Ph.D infantry soldiers

[The_Green_Basterd]

A Degree, or a brain that ticks contributes a different view or opinion to any obstacle.  While your job is to close with and destroy the enemy, and that’s it, we have been witness in the past decade to the army being farmed out to do anything from fight fires to shoveling snow.  Therefore, the job of an infanteer is to do anything no one else would put their hand up for.

In the forest Fires in BC, Many Reservist whom double as Fire Fighters were able to help train their members.

And Back to the PhD thing.  On my Basic, we had a 40+ year old Russian on my course.  He was a Russian Doctor whom was waiting for his paper work to clear so he could go in as a Reg Doctor and Get is $ 225,000 Signing Bonus.  Never seen a man look so depressed as I did when I looked at him doing CPR training on Our Basic.

 

[DiamondDarryl]

Im on my DP1 infantry course right now and there are more then a few with either university degrees or university experience such as myself.  You will fit in just fine.

 

[28402 engineers]

I'm 15 years old, and am looking forward to a career in the army. i also would like a university degree, for when i leave the force and get a civilian job. from what I've read so far in this thread, officers fresh from the RMC or otherwise are usually not well received. is that true?
and if i was to go to RMC, is it possible to be demoted or brought down to say maybe Sgt.? i need a degree, but a dose of real life couldn't hurt either.

regards,
Matt

 

[Sig_Des]

and if i was to go to RMC, is it possible to be demoted or brought down to say maybe Sgt.? i need a degree, but a dose of real life couldn't hurt either.

As much as the idea that you don't consider a career as an officer as real life amuses me, give your head a bit of a shake.

Even if you could come out of RMC as a Sgt, you wouldn't have the life experience or training for such a position.

You seem to want your cake and eat it too.

If you're really that inquisitive about the NCM side of things, join the reserves as an NCM when you turn 16, and then make your application to RMC, if that's what you want.

Either way, I'm gonna suggest you spend more of your time on this site in receive mode, rather than in transmit.

 

[DiamondDarryl]

I can only give you my opinion on that question but my course officer is fresh out of RMC as well as the other Infantry courses, and it is kind of hard sometimes to take a guy seriously when they have not made battalion yet either. They do posses a wealth of usefull information but I find the NCO's are much better leaders at that point. Now on the question about demotion. If you get demoted straight out of RMC your gonna get demoted to Civy status and certainly not Sgt.

 

[28402 engineers]

this was only my third post...sorry...
i was actually considering the reserves, but the nearest garrison is an hour and a half away, which poses problem (gas money).
but if i did join the reserves, and then join reg force once I'm 18, approximately how long would it take to reach....say master corporal.
I'm not in a rush or anything, just kind of curious.

 

[Sig_Des]

this was only my third post...sorry...
i was actually considering the reserves, but the nearest garrison is an hour and a half away, which poses problem (gas money).
but if i did join the reserves, and then join reg force once I'm 18, approximately how long would it take to reach....say master corporal.
I'm not in a rush or anything, just kind of curious.

I don't think you got my point. Do a search on career progression.

It's all relative on how well or how badly you do your job. Your qualifications. It could never happen.

 

[aesop081]

, approximately how long would it take to reach....say master corporal.

I was promoted to MCpl in my first trade after 6 years..........and i got them in my second trade after 2 years.....every trade and every individual is different when it comes to promotions.

 

[28402 engineers]

thanks guys. sorry for the trouble.

regards,
matt

 

[GO!!!]

I think the major problem with this eternal "Officer vs. NCM vs. Education vs Experience" argument is that the whole system is based on the premise that only certain people of certain educational background (or "breeding" in the old days) could be trained as military leaders.

While this is no longer the case, the CF has not caught up with the private sector, where the education/trades flip flop is happening right now in terms of renumeration. The demand for university grads in the soft arts is very weak, while tradesmen of all stripes are in high demand.

What it comes down to, is that the CF has not yet realised that certain work needs to be valued more than others. For example, if there is a dearth of certain type of technician, who takes several years to train, but a surplus of DEO and RMC applicants, are junior officers really of a high value?

Would we not be better served by making said technicians pay, benefits and priviliges superior to the surplus group's, in order to attract some of the talent there?

I acknowledge that retaining both groups is also an issue, but IME, I've never seen front line units short of officers, but they are ALWAYS short of techs of all types (LCIS being a perfect example).

 

[scas]

My old unit had an Sgt. with a PH.d. He taught on my QL3, then left and came back as an officer. Hes a good guy, and I think his is in Business or something close to that.

