The Navy is correct in seeking unrestricted line officers with a high degree of technical proficiency. But for the NROTC accessions process, this approach is beginning to look more like zealotry. Over the past few years, the Naval Education and Training Command (NETC) has implemented a policy that effectively prevents non-technical majors from earning a commission via NROTC. Although four-year scholarship winners can still choose their own majors (for now), the vast majority of scholarships currently being awarded fall in the three- and two-year category. As a result, the Navy has all but eliminated non-technical majors from its programs. The most onerous aspect of this policy is that local unit recommendations are being ignored. The procedures for selecting scholarship awardees are secretive and inflexible, and attempts to address the issue-short of a Proceedings article-have been unsuccessful.
In theory, the policy articulated by the command allows outstanding nontechnical majors to win a scholarship. But this hardly ever happens. Time and again, the best students are passed over in favor of those with technical majors. A recently rejected candidate had a near-perfect grade-point average, was a proven leader in his class, and earned a top ranking from his unit. His commanding officer's endorsement read, in part:
"[He] is the strongest applicant [this NROTC unit] has nominated in the past two years . . . . If you must only select one nominee from [this unit], I can not emphasize enough that it should be Cadet [X]."
This young man was denied a scholarship in favor of several less qualified students with technical majors. Unfortunately, this is not an isolated incident. It is symptomatic of a "we know best" mindset that pervades NETC. Local units should be trusted to recognize outstanding officer potential in their own candidates. If commanding officer recommendations do not count, then why do they exist?
As damaging as the command's policy is to the deserving students who are denied scholarships, it is perhaps more damaging to the long-term health of our service. We are losing some of our best potential officers to the shibboleth of technical proficiency. The command will undoubtedly argue that the fleet must be supplied with technically adept officers, but core academic requirements are in place to provide the foundations for this. Every NROTC midshipman, whether pursuing a technical major or not, is required to take physics, calculus, and an entire battery of naval science courses. The curriculum is already rigorous enough.
The command's over-zealous pursuit of technical majors is hurting the Navy. The one-dimensional approach to accessions will severely limit the breadth of academic experience within the service. Focusing on non-technical subjects does not preclude someone from being an outstanding naval officer. Yet under command policy, a student choosing to major in Arabic culture and language would likely ruin any chance of winning a scholarship. This is absurd. A simple solution (already suggested once) would be to give local units more control over selecting awardees. There is already a mechanism in place for this, if the command can be persuaded to employ it. At the very least, the effects of the current policy should be acknowledged, and NETC should initiate an open, honest dialogue with NROTC unit commanders on how best to address the issue.
The author, now attending Yale Law School, served on active duty as a naval aviator flying EP-3s. He was also an NROTC instructor at The Citadel, Charleston, South Carolina.