"Say, Prof, what's this hot dope about the midshipmen strolling to and from classes at Annapolis?. . . What's happening at the old Navy school?"
The questioner was a Commander, graduated in the mid-thirties from the Naval Academy; the one being questioned was myself, Senior Professor of the Department of Electrical Engineering. The time was July, 1947; and the place, Northwestern University where both of us were in attendance at the Instructors' Course of the Naval ROTC. I assured this graduate that the rumor was only partially correct, that only the first classmen were allowed the privilege of not marching in formation, and that the standards and spirit at Annapolis had not been lowered, but had improved in the past decade.
The Naval Academy, being a public institution, and having as students representatives from 48 states, is under constant criticism. Some of this is correct and constructive, but much of it is based upon inaccuracies of data, warped emphasis on existing facts, and misconceptions as to the purpose and function of the training. Even among our own graduates we find personal experiences outweighing statistical tabulations, and the patina of time increasing emphasis on anomalies and fading out the normal method of behavior. We still find the sophomoric tales of the "juice prof who gave me a 1.0 when I rated a cold 4.0," the time the "cops and robbers papped me for insolence, when all I was doing was explaining," and "he's nothin' but a referee between the textbook and the red book."
The Naval Academy has a duality of purpose: first, to teach the fundamentals of education on the college level, and secondly, to point this education toward that required of junior officers. We cannot graduate the "compleat sub-lieutenant," but we can graduate men who have the intellectual potentialities of "officers and gentlemen," and are capable of a "future leading to the highest responsibilities of command, administration and policy."
The Superintendent, Rear Admiral Holloway, in a recent speech emphasized that the Naval Academy is the undergraduate portion of the Navy university system:
I present the Naval Academy as the "college" of the Navy "university"—in other words the Naval Academy is the undergraduate level; the Postgraduate School and our General Line Schools, Staff Colleges, etc., operate at the graduate level; and we have numerous research activities, such as Bellevue, White Oak, Point Mugu, Engineering Experiment Station, Annapolis, and so on; all of which rolled up is more than equivalent to any ten universities operating at the collegiate, graduate, and research levels.
The Naval Academy must therefore be considered as a government institution on the college level, having a specific objective and attaining this objective through both practical and theoretical instruction.
Under the Post-War Plan for the Procurement and Education of Naval Officers the Naval Academy has been retained as a 4-year undergraduate school, the present academic year marking the complete return to the 4-year curriculum. The Academy, in cooperation with the 52 colleges and universities of the Naval ROTC's, will be the source of supply of junior officers for the post-war Navy. As such its present high standards of education must be maintained.
In 1802 West Point opened with ten cadets and became America's first technical institute, as for years it was the only school of applied science to give systematic instruction in those branches of learning which now are said to constitute "engineering." The second technical school was founded in Troy, N.Y., in 1824 as Rensselaer School. Among the firsts in education at Rensselaer were individual laboratory work, field experimentation, observation trips, scientific research on the graduate level, and the break with the traditional classical curriculum. Union College and the Naval Academy followed in 1845, with Lawrence School at Harvard in 1846, and Sheffield School at Yale in 1847. As late as 1874 West Point and Annapolis were still considered the leading engineering schools, or as one 1878 graduate recently reported: "The engineering course given at the Naval Academy was excellent, advanced, and thorough for its day, although little teaching was done and in my day I only heard two lectures." The Naval Academy since that time has broadened not only its curriculum but also its methods of instruction.
Since my return from the Pacific in November, 1945, I have visited, under orders from the Superintendent, numerous institutions comparable to the Naval Academy "to investigate the courses in chemistry, physics, and electrical engineering with a view toward bettering those at the Naval Academy." These institutions have included Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Worcester and Rensselaer Polytechnic Institutes, the United States Military and Coast Guard Academies, North Carolina State, Georgia Tech, the University of Illinois, and Purdue. The required curriculum and methods of education at these schools are not all the same, nor are they the same as at the Naval Academy. We could well adopt some of the methods of the civilian institutions, if the necessary time in hours per week, personnel, and equipment were available. In turn there are many ideas at the Naval Academy which could well be adopted by the civilian institutions. They can learn something from us, we can learn something from them.
During the war the Military and Naval Academies have been in the forefront in training leaders to win the war. It is a paradox of democracy that now that the war has been won these institutions which so successfully trained the leaders are subject to criticism. Let us hope that this criticism is based upon correct data. If you will read the succeeding pages you will find the picture of the Naval Academy as an educational institution in the academic year 1947-48.
LECTURES ON EDUCATION AND METHODS OF INSTRUCTION
As an indication of the increased interest in education at the Naval Academy there was held during September a series of lectures conducted by Dr. A. John Bartky, Dean of the School of Education at Stanford University. The subjects discussed were "The College Curriculum," "The College Student," "Methods of Teaching Academic and Laboratory Subjects," "Tests and Measurements," and "Teaching Leadership." As part of each lecture there was formed a discussion panel in which were heads of departments, officer instructors, and members of the civilian faculty. The discussions that resulted showed a high degree of objectiveness, and showed that the Academy faculty believes thoroughly in self-evaluation and self-analysis. Dr. Bartky found that an argument could be started on nearly every phase of Naval Academy methods, and that, like all college faculties, there was no such thing as unanimity of opinion.
