Implementation - Withers Report

This page has been archived on the Web

Information identified as archived is provided for reference, research or recordkeeping purposes. It is not subject to the Government of Canada Web Standards and has not been altered or updated since it was archived. Please contact us to request a format other than those available.

Report of the RMC Board of Governors By the Withers' Study Group
Balanced Excellence Leading Canada's Armed Forces In The New Millenium
4500-240 (ADM (HR-Mil))
24 September 1998

Cross-reference p. 59 of 63 of official printed copy of report

There is no question but that the College is a fine institution populated by outstanding young Canadians. In the main, academic programs are strong and the faculty, military and civilians alike, are committed to its well being. In our work we found an institution which forms a solid foundation upon which to build the necessary structure required for the next millennium.

A. The Core Curriculum

In all of this, the concept of a core curriculum is a central theme. This curriculum will be constructed in response to the requirements of the Forces. All of the principal stakeholders must play a role in articulating their needs.

At RMC the core curriculum obviously will contribute to putting the "M" back into RMC, because in essence, it has a militarily oriented scope. The key to its success however, lies in the fact that it is a natural integrator. There is considerable overlap between the academic and military pillars. Above all, it makes a substantial contribution to the production of officers, all of whom share a common body of knowledge virtually unique to the profession of arms in Canada.

B. Command and Control

The issues of unity of command and chain of command need to be clarified. There is a sense that the current situation reflects more a "chain of consensus" than a military chain of command. There is no doubt but that the operation of the College is a complex business in which co-operation and a collegial atmosphere are essential. Nevertheless, the aim set out by the Board to the Study Group will not be achieved if it is unclear who is in charge at every level.

In the view of the Study Group the desired situation is as follows:

  • The Board establishes broad guidelines and provides strategic direction; over the long term the Board must also be the agent which ensures continuity, predictability and stability;
  • The Commander CFRETS, who is the Vice-Chairman of the Board, provides the essential military link between the Commandant and the military chain of command up to the CDS;
  • The Commandant is the next in the chain of command, is in full command and is responsible, in detail, for all four pillars.

The nature of the institution requires that issues related to the academic pillar will demand more effort and more time because it is relatively unfamiliar territory for a military officer. The Commandant clearly requires the full, active support of the Principal in this area of overall responsibility.

The Principal and the Director of Cadets are responsible to the Commandant for policies, programs and daily activities designed to accomplish RMC's mission. The necessary improvements to the military pillar and the requirement for these individuals to work closely together, demands an outstanding officer in the appointment of Director of Cadets. The Study Group recommends this appointment be upgraded to Colonel.

Unity of effort can only be achieved when the objective is clear and this aim is maintained. Unity of command follows inevitably from this premise. The Board must articulate the objective, maintain the aim and insist on unity of command for its achievement.

Implementation of the Balanced Excellence Model should begin as soon as possible. The Board may want to consider how the creation of a more formal CF University would enhance the various programs at RMC. As outlined in this Report, the Study Group sees considerable merit in this concept.

However, to reiterate, the Board should begin the process of implementing the Balanced Excellence Model immediately. There are four basic components to the implementation plan.

  1. Put in place a system for the ongoing assessment of progress in the implementation of all aspects of this report. This should be a permanent item on the agenda of the Board until the process is complete;
  2. Establish the necessary relationship between NDHQ, the Board and the Commandant to modify the officer training structure. The optimum relationship would be achieved by putting the subject on the Armed Forces Council agenda on a permanent basis until the new system is in place. The Board would direct the Commandant to develop the detailed plan with appropriate authorities in the three Services. Commander CFRETS would brief Armed Forces Council on a regular basis. This will require the endorsement of the Minister of National Defence and the active support of the CDS;
  3. Establish a Board Committee to oversee the integration of RMC's four pillars. There are two elements to this process which must be accomplished concurrently - reinforcement of the military pillar and integration of all the pillars. Require the Commandant to establish a Working Group of military and civilian faculty, headed by a military officer, to develop this plan;
  4. Establish a Board Committee to oversee the development and implementation of the core curriculum at RMC. Require the Commandant to establish a Working Group of civilian and military faculty, headed by a civilian, to develop the detailed plan, in co-ordination with all departments. The chairman of the Working Group should be a respected scholar external to the College. Additional external advisors may also be desirable. This may require a review of the Engineering program at RMC and must be co-ordinated with the proposed long term overall academic review.

In terms of timings, the following sequence and milestones seem reasonable:

  1. The first iteration of the Integration Plan should be accepted by the Board and implementation begun in September 1998. Subsequent iterations should proceed in as timely a manner as possible, depending on resources and the progress in the CF of the implementation of the Balanced Excellence Model;
  2. The Core Curriculum should be developed over the course of academic year 1998-99. The Core Curriculum should be in place for academic year 1999-2000. Where possible, current student years should take core courses. However, in some cases, science courses may apply only to those years adequately prepared by virtue of an improved Prep Year at St Jean, and after the establishment of an appropriate tutoring and course structure at RMC for first and second year students;
  3. The 16 month training period in the Balanced Excellence Model should be in effect for the class entering RMC in the year 1999. That is, next year's recruit class would undergo the BOTC1 training in the summer of 1999 and undergo the first MOC familiarisation training in the summer of 2000. They will choose their MOC in February 2001 and proceed to 16 months MOC training in May 2001.
Date modified: