Student Training And Academic Retention Service 2014: Fill & Download for Free

India’s GER is around 6% below the current world average and over 50% below first world countries like the USA and Australia. The government aims to increase this percentage by at least 30 percent before the end of 2020.Before the government can do so, a great deal of critical analysis needs to be done about the importance of education accompanied by the implementation of new rules and regulations that could make the quality of education in India better.To start this great revolution, here is an in-depth analysis of what are the fundamental problems with India’s educational system and how they should be changed.1. Lack of Hands-on ExperienceIndian Educational system Lack of Hands-on ExperienceEvery year, a list of the world’s top 200 universities is published. For year 2014-2015, no Indian university made it to this list. This does not mean, however, that the country doesn’t have a good standing. At least 4 universities actually made it to the top 400. The Indian Institute of Science and Punjab University even made it to the top 300. This fact alone is sufficient to ring the alarm bells that India’s higher education system needs desperate changes, to provide students with the competitive edge, that other countries’ education system is providing.The number one thing to note about this is the fact that most universities that offer higher education focus on textbooks and they completely lack in giving students a hands-on experience. It’s common knowledge that a child who does not have much exposure with other children often have difficulties in reaching basic milestones like talking, walking, and many more. But a child that is exposed with adults and other children often have a faster time developing their skills.If a student is given thousands of books to read but not given enough time to apply what he has learned, he will not be able to develop his skills. On average, an engineering student has to study over 40 subjects; this is probably equal to around 6000 hours of attending classes and more than 300,000 pages of engineering information. Of the 6000 hours devoted to studying, only around 500 hours is actually spent on hands-on lab work.If the government wants to reach its goal of a 30% GER by 2020, the education in India should be more project-based or hands-on.2. Lack of Relevant IndustryIndia lacks relevant Industries and Industry exposure.India, today is known for the service industry. Gone are the days when students wanted to be doctors, engineers, architects and the like. Most of the students of today often end up in the service industry after completing higher education. With the rise of IT industries and BPO companies, Indian graduates usually end up as call center agents because of the high salary. If not in the IT industry, most Indian graduates of higher education often end up in an industry that has nothing to do about what they studied for more than 4 years in the university.In order to encourage students to further their studies and enter higher education, the government should create more industries. If a student knows that there is an opportunity to have a better standard of living by finishing a certain course or degree, the country’s GER will definitely increase as planned.3. Short Supply of EducatorsIndia has very Short Supply of Educators vs. StudentsTo date, there are over 100 million teenagers in India between the ages of 17 to 19. Given the GER of the country, this means that around 19 million students enroll to institutes for a higher education every year. This amount is just 19% GER. This means that there are more than 80 million students who just don’t have access to the opportunity of a higher education even if they wanted to.With the 19 million enrollees, there should be at least 1.9 million the number of teachers. This is if the ideal student-teacher ratio of 10:1 should be followed in the system of education in India. However; the number is very very less. On an average the higher education classes has student-teacher ratio of 100:1. In some cases, it’s even more than that. Acute lack of teachers, doesn’t provide the attention the students’ should be getting and it hampers the education perspective on the whole. Moreover, out of these enrollees, very very few opt for education based degrees.With the amount of higher education enrollees every year, roughly only around 3.5 million students actually graduate and enter the workforce annually. Most of the 3.5 million even end up in the IT and BPO industry. So, this means that there is a very short supply of future educators in the country.If the government wants to reach its 2020 goal for education in India, they should address this problem and create more opportunities and benefits for teachers in order to entice students to enter the academe.4. Low Quality InstitutionsIndian education system lacks quality but focuses on QuantityBecause of the very short supply of institutions that offer higher education, there seems to be a great increase of low quality institutions popping up like mushrooms over the country. Businessmen and politicians often start colleges that offer higher education because there is a huge demand for education.For example, in some cities there are houses that look like 3-storey apartments, and they have various small colleges offering degree level courses. You can yourself imagine, what might be the kind of education these storeyed colleges must be providing. There are a number of colleges in every nook and space in some cities of India that you didn’t even think was a college.In various states in India, the number of colleges in the relatively small town is overwhelming. This casts doubts about the motives of the people who put up these institutions. It is questionable whether they are in the higher education industry because of their passion to teach or if they are simply grabbing the opportunity to gain from getting admissions as well as donations.If the government wants to get a higher education GER, they should focus on regulating the incorporation of educational institutions. They should ensure that the higher education institutions in the country are there for the right purpose and not just to make a good profit.5. Rat RaceIndia’s higher education system promotes a mindless rat race.The country’s higher education system promotes a mindless rat race. Students as well as parents focus on the grading system. Students are taught to read and grasp thousands of books without actually understanding them. The goal of students is to top a specific examination. Once the examination is done, the information that was hurriedly stuffed in by the students easily goes away without retention.Most examinations are also very simple in context, ranging from multiple choice questions to true or false. Therefore, students lack the analytical skills that they need when they leave the higher education institution and join the workforce.Higher education should make a way to improve students’ analytical skills by providing other means of gauging a student’s intellectual capacity. One good way to achieve this, is by considering the examinations conducted by private companies