The Naval Academy uses all the methods of instruction found in civilian institutions, but not in the same degree or with the same emphasis. The major method still remains the classroom recitation preceded by study by the midshipmen. The classroom time will be used by the instructor for instruction and testing, for informal lecturing, seminar, discussion, oral questioning, explanation of difficult and important points, work at the boards, and written quizzes. The returning graduate will find a greater percentage of time being spent in instruction and not so much on quizzing. In the engineering and professional departments there will be found laboratories, where the students are working as individuals, in pairs, or in groups with each man having a specific job. In the professional and executive departments you will also find drills, for the purpose of discipline or of learning-to-do by actual operation. The coach-pupil method is found on the rifle range and in plebe drawing. Formal lectures are held in many departments: in physics and chemistry for demonstration purposes, in the humanities to interest the student in world affairs. Training aids will be found wherever applicable: charts and maps, sound-films and slide-films, models and mock-ups. In spite of many changes the classroom still remains the backbone of the Naval Academy system, but as stated previously the time spent in teaching has increased, that spent in testing has decreased.
TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE
The $64 question at the Naval Academy at present is how to get more hours in the day and in the week. The Electrical Engineering Department wants more time for physics and laboratory work, English wants more emphasis on the social-humanities, Executive wants more for infantry drills, parades, and the course in leadership. The officers of the fleet want more professional subjects, the PG's want more intense study in the fundamentals of science, the white-collar attaché crowd wants more "diplomatics" and languages.
At present practically all the heads of departments, executive officers, and senior professors seem to be working on new schedules and changes in curriculum. However, the shift has been made from the 3-year, 4-term, to the 4-year, 2-semester schedule. In March, 1943, the Superintendent, Rear Admiral Beardall, appointed a committee on postwar curriculum. This committee and its successors have been faced with the difficult problem of adding subject matter to the curriculum—aviation, more social-humanistics, leadership, electronics, and nuclear reactions—without increasing the midshipman work-load. Increases in time were given to Aviation, English, History, and Government, and to a lesser extent Executive, with the major losses being borne by the professional departments, Seamanship and Navigation, Ordnance and Gunnery, and to a minor extent by Marine and Electrical Engineering. Last year the 4-year schedule called for 3443 "contact hours," and, including study time, a midshipman work-load of 43.0 hours per week. The 1947 curriculum committee felt that this work-load was too heavy and cut 151 "contact hours" off the curriculum, making the average weekly work-load 41.7 hours.
Like Mark Twain's weather, everybody talks about the curriculum and yet no one department is completely satisfied with its place on the curriculum or the schedule. The healthy sign, however, is that, unlike the weather, something is being done about the curriculum, work-load, and scheduling. These are being continuously studied, and some solution will certainly be adopted. If all the changes that have been suggested by our well-wishers and our critics were adopted, the midshipmen would all be psychoneurotic cases, from their frustration attendant upon trying to carry the increased load and follow an impossible schedule.
ENTRANCE REQUIREMENTS
One of the matters which is being studied continuously at the Academy is that of entrance requirements and examinations— whether these are such as to fit normally into the American educational system, and whether the best screening is being accomplished. There are at present three methods of qualifying for admission at the Naval Academy. The most popular of these is the "College Certificate Method" by which 43% of the midshipmen have entered in the past ten years. Next is that of "Regular Examinations" which represents 35%, and lastly, the "Certificate with Substantiating Examinations" which admits 22%. One test of the validity of any one method in comparison with the others would be the per cent of academic failures under each method, but this shows little difference: 17% of those entering by the college method failed, 15% of those entering by the certificate-substantiating method, and 18% of those entering with regular examinations.
The history of the changes in entrance examinations is a long one, but we shall go no further back than World War I. The classes of 1922 to 1928, which had been examined for entrance from 1918 to 1924, showed an average over-all attrition of 40.5%. This was considered much too high. During this time the high school certificate was accepted without examination. This gave a poor screening, because of the wide variation in secondary school standards throughout the nation. Substantiating examinations were therefore considered necessary and were adopted in 1925. In 1935 the college certificate method was adopted so that men would not have to leave college in order to prepare for the Academy examinations. By this method a year's work in a college, university, or technical school accredited by the Naval Academy is considered the equivalent of an examination.
During the last year conferences on the subject of our entrance requirements were held with representatives of the National Association of Secondary School Principals, the National Science Teachers' Association, and the U. S. Office of Education. It was decided to drop Chemistry from the entrance requirements and regular examinations, to take effect in the April, 1948, examinations. The regular examinations will now be in English, U. S. History, Physics, Plane Geometry and Plane Trigonometry, and Algebra, with the substantiating examinations in comprehensive English and Mathematics.
In 1941, by Act of Congress, the age of admission was raised from between 16 and 20 to between 17 and 21, as of April 1. The average age of admission has varied but little in the past thirty years, as it was 18 years, 7 months in 1918, and 19 years, 0 months in 1946. It is the policy of the Superintendent and the Navy Department to bring the average entrance age down to the lower part of the band set by law. Not only do the records show that the younger men are much better adaptable for indoctrination into the Navy "way-of-life," but they also actually do better academically coming directly from high school than via the colleges. During the past year a study has shown that the top hundred men in scholastic standing of several classes were 4.3 months younger on the average than the bottom hundred. It is therefore considered advantageous to seek methods to lower the average age of entrance without lowering the standards.
Two factors have been instrumental in negating this effort and in raising the mean age of entrance: first, the assumed need for extra preparation of those taking the regular and substantiating examinations, and secondly, the college certificate method. Parents whose sons have been fortunate enough to secure nominations for appointment to the Naval Academy feel that it is their duty to leave no stone unturned to insure that their sons pass the examinations. Hence as much special preparation as they can afford is provided for the candidates. The college certificate method, although it adds a year to a man's age, allows the candidate to avoid examinations and gives him a year of college credit if he fails to get into the Naval Academy.
