I've had a mixed (civilian & PME)
academic career. 15 years at a mid-level state university, adjunct at 5 private universities, adjunct at a community college, 5.5 years full time at CGSC plus Consulting Faculty status for 20 years, 8.5 years at NDU, and now 2.5 years at a major state university.
My experience has been that I have generally experience more freedom to pursue my professional interests both in the sense of fewer restraints and mor positive support in the PME institutions than in all the rest. The exceptions (negative and positive, respectively) to that statement come from one component within NDU under one Director - no longer there - and currently at the U. of Oklahoma. Generally, academic freedom in the PME institutions I've been associated with has been well respected in terms of the AAUP definition. In those terms, it has also been generally respected in the civilian insttuions. The positive support side is where both have fallen down in those cases where they did not meet the ideal. In civilian institutions there can be pressure to conform to a model of political correctness. Bob notes a similar "pressure" from his experience at AWC but it was one I never felt at either CGSC or NDU. I would also note that at American U - one of the most Liberal institutions in the country - the Dean of the AU School of International Service, Dr. Louis W. Goodman, made certain that PCitis did not reign and that all political pursuasions were treated with respect. I would say that the same attitude exists at OU and at CGSC, AWC/SSI, and NDU when I was there.
Cheers
JohnT
We can disagree and do so amicably. If we do in fact...
Quote:
Originally Posted by
120mm
I agree with Bob's World on this one. I think the STUDENTS should not only be driving the curriculum, but the students, who actually have recent and relevant experience in warfighting, should be shaping our country's warplans, not some 75 year old contractor in the CTD who's last military service was 40 years ago.
That's fine -- and I do not disagree with you on the students shaping war plans but that's not what Bob's World said; he said "strategy." Not the same thing at all. I also agree with you on the contractors.
Quote:
I am disgusted by the paternal, "I'll tell you what's good for you" mindset of the current PME system.
Your prerogative though I doubt that said disgust has done or will do much to change that -- people will do people things...
I had the dubious distinction of attending several civilian institutions of higher learning, two State and two private in my brief and abandoned pursuit of a degree in Political Science. I went to four schools and abandoned that pursuit because I could not stand "I'll tell you what's good for you" mindset at ALL of those universities. People will do people things...
Quote:
But we've had this discussion before.
And may again. :D
From Bob's World:
Quote:
"...While I respect Ken's insights, we'll have to agree to disagree on this one.
Not a problem.
Quote:
First, the Constitution does not come into play on this issue, so save that round for another fight.
Sure it does or else I wouldn't have mentioned it. The Executive Branch is responsible for the Foreign Policy and the Military efforts of the US as funded and more or less agreed by Congress. While the service colleges are part of the Executive Branch and should certainly have inputs to the development of strategy to execute the will of our elected leaders, those leaders and those they appoint to positions that by law are charged with the 'shaping of strategy' are the ones that should do just that. Diffuse the effort and you diffuse the responsibility -- committees do not make good decisions...
There's a chain of responsibility and you're advocating ignoring it?
Quote:
I've worked at the Pentagon, I've served on MACOM and Combatatant Command staffs...
So have I but I'm now retired so all I can do is offer sympathy for your pain. :D
Quote:
and too often the guys who should be thinking the most, just do not create the time to do just that. (see back to comments about how to be successful)...
I agree and often saw the same thing at the same level. Much of their lack of time in my observation came from their efforts at micromanaging things that they didn't even need to know about, much less be involved with and more came from their golf games and inclinations to do other things. Regardless of reasons, I agree your point that there are distractions is totally valid.
Quote:
...But the guys at the Service Schools, armed with the ever refreshed perspectives of their students, have just that.
Perhaps, I'm not sure but I suspect they have as many distractions as the folks in the echelons above reality.
Quote:
I think it is a cop out to simply be an amplifier for putting out the party line.
I agree with that but I am not at all sure what you suggest is the case.
Quote:
I think the Secretary and the Service Chiefs need to put these guys to work to challenge and shape strategy. Obviously any product is just input; and needs to then be sent to the decision makers to consider as to if they will use it or not.(emphasis added / kw )
Ah, so we do not disagree after all. Had you said that earlier, I would merely have pointed out that they in fact do that on a regular basis and that this study LINK which was produced prior to the invasion of Iraq in an attempt to shape (provide input) to developing strategies was just what your addition to your earlier comment now advocates and with which I agree.
Or perhaps this LINK more current product aimed at doing the same thing? :eek:
I think the Colleges are doing their part -- I also think 120mm and Bob's World have a legitimate bone to pick with the folks in the Pentahooch on not paying attention to some inputs.
I also suspect all of us can agree with some inputs and disagree with others... :cool:
I can visaulize the frustration
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bob's World
Concur on who creates strategy. I have a team that is dying to produce strategy; and get quite frustrated when I remind them that at the Combatant Command level we are far more the consumer of strategy, rather than the producer.
because when you're at that level, you know far more what's going on in your world than some clod in DC knows. The flip of that, naturally, is that said clod may know things you don't. No easy solution to that conundrum.
Quote:
Yet produce we must, but the real important big ideas, we wrap up real nice and share them with those who, if they do not produce the strategy that we must consume, at least have audiance and sway with the same. Its a slow game. But every now and then you see good things burble their way up to the top, and come back down for your further consumption.
Yep, shame that we can't just provide brilliance to those in power and have them bless it but they will insist that it be their idea -- so you've gotta flank 'em to get them to believe it is their idea. Heck of a way to run a railroad. :D
Come to think of it, aren't the railroads in trouble because they thought they were in the railroad business instead of the actual business they were in? :wry:
That's what I thought, just didn't say it
well. Leaves me with the impression that either Schmedlap or Mark O'Neill are correct above and / or that I am with the 'undue' umbrage remark -- emphasis on the undue...
As I tried to point out and as you said:
Quote:
"So when it comes to academic freedom in PME, my personal opinion is that there's nothing to see here folks--let's move along and discuss issues that really need it."
I also agree with Rank Amateur...
Oh, I frequently agree with you
but your creative bent sometimes leads you off track just a tad... ;)
True also on the emotion bit, I suspect...