Document created: 11 August 05
Air University Review, September-October 1966

The Evolution of NCO Academies

Lieutenant Colonel Ernest M. Magee

Late in the last century when Kipling penned this line, it served to emphasize the key role of the noncommissioned officer in the profession of arms. The line has been uttered down through the years, repeated ad infinitum by commanders and staff officers until it has achieved the dubious distinction of a cliché. And like most clichés, it has become a somewhat stale statement, used perhaps more often as a handy verbal crutch than as an honest assessment of the NCO’s worth.

Before World War II, the image of the army NCO was not always a sparkling one, at least not in the eyes of the general public. To a great many people the term “NCO” suggested a tough-talking, rough-acting, pear-shaped martinet whose mission in life appeared to consist of bellowing orders to hapless recruits. On the movie screen, Wallace Beery and others did nothing to destroy this image.

The coming of age of the airplane in World War II signaled a change in the NCO corps within the air arm of the U.S. Army that is still evolving in today’s Air Force. (Similar changes occurred, of course, in other branches of the Army, but this discussion is limited to the impact on Air Force personnel.) Literally overnight, hundreds of thousands of enlisted personnel, most of them new to military life, were thrust into assignments requiring a certain degree of technical know-how. The rapid expansion of military aviation at the same time created heavy demands for senior enlisted people who could accept enlarged areas of responsibility. A new breed of NCO, spawned by rapid technical advances in a wartime situation, began to develop.

After the letdown following World War II, the fighting in Korea re-emphasized the critical need in the newly formed U.S. Air Force for enlisted personnel who could be trained as middle managers to handle an ever increasing range of responsibilities. As time went on, the accelerated development of a family of powerful missiles, and then involvement in Vietnam, accentuated the obvious: since most of the people in the Air Force are supervised by NCO’s, these enlisted supervisors must of necessity be better educated, more skillfully trained, and more fully aware of current directions and techniques in leaders and management.

Today there appears to be a general recognition of the vital role that NCO’s play in the effectiveness of the Air Force. Their number alone is impressive: approximately 265,000 NCO’s currently are on active duty.

To illustrate the importance of NCO’s in accomplishing the Air Force mission, consider these three extremely unlikely possibilities:

(1) An Air Force made up completely airmen below the rank of staff sergeant. Here we would have plenty of youth and muscle and vigor, a limited amount of know-how, and almost a complete lack of executive talent. All Indians, no chiefs.

(2) An Air Force consisting entirely officers. Here we would have a highly educated group with an abundance of executive know-how, but a great deficiency in worker skills. All chiefs, no Indians.

(3) An Air Force made up wholly of NCO’s. Here we would find a mature group possess worker skills to a high degree, coupled with capability—to a large extent—of planning, organizing, and directing. A blend of Indians and chiefs. It would appear, if a choice among these three possibilities had to be made, that an Air Force composed of NCO’s might be the most useful over the long run.

The continuing important role of the NCO in the Air Force was brought sharply into focus in the spring of 1965 in a speech by the Air Force Chief of Staff, General J. P. McConnell, when he told his major commanders: “The authority vested in NCOs is different than that vested in commissioned officers only in degree. The closeness of NCOs to their subordinates in carrying out their daily responsibilities sets a most serious and exacting task”¹

In 1950 certain senior Air Force commanders recognized that a new breed of NCO was developing and decided to do something about it. General John K. Cannon, then commander of the U.S. Air Forces in Europe, is credited with establishing the forerunner of today’s NCO academies. The original school for NCO’s was in Wiesbaden, Germany, and was called the USAFE Academy of Leadership and Management. Its curriculum was adapted from portions of the Senior Military Management Course and subjects offered by the Wharton School of Finance and Commerce, University of Pennsylvania.²

In the early 1950’s, the Strategic Air Command began operation of four NCO academies. The first one was established by SAC’s 7th Air Division in England, and when it proved successful an NCO academy was started in each of the numbered SAC air forces. Other major commands eventually followed suit. Today, there are NCO academies in the Military Airlift Command, Tactical Air Command, Air Force Systems Command, Air Defense Command, Air Force Logistics Command, U.S. Air Force Security Service, and Headquarters Command, USAF. Several other major commands are currently studying the establishment of similar academies. SAC, which had trained over 100,000 NCO’s and airmen first class in its leadership schools and NCO academies, temporarily closed all its NCO school facilities in March 1966 because of manning problems related to the conflict in Southeast Asia.