In the past ten years 70% of those who entered the Naval Academy have had college, preparatory school, or special preparation, leaving only 30% of the plebes who have come directly from high school. A five-year study shows that 33% of those who took the substantiating examinations passed them; but that, of those passing, 95% had had special preparation. Forty per cent of those who took the substantiating examinations passed; and of these, 75% had had special preparation. In contrast are the state universities which in many cases must accept any high school graduate from their state schools who has the proper credits. No wonder their attrition in freshman and sophomore years is excessive.
The Naval Academy, without actually making the statement, has always been adverse to the methods of "cramming" schools, and has tried to accept the best products of the legitimate public and private preparatory and secondary schools directly. All present changes in entrance requirements are beamed toward that idea.
Commencing in 1946, the College Entrance Examination Board, with its more than forty years' experience in testing methods throughout the forty-eight states, was given the task of preparing and grading our entrance examinations. With the exception of the theme part of the English examination, which is corrected at the Naval Academy, the examinations are entirely of the objective type. One of the recent developments has been the construction of a Naval Academy Aptitude Test which is an improved version of the Officer Qualification Tests used so successfully during the war to screen officer candidates and also used in the 1946 and 1947 Naval Academy entrance examinations. The aptitude test has been lengthened from one to three hours, including one hour of mathematics, and one-half hour each of verbal, common-sense science, spatial relations, and non-verbal tests. Additional to the candidates taking the regular or substantiating examinations, those certifying by the college method are required to take the aptitude test. There is no passing or failing, and no candidate is disqualified by his score on this test alone. It is used mainly in the evaluation of a candidate's ability and more particularly to assist in the examination of a candidate's certificate. With more experience in the study of performance curves and prediction grades, it is expected that greater use can be made of the aptitude type of testing which may lead to requiring a passing mark.
This Navy-College Aptitude Test was given in the summer of 1947 to 600 plebes who earned a mean score of 138. The mean score of successful NROTC candidates screened nationally for entry into the freshman classes of the 52 NROTC's in the fall of 1947 was 137. This rather amazing parallelism of mean score indicates proper screening, as the successful NROTC candidates were scholastically from the top 10% of those who took the test. In other words, the Naval Academy plebes and the NROTC students represent the top 10% of the nation's freshmen.
The screening of candidates at the Naval Academy through the system of appointments, entrance requirements, and examinations can be considered a success, particularly in view of the low attrition of the past few years. However, any change in method which will secure better students and get a higher percentage directly from high school would be considered an advance.
APPOINTMENTS
The Superintendent in a recent memorandum to the Secretary of the Navy stressed the advantages of the present system of Congressional appointments. He stated that "one of the best indications for diagnosing future success is to look at the parents and background." Each Congressman assists in securing superior candidates for the Naval Academy because he can make a careful personal appraisal of those subjective attributes of character and leadership which it is so difficult to measure by an objective examination.
If all the appointments to the Naval Academy were filled, and the attrition were zero, there would be at the Academy this year a total of 3,897 midshipmen instead of 2,880, with an increase to 4,406 in 1950-51. Each Congressman and Senator is allowed five midshipmen at the Academy at one time, this accounting for 2,665. Also the President can appoint at large a total of 75 each year, with an additional 160 each year coming from the enlisted men and 160 each year from the Naval Reserve. The Naval ROTC and honor schools are allowed 20 each year, a total of 26 can enter from Puerto Rico and the American Republics, and 55 can come from other sources.
It is not expected that the total number of midshipmen will approach the 4,406 mark allowed under present legislation, but the increase in the Presidential, enlisted, and Reserve quotas means that the Naval Academy must expand in order to accommodate somewhere near 3,500 midshipmen in September of each year.
PSYCHOMETRIC TESTS
From 1930 to 1947, with the exception of 1932 and 1933, there were administered to the plebes of the entering class in September the psychometric tests of the College Entrance Examination Board. These consisted of tests on scholastic aptitude, mathematics attainment, and spatial relations. During this time constant studies were made by the CEEB and the Secretary of the Academic Board as to the validity of these tests in predicting success or failure in the Naval Academy. For example in the Class of 1945, at the end of the first term of plebe year, out of 54 bilgers 48 had previously been predicted as poor risks. At graduation 72% of the predicted poor risks had been found deficient, and had bilged or been turned back. For the class of 1946, 90% of the predicted poor risks bilged.
These tests have shown particularly that turn-backs are poor risks. The class of 1945 included 50 men turned back from senior classes; of these 24 were considered poor risks, and 22 obliged the "statistics man" by actually bilging. Because no single test could be considered 100% accurate, and because legislation required other tests, the Naval Academy was unable to adopt the results of these tests to screen unsuitable midshipmen. However, the Naval Academy Aptitude Tests should accomplish this purpose in a similar manner.
ATTRITION
In the sixteen classes at the Naval Academy from 1932 to 1947 there have been 12,182 midshipmen (including turn-backs), of which 8,941, or 73.6%, have graduated with the B.S. degree, and of which 8,318 or 68.5% have been commissioned directly upon graduation into the Navy or the Marine Corps. The average attrition over this period has been 26.4%, with the class of 1940 holding the dubious record of 41.0%, and 1945 being given the prize with only 18.2% attrition.
