Tuition Assistance Cuts

[Guest C-17 Flyer]

Link

[Magellan]

Well that sucks for anyone not within 18 credits of finishing their degree, since the Air Force insists officers must have a masters to be competitive. That said it will be interesting to see how big of a factor this is when all the 10 year commitment guys start the mass exodus.

I wonder what Touro, TUI, Trident or whatever they call themselves these days is going to do when the money dries up, but not like it matters from what I hear they are going to lose their accreditation anyway. I just think it is another case of a waste of government money as they made money while the TA lasted, but since they are for profit institution I imagine when the profit goes away so will they. Makes one wonder what the fall out will be for people who hold degrees from a school that lost its accreditation and then went out of business.

[spaw2001]

This is actually a good thing, in my opinion. 250/credit hr or whatever they pay, simply reinforces behavior to get a cheap, worthless, for profit degree. $250*30 credits for a masters=$7,500. What quality degree costs only $7500? None is the answer. I got my masters from a state school and it still costed $1000 per credit hr. It will be interesting to see if they will mandate degrees if there is no financial support from the gov. It's kinda jacked up that people essentially have to pay for promotion.

[BitteEinBit]

No TA? What? You mean now I'm going to have to pay for my promotion? I see a masked advanced academic degree in our future...or people complaining that they have to "pay for something the Air Force requires for advancement." Maybe this is the beginning of the end of the focus on AADs for advancement. Isn't this what the masses wanted? Less focus on AADs and more on "work skills" and "leadership?"

I'm not sure I agree anymore that there will be a "mass exodus"...but I am sure that the Air Force will have less rated officers than they need in the near future, and they will "fix the glitch" by just reducing the "requirements" On paper, we'll have enough pilots, but those of you on the line will know the difference...

This is actually a good thing, in my opinion. 250/credit hr or whatever they pay, simply reinforces behavior to get a cheap, worthless, for profit degree. $250*30 credits for a masters=$7,500. What quality degree costs only $7500? None is the answer. I got my masters from a state school and it still costed $1000 per credit hr. It will be interesting to see if they will mandate degrees if there is no financial support from the gov. It's kinda jacked up that people essentially have to pay for promotion.

You beat me by 69 seconds! But that is a good point regarding reinforcing behavior to get a cheap worthless degree...we do waste a lot of money supporting that behavior. I think it is a good thing that TA goes down.

By the way, if you haven't looked into the post 911 GI Bill, it is a pretty kickass deal...wonder how much longer it will last...

[jazzdude]

It will be interesting to see if they will mandate degrees if there is no financial support from the gov. It's kinda jacked up that people essentially have to pay for promotion.

Well, there's still gov support, it's called the GI Bill. Or the masters will come in conjunction with PME.

On a side note, I think it's only a matter of time before the post 9/11 GI Bill is changed because it's almost too good of a deal.

[ThreeHoler]

This is actually a good thing, in my opinion. 250/credit hr or whatever they pay, simply reinforces behavior to get a cheap, worthless, for profit degree. $250*30 credits for a masters=$7,500. What quality degree costs only $7500? None is the answer. I got my masters from a state school and it still costed $1000 per credit hr. It will be interesting to see if they will mandate degrees if there is no financial support from the gov. It's kinda jacked up that people essentially have to pay for promotion.

You can get a master's degree right now for no cost and never have to visit your base education office. http://www.au.af.mil/au/dlmasters.asp

You even get partial (Captain) and full (Major and Major(s)) ACSC credit.

(Edit to fix crappy formatting and attach the credit matrix)

Edited October 20, 2011 by ThreeHoler

[Magellan]

It's kinda jacked up that people essentially have to pay for promotion.

Why? Promotions are about the needs of the Air Force, and it is in the tax payers best interest to promote the most qualified person. Whether or not this actually happens is a different thread altogether, but if there are enough people willing to pay to get masters degrees all other things being equal. Why shouldn't they be promoted first? I would argue an AAD is largely viewed everywhere as being a good indicator of future leadership potential.

Just because TA is getting reduced doesn't mean that you have to pay to get a masters degree. The Air Force has tons of avenues to send people to get degrees. The ability to use TA/pay to get a degree of your choice and not have it masked levels the playing field for those who want an advanced degree, but aren't interested in the free masters (PME top off programs, AFIT, etc.) the Air Force has to offer.

Who does masking AADs really benefit other than the people who had no intention whatsoever of getting them in the first place?

