Section 245 of the Fiscal Year 2013 National Defense Authorization Act (H.R. 4310) instructed the Secretary of Defense to enter into an agreement with the National Research Council (NRC) to conduct a review of specialized degree-granting graduate programs of the Department of Defense (DoD) in science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and management (STEM+M).1,2 This report is the third in a series of recent NRC reports relating to STEM and DoD’s workforce.3,4 Its purpose is to address the need for relevant graduate STEM+M education for DoD personnel, both military and civilians; assess the cost, benefits, and organizational placement of DoD institutions that grant degrees in STEM+M; and evaluate alternative ways (e.g., the proper balance of DoD and civilian education sources and funding, distance learning delivery methods, and reporting structures of DoD-funded institutions) to ensure high-quality education outcomes.
_________________
1 For additional Information, see Bill Text Versions, 112th Congress (2011-2012), H.R. 4310, http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:H.R.4310:, accessed March 4, 2014.
2 See Appendix A for the terms of reference and Appendix B for short biographies of the committee members.
3 National Research Council (NRC), Assuring the U.S. Department of Defense a Strong Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Workforce, The National Academies Press, Washington, D.C., 2012.
4 NRC, Examination of the U.S. Air Force’s Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Workforce Needs in the Future and Its Strategy to Meet Those Needs, The National Academies Press, Washington, D.C., 2010.
DoD is arguably the most intensely technological and complex enterprise in existence. When compared to the gross domestic product of other countries, DoD’s budget ranks above all but about 20 nations. If DoD were a company, it would have the world’s largest footprint and employee population. DoD maintains its edge over adversaries through continued investment in technology-enabled weapon systems. Each weapon, platform, vehicle, and person in an operating force is a node in one or more broadly distributed networks. Without STEM+M graduate education of sufficient quality and quantity, DoD’s workforce will lack the understanding needed to acquire and operate these networked forces in support of U.S. security needs.
The committee could not determine how many advanced degrees are needed—or available—by STEM+M discipline, but because of globalization and the rapid pace of technological change, we know that more are needed overall. It is also apparent that a “one-size-fits-all” graduate education solution that meets DoD’s growing STEM+M needs is not the correct solution. Students differ in their starting skills, academic interest, geographic location, time commitments, preferred learning style, and their ability to afford a quality education. It is therefore no surprise that the United States has more than 6,700 post-secondary schools, including many large state schools that each offer more than 100 STEM major and minor degrees.
DoD depends on these civilian institutions to educate the majority of its civilian workforce and military members. In addition to providing the opportunity to learn from world-renowned faculty members, civilian institutions offer degrees in disciplines not available at DoD-funded institutions, particularly in law, medicine, life sciences, and social sciences. The large number of civilian institution options creates a diversity of perspectives and ideas that strengthen the DoD workforce and military members, as well as the military and civilian faculty of DoD-funded educational institutions.
While a large number of DoD civilians and military members receive their graduate STEM+M education at civilian institutions, a not insignificant number are educated at specialized, DoD-funded degree-granting institutions, particularly the Air Force Institute of Technology (AFIT) and the Naval Postgraduate School (NPS). 5 These schools offer valuable educational experiences typically not available at civilian institutions, which provide benefits that outweigh their costs. Notably, students attending AFIT and NPS possess the ability to readily conduct sensitive and classified research on campus alongside fellow students and faculty members. Their programs focus on militarily relevant problems, some of which might not
_________________
5 From The Armed Forces Officer: “Broad continuous education—technical, conceptual, and moral-ethical—is the hallmark of a professional officer” (Congressman Ike Skeleton’s Foreword, p. xii); “The profession itself, and the individual service in which one serves, must assume some of the burden of education and support for character formation” (p. 14); “The Services operate sophisticated education institutions to develop new officers, progressively through their careers” (p. 26) (U.S. Department of Defense, Potomac Books, Dulles, Va., 2006).
be welcome in civilian institutions (e.g., weapon system research). Their classroom environments allow for the free exchange of sensitive ideas. Their geographical and cultural proximity to Service laboratories create significant leverage for limited DoD research funds. In addition, the students have the opportunity to interact inside and outside the classroom with a cohort that shares a common interest in military culture and problems.
The majority of this report focuses on the graduate STEM+M education issues of the Air Force, Navy, and Marines, particularly those associated with AFIT and NPS—the two major specialized STEM+M degree-granting institutions in DoD. All three Services employ a similar graduate STEM+M education delivery model. These three Services identify, select, and fund a portion of their military officer graduate education pool from a central Service office. In addition, the Air Force, Navy, and Marine Corps send a significant number of their officers to AFIT and NPS and a smaller number to civilian institutions to obtain degrees not offered at AFIT or NPS and to broaden the intellectual diversity of AFIT, NPS, and Service Academy faculties.6 Civilians and military members that fall outside this pool are funded predominately from local organizational budgets and tuition assistance programs, and they are nearly all educated at civilian institutions. In contrast to the partially centralized approach to graduate STEM+M education by the Air Force, Navy, and Marine Corps, the Army employs a decentralized graduate STEM+M education model that relies on subordinate organizations to identify and fund the graduate STEM+M education of its personnel. Also, as with the other services, the Army sends roughly an equal number of military officers to AFIT and NPS. The relative numbers of Army officers at these two institutions suggest that they send a larger percentage to civilian institutions. The Army’s decentralized graduate education management approach presumably prevented the Army from responding to committee requests with sufficient information to allow the committee to make meaningful recommendations.7 The apparent existence of an alternative graduate STEM+M education delivery model within the DoD suggests the need for a subsequent study of the Army’s graduate education approach to determine if best practices of both centralized and decentralized education delivery models might be shared across the Services to enhance overall graduate STEM+M education outcomes. While all four Services appear to rigorously manage the graduate STEM+M education needs of their military personnel, they lack the enterprise-level ability
_________________
6 The Marines require that officers who obtain STEM+M graduate degrees serve a “payback” assignment immediately following their degree program that requires their technical skill. This ensures the Marines achieve a return on their education investment. This requirement can be waived on a case-by-case base.
7 Nancy Harned, Executive Director, Strategic Planning and Program Planning, Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army (Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics), “STEM and Army S&T Enterprise,” presentation to the committee on January 9, 2014.
to systematically manage their civilian workforce graduate education needs and sources. As a result, the committee was unable to determine if the Services are doing a good job of meeting the graduate education needs of their civilian personnel.
The increasing complexity and role of technology in new and future weapon systems provides sufficient evidence to demonstrate that DoD has a growing need for a workforce with graduate STEM+M degrees and a greater overall STEM+M literacy. Furthermore, this need can be satisfied using a holistic education strategy that offers a blended portfolio of graduate education choices that includes AFIT, NPS, and civilian institutions. Additionally, it is important that DoD recognize and continue to strengthen the value proposition of AFIT and NPS, particularly their research activities that are essential for achieving quality graduate STEM+M education outcomes and providing DoD with innovative capabilities. Following the examples of NPS and the Service Academies,8 DoD can strengthen AFIT’s value proposition by elevating its organizational placement to reflect its strategic importance. Finally, while DoD graduate STEM+M education programs for military members appear to be well funded and managed, a similar institutional commitment is required to manage the graduate STEM+M education needs of DoD’s civilian workforce.
PRINCIPAL FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The report’s principal findings and recommendations align with six major themes. The themes, in priority order, are as follows:
1. Strengthen the STEM+M competencies of DoD’s total workforce by placing greater emphasis on graduate STEM+M education.
2. Maintain a balanced portfolio of STEM+M graduate education sources consisting of DoD and civilian institutions.
3. Expand and adequately resource civilian workforce STEM+M graduate education initiatives.
4. Recognize and support the importance of STEM+M research at AFIT and NPS.
5. Enhance AFIT and NPS graduate education outcomes by increasing institutional collaboration through partnerships and effective distance learning methods.
6. Elevate AFIT’s strategic priority.
_________________
8 The Service Academies are Direct Reporting Units (i.e., they report to the headquarters of their respective Services), and the Uniformed Services University of Health Sciences reports to the Joint Chiefs.
Each theme is explained below and is then followed by supporting principal findings and recommendations. All report findings and recommendations, along with the evidence supporting each finding and recommendation, can be found in Chapters 1 through 4. Chapter 5 summarizes the contents of the report and provides the full text of the principal findings and recommendations.
1. Strengthen the STEM+M competencies of DoD’s total workforce by placing greater emphasis on graduate STEM+M education.
The world’s technical knowledge base and the technical complexity of modern warfare are rapidly increasing. By increasing its investments in graduate STEM+M education, even as the total workforce decreases in an increasingly constrained budget environment, DoD can continue developing and exploiting advanced technologies as key force multipliers. (Cf. Finding 1-1; Recommendation 1-1)
DoD leaders, regardless of background, will increasingly confront technical and technical management issues as the already rapid pace of technology change increases. DoD leadership could therefore encourage all graduate education programs to include technical and technical management-oriented components in order to send a strong signal of STEM+M’s importance to the workforce and increase the STEM+M literacy of DoD decision makers. (Cf. Findings 1-2, 1-3; Recommendations 1-2, 1-3)
2. Maintain a balanced portfolio of STEM+M graduate education sources consisting of DoD and civilian institutions.
AFIT and NPS each have important value propositions that yield significant return on DoD investments. Value-added elements include graduate programs built around defense-based curricula and supported by military-relevant graduate research, the formation of multiservice and multinational intellectual networks that aid students throughout their military careers, and infrastructure and policies that facilitate sensitive and classified research. With recognition and full support of DoD, AFIT and NPS can contribute to a balanced STEM+M portfolio. Faculty members also form a body of technical and management experts that DoD acquisition and logistics professionals use to obtain independent opinions on challenging issues. (Cf. Findings 2-1, 2-5, 3-1, 3-4; Recommendations 3-2, 3-3, 4-1)
A significant portion of DoD’s STEM+M graduate education needs could be met through civilian institutions. This is particularly important for degree programs in mission critical areas, such as life and medical sciences, which are not offered at DoD educational institutions in sufficient quantity to meet DoD needs. (Cf. Findings 2-3, 4-1; Recommendation 4-1)
