a. How was your experience here at Ft Benning?
The course has been a great experience and I really have enjoyed my time
at Ft Benning. I really think this course have changed and developed me, as a
person, a future commander and an officer.
b. What aspects of MCCC surprised you the most?
The US Army way of doing things differs on quite a few areas from what I´m used to from back home. The difference is not so much a question of what we do, but how we do. I´m used to a much broader perspective on mission command and initiative, a more indirect approach to problems and objectives, coordination instead of synchronization, and less micro management.
In the beginning of the course those contrasts were like a filter which made it very hard to understand the benefits from all details and structure the Army methods and TTPs are forged by. When I later could combine what I learned at the course, with experiences from my sons school here in Columbus, and with an increased understanding of American values and way of life, it all suddenly made perfect sense.
The US Army way of doing things differs on quite a few areas from what I´m used to from back home. The difference is not so much a question of what we do, but how we do. I´m used to a much broader perspective on mission command and initiative, a more indirect approach to problems and objectives, coordination instead of synchronization, and less micro management.
In the beginning of the course those contrasts were like a filter which made it very hard to understand the benefits from all details and structure the Army methods and TTPs are forged by. When I later could combine what I learned at the course, with experiences from my sons school here in Columbus, and with an increased understanding of American values and way of life, it all suddenly made perfect sense.
c. What training received from MCCC was most beneficial for you?
The most valuable training for me at the course was the IPB, MDMP, and
Targeting processes.
d. How might MCCC be improved to better serve the Maneuver Officer?
v The SGL system has some weaknesses:
the perspective you get as a student in most cases is very “single minded”. The
idea might be that the students should share their experiences as well and
thereby broaden the perspective, but I would argue that this just working to a
limited extent. Too many students simply avoid expressing ideas and opinions
that are conflicting with the one of the SGL.
Furthermore; with just the same SGL for a whole phase I get the feeling that the areas that the SGL is weak on don´t get all the attention it deserve. This problem doesn´t matter so much in company phase as in battalion phase, because we briefed other SGLs, starting already at A2.
Furthermore; with just the same SGL for a whole phase I get the feeling that the areas that the SGL is weak on don´t get all the attention it deserve. This problem doesn´t matter so much in company phase as in battalion phase, because we briefed other SGLs, starting already at A2.
v The quizzes or tests that were given
during the course are in most cases under all critique. They mainly address the
simplest type of knowledge; memorizing lists of different fundamentals without
making sure students know when and how to utilize them. The fact that about
half of the questions are of multiple choice type, doesn´t increase the quality
of the test either.
The above said, together with the very specific study guides that are given before every quiz, encourages a very shallow form of learning and one can have strong suspicions that most of the students don´t remember any of those lists except SOSRA, AGADAP and a few other that were used frequently during the course´s practical training.
One could argue that the tests are mainly for learning where to get the information, but that argument is not true, because a great majority of students uses study guides and not field manuals. (Whit a “open book” type of tests you might address this a little bit more.)
During company phase, there were two quizzes in each marginal and the second one of those two, designed as a practical exercise, made a lot more sense to me than the other ones. Those PE-type of tests really made you show that you understand what you are doing!
My overall impression is that the tests were mainly designed for grading (even though poorly so) and not to encourage learning.
The above said, together with the very specific study guides that are given before every quiz, encourages a very shallow form of learning and one can have strong suspicions that most of the students don´t remember any of those lists except SOSRA, AGADAP and a few other that were used frequently during the course´s practical training.
One could argue that the tests are mainly for learning where to get the information, but that argument is not true, because a great majority of students uses study guides and not field manuals. (Whit a “open book” type of tests you might address this a little bit more.)
During company phase, there were two quizzes in each marginal and the second one of those two, designed as a practical exercise, made a lot more sense to me than the other ones. Those PE-type of tests really made you show that you understand what you are doing!
My overall impression is that the tests were mainly designed for grading (even though poorly so) and not to encourage learning.
v Battalion phase should come before
company phase. The two main reasons for this is:
1. It gives a broader (and more realistic) perspective and better quality on solutions during company phase if students have a better understanding of the process that drives a company commander’s mission. (I´ve seen both way of arranging the phases as an instructor at home, and is convinced that this way is the most effective.)
2. After Battle Forge people got the feeling that they had passed the course and stopped caring. It was a very different course before and after Battle Forge, and the change was not to the better.
1. It gives a broader (and more realistic) perspective and better quality on solutions during company phase if students have a better understanding of the process that drives a company commander’s mission. (I´ve seen both way of arranging the phases as an instructor at home, and is convinced that this way is the most effective.)
2. After Battle Forge people got the feeling that they had passed the course and stopped caring. It was a very different course before and after Battle Forge, and the change was not to the better.
v For battalion phase to be effective
the staff groups need to be smaller; no more than 6 persons each. Now, too many
people are doing too little during too long time when a seminar of 18 persons
are divided into only two staff groups.