in screening their potential employees.Some companies actually let their applicants go through scenarios in order to gauge their decision making and analytical skills. Adopting this in the higher education system can be very beneficial for new graduates, in landing their first jobs.6. No Focus in Building a PersonalityIndian education system lacks personality building exercise.Again, the country’s higher education system does not focus on the student but the grade. Most institutions think that academic qualification and certification from a higher education institution is far more important than a building a personality.Most companies, however, would rather have an employee that is flexible and can work through adversities than have an employee that has good grades but no personality to show for. You can ask any HR department personnel and they will all agree to this. Even though their higher education grades are a good indication of a person’s ability, these do not paint the whole picture.If the country wants to improve the educational system, they should provide more programs and workshops that can help build a well-balanced individual.7. Discourages DevianceThe current higher education system in India does not reward original thinking.The current higher education system in India does not reward original thinking. Deviance is greatly discouraged in this country. In fact, most students are afraid to take risks because of the fear of being mocked. Memorization is still the most common way of learning, in the system of education in India. This is due to the fact that most examinations can only be answered by one specific answer. Memorization is not exactly learning.In order to get the most out of higher education courses, students must learn to think for themselves. A test question should not just be either black or white. The government should make sure that the systems of higher education in India provide a way to encourage critical thinking.They should provide programs that would create opportunities to analyze and solve problems with innovation. There can be other means to get a good education in India. One does not have to be confined to a brick and mortar type of school to be given an educational distinction. There are various distance education courses and online classes that could provide a great way to learn innovatively. The government should also take distance education as a valid option to earn a degree.8. Uninspired EducatorsEducators must inspire their students to want to do more in their lives.Educators must inspire their students to want to do more in their lives. They should be able to help their students realize the importance of education. Educators must also be inspired in order to just that. Not all educators have the inspiration to pass on to their students.There are teachers who actually go by the thinking that they will get paid whether or not their students learn from their classes. Unfortunately, this is a common thinking for most educators in India. Not that they don’t know what they are doing. It’s just that they don’t have the necessary incentive to strive to be better at the profession they chose to do.The government should find a way to give educators a reason to be excited to teach every day. One good example would be opening up the classroom to the world to see. Some universities in other countries have what they call an “open day” wherein parents can actually go to the classrooms to see what their kids are learning in school. This kind of event can help inspire teachers to do more in order to build their reputation.Aside from that, educators should also be exposed to global education methods and standards. The government should make a way to introduce new ways of learning by bringing in higher education professionals from other countries.9. Educators not Salaried EnoughThe government should also focus on providing great benefits to educators.The government should also focus on providing great benefits to educators. In fact, most educators are not efficiently trained because the government doesn’t have enough resources to pay trained educators. Moreover; their pay grades are way too less than those of developed countries. This reason makes most of the students, move away from taking education related jobs or academe. Till the time the perks associated with teaching are not high, the people associated with the teaching profession will be of mediocre class.In order to improve education in India, the government should put emphasis on training educators and providing them with great benefits.10. Wrong Medium of LanguageMost higher education institutions use English as a medium of teaching.Most higher education institutions use English as a medium of teaching. But not all Indians use this language. In fact, most students don’t even understand this language. The system of education in India should first focus on teaching using the mother tongue and move on to English upon higher education.There are countries like the Philippines that are now putting emphasis on teaching in the mother tongue. They only introduce the English language upon entering higher grade levels because they want to first focus on the child’s core skills. This should also be implemented in India in order to empower our youth.11. Lack of Skill SetsStudents are not taught any specific skills that will benefit them in finding jobs.Students are not taught any specific skills that will benefit them in finding jobs. There are a lot of industries after graduation, but the companies don’t hire employees without necessary experience. If only universities provide training and skill sets that could help them land jobs, more students will be willing to enroll for higher education.The educational institutions in the country should focus more on providing technical skills development. Instead of concentrating on higher education textbooks, schools should concentrate on providing trainings. Some skill sets that employers look for include computer know-how, decision-making, systems analysis, sales and marketing.If the education system in India focuses on these skill sets, more students would be able to realize the importance of education.12. Lack of Proper InfrastructureIndian education system lacks proper infrastructure.Even though there are thousands of small colleges in the country, none of them seem to have the proper infrastructure needed to actually provide positive results. Most of these colleges look like apartment buildings.The government should invest in implementing a good infrastructure for education. This does not mean that the government should build hundreds of schools before 2020. There are various ways to get this job done. For example, the country could actually focus on using today’s technology to provide a higher education. They could make use of the internet to broaden the reach of educational facilities rather than spending more on physical infrastructure.Everyone in India must have some form of smartphone, tablet or computer. So, the education system in India with the help of the government should make sure to provide a high speed internet access that could serve as a new delivery mechanism for educational information. Some