Advertisement

Search News


Browse Archives

News

ROTC Plus

March 29, 2011

Share This Story

FREE Daily News Alerts

Advertisement

A graduate of Dickinson College serving as an infantry platoon recently leader praised -- of all things -- his liberal arts education for helping his unit make military gains in the Kandahar province of Afghanistan.

One day, as he recounted in an e-mail that he sent to Dickinson President William G. Durden, the graduate, who was commissioned through Dickinson’s Reserve Officers Training Corps and majored in Middle Eastern history, found himself sharing small talk with five village elders. After he recited the first chapter of the Koran (which he learned as part of a class assignment), the first lieutenant earned the men’s trust, he wrote to Durden.

Soon after, one of the men handed over five small papers which appeared to be “night letters,” or notes left by the Taliban on local mosques or the doors of homes. Typically, such letters urge resistance or threaten violence to those who cooperate with American forces. These, however, were asking for help. “The three letters this man gave to me thus signaled a major shift in Taliban morale in our area of operations, and at the end of the day became very valuable intelligence information,” the unnamed lieutenant wrote.

This episode -- which demonstrates how core liberal arts subjects, such as foreign language, cultural studies and history can yield better-trained, more culturally sophisticated soldiers and officers -- illustrates the kind of thing that Dickinson’s administration and military analysts want to see happening more often. And, by ensuring that future military leaders learn on campus alongside more typical students, higher education and military officials hope to start bridging the divide that separates servicemen and -women from the rest of society.

On Monday, the college announced that Dickinson had received $100,000 from the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation to organize forums (one next month and another in the fall) that will help liberal arts colleges collaborate with neighboring military institutions of higher education. The forums will draw upon and look to strengthen several existing relationships between neighboring institutions: Dickinson and the nearby U.S. Army War College; Bard, Union and Vassar colleges and the U.S. Military Academy at West Point; St. John’s College and the U.S. Naval Academy in Annapolis, Md.; and Colorado College and the U.S. Air Force Academy.

While the number of paired-up institutions is small, college officials hope that the example of their postsecondary and military partnerships will create a wider impact among other colleges. “It sends a message,” said Neil Weissman, provost and dean of Dickinson. “Two sectors of higher education can, and in fact must, collaborate.”

Dickinson is looking to tighten ties between higher education and the military in other respects. College officials recently submitted a proposal (where the e-mail account of the first lieutenant appeared) to the U.S. Army to beef up its existing ROTC curriculum to include four years of foreign language, cultural immersion, a semester or year’s worth of study abroad among civilians, and a concentration in global security studies. Upon graduation, students would receive a commission with a “certification in global preparedness,” Dickinson officials hope. These requirements, all of which would be supervised by Dickinson faculty, would come on top of the standard ROTC curriculum, which is supervised by military personnel.

Durden said that if the proposal is accepted by the Army, he wants to help other colleges adopt more rigorous standards for their ROTC programs. A graduate of Dickinson’s ROTC program in 1971, Durden said traditional military education has erred by training most young officers chiefly in operations and tactics. “It’s very critical for the military to somehow reevaluate this and give some of the junior officers an opportunity to think in a more complex manner,” said Durden, adding that junior officers are increasingly being thrust into highly complex situations. “We have young lieutenants running cities.”

Military analysts lately have been touting the virtues of a liberal arts education at all levels of the armed forces. “We want lieutenants to be critical thinkers,” said Bill Johnsen, dean of the U.S. Army War College, who added that these skills were particularly important to impart to the war college’s students, who tend to be decades into their careers and occupy senior posts. Most of these students are on the brink of taking jobs in which they will serve as policy advisers and provide counsel on highly ambiguous issues, and in which they will have to persuade rather than command. “They need to get used to the give and take,” Johnsen said.

Durden argues that training in flexible thinking needs to be extended down the chain of command. This argument mirrors the one used by advocates for the liberal arts in higher education more generally: exposure to the liberal arts ought not to be restricted to the elites, but also provided to lower level officers (or entry-level workers, in the more general sense) so that they can adapt to complex and even unforeseeable situations.

“America arguably relies on its armed forces to perform a wider variety of functions than any other nation in history,” wrote the authors of "Keeping the Edge: Revitalizing America's Military Officer Corps," which was published by the Center for a New American Security. That paper, which Durden cited as greatly influencing the two initiatives at Dickinson, lays out the argument that a broad liberal arts education ought to be the foundation for future officers in the military. “In addition to demonstrating a high degree of proficiency in conventional state-on-state warfare,” the authors continued, “officers must also develop a broader skill set in politics, economics, and the use of information in modern warfare to cope with a more complicated and rapidly evolving international environment.”

