College Degree =/= leadership

[RogueLeader]

After due thought, I have come to the conclusion that having a College Degree does not directly confer Leadership Skills.  as evidence of this: Why does all branches have "leadership schools" for Officers?  When I was going through Squadron Officers School, they were teaching a lot on leadership.

Don't get me wrong, having a college degree does have benefits, such as more training in critical thinking, researching topics, extra writing skills, and not to mention the Technical Training for your chosen program.

Thoughts?

[Storm Chaser]

And it took you that long to figure that out?

[RogueLeader]

And it took you that long to figure that out?

No, but considering the almost dogmatic fight in the NCO thread that somehow a college degree is what makes an Officer/SNCO able to lead; that I would make this topic to challenge that assertion.

[Flying Pig]

What if your degree is in Leadership    Ready....FIGHT!

[AirAux]

Which of these do not contribute to the making of a Leader, "critical thinking, researching topics, extra writing skills, and not to mention the Technical Training for your chosen program."

If a college degree does not contribute to the making of a leader, why do the uniform services require it of their officer corps??  Is the military wasting giant sums on their Academies and ROTC programs?

Why is it so hard to see the value of a college degree in the making of a leader?

The mere fact that someone has stayed the course for four years and shown enough self-discipline in the pursuit and obtaining of a four year degree shows some of the qualities desired in a leader, does it not??

A degree shows ambition and the ability to concentrate on a goal.  A college degree demonstrates that a person has the ability to think logically and has demonstrated depth of knowledge in one or two specific areas.

A degree doesn't guarantee leadership ability, but there is probably a higher chance that out of 100 college graduates you will have more leaders than you will out of 100 highschool graduates.     

[Storm Chaser]

And it took you that long to figure that out?

No, but considering the almost dogmatic fight in the NCO thread that somehow a college degree is what makes an Officer/SNCO able to lead; that I would make this topic to challenge that assertion.

Hmm... I didn't get that from the discussion. But no, that's not why the Air Force and other services require a bachelor's degree to qualify for a commission.

On a different note, the Navy and Marine Corps have Limited Duty Officers (LDOs), which are selected for commission based on skill and expertise and are not required to have a bachelor's degree. However, they can't usually assume major commands.

[coudano]

Leadership =/= Command.

[RogueLeader]

Which of these do not contribute to the making of a Leader, "critical thinking, researching topics, extra writing skills, and not to mention the Technical Training for your chosen program."

If a college degree does not contribute to the making of a leader, why do the uniform services require it of their officer corps??  Is the military wasting giant sums on their Academies and ROTC programs?

Why is it so hard to see the value of a college degree in the making of a leader?

The mere fact that someone has stayed the course for four years and shown enough self-discipline in the pursuit and obtaining of a four year degree shows some of the qualities desired in a leader, does it not??

A degree shows ambition and the ability to concentrate on a goal.  A college degree demonstrates that a person has the ability to think logically and has demonstrated depth of knowledge in one or two specific areas.

A degree doesn't guarantee leadership ability, but there is probably a higher chance that out of 100 college graduates you will have more leaders than you will out of 100 highschool graduates.   

No, all those things that I mentioned make you a better manager.  Manager =/= Leader.  They also give you the skills to make more informed decisions.  That being said, that there are more opportunities to learn leadership skills; but not nearly to the extent of learning management skills

In all of my 160+ credit hours in Collegiate Classes; I have learned how to be a better manager than Leadership (there wasn't much about leadership.)  I have learned much more in CAP about leadership than college- I would rate it 95-5 ratio CAP/College split.  Of course you millage may vary.

[JayT]

After due thought, I have come to the conclusion that having a College Degree does not directly confer Leadership Skills.  as evidence of this: Why does all branches have "leadership schools" for Officers?  When I was going through Squadron Officers School, they were teaching a lot on leadership.

Don't get me wrong, having a college degree does have benefits, such as more training in critical thinking, researching topics, extra writing skills, and not to mention the Technical Training for your chosen program.

Thoughts?

I'm not sure exactly what you're trying to get at with this post. A college degree has nothing to do with 'leadership.' The purpose of a college degree is to challenge your assumptions and help you understand the world around you better. Some of this comes through your classroom and lab instruction, while some of it comes through the social interaction and networks you form. I know that I went into college with one very specific set of views, and came out with a much more opened mind.

From my experience as a Cadet in CAP, at least in my area, CAP got it backwards. 'Leadership' 'followership' and all of those other nonsense buzzwords that the textbooks bandied about are a means to an end, not the ends to the mean. You don't train someone to be a leader so they will be a leader, you train someone to be a leader so that a job will get done.

[RiverAux]

I don't think that anyone thinks that having a college degree confirms leadership abilities.  I daresay that there are very few college degrees that even have components that someone could stretch to say have any relation to leadership. 