institutions have actually started exploring the possibility of offering distance education courses.13. Lack of PersonalizationIndian education system lacks personalization.Not all students learn with just one method of teaching. Students learn through various mediums. Some students learn better through their auditory senses while others learn better through their vision. With this information, school education should be personalized depending on a student’s learning style. Most kids that don’t fall into the current educational system end up feeling like they are dumb. But this is not really the case; they probably just have a different learning style compared to the norm.The government should encourage more innovative measures of learning. One measure of learning will not fit all students. If learning is personalized, no student will ever be demoralized to learn.14. Social DisparityIndian education system is promoting disparity in some ways.In today’s world, only rich people often have access to higher education because of the costs involved. Education was once viewed as something that could end disparity. But as it seems, education has now become a tool to create that very disparity.The government should find a way to give even the most basic education to all residents whether they came from a rich family or not. The government should find ways to create opportunities for even the poorest families to send their kids to school. A good example of opportunities includes school grants, scholarships and other education programs.15. Lack of AmbitionThe Indian educational system does not inspire students to create better lives for themselves.The Indian educational system does not inspire students to create better lives for themselves. Students lack the ambition to be better. They are satisfied to get high paying jobs without the ambition to actually be a good citizen. This is also the main reason why most graduates just end up taking high paying IT jobs. The salaries they get from BPO companies are relatively bigger compared to other industries.The government should design a school education system that will motivate them to create their own businesses and help out their fellow citizens in the future.Education should be a person’s key to success in the future. With India’s current educational system, there is no wonder why the country is still on top of the list when it comes to high rates in poverty. In order to move out from poverty, the government should reconsider its allocation of its resources. They should focus on providing better quality education in India. The government should provide more long-term projects that could sustain the quality of school education in the country. Once the education problem is addressed, all other problems stemming from it will also be addressed.Source: Problems with Educational System in India

Congratulations on asking a very insightful question, and for researching the Marine Corps. And for considering joining us as a career move of the most excellent vision.Similar to Ben Eisner’s answer, I would agree that Marine Officer Candidate School (OCS) is very different from Marine boot camp. My experiences with both of these were more than 25 years ago, but the fundamental constructs have barely changed at all. How might I know this?MARINE BASIC TRAINING (AKA “BOOT CAMP”) —I had the privilege to undergo Marine boot camp at MCRD San Diego in the summer of 1987 at age 19 a mere 2 months after graduating from high school. My contract was for 6 years of active duty as a combat engineer (and 2 more years in the reserves for any portion of the 8-year Military Service Obligation contract that was not served on active duty…).I completed boot camp, continued on my way, and eventually was accepted to several officer commissioning programs; I chose the NROTC path. Which I immediately regretted, but that is a story for my separate post (Will Bentley's answer to How was your ROTC experience?). And which is purely my own story; a large percentage of all Marine officers are commissioned through the ROTC program, so it works.NAVY ROTC (NROTC) AND MARINE OCS —A requirement for an officer of Marines’ commission through the NROTC program (and most other sources of commissions for officers) is to complete Marine OCS. I did this in the summer of 1990, between my junior and senior years of college (EDIT: I entered the NROTC program and full-time college with something like 60 credits — out of 120 credits to graduate with a baccalaureate degree — so I was already an academic junior…but as I note in my separate ROTC post above, NROTC didn’t know what to do with me. I convinced them to have me wear the rank insignia and pretend to be a freshman and thus an NROTC “Fourth Classman” for only the first quarter, and then “promote” me for my second quarter to “sophomore” and thus an NROTC “Third Classman,” before my third quarter promotion to “junior” and NROTC “Second Classman.” I actually had enough credits by the end of my first year to be an academic senior; NROTC had me wait until the beginning of the next fall quarter to be classified as an NROTC “First Classman.”) After finishing OCS in August 1990, I then returned to finish my final year of college, completed my baccalaureate degree and the NROTC program requirements, and was tendered and accepted a commission in March 1991, and continued on my way to eventually retiring with many more than 8 years of service….fulfilling my original 8-year MSO 3.5 times over.I did not like boot camp.Nor did I like OCS.I found both to be miserable experiences. Others may feel or state differently…but I would not change my life or career path one inch from that which included both of those experiences! “That which does not kill us makes us stronger…”To try to answer your sub-questions specifically:Recruit training indeed often has multiple DI’s (Drill Instructors in the USMC, Drill Sergeants in the Army) yelling…sometimes at the same recruit(s), sometimes in unison, sometimes in opposition to each other, sometimes just to hear themselves or each other shouting. At OCS, the SI’s (“Sergeant Instructors,” and they are fully-trained, indeed among the best DI’s there are!) do yell, but there are fewer of them, and the (usually) maturity and quality and intelligence of the OCS candidates typically results in much less of the intense “in your face” DI methods. 11-secrets-marine-drill-instructors-hide-boot-campMarine enlisted recruits do NOT get trained alongside Marine officer candidates. They never see each other. They aren’t even in the same states:Marine OCS is at Quantico, VA. (And yes, the photo below isn’t actually at OCS, or even Quantico…I show it because it looks good and points out several things all at once.Here is the caption: “I DO SOLEMNLY SWEAR — Capt Chad Luebke, Officer Selection Officer of Recruiting Station Milwaukee, administers the Officer Oath of Office to 2ndLt Louise Nowak during her commissioning ceremony in Pound, Wis., on Sept. 20, 2014. Nowak, a recent graduate of Carroll University, was awarded the Commandant's Trophy earlier this year in recognition of her exceptional academic performance, physical fitness and leadership at Officer Candidate School in Quantico, Va. Photo by Sgt Tia Nagle.First, it does show the commissioning of a young Marine officer, who is specifically mentioned as excelling at OCS in Quantico, as the “honor grad” for her OCS platoon.Second, notice that she is wearing more than one medal…and her senior medal is the Marine Corps Good Conduct Medal, which means that she was a prior-enlisted Marine and served at least 3 years on active duty before she was commissioned, and she also has deployed at least once to Afghanistan as part of the International Security Assistance Force (from the bottom right/most junior medal, the NATO-Afghanistan medal). (And, unfortunately, it appears her Afghanistan Campaign Medal is missing one or more of the required campaign stars…the ACM cannot be worn without at least one bronze campaign star…but maybe my eyes simply can’t discern it. No matter, the photo was 2 years ago.)Third, she is wearing one of the most awesome Marine Corps officer uniform accessories, the Sam Browne belt (which these days is actually black…), one of the many uniform items and customs/traditions that the USMC borrowed/inherited from our good friends and neighbors in the Royal Marines and British Army. The Sam Browne is an optional item, but any officer who doesn’t buy one upon commissioning and then wear it every chance they get is missing out. The plain black cloth belt (not shown on either officer, since they both wear the Sam Browne) simply is not the same thing! Spend the $100 or so. Wear it every chance possible. (And buy the optional Boat Cloak [or Dress Cape for female officers] as well, $650 well spent. Wear it every chance, as well. Exceedingly few Marines have ever seen one other than on a picture on the wall. I wore my Boat Cloak to perhaps 20 functions over 15 years I had it, and only once, in all that time, did I ever encounter another officer who had one…and he wasn’t wearing his until he saw me proudly sporting mine and he went back to his car, got it out, and put it on because he had never seen anyone else wear one and wasn’t quite sure about the protocol for wearing it. Even generals don’t always have them, and they’ve had decades to buy it and sport it to functions…And even I have never, not once in 30 years, seen the female officer Dress Cape being worn…only the pictures on the wall. Like a unicorn.)Lastly, Lieutenant Nowak is wearing the male-style uniform cover (hat), a relatively recent transition away from the older female “bucket cover.” The rest of the transition will be to jettison the current black blouse (uniform coat) she is wearing, and transition to a new uniform coat. See: Senior female Marines displeased with new dress blues - USMC LifeHere is the old-style female uniform:Here is the new-style female uniform:b. MCRD Parris Island is in South Carolina.c. MCRD San Diego is in California.Recruit training for those enlisted in the United States Marine Corps, includes a thirteen-week process during which the recruit becomes cut off from the civilian world and must adapt to a Marine Corps lifestyle. (See: Marine Corps Recruit Depot San Diego - Wikipedia)But while OCS may not be 13 weeks long, it is very different. This is because OCS isn’t really about training. Oh sure, there are classes and tests, and an entire portion of the final scoring is for “academics,” but OCS is a SCREENING AND EVALUATION tool: the DI’s, and the Platoon and Company Commanders (again, experienced officers who are among the best or they wouldn’t be chosen to lead Candidates), spend a lot of time just observing, nudging, and discussing everything and everyone to ensure that only those who meet or exceed the highest standards actually make it out of OCS successfully. See: LeadershipLEADING FROM THE FRONTLeadership is evaluated on your ability to motivate your peers, successfully complete assigned tasks and make sound decisions under pressure. Instructors constantly monitor each candidate and track individual progress. You will have opportunities to prove your leadership skills during problem-solving challenges such as the Leadership Reaction Course, and during increasingly difficult tactical exercises.Demonstrating leadership potential is key to your success at Officer Candidates School. Instructors are looking for candidates who display self-reliance, discipline and responsibility. Your desire and motivation to lead Marines will be a deciding factor in your success.I cannot state for the record the attrition rates for either boot camp or OCS, either in 1987/1990, or today, but regardless of the numbers, once you factor out the uncontrollable attrition (deaths, goes UA/AWOL over the fence at night, medical conditions, etc.), the difference is largely in WHY you are “let go.”Completion of boot camp or OCS is a “condition of employment”: you may have a contract to serve, and the US Govt will honor its side, but ONLY after you have completed the minimum required entry-level requirements that not only include boot camp/OCS but also security clearance background checks, drug tests, etc.Oddly, the USMC has usually spent very little (comparatively) on the typical enlisted recruit before they arrive at boot camp. Their recruiter may have had to work hard to convince them (and maybe their parents), but other than that and their entrance physical at a MEPS, and the cost of their transportation to either MCRD Parris Island or Hollywood (sorry, San Diego!), essentially almost nothing spent before recruit training begins.But the typical officer candidate is a different matter. Getting recent and detailed manpower demographic information is difficult, so I’m going to use some slightly dated material (2004) to generalize…but I’m comfortable that the general trends remain fairly similar even 12 years later. See: https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0059/6242/files/tenchfrancisprose.pdfService academies cost on average eight times as much as OCS graduates and about four times as much as an ROTC graduate. Comparison of commissioning source costs proves difficult since complete and uniform cost reporting from each source does not exist.The same source stated that after 15 years of service, Service Academy graduates were only slightly more likely to still be in the service…From a 1992 Government Accounting Office (GAO) Report, only about a 6% higher retention rate has been measured for service academy graduates after 15 years of active duty, when compared to ROTC and OCS Graduates.Service Academy = $340K (FY97 dollars)ROTC = $86KOCS/PLC = $32KAnd something more recent, from 2012, a report that specifies the broad sources of commission across the Services (although the USMC will slightly skew away from Service Academy and toward OCS since the “OCS” category includes both enlisted-to-officer programs and PLC, which is the single largest source of USMC officer commissions. And the USMC trends to have the largest percentage of prior-enlisted officers). See: http://www.gao.gov/assets/660/658996.pdfAnd to provide my own concluding perspective:I found boot camp to be mind-numbing, but it was very effective at doing what it is very carefully honed to do: make Marines. At least basic Marines. The next phases of their entry-level pipeline continue to build upon the foundation that