[BitteEinBit]

Why? Promotions are about the needs of the Air Force, and it is in the tax payers best interest to promote the most qualified person. Whether or not this actually happens is a different thread altogether, but if there are enough people willing to pay to get masters degrees all other things being equal. Why shouldn't they be promoted first? I would argue an AAD is largely viewed everywhere as being a good indicator of future leadership potential.

Who does masking AADs really benefit other than the people who had no intention whatsoever of getting them in the first place?

Here is a concept....how about demonstrated LEADERSHIP as a good indicator of future leadership potential!

If someone has a Master's degree, and in your opinion that means they have good future leadership potential, then their "demonstrated potential" by just having a degree should take care of itself. Whether or not it is masked is irrelevant. Surely you can identify who in your squadron has a Masters just by simply watching their demonstrated leadership abilities.

"That is a take charge kind of guy, he must have a Master's degree"

See, it's that simple....

The real question should be: Who does the unmasked Masters really help other than the douche bag with absolutely no leadership or social skills who would never get promoted based on leadership and performance alone...works both ways. Performance should be your first indicator of potential...a Master's degree in basketweaving doesn't make a leader...

Edited because I have a Master's degree but still can't spell worth a shit...

Edited October 20, 2011 by BitteEinBit

[pawnman]

Why? Promotions are about the needs of the Air Force, and it is in the tax payers best interest to promote the most qualified person. Whether or not this actually happens is a different thread altogether, but if there are enough people willing to pay to get masters degrees all other things being equal. Why shouldn't they be promoted first? I would argue an AAD is largely viewed everywhere as being a good indicator of future leadership potential.

Just because TA is getting reduced doesn't mean that you have to pay to get a masters degree. The Air Force has tons of avenues to send people to get degrees. The ability to use TA/pay to get a degree of your choice and not have it masked levels the playing field for those who want an advanced degree, but aren't interested in the free masters (PME top off programs, AFIT, etc.) the Air Force has to offer.

Who does masking AADs really benefit other than the people who had no intention whatsoever of getting them in the first place?

The English used to do this too...letting privileged people buy their rank. I don't think that led to the best leaders then, and I don't think it will now. Hell, why don't I just go ahead and write a check to my rating official so I can get promoted.

Edit to add: I don't see the cut they plan on making having a big impact. They aren't eliminating it...TA for Master's classes will go from $250/hr to $225/hr. Oh no, $75 a class? I don't see a large drop in TUI's enrollment anytime soon. I do see a mass exodus coming, but that's a different issue.

Edited October 20, 2011 by pawnman

[Wandering Dog]

Can't resist.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Luther

[Magellan]

Here is a concept....how about demonstrated LEADERSHIP as a good indicator of future leadership potential!

If someone has a Master's degree, and in your opinion that means they have good future leadership potential, then their "demonstrated potential" by just having a degree should take care of itself. Whether or not it is masked is irrelevant. Surely you can identify who in your squadron has a Masters just by simply watching their demonstrated leadership abilities.

"That is a take charge kind of guy, he must have a Master's degree"

See, it's that simple....

The real question should be: Who does the unmasked Masters really help other than the douche bag with absolutely no leadership or social skills who would never get promoted based on leadership and performance alone...works both ways. Performance should be your first indicator of potential...a Master's degree in basketweaving doesn't make a leader...

Edited because I have a Master's degree but still can't spell worth a shit...

Guess you missed the line in there that said, "all other things being equal." That said right now perhaps too much emphasis is being placed on masters degree, and I think that is the point you are trying to make. An example that comes to mind is a WG/CC or OG/CC that sets a policy of you must have a masters to get a DP. So effectively the commander has eliminated the category of DP without an AAD. That is a foul in my opinion if the board is already going to factor in AADs.

That said I think AADs being should be considered as part of the process, but you have to consider where is the pendulum at currently. Right now it is probably fair to say the Air Force is putting too much emphasis on tying masters degrees to promotions. Which is probably what is driving people in droves to get the basket weaving degrees, and the current TA program coupled with for profit schools has started to make having an AAD less and less meaningful. I think this is probably the first step in the start of the pendulum swinging back the other way.

The English used to do this too...letting privileged people buy their rank.

I think comparing paying for a masters degree to the bribing a feudal lord for rank is like comparing apples to homing pigeons. My point was that allowing people to use TA or pay for their own AADs helps them to stand shoulder to shoulder with guys that do the DL Masters, AFIT, etc. while pursuing a degree that interests them. Because lets face it we don't need just people with Science and Engineering and/or Military History/Leadership degrees in the upper echelons. Having a few people around with MBAs or other degrees that the Air Force doesn't put on a silver platter isn't a bad idea.

