Preface - 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This page has been archived on the Web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. (i) of official printed copy of report

When we started this enterprise, it seemed that the mandate was sharply defined:

"The aim of this review is to ensure for each graduate a broad-based education, well grounded in the sciences and the humanities, with special emphasis being placed on the development of values, ethics and leadership skills needed for responsibilities and service to country."

However, as our inquiries evolved, it became evident that we were not simply talking about a critical review of the subject material in the many courses offered in the academic program, but rather an in depth look at the "four pillars" of the established program - academics, military training, bilingualism and physical fitness - and the process by which they are delivered. In particular, several of our early interlocutors suggested that our quest should be based on putting back the "M" into the Royal Military College.

Moreover, we found an institution experiencing turbulence. Perhaps this is too critical a word to use; perhaps it would be more appropriate to say an institution in transition. Nevertheless, what with the closing of Royal Roads and St-Jean and the consequent amalgamation in Kingston; the intense focus - in the media and elsewhere in the public domain - about the post-Somalia ethos of the Canadian Forces; the constant calls for reductions in budgets; the unfortunate "buy-outs" of graduates, to meet the dictates of Canadian Forces reductions, as they marched off the square; all of these factors have conspired to have a distinct negative impact on the Royal Military College.

We also encountered some problems at the interface between the Canadian Forces and the Royal Military College, too harsh to describe as "two solitudes" but, at the least, to describe as a lack in mutual appreciation of needs.

On the positive side, we have seen a rather belated but welcome appreciation of the total worth of the Royal Military College to the Canadian Forces. In the past few years the continuing education program has extended the educational riches of the College to thousands of all ranks members of the Forces, civilian employees of the Department of National Defence and spouses of both with the result being intensively increased "value for money", to borrow a term from the Auditor General of Canada.

At the same time we only wish that the Canadian Forces would, even more significantly, appreciate the magnificent educational, training and research tool which is theirs at RMC and clasp it firmly to the bosom of their operations.

Hundreds of post-graduate candidates, both on and off campus, have been added to the rolls; substantial defence research contracts have been situated at the College; needed specialist training - such as the Land Forces Technical Staff training program has been repatriated from abroad; particular needs of the Department of National Defence in environmental studies and material testing have been assigned to RMC; and as we have discovered, there is ample scope for more to be done to honour two principles of war: concentration of effort and economy of force. For, after all, that is what a military college is all about; to provide the basic professional accreditation demanded by the profession of arms.

All of this is to demonstrate that the aim mandated to us inevitably involved a much broader scope. The analogy one of our members, who devoted two decades to medical education, would probably offer is that one cannot examine cardiac behaviour in total absence of study of the rest of the human body. And perhaps RMC is at the heart of the whole matter of leadership in the Canadian Forces. The deduction, for us, was clear; we had to look at the undergraduate mission of the College in the context of the whole body of the Canadian Forces.

It will be apparent, in our report and its recommendations, that we regard RMC as "The Canadian Forces University" or, indeed, "The National Defence University". It will be seen that we encourage even more exploitation of opportunities to enhance the value of this gem.

While we took into account current and future appreciations of the place of civilian universities in officer production, we were most aware that there was no comparable military university for us to examine within our borders. Consequently, we looked south at the United States Military Academy, at West Point, NY, and the United States Naval Academy, at Annapolis, Maryland. We deemed that, more so than examination of other military colleges abroad, Canadian military and civil society would be more in tune with our closest, longtime military ally.

Furthermore, we noted that Annapolis formed officers for naval, naval aviation (the second largest air arm in the world), Marine Corps (an army larger than ours and with the same characteristics of combat arms) and support services in the same way as RMC endeavours to prepare officers for all MOCs in the Canadian Forces.

In both U.S. cases, we found that searching reviews have been conducted, since the end of the Cold War, on the requirements for officer production in the new millennium. We found that the thoughts which governed our aim have been turned into concrete action in the curricula of both Academies.

