mombee

Good article. Looks as if perhaps things are indeed headed in the right direction, perhaps only slightly slower than GoNavyXC would wish.

Luigi, thanks for posting.

keydet

I'm rather curious- which of these articles do you see as positive and reassuring rather than an indictment of the USNA administration that supports what GoNavyXC has been saying about the gutting of the Honor Concept? Sure the Commandant says "the Honor Concept is important to the Commandant" - but it seems hard to imagine the Commandant saying that he's not interested in the Honor concept so that's hardly reassuring. What else does he say that makes you think things are changing at all? It's all alumni who are quoted as saying things were adrift- not Capt Klunder who is carefully modulating what he says in this article. In fact reading it closely it seems to me that he is making an awful lot of justifications for honor violators- talking about the stresses placed on Midshipmen and categorizing an awful lot of things as "minor violations" which don't seem so minor to many of the alumni interviewed who also make some pretty telling comments about the remediation vs separation approach. "According to the case reports and related documents, instances of lying and cheating frequently involve multiple midshipmen acting in concert. Also according to the records, some mids have been allowed to violate honor standards multiple times without being separated.
"What got me was the conspiracies to commit honor violations," said Curt C. Hartman, a 1987 Naval Academy graduate and the attorney who worked for two years to obtain the honor reports. "The mids know they will be 'remediated' and not separated."

As far as Captain Klunder's points about the stresses and time constraints on the Midshipmen- Really? And if they are having problems with basic honesty under the stress levels they have now- will their ability to deal with stress, take the heat and do the honorable and honest thing even at their own expense get easier when they are leading their platoon and asked to put themselves and their soldiers in harms way?

My take after reading these articles is that I've reevaluated GoNavyXC's posts and now find myself a great deal more sympathetic to his point of view- prior to these articles I suspected that this was typical first class belly aching about the administration and that there was a flip side that the Mids just didn't understand. Now- I believe GoNavyXC is right to be seriously concerned about the state of things.

mombee

First off, GoNavyXC was disallusioned with the Administration’s apparent lack of support for the honor concept. Capt Klunder’s comments, to me, at least, indicate that he is indeed on board. And if the Commandant is on board, it is only a matter of time until the remainder of the administration is also on board.

I heartedly support the current policy to use honor as a learning tool. The article does not differentiate between punishment for fourth class and punishment for first class. I can assure you that there is a huge difference. The newly established Ethics Dept is there for a reason. Allow them to do their job, to educate and to train.

Secondly, in the old days as the article indicates, honor was much more black and white. While it made enforcement simpler, it made the reporting thereof much more complicated. Midshipmen were much less apt to report someone knowing that they would be dismissed. The current policy, as statistics prove, support this. Also, the definition of honor violations, in itself, is much more sophisticated. It is ironic that the old grads are upset that a Midshipmen was not separated for ‘stuffing’ his rack. When they were Mids, this was not even considered an honor offense. This, to me, is progress.

All in all, a more mature approach which will help all Midshipmen over the long haul.

GoNavyXC

What do you mean WAS disillusioned?

Why does it take 3 articles published in the Capital for this issue to "come to the surface again?"

People, this issue has been eating at the Academy for at least 30 years, and it's our job to fix it.

These 3 articles are just a jab and preview of what's to come. What's next, the honor staff resigning their stripes? Something noteworthy needs to be done in order to show AMERICA that the Brigade honor staff cares about the quality of NAVAL OFFICERS that are being produced at USNA.

Everyone, there are a lot of hands in the Naval Academy pie (athletics, academics, etc), but without HONOR, there is no pie. Nothing means anything without our reputation for honor and excellence. Cynical mids live in the brigade, and there are many because they had an expectation of the standards of honor upon arrival. When we preach high standards, but we see mids in the brigade who have committed honor offenses running around, it makes my commission feel tainted in a way, do other mids agree?

The Brigade Commander thinks that it is his job to tell everyone what the administration wants him to tell people. The honor staff of 2010 is a tight knit group of mids who has known something is not right with honor here, and it has not been right for a long time. Take it from someone who intricately knows the system, the process, how mids feel about this, and most importantly, how the administration is handling this. The honor staff is working hard to give honor "teeth", but after awhile, you have to wonder when the staff is going to go into the 'Dant's office, throw the stripes down on his desk, and ask him to pick a new staff, or restructure the way we do business.

The biggest issue is ownership. They say honor is run by mids, but the only fate we can control is by forwarding midshipmen to the Commandant for separation. After that, that person's fate is out of our hands and we leave those decisions up to an 0-6 in the United States Navy to determine whether that mid should stay or go.