Having a college degree simply indicates that you have advanced education beyond that received by most people in the country.  That by itself is a good reason to make it required to be a military officer. 

As to leadership itself, I'd say that CAP's courses cover more leadership topics than I learned in 7 years of higher education.  Not saying that they were all that great, but CAP does try. 

[SamFranklin]

This could become a good discussion. Here are a few points:

(1)  By talking about leadership "skills," versus education, you're already making a big assumption about the way to develop leaders. A skills-based approach is "Here are 5 steps for implementing One Minute Praisings."  You know how to do the process, but you don't understand the underlying principles that (supposedly) make that technique effective. An educational approach would look at the key factors affecting individual motivation. That means you need to study some psychology and history and stuff like that. The AF doctrine says that it takes a little of both to make a good leader.

(2)  A college degree can indeed have benefits in improved critical thinking, communications, etc. But that's not to say the purpose of a college education is to achieve those benefits.Some of us believe that an education is intrinsically good in itself. Some philosophers go so far as to say that the minute you put education to a utilitarian benefits test, you debase education, and that the only pure "goods" in the world are things that are done for their own sake, not in pursuit of a benefit down the road. Stanley Fish writes about this perspective in the NY Times a lot. YMMV.

(3)  for a really big discussion go look at whether the military is still served by the nineteenth century division between commissioned and non-commissioned officers. In 1800, if you were rich you could read and you had economic interests to defend, hence the commission. If you were poor, you could not read, and the best you could hope for was NCO status. (This fact is what motivates Iago to seek revenge against Othello.) But we're a (supposedly) class-less, democratic society, not England or Prussia where there's an aristocracy. Even more, now it's 2013. Lots of airmen have associates degrees. NCOs often have bachelors degrees and are highly educated. I knew a CMSgt who was "ABD"  (all but dissertation).  Maybe the old "enlisted only" track and "officer only" tracks are outdated. Maybe a MSgt with a bachelor's degree and 18 years experience oughta have more standing and authority over a 22 year old lieutenant. But that's another story.

I'm a retired teacher. End rant.

[RogueLeader]

After due thought, I have come to the conclusion that having a College Degree does not directly confer Leadership Skills.  as evidence of this: Why does all branches have "leadership schools" for Officers?  When I was going through Squadron Officers School, they were teaching a lot on leadership.

Don't get me wrong, having a college degree does have benefits, such as more training in critical thinking, researching topics, extra writing skills, and not to mention the Technical Training for your chosen program.

Thoughts?

I'm not sure exactly what you're trying to get at with this post. A college degree has nothing to do with 'leadership.' The purpose of a college degree is to challenge your assumptions and help you understand the world around you better. Some of this comes through your classroom and lab instruction, while some of it comes through the social interaction and networks you form. I know that I went into college with one very specific set of views, and came out with a much more opened mind.

That's not what others were asserting; which are the assertions I am challenging.

From my experience as a Cadet in CAP, at least in my area, CAP got it backwards. 'Leadership' 'followership' and all of those other nonsense buzzwords that the textbooks bandied about are a means to an end, not the ends to the mean. You don't train someone to be a leader so they will be a leader, you train someone to be a leader so that a job will get done.

I train Leaders so they have a leg up on their peers, so they have a better opportunity than they would have had otherwise.  Learning the leadership and followership skills, in my experience, have helped my immeasurably increased my employability, because not only have I learned to be proactive and attention to detail, I can also take initiative in the absence of direction.  How many high school students learn that?  From what I've seen, they're conditioned to only do what they are told, and not question it.

[Storm Chaser]

Honestly, I don't see the point to this discussion. No one has asserted that a college degree equals leadership. No one said that a degree makes leaders or that people without degrees can't be leaders.

The previous discussion on the NCO Program Launched thread was about whether a degree should be required for new members to become officers. Some think that a degree should be required and others don't. That was part of the main discussion.

Some also took the opportunity to question the need for degrees in general and even to criticize those who promote higher education. Others defended higher education without necessarily agreeing that it should be required in CAP. But no one said that college education equals leadership. It doesn't, so what's your point?

[Eclipse]

The problem with the entire conversation is that the mental math doesn't balance without taking the other leaps.

Which means that we're left with the only two other options when something doesn't fit - either the planners didn't think things through to the
logical conclusions, or they are being less then forthcoming about the ultimate plans.

[Ned]

The problem with the entire conversation is that the mental math doesn't balance without taking the other leaps.

Which means that we're left with the only two other options when something doesn't fit - either the planners didn't think things through to the
logical conclusions, or they are being less then forthcoming about the ultimate plans.

Yep, those are the only two possibilities, all right.   

If something doesn't make sense to you personally, it is proof that the leadership are obviously shortsighted and illogical or -- even worse -- [whispering] they are hiding the ball.[/whispering]  Quod Erat Demonstratum.

Or just maybe . . .