[HiFlyer]

Well, whenever the govt raises the rates, the tuition costs go up by the same amount. So, I expect the colleges to lower their prices to keep the business. Right??

[pawnman]

Guess you missed the line in there that said, "all other things being equal." That said right now perhaps too much emphasis is being placed on masters degree, and I think that is the point you are trying to make. An example that comes to mind is a WG/CC or OG/CC that sets a policy of you must have a masters to get a DP. So effectively the commander has eliminated the category of DP without an AAD. That is a foul in my opinion if the board is already going to factor in AADs.

That said I think AADs being should be considered as part of the process, but you have to consider where is the pendulum at currently. Right now it is probably fair to say the Air Force is putting too much emphasis on tying masters degrees to promotions. Which is probably what is driving people in droves to get the basket weaving degrees, and the current TA program coupled with for profit schools has started to make having an AAD less and less meaningful. I think this is probably the first step in the start of the pendulum swinging back the other way.

I think comparing paying for a masters degree to the bribing a feudal lord for rank is like comparing apples to homing pigeons. My point was that allowing people to use TA or pay for their own AADs helps them to stand shoulder to shoulder with guys that do the DL Masters, AFIT, etc. while pursuing a degree that interests them. Because lets face it we don't need just people with Science and Engineering and/or Military History/Leadership degrees in the upper echelons. Having a few people around with MBAs or other degrees that the Air Force doesn't put on a silver platter isn't a bad idea.

Agreed, and I hope you're right. The comparison was in relation to your comment:

but if there are enough people willing to pay to get masters degrees all other things being equal

implying that I have to buy my way into a promotion.

[spaw2001]

Why? Promotions are about the needs of the Air Force, and it is in the tax payers best interest to promote the most qualified person. Whether or not this actually happens is a different thread altogether, but if there are enough people willing to pay to get masters degrees all other things being equal. Why shouldn't they be promoted first? I would argue an AAD is largely viewed everywhere as being a good indicator of future leadership potential.

Just because TA is getting reduced doesn't mean that you have to pay to get a masters degree. The Air Force has tons of avenues to send people to get degrees. The ability to use TA/pay to get a degree of your choice and not have it masked levels the playing field for those who want an advanced degree, but aren't interested in the free masters (PME top off programs, AFIT, etc.) the Air Force has to offer.

Who does masking AADs really benefit other than the people who had no intention whatsoever of getting them in the first place?

Yeah, don't get me wrong, I am a big proponent of educated officers. I have ranted and raved in other threads about the f'd up AF education process. The check the box system the Air Force has now and the limited opportunity for ops folks to get a prestigious degree is insanely short-sighted. A lot of my peers are getting out of the Army at this point (I was a cross-commissioner) and cruising into Harvard, U of Chicago, Dartmouth etc...Further, the Army has programs very early in careers to send folks back to get masters degrees at good schools. Also, teaching at West Point is considered a good career move unlike teaching at USAFA for AF pilots. So, while our peers are out getting great degrees, the Air Force flying community is stuck getting online degrees and wondering if TUI is going to keep their accredidation. Yes, I know that one could argue that pilots don't necessarily need prestigious degrees, but do infantry officers need these degrees? No..but the other services seem to have a better grasp that educating their officers and building more credentialed individuals is an investment into the profession and ensuring military officership is considered elite...The Air Force tends to boil everything down to technical necessity...This is bullshit because educating people (outside of AFIT and Maxwell) expands people's horizons and builds more thoughtful, perspective-rich decision-makers.

Now, off that soap box....there is a fundamental problem with the "pay to play" promotion process. Essentially, it fosters an environment where people knock out a degree out of necessity rather than for the actual interest in knowledge. Further, how do we measure this? So, I chose to use my GI Bill and TA to get a MBA at a reputable school. I did it for me and future options, but does that mean the Air Force should favor me more than someone that got a check the box? What I say, and I actually briefed this at SOS, is we should eliminate the "requirement" to get a masters before Major promotion. Eliminate TA altogether for O's. During the Capt years, people are assessed based on technical skills and leadership potential alone. When the most talented folks are selected for IDE in residence, then the Air Force should have a much broader selection of schools outside of the military education structure. These should include top-tier civilian schools. This serves 3 main purposes. First, it is a carrot to keep people in. Second, it broadens horizons for military leaders. Third, it reduces wasteful education spending (i.e. TA on for profits) and replaces it with real, worthwhile education.

Edited October 20, 2011 by spaw2001

[FlyingBull]

...and I actually briefed this at SOS...

Did BQZip help with the slides or were you his competition for DG?

