<p>Great point, nicely put. You’ve not had any political science yet, perhaps? Hold on. Your clear logic is about to be challenged by the allegedly enlightened.</p>
<p>Quick opinion, this whole grumblings over minority, someone pointed out the point that Asians are not considered minorities… That is an impossibly frustrating dilemma to be included in statics for diversity but be not only not given a step up but put down a stair.</p>
<p>Also I agree with people looking at the Academic side of things as one of many margins. I think that in some ways it’s own blessing and curse. A midshipman that now attends the Academy FAILED out of two prior colleges, but at the Academy has a double major and a 4.0. So we can debate how the Academy works, but we won’t ever know what makes that perfect officer. That standard is far more intangible than SAT scores.</p>
<p>Clif -</p>
<p>I am curious about a statement in your response - “A midshipman that now attends the Academy FAILED out of two prior colleges, but at the Academy has a double major and a 4.0.” </p>
<p>I have a son who applied to USNA but didn’t get accepted and is now doing ROTC at a civilian college. He loves the unit activities and made the pistol team but he is frustrated at the party atmosphere and anti military biases…His grades are OK but a Chem class with 400 students is killing him and between that and Calc, I’m afraid that his GPA isn’t going to be great for the first semester - he has reapplied to Annapolis but is afraid that they won’t even look at him because of less than stellar grades. He really believes that he would succeed at USNA but does he even have a chance at this point?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I find that very hard to believe, especially now with applications at all time high.</p>
<p>Concur. Is there a rat in the woodpile? </p>
<p>If not, this could be a first. Unless he/she came outta the fleet. And/or “failed out” does not mean what most would assume it does.</p>
<p>The whole person concept allows many many various paths to the Naval Academy. The 2/3 directly from high school are more ‘cookie cutter’ than the remainder. However, for those with alternate paths, many are very unique. Nothing should surprise or shock you.</p>
<p>Remember that the whole person concept is based not on what you or Prof Fleming think would make a good applicant but what the Naval Academy has determined will make a successful officer.</p>
<p>Really, Beat Army! I don’t give a hoot about this thread cause my kid got in on an athletic scholarship and he says all the real real smart kids are idiots who can’t lead. I would rather have a tough hard working jock with great leadership skills anyday then a 4.0 whimp. My boy was pretty smart though ,34 act so he had that going for him too.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The academy will consider his grades carefully, especially in Calc and Chem. If he can get extra help to boost his grades it might be worth considering. Getting a solid recommendation from his ROTC officer will work in his favor. Keep in mind as many as 1/3 of the incomming class will have at least a year of post-HS education under their belts.</p>
<p>Best of luck</p>
<p>Thanks for the leadership update, Swimdad! Your son confidently declares all “Smart kids are idiots who can’t lead”. Then you follow up that your kid is pretty smart with a 34 score. Hmmmmmm. Sometimes you get great input here, and sometimes you get this…</p>
<p>jscam, I think what swimdad was saying is that a wardroom composed of nothing but magna cum laude engineering majors would probably be a very dull place. I agree wholeheartedly.</p>
<p>Thanks for interpreting what jscam was confused on. 
Sounds like a left-handed endorsement for diversity. :eek:</p>
<p>Bet that argument isn’t often made on the sub when the reactor is overheating. “Hey Chief, where is the left-handed, blonde-haired Slovenian/Brazilian female double major in English and Parks/Recreation 2nd Louie? She’ll get that over-heated bugger under control.” ;)</p>
<p>“Ah Sir, I believe she’s in the can fixing her makeup. She was crying some, you know that time, Sir.” :p</p>
<p>“Oh, ok. Well just let us know when she can join us.”
</p>
<p>“Ay ay sir. Should we sing the diversity theme song in the meantime, Sir?” :)</p>
<p>“Ah screw it.”:(</p>
<p>"Ah, about that Sir …I’ve got more news. ":eek:</p>
<p>Well, there is a difference between being smart and real real smart. Real real smart imo can be and often is the individual who cares little about anything other then the 4.0 gpa and does not develop strength in a broad arena of skills, that is where I was going with my previous post. Again, imo to lead effectively “it pays to be a winner” and that is about having GAME in all respects. </p>
<p>Do you have a problem if a person is smart as well as a being a stud?</p>
<p>If I’m on the board of review for candidates for admission to USNA I’m looking for the whole package,make sense? I’ve seen a lot of water go over the Dam and the cream does rise to the top and he/she is humping a 3.2 gpa and a six pack of brew in his/her Rucksack.</p>
<p>
Actually, diversity was the last thing on my mind when I made that comment. But thanks for attempting to put words in my mouth.</p>
<p>There are three basic ‘tracks’ at USNA; academics, sports, and professional/military/Brigade activities. Most can excel in one, a few can excel in two, and those who excel in three usually wear five or six stripes and get recommended to go to England and study for a couple of years after graduation. Those who choose academics (“real real smart”) to the exclusion of all else, treat USNA more like a real college and miss out on a lot of the opportunities which are unique to a service academy. I feel the best officers are those who are well-rounded and participate in as many diverse activities as possible.</p>
<p>“There’s a difference between smart and real real (sic) smart”, really? I feel left out of all this insight to military leadership. If only the Academies knew!
