Structured Self Development (SSD): Does it meet the intent it was designed for OR is it another form of "death by powerpoint"?

SFC Toby Northen — Thu, 25 Dec 2014 07:54:26 -0500

I'm curious as to what the opinion from the "field" is on Structure Self Development (SSD). The Army message was put out reminding all SGT(P)s (all Sergeants who are promotable) that they have until 8 January 2015 to complete SSD-2. As of 9 January, all SGT(P)s who have failed to complete SSD-2 will be removed from the promotion standing list. They'll have to complete SSD-2 and then reappear before the promotion board again. The Army is synchronizing the SSD with NCOES; this is the next step in the synch process. What are your views/opinions on the SSDs?

Response by SFC Dr. Joseph Finck, BS, MA, DSS made Dec 25 at 2014 8:15 AM

SFC Dr. Joseph Finck, BS, MA, DSS — Thu, 25 Dec 2014 08:15:50 -0500

SFC Toby Northen Prior to retirement, I completed SSD IV. The modules were arduous, the material good, but not always well presented, and the exams were challenging. I don't agree with the requirement of SSD for promotion if we are to maintain the current NCOES system. If this is a replacement for the "common core" phase of NCOESs then perhaps, but the SSD courses should be shortened. I read that SSD was also replacing the 1SG course. Personally, I never agreed this was not an NCOES course and I do not agree with it being discontinued.

Response by SFC Boots Attaway made Dec 25 at 2014 9:09 AM

SFC Boots Attaway — Thu, 25 Dec 2014 09:09:34 -0500

It seems to me just another way to remove the Jr NCO from his soldiers and doing his job as a first line supervisor. While I agree that one can never stop learning or can never get to much education, the Sgt should have matured enough to get something like this done in their down time.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 25 at 2014 6:56 PM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 25 Dec 2014 18:56:08 -0500

I personally think that the SSD's should not have replaced the common core. I think it should have been in addition to, the common core training. Now, I know or at least I think I know, its one of the many ways the Army is attempting to save money. If the Soldier actually had to go to the Common Core phase of an NCOES school, the Army will be spending money on the common core portion of that particular school. Whereas, now the SSD's is online all the Soldier have to do sign up log in and start the course. Now, here's the dilemma, how many Soldiers are actually learning anything from the SSD's? I'm pretty sure Soldiers are finding other ways of actually getting the answers to the test, without having to pay any attention to the online material. Whereas, if they were in a class, they could ask and answer questions pertaining to the different subjects petaining to common core. Now, when it comes to Army Soldiers, it is very important that we educate each other properly. Given the fact that some of us has been promoted very quickly through the ranks. We (The Army as a whole) need to stop and take a real good look at the dynamic of ranks, and decide what would be the BEST way of teaching our Soldiers of today, not the most cost efficient way.

Response by TSgt Joshua Copeland made Dec 25 at 2014 7:56 PM

TSgt Joshua Copeland — Thu, 25 Dec 2014 19:56:36 -0500

Sounds a lot like what the AF is doing with our PME.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 25 at 2014 7:57 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 25 Dec 2014 19:57:41 -0500

I believe that SSD was a good idea it does for the most part does help bridge the gap, reinforce NCO values, and remind us as leaders to always continue to learn.

Response by 1LT Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 25 at 2014 8:34 PM

1LT Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 25 Dec 2014 20:34:35 -0500

This is coming to the Officer side of the house as well, as "OSD-1" will be introduced to 1LT(P) and CPT's looking to attend their career course. I haven't seen a hard date as to when it is coming.

As I've never taken an SSD/OSD I don't have a real opinion of whether or not it is helpful, but my personal anecdotal experience is that there are very few things that are better than instructor to student face to face education.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 26 at 2014 12:00 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 26 Dec 2014 12:00:31 -0500

I picked no opinion, simply because I don't know what the Army would have in it's place, if we didn't have it, and I don't know what it would be instead. Even though I would like to see improvements to the course.