But the melding of military objectives to educational pursuits is deeply discomfiting to some in academe. For example, the American Anthropological Association determined that the Human Terrain System, which embeds social scientists with U.S. Army or Marine combat units to collect ethnographic data, does not meet the discipline's ethical standards. “Where data collection occurs in the context of war, integrated into the goals of counterinsurgency, and in a potentially coercive environment,” the association’s report reads, “it can no longer be considered a legitimate professional exercise of anthropology.”

And, while Harvard University has announced the impending return of the Naval ROTC to its campus, incidents at other campuses -- such as Columbia University -- have fed the perception that the cultures of the military (with its emphasis on obedience to the chain of command) and higher education (which prizes questioning, debate and argument) are so different as to be incompatible to each other.

But this apparent chasm is one of the biggest reasons to bring the military and higher education into closer contact, said Dickinson officials. The true risk, said Weissman, isn’t that military imperatives will co-opt educational ones. “It’s the divorce and separation of the American military from democratic society,” he said.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates has made the same argument. “It is also true, however, that whatever their fond sentiments for men and women in uniform, for most Americans the wars remain an abstraction. A distant and unpleasant series of news items that does not affect them personally,” Gates said at Duke University in 2010. “For a growing number of Americans, service in the military, no matter how laudable, has become something for other people to do.”

To underscore the sense of disassociation, Gates said that the percentage of 18-year-olds with a veteran parent had dropped from 40 percent in 1988 to 18 percent in 2000 -- and is projected to fall below 10 percent in the future.

Some observers hope that efforts like the ones being launched by Dickinson will help to reduce that separation. “I think this is a terrific development,” Cheryl Miller, program manager for American citizenship at the American Enterprise Institute, said in an e-mail, and noted changes on campus to better integrate and serve veterans as other positive steps. “There’s really been a sea change in university attitudes toward the military, particularly since 9/11.”

But some in higher education said that it is not always the case that aspiring military cadets and liberal arts students are at loggerheads. Even at Bard College, there is more accord than discord, said Jonathan Becker, Bard's vice president for international affairs and civic engagement. For the past six years, Bard and West Point have shared what Becker called an “odd-couple relationship,” in which students sometimes attend classes at each other’s institutions, faculty travel to deliver guest lectures, and students and professors from both colleges mix sides to debate political issues. “What we have found is that the clichés about our respective student bodies don’t always hold,” he said. “Twenty-year-olds enjoy meeting and learning with other 20-year-olds.”

Advertisement
Advertisement

Matching Jobs

Comments on ROTC Plus

  • Good Catch!
  • Posted on March 29, 2011 at 10:15am EDT
  • Kudos to the 'unnamed lieutenant' and President Durden for highlighting the value of a liberal arts degree for soldiers.

    Although soldiers are free to join any program of their choosing, many of the programs that are supported by the military on behalf of the lower level officers or entry-level workers focus primarily on technical degree programs (business/management, information technology, and criminal justice). The programs in the liberal arts are few and far between in comparison to those general areas aforementioned.

    With military personnel being faced with so many different cultural values and norms, it is important that they be as prepared as possible to understand the background of the people that they may encounter. The varied general education curricula provides them with basic introduction, but they should be encouraged to do more to understand life in an integrated way.
  • ROTC Plus
  • Posted by Harry Nickens , Dean, Health and Human Services at St. Catharine College, KY on March 29, 2011 at 10:30am EDT
  • Excellent treatis on the influence of liberal arts in preparing leaders for the military. The conclusions in th eROTC Plus article are consistent with the findings that most leaders of the major companies in this country are liberal arts prepared.
  • Posted by Adjunct George on March 29, 2011 at 12:30pm EDT
  • Great article. Kudo's to Dickinson. As an ROTC trained officer in the early 1960's, I found our military officers much more receptive to discussion of different points of view than the political science department at my college. Looks as if times have not changed. My liberal arts education stood me in good stead in my 20 years in the USAF. I wasn't always popular with my supervisors but I was correct more times than I was wrong. A liberal arts education is a great basis for a military career.
  • Academics, think about implications of ROTC
  • Posted by Kathy Barker on March 29, 2011 at 1:30pm EDT
  • Before academics become another player in endless wars, they should think carefully about their involvement with the military. The article suggests that such a collaboration is logical and admirable and desirable, as if we are working towards a kinder, smarter military.....but do you really want to support occupation?

