6
6
0
Commentary: 3 reasons to rethink Army University
http://www.armytimes.com/story/opinion/2015/11/16/commentary-reasons-rethink-army-univ/75822152/
The Army is testing the possibility of reorganizing the Army’s education enterprise for Soldiers by consolidating military training and post-secondary education.
Our training will thus become schools and it will become longer.
Thoughts?
http://www.armytimes.com/story/opinion/2015/11/16/commentary-reasons-rethink-army-univ/75822152/
The Army is testing the possibility of reorganizing the Army’s education enterprise for Soldiers by consolidating military training and post-secondary education.
Our training will thus become schools and it will become longer.
Thoughts?
Posted in these groups: 
Education
NCO Academy
Education NCO Academy
Edited 9 y ago
Posted 9 y ago
Responses: 5
3
3
0
The USAF has been doing this for years. We still have many schools which are short, but the good thing is that instructors are required to obtain their associates degree in order to keep their instructor credential and curriculums are required to be certified occasionally in order for Airman to obtain college credits for courses. It certainly helped me by eliminating several elective college courses.
(3)
(0)
(1)
(0)
SMSgt (Join to see)
Maj (Join to see) don't trumpet the "greatness" of the CCAF program in regards to AETC training too fast! As someone that possess two CCAF degrees and was a tech training instructor I can assure you the CCAF requirement does very little to enhance the program. The biggest issue is that you HAVE to have a CCAF degree in order to teach an Air Force course...if not, then you must remain in the inter-service portion of training (if applicable). An AAS from any other institution precludes you from instructing the Air Force portions of training. At places like Sheppard AFB, airmen do not receive CCAF credit for courses that fall under the inter-service training umbrella because the Army and Navy instructors do not possess CCAF degrees (although they are available if they choose) even if they do possess degrees from other institutions. Personally I received both CCAF degrees without ever sitting in a single college course. Between CLEP tests and credits earned through PME, tech-training and UGT I was able to get two CCAF degrees.
(1)
(0)
Maj (Join to see)
SMSgt (Join to see) - I've never dealt with the CCAF stuff in a joint environment, but although it's not a perfect program it certainty puts us ahead of our peers from other services when it comes to college. As you mentioned, CCAFs are very attainable and are acceptable by man accredited programs as two years of school. Working on mine certainly helped me reach my educational goals.
I agree with you that it doesn't make sense that holding an associates from a civilian institution doesn't check that box for instructors.
I agree with you that it doesn't make sense that holding an associates from a civilian institution doesn't check that box for instructors.
(0)
(0)
SMSgt (Join to see)
Maj (Join to see) you are correct...I didn't mean to come off that negative about the CCAF program itself. I too have used my CCAF degree as a foundation for a BS in Management and now working on an MBA.
(1)
(0)
3
3
0
2
2
0
A few thoughts:
- Army University is not a possibility. It has been worked in concept for a few years now and is already being stood up organizationally at Fort Leavenworth, KS.
- The Army Leader Development Strategy and the Army Leader Development Model include three training domains (institutional, operational, self) with a combination of training, education, and experience within each domain but prioritized differently within each domain (ie experience more in operational domain, education more in institutional domain).
- I do not see practical skills and education as being mutually exclusive concepts. There is no reason these can not be mutually reinforcing concepts.
- The Army Operating Concept (and anyone who thinks realistically about the future) argues that we will need agile and adaptive leaders. Agility and adaptive leaders require critical and creative thinking abilities. Critical thinking is about thinking comprehensively about the problem while creative thinking is about the solutions. Critical and creative thinking require a combination of practical skills and education in my opinion.
- Army University is not a possibility. It has been worked in concept for a few years now and is already being stood up organizationally at Fort Leavenworth, KS.
- The Army Leader Development Strategy and the Army Leader Development Model include three training domains (institutional, operational, self) with a combination of training, education, and experience within each domain but prioritized differently within each domain (ie experience more in operational domain, education more in institutional domain).
- I do not see practical skills and education as being mutually exclusive concepts. There is no reason these can not be mutually reinforcing concepts.
- The Army Operating Concept (and anyone who thinks realistically about the future) argues that we will need agile and adaptive leaders. Agility and adaptive leaders require critical and creative thinking abilities. Critical thinking is about thinking comprehensively about the problem while creative thinking is about the solutions. Critical and creative thinking require a combination of practical skills and education in my opinion.
(2)
(0)
MSG (Join to see)
Sir,
I'm not sure I understand your response. You state that the Army University model is not a possibility, but your last comment states 'Critical and creative thinking require a combination of practical skills and education'. Can you explain?
Also, you stated it had already been stood up at Fort Leavenworth. Does that include education for enlisted Soldiers as well?