Over the same period the average attrition during plebe year has been 14.6%, during youngster year 8.7%, during second class year 3.1%, and during first class year 2.2%. During plebe year the attrition from all causes has varied from 27.7% for the class of 1923 in 1919-20, the first full academic year after World War I, to 6.5% for the class of 1948, in 1944-45, the last year of World War II.
Attrition: 1932-1947
|
| Percentage |
Total midshipmen, including turn-backs | 12,182 | 100.0% |
Graduated with B.S. degree | 8,941 | 73.6% |
Total attrition | 3,241 | 26.4% |
Academic deficiency | 1,825 | 14.9% |
Physical disability | 457 | 3.7% |
Turn-back to lower classes | 464 | 3.8% |
Voluntary resignations | 284 | 2.3% |
Dismissed for bad conduct and other reasons | 149 | 1.2% |
Died | 26 | 0.2% |
Miscellaneous | 36 | 0.3% |
Commissioned at graduation | 8,318 | 68.5% |
Graduated, but not commissioned | 623 | 5.1% |
Discharged for physical disability | 343 | 2.8% |
Voluntary resignations | 268 | 2.2% |
Discharged for inaptitude | 12 | 0.1% |
Attrition by Classes
Class | Membership, Including Turn-Backs | Attrition | Per cent Attrition |
1932 | 623 | 202 | 32.4% |
1933 | 634 | 202 | 31.9% |
1934 | 662 | 199 | 30.0% |
1935 | 610 | 168 | 27.0% |
1936 | 350 | 88 | 24.9% |
1937 | 446 | 123 | 27.6% |
1938 | 612 | 174 | 28.4% |
1939 | 879 | 298 | 33.9% |
1940 | 773 | 317 | 41.0% |
1941 | 602 | 203 | 33.7% |
1942 | 781 | 218 | 27.9% |
1943 | 811 | 196 | 24.2% |
1944 | 982 | 216 | 22.0% |
1945 | 1110 | 196 | 18.2% |
1946 | 1289 | 243 | 18.7% |
1947 | 1018 | 198 | 19.4% |
In a tabulation on attrition similar to the above, one never knows what to do with turn-backs. Like the poor disembodied souls floating in purgatory, they are neither in heaven nor have they bilged to hell. In the above table turn-backs from senior classes have been included in the gross membership of the class, and turn-backs into junior classes have been included as part of the attrition.
Several conclusions can be drawn from the above tabulation of attrition: (1) academic deficiency still remains the greatest single cause for failure, representing over half of the total losses; M physical disability is a poor second, with 3.7% before graduation, and an additional 2.8% who cannot be commissioned; (3) the total attrition at the Naval Academy is less than that in equivalent civilian institutions; (4) the attrition decreased greatly during the war years, reaching a minimum with the class of 1945 which graduated in June, 1944. Many factors .have been credited with this decrease: better entrance examinations, closer physical examinations, better instruction, and a greater motivation on the part of the individual because of the immediate demand for more officers. It is believed that none of these is the whole story. With the return of peace, and with a raising of standards, even with a better screening before admission it is expected that the attrition will increase. This has always been the pattern of the past.
BACHELOR OF SCIENCE DEGREE AND ACCREDITATION
In the spring of 1933 authority was granted by Congress to the Superintendent of the Naval Academy to confer the degree of Bachelor of Science upon the graduates of the Academy. At the same time the Military and Coast Guard Academies were given the same privilege. Granting of the degree was made contingent upon the accrediting of each academy by the Association of American Universities, but this accreditation had been accorded the Naval Academy in 1930. This Association approves undergraduate schools so that the graduates may enter any one of 33 member universities for graduate study.
The endeavor to secure legislation allowing the granting of the B.S. degree had started in 1922 when a bill had been prepared but had failed of passage. When in 1933 only 58% of that class were to be given commissions in the Navy, it was believed that a degree would be of great help to the graduates who were to go into civilian life. In 1937 a further bill was passed allowing all previous graduates to be given the degree. The granting of the degree was an excellent move, as it gave the graduate of the Academy a standing on the same level as the graduates of the colleges, and allowed him to take graduate work in universities leading to advanced degrees without a course-by-course analysis of his record.
Some of the older graduates chuckled with inward satisfaction when they received the Naval Academy B.S. degree after acquiring many higher degrees elsewhere. The late Dean Emeritus Cooley of the School of Engineering of the University of Michigan received his Naval Academy B.S. degree 60 years after his graduation in 1878, and ten years after he had retired from active educational work and from the presidency of several scientific and engineering societies.
Many Naval Academy graduates falsely believe that this B.S. degree is a B.S. in Electrical Engineering, or General Engineering, or even in Naval Science, but this is not the case. The degree is a straight B.S., with the major field undesignated, and with the meaning of the degree unlimited.
In order to take advantage of greater opportunities through liaison with other educational institutions, the Naval Academy has recently joined several of the cooperative educational societies. In 1941 the Academy was granted institutional membership in the American Council on Education, and in January, 1947, was voted membership in the Association of American Colleges. In the summer of 1947, after investigation of the curriculum and the methods of teaching, the Academy was accredited by the Middle States Association of Colleges and Secondary Schools. This is the chief college accrediting agency in this area, having its counterparts throughout the country in the New England Association, Southern Association North Central Association, and Northwest Association.
Through the legislation granting the degree of B.S. and through the accreditation by educational societies, the Naval Academy has been recognized as an excellent educational institution at the undergraduate level. This has been particulary necessary since the expansion of the NROTC among 52 degree-granting colleges. The Academy graduate must be equivalent to the ROTC graduate, even on the degree standard established by those institutions. There has never been any question about the standards of the Academy, it has only been necessary to get these standards recognized by our collateral educators. We should not stand alone in the admiration of our own glory.
