Recent discussions have suggested that we should all visit the USNA in order to evaluate conditions there, since many of us have not been back for a number of years. I endorse the idea. Recently I paid such a visit, and I was pleasantly surprised to find that observed conditions are better today than they were on my last visit of some two years ago. In fact, I have changed some of my ideas about progress being made.

Now it is true that this was no surprise visit, and there is always the possibility that I was viewing a carefully stacked deck. That may be so; I certainly received kid-glove treatment. But it is hard to blow smoke up an old smoke-blower, and I think I was able to separate fact from fiction.

My reasons for the visit were threefold: (1) To conduct a personal tour for an outstanding prospective candidate, a 16 year old grandson of a friend of long standing, (2) To meet for the first time the Midshipman 3/c granddaughter of my USNA roommate, and (3) to sit in on a Leadership class.

I followed the Superintendent's instructions for arranging visits to USNA academic programs: Ask the Dean for permission, specify the time and date of visit, and specify the desired subject of the class to be visited. An email to Dean Miller set the wheels in motion, and I was soon emailed from a representative of the Leadership Department, with schedule and agenda for the proposed meeting.

In addition, I asked a local Classmate to arrange for a visit to the 5th Company wardroom [Our class of '45 is sponsor of the 5th Company]. And, of course, I sent an email to my roomie's granddaughter and set up a mutually agreeable time to meet with her.

We began with a walking tour of the Yard [just the three of us]: Chapel, Dahlgren Hall (now with ice rink), Halsey Fieldhouse, Visitor Center, Mem Hall, Rotunda, etc. Everything looks fine, even on a gray, overcast day. Somehow, I didn't remember the Chapel bells striking Westminister chimes to mark the time. I do remember the clock tower in Mahan Hall striking ship's bells, and they have been revitalized, but are drowned out by the Chapel bells.

One other note: I was struck by an apparent change in the attitude/appearance of Midshipmen we met along the way. Most of them had heads up, made eye contact, and said clearly, "Good Morning, Sir." That is a remarkable change from my impression of two years ago when I was depressed by large numbers of Mids with eyes on the ground or looking away, with hang-dog expressions, and no sign of a greeting of any kind. Something has happened to spark up the Brigade - even the Plebes. I mentioned this later to LT P----, a Company officer, and he remarked that some things had changed with the new Commandant. Perhaps an elevated esprit is a result.

We met the Youngster granddaughter in the Rotunda. She is a trim, neat, squared-away, pleasant young woman, who responded well to my intense questioning. Actually, she is the first female Mid that I have met "up close and personal," and I must admit that I was impressed by her positive attitude and her obvious liking for the USNA and the military life. [I guess she should. With a Marine father and two Navy Captains for grandfathers, she must have good genes.] We had a pleasant discussion until noon meal formation, when she had to leave and the 5th Company reps came to pick up me and my guests to escort us to lunch in King Hall.

The Company Officer, LT P----, his Enlisted Assistant, and Midshipman 1/c R--- joined us. LT P----, a friendly, pleasant young Naval Officer, introduced us to our escort, Midshipman R---. Mr. R---, a Battalion 4-striper, and former member of the 5th Company, is a tall, handsome, poised, and articulate young man. Most impressive; obviously specially chosen to escort the group. He led us to King Hall and joined us at a 5th Company table, along with 4 Second Class, 3 Youngsters, and 5 Plebes (who had to be rounded up to sit at the guest table, and were very shy throughout the meal).

The meal was uneventful. There was no running of the plebes anywhere. There was plenty of conversation; in fact, the noise level in King Hall rose to a very high decibel count. The meal was Tex-Mex: burritos, black beans, and rice. Salsa and chips. Not very good, but edible. Mr. R--- said we should have visited the previous night, which was the occasion of their annual "Dark Ages Dinner" a great meal calculated to raise morale, and featuring Maine Lobster and Filet Mignon. [Do I hear anyone quietly singing, "Spoiled and Pampered Pets of Uncle Sam."] I took this occasion to observe the female Mids at surrounding tables. They seemed to fit in well and to join in the conversations quite well. I must admit that all I saw were quite "plain," with no overt female or sexual attractiveness apparent. [No real babes were seen.] Of course, they wear no makeup, and hair is put up in some sort of rear pigtail or bun, neit her of which leads to female attractiveness.

Before the start of the meal, announcements were made by the new Commandant, COL John Allen, USMC. He also introduced 24 Third Class Midshipmen who will stand the new honor watch for the John Paul Jones crypt. He said they had waited for months to get additional Marine sentries or civilian Academy Police to stand the guard, but without success, so he decided to make it a Midshipman function and to award the honor to the Youngster Class. He pointed out the significance of Midshipmen guarding the tomb of the Father of the American Navy. His remarks and the new Honor Guard assembled in King Hall were given a rousing and sustained round of applause by the Brigade. COL Allen then came over to our nearby table and introduced himself to me and my guests, and offered his assistance should we want something. He is a most impressive man. I think his choice as Commandant is an excellent one, and we can expect good things to result. [I guess Dean Miller alerted him to our visit, thus setting up his meeting with us at lunch. Nevertheless, it was a gracious and courteous gesture.]

