Following is the recent email from MCPON Campo re: CNO approval to eliminate the AA degree requirement for advancement to SCPO.

Master Chiefs,

CNO has approved the recommendation to eliminate the Enlisted Education Requirement (AA Degree Requirement for advancement to SCPO). I strongly believe this policy revision is a clear example of the CNO's endorsement of Deckplate Leadership and where he wants us focused as a Chief's Mess
- leading and developing Sailors.

After taking a hard look at the policy, we determined that 35% of our Chiefs eligible for the FY11 SCPO selection board were at extreme risk of not meeting the requirement. Of those 35%, the majority belong to our most sea-intensive and GWOT ratings. This places them at an unacceptable disadvantage in competing for advancement and does not place the right emphasis on the qualities we have traditionally recognized as those inherent to an effective Chief Petty Officer. Today, more than ever, it is important that we advance our people based on leadership and their commitment to the success of the men and women they lead.

Revising this policy should not be viewed as the Navy backing away from our commitment to education. Our Guiding Principle of "Professionalism" clearly defines the expectation that Chiefs, "will remain invested in the Navy through self-motivated military and academic education and training."

The right emphasis on education will be placed in selection board precepts and will remain a contributing factor in selection for advancement. Our commitment to education must be measured by the access and opportunity we provide to our Sailors to pursue off duty education. As Chiefs, we must work to create those opportunities for our Sailors.

CNO has sent a similar email to the Flag Officers. Our intent is to give the Wardroom and the Mess visibility into this decision before it becomes public.

I want to thank those of you who provided input both for and against revising this policy. The strength of our CPO Mess is our ability to discuss matters within the Mess and then speak with one voice once a decision is made.

Thanks again for your leadership and for your commitment to those great Americans who proudly call themselves United States Sailors.

v/r Joe

This message has been edited. Last edited by: surfnturf,

Community service will probably count as much as a degree will - yeah, that levels the playing field. Lower the standards so everyone can compete - nice.

"Our commitment to education must be measured by the access and opportunity we provide to our Sailors to pursue off duty education" .. it's always been accessable, it boils down to the fact of wanting to. Can't think up an excuse good enough to dodge that fact........

Grantsdad, I think you missed the point. To me, the standards aren't being lowered; instead, MCPON Campa is using information that MCPON Scott may not have had to make sure people are not being set up for failure.

Should there be a degree requirement? I would say yes, and that it should be imposed on anyone entering the service after a certain date vice what was set out in the now recinded requirement. By that I mean that a Sailor entering the service say, after 01 Oct. 2008 that wants to make the service a career has to have an AA Degree to be eligible to compete for CPO, and a Bachelor's Degree to be eligible to compete for MCPO. That way they have plenty of time to use what is available to get that degree. They would be periodically reminded of that requirement through GMT, Career Development Boards, etc.

Boats - I took your comments onboard and I agree with them, they make sense. But... I might get blasted for this but, before it was file 13'd we all knew it was coming, it wasn't like an overnight requirement.
All I'm saying is that every rate gets a large amount of credits towards an AA degree. Just minimal effort will put you over the top and once you retire it's another tool in your tool box. With all the programs available today I can't imagine why someone would not want to do it - I guess it's all perspective. *off the soapbox now*
These young Sailors know the future of the Navy and that's a more formally educated, degree holding Chiefs Mess. Like it, hate it ... whatever spin you put on it, it's going to come to that. As the times change... I know some of the more seasoned Chiefs will bristle at this post but wait a sec and think back about the Z-Grams that allowed the beards, no more shifting back into the uniform of the day to eat, changing liberty from a privilege to a right, no drug testing in those days, etc. The Navy survived that so having a degree can't be all bad...... Blast away

Not a bad idea there Boats. Here is a post I made before in another thread...I still like this idea, even if it is mine.

quote:

Well, it sure is good to see that someone with some pull recognizes that leadership cannot be learned by having a college degree.

I'm not saying college education is not important, but I've said it before, making a college degree a REQUIREMENT for advancement cheapens the accomplishment, and takes the leaders out of the picture.

My complaint about this hollow requirement from the beginning is the implementation. There is a US Naval Academy that could sponsor degree programs for enlisted personnel. Who better to understand the trials and tribulations of the sea service than our own service academy?

And, if the senior leadership is really serious about CPOs getting degrees, why not let the CPO take a two to three year tour where the only responsibility they have is to get a degree? The officers can do that now, but do you think it will ever be offered to the Chiefs...not anytime soon. What's that say? The Chiefs are too valuable to allow them the opportunity to advance themselves professionally? Kind of a mixed message if you ask me.

