<p>Indeed you would have. Congratulations, knock 'em dead.</p>
<p>And your self-description illustrating your personal merit beyond being able to pole vault or run a quick dash or whatever classically illustrates another disservice done in this process. Forever and a day, not athletes so much, but those more readily identifiable by their ethnicity, will be viewed as 2nd class in need of special favor to get in, get out, get on. What a disservice to you and to many of the others.</p>
<p>It is a fundamental violation of a domain that was built upon the fundamental notion of hard work joined with capacity to learn. Some may cry that academic standards are “arbitrary” or that evidence of leadership in ECs is “arbitrary” but in the absence of others, they are the best the Navy has known. Surely there could be absolutely nothing more “arbitrary” and unfair judging someones unfit or undeserving because of their skin color and ethnic background. No more does the merit of ability and hard work stand as the pillar for judging people in what was once a bastion of meritocracy. That’s what the exposure of this means. </p>
<p>In the end it is indefensable beyond one reality. That’s what PC demands. And that is what PC will get.</p>
<p>And still none can offer a reasonable answer as to why a person of one ethnic background is better suited to lead than another? Any notions?</p>
<p>So shoot Professor Messenger if you wish. Proclaim the history of meritocracy and measurement of excellence to be bogus if you wish. But do not disclaim the truth in what he has shared, regardless of his message.</p>
<p>And in the end, those who suffer will be those who are forever identified as likely to have been admitted and graduated on a different scale than the others. Notably those who will forever have to defend their genuine performance to a far greater extent than those who we all identify as simply spectacular. And sadly, by this measure, they will be, barring medical intervention, forever identifiable. Now that’s unfair.</p>
<p>My dear friend Whistle Pig - you know as well as I that life isn’t fair. You also probably know that the “best” person for the job isn’t always the “most qualified” - whatever that is. You also know the service academies conduct their admissions under the constraints of the nomination process.</p>
<p>Each academy has 170 slots available each year for enlisted folks. They are admitted under different standards than high school students. Where is the out cry?
Congress has determined that each entering plebe must not have reached their 23rd birthday - where is the age discrimination outcry?</p>
<p>Getting admitted is simple really - it’s a competition. Be the best in your Congressional district and you are in. You can’t get into Harvard that way. If I were a Congresswoman and submitted 10 names and the academy chose to admit the student with the SAT of 1400, a 2.5 GPA and no sports or EC’s over several students who had SAT’s of 2100, 3.5 GPA and were student body presidents and varsity team captains - that would be the last year I would use the competitive method. From then on I would use the Principle method. Other MOC’s would too.</p>
<p>Each Academy has a certain number of slots available for children of disables veterans or who were KIA. This is dictated by Congress - not admissions. If such an applicant was black or white, male or female - they only have to show they are qualified to be admitted even if they are a “weaker” applicant than others. </p>
<p>No doubt the academy has made a concerted effort to increase recruitment of minorities - outreach to populations that are unfamiliar with military options, including service academies is to be commended.
Fleming has totally overblown his case.</p>
The ultimate anedote … from the Civil War … Confederate General Lee was #1 in his class at west Point (or darn close) … and Union General Grant was just about last in his class.</p>
<p>I would guess there is some correlation to class rank and success in the military but I bet it is a pretty weak correlation.</p>
<p>Let me start this off by saying that I am a minority. I do not agree with much that this professor has said in the past, however I must admit this is one that does have merit.</p>
<p>The things that are done in order to make the brigade look diverse in my opinion hurts minorities. When at the academy, the effort to have brigade leadership which is diverse means that some less qualified people are put in leadership positions over somebody who may have worked three years to try to get that position. Do not get me wrong, most of the minorities in high leadership positions were overly qualified for it, worked hard for it and earned it. What this leads to is any minority in a leadership position is viewed as a quota, rather than having earned the position. By putting a few in leadership position in order to “diversify” the leadership, it in turn negates the work of minorities who worked and earned the positions they are appointed to. I was a battalion commander my 1/C year, and worked hard to earn the position, however I knew that in the back of peoples minds, some think I got the position because I was a minority. I do not blame them because of the policy of “ensuring” there was a overly proportionate amount of minorities in leadership positions. As a minority, this thought would be in the back of my mind when seeing minorities in high leadership positions that I knew did not have the best records at the academy.</p>
<p>In my opinion, all that these actions create, is more racism, since it negates the accomplishments of minorities who obtained the same or higher accomplishments of non-minorities and earned their acceptance and position in the school.</p>
<p>This affirmative action used to eliminate racial discriminiation in my opinion creates inverse discrimination. It creates racism. We are now saying a minority is more qualified than a non-minority. Sounds like racism to me.</p>