When soldiers who will never get sent to WLC are being required to take SSD1, so that battalion or company can report 100% of SPCs have SSD1 done, there are going to be a lot of soldiers reporting that they didn't learn anything. Of course they didn't.
I honestly didn't think I had learned a lot from it, didn't remember anything when I was done. But then I went to WLC, and realized that I had learned more than I thought I had. I think of SSD1 as a familiarization. If you don't learn a thing out of it, at least when you get to WLC the concepts won't be brand new.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 26 at 2014 11:58 AM

MSG Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 26 Dec 2014 11:58:37 -0500

Every Soldier is responsible for their own career. If you know you need it for promotion and to move up, then just do it. If you are happy where you are and wand to QMP, then that is okay too.

Response by SFC Toby Northen made Dec 26 at 2014 1:35 PM

SFC Toby Northen — Fri, 26 Dec 2014 13:35:41 -0500

A concern I have for SSD is it may be considered the one-size-fits-all answer to budget cuts while still continuing to train Soldiers to be NCOs.

Sometimes it just seems like the DoD's answer to everything is PowerPoint slides.

Someone mentioned in an earlier comment that everyone learns and retains information differently. ( http://thepeakperformancecenter.com/educational-learning/learning/principles-of-learning/learning-pyramid/ )
So if, based upon the learning pyramid, we only learn 5% by lecture, 10% by reading, 20% by audio-visual and 30% by demonstration (which SSD barely qualifies for audio-visual and demonstration) this means we're learning/retaining, at best, 65% of what is being pushed through SSD. I would submit it's more like 15%-35%.

the learning pyramid - various percentages of retention.

the learning pyramid -There are various methods a learner can engage in which will allow them to learn information at various percentages of retention.

Response by COL Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 26 at 2014 1:48 PM

COL Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 26 Dec 2014 13:48:42 -0500

You are your best career manager. Those of us that have initiative and drive will likely separate themselves from their peers.

The Army, and the services for that matter, wants folks who have potential. Potential is created through the seizure of opportunities!

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 26 at 2014 1:49 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 26 Dec 2014 13:49:38 -0500

I agree with SSD to a certain extent. While the classes do serve the purpose of reminding the NCOs of their responsability to Lead and Train, it is full of redundancy. It is full to the brim of EO and SHARP classes, things that the entire mass learn on a yearly, if not quarterly, basis.

If SSD was more geared towards things like TLPs and such, I would think it would be much better, but I digress.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 26 at 2014 6:55 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 26 Dec 2014 18:55:54 -0500

As an NCO that has completed SSD 1 and 2 and now working on SSD 3 I think the SSDs are taking away one very important aspect of resident military training; peer to peer think-tanks. I don't think SSDs are all bad, but I do think there needs to be a greater emphasis on resident training to allow for more face to face interactions. All the Army is doing by allowing more digital interactions is creating a force that will eventually be unable to work together face to face.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 26 at 2014 7:14 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 26 Dec 2014 19:14:20 -0500

Grate question and topic.

I believe that SSDs is the way for big Army to make sure that soldiers on all levels get the education that sometimes lacking from their leaderships. And a way to unify across the board

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 28 at 2014 2:57 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 28 Dec 2014 02:57:52 -0500

I do not agree with the SSD. It is only just a hurdle that most people just click through the slides in order to get complete. Just as with most of the online distance learning education that the military offers, it is just a check the block in order to progress. In all effect, it does not replace the mandatory schooling needed in order to progress, such as WLC, ALC, and SLC. From my experience completing it faster does not even help with getting a school date for these, as it is all based on the willingness of your unit to send you.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 28 at 2014 4:23 PM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 28 Dec 2014 16:23:34 -0500

It's stuff like this that makes me glad I commissioned.

Response by SSG Trevor S. made Dec 28 at 2014 4:33 PM

SSG Trevor S. — Sun, 28 Dec 2014 16:33:37 -0500

Death by Good Idea Fairy.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 28 at 2014 6:16 PM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 28 Dec 2014 18:16:58 -0500

I see it as just a requirement. The SSDs do contain good info, especially SSD4 that contains info that will benefit a junior NCO serving in a joint environment.

