Electronic Publications

Zen Pundit posted an interesting question at his blog. He said that he was asked by Pressfield for views on whether integrating video and other features into an e-book would be desirable. After pondering that question and the responses, I wondered about doing the same for doctrinal publications.

Doctrinal publications are chock full of illustrations, but most of them add little or nothing to understanding. Here is a great example of a meaningless illustration that does nothing to clarify anything...

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4053/...f1c04fe2_m.jpg
I'm sure all of the guys at ILE were scratching their heads saying, "I don't get this whole 'principles of war' thing" until they saw this.

However, lots of illustrations might be useful if they were animated (take, for example, battle drills, movement formations, et cetera. Or animations such as THIS ONE could be incorporated into technical manuals.

Just imagine if the PMCS table in a technical manual actually made PMCS stupid-proof. For each step of the process, a Solder could click on a link to seeing that step performed. By clicking on the fault in the electronic PMCS table, the 5988E could be instantly updated. As soon as it is updated, the team chief or one of his minions gets the information pushed to his device. The biggest problem that I noticed as an XO was that Soldiers knew how to diagnose issues and knew what parts needed to be ordered, but they couldn't make heads or tails of the 5988E, so most of the time was spent correcting it, re-explaining to them how to fill it out, and then repeating this process over and over because there is just something about paperwork that doesn't make sense to Soldiers (not a horrible thing, imo).

Feasible? Not feasible? Other ideas?

My favorite, from the MRE heater, in case you cannot find a rock, something is always an option.

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/47/13...cd0b820ab2.jpg

Many FMs/TMs now include CDs or are just on digits to begin with. Including digital programs or features should be feasible. My boss in the MI Schoolhouse was working with a game development office to create some instructional videos/animation for use at OBC and CCC to illustrate different topics. Don't know if TRADOC or Army as a whole are moving this way, but some shops have started it.

A digital / self-completing 5988E would be nice, but the issues of computers, power, etc in Motor Pool are always constant. PDA, Crackberry, I-Phone, etc... maybe. In theory, a supervisor should always helps clear up paperwork, but PMCS was always more complicated than it should be, no matter how much leadership or CoC were down in the MP.

And that diagram you posted is clearly too robust and lacking in synergy. It needs to be more proactive, with synchronization and jointocity.

paper. I love books. You cant crack the screen. It doesnt have batteries and a million other reasons. It is near impossible to have a FM Library with the Army's rate of change and such. A kindle ebook reader might be nice. Reading from desktop/laptop is the worst. Wait one worse an audio-FM of your favorite instructors.... torture.
I do believe animation could be useful-ish. It would be a better way to go as you said the figures make little difference unless you are stealing one for a ppt. Then again it probably would not be worth whatever we would pay for it.

I'm with the others, PMCS seems the obvious choice for digitization. Get a PDA/Iphone, and have an interactive set of checks (with videos, if needed) Enter the results digitally and sync it w/the motor pool

Would require updating the MS-DOS ULLS-G system after thirty years though!

Let us not forget netcommand? Wireless on installation? in the motorpool? Eventually I would hope. You have my vote.
And i would like the e-reader with all applicable pubs preloaded and automatically updated.
Can you imagine the mess when the pda's go down? haha! bad enough when you cant print out the 5988e.
Do we have a strategic reserve of hardcopies for Y2K when all computers stop working? What shall we do?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OfTheTroops

Can you imagine the mess when the pda's go down? haha! bad enough when you cant print out the 5988e.

---

No ####, there I was. In the middle of a 2-month rotation at NTC as a mech inf XO. Six months prior, I ordered all new turret and hull TM's. They arrived just before we put our vehicles on the rails. Every crew had the latest TM in mint condition. Then along comes my Bn XO one day in the middle of the central corridor and says, after spot-checking maintenance, "XO, you're all dicked up. None of your crews know how to do PMCS because none of them have TMs." Well, my quick response was, "sir, they don't know how to do PMCS, but it's not because they don't have TMs. I just got 28 new ones prior to deployment!" Well, that was not what the crews had told him. Irate, I then gathered up all of the crews and let loose with a solid minute of expletives in which I think I managed to touch every base in accusing them of violating DADT, insisting that they had feces in lieu of brains, and directing them to perform an impossible carnal feat. Then I went back to what I was doing with my Bn XO in tow, asking, "that's it?" Yup. That's it. They all "found" their TMs.

