<p>I was not criticizing or questioning your decision or your reasons. You are the only one that can make the decision that is best for you. I guess my question was really about how the Foundation makes their decisions. If they have a perpetual fund for their tuition assistance I assume (you know what they say about that) they have a finite amount available each year. The more students they accept into their program has to influence the amount available for each student. I don't know. Each year there are Foundation sponsored students at my son's school. They seem to be great kids and I am always amazed at the number of SA appointments when they post the senior list. Good luck, fair winds and following seas.</p>
<p>UNSA gives Foundation a quota to fill with Foundation sponsored kids. About 70 kids a year I believe.</p>
<p>The foundation program has taken in as many as 80 in years past- recent numbers tend to hover in the low 60's.</p>
<p>
[quote]
And the money takes the back seat when it comes to education, it really shouldn't be a big factor between making a decision between NAPS and Foundation, I looked more at what would better prepare me in ways that I need it. The thing I heard most about NAPS is that the curriculum is more of a "where they want you to be at when you graduate high school" so they try to get everyone up to par academically.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I'd watch what you say there. NAPS isn't there to get you where you should be when you graduate high school. Its basically a crash course in how to survive plebe year. The curriculum is more heavily technical based that even plebe year at the Academy is. Furthermore, your not taking high school level classes. One plebe year roommate, who ended up being my company commander firstie year, said that he thought NAPS academics were tougher than plebe year, and that NAPS was the only reason he was able to get through the Academy</p>
<p>Itlstallion422, you are 100% correct.</p>
<p>The Academy is faced with two issues for unsuccessful candidates, those who they offer prep programs and basically a ‘guarantee’ of admittance and those who will strike out on their own for the extra year. Let’s first deal with those not offered a prep program at all. They were unsuccessful for a multitude of reasons. Since the Academy has not made them a ‘guarantee’, their advice must be compatible with a ‘get on with your life’ scenario. Hence the good college and take plebe-like courses. A sink-or-swim program. “Prove you can be a plebe and, if everything else is satisfactory, we will let you be one”. A nice non-committal proposal on their part. </p>
<p>Now let’s examine the NAPS/Foundation program candidate. An outstanding package, someone who the Admissions Board feels will make an outstanding officer, but cannot prove to them that they can survive the academics, especially the technical end. Of course, they could be subsidized at civilian colleges, NAPS could teach a college-level curriculum. Someplace where the students could receive college credit. Why don’t they? College credit should be the least concern of someone truly committed to the Academy. Someone who wants to make the Navy a career. Someone who has been ‘guaranteed’ an opening, pending successful completion of the prep program. What should these candidates be wanting? The best possible preparation for success at the Academy. Shoring up their basics. Making them competent to handle anything USNA academics can throw at them. How is this accomplished? By giving placement test as, of course, NAPS does and also the larger foundation programs such as MMI and NMMI. By placing the student in an environment of like-minded individuals, where they can shore up the basics on which they are weak, proceeding at their own pace, moving between groups as necessary. Instead of asking a plebe or a recent grad of Greystone, ask the people who designed and continue to support the prep programs. They see the long-term results.</p>
<p>Lastly, military vs civilian prep. Military school is not about folding laundry, marching, getting yelled at, etc. It is about trying to fit 28 hrs into a 24 hr day. The extra hours filled with seemingly inane but required taskings. An environment which will be mirrored once they reach USNA. The 1400 SAT, top 10% class ranking, with ECs a mile long, have proved they can excel in this environment.. The typical prepster has not. This extra year of learning how to prioritize and organize will definitely prove beneficial in the long run.</p>
<p>Therefore, I cannot imagine why anyone would turn down NAPS, basically a fifth year at the Academy, with like-minded contemporaries and with a faculty with sole mission and a proven track record of getting students to succeed at USNA. In my opinion, to pass up this opportunity in order to not get yelled at and to gain 36 hours of college credits definitely shows misplaced priorities. To attend a sink-or-swim college calculus class at a third tier college, probably with a bunch of business majors taking their only required college math class in an unproven program simply does not stand up against a program with a historical 85% USNA graduation rate.</p>
<p>Probably two thirds of those offered prep programs in lieu of direct entry don’t think they need it and initially must be persuaded. Probably two thirds of these two thirds will eventually avow that it was the best thing to ever happen to them. However, the point is that USNA has a multitude of collected data over the years that shows every one of those offered the prep programs do, in fact, need them.</p>