We left King Hall and headed for Luce Hall, where we were to meet with representatives of the Leadership Department. Actually, it is officially The Department of Leadership, Ethics, and Law. On this visit, however, I specified that I wished only to sit in on a Leadership class.

McDonough Hall blocked our way, but since I knew my way through it (I thought) we headed into the side entrance, second deck. Big mistake; McDonough has been radically overhauled since my time there as a Mid when I visited frequently for workouts, boxing, wrestling, and the like. Only the swimming pool remains as before. It seems to be in a rather run-down condition, but I think a complete restoration is planned. We worked our way through dark corridors and ladders, finally to emerge into the daylight and over to Luce Hall, where we were met at the appointed 1315 time by CDR Vazquez, who led us to a second deck conference room for a briefing session before attending a 1430 class.

Thankfully, we were able to get a cup of coffee in the conference room. Here is a warning: If you like a couple of cups of coffee during the morning after your breakfast coffee ration, be prepared to starve during a visit to the USNA. There is no coffee anywhere: not in King Hall [I looked hopefully around], not in the Visitor's Center, nowhere. There was none to be found, period. There are vending machines for Coke and other drinks and snacks everywhere, but none for coffee. Strange. And this man's Navy once ran on bullets, beans, black oil, and coffee. Now black oil and coffee have disappeared. Maybe beans and bullets are also on the way out, to be replaced by missiles and pizza. It's a new world.

Nevertheless, we settled down at a big conference table with plenty of coffee, and CDR Vazquez started a slides and pointer briefing. At this juncture we were joined by ADM Hank Chiles, USN, (Ret.), Class of 1960, who occupies the Distinguished Chair of Leadership. There is also a Chair of Ethics, occupied by a civilian professor, but that was not a part of the program on this visit, so we did not meet him.

I could see that the briefing was to be a standard Dog & Pony Show, so I asked for paper copies of the slides for future study and for a speeded up presentation, which CDR Vazquez did quite well. I knew the briefing was not going to touch on those things that concerned me, so I interrupted frequently with questions. First I stated my desire to know just why GEN Krulak was moved to call the class he visited "Mumbo Jumbo." ADM Chiles replied quickly that he assumed he was referring to an Ethics class. He then explained that Ethics classes are intended to lay the theoretical groundwork for learning the fundamentals of Leadership, therefore they are developed around Aristotle, Kant, and other theorists, psychologists, and philosophers. We agreed that was possibly one of the classes attended by GEN Krulak.

ADM Chiles said he also teaches classes in the Ethics program, but most of the instructors are from the civilian side, whereas most of the Leadership professors are Naval Officers. The curriculum was described as a gradual, four year assessment of the theory and practice of good leadership. It starts with instruction in Human Behavior (Know yourself) during Plebe Summer and Plebe Year, followed by Ethics courses (Moral Development) in Youngster year, Leadership Theory & Applications in Second Class year, with Law and Capstone Course completing the series in First Class year.

By now the D& P Show was thoroughly disrupted, so I asked other questions: "What is the ethical or moral leadership involved in judging Mids by different standards, for example PT requirements for female Mids?" ADM Chiles became somewhat agitated by this and said that they do not have different standards, and some of the women are far better than many of the male Mids. I asked about the use of boxes to assist the ladies in getting over obstacles. He said he didn't know what I meant, so I asked if he knew the "Pink Boxes" story, and related the story of how the First Class Mids painted the booster boxes pink. The ADM said he had not heard of that and it "sounds like BS to him." I dropped the subject, since my knowledge was only hearsay.

I asked about the Mission Statement of USNA, and ADM Chiles proudly pulled out his Reef Points (from 1956) and said the mission now is almost exactly what is was then. I asked, "Where does it say the USNA mission includes developing junior officers for combat leadership?" He replied that it is obvious in the wording of the Mission Statement. I asked him to show me the word "combat" in the Statement. He said it is certainly implied. I dropped that line of questioning as unproductive.

We moved back to the briefing slides and CDR Vazquez. All of the give and take and discussions were good-humored and not confrontational. We were trying to learn from examining the thoughts of each other, and doing it with proper restraint.

At the next opportunity, I asked about the Ethics and Leadership involved in the operation of the Honor Concept. I was told that the Honor Court is based on good Leadership and good ethical and moral values, as emphasized in the classes taught. I said, "How can an honor code be meaningful when the decision of the Honor Committee is overturned by higher authority, and what is ethical about readmitting a Midshipman removed for an Honor violation?" I said I was referring to Midshipman Rampani's readmission, which was suspicious because he was a fine football player. ADM Chiles said he knew nothing of the case, so could not comment.

We finished up the slide briefing, and settled into a discussion period that summarized the points made on the slides. I thought it a good time to bring up the subject of junior officer retention and quality, so I asked why it is that less than 50% of graduates of recent years remain in the Navy/Marine Corps after 10 years of service. ADM Chiles launched into a description of financial enticements and the strong demand from civilian organizations for good leadership skills, making the young officers in great demand at higher salaries than they are able to get in the services. I reminded him that this has always been true, that almost everyone has been tempted by higher rewards in civilian pursuits, yet some persist in the career for which they were trained. He stated, "Even with the early departures, we get the officers we need." [He later remarked that he would like to see more than 50% retention at the 10 year mark.]

