NotesFAQContact Us
Collection
Advanced
Search Tips
ERIC Number: ED509594
Record Type: Non-Journal
Publication Date: 2010-Apr
Pages: 238
Abstractor: ERIC
Reference Count: 0
ISBN: N/A
ISSN: N/A
Another Crossroads? Professional Military Education Two Decades After the Goldwater-Nichols Act and the Skelton Panel. Committee Print 111-4
Fenner, Lorry M.; Howard, Lee F., III; Kruse, John E.; Johnson, William S.; Hawley, Thomas E.; Crumpler, Ryan P.
US House of Representatives
This report examines officer in-residence professional military education (PME) as a critical investment in the most important element of our military--people. The primary purpose of PME is to develop military officers, throughout their careers, for the rigorous intellectual demands of complex contingencies and major conflicts. This report is divided into five sections of varying length. The first gives the background or context within which the PME institutions operate, including a brief history, estimates of the current and future security environment, and the Department's, CJCS', and the services' PME policies. The next two are the longest sections, which discuss the practical issues the Subcommittee focused on as well as observations, findings, and recommendations. Like the Skelton Panel, the Subcommittee agrees that the Department's PME system is still basically sound. However, there are areas that need improvement. As a means for facilitating improvement, the Subcommittee offers two sets of findings and recommendations: first, those that concentrate on systemic issues and, second, institutional issues or those related to organization and those specifically intended for individual schools, and their leaders, faculty, staff, and students. In this section, leadership and faculty are dealt with at some length. Like the Skelton Panel, this Subcommittee finds that leaders and instructors are the bedrock of the PME system. The fourth section briefly identifies a number of challenging areas of study that remain as well as some individuals whose broader proposals arose in the course of testimony, interviews, current debates, and recent writings. These bear further and more in-depth consideration than could be provided at this time. Finally, a short conclusion provides a nascent vision of the essential attributes of future officers. Professional military education must contribute to developing those attributes. Among the major findings was that today's PME system is basically sound; there are areas, however, that need improvement. The system operates within a dynamic national security environment. Consequently, it must be more prepared to anticipate and adapt to current and future challenges. Appendices include: (1) Glossary of Acronyms; (2) Air University Organizational Charts; (3) Amendment on Copyright; (4) Hearings, Briefings, Travel; and (5) Bibliography. Additional views of Representative Todd R. Platts are also presented herein. (Contains 506 endnotes.) [This publication was written with assistance from Sean McDonald, Drew Walter, Peter Kavanewsky, Ashley Alley, Anne Daugherty Miles, Nate Allen, and Abraham Kanter.]
US House of Representatives. Available from: US Government Printing Office. 732 North Capitol Street, Washington, DC 20401. Tel: 866-512-1800; Fax: 202-512-2104; Web site: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/
Publication Type: Reports - Evaluative
Education Level: Adult Education
Audience: N/A
Language: English
Sponsor: N/A
Authoring Institution: US House of Representatives. Committee on Armed Services, Subcommittee on Oversight & Investigations