This is an excerpt of a previous posting I made...I'll post it again since it was a while ago and the topic has come up again. Who know's, maybe someone will read it and think it's a good idea.

quote:

Why can't they come up with an advancement program with requirements, college level classes and training to support the requirements as a matter of normal advancement?

For example, if you are taking the advancement test for PO3, you have to meet a certain number of requirements. Add some college level classes to these requirements, and once you have passed the PO3 exam, you have completed the requirements for your freshman year of college. Then for the PO2 exam, same thing. Add some requirements, training and more college level classes, pass the test...now you are a sophomore with an associates degree. Pass the test for PO1 test, then you are a junior. Pass the Chiefs test, you have just completed the requirements for a Bachelors degree and are eligible for commencement ceremonies in addtion to your initiation process. Then to advance to SCPO, complete a Masters degree. By the time you are ready for MCPO, you have all the requirements completed and will have to compete against your fellow SCPO's based on the system that is currently in place.

All of these educational requirements could be sanctioned through the Naval Academy and conducted at the members duty station. Commissioned officers can administer any special testing that would be required. When it comes time for a Masters Degree, the candidates should attend classes in residence (as the officers currently do) at the various Naval War Colleges etc.

There may be some bugs in my system, but certainly it is more of a step in the right direction than just making advanced education mandatory.

I see everyone's position on this. I do understand that having a degree is a valueable asset. However, there are times when pursual of that degree can be inhibited by a duty assignment.

For example, my husband has been working on completing the needs for his degree. He was only taking one class at a time, as he will be the first to admit that he wants to concentrate on each class fully and multiple classes would make that hard.

However, we are currently on recruiter duty. He is working some evenings until 8 or 9 p.m. I also go to college, online, and we are forced to endure an incredibly crappy dial up connection--it is the only option in the backwoods area we live in. We tried one semester with both of us going to school, and it was a zoo with the computer challenges.

Using the computer at work is not an option, and as far as he is concerned, it should not be. HE is there to work, and is rarely at the office to begin with. They have a huge recruiting zone with only two recruiters to man it. Although it is a small station, it covers a significant size county.

When he gets back to a regular duty station, his goal is to knock out that degree, and hopefully long before he is up for SCPO. Intention is ther, but the opportunity for now is lacking.

ATWife,
I know about the dial up too but have you and your husband considered paper based courses that do not require a computer? Indiana University has a great program.
Just a thought.......

quote:

Originally posted by grantsdad:
ATWife,
I know about the dial up too but have you and your husband considered paper based courses that do not require a computer? Indiana University has a great program.
Just a thought.......

My husband is enrolled through Columbia Southern. I don't believe he had ever considered a paper based program. I know, I hadn't thought of it. I thought they had gone the way of the dinosaur with the advent of Internet learning. To go to a campus would not gel with his working hours, and for me to go on campus--we have four kids, two under schoolage--day care would make that cost prohibitive.

We have less than six months left here, and then we will be back to civilization, where we can network our computers and both be online with a cable modem. Just a matter of patience at this point.

All,

It would be interesting to see some numbers on how many Chiefs retire from the Navy with a degree of some sort. Most Chiefs I know are unwilling/unable to take time out of their schedules for school and that makes me wonder how it affects their marketability after the Navy. Maybe the old degree requirement was an attempt to help the Chiefs make a smoother and more profitable transition to civilian life?

v/r,
CTN1 Mario D.

quote:

that makes me wonder how it affects their marketability after the Navy

Having retired about four years ago, I can tell without a doubt that getting some jobs in today's job market is difficult at best without a degree.

For instance: I was still active, but getting close to my retirement date. I went to a job fair and found a short line at Home Depot. Wanting to just knock some of the cobwebs off and get over some of the interview jitters, I took my place in line. There was already someone talking to their HR person, and I was next.
(just a point here, I was dressed appropriately for a job fair, professional looking dark gray suit, white shirt, low key tie, gray socks, black shoes and matching belt)

After waiting for about ten minutes while they interviewed the first guy (also dressed appropriately), it was my turn. The first question I was asked "What is your degreee in?" I responded that I didn't have a degree and was getting ready to launch into my leadership abilities when I was told to "Just go down to the local store and fill out an application there. Next."

So, does a degree help? Absolutely. Should it be required by the Navy to advance...absolutely not. At least until such a time is they start restructuring the entire advancement system.