But seriously I like your idea.

[matmacwc]

Stop it, if they don't pay, they won't expect it, it just may take a bit for that to happen.

[brabus]

Stop it, if they don't pay, they won't expect it, it just may take a bit for that to happen.

2. Let it die, it's only a matter of time before enough people complain about how unfair it is that the AF forces them to pay 10 grand to get a masters if they want to be promoted. Then it'll degenerate into allegations that someone got promoted over someone else because they're single and have more money than the other dude with 5 kids. It'll happen...and then this horse shit masters req will go away.

[i.o.w.a]

Is it too optimistic to think these cuts will free up funding that prevents cuts in other areas? Cut a little TA and a lot of TIB and perhaps prevent cuts to TDY budgets? If I had to pick between helping the entire Air Force get bullshit degrees versus a couple of crews doing an OST flight to Red Devil LZ, I say let's go practice some mountain flying. I understand the budget is a complicated thing and it never works this way but please just lie to me and tell me I get to go to Colorado now.

[Herk Driver]

I got my masters from a state school and it still costed $1000 per credit hr.

Obviously money well spent.

Stop it, if they don't pay, they won't expect it, it just may take a bit for that to happen.

Uh, No. This is just back to the way it was in the early and mid-90's when you only got 75% TA, unless you were in a missile silo. And later that was determined to be not IAW the regs so they went ahead and gave 100% TA to all. That was also back in the day when only about 85% got promoted to Major IIRC.

Edited October 21, 2011 by Herk Driver

[BitteEinBit]

Guess you missed the line in there that said, "all other things being equal." .

Oh no, I didn't miss the line. Part of the original point was that you end up buying your distinction so you CAN stand out when all else is equal...I was only pointing out that "standing out" because you have a Master's degree doesn't make you a better leader or even a leader at all...and certainly not worthy of promotion above someone else simply because you have a degree. That is just my opinion...the Air Force obviously looks at it differently. Get your degree and stand out...that is what the Air Force expects.

That said right now perhaps too much emphasis is being placed on masters degree, and I think that is the point you are trying to make.

No, that wasn't the point I was trying to make, although I do agree with that statement. The point I was trying to make is that you are asking why shouldn't someone with a Master's degree be promoted over someone without one "all other things equal"...and my answer is: A Masters in basket weaving degree doesn't make a leader...

[Rusty Pipes]

Yes, I know that one could argue that pilots don't necessarily need prestigious degrees, but do infantry officers need these degrees? No..but the other services seem to have a better grasp that educating their officers and building more credentialed individuals is an investment into the profession and ensuring military officership is considered elite...

Let's be realistic here though, it would be fantastic if the AF would follow the lead of other services that do this for everyone, but they are only willing to do this for their "fast burners!" This would decimate the pilot force in the long run. Hell, it would decimate the entire officer corps! Hmmm... I'm a crew dawg with a 10 yr ADSC that the AF will pay to send to Harvard or Stanford for a few years to get an MBA? So after getting kicked in the junk since 9/11 with deployments and shoe clerk buffoonery, not only do I have an option of going to fly for Southwest or FedEx... I have an MBA from Harvard!!! The AF gives pilots enough reasons to get out ASAP already, making the folks they need to keep the most even more marketable on the outside doesn't help their retention rates.

And seriously... If someone is forking out some decent coin out of pocket to get a legit degree from a good school, 99.9% of them aren't doing it because they think it will make them better officers over their 20 yr military career or to help establish a better educated officer force. I would have loved to have used TA to get a real degree in something I was actually interested in, but not only are we telling guys that they need a Masters, they are saying that they will be looking at WHEN you got it! So I flushed thousands of taxpayer dollars and way too many hours that I could have spent with my family down the toilet to get a completely useless and unwanted Embry Riddle degree that most certainly didn't make me a better officer or leader!!!

Edited October 21, 2011 by Rusty Pipes

[BitteEinBit]

Let's be realistic here though, it would be fantastic if the AF would follow the lead of other services that do this for everyone, but they are only willing to do this for their "fast burners!" This would decimate the pilot force in the long run. Hell, it would decimate the entire officer corps! Hmmm... I'm a crew dawg with a 10 yr ADSC that the AF will pay to send to Harvard or Stanford for a few years to get an MBA? So after getting kicked in the junk since 9/11 with deployments and shoe clerk buffoonery, not only do I have an option of going to fly for Southwest or FedEx... I have an MBA from Harvard!!! The AF gives pilots enough reasons to get out ASAP already, making the folks they need to keep the most even more marketable on the outside doesn't help their retention rates.

And seriously... If someone is forking out some decent coin out of pocket to get a legit degree from a good school, 99.9% of them aren't doing it because they think it will make them better officers over their 20 yr military career or to help establish a better educated officer force. I would have loved to have used TA to get a real degree in something I was actually interested in, but not only are we telling guys that they need a Masters, they are saying that they will be looking at WHEN you got it! So I flushed thousands of taxpayer dollars and way too many hours that I could have spent with my family down the toilet to get a completely useless and unwanted Embry Riddle degree that most certainly didn't make me a better officer or leader!!!

Rusty, I've reached my quota for liking quotes today, but great post. You make an EXCELLENT point regarding retention. The Air Force has this idea that if they groom and take care of the "best and the brightest" that those individuals will somehow maintain a loyalty to the Air Force and stay in until 20 and beyond. A lot of them will stay, but a lot of the "best and brightest" are going to take their talents to the outside just like they have been for years if the opportunity presents itself. It is not a new concept at all. The only reason we have an overage and the AF is forced to make cuts today is because the economy sucks on the outside. When the economy recovers, not only will the Air Force not have its base of experienced SNCOs and officers that they RIFd, but their "best and brightest" will also take their talents elsewhere...

That is good news for the young folks coming in though...opportunities for advancement will be great, they'll send them to school, they'll call them their "best and brightest," and when given the chance, they too will flock to greener pastures...and the cycle continues.

[spaw2001]

Ha..thanks for the english lesson Herk.."me fail english, thats unpossible..."

And yes, I agree with Brabus that the Air Force would have a difficult time telling people how to best spend their money...But there seems to be unwritten examples of this anyway: 1. Masters degree basically required for IDE consideration 1st look 2. AD folks applying to pilot training boards essentially require a private pilots license

[HeloDude]

A Masters in basket weaving degree doesn't make a leader...

Agreed...but getting a masters degree because leadership told you to helps them determine who the 'yes men' are--and that's what the upper level leadership is looking for in terms of who to promote.

[spaw2001]

Let's be realistic here though, it would be fantastic if the AF would follow the lead of other services that do this for everyone, but they are only willing to do this for their "fast burners!" This would decimate the pilot force in the long run. Hell, it would decimate the entire officer corps! Hmmm... I'm a crew dawg with a 10 yr ADSC that the AF will pay to send to Harvard or Stanford for a few years to get an MBA? So after getting kicked in the junk since 9/11 with deployments and shoe clerk buffoonery, not only do I have an option of going to fly for Southwest or FedEx... I have an MBA from Harvard!!! The AF gives pilots enough reasons to get out ASAP already, making the folks they need to keep the most even more marketable on the outside doesn't help their retention rates.

And seriously... If someone is forking out some decent coin out of pocket to get a legit degree from a good school, 99.9% of them aren't doing it because they think it will make them better officers over their 20 yr military career or to help establish a better educated officer force. I would have loved to have used TA to get a real degree in something I was actually interested in, but not only are we telling guys that they need a Masters, they are saying that they will be looking at WHEN you got it! So I flushed thousands of taxpayer dollars and way too many hours that I could have spent with my family down the toilet to get a completely useless and unwanted Embry Riddle degree that most certainly didn't make me a better officer or leader!!!

Some good points for sure, but I don't think the AF consciously says, "Let's not qualify/train our folks too much because then they'll leave." It probably all comes down to costs...And then, that is a whole different topic because we all know TA is a waste for officers, but it looks cheap on paper..Only 250 per credit hour. It would be tough for the AF to justify paying the 150K per officer for an ivy league MBA. Also, I think it is difficult to really say who would "Stay and leave" based on the good deals and education investment the Air Force decides to give to an individual. I have met people across the spectrum from "fast burner" to shitbag decide to stay in or get out...It is a very personal matter. I for one, would stay in if they offered to send me to get a Harvard MBA/MPA and then go teach at USAFA as a stepping stone to future leadership positions (this is similar to a viable Army career route). Other people may dismiss such an opportunity because they want to stay in the cockpit. But no, instead, they force virtually all pilots to stay in flying billets until the 10-yr commitment is up, treating senior CGOs and junior FGOs as simple stick actuators. Then, they get around to sending 20% to Maxwell or, if you are lucky Joint school (which is still a bullshit military education). The rest then get the privilege of doing ACSC in correspondence. Wow...what an amazing confidence and leadership building program (all from the comfort of your computer)! I am not trying to sound aloof, but I am just tired of the Air Force throwing money around with all these ridiculous half-assed programs that look good on paper but provide little real, actual value to the member.