Furthermore, each staff group needs an instructor during the MDMP part of B1-marginal. This might be achieved by borrowing instructors from another team for those couple of days!? It shouldn´t be that difficult to coordinate the schedules of two teams.
Furthermore, each staff group needs an instructor during the MDMP part of B1-marginal. This might be achieved by borrowing instructors from another team for those couple of days!? It shouldn´t be that difficult to coordinate the schedules of two teams.
v The course should direct more time
and effort to develop critical thinking, dealing with leadership issues, and
decision making in difficult situations. More ethics and moral discussions
would be beneficial to most students.
As the course is laid out now, it addresses almost entirely the techniques that a company commander or a battalion staff officer uses and too little on what is the real difficulties; “the burden of command”.
As the course is laid out now, it addresses almost entirely the techniques that a company commander or a battalion staff officer uses and too little on what is the real difficulties; “the burden of command”.
v I think that the course should
benefit from a Cultural marginal. The main focus of this one should be on
military aspects such as different types of TLPs, MDMP, doctrine basics etc.
and most important of all; why different countries do things in a different
way. And if that why can be
explained, the perspectives really opens up.
We international students are getting this to a certain extent just by being here at the course, so the real value of this should be for the American officers, I think.
A marginal like this will enhance the ability to conduct those future multinational joint operations all field grade officers have been talking about on all briefs during the course.
For this, it should be possible to use some of the international students (that are probably a few each course with the ability to conduct such lectures), and some of all those liaison officers from different countries that are stationed in the US (there are probably a few at Ft Benning as well!?).
We international students are getting this to a certain extent just by being here at the course, so the real value of this should be for the American officers, I think.
A marginal like this will enhance the ability to conduct those future multinational joint operations all field grade officers have been talking about on all briefs during the course.
For this, it should be possible to use some of the international students (that are probably a few each course with the ability to conduct such lectures), and some of all those liaison officers from different countries that are stationed in the US (there are probably a few at Ft Benning as well!?).
e. How does MCCC compare to the education of Maneuver Captains in your
Army?
The overall layout of the courses is about the same. The focus varies a
little. I would say that we focus more on what difficulties you as a commander
may run in to. Not so much in the sense that someone tells you about how you
should do in those situations, but more of what situations that may occur and
why. This is usually embedded into the tactical training and it runs as at theme
through the whole course.
We also focus much less on grading and teaching. Emphasis is on that the students are learning, and they have to take a lot more own responsibility for that than I experienced here.
We also focus much less on grading and teaching. Emphasis is on that the students are learning, and they have to take a lot more own responsibility for that than I experienced here.
f.
What was the most valuable
experience you received while attending the MCCC?
My overall conclusion and biggest takeaway from the course, besides all the knowledge of TLPs and MDMP, is the great impact cultural aspects have on military organizations and the way they conduct business.
My overall conclusion and biggest takeaway from the course, besides all the knowledge of TLPs and MDMP, is the great impact cultural aspects have on military organizations and the way they conduct business.
g. What personal experience in combat (or in training) have you had which
future students might benefit from? What did you learn from that experience
andhow will you apply those lessons during your career?
NIL
NIL
h. What advice would you offer to Maneuver Captains and the US Army?
I think the Army should seek more education and training abroad for officers and NCOs. Not so much for learning new things, but to learn to interact with other cultures. Having international students at a course like this is a good start, but it is not enough.
Since Americans as a people don´t travel much abroad, you don´t have that cultural awareness as a natural component in your ranks. And try to gain that awareness while someone is trying to kill you in an AO is probably a little bit too late for being very successive.
I think the Army should seek more education and training abroad for officers and NCOs. Not so much for learning new things, but to learn to interact with other cultures. Having international students at a course like this is a good start, but it is not enough.
Since Americans as a people don´t travel much abroad, you don´t have that cultural awareness as a natural component in your ranks. And try to gain that awareness while someone is trying to kill you in an AO is probably a little bit too late for being very successive.
i.
Would ou like to add anything else
regarding your experience at MCCC and Ft Benning?
¨ The preparation course at IMSO is
absolutely critical for international students. It is sufficient in both time
and in content as it is now. It is not necessary to cover both TLPs and MDMP
during that course, it just has to stick to what´s going to be the content in
the first phase of MCCC.
¨ The A6 marginal (Training
Management) is of no, or very little, value to international students. If
possible, synchronize with IMSO so, that for example, the Washington DC trip is
done during this marginal.
¨ A “fieldtrip” to visit an American
unit during training would be very beneficial for international students in
order to help us to visualize the American way of conduct the things we learn
about in classes. I think this will help to see trough that cultural filter I
wrote about earlier.
Finally, I
like to thank the US Army, and specifically the Maneuver Center of Excellence,
and Ft Benning for a very interesting half a year.
Cpt Håkan
Broström
Swedish Armed Forces
Swedish Armed Forces
Inga kommentarer:
Skicka en kommentar