How would you improve Army training?
“We’re just not there yet.”
As the Army’s chief evangelist for social media, this is a response I get pretty often. Typically from organizations or individuals at the mid-to-senior level, or folks who have been doing their job for a long time. They’re willing to recognize the importance of social media, see the opportunities, but somehow also see themselves as a few steps away from the final cliff they think they need to jump off to start using new tools and tactics like social media.
It’s a response I received while trying to encourage social media at the Boring Army Class I find myself in this week. Now, if you’ve been in or around the Army for any point of time you’ll understand what I’m talking about. The U.S. Army truly is the best trained Army in the world. Sometimes in spite of ourselves.
In addition to having amazing, hands-on training and some of the best cadre and leaders you can find, we also have a finely tuned teaching technique that is particularly prevalent around the Pentagon – I call it “teaching to the break.” It’s when some instructor feeds you PowerPoint from a fire hose for an hour and then asks for questions. Now, you know that right behind questions is a break. So, you know no one is dumb enough to ask any questions. And if they do, they’ll be harassed by their fellow students later.
It’s a teaching technique that has its merits – it exists for a reason. PowerPoint is a great teaching tool and when navigating certain topics and themes it can be a great way to provide information. But the technique of “teaching to the break” is one that is just screaming for some kind of social media/collaborative tools innovation.
One thing that I’ve noted in college classrooms and even within classrooms at the U.S. Military Academy is the use of chat functions during classroom time. Students are able to trade notes, questions and discussion points during class – all while the instructor stands at the front of the room and lectures (most likely using PowerPoint). For digital natives, it keeps them connected and allows the experiences and knowledge in the room to play a roll – that’s particularly crucial for our military, where lessons learned often come from colleagues. College students are texting in class anyway – why not encourage them to engage on the topics of discussion?
Or how about uploading course materials in wiki format so everyone can input edits and make changes or contributions? TRADOC is already doing this with doctrine, so why not open up contributions on other materials?
When it comes to military education, I think we’ll see a shift over the coming years, as new individuals move into leadership positions and our understanding of how young people learn best develops. An education system that doesn’t take advantage of collaborative tools and social media technologies is missing out on an amazing opportunity.
What’s the worst Army training program you’ve been through? How would you make it better? Let us know in the comments section.
Lindy Kyzer, Public Affairs Specialist, Online and Social Media
Posted by inArmy News, Uncategorized, social media
With out any doubt, the worst Army training I have attended was handed out by First Army at Camp Shelby and Ft Carson when I was going through mobilization training prior to my two deployments to Iraq. It would take less space for me to describe the good elements of the training then the bad. In my opinion, at least 50% or more of the instructors were simply unqualified to teach anything, let alone the material they were presenting. It seemed to me they were selected as instructors simply because they volunteered rather than they had some skill to impart. In almost no instance did I see any actual training to standard. Everything amounted to familiarization training and if individuals happened to actually attain a “T” it was a bonus rather than a goal. The over riding concern of the instructors was always “to get you out of here as early as possible”. I put that in quotes because that was a constant refrain at mob station. To make matters worse, the entire concept that First Army is working from, that in which entire units receive the exact same training at the exact same time, from green private to all the way up to company commander, is completely wrong. In the Army I served in, we train the trainer and then send him back to his squad/platoon/company to teach. This turns leaders into subject matter experts and allows them to go back to their Soldiers and demonstrate their leadership qualities through instruction and training of Soldiers. This is what builds junior level faith and confidence in its leadership and obviously something that First Army knows nothing about or cares nothing about. And it creates units that go onto the battlefield and accomplish their mission in spite of their training rather than because of it.
Agreed, drop the “cookie cutter” mob training that seems to exist only so that returning unemployed Reservists/Guardsmen can have jobs when they get home. Get the Soldiers highspeed dynamic training by experienced infantry NCOs who have operational experience in what they are teaching. The training I did at Ft. McCoy prior to my most recent deployment in 2008 was a waste of time and money. We have many experienced combat arms and military police (I am in an MP Guard unit and a civilian police officer as well) NCOs (many of which are experienced civilian police officers as well) with multiple deployments to both Afghanistan and Iraq and we could have conducted much better training ourselves than through First Army “cookie cutter” training that has VERY LITTLE combat application downrange.
The Army in general needs to COMPLETELY shed the “garrison” mentality downrange as well. Win the war. Period. Leave all the extra garbage back at garrison. That mentality will get you killed in theater.
Yes i am totally agree with you it is very helpful for me i really like this post.
As a current student in the Army’s Command and General Staff School, I can say by far this has been one of the most productive education experiences in my career. The use of small groups and the focus on the Adult Learning Model places the responsibility for education on the student and the small group. When discussing the role of social media and collaborative tools, I think it is important to make the distinction between training and education and where social media would be appropriate. Training is designed to increase the capability of individuals or organizations to perform specific tasks and skills to a measurable level. The desired outcome of education is to increase knowledge and or skills through education. Since the majority of training is designed to impart new skills, I would presume there is little added value from collaborative or social media tools in training new tasks, since there is no knowledge base to build from. This is not to say there may be applications for social networking in a training environment. As younger, and more computer savvy Soldiers enter the force, they will expect to use these tools in training and on the job. However, as the skill set increases in a Soldier and the schooling moves more towards a balance of education and training, such as the Captains Career Courses or Advanced Noncommissioned Officer Courses, collaborative tools and social media should play a more important role. One tool I have seen in the Captains Course and in ILE is the development of group blogs and Facebook pages where students comment on world events, or recent discussion topics in the class. These tools not only allow a student to synthesize information to develop their own conclusion, but share that point of view with other students and the instructor. I have also seen schools use video-teleconferencing technology to bring together small groups with experts from the current field of study. This not only cuts down on TDY costs, but brings otherwise unavailable expertise to the classroom that the instructors do not posses. A risk in bringing collaborative tools and social media into the classroom is becoming focused on the tools, rather than the desired outcome. How many times have you seen a class postponed or canceled because PowerPoint crashed or the projector died? A competent instructor should be prepared regardless of technical failures. Once it is identified which venues are appropriate, instructors will need to focus on the desired outcomes and which social networking and collaborative tools support them.
MAJ Ross Graham
SG 10C, CGSC
I think the main thing is too integrate social media in the classroom with monitoring the students making sure they are using the tools to do classroom related task rather then reading or looking up unrelated info during class discussion.
check out this related post on social media
http://armylive.dodlive.mil/index.php/2010/02/dod-announces-new-policy-on-social-media/comment-page-1/
It is so tough training for a woman like me. I adore those who can get over it.
How about the Army Family Team Building (AFTB) training held in Las Vegas in April 2009? The instructors reminded me of when I was a Bluebird in the Camp Fire Girls and we were being taught by our Mommies. The training was so simplistic it made me wonder why the Army flew all these people out from the East Coast and from Europe, to teach a class that any in house GS-07 or an FRG Leader could have done a better job of. Does the Army not take note of that the USA is regional with our own cultures and the training would have been more palatable taught by trainers from our own areas? It would have saved a whole lot of money too. Also, these trainers came out here without checking if the hotel was suitable for those employees who required reasonable accommodations. The thermostat in the training room got stuck on 50 below zero so students were coming from their rooms wrapped in their bed blankets, when it was 102 degrees F outside in Vegas. Ask me if the trainers cared? Clueless is the answer and not accountable.