Games like that were commonplace. We don't have 5988Es. We don't have TMs. The mechanics are lazy. I annotated this fault, but the part isn't on order. But if the TM were a serial-numbered e-reader that would merit a FLIPL if lost, then no more claims of "my chain of command didn't give me the pubs I needed to do my job." If the 5988E were incorporated into it, then no more "we can't do maintenance because we don't have 5988Es." And if it's all electronically tracked, then when a fault disappears from the 5988E the XO can check to see why and then explain to the crew, "yeah, you dumb####, that was deleted because the fault you wrote down wasn't actually a fault - you just wrote it down to obtain another part to hoard." Of course, then I guess the risk is that they'll deliberately break the e-reader to avoid PMCS.

Let us not forget clear and effective writing! - an art sadly dead and gone in the US Armed Forces recent manual and most actual writing on the subject of war and warfare.

Maybe we need to "leverage our information domains, in forms cognoscente of the networked information environment" - some such rubbish.

Sloppy writing = sloppy thinking, = sloppy ideas.

Schmedlap

Too often similar occurrences are due mostly to the system deciding that the NCOs are incompetent and bypassing them by having an Officer do 'stuff.' That trend started in Viet Nam in the late 60s and is endemic. The symptom that hurts is that the NCOs perceive, rightly or wrongly that they aren't trusted and the reaction of most is to get their feelings hurt say 'No prob, I can sit on my a$$.' The solution is to let them do their jobs. Not make them, most want to do their job but they're human, can be lazy and are generally very practical -- they see no sense in doing a job themselves if you're going to do it for them. There's usually a sharp, go-getter around somewhere, find him and use him to get the others rolling. It is simply making the entire Chain of Command work, not just selected pers... :eek:

That is not a criticism of anyone and particularly not of Schemdlap -- it is, as I said, a systemic fault, societally induced in the US Armed Forces that is inimical to decent performance. :rolleyes:

Like our badly flawed training system, this process was dumbed down in the 20+ year block from the early 70s until recently. It must be corrected.

Wilf:

Quote:

---

an art sadly dead and gone in the US Armed Forces recent manual and most actual writing on the subject of war and warfare.

---

That too is a systemic fault and societally induced.

The easy way to fix it it have TRADOC 'authors' stop cutting and pasting stuff from old manuals and adding current day fluff plus their Bosses expressed (or, more often, presumed) positions to make it look new. :mad:

And, yes, that is a leadership problem. High level -- but leadership.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ken White

Too often similar occurrences are due mostly to the system deciding that the NCOs are incompetent and bypassing them by having an Officer do 'stuff.' That trend started in Viet Nam in the late 60s and is endemic. The symptom that hurts is that the NCOs perceive, rightly or wrongly that they aren't trusted and the reaction of most is to get their feelings hurt say 'No prob, I can sit on my a$$.' The solution is to let them do their jobs.

---

Ken, the only reason that I know you were not my first Platoon Sergeant is because you are posting under your real name. Other than that, what you just typed sounds word for word exactly like the analysis of the situation that my first PSG explained to me. Agree completely.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ken White

... most want to do their job but they're human, can be lazy and are generally very practical -- they see no sense in doing a job themselves if you're going to do it for them...That is not a criticism of anyone and particularly not of Schemdlap...

---

No offense taken. I agree completely. In fact, my Bn XO was frustrated that my response was not to micromanage even more. My explanation to him was (paraphrasing), "sir, I'm not going to treat them like kids. They're going back to Iraq in less than 6 months. They need to grow up. They told you a blatant lie because they thought they could get away with laziness and I called them out for being limp dicks in front of you. If I need to do more than that, then I'll address it when it arises. That's their freebie." That wasn't what he wanted to hear, but there wasn't a whole lot he could do about it. I'm not saying I was the best XO ever, but I was good at my job and I think his plate was a bit too full to try to find a replacement for me. After all, he had 6 other companies to micromanage.:D

But, back to the e-reader / electronification of stuff issue, I found digitized streamlining of processes like this to be really helpful. One thing that I created as an XO was the mother of all databases that I used to track maintenance. All I had to do was decipher the chicken scratches on the 5988Es and type it into a form in the database. I could then instantly verify whether the faults were 1) real faults (as opposed to the random crap that some Soldiers would scrawl on the sheet like "road wheel is old" - wtf?); 2) checked in the correct order (there's a reason for the order); 3) if the faults from the prior PMCS were still there; 4) if so, whether the part had been received (which meant the crew either didn't get it or failed to replace it); 5) quickly cross-check all faults with orders and order status so that I could gripe to Bn about parts not showing up, not getting ordered, etc; and various other consideration that have since faded from memory. This is essentially technical work. If it can be streamlined electronically, then frees up leaders for actual leadership stuff.