I think my comments not only stand, but are repeatedly supported by Swimdads comments. I can’t critique the son who started it, as one sentence taken out of context does not a theory make. But to take one sentence and run with it as the proud swimdad has done is at least worthy of a laugh. I get it. Your son was an athelete. You’re proud! He is the best because blah-blah-blah. Lighten up!
And I await the branding of the dreaded “real real (sic) smart” label! Lord knows after 21 years in, I should have heard it before now…</p>
<p>Dude relax,no need to be so harsh. I must have touched a nerve eh!
I am proud of my kid and those that he runs with but mostly I admire that they do all that they do with so much ease and with so much grace. It was a mistake on my part to slam others the (sic) smart and I regret that.
I do feel with no reservations that well-rounded people make better leaders. That is the core of what I am saying. Your just not hearing it.</p>
<p>According to:
[CDR</a> Salamander: Diversity Thursday](<a href=“http://cdrsalamander.blogspot.com/2009/11/diversity-thursday_26.html]CDR”>CDR Salamander: Diversity Thursday),</p>
<p>The Class of 2013:</p>
<p>Overall % of SAT scores below 600 (verbal): 33.6%
Whites: Overall % of SAT scores below 600 (verbal): 25.7%
Blacks: Overall % of SAT scores below 600 (verbal): 70.7%</p>
<p>Overall % of SAT scores below 600 (math): 22.3%
Whites: Overall % of SAT scores below 600 (math): 14.4%
Blacks: Overall % of SAT scores below 600 (math): 71.7%</p>
<p>Total hogwash.</p>
<p>Fleming is highly disparaging of the appointment of football players. Last week was selection night for the 32 seniors on this years football team. Sixteen USMC, 2 SEALS, 3 Nuclear Submrines, 4 Naval Aviation, and the remainder surface warfare, not a restricted line among them. Looks to me like a fantastic return on our taxpayer’s dollar. I think we can all be proud of them, with maybe the exception of Bruce. I am most positive they will do great. Fair winds and following seas to all of them.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Man mombee, we hope you’re right. But you’ve shown us zilch in terms of anything beyond your disdain for the messenger. Again unsubstantiated.</p>
<p>We’d love to be pulling for your point. Really. Can you deliver w/ any info beyond your opinion? Like anatomical youknowwhat’s, everyone has one of those, and worth every penny we’re paying to get yours. At least Flemng spent $59 bucks to get the data from admissions.</p>
<p>C’mon give us some meat to chew on.</p>
<p>And sadly, you and others who’ve made the same whiny arguments about how mean Prof. Fleming is …would seem to confirm the truth of his message by the total absence of any genuine rebuttal. With baited breath, we beckon evidence of your allegations. Fleming’s backed his up. Your turn.</p>
<p>Do you not think the service selection choices of the football players totally disputes Fleming’s contention that they are, as a whole, not worthy of appointments? This, combined with the NCAA releases a couple of weeks ago that showed USNA with among the highest athlete graduation rates in the country. His comments were in re minorities and blue chips. He was wrong about blue chips and minorities have been graduating a rates commensurate with the majorities. So I speculate he is wrong about them also. It is hard to measure ‘heart’ on the WPM.</p>
<p>Not at all. Remember, the end game is NOT to diversify the USNA. It’s to enable more AA admirals. So there is a double whamy here. They must 1. Graduate and commission these candidates …and 2. They must do everything possible to avoid their attrition as 5 and divers. How so? Service Selection. No sub guys here who don’t want subs. Bet on it. </p>
<p>This is merely tactical of a much more dreadful, costly, and narcissistic strategy. The only ones who care about the USNA outcomes? The Supe and his underlings. He wins. They win. Onward and upward. Did my job. Of course, Mullen and the higher-ups who’ve given the order. They win. Did our jobs. Oh, and one other group. The students who were denied despite being superior candidates in virtually every measure …except one, and it’s one none can affirm makes any difference beyond carrying out the order. </p>
<p>So your point strikes me in 2 ways. Once again, your opinion about Fleming’s apparent opinion. And you are entitled, but don’t suggest it’s anything more than that. But of course you and I don’t really know his opinion about football players. But if we did, so what? Fleming’s gone light years beyond opinion …and not a single soul at USNA has cried “liar liar.” They’ve cried “loon, loon” and “loser, loser.” But not a single solitary sailor has shown a shred of data or hard evidence to present a picture that is any different than what Fleming’s painted.</p>
<p>Speaking of data …isn’t it interesting how for the first time in USNA history, diversity students are carved out of the data and the public is fed pablum like …“75% of USNA minority candidates scored in the top 7% of all minorities taking the SAT” (not actual data, but the point is obvious. DO NOT compare these students to the other traditional students. Why? I suspect everyone gets that without any explanation. But who is USNA trying to humor, impress with this kind of silly reporting of data?) </p>
<p>The real issue is NOT how many are admitted. The issue is how many graduate and are commissioned. And so the same game as we see in admissions now, must be perpetuated. Lest the Dant and Dean heads will be chopped. No, they must see them through. So what you see is what USNA must deliver. Period.</p>