Letters to the Editor

Dear Editor:

Today was a good day. I work over at the Vermont Air National Guard and have recently been put on active duty. But that is not the reason why today was a good day, nor do I mean that it was a good day for myself.

My supervisor is probably the best supervisor anyone can ask for at the unit I'm at. My job title is a videographer, which means I shoot videotape/film of things such as military briefings, military jobs, planes taking off on the flight line, etc. I then take what I shoot and edit it together on the Avid and broadcast it throughout the base, so people can see what is new or simply what else is going on that is of importance. But that is not the reason why today was a good day.

For the past week, I have been on call with a pager, because my supervisor's wife is pregnant and was due at any time that week. I've been waiting all week in classes, at chow, even at the library studying, waiting for my pager to go off. While I was getting out of class Tuesday afternoon and heading back to my room to start in on my homework, my pager finally went off. I recognized the number immediately.

I quickly ran through the dorm and swung open my door. The phone was right on my desk, so I picked it up and called to see what my supervisor wanted, already knowing what the answer was going to be. He told me to get my butt down to the base immediately to take over for him.

My supervisor didn't have to tell me why, for I already knew the answer. His wife had just given birth to a baby.

Michael Davis

Dear Editor:

How is Norwich University a leadership laboratory? Given the experiences of most cadets, that is possibly the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. First, I'll explain to you what, in the context of a military environment, a laboratory should be, and then I'll explain just why Norwich is no kind of laboratory at all.

A laboratory, as everyone knows, is a place that is used for experimentation and research. Specifically, a leadership laboratory would be a place where one tries out his or her leadership style, finds out what does not work, and is corrected by someone who has done this sort of thing before, and then tries again until he (or she) has got the right idea. The most important part of this is the experimentation. No one is going to get it right the first time. That's the point. In order to learn to be a good leader, you have to try it out a lot, and watch other people who are good at it. Trial and error. That's what a leadership lab is for.

Unfortunately, what we have at Norwich does not resemble a leadership lab in any way. The first aspect of a leadership lab is experimentation. What we have at Norwich are people being removed from their experimental leadership positions on the slightest hint that they are not perfect, or even just on the whim of those in supervisory positions. If Norwich is really a leadership laboratory, should not an honest mistake just be corrected? We have cadre who are fired without paperwork or warning, under very questionable circumstances. If the commandants must watch over cadre, the questions they should be asking are: "Do the freshmen follow their orders?" "Are they improving?" "Are they being led?" The answers to the last three questions we all know to be "yes."

However, the wrong questions are asked, and promising future leaders are being fired for no reason at all. How is one supposed to become a better leader if no one tells him or her how to improve? There are several examples of cadets being fired without counseling or the opportunity to defend themselves against accusers. Does that make a cadet a better leader? Of course not. In fact, it makes him or her quite the contrary. Why should he strive to better himself if he gets slapped in the face for it?

All of this is done-endangering the esprit de corps of the regiment, strangling traditions, and compromising training…simply because Jackman fears litigation?

The second aspect of the leadership lab would consist of examples of good leadership to follow. The commandants are supposed to be examples to the cadre and upper class chain of command. Unfortunately, these commandants are seen by many as failures in this regard.

For example, they demand that cadre not correct freshmen in front of their rook buddies. Why should this matter? If an entire platoon is in disarray, does it make that much of a difference? Are we to be so tenderhearted with recruits, lest their oh-so-brittle self-esteem should crumble? What kind of leaders - what kind of cadets - are we supposed to be forming here?

If the commandants want cadre to take freshmen aside to correct them, then where do the commandants get off yelling at cadre members in front of crowds of freshmen? Where do commandants get off telling freshmen that they don't have to obey cadre orders? Where do commandants get off making freshmen go get ice-cream whether they want it or not? What kind of leadership is that? And, need I add, cadre have attempted time and time again to gently correct their mistakes, even though they are the only ones who are supposed to be instructing the cadets. However, they just ignore cadre. (It's not as if we paid their salaries or anything.)

In conclusion, I think that I have made my point. Commandants running about, firing people on whim or for extremely small mistakes does not constitute a leadership laboratory. By hook or by crook, we need to get our school back, if just for ourselves. If we want to uphold the reputation of Norwich University as an outstanding military school that produces excellent leaders, we need to get rid of our excess baggage and move forward. If we do not do this, our corps will become indistinguishable from those students who live in Dodge and Patterson. While that may be the vision of some faculty, it is certainly not the future that this cadet desires, and I trust that others in uniform share my view.

Nathan Hanawalt

Back to Guidon index