Page images

permits, while 36 hours are used for theoretical instruction in the classroom. The primary purpose is to teach the fundamentals of military tactics, and, through disciplinary training, to develop organization and teamwork. The basis upon which the course is offered is entirely a matter for institutional decision. At present the course is required of freshmen and sophomores at 80 of the 126 institutions maintaining senior units of the Reserve Officers' Training Corps.

The advanced course is entirely optional and operates on a schedule of five hours per week for both junior and senior years. In addition, the trainees must pledge themselves to attend one 6-week training camp during the summer following completion of their junior year. The aim of the advanced course is to give specialized instruction in that branch of service chosen by the candidate for commission, and to afford practical training in leadership and command. The course is more technical in nature than the basic work, which consists largely of tactical training.

The following study reports the results of a questionnaire sent only to graduates who completed the basic and the advanced R. O. T. C. courses. In view of their experience with the entire R. 0. T. C. curriculum they should be well qualified to evaluate educationally the course as a whole. However, it is realized that those graduates who took only the basic course, either voluntarily or as a requirement, may have an entirely different estimate of the value of military training, and of the wisdom of including it as a curriculum requirement. It is not expected that conclusions can be drawn covering so controversial a question as optional versus required training without a special study of the views of this group. It is hoped that this study may be followed by an inquiry to college graduates who took the basic course, voluntarily or as a requirement, but who did not elect the advanced training.


A questionnaire containing 8 principal questions was sent out to 16,416 graduates of the 1920 to 1930 classes, inclusive, of the 54 institutions selected, accompanied by a letter from the Commissioner of Education, urging compliance. The names and addresses were gathered from college catalogues, alumni association offices, and the Adjutant General's files. The extent of the inquiry among graduates of a specific institution was largely based on the size of the institution and the number of R. O. T. C. units maintained. The exception to this was the smaller college, whose entire graduate list was usually covered. Where graduate lists appeared exceptionally large certain classes were arbitrarily left out of consideration. For instance, the

1 The returns from the University of Washington are an exception.

1923, 1925, and 1930 classes of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology are not represented in the replies, and neither are the 1929 and 1930 classes of Drexel Institute, nor the 1923 or 1924 classes of the Virginia Military Institute. Considerable variation in the number of inquiries made was also caused by the difficulty of obtaining either names or accurate addresses. In every case, care was exercised to assure that the lists used were a random sampling of the whole number.

Every care was taken in formulating the questionnaire to avoid suggesting or influencing the answers. Sufficient space was allowed on the questionnaire for the amplification of remarks on any phase of military education, and such space was used by the large majority of graduates. It was realized that possibly there would be those unable to give direct "yes" or "no" answers to one or more questions, and the tabulations did show that such modifications occurred; but that question which elicited the greatest tendency to make such modifications was, “In your opinion does the R. O.T.C. course of instruction tend to produce a militaristic attitude inimical to world peace ?” Where answers were qualified they were not counted in the tabulation. Where replies under the last question were not marked in the space provided, but expounded directly below in the space designated “Remarks" the manifest intent was the guide as to their classification.

A wide geographical sampling of institutions was made, 39 States and the Districi of Columbia were represented. The selections were made with the assistance of the Office of Education for the purpose of covering at least one institution in each State and obtaining a representative sampling of each type of R. O. T. C. institution. All types of senior Reserve Officer Training Corps units were included except the institution organized essentially as a military school. The R. O. T. C. men reached are those who have received their training under varying educational conditions and who have entered various callings. While extension of the investigation back to a period earlier than 1920 would have been desirable, such a plan would have called for separate treatment. An investigation that went back that far would not have been applicable to the R. O. T. C. as it now exists. The questionnaire follows.

2 Culver Military Academy, New Mexico Military Academy, and Oklahoma Military Academy are the three institutions of this type.

United States Department of the Interior

Office of Education
Washington, D. C.


1. In your opinion, has the R. O. T. C. military course of study a definite educational value of its own?

Check: Yes

No 2. Did the R. O. T. C. contribute anything important or unique to your education?


3. How did the quality of the R. O. T. C. courses, as respect to content and
organization, compare with other courses given at your institution?

Below average in quality.
Average in quality -

Above average in quality --
4. From your own experience was the time you spent on the training justified
by the results obtained?


5. In your opinion, did military training aid or make easier the development in
your own life of one or more of the qualities or characteristics listed below:


-( ).

..( ) Orderliness.

-( ) Disciplinary value..

) Others (please indicate):

( )


--( )
6. In what way, if any, has the military education you have received been of

economic value to you since graduation? (More than one item may be

In improving physical development.-----( )
In helping to obtain first employment ---( )
Give any other reason if you have one:


7. In your opinion does the R. O. T. C. course of instruction tend to produce a militaristic attitude inimical to world peace?


No 8. Judging by your own experience: (a) Do you favor the R. O. T. C. as a required subject for the first two years of college?



[ocr errors]

(6) Would you make the entire course optional?


(c) Would you abolish the R. O. T. C. from collegiate institutions?


No. 9. Remarks: (Please express yourself freely on any phase of collegiate military


Please give calendar years in which you took collegiate military training. 19.-- 19---- 19.-- 19---


The following 54 institutions contributed to this study. They are classified according to their several types as indicated by the abbreviations given. L. G. =land-grant college or university; S. =State university; M. = municipal university; M. C. = military college, essentially; P. = privately controlled or endowed universities and colleges. The table also indicates those schools in which R. O. T. C. training is required and those in which it is elective. The number of graduates of these institutions of whom inquiry was made is given, also the number and percentage of replies received from these graduates.

List of institutions included in this study

[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]


Alabama Polytechnic Institute..
University of Arizona
University of California (Berkeley)
Carnegie Institute of Technology.
University of Cincinnati..
Colorado Agricultural College.
Cornell University
Davidson College.
University of Delaware.
De Pauw University..
Drexel Institute.
University of Florida
Georgetown University,
Georgia School of Technology
University of Georgia ----



126 631 182 256 141

85 395 133 124 114

67.2 62.5 73. 0 48. 4 80.8

100572°-32 -2


L. G.

L. G.

L. G.


do. Elective Required.


73 224 175 555 265

47 148 108 323 151

64. 3 66.0 61.7 58. 1 56.9

List of institutions included in this study-Continued

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

67.3 61.9 64.0 47.4 40.0


do. L. G.

P. Elective..

7 241


68 473

39 250 66

16, 416

10, 166


1270 four-year men; 348 two-year men.
2 94 four-year men; 147 two-year men.
3 34.3 per cent 4-year men; 42.2 per cent 2-year men,
• Received after final tabulation.

« ՆախորդըՇարունակել »