RULES, RATES, AND REGULATIONS
The present administration is continuing the determined effort to obtain the optimum synthesis and understanding of Leadership and Discipline. The volume Naval Academy Regulations still remains the most powerful "essence of good and evil" for the midshipmen, but a definite trend is indicated by recent changes. The first classmen are being given more responsibility for leadership in the brigade, and as they show that they rate them are extended privileges "commensurate with their responsibilities." This has tended to increase the midshipman's individual initiative and sense of leadership. The first classmen do not march in formation to and from classes, but walk in chatting groups as if they were officers at one of the graduate or staff colleges. All the other classes still march in formation, except upon dismissal from the last class in the afternoon. For a time "route step" was tried, but the result looked like Dryden's "rude militia" and was discontinued.
Each first classman, with certain provisos as to conduct, aptitude, and satisfactory academics, is allowed every other weekend to go away from the Academy. The second classmen have been given one weekend each term, as each desires. This privilege of weekends is guarded jealously by all, and in spite of numerous temptations has resulted in practically no increase in Class A offenses. Town liberty is also granted to first classmen every afternoon from the end of the last drill period to supper formation, and in addition they are now allowed to ride in automobiles.
Last year the system was tried of not assessing the first class with demerits for Class B offenses, but of requiring only a statement explaining the reasons for the offense. This experiment was not considered a success for several reasons: (1) because there no longer existed a yardstick for measuring the difference between the "good" and the "poor" from the viewpoint of relative conduct; (2) unnecessary time was being used up in writing the wrong kind of reports, when too often the culprit was "guilty as charged"; and (3) a few "sharpshooters," when desire overcame responsibility, were taking advantage of the relaxation of discipline. After a careful study of the advantages and disadvantages of the system the Superintendent made the decision to return to the demerit system, largely because good discipline and conduct were considered a necessary part of leadership and responsisibility. Punishment, however, does not entail walking extra duty, but, parallel to that assessed an officer, includes restriction, confinement, and deprivation of privileges.
That many midshipmen are able to obey all the rules and regulations is probably unbelievable. However, in the past academic year 150 out of the 2,576 midshipmen had 4.0 in conduct as a result of collecting no demerits!
One of the traditions most firmly established at the Naval Academy has been that of "rates." These have been designed for indoctrination, on the principle that there should be "appropriate gradations of responsibilities and privileges by their seniority." The class of 1948-B, when it assumed the leadership of the brigade in the spring of 1947, published a "Class Policy" in which these rates by classes were re-established. The essential underlying philosophy was that there must be a "class attitude of brigade leadership based upon mutual respect, precept, and example," and that in correction there must be eliminated the "flagrant violations of mature dignity."
Many of the long established rates are still maintained—squaring corners by the plebes, the seating arrangement in the mess, the rates as to walks and ladders, snapping to attention and "sounding-off." But many of the old customs have been abrogated, such as the practices of "spooning," "sitting on infinity," stoop-falls, and impromptu plebe performances. The emphasis has been placed on "private man to man correction which will supplant all practices of hazing," and the assumption of leadership by the first class with its authority to correct. Plebes are still plebes, with few privileges to "Carry on" except after victories or excellent performance, but the specter of hazing and unofficial "running" is disappearing. Plebes are still questioned, but by order only, on "customs and traditions of the Navy, on professional knowledge, and on pertinent current events." Gone are the days of "Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker!", "Good Morning, Merry Sunshine," and the drills on "Man Overboard" and "Swimming to Baltimore."
This Class Policy, including the rates, has been approved by the Superintendent and given the "force of regulations and approved policy in all appropriate circumstances." The Superintendent in a recent "Open Letter to the First Class" emphasized the "offense of unauthorized assumption of authority" and declared that the "powers of command must be exercised only by those having professional competence, moral integrity, and instant, constructive, and open-hearted obedience to constituted authority."
The Executive Department is backing up the first class in the maintenance of this Class Policy with its rates. The report via unofficial channels from the brigade is that hazing is extinct, as the real powers in the first class are officially frowning upon the few sophomore sadists who would practice the "science" under the cover of darkness.
MARKS AND MARKING
The late, unlamented dictator Hitler is said to have once remarked that he was not alarmed about the potentialities of a nation whose number one household god was a wooden dummy named Charlie McCarthy. By the same token the critics and detractors of the Naval Academy should not be exorcised because the idol of the Brigade is a wooden figurehead—Tecumseh, the god of 2.5. (Correction: the visible statue now is of bronze guarding the sections as they proceed to battle academics, but the wooden original still stands in Luce Hall—both Charlie and Tecumseh have had termite trouble.)
There has been in the past an overemphasis on marks at the Naval Academy, particularly in the traditional requirement for a daily mark in every subject. This necessity is changing in most of the departments, the emphasis now being rather on instruction. In "Juice," "Steam," and "Bull" the first and second classes are given a weekly mark, often the result of a single weekly quiz. The third and fourth classes are not treated so leniently, but the requirement for a daily mark has been abolished. A new Naval Academy standing order states that "it shall be within the discretion of each respective head of department to establish the procedure by which the weekly mark is determined in his department." This responsibility is being willingly assumed by the heads of departments. It has even happened that, because of material which required special instruction, the mark has been skipped for a week. Imagine that at the Naval Academy!