Sounds like a great idea. I suspect, however, that it would only delay the already overly-long process of producing doctrine and training materials. It would also require some expertise on multimedia production which is probably lacking at present. Not insurmountable obstacles, but significant considering the state of our military bureaocracy.

early in the thread, the idea of inserting videos and animation was to allow a soldier to follow the video in the execution of his duties. Sounds like a great idea if we were training the local Jiffy Lube attendent. The problem is we are not.

We need soldiers, regardless of thier job in the army to be capable of solving problems and adapting to unique situations. That is what will save lives in combat and ensure we are meeting the national interests in the current operations we are facing.

Much like emersive language training, the way to do that is to force problem solving and actual thought in everything that we do. Instead of giving a video of what to DO, i would insert a video or animation of HOW it works, and then show what could go wrong. that would actually educate the soldier and allow him to then solve the problems and THINK. Skills that he will need once that vehicle is rolling.

It is nice to think of making life easier in the motorpool, but that same mechanic will need to have that same skill under a moonlite night in some dark desert where the light from his KINDLE screen will attract attention from the nearest enemy force. lets not forget why we are training them in the first place.

Sounds like an appalling idea. While powerpoint now rules the military classroom do we really want animated kindles to rule the world of publications?

If the idea being presented is not concise enough to convey through text or a diagram (or series thereof), then the problem may be with the message and the medium will not help - more likely, a more complicated medium will make it worse.

you can hardly get a paper copy today!

you just can't carry 'em around. stuck in laptops or desktops :eek:

democratizing information should be a win/win and the more i think about it the better i like it.

Pull out your smart book Troops.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OfTheTroops

democratizing information should be a win/win and the more i think about it the better i like it.

Pull out your smart book Troops.

---

I do agree with your points. Perhaps I was a little extreme in saying it was an appalling idea, as I agree that e-pubs are the status quo nowadays - and the search and index function can be extremely useful. Further, I imagine having a library of pubs in your hand that are linked through (i.e. jumping from a generic 'Operations' pub into a 'Mission Appreciation' pub if you select a link for more detailed information) would be beneficial.

I still believe that animation and technology intensive references won't equate to better material. A concise, relevant and applicable piece of doctrine or tactical note wouldn't need animation to explain itself - a diagram of room-clearing or tactical movement would be a 'nice to have' but without considerations and the reasons behind the drills explained in text it would be nugatory.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pup

early in the thread, the idea of inserting videos and animation was to allow a soldier to follow the video in the execution of his duties. Sounds like a great idea if we were training the local Jiffy Lube attendent. The problem is we are not.

---

A TM is not a training document. It is a reference document and it is to be referenced when doing PMCS, no matter how proficient or competent and no matter how many times you've done PMCS.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pup

We need soldiers, regardless of thier job in the army to be capable of solving problems and adapting to unique situations. That is what will save lives in combat and ensure we are meeting the national interests in the current operations we are facing.

---

No disagreements there, but I don't think anyone is proposing that we create doctrinal publications on the assumption that Soldiers will be "reading along" as they fight. And much of what we've discussed pertains to technical manuals, which are technical references that we expect and demand that Soldier refer to even while deployed (but while in secure areas).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pup

Much like emersive language training, the way to do that is to force problem solving and actual thought in everything that we do. Instead of giving a video of what to DO, i would insert a video or animation of HOW it works, and then show what could go wrong. that would actually educate the soldier and allow him to then solve the problems and THINK. Skills that he will need once that vehicle is rolling.

---

That sounds like the practical exercise that we do after reading the doctrinal publications.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pup

It is nice to think of making life easier in the motorpool, but that same mechanic will need to have that same skill under a moonlite night in some dark desert where the light from his KINDLE screen will attract attention from the nearest enemy force. lets not forget why we are training them in the first place.