Since NCO academies were originally designed for the two most senior airmen grades then authorized, they came to be known as “senior NCO academies,” a title that is still occasionally applied. For the sake of brevity, they are also frequently referred to as NCOA’s. Selecting airmen to attend an NCOA is considered a command prerogative. Most of the seven commands that have academies enroll only technical sergeants and higher enlisted grades. A typical student enrolled in an NCOA in 1966 would be a technical sergeant, about 35 years old, with approximately 15 years of military service.

An interesting offshoot of the NCO academy program as time went on was the establishment in several major commands of so-called NCO preparatory schools, now called leadership schools. These are base-level schools of three weeks’ duration for promising airmen first class and staff sergeants. The curriculum generally is patterned after that of NCO academies, but it is pitched at a lower level. Since there are considerably more enlisted personnel eligible for enrollment in NCO leadership schools than in NCO academies, the growth of leadership schools has surpassed that of the NCO academies. Until March 1966, when Air Training Command and SAC shut down their leadership schools, six major commands supported over 40 such schools, which produced approximately 10,000 graduates annually.³

As the enrollment in NCO academies began to approach the 1965 total of around 6000 students, it was realized that the curriculums and operating procedures had to be standardized. Accordingly, a basic regulation, AFR 50-39, entitled, “Noncommissioned Officer Training,” was developed. It specified the policies and curriculum necessary for accreditation by Headquarters United States Air Force.

At present an accredited NCO academy must schedule 225 hours of Air Force approved subjects over a period of at least five weeks. The curriculum emphasizes the principles of leadership, management, and communicative skills, both oral and written. Approximately 25 hours are devoted to the study of world affairs, with particular emphasis on the ideological conflict between democracy and communism. While at an academy, students are given intensive refresher training in military customs, courtesies, drill, and ceremonies.

Basic textbooks have been developed over the years for each subject, and they are continually revised by instructional staffs. The material used in the textbooks has been largely derived from other USAF instructional publications, such as AFROTC manuals, which have been rewritten and edited especially for the NCO student.

Most of the instruction is conducted as seminars or guided discussions. Guest speakers are frequently scheduled to give special presentations, however. At the MAC NCO Academy, to cite one example, Lieutenant General Lewis H. Brereton (USAF, Ret) has spoken on the subject of leadership to over 65 separate classes. Several academies have also started using programmed instruction on a limited basis, and they report excellent results to date.

NCOA faculties are comprised for the most part of former students who have shown exceptional promise while going through the academy course of instruction. The majority of instructors have completed some college work, others have college degrees, and a few have advanced degrees. Early in their tour of duty as instructors they attend the Academic Instructor course at Air University. Not surprisingly, a large percentage of those who attend this course gain Distinguished Graduate status. The intense interest, dedication, and professionalism of NCOA faculties have continually impressed visitors and students alike.

The mission of NCO academies and leadership schools, broadly stated, is to prepare students for more advanced leadership and management responsibilities.

When he is graduated from an NCO academy, each student receives a diploma and a training certificate. On return to his home station, an official entry is made in his Form 7 to the effect that he was graduated from an NCO academy. A student who does exceptionally well is identified as a Distinguished Graduate. He receives an official letter of recognition from his major command headquarters, and the letter is authorized by AFR 50-39 to be classified as a “Category A” document for inclusion in official files. Graduates are also entitled to wear a distinctive ribbon.

Most NCO’s recognize the importance of attending and graduating from an NCO academy. Although decidedly not cutthroat, the competition for Distinguished Graduate status is intense. The academic standards at all academies are high, but the failure rate usually runs less than two percent. The loss rate for emergency, disciplinary, or other reasons is normally even less.