<p>Navy 07 - You have hit the nail on the head! The main problem with ANY “quota” system is that the people who are really hurt are the very ones who have worked their tails off to get a position but are forever viewed as suspect because of affirmative action policies. The people who get positions they don’t deserve, simply due to the need to “fill a slot”, are well aware that there were more qualified applicants and thus they are either intimidated or they become resentful and bitter.</p>
<p>The racial tensions in this country have, sadly, become more pronounced as people are too quick to identify by race first and make little effort to see each person as a unique individual with specific strengths and weaknesses. When we get to the point where the admissions board, and society as a whole, are willing to look at the “content of the character” rather than the race/color/gender, then we will have the best people possible and, maybe-just maybe, we can actually learn to respect each other and stop all the infighting! We need to get to the point where people identify as Americans, first and foremost, and leave all of the other “hyphenated” identities out of the picture!</p>
<p>While there’s plenty of meat to chew on in these observations, the easiest to debunk is this one. Despite the aberrent anecdotes showcasing the occasional misbehaving class bottom-dweller legacy who goes on to marry well and become a U.S. politician thanks to her largesse … or on the other end, the USNA Rhodes Scholar who couldn’t find his behind when the lights are turned out let alone lead a platoon of peers to the grocery store …and they abound and mean nothing beyond interesting fodder for those who somehow think these mutant cases provide sufficient evidence to pooh-pooh USNA’s longstanding fundamental framework for identifying her “best” as her brightest … </p>
<p>Who gets the #1 choice of assignment? The #1 ranked Mid, most of which is determined by his/her academic merit. </p>
<p>Will this now change to ensure that minorities are proportionately distributed in the USN professional communities? It seeminly would follow.</p>
<p>What did even Sen. McCain’s admiral granddaddy say was the most important thing in developing and identifying top-shelf Navy officers? Men who could and would be able to THINK on the fly. While indeed there are many types of gifts, the NFL needs fast lads who can catch a football, no matter their color or lack there of.</p>
<p>In fact, the USN has long determined the single most significant factor in predicting who’ll be the best officers in the Navy, are the brightest. Until now that is.</p>
<p>The question never asked and never addressed remains: …</p>
<p>Can anyone lend insight as to why it has now been determined that the body of officers must relect the same ethnicity of enlisted, even when requires separate-and-unequal tracks for admission and completion?</p>
<p>P.S. Amen 2010! Who’da thunk it! 'Tis a good thing.</p>
<p>Question -
Hypothesis - USNA is admitting a bunch of dumb Black kids who can’t do simple addition or write a complete sentence. Hence, keeping out very bright white students who deserve to attend because of their genius.</p>
<p>How then does USNA have such a remarkably high graduation rate? The majority of appointments are made within the confines of a Congressional Nomination - which admissions has no control over.
Yet the Academy still graduates over 80% of midshipmen. If all these minorities are so “unqualified” then how do they manage to graduate?</p>
<p>Perhaps part deux will the the “two track curriculum”.</p>
<p>Whistle Pig; the initial assignment is no big deal, unless you are going into some speciality where they take a limited number. Does it really matter if you are the first person to select Navy air or the 300th? I do not think so. Does it matter that your ship is homeported in San Diego vice Norfolk? Professionally, no. Once you get to your first duty station, no one cares that you graduated first in your class from USNA. You are just another in the long line of new ensigns that have reported on board over the past many years. It is now time for you to grow professionally and prove yourself as an officer. Why does a body of officers need to reflect the ethnicity of the enlisted? My personal belief and answer is role models. We are an all volunteer force that expects the citizens to stand up and become members of our armed forces. We need to reach out to everyone. We need to demonstrate that there are opportunities for advancement for everyone. We need to show that becoming an officer or senior enlisted is based on performance and nothing else. As for lower ranked high school students, I would actually prefer to have the person working for me who worked hard to get C’s rather than the person who did nothing and got A’s and B’s. The person who worked hard for the C’s is probably a more goal driven, get the job done individual. Based on my experience in the fleet with USNA grads, I think the admissions process has worked out really well.</p>
<p>The real question is do the parents of enlisted Marines and Sailors really care what ethnicity is leading their sons or daughters? No, they care that their sons and daughters are being led by the most competant and most qualified officers, period. I want the most qualified and best people I can get in my detachment. When picking people to deploy with me, I dont base it on ethnicity. I base it on qualifications…who can best complete the mission. Why are we picking officers based on ethnicity? If our overall goal is mission accomplishment shouldnt we be picking the most qualified person regardless of their ethnicity?</p>
<p>Thank you 07 for your voice of sanity. This is about equal opportunity for men and women surviving. Not about who delivers the mail. Not about everyone getting a trophy and not keeping score. Equal opportunity fails to mean equal ability to lead. Let those to the post office and little league. And it’s not bound by color or ethnicity. It’s about identifying and equipping the best. Or was.</p>
<p>So, okay base it solely on “qualifications” but what makes a person “more qualified” to lead or “better qualified” to lead?