---

I don't see why we have to choose one or the other. In those conditions, I wouldn't have my Soldiers filling out their 5988E or flipping through the pages of the TM, either. They would be doing field-expedient quick fixes and/or improvising until the vehicle can be moved to a secure area or until the area where the vehicle is at can be secured. The e-pub idea is a garrison and secure area idea to streamline technical tasks and make the process of interacting with the supply system easier and faster - to reduce the amount of time Soldiers spend on those tasks and reduce the amount of attention that leaders pay to technical work rather than hands-on leadership.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chris jM

I still believe that animation and technology intensive references won't equate to better material. A concise, relevant and applicable piece of doctrine or tactical note wouldn't need animation to explain itself - a diagram of room-clearing or tactical movement would be a 'nice to have' but without considerations and the reasons behind the drills explained in text it would be nugatory.

---

I suspect that many made similar points about adding graphics to publications when that technology was first available. Heck, Socrates was opposed to writing!

I don't think anyone is suggesting substituting videos and eyewashes in lieu of ideas and concepts. I think we're just finally realizing that technological advances could help to make some things clearer. In other words, they are, as you put it, "nice to have." And since implementing them would be of negligible costs, in the long run, why not do it? After all, it's nice to have.

We didn't have DA Form 5988-E when I was in the Army. Is it sort of like a computer-generated DA Form 2404, except that it also has a section for parts on order?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pete

We didn't have DA Form 5988-E when I was in the Army. Is it sort of like a computer-generated DA Form 2404, except that it also has a section for parts on order?

---

Yeah, it combines the worst of both worlds. If by "computer generated" you mean that the information is maintained on a 386sx computer with a green monitor, updated with information on 3.5" or maybe even 5 1/4" floppy disks, and then the form is spit out on a dot-matrix printer that is still using ink ribbons... then yes. It is "computer generated" but new faults are manually entered into the system. Crews hand write faults on the form, just like with a 2404. The handwriting is then manually entered into the system by clerks who may or may not know what the stuff on the form means. Then when the updated form is sent to you and it is dicked up 8 ways to Tuesday, and you point out that it is either not up-to-date or not correct, the clerks/technicians always fall back upon the fact that "this is what is in the system" as if "the system" is foolproof and not prone to the human error of the clerks who input the information into the system (even after you show them photocopies of the forms that they incorrectly recorded in "the system").

Electronic technical publications exist. I don't know about producing them for established doctrine (in terms of payoff), but for "emerging doctrine" and new TTPs that need to be diseminated quickly across the force, I think that electronic, mobile publications and courseware are a great way to go. There is already Army interest in training material being run on mobile devices.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wargames Mark

Electronic technical publications exist. I don't know about producing them for established doctrine (in terms of payoff), but for "emerging doctrine" and new TTPs that need to be diseminated quickly across the force, I think that electronic, mobile publications and courseware are a great way to go. There is already Army interest in training material being run on mobile devices.

---

I was downloading ETMs from the LOGSA website in 2004. But those were just digital copies with hyperlinked bookmarks. Nothing all that innovative. I was advocating integrating technical references with the supply system networks to streamline technical work.

In regard to doctrinal pubs, I think we should keep a firewall between between doctrinal pubs and training materials. Otherwise, the tendency will be for the authors to create a training device in the form of a doctrinal pub and for people to click through the training material rather than absorb the doctrine.

FM 3-24
FM 3-07
I would imagine that FM 5-0 will also have an interactive multi-media supporting product...

The Army Campaign Plan when it was first operationalized...

Point is that this is fairly common any more... there is a contract on the street to retroactively develop similar products for existing doctrine... this isn't a thing of the future, except for the ideas regarding motorpool use... now that has real potential... I was shocked to hear that maintenance was still being run on ULLs... I was around when it was introduced early in my career and I'm retired:eek:

Pubs are digitized and so forth but I think accessibility is the next step. How do you get all this whizbang knowledge down to the bright Soldier if they want to read them and sharpshoot the LT. How many squad leaders sit in front of a computer all day or any real part of the day.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OfTheTroops

Pubs are digitized and so forth but I think accessibility is the next step. How do you get all this whizbang knowledge down to the bright Soldier if they want to read them and sharpshoot the LT. How many squad leaders sit in front of a computer all day or any real part of the day.