Make no mistake, MIDS WANT PEOPLE OUT WHO CAN'T FOLLOW A STANDARD. It is not up to us whether or not someone gets the boot. We are asking for support in a passive-aggressive manner to get OWNERSHIP back to be able to determine whether or not particular mids deserve to stay here.

Our degrees and commissions should be EARNED and held in high regard by those whom we lead and to the American people.

The wrong message is being sent here everyone. Here's the problem in a nutshell:

A mid will get kicked out, no doubt for sexual misconduct, drug abuse, prt failure, and academic deficiency. However, a "slap on the wrist" is given for academic dishonesty, lying, cheating, or stealing. Shouldn't it be the other way around?

Unless the honor process gets some teeth, MIDS will always weigh the punishments in their minds before doing something or telling a story. If we start kicking people out for lying, the first time, people will understand that it is ok to own up to mistakes of conduct, and in fact, those could be mitigated in the process if an emphasis is placed on being an HONORABLE PERSON FIRST.

I don't care if you got a 2.1, failed every PRT...If you are honest and competant at your job, that is the officer I want. If you were a Rhodes Scholar who lied about everything, then what are you worth to the men and women of our Navy and America?

mombee

An honor code is fixed, static, a set of tables chiseled in stone. Both its implementation and its enforcement are based on fear, fear of getting caught and fear of not turning in a classmate. A simple black and white program. The only variable is how the board will view each offense. The question is does someone under an honor code learn anything for the future when they are no longer bound by the code or are they simply presently reacting from pure fear with no guarantee of future performance?

However, an honor concept is a living breathing entity. Everything in the environment affects it, causing it to ebb and flow. When the affirmative response to “Are you lying to me?” can range from a simple reprimand of “Don’t ever do it again” to a recommendation of expulsion places quite a responsibility on those who chose to enforce honor. What can affect the diversity of these responses? The perceived seriousness of the offense of course but also many other things. For example, if the honor board is too zealous and too strict, it will probably decrease the number of honor offenses which reach it. Does this mean there is no enforcement of honor? Of course not. It is just administered at a different level. Why should the administration encourage honor enforcement at the honor board level? Standardization, of course. An equitable enforcement of honor is one of the things which will cause a mature system.

For someone to want to return to the honor system of 30 years ago or for someone who graduated 20 or so years ago to bemoan the present system demonstrates a true naivety as to how things really were. The honor system was basically a crutch for a lazy academic dept who didn’t want to make multiple tests. There was no honor committee, no Saturday morning PMT, no Ethics Dept. The concept of honor was, and remained, what each individual Midshipmen brought to USNA on I-Day. Most infractions were handled informally. The honor concept taught deception, how to "ethically" get around something. Mids were probably no more, or no less honorable than today. However, I would vouch that today’s officer-to-be is, through education, much more sophisticated than those of 20 or 30 years ago.

A living breathing organism will continue to ebb and flow. The pendulum will continue to swing. Sometimes, the administration of honor will be more lenient than some like, sometimes more strict. Sometimes the administrative department will be more active than some like, sometimes less. Sometimes the Brigade honor committee will be given a loose rein, sometimes they will be reined in. All based on other external factors which, at first glance, would seem to have no bearing whatsoever on honor. Perhaps a more lenient administration is actually forcing more honor enforcement to a newly matured honor committee, rather than it being handled informally.

HVWebster

The way the Honor System exists now is a complete joke. Mids blow it off, knowing that if they get caught, they'll be subject to remediation instead of separation. I've seen very clear-cut cases of premeditated violations of the honor concept that resulted in retention. What this tells most people here is that with very few exceptions, an honor offense will not lead to separation.

I hope that 2010 works hard toward fixing this.

Whistle Pig

While neither defending nor denying the Honor System, I'm confident the allegation that it "is a complete joke" is the real joke. And the broad-brushing that "Mids blow it off" is absurd, silly, unfair, offering more insight to the author than either the Brigade or its Honor System. Your edge would not merit a passing grade, I fear. C'mon HV, reign it in and communicate like the leader your being trained to be might. Not trying to pick a fight or even challenge your allegations. Merely suggesting that if you have a valid point, work at presenting it in a more honorable, mature manner.

mombee

HVWebster, GoNavyXC, the first thing one should learn Plebe summer is that they have become a very small part of a very large entity and that, to succeed, one must work within the confines of the organization. No longer will they be able to do what they want to do, when they want to do it, and how they exactly want to accomplish it. Whining and airing one's dirty laundry in public is definitely not a part of being a viable part of any organization. With that said, I just got back from South Bend and am ready for a good discussion. Throw out some ideas and problems in a positive manner and lets go at them.

GoNavyXC

2010 is devoting their firstie years to fixing these issues in the honor concept. This is really our academy to develop, and we see it as a personal obligation to improve the INSTRUCTION, PROCEDURES, ADMINISTRATION, and SANCTIONING of the honor concept, and not why it is in place.

