just to get to the final quiz and printable certificate. Thus all the money the Army is throwing at civilian agencies to produce is being wasted. Does the Army need all the 350-1 training? Possibly. But someone who is that much of a scumbag who will take advantage of an inebriated female, will not be dissuaded by a powerpoint slide, or catchy Army slogan (SHARP, POSH, AIM, etc.). Should Soldiers take advantage of some of the training? Of course. The online SERE course is actually full of good stuff, if you actually read it and absorb even 50% of it. You never know when you might need survival skills. But again, the onerousness of the sheer volume of training that is required forces Soldiers to not care, and simply do it to check the block.

Response by Cpl Justin Goolsby made Feb 9 at 2017 9:52 AM

Cpl Justin Goolsby — Thu, 09 Feb 2017 09:52:21 -0500

No, I don't believe so. I'm sure the classes are just as effective today as they were years ago. Now I can't speak for the classes the Army gives, but for Marines it is Pass/Fail and if I was getting out at 1300, it was probably because we were out at 0400 doing some Motivational Run or such.

The fact of the matter is, there will always be people who want to learn and people who want to go through the motions. I enjoyed Cpls Course because I wanted to be a good NCO. I wanted to better the Marine Corps by shaping my Junior Marines into future NCOs.

The main issue is a lot of these courses are prerequisites for promotion. If you don't take the class, you don't get that rank and you don't get that bump in pay. That's the main problem, a lot of the people who take the classes are just doing it for brownie points to look good for promotion or retention. It's not that they care about the subject matter, it's just a check in the box for whatever their goal is.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 9 at 2017 9:33 PM

MSG Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 09 Feb 2017 21:33:39 -0500

I was excited to attend WLC as an 11B. I tried to make the most out of it, but I did have an issue with it that I consider to be a waste of time and resources. Every single test I took in that course was on a computer, where I could open up FM's and AR's, then use control+f to find the answer. Not a single question on those tests were complex enough for it to require you to reference a manual or regulation. Using control+f means I don't have to study, I don't have to remember, and I don't have to internalize. That isn't tough, realistic or challenging.

I did ALC as a 37F. It was built into the psyop qualification course. It was a semi-deep dive into MDMP, JOPES, COG analysis, and the CARVER matrix. The test on that was not open book, and it was timed. If you didn't manage your time wisely and study your material, you wouldn't pass that test. Many people failed it thinking it was another simple army test, and they were removed from the school house and sent back to their old MOS. That was tough, realistic and challenging. I could very well find myself with PCS orders tomorrow, sending me out of group to be a staff planner - without that knowledge I would fail.

I have not attended SLC, however I have done a course that is considered an in-between "NCOES" for ARSOF NCO's who have completed ALC but not yet attended SLC. The class makes you competitive for promotion, but it is not a traditional NCOES. Its 8 weeks fully online, and it is NOT self paced. Each week you are given a topic, a powerpoint that will familiarize you with the topic, and several references and required readings. You are then required to write a paper on the subject as your weekly homework. Your papers have to be in accordance with APA format, as well as correct usage of citations. Your grammar is graded, and the depth of your answers matters. The paper topics are complex and you will not be able to address them properly unless you actually read the material. A paper topic can be something like this: Choose five different interagency partners and consider the methods or resources that are in place to improve collaboration and cooperation between your unit at the tactical, operational, and strategic decision making levels. Identify advantages and disadvantages of working with each interorganizational partner, and describe their relationship with the national security coucil. The questions are tough, they are extremely realistic as SOF utilizes interagency partners, and the course challenges you to learn. Absolute best NCO development course I have ever attended - and ARSOF has one for each enlisted grade.

I understand that NCOES probably wont implement something like that, but I think its more important to have a new NCO, or NCO who is moving up in their career return to their unit from an NCOES feeling comfortable and well rounded with their new knowledge, empowered to lead their subordinates and able to think critically and make solid decisions within their craft. If thats not happening then I believe its a waste of time and resources.

Response by SSG Ed Mikus made Feb 10 at 2017 2:57 PM

SSG Ed Mikus — Fri, 10 Feb 2017 14:57:41 -0500

SGM, I attended BNCOC in 2008 and SLC in 2014; both at Ft Gordon, and both were a complete waste of my time. I, personally, would like to see tough prerequisites that prove your technical proficiency and topped off with a tough course that people actually fail. In my case, as a previous 25B a CISCO and Microsoft certification could be the prerequisite.

Response by COL Charles Williams made Feb 11 at 2017 12:09 AM

COL Charles Williams — Sat, 11 Feb 2017 00:09:12 -0500

Yes