culminated at the Crucible for most modern Marines (implemented a few years after me). And yes, after all these years, I do remember the hilarious moments among the drudgery, the DI’s struggling not to laugh at something stupid or unexpected, hours and hours of Incentive Training in the “pits” doing exercises like bend-and-thrusts and side-straddle-hops…but never fast enough, so we got to do more!I attended OCS almost exactly 3 years after I hit the yellow footprints at MCRD San Diego. I was a Marine NCO, and damn proud of that fact in my own mind, having been promoted much faster than my peers who still awaited the day they would pin on Corporal (and many never did get it…4 years and out as “terminal lances”: E-3/Lance Corporals…or worse).I had already completed more than 3 years of college, and most of the NROTC curriculum, by the end of my first year in NROTC, and even with more than 2 years of active duty after high school, I was actually a semester ahead of my former high school classmates in college.My NROTC unit had an intensive, in-house preparatory course (the whole academic quarter before going to OCS) run completely by the upper-classmen and enlisted Marines who had already completed OCS (the previous year) and were finishing up their senior year before commissioning. We ran fast, got dirty, wet, marched miles in boots at night uphill both ways…literally because the routes could be made to do that!…ran through the standardized USMC obstacle course and improvised combat conditioning courses, memorized lists of all sorts of stuff (mostly but not all repeat for me from boot camp basic “knowledge”) so we wouldn’t have to study it during our limited time off at OCS and thus get ahead, go over the maps of the training areas most used at OCS, the small unit infantry tactics and operations orders used to really sort out who could lead and think when tired, hungry, and smelly, and surrounded by your peers who you are expected to lead, and more.I recall OCS including some initial yelling, but most of the candidates (at least in my class) were either prior-service or had enough preparatory work through their ROTC units/Officer recruiters (the “OSO”) sponsored prep time, or they were just smart and athletic types. The SI’s zero in quickly on strong leaders who take charge and are willing to help others even when not asked (or ordered), and those who appear to have no clue or other weaknesses that needed to be “SCREENED AND EVALUATED.” Because obvious weaknesses or deficiencies that could not be readily corrected, either by remedial training while at OCS or maybe with the time remaining in their commissioning pipeline (for example the senior year at NROTC), likely meant that candidate would not pass the course. And very few were allowed to “remediate” another OCS class in the same year…if allowed another chance at all after being failed at OCS, it required several personal interviews with people like the Commanding Officer of OCS, and just maybe a second chance. (Medical issues weren’t treated as harshly…a strong desire thwarted by a broken foot or finger just needed time to physically heal…) Guest Post: Advice for USMC OCS Female Candidates | OCS BlogWhat the leadership at OCS wanted to see was whether you “had it in you.” Could you rise to the challenge, the occasion, whatever “it” was? We always seemed to be running from one class, exercise, physical training session, or formation, without time to assimilate properly the lessons. THIS WAS THE REAL CHALLENGE: can you keep up physically, mentally, and still function, still possess at least the basics of the intangible thing called “leadership” as the art of influencing others even when those others wanted to choke you for going the wrong direction during an exercise or for failing to execute a part of a plan? And they were your “peers,” maybe even your friends from back home in college — leading your peers is often the hardest type of leadership.I found that OCS was “mental.” Much more so than recruit training, where the DIs really did lead you around 24/7 while ensuring you learned what you needed to know.In boot camp, there are “recruit fire team leaders (corporals)”, “recruit squad leaders (sergeants),” and a “platoon guide” who was the “best of us.” (Plus a Company Honor-man/Guide during graduation.) But we were never expected to function much above the level of fire team (4-man unit), because we simply didn’t know how and the DIs were doing the thinking for us.In OCS, that concept was GREATLY expanded: in addition to the Candidate Fire Team Leaders and Squad Leaders, we also had all the other leadership positions commonly found in a Marine infantry company: Candidate Platoon Sergeants, Platoon Commanders, Company First Sergeants and Gunnery Sergeants, Company Executive Officer, and the dreaded Company Commander job. The Candidates selected for these exalted positions were not randomly chosen…they were deliberately chosen either because (at least early on) we needed a good example of someone who knew what they were doing (like a prior-enlisted NCO or SNCO), or especially near the end, to “separate the wheat from the chaff…” And the office-holders typically worked for a few days or a week, and they were actually expected to perform as many of the real-world duties of that office as they knew how to do…or ask for help from their peers…or learn really, really fast…or learn how to delegate effectively what couldn’t be done and focus on what could be done because there was never enough time to get it all done.We learned within a couple of weeks that the more challenging positions, at the Platoon and especially Company level, were proving grounds for Candidates who, for whatever reason that the OCS staff saw that perhaps we mere Candidates did not, needed to be SCREENED and EVALUATED on an up-close and personal basis, with significant extra time spent working directly with the DIs and the actual Platoon and Company Commanders (senior Marine Lieutenants or Captains).My own story? I was assigned early as a fire team leader, the lowest level of responsibility over only 3 other Candidates, and did my few days and turned it over to the next guy without incidents I can recall. And then, nothing. I was not selected for any more leadership billets. As a prior-enlisted Marine NCO, I figured that I might be challenged with at least a Squad leader billet, or Platoon level, but…nothing.That actually made me worry toward the end, because without much feedback one way or the other I just wasn’t sure the OCS staff wasn’t going to surprise me with being the dreaded Company Commander billet, the sure sign that you were about to fail if you couldn’t step up and prove your worth — fast. One of the NROTC students from my own NROTC college program, whom no one would ever have said would fail, a star athlete, well-liked and otherwise a steady hand, had already been “DOR,” or “Dropped Own Request,” after a dreadful performance as the Company Commander, and I distinctly to this day remember him walking down the road at OCS in his civilian clothing carrying a large sea-bag as he failed out of OCS…never to return to his NROTC unit or indeed even the same college as far as I know.The very last rotation of