Perhaps one of the reasons that you cannot make the mental math work is there is no active "plan" to require college for some or all CAP officers in the first place.  It can be hard to carefully evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of a non-existent plan.  A difficult feat of mental math to say the least.

There is a discussion here on CAPTalk, of course.  As there should be.  And probably in dozens of squadron parking lots throughout the nation.  Heck, maybe even somebody on one of the dozens of assorted CAP committees has asked "what if . . . ?" 

We can and should continue to discuss our PD program and officer appointment standards.  All of our programs and standards should be reviewed periodically and improved over time.

But my point is there is no current public or secret "plan" upon which to perform your mental math.  Really.  I've attended every BoG meeting for the last three years, and nothing was ever discussed about requiring college one way or another.  Not a single word that I can recall.  Not even informally over breakfast.

So let us continue the discussion without excessive worry about leaders being "less than forthcoming."

[Eclipse]

The problem with the entire conversation is that the mental math doesn't balance without taking the other leaps.

Which means that we're left with the only two other options when something doesn't fit - either the planners didn't think things through to the
logical conclusions, or they are being less then forthcoming about the ultimate plans.

Yep, those are the only two possibilities, all right.   

If something doesn't make sense to you personally, it is proof that the leadership are obviously shortsighted and illogical or -- even worse -- [whispering] they are hiding the ball.[/whispering]  Quod Erat Demonstratum.

Actually, that's exactly what it means.  Any plan or idea which cannot be summarized in one simple paragraph is generally doomed to failure or is not being completely disclosed.

Or just maybe . . .

Perhaps one of the reasons that you cannot make the mental math work is there is no active "plan" to require college for some or all CAP officers in the first place.  It can be hard to carefully evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of a non-existent plan.  A difficult feat of mental math to say the least.

Or maybe I wasn't referring to the college degree discussion, per se, but the entirety of the NCO discussion that invited the next leap.

It was not announced as "let's allow our prior service NCO's to progress" (period dot), it was announced as "NCO's are the backbone of the military, so we need them too, and
we're going to grow our own organically".   That opens the "why?" door, as well as the "what's broken that needs fixing?" door.

You unequivocally cannot provide one segment of your organization to have grade with "weight" without changing the game for the rest of the organization, especially not in a volunteer paradigm.
You can't have "real" NCOs without "real" officers, at least not and still maintain the credibility this is apparently seeking.  The only way to get us to any "real" in our officer grades is
raising the bar there, too.  Whether that means requiring college, granting actual commensurate authority regardless of staff posting, or some sort of internal OCS, remains to be seen,
but it has to be on the spreadsheet with this "backbone" rhetoric.

Since the math doesn't work, that only leaves the possibility that the second and third steps were not considered, or there's much more to come.

[AirAux]

Concur.

[Major Carrales]

I always assumed the idea was that having a college degree is a "benchmark" of being a professional.  Thus, as in States that require teachers to have Bachelor's, and even Master's degrees, to teach (by the way the "degree" does not automatically equal "teacher")

Goes back to the idea of a "classical" education, where one has a "universal" education.  I assert the reason is that someone who has gone to a "university" would have been trained in writing, reading, history, science, culture (music and arts) as well as being a specialist (via their "major") and could use those skills for management and even, as an educated person, command.

Leading is more than just "hey, let's go this way follow me!" it is "let's see where to go, examine with cost benefit analysis and decision making based on all available intelligence (you know there could be a reason why such is called "military intelligence.") analyze the situation and synthesize an action that is also germane to the mission objective/orders and then let us go this way....follow me."

Oh..."Street" and "Book" smarts in isolation, and mutually exclusive" make an incomplete person.  One must have both..

The US military's uniformed services probably use this for the same reason.

My question is....all speculation and "common sense" aside, what is the official reason such a degree is required for a commission?

[Mitchell 1969]

Which of these do not contribute to the making of a Leader, "critical thinking, researching topics, extra writing skills, and not to mention the Technical Training for your chosen program."

If a college degree does not contribute to the making of a leader, why do the uniform services require it of their officer corps??  Is the military wasting giant sums on their Academies and ROTC programs?

Why is it so hard to see the value of a college degree in the making of a leader?

The mere fact that someone has stayed the course for four years and shown enough self-discipline in the pursuit and obtaining of a four year degree shows some of the qualities desired in a leader, does it not??

A degree shows ambition and the ability to concentrate on a goal.  A college degree demonstrates that a person has the ability to think logically and has demonstrated depth of knowledge in one or two specific areas.

A degree doesn't guarantee leadership ability, but there is probably a higher chance that out of 100 college graduates you will have more leaders than you will out of 100 highschool graduates.   

Those stats get skewed when you factor in that a degree is a particularly American requirement for commissioning. RAF and British Army, among others, do not require a degree for commissioning, for example. So, their "higher chance" of getting leaders is gone, according to your argument.

[Blackhawk]

I concur.