<p>thank you USNA69 for explaining the purpose of the prep programs. i have a question which bounces around in my head which doesn't make so much sense. so from what i have gathered, some of which you have said, there are 3Q/fully qualified candidates and there are not. If you are 3Q and determined to be cream of the crop, you are picked up by USNA. hurray! If you are not the cream of the crop, you can't be offered prep, so it's "so long, get on with your life, and come back and see us next year if you are still interested". if you are less qualified than the 3Q (by definition!) then you might be offered prep and a GUARANTEE of admission to USNA if you successfully get through prep, while those "more qualified" 3Q (again, by definition) that didn't get an offer, are a bit worse off.</p>
<p>furthermore, among those 2Q/1Q that get prep, you've said you observe both NAPS and Foundation students are excellent, except that Foundation students are slightly stronger academically. so then those who are slightly weaker academically are getting the "free-ride" at what you are saying is a better prep program (NAPS) and those who are academically slightly stronger are getting a 3rd tier prep program (Foundation) where their parents have to bear some of the cost?</p>
<p>so based on what i've read even in just this thread, i would rank the sort of "deals" these different "excellent" students are getting in the following way.</p>
<p>Deal quality:
3Q fully qualified but not cream of the crop (so long and thanks for all the fish) < 1Q/2Q slightly stronger academically (Foundation w/ pseudo-guarantee) < 1Q/2Q slightly weaker academically (NAPS w/ guarantee) < 3Q cream of the crop (USNA- hurray!)</p>
<p>so what is wrong with this picture? the only part of this that makes sense to me is the part where 3Q cream of the crop are getting the best deal by getting admitted right away. lol. someone explain to me the "Navy logic" in the rest of this! you can start with explaining why "fully qualified" students are sent off to fend for themselves and get on with their life, but not-fully qualified and academically weaker students are given a free ride and a guarantee at NAPS! i'm not getting this.</p>
<p>DSL1990, you are correct on your observation that 3Qs are not offered prep programs. First we have to examine what makes up the scholastically qualified candidate. It is the whole person score, pure and simple. What makes up this score? Everything about the candidate.. SATs, coursework to include the courses themselves, and both their difficulty and successful completion, and, lastly, ECs. It can be any or all of these factors which might drag a candidate to the bottom of the 3Qed list. Most likely, it is somewhat of a combination of all three. They are at the bottom of the list for a reason. </p>
<p>Now, lets examine what makes a candidate unqualified scholastically. Again, it can be a combination of SATs, coursework and ECs. What about the candidate who was deemed unqualified for SATs only? Had his SATs been above 600/600, he would have been a guarantee for admission. Same about a slightly low academic coursework accomplishment. Both these candidates had outstanding ECs. They are what the Academy is looking for in an all-around individual. These are the ones for whom it is worth the effort to invest extra effort.. Academic defencies are easy to fix. Being a well-rounded candidate is not.</p>
<p>I learned a lot from that, thank you. But, I'm still perfectly satisfied with my decision and do not regret it at all. Other people are entitled to their opinions. I also feel that Schreiner is a good university, whether it is third tier or not, you don't know the curriculum nor have you attended it so don't make assumptions about it. I have done my research on the Greystone program and it prepares candidates physically and academically just as any other prep would do, whether it is the same as a military, I highly doubt it but thats ok with me. I do feel that I have my priorities in order (Not getting yelled at was not a deciding factor incase you were wondering) I made this decision on my own based on what I feel would help me most when I arrive at the academy. Hopefully it will serve me well, I'm sure NAPS would serve me well also but I feel that the Foundation Program will serve me best. Thank you everybody for all of your input and advice!</p>
<p>
[quote]
you don't know the curriculum nor have you attended it so don't make assumptions about it.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Sorry, that one can't be bought. none of us lives by experience alone or even primarily. Rather, we go on the expert opinions of others every single day ... be it your butcher at the market, your MD, your counselor.</p>
<p>Yours is generally a post-modernistic rationalism. Your choice is your choice, but don't suggest that it's logical when its purely relativism. </p>
<p>One may indeed have a decent experience at your chosen college. But the experts agree, it's ok, no more. And in saying that, I'm not belittling the place. It is what it is.</p>
<p>More important, now that you've made your decsion, rather than trying to justify it to others who perceive it as challenging at best to understand, you can make it all right by going and busting your hump to make it right. It's not up to Shreiner or Greystone. No doubt you'd have gained substantial benefits from NAPS in light of what you proclaim as your ultimate objective. Put simply, imo, your counsel was not superior in this instance. But it ain't fatal. I always prefer enhanced odds and opportunities. Good luck. Do your best. You've made your choice now live well with it.</p>
<p>Ok, just be quiet. The discussion is over with, no need to belittle other people, no need to pick apart everything someone says, just live with the fact that they have different opinions than you.</p>