Incidentally, I went to school full time for the next two years (after I retired) while I worked full time. I busted my a55 and now I have a very good job to show for my efforts. But I know for fact that there is not always time to put forth the effort to obtain a degree while on active duty. Some manage, but most don't.

My SMART transcript as an E-6 put me somewhere close to 45 credits Navy-wise (I did have some prior college which I am not counting.)
I ended up having to take 3 classes to get an associates.
At the E-7 level my SMART transcript would get me two additional classes in personnel management and human resources or something like that.

That means your average E-7 can walk into a Navy college Office with close to 51 college credits. 60 are required for most Associates. That means 3 classes total to meet the credit requirement. Granted you won't necessarily have your basic english, humanities, and science/math requirements done. Most Chiefs with experience writing evaluations should be able to CLEP or ECE exam out of the English. If you are in a T-rate field you know enough for an Algebra CLEP. FT2 actually got me trigonometry credits. All my LAN schools got me networking and computer credits.

Most Chief's are a Navy College Office visit away from filing the paperwork to get their Associates.

I would urge anyone of any paygrade to at least stop in their Navy College Office to see how much of a challenge it really is to get a degree. A lot of people would be surprised at how close they really are after they talk to the NCO counselors.

bump

I managed to get an Associates Degree before I retired. It has helped somewhat. Thins would have been MUCH easier had I obtained a Bachelors Degree prior to retirement.

Most companies will not even look at your Resume if you don't have a Bachelor's.

I think the removal of the requirement was a good choice. Chiefs, Seniors, and Masters need to be what they are, not J.O's. I retired as a 1st and I got my degree and while on sea duty at that and without taking away time from my duties. I regret not being sellected, but I wont blame the mess or anyone else. Getting my degree was the best thing I could have done for my future after the Navy, not during. Chiefs need to be salty not wattered down and I'm glad the requirement was lifted. If you want your degree get it now for your future after the Navy, not for the star.

I wouldn't see any problem with it counting extra towards advancement at any enlisted level. I have my degree, and I know it had nothing to do with me getting my current job. I am currently working on a Master's degree, but that is more out of a desire to continue my education than it is of any hope it will get me promoted.

Bottom line: I have had good Chiefs/Senior Chiefs/master Chiefs to work for, and bad E-7/E-8/E-9. The presence or absence of a degree didn't matter. What mattered to me, on the deckplatse, is "Can they do the job?"

I don't think a degree determines that.

To be totally honest, I was pretty outspoken on my opinions against the requirement. But I went on ahead to persue my degree, and found it to be pretty easy. Then the message came out taking back the requirement - and continued to persue.

The Navy was so split on the decision to require it, that I'm willing to bet that the next MCPON or the one after him will bring back the requirement - and I just want to be ready for when that happens. Whereas, everyone who kicks back and relaxes just because the current MCPON took back the requirement may find themselves in a bad position, should the requirement come back.

I don't think it should ever be a "REQUIREMENT"

It is a REQUIREMENT for officers to have a Bachelors (not counting LDO/CWO). It is optional for them to have a Masters. However, the Masters has such emphasis placed on it that it is difficult for them to be promoted without one. As such, it seems to be a requirement except in rare cases of someone so stellar and so qualified that they can make it anways.

Seems degrees for the e-side should be the same way. There is nothing wrong with the board looking closely at Rating-related education and other education that enhances a leaders ability to speak to and communicate with servicemembers of ALL communities.
Nonetheless there are still those individuals who would be great and are great without the traditional education whose Navy schooling, diverse tours, intense tours, and great qualifications have limited traditional education.
Boards should always operate on a "whole person concept" and the question should merely be is how important compared to other things the board looks at is education.
There is a big difference between "required" and "highly recommended for competitiveness."

As it is I hear the LDO board is already like that. Certainly no degree requirement. . .but for many communities good luck getting selected without one.

An unfit sailor shouldn't make Chief because he's got a degree, since fitness is part of the lead-by-example mandate of the Chief's.

Nor should a sailors educational achievements be ignored when in all other respects his performance is equal to his peers.

The Navy just has to fine-tune how important the degree needs to be.

Recent messages state that the FY09 CPO board WILL be looking at education. Of course. . .that is a little vague on whether or not it is VERY, MEDIUM, or LOW on the importance scale.

Quite frankly, I bet you could find a statistical correlation between degree holders, or at least education-pursuers, and making rate. My off-duty education seems to have helped my study habits for rating exams and my ability to write memo's/evals/award write-ups.