"Adopt a Marine"

[Ender]

I have been kicking over a concept recently and wanted to float it here. The catalyst for my idea is that many historical military cultures I have studied had some form of (outright or culturally subtler) mentoring program that enabled the junior soldier to directly learn from the senior, more experienced soldier.

My idea is that a program is instituted by where, as a form of PME or some other incentive, (for both junior and senior ranks) SNCOs and senior officers are encouraged to "adopt" a junior Soldier, Sailor, Airman or Marine. (E-4+/NCO+ makes sense to me from a career development standpoint) SNCO's take NCO's under their wing and senior officers take junior officers. "Adoptions" have to be between service members who are not in the same unit (or at least the same direct chain of command) but who are both in parallel fields. The senior service member is responsible for mentoring and aiding in the development of the younger one, both professionally and personally but are still far enough removed from the chain to maintain order and prevent fraternization. What I am envisioning is nowhere near as touchie feelie as it is sounding here and would ask senior warriors to plan, prepare and teach modules based off their own knowledge set or experiences. The plan and prepare part would include using things such as Photoshop to put visuals together, Powerpoint to present lectures, and various Word programs to communicate concepts. Sergeants Major can approve or in effect "grade" programs from their E-6+ population and I am sure there are some Colonels and General grade officers who would love to see what their staffs put together for the junior officers. I know we have SNCO's who are NOT that hot on the computer and this would give them a huge incentive to improve on their communications skills and give them even more experience for the civilian sector when they retire.

I understand that there is a huge disparity between the number or E-9's we have in comparison to E-4's and similarly 0-9's to 0-2's but this would not be a program for everyone. For those who are inclined to teach, teach and those who really want to learn will. There could be a standard that quantifies and qualifies the mentor-ship and incentives for promotion or pay can be offered accordingly.

The end state, as I see it is that we obviously end up with more knowledgeable, more professional NCO's who feel accountable for their development and will not need to reinvent the wheel throughout their 20 but also that some of the innate tricks the younger set has might rub off on the those who really do know the art of waging war. In the end I think it would be a very fair trade.

Thoughts from higher?

[Ender]

There is another catalyst for the question presented here that I did not mention above. In the Marines there were a few select SNCO's that I came into contact with who had forgotten more about the conduct of warfare than I would ever know. These guys were the old school 0321's who had learned their trade directly from the guys who served in Korea and Vietnam. I wanted to sit down and politely and professionally pick their brains. I wanted to learn from their mistakes and capitalize on their successes but the rank system prevented me from being able to break through and ask the questions that I wanted and also would have prevented them from answering the way they would have wanted. I see this as counterintuitive and counterproductive. Why should a young Marine have to wait for Master Guns to retire and write his memoirs so he can learn about his career when he has the primary source, unedited RIGHT there? Some things are rank specific and would not need to be covered under a mentor program because the Marines, and I am sure all others as well, do an excellent job of progressively training and pushing PME's... but there is more than that, there are intangibles that aren't put in the pubs that could be communicated one on one.

At the end of a mentor tour (imagine three years at home, with your wife and kids and outside of your normal job your sole purpose for existing is to take this Marine under your wing and teach him what you know.) success is measured by completion, and both sides would be required to submit final summaries of their lessons learned etc... SNCO/NCO symposiums and the like could collate and present the cumulative data annually or publish biannual reports and everyone all around would have a (hopefully better) idea of what areas need focus or attention in the next year. eg: "Seven out of ten Segeants are asking about circumstance such and such, why aren't we addressing this?"

Imagine a scenario: Gunny Jones from 1/8 is assigned Corporal Smith from 2/8 under the newly formed Military Mentorship Program(MMP), which serves as an umbrella for the MMPA, (Army ) MMPMC (Marine Corps) etc.... Both are 03's and Smith just re-enlisted so he is now eligible for MMPMC and all of the corresponding benefits and Gunny gets a gold star in his record and is now given higher consideration for E-8. Imagine what can be communicated over PT, "If you are ever in the Phillipines watch out for the (insert specific, localized piece of knowledge here)" or in the woods, implementing counter sniper tactics "This one I picked up on a training op in (insert "wooden" nation the NCO has never seen) from the local (insert instructive indig culture here)." Corporal Smith is then required under the program to submit his weekly review, which in turn can be checked on by his platoon sergeant or Gunny himself. I won't go on but I think the benefits COULD be tremendous...

I can see why some Platoon Sergeants or Battalion Commanders would not want someone messing with their Marines but there is a certain strength to working with someone who does not know if you are a ####bag or are ####hot... there is no history and as long as respect and discipline is maintained there should be no consequences, only benefits.

If this concept is malformed, half-baked, premature or immature I would like to hear about it... I have wondered what lines exist and how much could feasibly be communicated between senior and subordinate in the interests of the individual Marines' development and can't imagine a better forum to ask in.

[jcustis]

You're tracking in the right direction. I don't follow what is going on with it now, but i thought there was some mentoring initiative pushed in the Marine Corps as recent as a couple years ago.

I also don't know if it got off the ground, but there may be a framework around somewhere that needs to be dusted off.