 

[MARS2INF]

...as I read this thread, I think to myself that it's the powers-that-be that desire the Officer corps to have a degree. Amongst all the different recruiting options for every officer trade (CFR notwithstanding), there is a requirement to either have or work on (in the case of CEOTP) a degree.

Personally, I know two people that would put most graduates to shame in terms of overall knowledge of "stuff". A graduate has specific knowledge of certain aspects of a particular trade or profession, but these two guys I speak of, like Ken Jennings on crack.

A degree, as references before in this thread, is nothing more than a $40,000 receipt that acknowledges your ability to regurgitate knowledge with regards to whatever field your studying. My receipt is almost paid off - then I go back and upgrade it to a Masters.

But, today, I'm a 2Lt learning to lead a platoon of far more knowledgeable and qualified soldiers than I...  ...my $0.02

 

[visitor]

If a person spends $40,000 and 4 years learning to "regurgitate information" it was waste of time and money. A university education should  endow someone  wth the skills to think critically,  to understand the context of our sociey in history, to be able to argue logically and consider other points of view, to communicate effectively:  in short: to be an educated person.  Knowledge of "stuff" gets outdated very quickly.  Certainly some people can learn to think critically without the benefit of University, but learning  that under a  brilliant thinker is invaluable.    To my mind a leader  needs to be creative, a forward thinker, be able to assess information and make decisions when faced with unique situations.  Ideally that person would  both be a critical thinker and have  specific knowledge of their trade.

 

[MARS2INF]

Ideally that person would both be a critical thinker and have specific knowledge of their trade.

Roger that.

...but is a $40,000 receipt required to show that in the CF? Not necessarily.

 

[GO!!!]

Ideally that person would  both be a critical thinker and have  specific knowledge of their trade.

....and there is no better way to ascertain this than by allowing applicants with a 3 year degree in recreation studies and a 2.2 GPA to become platoon commanders?

How is a civilian coming from university going to have any knowledge of any military trade?

Anyone who has been to university knows that it is only worth what you, the student put into it. Some invest alot, learning to learn and to think critically, or gaining education in the learned professions . Others lounge through it, and join the army at the end.

 

[armyvern]

Some invest alot, learning to learn and to think critically, or gaining education in the learned professions . Others lounge through it, and join the army at the end.

Well, to be fair, many who do learn to think critically also join the army; and some who lounge through it, do so in the civilian world as well. We are a reflection of our Canadian populace.

 

[observor 69]

If a person spends $40,000 and 4 years learning to "regurgitate information" it was waste of time and money. A university education should  endow someone  wth the skills to think critically,  to understand the context of our society in history, to be able to argue logically and consider other points of view, to communicate effectively:  in short: to be an educated person.   Knowledge of "stuff" gets outdated very quickly.  Certainly some people can learn to think critically without the benefit of University, but learning  that under a  brilliant thinker is invaluable.    To my mind a leader  needs to be creative, a forward thinker, be able to assess information and make decisions when faced with unique situations.  Ideally that person would  both be a critical thinker and have  specific knowledge of their trade.

Years after having completed a degree I realize the above statement is what it was all about. Perhaps there are those who have acquired these traits without going to university.

Personally I consider it the most  invaluable experience of my life.

+1

 

[GO!!!]

Well, to be fair, many who do learn to think critically also join the army; and some who lounge through it, do so in the civilian world as well. We are a reflection of our Canadian populace.

Very true.

I would just like to see a University degree in the Arts recognised for what it is - a document that recognises a person has an above average ability to read, write, and comprehend. It is not indicative of intelligence or critical thought most of the time, just an advanced communicator who enjoyed learning.

The "gold standard" would be to pair demonstrated military leadership ability with an education firmly grounded in the Liberal arts, which would be far more economical as well.

 

[George Wallace]

I would just like to see a University degree in the Arts recognised for what it is - a document that recognises a person has an above average ability to read, write, and comprehend.

I would like to see that too, but we both know, as evidenced so often on this very site, many people who are holders of higher degrees, or in the process of attaining one, are very often illiterate.  Back in the '70's, when I was getting my degree, there was such a fuss about there being so many people graduating with Degrees who were functionally illiterate, that they said something had to be done to correct the problem.  Here we are thirty years later, and it is obvious that the Education System has failed in its' goal.

 

[Journeyman]

...on this very site, many people who are holders of higher degrees...are very often illiterate.

You take that back! My parents were married!



Oh....I thought you meant illegitimate.....sometimes I don't read so good.