the Candidate billet holders, I was very anxious in spite of (at least I thought I was clever) cleverly figuring out the master plan in my OCS company: those who are not doing well, especially in the leadership area (the most important area), were those who were getting challenged at the Candidate billets, where they got a work-out in their leadership capabilities just as everybody (including them) had to go, go, go for perhaps 16 or more hours every day. My fellow NROTC candidate’s experience and essentially “self-expulsion” to avoid the complete stigma of being forcibly failed out weighed heavily.And…the final rotation resulted in me being assigned as…Candidate Fire Team leader. Again. I later learned that the goal was for each of us to be evaluated at least twice in a Candidate leadership billet, so our capabilities and leadership could be SCREENED and EVALUATED. Since I had only been assigned once during OCS, apparently I needed one more rotation, but the final week’s Winners were actually the losers at the higher levels…it was the final opportunity for the OCS staff to decide who was worthy and who was not. So, I resumed my former billet, over the same 3 Candidates if I recall correctly, my bunkmate and two next door bunkies from the entire OCS experience, and quietly served out my last few days of OCS without further incident. And of course…I asked no questions about that, not wanting to remind anyone near the end that I felt “cheated” or “left out” of the “thinning of the herd.”I graduated, returned to my parents’ house for a month of rest, then went back to college for 6 more months before graduating right after the first Gulf War ended, and was commissioned as an officer of Marines before serving 24 or so more years.Post-script: many years later, I chanced upon my own OCS Platoon Commander, a Captain during OCS and later a Major near retirement when I met him again. We talked briefly; he didn’t remember me at all. No surprise, since I was never enough of a problem to be hit with a real Candidate leadership challenge, never failed anything nor was I awesome to behold. When reminded I was a prior-service NCO, he said words to the effect that the OCS staff in his day generally considered prior-service Marines as “lead or follow or get out of the way,” and unless we did something horrible that they figured that between Marine boot camp, and our subsequent Marine service, PLUS whatever commissioning screening we had been through, were far more thorough preparation than simply showing up to OCS to be SCREENED and EVALUATED, really for the first time. And the OCS staff simply didn’t have the time to work every Candidate over like a Holly Holm-Ronda Rousey UFC fight. Since no prior-service Marine was going to be permitted to even join a commissioning program unless their Commanding Officer (up to the Commanding General level) had seen their packages, and that meant that several levels of the chain of command (both senior enlisted and officers) not only endorsed favorably, but “enthusiastically,” or else they weren’t going to be at OCS in the first place…the screening was largely already done, and OCS was just a final hurdle that must be completed.Not to minimize the INCREDIBLE difficulty, but it really wasn’t about whether you got an A or a B- on an academic test, or ran 3 miles in 16 minutes or 20 minutes, or knew how to do anything with an M-16 except carry it around, keep it clean, and do some basic “Manual of Arms” on the parade deck (since Marine officer candidates don’t shoot their rifles for a qualification score while at OCS…that comes at the next stage of training after commissioning). OCS was a test of intangible components of each Candidate’s character…who they were…who they could be…and did they have “it,” the spark that either they already had or would quickly grow to the level necessary to earn a commission as an officer of Marines, and lead Marines confidently who look up to you every day, and whom you must look after just as they look after you in trying circumstances up to and including the Crucible of combat.

Q. How competitive is the job market for radiologists?A. The job market for radiologists has finally turned around.New survey finds radiologists are back in demandThe Radiology Job Market Must Change with the TimesTwo ways to make the most of the improving radiology job marketNew survey finds radiologists are back in demandBy Brian Casey, AuntMinnie.com staff writerJune 8, 2017 -- For the first time in a decade, radiologists have landed back in the top 10 of search assignments for U.S. physicians by recruiting firm Merritt Hawkins, as employment conditions in the specialty continue to improve.Merritt Hawkins noted that radiologists had been absent from its top 10 list since 2007. The specialty's return is due to an increase in diagnostic imaging procedures, a more limited pool of candidates, and the proliferation of teleradiology services.The firm said it received 80 requests for radiologist searches in 2016/2017, up 100% from 40 in 2015/2016. The growth was enough to land radiology in the tenth spot on the list, which was topped by family medicine physicians, psychiatrists, and internal medicine doctors.The firm also reported an average salary for radiologists of $436,000 in the 2016/2017 period. The company characterized radiology's resurgence as the continuance of a comeback. Demand for radiologists had diminished starting in 2003, when the specialty topped Merritt's list of most requested search assignments. Contributing to the decline was a "robust" supply of residents entering the job market, reimbursement cuts, and utilization suppression.But renewed demand for radiologists is "inevitable," according to the report, "because imaging remains central to diagnostic and procedural work in today's healthcare system, in which very little transpires without an image." Also, due to an improving economy and an aging population, "demand for radiologists was going to rise at some point." What's more, close to 50% of radiologists are older than 55, "and attrition is beginning to reduce the candidate pool. "Teleradiology has affected the field, but Merritt noted that demand is at the level where clients are seeking both traditional onsite radiologists as well as teleradiologists. The report can be accessed by clicking here.The Radiology Job Market Must Change with the TimesApr 14, 2017 | Nisha Mehta, MDAll signs indicate that the radiology job market is turning around. The number of available positions in 2016 well exceeded the number of finishing trainees, and this trend is expected to continue as more senior radiologists retire or cut back. A 2013 Health Affairs study projected that as the U.S. population ages, demand for radiology services will grow approximately 18 percent between 2013 and 2025 (Health Aff (Millwood). 