At Air Force and West Point, they have 2 separate documents for honor. One is their honor code, which changes maybe once every five years. This handbook outlines why they have the code and why it's important, a history of the code, and the legacy of the code. Nowhere in this handbook does it saying anything about PROCEDURES.

Here, our honor concept is one document that includes why we have the honor concept AND the PROCEDURES for case processing and sanctioning. The bottom line is that we need to make it clear that lying, cheating and stealing are much more unacceptable than failing a class, failing the PRT, or abusing alcohol. Inability to trust is much more costly than a failure in judgment or lack of concentration in a class or physical readiness.

The honor concept at the Naval Academy is gaining an immense amount of momentum. 2010 is planning a number of initiatives that will try to inform recent classes and alumni of the lenient punishments. Although I feel I have the abilities to be a servicable naval officer, it will be bittersweet to walk across that stage in May knowing that our honor concept was never challeged. I personally will not let that happen for 2010 or any of the classes that are here during our training, at any cost. Accepting a commission in the United States Navy is a sacred event, but I would feel my own personal experience would be tainted if the honor concept was not more clearly defined before I left. Before I started as an investigating officer as a 2/c, I wondered why the sanctions of the honor concept were so inexplicably lenient (See HVWebster's post) to the point where mids would balance and pre-meditate actions in their minds, then lean on honor to give them a lighter punishment.

During Plebe Summer, you learn to stand up to issues when no one else will. People are scared that their reputations are on the line and that they might "get in trouble" at the Academy. Personally, I feel that the Academy has been done a disservice for a number of years, and we deserve a better honor concept. At this point, schoolwork is like a collateral duty compared to the amount of work we've devoted to improving our honor concept as a class. People are so used to covering their own backs rather than standing up to the issues that pertain to EVERYONE. Mombee, do you think that I'm not devoting my cause to something larger than myself and for the better of the organization?

I do feel that a Bachelor of Science degree is certainly justified here. A commission means so much more. I don't want to feel like I earned 50% of a commission, I want to know that I've earned the whole thing. Our honor concept needs to be addressed before 2010 can cross the stage, we owe it to our sailors, marines, and America. I am not saying that the other classes did not deserve the commission. I am saying 2010 is now in the spotlight, because we KNOWINGLY have a list of problems with our honor concept. Previous classes may not have seen the whole picture, but certain facts have been revealed to us (or by us) to the point where revamping the honor concept is a moral obligation in itself, that we can't allow it to go on like this! Every class has a diiferent obligation or project that looms over it, and I think 2010's is coming to grips with our value system and moral integrity.

mombee

Honestly, I haven't enough information to make a decision. However, your following statement does give me pause:

Throughout your career, as you quietly and competently go about doing your job, you will be frustrated by those who subsequently report to your command and rant long and loud about how screwed up their division is and how much they have to do to fix it, bringing attention to themselves about how great they are doing, and by doing so, receive a better fitrep than you. Which of you did the better job? Which one had the best interests of the command at heart? I have always questioned the motives for throwing one's predecessor under the train as a part of doing their job.

I do question why you feel that the alumni need to be in the loop on this. Alumni who are not there and do not know the present dynamics of the system. Alumni now who have ulterior motives in questioning the diversity initiatives of the Navy.

Just a few observations. This is a system designed to get everyone involved. To be handled at the lowest level possible. A system designed for one plebe to be able to handle an offense with his roommate and no requirement for it to go any further. It is a system where 'lenient' punishment is a viable solution. It is a also a system where informal low level solutions are becoming more difficult. The honor board must do what a squad leader did in the past. The past that you so intensely want these alumni to hear about. For example, until recently, a first class only had to sleep and go to classes on the Yard. Basically he could spend the remainder of the week at his girl friends apartment. He may have been given the silent treatment and not even be around enough to realize that he was being punished. Back in the days when a plebe could report to an upper class after evening meal in rain gear over sweat gear over service dress blues with M-1 and be shoved out in the shower with the water on full hot and the rifle rigged gave upper class a lot more opportunities to 'administer' the honor concept. Now, of course, since this type of enforcement is not possible, the board must be more involved. But they will be more involved in education as opposed to punishment. Too lenient and the Brigade will laugh. To strict and the Brigade will not report offenses. And lastly, any legal system has to have a check and balance. The Administration must be involved. They have their own goals and requirements. To ignore them will only lead to frustration by the board.

Good luck, you have a lot of difficult work ahead of you.

grad/dad

Bottom line: give me an officer I can trust whether it is because of individual ethics, an honor code or honor concept, it does not matter. But, don't send me someone who is a known liar.