I then asked why it is that the Atlantic Fleet, in a 1997 poll, judged these "young leaders" to have a mark of only 3.5 on a 5.0 scale. His response caught me completely by surprise, and the rapidity of it caused me to think that he had anticipated the question and prepared for it. [The quotes below are only approximately what he said; I don't remember his exact words, but these capture the essence of his statements.]

He replied, "Do you realize that the grades you quoted are those given on the SECOND part of the questions asked?" I admitted that I did not understand what he was driving at. He explained that the poll had actually asked two questions: The first was "Given the service time of this young officer, where would you expect him to grade at this point in his junior officer career?" He said the responses to that were generally at an average 4.0, 4.1, or 4.2 level. The next question was "Based on that estimation, where would you actually grade him to be at this time? These grades formed the averages of 3.5 and were the grades reported in the report. Thus, the reported grade of 3.5 was actually based on a scale of 4.0,4.1, or 4.2., and on that scale would be around 3.5 on a scale of 4.0 of what was expected at a junior point in their careers."

I puzzled over that for a while, and admitted that it would take some thought. I also admitted that I had no idea how the questionnaire had been structured, so didn't realize that there were dependency questions asked.

I am still puzzled by the reasoning given by ADM Chiles, but the more I think about it the more I think he is probably right. If the poll attempted to normalize the assessments made on young officers with anywhere from one to five years of service, then it is possible that asking the second question and making it dependent on the first makes some sense. This takes the curse off of the 3.5 grade given in the report. But I wonder why the report did not say that it was a normalized value related to the total years of service at that time.

We concluded our discussions amicably. I found both CDR Vazques and ADM Chiles to be intellectually honest, smart, and quick in their thinking, and very friendly and forthright in their approach to my questions. I quoted herein mostly from ADM Chiles, because he carried the bulk of the answers, but CDR Vazquez carried his part quite well, with ready answers and a fine briefing.

We next moved into a classroom, met the instructor, LT M----, a bright and personable Surface Warfare officer, and awaited the arrival of the Midshipmen. They straggled in by twos and threes (in a variety of uniforms) and took seats, staring curiously at the three visitors in the back of the room. I had previously told LT M---- that I wanted for us to be observers and not participate in any way, so later in the class, with a brief announcement, he said we were alumni observers.

After about 10 minutes, the Section Leader commanded, "Attention on deck. Section ___, Sir, one Mr. ___ absent". LT M---- gave a "Carry on" and everyone sat down. I counted the class: A total of 19 Second Class Midshipmen, with one female, one African American, and three Asian Americans. LT M---- asked for their essays on today's subject (Leadership failures in the collision of the USS GREENEVILLE [with the Japanese fishing boat]), and each Mid passed in what seemed to be a one or two page typed paper. The class was broken down into 3-person groups, each of which discussed with the class one element of leadership, and how it had been displayed, or neglected.

The class discussions were very interesting, the Mids were well prepared and spoke articulately and well. Good points were made and all emphasized various elements of leadership that were concerned. I was impressed by the Midshipmen and their earnest approaches to the problem. All seemed well prepared, although I saw a few sneaking peeks at the textbook. It was a good class and an excellent learning experience for all. If all leaderships classes are that good, then there is much to be said for the program.

At the bell, the Section Leader again gave his, "Attention on deck" command and the instructor dismissed the class. After thanking LT M---- and CDR Vazquez, and telling the CDR that I would return to sit in on an Ethics class, we departed.

I have not said much about the other two members of my party: CDR Jones, Class of '43, and his grandson, a high school student in Richmond who wants to go the USNA and needed this first visit to see what it is like. Both were impressed. Both participated in our discussions with officers and Midshipmen. It was a successful visit on their part and I also felt that I had learned a great deal.

After the visit, I believe that my previous impressions of things wrong at USNA have been modified somewhat. Since my views were based on past years and past visits, I think my more recent view is more accurate. I still believe there are things that can be improved and I am still dedicated to working hard to improve them. But I am reminded that we "involved" alumni tend to focus on the bad reports and the bad conditions that we and others observe and comment on. Those at the Academy seem to be equally narrow-minded and to focus on only the best of things. Thus both viewpoints are slanted and we need to get together and adjust our visions to see more of actual USNA conditions. Above all, the Midshipmen are great and good young people, and they deserve all we can do to improve their development into outstanding young officers.

I do hope that by mentioning some of the details I can entice others who have not been to USNA in several years, to make the trip. I believe your will find a visit interesting and informative. And it may cause you to rethink your position on some matters of concern. I strongly encourage all alumni to visit and observe for yourselves before judging on the observations of others or perhaps on the reports in the media. There is much to be admired at our alma mater, along with some needed changes.

Copyright 2002 Dick Van Orden; used by permission.

All USNA alumni—active duty, retired and civilian—
are invited to JOIN the Concerned Alumni discussion.