[Ender]

In my History "Lite" course there is a format that is used that I think could be useful here with my little brain child. The class is huge (100+) so the prospect of many tests and lots of quizzes are not as feasible as they would be in a class of 20. A method the professors use (it is co-taught) to ensure that students are attending class and paying attention is something they call "Signs of Life." I don't know if anyone here has heard of this or something like it but they basically present a question on the internet system we have for school (Blackboard) sometime after the first lecture of the week. Every student is required to check in (from wherever they choose, wherever they have internet access) by 11:00 PM every Saturday of that week and show some "Sign of Life." If they did not attend they won't know what the hell they are talking about and won't receive credit. If they are not paying attention same thing...

Where I am going with this is, how much time in the week do your Marines spend watching porn, or stupid movies? How much time do your Marines spend reading Maxim or Hustler? Why not fill that time requiring them to learn about Salamis or the United States government under a mentorship? Why can't we put their asses to work? If every week a Marine was required to spend one hour of his libo time writing his notes on what he learned from his "War Dad" and submitting them he would be a much more well rounded and educated Marine when he is finished. I know colleges would respect their SMART transcripts a great deal more if they could say "Look pal, I wrote a freakin paper every week for four years... I dont need to take this Comp Class" and if helping that young Marine for a period of time only enables him to skip four stupid classes and save $3,000 on their education it would be well worth the time and energy invested.

[selil]

The apprentice and mentors model is fairly mature as a model. It was abandoned in the 50's and 60's as the rise of academia eclipsed and obliterated any other model.

Socrates was a mentor rather than a teacher and his students were literally apprentices to his process. One mentor in this model can take on several apprentices and broaden the scope and match a hierarchical command structure. The apprentice/mentor model is NOT something you want to apply to everybody. You have to be selective in both directions of selection.

If you're an undergrad it might be a little soon to be building a self standing curriculum but I'll help you with an outcome based learning objective course model when you're ready.

[marct]

Hi Ender,

Interesting idea, and its lack seems to go hand in hand with the decline of the regimental system (comments Steve?).

The apprentice and mentors model is fairly mature as a model. It was abandoned in the 50's and 60's as the rise of academia eclipsed and obliterated any other model.

As a formal model, I suspect you are absolutely correct, although it is still operative in many other areas including academia . A lot of it goes back to how organizations conceive of knowledge, and to the conceptual distinctions and valuations these organizations place on differing types of knowledge.

In general, most Western societies recognize three overall forms of knowledge: "logos", "gnosis" and "thumos" (I'm using the Greek terms).

1. "Logos", from which we get the suffix "-ology" roughly translates as "authoritative word". This is the basic type of knowledge that is taught in academia; it is codified, put together into inter-linking systems and presented as "valid" (meaning culturally validated by whatever system the culture uses). If you have studied Max Weber, it covers both "rational-legal knowledge" and "traditional knowledge" (which is actually a bad translation of herreschaft - "blood right" is better).
2. "Gnosis", from which we get words like "Gnostic" and "Agnostic" roughly translates as "experiential knowledge" - "what I know from having experienced it". When Socrates talks about "the man who knows", this is the type of knowledge he is talking about. At the same time, it's also the type of knowledge that can be "taught" best by a mentorship or apprenticeship type program. In general, academics use this type of knowledge, but most disciplines "hide" it from their students (Anthropology, qualitative Sociology and Social Work are the major exceptions).
3. "Thumos" is the type of knowledge that we use the least n any formal setting. It should properly be transliterated as "body knowledge", although terms like "gut knowledge" are the closest translation. In most Western societies, it is considered to be "invalid", although it is used extensively in high risk / high problem occupations and frequently"validated" (i.e. justified) with reference to experience or intuition.

Socrates was a mentor rather than a teacher and his students were literally apprentices to his process. One mentor in this model can take on several apprentices and broaden the scope and match a hierarchical command structure. The apprentice/mentor model is NOT something you want to apply to everybody. You have to be selective in both directions of selection.

I must admit to being prejudiced in favour of Socrates - that's Xenophon's Socrates, not Platos' . You absolutely right about the application, however. Attempting to apply this style of teaching and learning means that you have to have an emotional and psychological "mesh" (or "empathy") between the student and teacher. If this is absent, it will fail miserably.

If you're an undergrad it might be a little soon to be building a self standing curriculum but I'll help you with an outcome based learning objective course model when you're ready.

Sure, I'll toss in an offer of help as well. I run a couple of servers and have my own Moodle site. If you want to play around with trying to set up a course, let me know and I'll build a basic page for you and let you play with it.

As a note, I would point out that the SWC itself is acting as a mentorship venue.

Marc

[mmx1]

You're tracking in the right direction. I don't follow what is going on with it now, but i thought there was some mentoring initiative pushed in the Marine Corps as recent as a couple years ago.

I also don't know if it got off the ground, but there may be a framework around somewhere that needs to be dusted off.

We got a bit of the Marine Corps Mentoring Program pushed to us early in TBS (this year) (Lt. Col Shusko of the MACE was selling it wholeheartedly), and I have the guidebook from Nov 05 sitting in my stack of pubs. However, it is aimed more at personal traits and characteristics (leadership, honor courage commitment; personal finances) than warfighting topics.

It doesn't seem to be taken seriously, though, since I haven't heard squat about it since the second week of TBS, and the priors treated it as a bit of a joke, so I figure it hasn't really taken hold in the fleet.

Still, it is a framework, and one that is still pushed to junior officers in some limited manner.