- Reaction score
- 1,729
- Points
- 1,140
I am pretty sure DL grads can take a couple more RMC DL courses to get their Masters.Correct. JCSP DL graduates in 2014 (I believe) were the last to have any real chance at a Master's.
I am pretty sure DL grads can take a couple more RMC DL courses to get their Masters.Correct. JCSP DL graduates in 2014 (I believe) were the last to have any real chance at a Master's.
Oops, sorry. I know there’s a thread on this recently, I thought we were in that one.Actually nice to see posts that have nothing to do with the thread topic for a change.......however.
That changed with the class of 2015. CFC hasn't bothered to get off their ass to fix it.I am pretty sure DL grads can take a couple more RMC DL courses to get their Masters.
And now we are.Oops, sorry. I know there’s a thread on this recently, I thought we were in that one.
What I still find weird is that the JCSP is supposed to be Master's level study as part of the professionalization of senior officers, but if you already have a Masters, you still have to go to JCSP for the tick in the box. After spending a few years getting a real Masters under the PG program, nothing less appealing then spending a year on IR in Toronto doing some BS CAF academics, that doesn't actually get into anything concretely useful.
The problem is that it has become carrot and stick. You need JCSP to advance, but the Masters is also a carrot dangled to get reluctant folks to commit to institutionalized education on the CAF's terms.It's intended to be job training that is also structured in an academic manner, to allow for the dual benefit of both counting for (or towards) a Masters, while also getting the military qualification. Yes, the academic nature of it helps out as part of the "professionalization of senior officers" that any post-secondary education would aid in, but it has a specific focus as well.
Content vice method my friend. You're learning and demonstrating skills in a Masters program more so than learning content. Talk to someone who has a Masters in History about what facts they learned vice what processes they learned for research, constructive thought, multiple perspectives, etc. It's not what is learned but how it's learned that makes the difference between a Bachelors and a Masters.Doing some random Masters on Shakespeare or Guided Weapon Systems or the War of 1812 isn't going to provide the base level knowledge that they're trying to instill in everyone who goes through Staff College.
And I would counter that any practical application from JCSP is minimal unless you're going to be force employed in a Joint L1/2 environment.I'd suggest that your assessment of it not "actually getting into anything concretely useful" is ... inaccurate at best.
JCSP is not masters level and, as demonstrated by the fact that the masters level is both optional & not universally available, it is not supposed to be.What I still find weird is that the JCSP is supposed to be Master's level study as part of the professionalization of senior officers
A few years ago they made the Masters of Defence Studies portion mandatory; previously it was optional for people that already had a Masters. Not sure if that has changed back, but I guess they thought some students had too much free time, as there wasn't an option to do a shortened version without the MDS (ie do a single semester for the Command/Staff roles).JCSP is not masters level and, as demonstrated by the fact that the masters level is both optional & not universally available, it is not supposed to be.
It is post-graduate level, but there are lots of post-graduate certificate and diploma programs at various universities & colleges. Post-graduate includes but does not equal higher degrees.
JCSP is supposed to be professional military education relevant to filling command and staff roles at operational, institutional, and strategic levels.
We should not be doing just in time training. That is a Lean practice that makes the Human resources pool fragile. We should (as we used to reach) train two levels up so that people are ready to step into higher roles when an emergency demands.isn't really in line with the just-in-time training philosophy.
Given that you are paying a senior Major for a year …
Sure, but you do that in the unit, not in a class room. Our HR pool is fragile, and this takes people out of it for a full year, while providing very broad PME that will still require direct and job specific on boarding.We should not be doing just in time training. That is a Lean practice that makes the Human resources pool fragile. We should (as we used to reach) train two levels up so that people are ready to step into higher roles when an emergency demands.
… also, it is cheaper to send a major onto a year of PME than to send a LCol.
And my 39 years plus of service showed me that degreed vs non-degreed officers meant jack-shit. Some folks r born leaders, some folks learn their position, some folks are middling, and some folks are toxic. It is like, "voila, competency vis a vis rank is acquired.Well, since at least a BA is an entry-level requirement for loads of positions not requiring management or leadership these days outside the military, is it the ideal "first hurdle" to becoming an officer? Anyone have any data on degrees are statistically more likely to lead to better officers? I ask because my anecdotally limited evidence from 30 years ago showed me both good and bad officers with and without degrees.
Bingo.And my 39 years plus of service showed me that degreed vs non-degreed officers meant jack-shit. Some folks r born leaders, some folks learn their position, some folks are middling, and some folks are toxic. It is like, "voila, competency vis a vis rank is acquired.