SAT scores? No way. And this is the crux of the argument. Folks are complaining that some persons of color have lower SAT’s and hence less qualified or not qualified at all.<br>
The graduation rates disprove this.
I also raised the question that Prof Fleming did not address - what about those from prior service? This group is normally “less qualified” than the direct admit group from high school. Lower SAT’s and more minorities.
With 15,000 applications for Navy and nearly 12,000 for West Point it would probably be pretty easy to admit a class that is all white male, from an upper-middle class background, with exceptional SAT’s.<br>
This is not what the Navy (or Army) wants and not what Congress wants. Nor what most American’s would want - we’ve been there done that.</p>
<p>As far as the best and the brightest goes - look at Craig Mullaney, West Point grad, Rhodes Scholar, Combat Platoon leader. After one tour he called it quits. Finished his commitment (extended so the Army could pay for his Oxford education) teaching history at the Naval Academy. He is now out of the Army.
Professor Fleming should conduct a study - tell us how long the top of the class, Rhodes Scholars (and other scholarship winners) last in the service. I think you would find General Petraeus the exception and not the rule.</p>
<p>So what??? Standards are compromised and the response is “so what?” To use Admissions standards alone to determine whether or not an applicant will be successful is, as you put it, “tenuous” at best. However when using admissions standards across a wide spectrum, say for instance, an entire class there would be some limited correlation to success. For example, there are two Naval Academy classes. One is a random cross section of the American public, while the other is selected based on their academic record, club/sport involvement, personal interviews, and demonstrated leadership ability/potential. Which one would you put your money on? </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>There are many examples of outstanding and high ranking officers that were not ranked high in their respective classes. None of the three McCain’s were ranked above the bottom. Patton and Grant have also been used as examples. Hell, the youngest general in history, Custer, was ranked dead last in his class (there is even a story about him breaking into his prof’s house the night before an exam to steal a copy of the test). But if we are going to use the example of a few who gained success from the bottom of their class, then what about all those great leaders who never were because someone less qualified was admitted over them?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>What do black, white, red, brown, and green high school students have in common? They are all high school students of course. Prior enlisted however, are a different breed They bring to the table things that no high schooler could even recognize. They offer not only their fleet experience, but also the perspective of being an enlisted sailor to the incoming plebe class. They have already demonstrated to the Navy their abilities, and depending on their academic pedigree, the Navy will invest in them further by either sending them straight to the incoming class, or to Naps for a year of polishing.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The true question is why isn’t it higher? As Prof. Fleming points out in his article, attrition rates are higher among minorities.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This is a very convincing argument. For example, a young black sailor who maybe never had any advantage in life, who thinks he can never rise above E-3 sees his new Div-O fresh from the Naval Academy with shiny new ensign bars who looks like him. He may be more likely to identify with that officer and believe that maybe if he works hard that he might become an officer too. I just wish we could increase diversity without compromising standards.</p>
<p>Not sure what your point is here. In fact, many have written various pieces about how the watering down and multiplying of standards is a, perhaps the principal cause for 5 and divers like Mullaney, who btw was a shining star …and #2 in his class.</p>
<p>Lastly, it’s a bit superscilious proclaiming to be sufficiently all-knowing about what “Americans want.”</p>
<p>If you want to make some kind of point look no further than the USNA where the director of the admissions diversity effort is a 5 and diver too. Quit the Navy, probably making 2 or 3 times what he made the month before his departure. So much for calling and commitment. Probably sitting in the same desk he had while wearing a uniform.</p>
<p>And let’s remember …we can debate the validity of qualifications till the cows arrive on the Yard. They are the quals the Navy has determined work best and for generations. Anecdotes of deviations abound and change or prove nothing. The implication of those who like to use those illustrations is “screw up, don’t perform, etc…and you’ll be a great leader.” The Navy does not agree. They are merely interesting wind stories.</p>