    Rather than make a smarter and kinder military, the big move by the the DoD to get ROTC on campuses is more likely to make a deeper militaristic educational system. The public school systems have already been heavily militarized, partly due to NCLB section 9528. People and organizations are afraid to say no to the military, or to even question its motives. They should.
  • Right Direction
  • Posted by Doug Lovejoy , VP at Alumni and Friends of Princeton University ROTC on March 29, 2011 at 3:45pm EDT
  • Many thanks to Inside HE for this article (forwarded me by Prof Stan Katz, who was awarded the National Humanities Award by President Obam this year). Dialogue between the military and the academy, especially the ones that produce the nation's "elite" is critical - as the current Libya situation (and other potential ME crises demonstrate.
  • Liberal education and the military academies
  • Posted by David Tritelli , Editor, Liberal Education at Association of American Colleges and Universities on March 29, 2011 at 4:00pm EDT
  • It's worth noting in this context that the military academies, too, have been very vocal in their calls for greater attention to liberal education outcomes in the preparation of military leaders. See, for example, the several articles on liberal education and military leadership published in the spring issue of the journal of the Association of American Colleges and Universities: http://www.aacu.org/liberaleducation/le-sp10/LESP10_index.cfm
  • Bridging the Gap
  • Posted by Susan Shwartz on March 29, 2011 at 5:00pm EDT
  • What Dickinson is doing with its ROTC program strikes me as an outstanding idea. I hope that my graduate university, Harvard, will do as well now as it moves to reinstitute its program.

    If the dean of the U.S. Army War College, which is the senior school of the U.S. Army, favors this, field-grade officers will take it out of Carlisle and into their postings.

    I think it will create a military with a broader intellectual perspective. This is good for both lateral thinking (important in command and in a highly mechanized service) and for a deeper understanding of the cultures in which they are based and from which they spring.

    I also think that civilians like myself will benefit too: the gap between the Armed Forces and civilians has become alarmingly wide, to the point where mutual fear and loathing are all too prevalent. That way could lie Praetorianism: Dickinson's and the War College's way strike me as a potential countermeasure.

    There's an excellent book by a Yale PhD who taught at West Point: A SOLDIER'S HEART. Very worth reading, just as the humanities are for the military, and military history is for civilians.

    Knowledge is really the best way to overcome fear and prejudice.
  • Subject Verb Agreement
  • Posted by Susan Shwartz on March 29, 2011 at 5:15pm EDT
  • That'll teach me to first-draft.

    "Ways," not "way."

    Sorry. It was a long day.
  • Classical education
  • Posted by Insufficiently Sensitive on March 29, 2011 at 10:00pm EDT
  • Well! Looks like the US is making one tiny step in the direction of... nineteenth century education. Which is an advance from the present.

    For example: TE Lawrence. Began his studies of Arabic at Oxford, which came in pretty handy in Arabia. Also picked up Greek (and probably Latin) in school, and one of his translations (of the Iliad, into English) is still in favor.
  • Soldiers need a good education, scholars need a spine
  • Posted by Sean D Sorrentino on March 29, 2011 at 11:00pm EDT
  • "A nation that makes a great distinction between its scholars and its warriors will have its laws made by cowards and its wars fought by fools."
    — Thucydides
  • A thought on 'perspective'
  • Posted by SMSgt Mac on March 30, 2011 at 4:30am EDT
  • Re-imagine this article as written with the understanding that most 'military' men and women are no less connected to the society they serve than the population at large. Very few 'military' make a career of it. We come, we serve, and most return to the non-military environs from which they came. Those who make it a career still have family members back home who can't even remember which branch of the service they are in, much less their 'specialty'. We are Citizens first, ‘military’ second -- I submit that the average GI is better versed in US History and Civics than his civilian counterparts on or off campus. We travel widely, actually ‘living’ in many different parts of the country and the world for years at a time. We live amid the local population forming associations and friendships that last lifetimes. We learn foreign languages through immersion as best we can, because very often the people we encounter prefer to practice their English. Far more of us enroll in universities and colleges than you suspect. We do so wherever we are stationed in peacetime. Now, with the advancement of the internet, we complete degree programs online from home and in the war zone. I could go on and on how 'connected' we are to the world, the nation, and our culture as well as the cultures of others. IMHO the ivory towers of 'Higher Ed' would benefit from the presence of the military on campus far more than the military would benefit from and expanded military presence on campus.
  • Liberal education
  • Posted by Richard Aubrey on March 30, 2011 at 8:30am EDT
  • When I was in the Army--69-71--I discovered something interesting. Lots of interesting things, actually.
    One, relevant here, is that if you have a nasty, grubby little technical specialty, the Army will find a nasty, grubby little technical job for you. There are many situations in the military which are analogous to the world of the sillyvilian and such things--paperwork, garbage, etc--have to be taken care of just the same.
    The Infantry has no civilian analog. Therefore, those with no nasty, grubby little technical specialty are put into the Infantry. Instead, if we speak of college majors, it will be the humanities and social science guys at the sharp end. Although born, bred and trained as a grunt, I had some time in Air Defense, all engineers and technical types. Trekkies, no less. Much easier to find literate conversation among the Infantry.
    So, efforts like Dickinson's are nice, but irrelevant to, at least, the Infantry.
  • Posted by Harry on March 30, 2011 at 9:30am EDT
  • As one who has received military, technical and liberal arts training (degreed up to the doctorate level), I can affirm the importance of each. The liberal arts traing is critical toward understanding historical, political, economical trends, identifying tendencies, understanding how people think, understanding how to think critically and making sound judgements. Unfortunately, I am not so confident that institutions teach these skills today.
  • Learning Goes Both Ways
  • Posted by Diggs , Major (ret) at US Army on March 30, 2011 at 9:30am EDT
  • I entered UW after five years in the Army, almost all of it spent OCONUS. I found that many of the ideas stressed in my Liberal Arts education were in complete contrast to what I had seen firsthand. When questioning the professors, my military experience was seen as a detriment to my "education", not a bonus. Real knowledge about what I had experienced just had to come from the professor or a TA that had never been to where I had been, or it was somehow false. The fact that I wore a uniform when I got first-hand knowledge of the area and people seemed to make it even more questionable.
    If colleges like Dickinson want to change that weird perception (that first-hand knowledge is secondary to book study) while helping those students who are also to be officers, then I salute them. But the change needs to be internal to the professorship, not in the student.
  • Posted by Richard Aubrey on March 30, 2011 at 10:30am EDT
  • Maj. Diggs.
    If first-hand knowledge were considered primary, why would we be paying those who purvey only second-hand knowledge?
    You can see how damaging your view could be.
  • Not just ROTC, Not just military
  • Posted by MIKEE on March 30, 2011 at 12:00pm EDT
  • I took a course in the cultural history of Japan as an undergrad. 20 years later, when I was sent to Japan by my semiconductor equipment manufacturing company, I got a great deal of respect from my coworkers because I knew who Atsumori was, when Tokugawa became Shogun, and knew Musashi was the greatest swordsman ever.