2013 Nov;32(11):2013-20). When accounting for other factors leading to an overall increased utilization of radiology services, the increase in volume will likely be larger. Compounding this numbers problem, a higher proportion of radiologists are interested in limiting the number of hours they spend at work. So along with the other challenges facing the field, radiology is now in the position of facing a shortage of physicians.In 2015, applications for radiology residency were the lowest in a decade, according to data from the National Resident Matching Program. Conversations with medical students yield concerns about declining reimbursement and uncertainty about the future of the field. However, this factor only accounts for a fraction of their concerns. Compensation cuts and rapidly evolving practice landscapes are realities across the board in medicine, and radiology remains one of the better reimbursed fields. So what is it about radiology that’s causing a decline in applicants?Digging deeper, a less discussed factor provides some answers. Medical students have been listening to the complaints of those they rotate with. As an increasing percentage of women and millennial physicians enter the job market, simply looking at compensation downplays the crucial role that work-life balance and job satisfaction play in selecting a specialty. Millennials have consistently shown that they are willing to take significant salary cuts to achieve better work-life balance. For women, who stereotypically place more emphasis on this, the numbers indicate that radiology is not faring well with recruitment. Although nearly 50 percent of medical students are female, only approximately 27 percent of radiology residents are female.1According to a recent study published in Mayo Clinic Proceedings, radiologists ranked fifth out of more than 23 surveyed specialties in their reported burnout rate (Mayo Clin Proc. 2015 Dec;90(12):1600-13). While 47.7 percent of radiologists reported experiencing burnout in 2011, that number jumped to 61.4 percent in 2014. Contributing factors include increasing volumes, the heavy emphasis on reducing turnaround times, decreasing reimbursement and the amount of required after-hours work. Also, as radiology groups look to compensate for lost income by taking back the night from teleradiology, companies and hospitals are increasingly requesting in-house (and in some cases, subspecialty) coverage and the frequency of in-house calls has become more burdensome. It’s been cited as a reason why many switch to teleradiology jobs, as well as a reason why competitive medical students choose to pursue other in-demand specialties, which for the most part allow calls to be taken from home and utilize physician extenders to cover basic needs in the hospital. While medical students are expressing a preference for lifestyle-oriented fields, the average radiology group is actually shifting in the other direction.Traditionally, radiology practices have operated on an egalitarian model, with work responsibilities, income, and vacation being evenly distributed amongst partners. There are obvious benefits to this framework, and its simple nature is appealing to groups that don’t want to get caught up in the many nuances that arise if they stray from it. Accommodating part-time physicians can significantly complicate work and vacation scheduling, for example. And employing part-time physicians can contribute to the mentality that shifts extra responsibility onto full-time partners, adding to an already perpetually increasing administrative burden. Structuring partnership agreements to reflect varying commitments to the practice while still remaining fair to everyone involved can become very subjective, and often contentious.Regardless, it is now time for a change. Although many groups would (understandably) make the argument that they are looking to recruit people who are willing to work more, rather than less, these radiologists are in limited supply. Recruitment and retention of full time radiologists with large call responsibilities will become increasingly difficult as the demographics of trainees change. The lack of part-time options or flexibility in scheduling is one of the most common cited factors in the decision of a growing number of radiologists to shift to locums or teleradiology positions. As this trend is often blamed for undermining the private practice radiology group’s ability to negotiate with hospitals, commoditizing radiologist skills and driving down reimbursement, groups should pay close attention to this new demographic.We as a field need to become more creative and address changing demographics and physician burnout. We need to make it possible for people to work varying amounts and recognize the needs of those who would trade a portion of their compensation for increased flexibility. As groups grow larger, the potential for these opportunities should increase. This would help groups with the recruitment of new physicians while also helping them keep senior partners who might be looking to scale back a bit.Time off is an obvious area that groups should revisit. Most radiology groups offer generous amounts of vacation, but also tend to offer vacation in one-week blocks to ease scheduling complexity. This process is problematic for those hoping to take more three day weekends or have an occasional day off to go to a school event. By offering at least a portion as individual days off, radiologists could choose to work less days a week, and part-time positions could be more easily accommodated.Job sharing doesn’t have to only involve two people; it could be a combination of three or four people who make up an even number of full time equivalents. Tailoring worklists such that certain assignments could be handled remotely would also allow for greater options in larger groups, including an expanding role for home workstations and the ability to customize work hours. The utilization of physician assistants can provide additional latitude. Many groups have found “weighing” shifts to be helpful, heavily incentivizing those who are willing to work nights, weekends and holidays. Those who don’t want to take as much call should be permitted to outsource their calls to other radiologists in the group or even locum radiologists.Groups in the Midwest and the South will have to adjust first, as this is where the largest percentage of open positions are right now. These groups have conventionally attracted fewer applicants, but have been able to successfully recruit by offering higher salaries and lower costs of living. Given that millennials are less lured by these factors, recruitment will become increasinglydifficult. This will be compounded by the fact that many of these groups are smaller and may need radiologists who are willing to be generalists. Today’s trainees, who are completing mini-fellowships in residency followed by formal fellowships after residency, may find themselves uncomfortable with these positions. Having more flexible options than those offered by in-demand urban groups would provide these groups with a competitive edge.Lastly, more groups may want to consider providing paid maternity leave. In the larger scheme of a radiologist’s career, paying for a few months of time off is likely a drop in the bucket. However, for young female radiologists coming out of training, who are often burdened with medical school debt, this unpaid time can be quite stressful. The prospect of paid maternity leave not only relieves that stress, but fosters goodwill in showing that a group is family friendly. This trait