The objective now is to teach, with the testing and evaluation of midshipmen assuming a secondary though important role. This has allowed more freedom to the instructor in the classroom, as he is not now haunted by the necessity for a daily mark.
It must not be forgotten, however, that the testing of the student through examinations or quizzes is part of the learning process. Schools which have tried to abolish marks and examinations have consistently failed in this attempt. My own undergraduate school, Clark University, tried this in its early history, but the "savoirs" protested. They could not bear to be rated no better academically than "Durnmkopfs." "Education for marks," however, is a poor substitute for learning.
The frequency and form of this testing is a much argued point with professional educators. In his Manual of Mental and Physical Tests the late Professor G. M. Whipple of the University of Michigan has stated: "Shall efficiency be measured in terms of quality, excellence, delicacy or accuracy of work, or in terms of quantity, rate, or speed of work?. . . No general answer can be given."
The Naval Academy has used many types of quizzes: subjective and objective, open and closed book, written work at the seats and at the boards ("Draw Slips and Man the Boards!"), reports, short "research" papers, homework problems in physics or phrases in languages. The choice is left to the head of committee, of detail, or to the individual instructor. The Department of Electrical Engineering has for years used objective type questions in the examinations: true or false, short answer, fill-in, matching, multiple choice. The swing at present is probably back to the subjective or essay type question, and to problems with mathematical answers. The chemistry examinations still include 60% objective questions, the physics 30%, and basic electrical engineering 20%.
The Naval Academy, partly because of the necessity for accurate grading, requires excellent preparation for all examinations. Each head of a class committee or detail prepares the examination from the important material covered. Average instructors then work it against time. In Mathematics the instructors must work a 180-minute examination in 60 minutes; in English they must work it in 75 minutes, and in Electrical Engineering in 90 minutes. The examination is then given a final polishing, and ambiguous and unimportant questions are discarded before the examination is approved as ready for the midshipmen.
From the above it is seen that the Naval Academy still regards marks as important, but that it is coming to believe that 700 valid marks have the same accuracy in determining a midshipman's final standing in his class and on the promotion list as the previously required 2,500.
TRAINING AIDS
During World War II the Army and Navy in their training camps and schools adopted the policy of maximum use of training aids, also known as visual aids and special devices. These aids were used at all levels of intelligence, from the training of illiterates to read and write to the daily briefing in the War Room of the Combined Chiefs of Staff. These aids included sound and silent moving picture films (both 35 mm. and 16 mm.), slide-films with accompanying records, charts of lecture outlines or of the breakdown of weapons, models of every conceivable piece of equipment, mock-ups of materiel from a wooden Springfield to an expanded B-29, wire recordings for pronunciation and speech training, war games including models of ships and terrain, three-dimensional maps, bread-boards for fire control and electronic devices, and others too numerous to tabulate.
For the past few years there has been on duty at the Naval Academy a Training Aids Officer whose duties have included advising heads of departments on the use and procurement of training aids and special devices. In each department an instructor has also been assigned as training aids officer. A large library of sound- and slide-films, both from Naval and civilian sources, has been collected. Many of these are used regularly in the various departments for instruction in classrooms and at drills.
The main philosophy regarding training aids at the Naval Academy is that for instruction purposes the real thing is far superior to any training aid; any device except the real article is merely ersatz. The movie can never take the place of a real teacher, the mock-up can never completely substitute for the real weapon, the beautiful case of three-dimensional cotton cloud formations can never take the place of direct experience with towering cumulus clouds in an airplane. The model and the chart are functionally incorrect unless the student can do something—trace circuits, operate equipment, or ask questions, and not merely stand and gaze. The training aid must be used to assist, and not to substitute for the teaching process.
With this in view the laboratories of Electrical Engineering have real full-size motors, generators, oscilloscopes, waveguides, and electrical instruments; the laboratories of Marine Engineering have real engines together with working cutaways of these real engines; Ordnance and Gunnery has the actual 5-inch, 38-caliber double purpose guns with regular naval fire control equipment. To assist in understanding the real, operating range-keeper there is a breadboard model which works, together with numerous explanatory charts. However, as it would be rather impracticable to move an actual shore bombardment into the laboratory, this must be done with a simulated small scale model around which the midshipmen can work, each one having his position of responsibility in the problem. Radar can be taught from the textbook and the laboratory in Electrical Engineering, and from the actual instruments controlling the guns in Ordnance.
Wire recorders are being used in English for remedial speech training and for training in public addresses, and in Languages for pronunciation. The individual hears himself as others hear him, and sometimes this is quite a shock.
The conclusion is that training aids are valuable to assist in instruction, but should not be used to replace good teaching. The Naval Academy is conscious of this limitation and is proceeding in their use accordingly.
MEMBERS OF CIVILIAN FACULTY
Probably the greatest single' advance educationally in the Naval Academy during the past ten years has been the increase in the size of the civilian faculty. In 1938-39 there were 59 civilians and 188 officers attached to the academic departments, the civilians representing 24% of the instruction staff. In 1947-48 there are in these same departments 156 civilian and 222 officer instructors for a civilian ratio of 42%. The above figures do not include the civilian organist, the librarian, the Assistant Secretary of the Academic Board, the officers of the Executive Department, nor the officers and civilians of the Department of Physical Training. Including the civilians among these, and two professors on leave without pay, there are 176 members of the civilian faculty.
For the academic year 1947-48 the Superintendent succeeded in securing an original allotment of 209 members of the civilian faculty from the Navy Department, but this was cut to 185 by budget requirements, and to 176 by an across-the-board cut in government appropriations at the last moment. At the same time as this last cut the allowance of officers over the whole Severn River Naval Command was decreased by 116. The Naval Academy is still short 15 to 20 officers below this reduced minimum.