When I was a SGT chasing points I took the advice of a SFC, "Do all the SSDs before the Army controls them to limit promotion rates." Funny thing I have been in rank for a year and thanks to finishing my SSDs as a SGT I was able to attend SLC and graduate.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 13 at 2015 8:34 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 13 Feb 2015 20:34:54 -0500

That really depends on you. The information is there; whether you learn it or not is your decision.

Response by Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS made Feb 13 at 2015 8:59 PM

Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS — Fri, 13 Feb 2015 20:59:08 -0500

Reading through the descriptions, it appears to be very "similar" to the USMC's Marine Corps Institute (MCI) Correspondence Course Learning Program.

That said, there is definitely a "check the box" aspect, which I'll address in a second, however there can also be a "universal standard of learning" as well.

Depending on MOS, portions are going to be repetitive or "refresher" however, there is going to be a lot of really good information if you actually do the coursework.

That brings you to the "check the box" aspect. Checking a box, isn't a bad thing. You want to check boxes. It makes you competitive among your peers. Check them fast, check them early. If there are two people, and one of you checks the box first, that's the one who gets the school, the board, the slot, or whatever.

Speaking from experience, I knocked out every correspondence course that was available early. Because once you do, people just leave you alone about it, and it eliminates one more excuse about why they can't send you to X school or on Y TDY.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 13 at 2015 9:30 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 13 Feb 2015 21:30:18 -0500

to be honest, some of it was very redundant but informative. It was a good refresher and I learned many things that helped me prosper in WLC.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 13 at 2015 9:47 PM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 13 Feb 2015 21:47:16 -0500

It becomes a check the block course when the presentation is wrought with errors and the presenter is dull and monotone.

Response by SPC Christopher Smith made Mar 9 at 2015 8:19 AM

SPC Christopher Smith — Mon, 09 Mar 2015 08:19:41 -0400

I don't agree with SSD, in theory it is a great source of information, in practical terms no one is going to read nor retain all that information. Everyone who has done SSD1 is trying by any means to get it over with as quickly as possible, and stop the mind numbing experience. I'd imagine the next few levels are the same. Although I do not agree with SSD, I do it because it is a box that needs to be checked to keep my life simple. Honestly, I hope SSD sticks around because the Army has not done well in creating systems for awarding, PT, or promoting.

Response by SSG(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 9 at 2015 9:07 AM

SSG(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 09 Mar 2015 09:07:23 -0400

I think it is good that the Army is finally standardizing professional education. There was a lot of confusion with the different phases of ALC, SLC, etc.

I did SSD1 as soon as it was available while I was in Afghanistan. It took me 3 weeks to complete it because we only got one day a week off, and the software was so buggy that it would "forget" entire blocks that I had already completed. The slow link between the states and A'Stan made it even more frustrating. But I recognized that SSDs would become important and I got it done.

I did go through each module and yes, I took notes in my waterproof notebook, which I still have and refer to. So, yes it helped me to learn and understand more material that is indeed important.

I do have to admit though that I did not pay as much attention to SSD2 because the modules were more "death by PowerPoint" and I wanted to get through it as soon as possible.

A lot of Soldiers do just click through the modules in order to get it done, but I try to have them actually read the information, when I can do so. I fear though, it has become like the SkilPort classes, where Soldiers just click through to get it done.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 9 at 2015 1:58 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 09 Mar 2015 13:58:00 -0400

I don't agree with it only cause its to easy to cheat. Especially with NG they push guys through it just to make numbers so all the privates go together and pass the different test questions and answers to each other. I've also seen it done with the NCO's. If that issue could be fixed i think would be great.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 17 at 2015 12:14 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 17 Apr 2015 00:14:43 -0400

In theory it is a good idea. So what winds up happening is it is tolerated and ran through as fast as possible. Nothing gets learned and the money the army put into it gets wasted. In my opinion we should be teaching each other one on one.

Response by SFC Marcus Belt made Apr 18 at 2016 3:57 PM

SFC Marcus Belt — Mon, 18 Apr 2016 15:57:26 -0400

Did SSD3. Glad I won't have to do SSD4.