---

A great many more than it seems you suppose... I would opine that far more Soldiers sit at their PC for some period most nights than do those who sit down with FM 3-24.2, and if a young soldier is apt to sit down for quiet evening with a doctrinal manual... he is equally apt to sit at his PC while doing it...

I wouldn't claim that interactive media is the solution to US forces not reading their own doctrine, but I would argue that nearly anyone could sit with the FM 3-24 product and in 3 hrs have a very good idea of the content of the manual, its main principles, and examples as to how it might be operationalized... I won't engage in the debate as to whether 3-24 is a good doctrinal solution (I like it for what it was intended, don't like it for how it is sometimes interpretted - but that's no different than any other piece of doctrine)... only that the accompanying digital training tool was very effective...

Whether anyone on this panel likes this approach or not matters little... this IS the way the Army is heading... it is intended to both improve intellectual access, physical access to the material and also to support distance learning/shortened resident PME instruction...

"Now I'm done" - :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hacksaw

Whether anyone on this panel likes this approach or not matters little... this IS the way the Army is heading... it is intended to both improve intellectual access, physical access to the material and also to support distance learning/shortened resident PME instruction...

"Now I'm done" - :)

---

Don't stop now!

Do you think greater distance learning and shortened resident instruction is a good thing?

The came to mind because I recently recommended to the dean of my law school that the school re-think its policy on absentee-ism and class participation. Law students are required to attend class. If you miss a few classes you can be dropped from the course, regardless of your performance. Part of the rationale for this is that a profession is more than just learning material in a book and regurgitating it on a test. There is value in interacting with other professionals (in this case, professors) who are more experienced, skilled or knowledgeable than you are on the narrow topic that is being discussed in the class. Two of the problems that I pointed out with our current policies are that 1) they are not enforced and 2) most students are "present" in class but they spend the entire class period on Facebook, rather than paying attention and interacting. Many, if not most, of the highest ranking students (at least at my school) just buy commercial outlines and then, the week before the exam, take ADHD pills and study 20 hours per day to memorize the outlines, and then regurgitate this material on their exam at the end of the semester. Yet every professor scratches his or her head when observing that GPA has no correlation to one's prowess as a lawyer after graduation.

Having attended four undergrad, grad, and law schools and having taken distance learning courses in grad school and heavily abbreviated courses in the Army (40-hour courses that really only include about 28 hours of instruction, with little time for reflection), I've experienced learning in a variety of formats and I see very little value in avoiding classroom interaction and little value in short-term information cramming. The quicker information is learned, the more easily it is forgotten. The less involved the learning process, the more easy it is to think you've learned something when you haven't and the more likely you are to pencil whip and BS your way through an exam that says to the world that you understand the information.

Do you think greater distance learning and shortened resident instruction is a good thing? As always... it depends... for core curriculum stuff that falls into the category of mandatory topics that are universally considered a waste of time... and that lends itself to independent study... distributed works and serves the purpose it was intended

The came to mind because I recently recommended to the dean of my law school that the school re-think its policy on absentee-ism and class participation. Law students are required to attend class. If you miss a few classes you can be dropped from the course, regardless of your performance. Part of the rationale for this is that a profession is more than just learning material in a book and regurgitating it on a test. There is value in interacting with other professionals (in this case, professors) who are more experienced, skilled or knowledgeable than you are on the narrow topic that is being discussed in the class. The rationale clearly makes sense on the surface, but... Two of the problems that I pointed out with our current policies are that 1) they are not enforced and 2) most students are "present" in class but they spend the entire class period on Facebook, rather than paying attention and interacting. Many, if not most, of the highest ranking students (at least at my school) just buy commercial outlines and then, the week before the exam, take ADHD pills and study 20 hours per day to memorize the outlines, and then regurgitate this material on their exam at the end of the semester. Yet every professor scratches his or her head when observing that GPA has no correlation to one's prowess as a lawyer after graduation. Falling into the category of being careful what you measure, you might not get the behavior you intended

Having attended four undergrad, grad, and law schools and having taken distance learning courses in grad school and heavily abbreviated courses in the Army (40-hour courses that really only include about 28 hours of instruction, with little time for reflection), I've experienced learning in a variety of formats and I see very little value in avoiding classroom interaction and little value in short-term information cramming. Well if you put it that way :D ... and when discussing the finer points of leadership and tactical/operational employment of forces I agree that doing it via distance is less than an engaged discussion between two professionals interested in their profession and prepared for the dialogue... of course this is not so common