Personnel of Departments
(Including Heads of Departments and Executive Officers)
| 1938-39 | 1947-48 | ||
| Officers | Civilians | Officers | Civilians |
Seamanship and Navigation | 35 | - | 26 | - |
Ordnance and Gunnery | 22 | - | 25 | - |
Marine Engineering | 40 | 2 | 69 | 8 |
Aviation | - | - | 19 | - |
Mathematics | 12 | 24 | 9 | 59 |
Electrical Engineering | 41 | 4 | 54 | 21 |
English, History, and Government | 20 | 16 | 12 | 43 |
Foreign Languages | 18 | 13 | 8 | 27 |
Total (Academic) | 188 | 59 | 222 | 158 |
Executive | 27 | 1 | 35 | 1 |
Physical Training | 13 | 9 | 5 | 15 |
Asst. Sec. Acad. Bd. And Librarian | - | - | - | 2 |
Total | 228 | 69 | 262 | 176 |
Recommendations have been made that the faculties of the Departments of Mathematics, English, and Languages include 75% civilians, that Electrical Engineering increase to 50% and Marine Engineering to 25%. There should be little opposition to this increase in the non-professional departments, as the civilians provide the continuity of instruction and tenure of the academic staff.
The existence of the civilian professor has been made more secure at the Academy by the publication of a definite policy of pay, promotion, and tenure. The government is cooperating with the Teachers Annuity Association toward the purchase of deferred annuity policies to which both the professor and the government contribute 5% of the salary, this being collectible at age 65.
New appointees to the grade of Instructor now must have at least a master's degree (M.A. or M.S.) and have engaged in at least one year of teaching on the college level. It has become a policy that the Doctor's degree (Ph.D., D.Sc., etc.) will be required for promotion to the grade of Professor. This should not be too difficult as 38 of the faculty now have their Ph.D. degrees, with numerous others in the process of earning them.
For several years money has been available for civilian travel for the purpose of attending scientific and educational meetings and conventions, and for visiting other institutions of learning. Many of the faculty members, both officer and civilian, have participated in these meetings, and have helped secure a closer relationship between the Academy and other institutions.
In the five departments with civilian professors a new rank has been established, that of Senior Professor. In Languages this Professor is known as the Faculty Chairman, in Mathematics and English as the Dean, and in "Juice" and "Steam" merely as the Senior Professor. His duties are numerous and variable. He may act as chairman of a department advisory board, serve as liaison officer between the civilians and the head of department, act as advisor to the head of department, be the coordinator of curriculum, instructor assignments, teaching methods, examinations and scheduling, and the general factotum in all matters of continuity and past experience.
It is essential in an educational institution that there be professional educators, men who have a background of training well beyond that of the undergraduate level or the daily lesson. There exists no substitute for knowledge of subject matter for an instructor. The civilian members of the faculty supply this additional knowledge and continuity. Their place is necessary and must be maintained secure if the Naval Academy is to remain a top-drawer educational institution on the undergraduate level.
MIDSHIPMEN'S PAY
On July 1, 1947, the midshipmen's pay was raised from $65.00 to $78.00 per month, but because of increasing costs the "take home" pay still remains an infinitesimal quantity. For example, laundry now costs each midshipman $101.00 per year, and a suit of uniform blues which ten years ago could be bought for $39.00 now is debited at $58.26. The mess ration has been increased to $1.20 per day, but as this is credited and debited at the same time on the midshipman's account, there can be no saving here. This ration includes the price of food, which has gone up so much faster than the ration value, the cost of mess gear and of any special diets for the athletic squads on the training tables. The midshipman has no housing problem, at least for himself, as each is given his "quarters" complete with bed, desk, closet, and shower.
MATERIAL EXPANSION
The Naval Academy, being a government supported institution, must depend upon the will of Congress for money to provide needed expansion. In time of -peace the securing of this money is a long and tedious process. At the time of World War I, there was constructed for the Department of Marine Engineering another wing on Isherwood Hall, this being called Griffin Hall. In 1920 Seamanship and Navigation, with Foreign Languages, moved into an excellent building on the seaward side of the gymnasium, this being called Luce Hall. From then until 1937, a period of 17 years, there was no expansion in the academic buildings at the Academy. Peace was too promising. It is true that the Natatorium was built in 1924, the funds being so meager that the construction was of yellow brick rather than of grey granite; and that the Athletic Association gave the money in 1930 for a new boathouse on College Creek, now known as Hubbard Hall.
In 1937 another wing was added to Isherwood Hall, this being called Melville Hall. The Department of Marine Engineering uses the lower floor of this for an internal combustion engine laboratory, and the upper floor for a drawing room. The drawing rooms of Isherwood, Griffin, and Melville Halls can now accommodate a plebe class of 1,050 for drawing, examinations, or psychometric tests, being interconnected with a modern public address system.
In 1939 the Naval Academy Museum was built on Maryland Avenue, just inside the main gate, from funds provided by the Athletic Association and the Naval Institute, which have offices on the second deck. The Museum has expanded so greatly, with the addition of World War II memorabilia, that something will soon have to be done about expansion or discriminatory selection. In 1939 the yard dispensary was moved from its old quarters in Mahan Hall to a new dispensary behind the Museum, and in 1947 this building was revamped as an Aviation Building and the yard dispensary was moved to the Naval Hospital. Sick bay was moved in 1940 from over the rotunda of Bancroft Hall to the sixth wing where it now resides. Among the M.D. quarters only "Misery Hall" in the gymnasium. has retained its position during the years.
