Premise 1: Screening potential officers based off possession of a college education is ineffective.
Premise 2: Success in academics does not directly correlate with one’s leadership potential.
Conclusion: Possession of a college degree should not be the determining factor in choosing potential officers. First, Carl Forsling argues that the United States’ changing security priorities in the past created the reason that the military started to screen potential candidates for a college education. A person with a college degree in the past was seen to have more potential in being a better choice for military leadership than the rich kid with good social standing (Forsling). However, in today’s time, it is no longer the case that only a select few are able to receive a college education. Rather, it seems that the expectation is once one finishes high school, that they pursue a college degree. Forsling even states that being a college graduate only requires someone …show more content…
Many of America’s successful leaders did not receive a college education, such as Andrew Carnegie, John D. Rockefeller, Bill Gates and Steve Jobs to name a few (Forsling). Thinking, reading, and writing is a skill that one can gain proficiency by going to an academic institution and getting a degree, but is not necessarily necessary in order be good at perform those tasks. Additionally, if it is that important to success in the military, the military could offer classes in those skills (Forsling). A point that Fowling also adds is that a benefit of going to college is that it should develop mature adults. While that very subject could be argued, it the question of developing maturity is on the table, why not accept the NCO with experience? In short, this argues against the military adding criteria to the screening process that has little to no correlation to how well they can perform their
Premise 2: Success in academics does not directly correlate with one’s leadership potential.
Conclusion: Possession of a college degree should not be the determining factor in choosing potential officers. First, Carl Forsling argues that the United States’ changing security priorities in the past created the reason that the military started to screen potential candidates for a college education. A person with a college degree in the past was seen to have more potential in being a better choice for military leadership than the rich kid with good social standing (Forsling). However, in today’s time, it is no longer the case that only a select few are able to receive a college education. Rather, it seems that the expectation is once one finishes high school, that they pursue a college degree. Forsling even states that being a college graduate only requires someone …show more content…
Many of America’s successful leaders did not receive a college education, such as Andrew Carnegie, John D. Rockefeller, Bill Gates and Steve Jobs to name a few (Forsling). Thinking, reading, and writing is a skill that one can gain proficiency by going to an academic institution and getting a degree, but is not necessarily necessary in order be good at perform those tasks. Additionally, if it is that important to success in the military, the military could offer classes in those skills (Forsling). A point that Fowling also adds is that a benefit of going to college is that it should develop mature adults. While that very subject could be argued, it the question of developing maturity is on the table, why not accept the NCO with experience? In short, this argues against the military adding criteria to the screening process that has little to no correlation to how well they can perform their