can be incredibly important to women physicians, and may be the reason why they pick one job over the other.Market forces will ultimately force radiology groups to adapt, despite the hassles that come along with shifting away from traditional models. Happy radiologists are good for business, and maintaining the competitiveness of radiology applicants is good for the field. The evolution of our group practice models is consequently not only necessary, but smart.Two ways to make the most of the improving radiology job marketBy John P. McGahan, MDFour years ago I recall writing in this space regarding a downturn in the radiology job market.How things have changed!A recent (2016) ACR-commissioned survey of radiology groups reveals that between 1,713 and 2,223 new jobs will become available this year. This represents over a 16% increase from the prior year. Breast imaging remains the most sought-after subspecialty, constituting 14% of job opportunities. This is closely followed by general interventional radiology (13%), and then by neuroradiology, general radiology, body imaging, and musculoskeletal imaging, which all share nearly equal opportunities for radiologist employment. Also worth noting is an upward trend in emergency radiologist hiring, at 10% of position openings. As a brief aside, the survey found that a relatively large portion—28%—of practicing radiologists are 55 or older.The survey results reflect my own impressions which, based on anecdotal evidence, indicate the job market is much more robust than it was even a year ago. At my own institution, I have seen a resurgence of our fellows obtaining multiple job offers in desirable locations. This was not the case just two years ago.At the same time, on our recruitment end, we are having a much more difficult time filling our openings in abdominal imaging. Two years ago my section had 55 applicants for one position. In the past year that decreased to 15 applicants. Surveys of program directors show them offering positions in academic radiology to their best fellows at the beginning of the year, knowing the pool of qualified applicants will be diminished by mid-year.I would argue that this all means we need to do two things: 1) spread the word to our residents, and especially to our medical students, that radiology job opportunities are back, and 2) broaden the scope of our radiologic training.An interesting study published in 2015 by Arleo et al showed that 50% of respondents going into radiology were concerned about outsourcing, and 45% of those not going into radiology thought the radiology job market was shrinking. This same study showed that intellectual challenge was listed as the top reason for students going into radiology, while degree of patient contact was listed as the most common reason medical students chose other specialties.Another telling survey statistic is that in 2009, 87% of radiology residency positions were filled by United States medical graduates, while in 2015, only 56% were filled by U.S. graduates. In addition, only 2.8% of women, compared to 11.8% of men, applied for radiology positions.The same survey found only a small fraction of residency applicants previously had radiology rotations at their medical schools. Having such a rotation was correlated with a higher likelihood of choosing radiology. Thus, to continue the supply of top-tier applicants into radiology, it would seem that elective rotation exposure to the specialty in medical school is vital.Preparing for the job marketWith these recent improvements in the job market, how should radiology residents prepare to be successful job applicants? For one thing, it helps to have broad training.Certainly, in the 1980s it was rare for radiologists to seek fellowship training: in 1984, only 8% had fellowship training compared to 95% of radiologists today. Furthermore, up to 18% of radiology residents pursue two fellowships.What are some important skills sought by prospective employers? Three-quarters of those in private practice are seeking applicants with subspecialty training and general radiology skills.Academic departments seek similarly prepared applicants in 38% of cases, while 44% seek candidates with specialty training only. This may have implications for fourth-year radiology students and their selection of fellowship. Residents and fellows should realize that finding an isolated niche in one subspecialty may not make them competitive for the current job market. Thus, some have suggested that the fourth year of residency should include multiple or all subspecialties of radiology.For example, at my institution we still provide an obstetrical ultrasound rotation, yet one of our seniors planning for a career in interventional radiology preferred to skip that rotation in favor of another on the interventional service to further prepare himself for his fellowship. However, given the data noted above, more competence in multiple areas of radiology may be preferable, especially to provide on-call coverage. The potential for fellows to handle many specialty areas beyond training points to the need to preserve a strong level of general radiology training rather than do a pseudo-fellowship in residency before an actual fellowship where true specialty training should occur.While I certainly hope that ongoing job growth in radiology will encourage U.S. medical students to choose our field as a specialty, there is more we can do to keep radiology a robust and popular specialty. One is to get the word out about radiology earlier. It seems wise to provide medical students more contact with radiology earlier in their clinical training, rather than confining it to a fourth-year elective, when it is too late to influence their specialty selection.Second, we need to broaden the scope of our training. If prospective employers are looking for broad-based skills to provide appropriate coverage, it seems the senior year of residency should provide diverse training that emphasizes general skills. Added experience outside the primary specialty definitely appears important, particularly in the private practice setting.Amid the uncertainty of how today’s political climate in Washington will impact health care, I believe that taking these steps can help prospective job seekers make the most of the improving job market in radiology.ReferencesBluth EI, Bansal S. The 2016 ACR Commission on human resources workforce survey. J Am Coll Radiol.2016;13 (10):1227-1232. doi:10.1016/j.jacr.2016.06.006Arleo EK, Bluth E, Francavilla M, et al. Surveying fourth-year edical students regarding the choice of diagnostic radiology as a specialty. J Am Coll Radiol. 2016;13 (2):188-195. doi:10.1016/Journal of the American College of Radiology 2015.08.005Sharafinski ME, Jr., Nussbaum D, Jha S. Supply/demand in radiology: A historical perspective and comparison to other labor markets. Acad Radiol. 2016; 23 (2):245-251. doi:10.1016/j.acra.2015.10.009Glover M, Patel TY. The radiology fellowship arms race cannot be won. J Am Coll Radiol. 2016:13 (4):461-464. doi:10.1016/j.jacr.2015.11.025Bluth EI, Larson PA, Liebscher LA . Radiologist hiring preferences based on practice needs. J Am Coll Radiol.2016; 13 (1):8-11. doi:10.1016/j.jacr.2015.06.011