For many years the Chapel was too small for seating the regiment of midshipmen. In 1939 it was found necessary to enlarge it by the addition of a wing, so that the main chapel now seats 2,347. A small chapel, called St. Andrew's, was included on the ground level of the new wing. As a large number of the brigade regularly worship in the churches of Annapolis, the present chapel, although crowded every Sunday, has a sufficient seating capacity for the present brigade.
In 1941 McDonough Hall, the gymnasium, was divided horizontally, to give two floors where one had existed before. The Department of Ordnance and Gunnery at the same time expanded into a new recitation building, named Ward Hall. This is connected with the armory by a passageway so that ordnance drills can be run simultaneously in the armory and lower floor of Ward Hall.
Even with the new academic buildings the total number of classrooms now available is only 151, which is not enough to handle the present 228 sections of the brigade. The first need in any expansion is for increased classroom space, if the smaller size of sections—from 12 to 15—is to be maintained.
Bancroft Hall has seen several recent changes, the main one being the addition of two new wings in 1941, each housing 310 midshipmen in double rooms. The normal housing capacity of the Hall is about 2,500, with a saturation point of 3,100, thus still making it the largest dormitory in the world. Earlier in 1934 a "steerage" was added on the level with Smoke Hall, this now being complete with soda fountain and hostess. The job of modernizing the four old wings has just been completed at a cost of $4,300,000. All the rooms have been revamped as double rooms, new showers have been added, and fluorescent lighting installed. In fact the whole job has been so complete that the interior of Bancroft Hall has practically been rebuilt. The "watertight integrity" of Bancroft Hall is now an accomplished fact, and even the showers on the fourth deck spout water.
The Academy purchased about eight acres from the waterfront of Annapolis, just behind Thompson Stadium, and this is now used for drills and intra-mural sports. The old Johnson Lumber Yard, which used to pour smoke into the football stands in the middle of every game, has been moved to West Street extended, much to the joy of all football fans. Another intra-mural sports field was constructed by making a 23 acre fill off Hospital Point in the Severn River just inside the Ritchie Bridge.
Fourteen apartment houses have been built, each capable of housing six families. A total of 300 additional families are housed in Quonset huts in two Homoja villages, constructed under war contracts.
Plans are constantly being made for expansion, to handle 3,600 or even 5,000 midshipmen, so that when Congress appropriates the money there will be no lag between the appropriation and the commencement of the construction.
CONCLUSION
Several other titles were suggested by readers of the draft copy of this article—"How Are Things in Annapolis?," "Something New Has Been Added," or "The Naval Academy Evaluates Itself." You have seen that there is something of all three ideas in the previous pages, but above all this has been a "Professor's Report" on the status of the Naval Academy as an educational institution. You have seen glimpses of some skeletons, answers to the criticism of some razzing, raving, and ranting critics," but essentially you have seen the evolutionary plans for the progress of naval instruction on the undergraduate or collegiate level.
The Naval Academy must expand materially and educationally. There must be an airfield. As the Superintendent stated recently: "The Naval Academy without an airfield has no more sense than a Naval Academy without a harbor." We must graduate men better prepared intellectually for service in life and in the fleet. Our instruction must be on a par with the best in the country.
Many fond memories from the past still remain to grace the Yard and Annapolis:
Tecumseh guarding the approach to academic walk with his annual coat of many colors;
The sarcophagus of John Paul Jones supported by symbolic dolphins in the crypt of the Chapel;
The "tree" for the unsats early each week, where "Tis unpleasant, sure, to see one's name in print";
The sound of midshipmen's hurrying feet echoing through the silent streets of Annapolis bare seconds before the fatal hour of midnight;
Band concerts to distract our wandering minds at 10 A.M. and 4 P.M. with the 120-beat when we dare march by en route to classes;
Movies on Sundays when even the "yard engines" rate being dragged;
Memorial Hall with its memories of Articles of the Navy, and "Don't Give Up the Ship"—pictures have been added—our friends who did not return—Ike Kidd from Pearl Harbor—Dan Callaghan and Norm Scott from the San Francisco off Guadalcanal—Pinky Swensen from Savo Island—Ted Chandler from Lingayen Gulf;
The Museum with its mementoes—Halsey's saddles, Mitscher's cap, the surrender table from the "Ol'Mo'";
Midshipmen still "riding the velvet" going into exams;
The new stadium still only a gleam in the eye of the Athletic Association;
Traffic still jamming the narrow colonial streets of the ancient city.
Yes, things are normal at Annapolis. Be assured that the old Navy school is still progressing, and very much alive.
Educated in physics and mathematics at Clark University and Dartmouth College, with graduate work at the University of Chicago, Johns Hopkins University, and Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Professor Thomson served as Captain in the U. S. Coast Artillery in World War I. As Colonel, General Staff Corps, U. S. Army, he saw service in World War II in England with the Anti-Aircraft Command, the VIII Bomber Command, and the Eighth Air Force as Flak Officer and Chief of Intelligence. After duty in 1944 in the Plans Section, Army Air Force Headquarters in Washington, he went to Pearl Harbor as Chief of the Flak Intelligence Section of the Joint Intelligence Center, Pacific Ocean Areas. For many years a Physics professor at the Naval Academy, Professor Thomson is affectionately known by thousands of midshipmen and naval officers as "Slip-Stick Willie."