Logical, fact based, unemotional opinions backing arguments of substance over an issue that matters to the future of the USAF... Seems like an anomaly around here sometimes...
FWIW, I'm an in-res IDE guy who followed on to ASG. Like others, I found the first year to be almost a complete waste. It gave me a sister-service networking opportunity and a chance to write - something I plan to do upon retirement. Other than that, I went to school to go to a second year of school. The real learning was in the second year, and made the entire experience worth it. Scoff what you will, this same model (two-years of mid-career PME) has been used for centuries by some of the most successful armed forces in history. We aren't inventing new ways to educate here... We are in fact lagging behind in that department in my opinion.
We don't have it all figured out. In fact, the over-education of our officer corps as they proceed toward O-6 is a real topic of discussion... But there has to be a balance. Not everyone can depart the line for two years mid career. Not everyone should. Not everyone has the drive, brains, or desire to. That's not a bad thing. That's expectation management. But sending officers of 20+ years experience to just a little under three and a half years of schooling in their service is not overeducation IMHO -- ASBC (4 weeks), SOS (6 weeks), IDE (1 year), ASG (1 year), War College (1 year) - three years, spread out over the career, is nothing. Just my opinion. And realizing there's other things that pull dudes off the line for months/years -- WIC, TPS, JPME-II, Safety School, staff, etc -- I guess my question is, what's the alternative?
Where do our officers get the education they need to be effective in the joint world? Because I'm telling you, the USAF is getting murdered in the joint environment. It should be our wheelhouse, and we suck at it - something that's still shocking to me given the quality of some of the dudes I was at school with. Short of throwing folks into the deep end and letting them sink or succeed on the job, the only prep for entry into that world is PME (of all forms, correspondence included) - comments on the quality of that prep aside.
These aren't things I knew about or cared about on the line. They are things that I touch daily now, in a joint and service-headquarters level environment in which there is far too little understanding of history, theory, politics, and doctrine to go around. That speaks directly to the quality and breadth (read: civilian schools and PME) of our education programs... You're on to something when you talk about broadening/diversifying the school experience. But there is an element of quantity that has to come into play as well - because flying the line forever isn't an option yet, and if you're going to go to staff anyway I'd rather have you be trained and educated at the staff than not.
Spears accepted willingly.
Cheers,
Chuck
--spelling edits