View Single Post
Old 04-24-2012, 20:11   #15
Tree Potato
Guerrilla
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: NoVA
Posts: 171
Some thoughts from a current AWC student (and at the end of month 10 of an 11 month program, not that I'm counting)...

Most of the big issues brought up have been addressed by the accreditation process and by the ever growing list of standardized JS directed Joint Learning Objectives. There are still issues, but the sky isn't falling. Some sheltered academics need to take a deep breath.

The key aspect of the war colleges, IMO, is helping officers to grow from rigid thought processes and to learn to critically think through more complex and ambiguous issues, while still knowing when to apply tried and true black and white rules. In this task AWC has successfully raised the capability of everyone attending (from what I see everyone's thinking ability has improved, all from different arrival baselines; naturally some improved more than others).

As for making it "tougher", there's a point of diminishing return. There are two ways to make it tougher; either by raising the standards to get certain grades or by having a more regimented curriculum. As for grades I don't see AWC grades as being significantly different from civilian grad schools. For example where I earned a master of science degree a certain professor wouldn't give lower than an A-- (yes, two minuses), but no B's; even at AWC there are C's, D's, and F's, just not many. Further, not all students are created the same and the variety of roles and missions my fellow students will assume later don't lend themselves to a single rigid schoolhouse process which would naturally result from any effort to make it tougher. Actually keeping up with the existing curriculum is a challenge; 12-16 hour days of studying are not uncommon while researching a paper, writing, and taking the JS mandated courses. But as they say, it's only a lot of work if you do it. Which leads me to my last thought...

The school shouldn't have to make it tougher... colonels should (and most do) set higher personal standards than the school ever should. If we're not harder on ourselves than the organization is, something is wrong. By the ~20 year career point most know their strong and weak areas, and leaving enough flex in the academic schedule to work on filling those personal gaps is valuable. Those who don't work on those gaps quickly get sidelined in their next position and rapidly transition to civilian clothes. Meanwhile, those who take advantage of the resources here and aggressively work to overcome personal weak areas will likely continue to progress in future jobs, and result in better GOs than could be produced from a tougher (read: less flexible, more standardized) school program.

My only regret is I've yet to hit the Maxwell golf course this year. I'll have to rent some clubs after packout and at least get in a round.
Tree Potato is offline   Reply With Quote