<p>i take it you never took debate in high school? ;)</p>
<p>actually, zrmvrhs08 is right about one thing- let's hypothetically say that he made the worst possible decision. ok, so what? it's his life to live and his lessons to learn. that he is making them himself makes him a hundred times better than those USNA students who got dragged in by their parents or who needed their parents to help them on everything. sometimes, as a kid, you might not make the best decision on everything, but if you are trying, i think you still will end up better off than those who never learn to make any decisions on their own.</p>
<p>good luck zrmvrhs08! i hope you're successful! :)</p>
<p>I must say that USNA69's posts #45 and #47 in this thread are probably the best explanation of NAPS that you will find anywhere.</p>
<p>They should be framed and permanently nailed up at the beginning of this section.</p>
<p>(Yes, it's me and no one has hijacked my account) :D</p>
<p>Thanks Luigi.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>zrmvrhs08, this discussion is no longer about you. You have made your decision. You have to live with it. Now it is to help others who read this to be able to make a more informed selection.</p>
<p>Amen on the 69 posts. Clear, concise, non-patronizing, informative and on the $$.</p>
<p>Re: the discussion, one thing we do know and hope happens at Greystone, NAPS and others... a cultivation of a far thicker skin. :eek: It will be essential to the next step. .;)</p>
<p>Indeed, debate is good for the soul and revealing both explicit rationale and underlying values and assumptions. In this case one argues there is no real truth, it's what one makes it. In the other, it's more that indeed there is truth, and it's been time tested by many. I tend to be in the latter camp. I'm confident the USN, while not asking Mids to park their brains at Gate 8 as they arrive, the primary assumption is there is often 1 way and only 1. And isn't this one of the fundamental notions of this type of education vs. going to Oberlin? I believe so, and in fact, that type of altered thinking, especially in this relativistic, existential world that these young men and women have been enculturated, may be particularly challenging and for a great many unattractive or even unimagineable.</p>
<p>I attended NAPS many, many years ago when it was located in Bainbridge, MD. I agree with USNA69, it is more than just about academics and athletics. At the time I attended there were personnel from other commissioning programs, such as BOOST, also in attendence. You learn quite a bit about the people who comprise the fleet that you will soon be part of. You can learn from their expereinces, their maturity, and their devotion. There is alot to be learned from people who have been there, are there and want to continue to be a part of the Navy Marine Corps team. By the way, I was offered both even way back then, NWP or NAPS. In those days we were E-2's when we started NAPS and were able to be advance to E-3 prior to the year ending. Not sure how they do it now.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Not so sure. I was a VERTREP pilot. During one three year period in my life, I was OINC for a bunch of short term detachments involving CVs and a lot of ordnance transfer on an extremely limited timetable. My detachment usually consisted of two or three experienced pilots, three aircraft, and a bunch of nuggets. Usually, not more than a few hours into the non-stop two day evolution, I would get a call from the CV airboss that the admiral wanted to see me right away. Refusing to get out of the cockpit and set a bad precedent, I always gave a phone number and told him to tell the admiral that he could talk to my duty officer. Do the math. It was normally some kid who hadn’t been out of the training command more than a few months.</p>
<p>How did I prepare these nuggets to talk to the Admiral. Every time one of these dets was established, the first thing I told the gathered pilots was that I firmly believed there was always one perfect way to do anything. There was probably also one way that was totally wrong in every manner. Barring those, I expected my duty officer to pick one of the remaining ninety nine that he felt comfortable with and go with it. We would execute based on his briefing to the Admiral or CO. If there was something that maybe needed a discussion, we would do it later, after the evolution. And I did not expect any of the experienced pilots to second guess them.</p>
<p>During the early days when AIRLANT was supporting an Indian Ocean CV and there were not enough bombs to go around, we moved a LOT of ordnance, and all of it safely and expeditiously. And a lot of nuggets had their first very positive fleet experience watching their plans come to fruitation.</p>
<p>The main purpose of USNA training, different from WP, is that the ultimate goal of a Navy officer, be it an aviator or a surface/sub type, is driving their own thing around out there and be capable of making decisions.</p>
<p>I'm a little confused....Army officers don't need to be capable of making decisions? Whew, that's good news!</p>
<p>^^^^
LOL - mom3boys - you caught that little dig eh? just to catch us off guard is all! It's just the bias of one who spent too many sea tours floating on a postage stamp in the middle of the ocean! ;)</p>
<p>^^^^^^Actually not a dig at all. The Army is a more regimented style of leadership. When taking a mountain, the General doesn't expect a whole lot of creative original thinkers out there in his troops. Different atmosphere totally.</p>