    It isn't just in the military that cultural literacy becomes an asset.

    However, the military has been going to foreign shores for serious purposes as their primary business for quite a while, and it is not surprising that the military recognizes the value of knowing a bit about the places they visit.

    What is surprising is that the academy's insularity, particularly from the military, keeps the academics re-learning this again and again.
  • Three Points of Contention
  • Posted by RM3 Frisker FTN , Political Science at UC Santa Cruz on March 30, 2011 at 1:45pm EDT
  • Point #1: Dan Berrett, author of article, wrote ... "perception that the cultures of the military (with its emphasis on obedience to the chain of command) and higher education (which prizes questioning, debate and argument) are so different as to be incompatible to each other."

    What military are you referring to? Certainly not the US Military. I spent nine-years in the Marines. Every day was a day of questioning, debate and argument. Those from other US military services I have met in Silicon Valley have similar stories about their military days spent questioning, debating and arguing.

    The academic perception that the US Military is a bunch of wind-up tin soldiers is akin to the worst racist stereotypes that bigots have toward a different ethnic group. Professors need to get over it and get out more.

    Point #2: Although ROTC programs would certainly prefer (not require) their students major in a STEM subject; what is required is taking a certain number of first & second year hard-science & math classes (e.g. 'physics for engineers' rather than 'physics for poets'). Other than a minimum number of STEM classes, an ROTC scholarship student can and often does major in English Lit, Poli-Sci, French, etc.

    Point #3: "Durden said traditional military education has erred by training most young officers chiefly in operations and tactics"

    This is mixing two different issues: ROTC college training vs post-ROTC specialty training.

    ROTC training is both some military classes plus whatever is req'd for a regular college major (STEM or non-STEM). Post-ROTC specialty training is where a young officer learns ops & tactics, often at a live training facility that looks nearly identical to IraqAfPak village in upstate New York, Virginia, Texas, or California staffed with IraqAfPak expats who are US gov't contractors.
  • Thanks for your service -- now, for a different outfit
  • Posted by Susan Shwartz on March 30, 2011 at 1:45pm EDT
  • Mr. Aubrey and Diggs, thank you.

    SPEAKING as the daughter of an infantry captain (WWII), I can tell you that my father (who left combat infantry after the Bulge for JAG Corps) venerated the liberal arts. I remember the time I got to the 13th century, and he ran around shouting about Chester and Leister and was right. He was thrilled when I decided to go on for the Ph.D. Not so much my mother, who had gone to business college.

    Diggs, I do see your point. Learning needs to go on on both sides. One thing that -might- help is to regard the "community of scholars" as a new outfit to which you've assigned yourself. Please do not beat up the butterbars; they are very young.
  • Occupation?
  • Posted by Gene , Major at USMC on March 30, 2011 at 5:15pm EDT
  • Kathy Barker

    Exactly which "occupation" did you have in mind when you wrote your post?

    Get out of your blinkered little ideological closet and smell the reality.