It has been my personal observation, after previous tours of duty with the AFROTC program and the Air Command and Staff College, that NCO academy students are as fully motivated as AFROTC cadets and student officers in their thirst for new and useful knowledge. Whereas an officer can look forward to the Squadron Officer School, the Air Command and Staff College, the Air War College, and possibly even the National War College or the Industrial College of the Armed Forces, an NCO knows that the only opportunities he will have for formal military professional education are at the leadership schools and NCO academies.

During his stint at an NCO academy, a student is kept extremely busy. Normally his day begins with a reveille formation at about 0530 hours, six days a week. He marches in formation to and from class. His classes are about 50 minutes in length, with a ten-minute break in between. His school day ends with an athletic or drill formation late in the afternoon, except on Saturday when classes end at noon. Outside reading assignments keep him busy after classes.

Commanders often take advantage of the pool of NCO experience in an academy class. MAC Commander General Howell M. Estes, Jr., regularly asks students at the MAC Academy to study special command problems and make recommendations for solutions. In effect, the command school serves as a consultant to the MAC commander and his staff.

Students appear to truly appreciate the opportunity they have for professional development, if the results of class critiques are any indication. During the past year, for example, students at the MAC NCO Academy, largest in the Air Force, consistently rated all academic aspects of their course of instruction above 4.5 on a 5-point scale. Other NCO academies have noted similar results. A more significant evaluation of NCO effectiveness resulted, however, from two independent surveys conducted by the Military Airlift Command last year. One survey asked a cross section of graduates to what extent they felt they had improved back on the job as a result of having attended an NCO academy; a similar survey was made of the commanders of the same graduates. The replies indicated that a great majority of former students noted substantial improvement in most areas of performance. Their commanders were even more enthusiastic in their ratings. 

In a letter of 12 February 1965 to the conferees at the 1965 Air Force NCO Academy Conference, General McConnell noted the value of the NCO academy and leadership programs: “We know that these programs. . . are essential in providing leadership education. The quality of the graduates has constantly improved as demonstrated by their effective supervision in units throughout the force.”

It is obvious that the unskilled worker is as obsolete in the military today as he is in the factory and on the farm. The need to continually upgrade the caliber of all personnel becomes more obvious each day as the complexity of operations and management increases throughout the Air Force. The challenge to NCO academies—as well as other professional military educational activities—is to turn out graduates who can think, act, and communicate more effectively.

All pertinent factors confirm that today’s Air Force NCO’s are more intelligent and better educated than they have ever been. President Lyndon B. Johnson, speaking before a National War College audience, obviously was not referring to commissioned officers only when he said, “The military career today demands a new order of talent, and training, and imagination, and versatility.”⁴ Today over 70 percent of all enlisted personnel on duty in the armed forces are high school graduates, compared to less than 55 percent in 1955.⁵ In a typical class at the MAC NCO Academy, about 95 percent of the students enrolled possess a high school diploma or its equivalent; approximately 20 percent have some college credits. Students at other NCO academies have similar academic backgrounds.

The overall NCO academy program has continued to gain stature. Another major step forward was taken in the fall of 1965 when the basic Air Force regulation on NCO academies and leadership schools was thoroughly overhauled at an NCO academy conference. Quite a significant change, in the opinion of those close to the program, was the revision in the title of the regulation from “Noncommissioned Officer Training” to “Noncommissioned Officer Professional Military Education.” This departure from a narrow, training viewpoint to the broader educational outlook signified that the program had finally achieved a full measure of maturity.

Another important recommendation of the 1965 conference, which was incorporated in the revised regulation, was the requirement for Air University to prepare and distribute annual bibliographies on the curriculums of NCO academies and leadership schools. This new requirement should greatly enlarge the scope of reference material available to students and faculties. Procedures for the acquisition of such reference material are being investigated at the present time.

The 1965 conference also established the requirement for an annual conference to review and recommend changes in the NCO academy program. Prior to 1965 conferences were held infrequently, the last previous one being in 1959.