Having said that, there are fundamental differences between the U.S. academies and RMC: they are restricted to undergraduate education while RMC offers the full range of post graduate studies; and of course, having only one official language, the U.S. academies feature but three of our four pillars. In the United States higher level Defense institutions, augmented by attendance at civilian universities, provide the means for post graduate achievement.

Putting these differences aside, the U.S. Academies have carefully re-examined curricula and changed direction to provide for the broader based officer required for the future. To illustrate the thrust, West Point's cry is, "to achieve excellence". Both academies have strengthened their approach to the humanities (including ethics, the military ethos and military history) in awarding a multitude of majors in what is a Bachelor of Science degree. And, in engineering terms, it is a fully accredited degree ranking in the top tier of all U.S. universities.

Retention and promotion statistics in the U.S. are ample proof that their service academies are achieving the aim. In so doing, they have not only maintained but also strengthened the 'military pillar' without, in any way, diminishing their academic standing in the top tier of American universities.

However, at all times, we kept well in mind the understanding that whatever lessons we learned "south of the border" had to pass the test of Canada's ethos and culture to be applicable here.

Returning to RMC, we found that the academic pillar has become predominant to the detriment of the military pillar. This result is not solely because of the program at the College. As much, if not more so, it is because of the departure from integration of effective military training into the four year cycle in the total experience. Simply stated, the Forces - with the exception of the Army - have moved to the practice of concentrating meaningful professional qualification to a period after graduation from RMC. Thus the end result is the perception that the RMC graduate is of no greater value, or indeed less, in terms of professional performance standards, than a direct entry officer candidate from a civilian university or an officer candidate who is a high school graduate.

Accordingly, we proposed a change of emphasis, based on a dual track education and training model, which would yield a fully trained officer, totally prepared for employment in his/her MOC upon graduation. As will be seen, our model proposes selection of the MOC during the second academic year and the positioning of sixteen months of concentrated military training at the end of the second academic year, which is the mid-point in the academic sequence, during which training for the MOC will occur.

As well, during the academic years, while the emphasis would be on academic instruction, military values would continue to be inculcated. This would increase the 48 month current program to 56 months to graduate and be commissioned as a junior officer. But the end product would be a functionally bilingual, physically fit officer fully qualified for immediate employment which, in fact, would be up to one year shorter time than the current model. We have adopted the term "Balanced Excellence Model" to describe this proposal which continues to achieve academic excellence and integrates excellence in military preparation for officership. This undoubtedly is the most significant of our recommendations.

At the same time, we have made many other recommendations about the content and conduct of education and training in all four pillars, the synergies to be exploited through the presence of post graduates and research projects, the recruiting and selection process and the staffing of military positions at the College.

A special word needs to be said about staffing. While it would seem obvious that the assignment of military members would feature considerable care in choosing the best qualified, high performer to form future leaders and that their service at the College would be regarded as ''a career-plus" by promotion boards such, regrettably is not the case. We observed that, in the U.S. Academies, officers are carefully prepared for their tours, indeed acquiring a Master's degree in counselling as a prerequisite to the posting, are very frequently promoted during their tours and leave headed straight for career progression. We strongly recommend emulation of the U.S. practice.

And, finally, we have been inspired by the eagerness to embrace constructive change on the part of both the senior leadership of the Canadian Forces and the combined military and civilian family that is the Royal Military College of Canada.

In its 122 years of service to Canada, the Royal Military College has served with distinction, in peace and war, producing leadership for the country's defence forces and, following service, providing graduates with that same understanding of commitment to making ours a better land through their performance in industry, business and society at large. Truth, duty, valour have been the watchwords over these years: truth, duty, valour must remain the watchwords now to be applied to the new challenges facing Canada, its Forces and its society as we enter a new millennium. This will require creative, sensible change. We trust that our recommendations will assist in the transition and add value to the way ahead.

Date modified: