Download PDF
Commander Douglas M. Morea, USN, was a student in the Joint Advanced Warfighting School at the Joint Forces Staff College.
Education has been a top focus in the United States since its earliest days. The Nation’s leaders have recognized the importance of dedicated, formal military education for over two hundred years. Although training in the field, wartime experience, and studying the military profession in foreign countries provided benefits, leaders such as George Washington, Henry Knox, and Alexander Hamilton understood more was needed. The United States would fail in the face of future challenges if its military leaders were not well-versed in the art and science of war.
What began with the United States Military Academy in 1802 quickly evolved into the vast professional military education (PME) network present today. The late 19th century saw the creation of Service schools like the U.S. Naval War College and the U.S. Army Command and General Staff College. By the early 20th century, these Service-specific schools had begun to open their doors to other branches. By World War II, the military began to consider the joint perspective with the opening of the Army-Navy Staff College (which evolved into the Joint Forces Staff College and National Defense University). These institutions of higher officer learning were initially designed to provide formal education separate from a Servicemember’s daily routine. Joint professional military education (JPME) was not different.
Temporarily removing military officers from operational duties to attend PME was—and still is—a force multiplier for the U.S. military. However, due to quota limitations, increased throughput require- ments, career constraints, and operational needs, most U.S. military officers are currently educated outside of the class- room through nonresident means. While assigned to a unit for an officer’s primary duty responsibility, they are still expected to meet educational requirements. With the passing of the Goldwater-Nichols Department of Defense Reorganization Act of 1986, JPME became a statutory requirement for promotion to certain ranks and to be assigned to joint duty. Yet the current structure of nonresident JPME I prevents officers from performing well in such positions.
As highlighted by the Joint Chiefs of Staff in their 2020 memorandum, JPME is a key enabler of successful joint operations and maintaining an “intellectual overmatch against adversaries.”1 However, nonresident JPME I does not adequately prepare field-grade officers for joint operations due to current delivery methods. Field-grade officers are already overtasked with primary duty responsibilities, and that is before they even start their after-hours schoolwork. Nonresident courses also make it virtually impossible to engage in any sort of joint acculturation. According to Federal law, JPME is an “environment designed to promote a theoretical and practical in-depth understanding,” but the distance programs offer none.2 As such, a more effective nonresident JPME-I course must be developed to allow officers to effectively learn course material and familiarize themselves with other Services to adequately prepare for joint duty. This could be accomplished by creating a shortened distance learning course that officers can complete as a primary duty, followed by a brief in-resident joint acculturation seminar.
To accomplish this, JPME I needs to split from Service-specific intermediate- level education (ILE). Divorcing JPME I from ILE would require a change in Federal law, but it would facilitate shorter JPME-I courses, allowing nonresident JPME-I programs to focus exclusively on JPME-I subject matter. Current Federal law dictates that JPME-I subject matter include the following items:
- National Military Strategy
- joint planning at all levels of war
- joint doctrine
- joint command and control
- joint force and joint requirements development
- operational contract support.3
As such, course duration must be set to deliver this course material while con- sidering the issues adequately. A course too short in duration could negatively affect the joint force, whereas a course too long could impact the Services and individual officers. The target course length should be 6 weeks to meet this desired outcome, corresponding to 1 week per topic. A 2020 study conducted at Santa Monica College and a 2006 article in the Journal of Economics and Finance Education both found that civilian students performed better in shorter courses, typically in the 4-to-6-week range. There is no reason these results would not carry over to military officers.4 Although this could present challenges for the Services and individual officers by requiring of- ficers to complete JPME I and ILE at different times, it would better meet the intent of the Goldwater-Nichols Act.
A 6-week nonresident program, followed by 2 weeks of in-person joint acculturation, would allow for an inten- sive dive into content while giving the Services enough flexibility to support dedicated instruction for their officers. It would enable an officer to complete all JPME I as a full-time student—not an officer, student, spouse, and parent all at the same time. Ideally, this would occur between assignments.
This 8-week hybrid course (6 non-resident, 2 in person) would provide each officer student the best of both worlds but in a more manageable method. The goal would be a standardized JPME-I course that would work for all Services. Like current nonresident programs, most instruction would still come from asynchronous modules, weekly readings, and virtual classroom lectures. It would give officers more time to familiarize themselves with joint matters and then acculturate during their in-resident pro- gram. In restructuring the nonresident approach to earning JPME-I credit through dedicated means, the expected outcome would:
- better assist the joint force by ensuring officers understand JPME-I subject matter, attend joint duty as JPME-I-complete, and prove competent in the joint environment
- benefit the Services by allowing officers to keenly focus on their primary duties
- improve individual officers’ quality of life and output by providing a better work-life balance and environment for learning joint matters
- allow for actual joint acculturation.
Officers serving in the U.S. military today face several challenges, including the most globally unstable international environment since the Cold War. Yet the size of U.S. military personnel numbers has been reduced by one-third since the end of the Cold War. The operating tempo has not subsided, however, which has placed a significant strain on Servicemembers and their families. In addition to grueling operational requirements, officers must lead subordinates, manage departments, and be tactical experts. A 50-hour workweek is not uncommon for these men and women. There is little room—if any—to add requirements to an officer’s demanding and compact schedule.
Field-grade officers who do not complete JPME I in residence will spend roughly 1 to 3 years completing a nonresident program. With most intermediate-level Service schools requiring students to complete 8 to 10 hours of coursework per week, an officer can be expected to undertake up to 60-hour workweeks. In addition to the personal challenges this presents, the long duration of each course and the after-hours commitment are not conducive to fully absorbing course material, leading to cognitive overload and inefficient recall. Furthermore, limited interaction among officers in nonresident programs prevents joint acculturation.
These factors do not impact only nonresident JPME-I students. Poor joint education creates officers who will not benefit the joint force. Besides that, their primary duty assignments will suffer. If officers add 8 to 10 hours a week on top of their already grueling schedule, their performance will likely suffer professionally and academically. Just as important, the after-hours requirement affects the quality of life of nonresident JPME-I students and their families—a concern that should not be overlooked when considering the ever-increasing challenges associated with mental health and retention.
In their current state, nonresident JPME-I programs do not fulfill the spirit of the Goldwater-Nichols Act or the Department of Defense’s vision. The current nonresident program exists to fulfill the letter of Federal law. But it is just checking the box. By developing a dedicated, albeit abbreviated, hybrid JPME-I program, field-grade officers can earn JPME-I credit as full-time students. For the price of only 8 weeks and temporary duty travel expenses, the benefits for the joint force would outweigh the costs and improve the product. The U.S. military could have a force educated jointly or a force that can produce a joint certificate—it is the military’s choice. JFQ