Perhaps one of the most unusual features of the entire NCO academy program is the sponsorship of graduate associations. Authorized by the 1965 revision of AFR 50-39, these associations are chartered and supervised by those major commands having NCO academies. Association chapters are formed with a four-fold purpose: (1) to be of service to local commands and bases, (2) to provide a fraternal organization of NCOA graduates dedicated to the welfare of the civilian and military community, (3) to provide a medium through which graduates can further fulfill their responsibilities to the military and civilian community, and (4) to improve and utilize the leadership, management, and supervisory qualities of graduates through sponsoring worthwhile projects as a group. NCO involvement in association affairs varies considerably, of course, from base to base. Graduate association chapters are providing both a valuable outlet for graduates’ talents and an effective management tool for base commanders. Senior commanders have recognized the worth of the NCO graduate groups and have encouraged full support for them.

In March 1966 the commandants of all USAF NCO academies and representatives of interested major commands made a number of recommendations to Headquarters USAF at their annual conference. One significant recommendation currently being reviewed at the Pentagon pertains to the feasibility of a single major command, such as Air University, taking over the responsibility for the administration and operation of all NCO professional military education. Implied in this recommendation is the consolidation of existing NCO academies and leadership schools, plus a more equitable distribution of student quotas throughout the Air Force. The distribution is distorted at present because some commands do not operate either NCO academies or leadership schools.

Another important recommendation concerned the stiffening of accreditation requirements for NCO academies and leadership schools. Currently these requirements are considered by many in the program to be minimal. The development of new accreditation standards in such areas as facilities, faculties, teaching methods, and equipment is calculated to raise the level of the entire program.

It would appear that in the first fifteen years of their existence the NCO academies, like Topsy, just “growed.” It now appears, however, that the great need which NCO academies fulfill finally has been recognized and appreciated.

General McConnell, in speaking of NCO’s and their responsibilities, has said, “The ability of the NCO to perform his job largely depends upon the degree to which he has been informed and supported.”⁶

NCO academies have obviously played an important role in the Chief of Staff’s expressed desire to keep NCO’s fully informed. Despite recent cutbacks in part of the NCO professional military education program caused by the demands of Southeast Asia, it is apparent that the value of the program is firmly established. From this observer’s viewpoint, there is no doubt that the program is essential to the full professional development of NCO’s in the United States Air Force.

Notes

1. Supplement to AF Policy Letter for Commanders, No. 7, July 1965.

2. USAF TIG Brief, Vol. 17, No.3, 18 January 1965.

3. “NCO Leadership Training in the USAF,” USAF Fact Sheet, 6-65.

4. This Changing World, Armed Forces Information and Education, DOD, For Commanders, Vol. 4, No.6, 15 September 1964.

5. Ibid., p. 2.

6. Supplement to AF Policy Letter for Commanders, No. 7, July 1965.

Contributor

Lieutenant Colonel Ernest M. Magee (B.S., University of Rhode Island) was Commandant, Military Airlift Command NCO Academy, Orlando AFB, Florida, at the time of his retirement in July 1966. During World War II he served as a flight instructor in various aircraft. Other instructional assignments have been with the Air Command and Staff College, 1951-54, and with the AFROTC at the University of Iowa, 1957-60. He attended the Army Air Corps public relations course in 1946 and has held information assignments with USAFE (1946-49); with the Pacific Division, MATS, in Hawaii (1955); and as OIC, Armed Forces Radio Service, New York City (1949-51). He has served as a squadron commander in MAC on three assignments: with the 1502d Air Terminal Squadron in 1955, with the 47th Air Transport Squadron in 1956, both in Hawaii, and with the 33rd Air Rescue Squadron, Okinawa, 1960-62.

Disclaimer

The conclusions and opinions expressed in this document are those of the author cultivated in the freedom of expression, academic environment of Air University. They do not reflect the official position of the U.S. Government, Department of Defense, the United States Air Force or the Air University.

Home Page | Feedback? Email the Editor