Reforming Professional Education for Army Officers

From the Army Times comes an interesting article about a Congressional inquiry and recommendations for Army officer education.

In general, the subcommittee, headed by Rep. Vic Snyder, D-Ark., found that the education system is “basically sound” but has much room for improvement.

For example:

One requirement to reach flag and general officer rank is to complete professional training in joint service matters, an outgrowth of the 1986 Goldwater-Nichols Act that tried to reduce interservice rivalries.

Officers are getting the joint-service training, but the curricula and depth of what they learn give the impression that completing coursework is more a matter of fulfilling the requirement for promotion than learning something that would actually help in a future assignment. If anything, professional training for flag and general officers is lacking, the report says.

Fitting professional education into a career is difficult, the report acknowledges, but urges the services to find a way to make time.

“There is a tension between the officer’s assignments necessary for career development, the needs of the joint force, and professional military education, whether it is at a military institution or a civilian institution,” the report says. “Officers are finding it increasingly challenging to complete their required [professional military education], which is only compounded by current operational requirements.”

Sending more officers to civilian institutions early in their careers is another recommendation, and the panel suggests having them study something more than just military-related subjects.

Army officers tend to be pretty smart people, but they are going to pay attention to the things that matter to their career, and fit what else they can around that. That doesn't mean they aren't intellectually curious; they just focus that curiosity to what matters.

By: Brant