3. Expand and adequately resource civilian workforce STEM+M graduate education initiatives.
DoD does much better strategically supporting the graduate education needs of its uniformed members than it does the needs of its civilian STEM+M workforce. This is true in terms of process, structure, opportunities, and funding. This issue could be addressed in three ways: (1) increase funding for civilian tuition assistance programs; (2) expand support for DoD’s Science, Mathematics, and Research for Transformation program; and (3) aggressively use Defense Acquisition Workforce Development Funds (DAWDF) or “DAWDF-like” funds for the entire STEM+M workforce, by obtaining authorization from Congress either to expand existing DAWDF to include all STEM+M workforce professionals or to establish funding to educate those not covered by DAWDF. (Cf. Findings 1-5, 1-6, 2-6, 4-6, 4-7, 4-8, 4-9; Recommendations 2-2, 4-6, 4-7, 4-8, 4-9)
4. Recognize and support the importance of STEM+M research at AFIT and NPS.
An active research program is essential to quality graduate education. Active, high-quality DoD research programs
• Provide critical elements of the student’s graduate education,
• Identify future education needs before requirements are specified,
• Expose students early on to emerging technologies and new scientific and engineering discoveries,
• Instill a culture of lifelong learning in the students,
• Attract and retain quality faculty for all DoD educational institutions,
• Enhance the national visibility of DoD institutions, and
• Result in cost savings and new capabilities for DoD.
Ensuring that AFIT and NPS are allowed to maintain active research programs and encouraging them to achieve international recognition in selected, DoD-relevant areas could lead to better education outcomes for students at and graduates of both institutions. (Cf. Finding 3-3; Recommendation 3-1)
5. Enhance AFIT and NPS graduate education outcomes by increasing institutional collaboration through partnerships and effective distance learning methods.
By jointly sponsoring research and teaching activities, and by continuing to maintain and broaden their partnerships with DoD laboratories and civilian re-
search universities, AFIT and NPS can provide a wider range of degrees and problem-solving perspectives to their students and enhance the quality and relevancy of their research. (Cf. Findings 2-3, 3-1, 4-2, 4-3, 4-4; Recommendations 4-2, 4-3, 4-4)
Both AFIT and NPS understand the elements of effective, quality methods of distance learning (DL). For example, NPS has achieved a national reputation for its systems engineering programs via quality DL methods. In an era of rapidly developing DL technology and opportunities, DoD can actively leverage its proven DL approaches to connect students in residence at AFIT, NPS, and civilian institutions; broaden AFIT and NPS student bodies with more civilian DoD personnel; and expand the size of AFIT and NPS Ph.D. programs by offering a wider range of courses and research experiences. (Cf. Findings 2-2, 4-4, 4-5; Recommendations 2-1, 4-4, 4-5)
6. Elevate AFIT’s strategic priority.
Many DoD organizations recognize the strategic importance of their educational institutions by having them report at the highest levels in the Services or Joint Staff. These institutions include the Service academies, the Uniformed Services University of Health Sciences, and NPS. AFIT currently reports to Air University, which reports to the Air Education and Training Command (AETC), where AFIT’s graduate STEM+M education and research activities do not align well with AETC’s Professional Military Education and training missions. By aligning AFIT with leadership that prioritizes its education and research mission, DoD can increase AFIT’s strategic value and give it the authority and autonomy it requires to effectively interact with institutional peers, such as NPS. In accordance with the examples cited above, the best way to achieve this result is to have AFIT report directly to the Chief of Staff of the Air Force. (Cf. Findings 3-5, 3-7, 3-8, 4-4; Recommendation 3-2)
CLOSING REMARKS
Achieving success in modern conflicts is due in no small part to military forces that leverage technology enablers that connect mobile forces, create and accurately deliver smart weapons, hide from and defeat sensors, automatically detect threats from stand-off distances, allow small units to control large areas, and follow the commands of remote operators located outside the region of conflict. The increasing reliance on sophisticated technologies by friendly and adversarial forces to achieve force multiplier effects demands a technically competent workforce capable of buying, operating, maintaining, and, in some cases developing, technologies and technology-enabled systems. DoD leaders, regardless of their background, also require a basic understanding of technical concepts as they increasingly make
decisions influenced by technical factors. One of the most effective ways to prepare DoD leaders and DoD’s workforce to maximize the benefits of technology-enabled capabilities is through robust STEM+M graduate education. DoD has many graduate education options to choose from, including DoD schools, such as NPS and AFIT, as well as a wide range of civilian institutions.
No single source or class of sources meets all DoD graduate education needs, and not all needs are filled by technical degrees. Civilian and military professionals advancing their education in non-technical disciplines would augment their education with technical and management courses that would enable their decision making in an increasingly technical society. The committee’s recommendations are designed to help DoD develop to retain a technically literate workforce through an appropriately blended portfolio of effective DoD in-house and civilian education options. A properly educated DoD workforce will help ensure DoD’s ability to meet future challenges.
