This html article is produced from an uncorrected text file through optical character recognition. Prior to 1940 articles all text has been corrected, but from 1940 to the present most still remain uncorrected. Artifacts of the scans are misspellings, out-of-context footnotes and sidebars, and other inconsistencies. Adjacent to each text file is a PDF of the article, which accurately and fully conveys the content as it appeared in the issue. The uncorrected text files have been included to enhance the searchability of our content, on our site and in search engines, for our membership, the research community and media organizations. We are working now to provide clean text files for the entire collection.
Sector S^e<^ Professionals in the civilian ists invfti, j •^een a barSain- The reserv-
S al * augI“ciiuiig me scr-
site jn ^ available at the active duty
[Sj —- w a uargain. i ne reserv-
theirsi,0||Vecl-‘n tlle Pro8ram have brought viCes them, augmenting the ser- vided ' most.cases> they have either pro- °n site n a<^'t'onai necessary service not experie’ °r ^ey have added to services $hortaenClni= an overload or personnel
b]e op**16 reservists, it has been a valua- irig foPortUnity to work with the operat- encoumeS *n sctt'n8s that would only be time act6reC* ^ Rlem were they on full- ti°n Th'Ve ’n event °f mobiliza- s'°nal pS P'cnc' °f people and profession i f ^as er,hanced the profes- Weli as ttf tPe active duty personnel as ciary f6 reservist. The ultimate benefi- \j’ ° course, has been the patient. cal, e °Wn exPer’ences may well be typi- ciaity jg611 [^ou8h my professional spe- vvitp a ■not’—I’m a clinical psychologist Clvtlian specialty in psychotherapy with children. On three separate tours of ResMOP/TemAc, I have been to Iceland, Pensacola, and Okinawa. Each time, I have been assigned to the hospital on board the station and have left with the feeling that my professional skills and training were fully used. There is no fat in this program. I encountered career Medical Department officers who not only did not watch the clock, they did not even watch the calendar. If a patient had to be seen at night or on a weekend, then the patient was seen.
Each time, I also had the opportunity to expand my knowledge of and familiarity with the role of the operating forces of the Navy and Marine Corps with hands- on experience. 1 also had fun. I got to do things like flying over the Arctic Circle in a P-3, going on board an aircraft carrier, and firing a 105-mm. Howitzer with the 12th Marines. Not the kind of things a psychologist in private practice ordinarily experiences.
Each year, as funding time approaches, there is some question as to whether the ResMOP/TemAc program will be renewed. It is a cost-effective program that provides needed Medical Department professional services to the operating forces. It gives our Medical Department reservists the opportunity to use their professional skills and specialties in settings that will enhance their current and ultimate value to the Navy in the event of mobilization, while meeting an immediate need. I hope the program will be renewed on a regular basis.
Captain Shimberg entered the Navy as a hospital corpsman in 1943 and has continued to be a member of the ready reserve. After being commissioned in 1950, he returned to active duty during the Korean Conflict. He is currently commanding officer of CMCHS-104, which drills at the U. S. Naval Hospital, Philadelphia. He began participation in the ResMOP/TemAc program in 1980 and has continued each fiscal year after that. He has a private practice in clinical psychology.
NRotc
“yco,
Curriculum: New Vitality
mander John B. Washbush, U. S. Naval Reserve
0 t
^ar
3 NRo- ^eserve Officer Training °> the
°f these courses: naval orientation,
-Orno a. vc willed naming
(NRotc) midshipman 20-some %ed Ple curriculum I followed con
naval i.
°gy, na;story> naval weapons, psychologic ■1^at*on> naval operations, naval Each of .l®’ anc* naval administration. ter-l°nese was a three-credit, semes- PsycholoCOUrSe- ^dh the exception of the s'gtiea , "y course, naval officers as-
0
^ — cw, ne* v mi wii ^ aa
the unit taught these courses
JPon r laugin uicse courses.
X e P0rt'ng to the initial sea tour, the
ensign
to
so educated was considered
aSSU
tely employable” and qualified
„ -Ump ,1 - • *---
(0 “'vision officer responsibilities eadingCoinnience operational training . 0 qualification as officer of the
To inder Way-
simjp NROTC curriculum is gener- ntr°duct^ consists of these courses: !!S; NaJ0" f° Naval Science, two cred-
tk N aval cl- aval ociciicc, iwo creu- i e crpH- lps Systems I (engineering),
r e CrpH- '-’yswuis x (engineering;, uaP°nsi*tS; ^aval Ships Systems II Maritime 1 ,tPlree credits; Seapower and ^d Nav.,1 r!'a'rs’two credits; Navigation 'tS e&ch ■ ^Perat'ons I and II, three credit j a’ aLeadership and Manage- eat cun-: | ’ tWo credits each. The cur- U is .CU*Uni totals 20 semester hours, V* ^ally taught entirely by naval
N'pQ-j^'Sncd to the unit.
:r,ts t0 academic policy requires stu-
. si lQ •*» i cvjunc, OLU
°urse w ^P^fe ac^itional on-campus Udet«s 0rk- Navy option scholarship Ust complete one year of cal-
cuius, one year of science-level physics, a block of technical electives, and one term of a modem Indo-European or Asiatic foreign language. Navy option college program (non-scholarship) students must complete a year of college mathematics and a year of college physical science. All Marine option students must complete two elective courses complementing NROTC courses taken in the junior and senior years, and scholarship Marine option students must complete the foreign language requirement.
In addition to the academic courses, NROTC midshipmen receive professional training in laboratory classes, drill periods, and summer cruises. Students pursuing commissions in the Marine Corps take the same professional courses during the first two years as those desiring Navy commissions. However, during the junior and senior years, Marine option students focus on the history of land and amphibious warfare in two three- credit academic courses: Evolution of Warfare and Amphibious Warfare. During the cruise between the junior and senior years, Marine option students attend special training at the Marine Corps Officer Candidate School rather than participating in the afloat training cruise taken by those seeking Navy commissions.
Changing Curricula: The societal and campus unrest of the late 1960s and early
1970s had a significant impact on the NROTC curriculum. At many institutions, NROTC academic programs were critically reviewed, frequent reductions in accreditation occurred, and some campuses ceased offering the program. Course offerings were often criticized as being indoctrination and training, lacking academic merit. For nearly a decade, commencing in 1969, considerable curricular unrest ensued, and NROTC program managers attempted to meet the criticisms by a series of curricular modifications, embellishments designed to promote greater academic respectability.
One of the effects of this period was the establishment of an NROTC curriculum officer billet in the program manager’s branch at the Naval Education and Training Command headquarters. While today’s curriculum is similar to that of “the good old days,” it rests on a considerably sounder base and is the focus of continuing review and upgrading.
The current foundation of the NROTC curriculum is the “Manual of Minimum Professional Core Competencies (MPCC) for Officer Accession Programs.” In the mid-1970s, NROTC program managers began to explore stating the instructional program’s intended objectives in concrete terms. The result would be useful for a number of purposes, including curriculum design and program evaluation. A general model existed in the Professional
ie1in
'Ss 1 October 1984
165
Competency Objectives published by and used at the Naval Academy.
In 1977, discussions between the head of the officer accessions branch of the Naval Education and Training Command headquarters (the NROTC program manager) and the director of professional development at the Naval Academy crystallized interest in establishing a common basis for the professional formation of prospective naval officers from all accession sources. During the next several years, there were a series of meetings which included participation by (among others) representatives of the Naval Academy, NROTC, Officer Candidate School, the Aviation Officer Candidate School, the Marine Corps, and the warfare sponsors (surface, subsurface, and aviation) from the Office of the Chief of Naval Operations. A draft of a core competency manual was drawn up. The competency statements were to list the
knowledge and skills the prospective officer would acquire through accession education and training programs. Subsequent revisions and resubmissions led to promulgation of a final draft in early 1982. This draft document was approved at the Chief of Naval Operations level by the Assistant Deputy Chief of Naval Operations (Manpower, Personnel, and Training).
As approved, the core competencies apply to the Naval Academy, NROTC, Officer Candidate School, and the Aviation Officer Candidate School. Most of the core competencies apply to prospective Navy officers. Some of the competency statements apply specifically to Marine Corps option students in the NROTC. A major sub-set covers the aviation-oriented curriculum of the Aviation Officer Candidate School. The competencies applicable to the Naval Academy, NROTC (except Marine option), and the
engineering, ship control, and coi
,rnt>at the basis
systems. These requirements are tne for NROTC curriculum developing review, and revision and for assess of program educational effectiveness-^ Course Coordinators and Cwrricw Guides: Because the NROTC staff 0re. headquarters is small, a great deal o ^ sponsibility is shared with NROTC ^ and instructional personnel. For NROTC course a unit is designate course coordinator. The course coor ^ tor acts as a channel for review and t
mation about the course between NROTC units and the headquarters- ^ course coordinator assigns the star ^ cer who regularly teaches the c0’j.rinat- serve as the point of contact for al , ters concerning the course. The P0111^. contact officer will usually chair co ^
reviews in
the
ms
ant
by
At
Slit
°bj
insi
Opt
Out . 1 •Osi Oft
Ofi
ble
■Uei
ties
is a
*eSs
Oy,
Because of the establishment of the core competencies, which provides a common basis for all officer accession sources, these NROTC students and instructors are now better prepared to meet the Navy’s needs.
Officer Candidate School are identical. These reflect the “immediately employable ensign’’ concept but are based on defined fleet requirements.
Under the core competencies, NROTC curricula address the topical areas of naval orientation, naval leadership, naval administration, damage control, watchstanding, seamanship, navigation, command and control, communications, naval warfare, physical fitness, naval
_
.VY
Course reviews are conducts - (eaj> or revise a curriculum. A revie ^ consists of three to five instructor the various units. The revision f0r- mendations of the review team c{lCe< warded to the NROTC curriculum ^ for review, approval, and public Each NROTC curriculum is Pu” ^ in a curriculum guide. These gul e^e t<j tify the core competencies aPP lCgS the course, list the texts/referenC
. H
"idi
Nav
?oti,
hrei
but
f0rC|
n8
•hat
f°r.
166
Proceedings
/ oci®1
1
Struct-, -
and Pr . a resources supplied to units,
by instru* 6 ^eta^C(^ lesson briefs for use A typicnlC,tors *n preparing lesson plans. sUggest , esson brief identifies the topic, °^ective 'nstructional hours, learning 'nstnictSS’ 3 text anc* reference list, an °ptions10na' a'd *ist> suS8este<J method QUtline ’ 3nd a very detailed presentation The
Sue* °f detail presented to the °f res0ur ls 'ntended to provide a wealth °f instrurtes’ not t0 dictate the mechanics hie f0rctl0n- The instructor is responsi- r0ents asmeet'n8 instructional require- C’es and Sf>ec'fled in the core competen- 'S aho C0Urse objectives. The instructor exPerien ^ectec* t0 use the lesson guides, less°n ,Ce’ and personal style to prepare • ■ans for instruction.
li°n to l°^a^ f' eedback Systems: In addi- *)r°v'ded r6 communication mechanism other me ^ ihe course coordinators, an- ans for curriculum assessment is
the annual NROTC comprehensive examination. This test is based on the core competencies applicable to the first three years of NROTC courses. Seniors seeking Navy commissions take this exam during the fall academic term. While providing a mechanism for evaluating prospective graduates, result assessments can disclose curricular deficiencies. In addition, data systems exist to permit evaluation of the performance of NROTC graduates in post-accession schools. These provide the means for determining the predictive validity of the comprehensive examination, and they can also provide information about curricular adequacy. This fall, additional testing programs are being developed. Annual cumulative examinations for NROTC sophomores, juniors, and seniors have become program policy.
Recent events at the University of Wisconsin where I am on the NROTC staff
confirm the value of the development of the core competencies. We have shown that the core competencies prove that the NROTC curriculum is a professional education program built on validated professional requirements, and we have succeeded in requesting from the faculty members of the university’s officer education committee support for new and expanded course offerings.
During the 1982-83 and 1983-84 academic years, we instituted three new courses and added credit to two existing courses. These actions expanded our curriculum by nine semester credits (to a total of 20), enabling us to meet much more effectively our instructional responsibilities. In addition, the detailed structuring of the curricular guides provided by the headquarters has proven valuable in that NROTC courses are both substantial and possess academic merit.
Not only have the times and the atmosphere on campuses changed, but the efforts of curriculum managers have supported a resurgence of academic credibility for NROTC courses on campuses across the nation.
Commander Washbush was commissioned through the NROTC program at the University of Wisconsin. He served in the USS Arnold J. Isbell (DD-869) and Enterprise (CVN-65) and is qualified as a surface warfare officer. He was a drilling reservist, 1972-79, and was recalled to active duty in 1980. He was an NROTC instructor at Marquette University, 196972, on the staff of CNET, 1980-82, and is currently NROTC unit executive officer at the University of Wisconsin. He is the co-editor of To Gel the Job Done (Naval Institute Press, 1981).
up the Naval Reserve
Naval Reserve
peacetime as well as in conflict. Objective observers see clearly that taxpayers will not allow a financial burden of the magnitude required to maintain military forces at levels necessary for wartime operations.
Today, we would probably have little time to ready a supplemental force to assist in time of need. Also, reliance on technology alone to take the place of manpower would be a tragic mistake.
Admiral William S. Gilmore, U. S.
•j.
^ciiffCr^nany times in the past, neglect, K?Ve leftCG’ aPa[hy, and lack of funds . val p a make do on your own” ?(chve a.l?S,erVe force. We all know that ,rcduCtj reserve forces suffer in the fUt no\y n syn(frome” after a conflict ?rce r ’ rr'0re than ever before, active ll'ng, ar)(| nct'°ns, congressional prod- f 1 the a ?VCra^ fiscal restraints demand °r> feC(jC 1Ve force realize it must “care ’ and use” its reserve force in
Reexamination of our people assets and how they are gained, trained, and retained is essential.
Vast sums are expended to recruit, train, deploy, retain, and retrain specialists (officer and enlisted). These individuals are not only valuable assets to the Navy and the nation while on active duty but have expended years of useful life to train others and be available when needed. Efforts, methods, and programs
167
"8S 1 October 1984