I'm not sure I understand your response. You state that the Army University model is not a possibility, but your last comment states 'Critical and creative thinking require a combination of practical skills and education'. Can you explain?
Also, you stated it had already been stood up at Fort Leavenworth. Does that include education for enlisted Soldiers as well?
(0)
(0)
COL Jason Smallfield, PMP, CFM, CM
MSG Beverage,
- Organizationally, Army University is already being stood up.
- Conceptually, the purpose of Army University will require years of effort to accomplish.
- Think of it this way. In WWII, the Army to defeat the Axis began to stand up in 1939, jumped into high gear on 7 DEC 41, but did not accomplish its mission until AUG 45. The organization and the concept are related but different issues.
- By "Army University model is not a possibility" I mean that it already is a reality organizationally and has been working conceptually for a few years.
- By "critical and creative thinking require a combination of practical skills and education" I am an engineer so let me use a few engineer examples such as gap crossing, field landing strip repair, or vertical construction. Each of these examples require practical skills (field craft, field expedient solutions, how to make things happen on the ground) combined with education in the art and science of each (bridging, horizontal construction, vertical construction). The same can be written for each branch and WfF.
- Does education include enlisted Soldiers as well? Yes but the current status and applicability varies by MOS. For example 12M Firefighters and 12Y Geospatial Soldiers already receive college credit for attending AIT, ALC, and SLC. After graduating ALC, a firefighter through training, education, and experience has already earned an associate's degree in fire science. Efforts for other MOS, however, are not nearly as mature. Some MOS have started this effort while other MOS have not even started. These efforts are worked at branch school level and not Army University (CAC-E) level.
- Organizationally, Army University is already being stood up.
- Conceptually, the purpose of Army University will require years of effort to accomplish.
- Think of it this way. In WWII, the Army to defeat the Axis began to stand up in 1939, jumped into high gear on 7 DEC 41, but did not accomplish its mission until AUG 45. The organization and the concept are related but different issues.
- By "Army University model is not a possibility" I mean that it already is a reality organizationally and has been working conceptually for a few years.
- By "critical and creative thinking require a combination of practical skills and education" I am an engineer so let me use a few engineer examples such as gap crossing, field landing strip repair, or vertical construction. Each of these examples require practical skills (field craft, field expedient solutions, how to make things happen on the ground) combined with education in the art and science of each (bridging, horizontal construction, vertical construction). The same can be written for each branch and WfF.
- Does education include enlisted Soldiers as well? Yes but the current status and applicability varies by MOS. For example 12M Firefighters and 12Y Geospatial Soldiers already receive college credit for attending AIT, ALC, and SLC. After graduating ALC, a firefighter through training, education, and experience has already earned an associate's degree in fire science. Efforts for other MOS, however, are not nearly as mature. Some MOS have started this effort while other MOS have not even started. These efforts are worked at branch school level and not Army University (CAC-E) level.
(1)
(0)
COL Jason Smallfield, PMP, CFM, CM
SGT Laskaris,
- We must agree to disagree on several points.
- I agree Soldiers and Marines need to go to the field, practice tactics and combat skills as well as leadership appropriate to their rank and billet. This is training.
- I disagree that degrees and credentials confuse the rank and file, that they provide nothing in the way for readiness for war, and are not useful.
- Credentialing includes education but it also includes licenses, certifications, and recognized expertise levels. By your thought process, an Army electrician does not need to be a certified electrician, an Army firefighter does not need be to be certified as a firefighter, a leader is not improved by obtaining a Project Management Professional credential, or a Soldier is not improved by studying the history, doctrine, and theory of warfare.
- You are talking about training alone. I am talking about training, education, and experience. As a Marine you are not familiar with the Army Leader Development Strategy and Model. I recommend you review both (can find by Google search). They may help to educate and inform, and eventually modify, your viewpoint.
- We must agree to disagree on several points.
- I agree Soldiers and Marines need to go to the field, practice tactics and combat skills as well as leadership appropriate to their rank and billet. This is training.
- I disagree that degrees and credentials confuse the rank and file, that they provide nothing in the way for readiness for war, and are not useful.
- Credentialing includes education but it also includes licenses, certifications, and recognized expertise levels. By your thought process, an Army electrician does not need to be a certified electrician, an Army firefighter does not need be to be certified as a firefighter, a leader is not improved by obtaining a Project Management Professional credential, or a Soldier is not improved by studying the history, doctrine, and theory of warfare.
- You are talking about training alone. I am talking about training, education, and experience. As a Marine you are not familiar with the Army Leader Development Strategy and Model. I recommend you review both (can find by Google search). They may help to educate and inform, and eventually modify, your viewpoint.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google