The quicker information is learned, the more easily it is forgotten. The less involved the learning process, the more easy it is to think you've learned something when you haven't and the more likely you are to pencil whip and BS your way through an exam that says to the world that you understand the information. But if i can't (for reasons of OPTEMPO and $) afford to maintain long resident courses that allow students adequate time to reflect upon operational experiences and engage in professional banter over a couple Guiness Pints.... Can I at least make the distributed learning experience as rich as possible so that learning is retained... so that unlike the CAS3 box of books... students can see the topic within context and hence have a better chance of applying that concept when it matters... and that is the point... the resident courses (less ILE, SAMS and USAWC have already been shortened)

Hacksaw,

I'm not disagreeing with your response, but I'd just add one thought. Regarding the concern of...

Quote:

---

"...if i can't (for reasons of OPTEMPO and $) afford to maintain long resident courses that allow students adequate time to reflect upon operational experiences and engage in professional banter over a couple Guiness Pints...."

---

I wonder if we've done an accurate cost-benefit analysis of that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Schmedlap

Hacksaw,

I'm not disagreeing with your response, but I'd just add one thought. Regarding the concern of...



I wonder if we've done an accurate cost-benefit analysis of that.

---

Wow.... fair enough...

(I should caveat that I in no way have a voice or means to influence senior leader thoughts on this matter, but....)

Today it isn't so much a cost benefit assessment as much as a function of physics...

CPTs and NCOs faces to spaces it so tight that the return to PCS LDE is very much a thing of the past for the foreseeable future (ILE and USAWC not withstanding)...

As a product of the Socratic method, and having been blessed by the Army, on multiple occassion, with the opportunity to do cogitate in an academic setting... I am sympathetic to your perspective...

But even TRADOC can't warp the time space continuum...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Schmedlap

I wonder if we've done an accurate cost-benefit analysis of that.

---

However, I'm totally convinced of its value...:cool:

Distance learning doesnt shrink the time box either. There is talk of making core classes all DL. This seems to place all the burden on the student and little on the institution. In essence they will be able to do more with less. And as drill said if you aint cheatin you aint tryin (just look at correspondence courses). 5 years down the road will this officer be as good as an officer who went to a resident course maybe. One thing that will certainly be lost is the peer relationships and networking that occurs at long residencies and there is a certain value to that. I can see both sides here. I am taking an online masters program and while i dont feel the core education is lost there does seem to be a great lost from the face to face and the non verbal. In fact, SWJ is a great deal like the education received from a DL course. The bureaucracy needs to stop pawning their kids off on the neighbors or grandparents etc. Yes education is an individual responsibility but individuals dont pay the price.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OfTheTroops

Distance learning doesnt shrink the time box either.

---

I'd never claim that it does... it shifts the burden to the student... who undoubtedly has precious little time whether deployed or otherwise

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OfTheTroops

There is talk of making core classes all DL. This seems to place all the burden on the student and little on the institution. In essence they will be able to do more with less.

---

See above... no doubt... still there is a physics to this... if you have an inventory of low 90% faces to fill 100% operational spaces... and if you have some critical none operational jobs you really need a green face to fill... regardless of value of long stretches to build relationships and debate the universal relevance of one's experiences versus another... time in resident courses is a luxury that we probably don't have

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OfTheTroops

And as drill said if you aint cheatin you aint tryin (just look at correspondence courses). 5 years down the road will this officer be as good as an officer who went to a resident course maybe. One thing that will certainly be lost is the peer relationships and networking that occurs at long residencies and there is a certain value to that. I can see both sides here. I am taking an online masters program and while i dont feel the core education is lost there does seem to be a great lost from the face to face and the non verbal. In fact, SWJ is a great deal like the education received from a DL course. The bureaucracy needs to stop pawning their kids off on the neighbors or grandparents etc. Yes education is an individual responsibility but individuals dont pay the price.

---

I'd only disagree to say that most on this venue communicate in complete thoughts (save perhaps myself) and a degree of decorum is practiced... I can't imagine anyone claiming dL is better, only that we can make it better and mitigate the loss of the face-to-face interaction... a final thought... Last night, I watched my daughter carry on a four way text conversation with four of her teammates that she had just left at the gym... I think there is a level of comfort in this generation of young soldiers that far outpaces ours