<p>And on another note, the end game would suggest that Custer merited his spot, thus validating WP’s determination that no matter his latter rise, the Academy’s assessment was indeed, right on the $. Not only did he get himself scalped, but also every man in his charge. Some might suggest the same of McCain, brave as he was in incarceration, and his tanking 2 aircraft while practicing to become a USN flyer.</p>
<p>The cows should be arriving on the yard whenever the Ac year begins. I’m not sure how many exchangers they have this year but there should be atleast a dozen or so</p>
<p>Justamom… The underlying issue is that there is a difference in SAT scores, academic grades, and overall strength of a packet. By saying that they graduate does not make up for the fact that race plays a role in admissions. Why should standards be different for different races. Would that not be a case of racism? I am a minority as I have said in previous posts. Does this give me the right to be accepted with lower achievements in academics, SATs, athletics, leadership positions than somebody who is not a minority? </p>
<p>Why should it matter what race somebody is ? How is it different for somebody to be not accepted because they are caucasian than not being accepted because you are a minority? By not accepting sombody because of race is a definition of racism. Anybody can graduate from the Naval Academy with hard work. The issue isnt can they graduate. The issue is that we are deciding who has the opportunity to graduate from the Naval Academy, since you have to be accepted in order to graduate. </p>
<p>As I said before, it diminishes the validity of all minorities by creating racism. I gave up a lot and worked hard to get to the academy including going to a prep school sponored by the Naval Academy Foundation before I was accepted. The stereotype that is created by the race based admissions makes people think that I am there as a quota instead of earning my spot which I feel I did. By eliminating race from the equation we get a sampling of the best and brightest in the country. It could be 75% minority or 1% minority. What does it really matter? Everybody has an equal chance and it is not based at all on race, gender, religion or any other factors which produce racism of any kind.</p>
<p>The comments in your post reflect this racism which is fostered by the two tier system. It shows an assumption that minority applicants do not achieve the same scores. THis in fact what is happeneing. As you said, people assume black applicants have lower SAT scores. This generalization is exactly what happens when a certain group is seen as having an advantage. I had a 1300SAT, 4.0 GPA, AP classes, varsity captain of 3 teams, student council yet since I am still viewed as being a quota, being accepted on a different scale. If this is what diversity brings then we are never going to get rid of racism.</p>
<p>The comments on Craig Mullaney show a clear lack of understanding. Let me remind you this is a combat veteran you are talking about. If 100% of officers stayed in the entire structure of the military would be in shambles. It is built in yearly that a certain percentage of officers will get out. There are many different reasons for getting out. This individual like others who get out served his country honorably…in combat. He did his time and sacrificed much. It is not my right or the right of any others to judge him for his decision. He served honorably, thats all I need to know. The mission of the Naval Academy states to "in order to assume the highest responsibilities of command, citizenship and government. I guess you do not view being a teacher as being a good citizen. He is giving back to society. I know many of my teachers at the academy with prior military experience related this in order to develop us as combat leaders. I can tell you that being in the military is not always the most conducive thing to family life and it does require much sacrifice from you but also your family. Perhaps multiple combat tours does not justify him getting out with a masters degree in your eyes but in mine he is a true American who has sacrificed for his country.</p>
<p>What does one say to comfort the 4.0 non-URM male with 1450+ SATs, three varsity sports, team captaincy, civic awards (etc.) who was rejected by USNA and knows he is is in the same district as an URM with 1190 SATs, no APs and one sport who was accepted? Not a hypothetical situation.</p>
<p>The 1450 is going NROTC but will likely experience that subtle bias in the fleet that favors USNA grads as a cut above. Ironic.</p>
<p>2010… as any midshipman would know, there are a number of WP exchange cadets during the fall (and now spring) semester. I figured a dozen or so was a nice general number, although I am not privy to the exact count… But your right, it has been a long time since the term “secundo” has graced the yard.</p>
'Tis a good thing.</p>