Army Is Enlisting More Low-Scoring Recruits

[zimv20]

link (http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-recruit16dec16,1,3964664.story?coll=la-headlines-nation)


Army Is Enlisting More Low-Scoring Recruits

The service hits its mark for November, but many observers worry about the quality of soldiers.

WASHINGTON — The Army met its recruiting goal for November by again accepting a high percentage of recruits who scored in the lowest category on the military's aptitude test, Pentagon officials said Thursday, raising renewed concerns that the quality of the all-volunteer force would suffer.

The Army exceeded its 5,600 recruit goal by 256 for November, and the Army Reserve brought in 1,454 recruits, exceeding its target by 112. To do so, they accepted a "double digit" percentage of recruits who scored from 16 to 30 out of a possible 99 on the military's aptitude test, said officials who spoke on the condition of anonymity.

Last month, the Baltimore Sun reported that the Army had reached its recruiting goals in October by accepting 12% from low scorers, known as Category IV recruits. The Army may accept no more than 4% annually, Defense Department rules say. Although officials last month disclosed the percentage accepted in October, they refused to reveal the November figure.

"We are not giving out [aptitude test] categories during the course of the year," said Douglas Smith, a spokesman for the Army Recruiting Command at Ft. Knox, Ky.

Army officials say that at the end of the recruiting year on Sept. 30, the total percentage of Category IV soldiers will be no more than 4%.

For at least a decade, the Army kept its Category IV soldiers to 2% of its recruitment pool. But last year, faced with a difficult recruiting climate because of the war in Iraq, Army Secretary Francis J. Harvey decided to double the number of Category IV soldiers.

"We will be at 4% at the end of the fiscal year, that's what matters," said Lt. Col. Bryan Hilferty, a spokesman for the Army.

The increasing reliance on the lowest-scoring recruits is troubling to former officers who worry that the quality of the force will erode. They say that the increasingly high-tech Army needs qualified soldiers. And with troops facing more complex duties, good judgment is crucial.

"We are putting more responsibility on the shoulders of privates, probably more than any time in our history," said retired Lt. Col. Charles Krohn, a Vietnam War veteran who worked as a speechwriter for the head of Army personnel in the 1980s. "You don't want [low-scoring recruits] wandering into a mosque in Baghdad."

The Army already had brought in 4% from Category IV — or about 2,900 of its 73,000 recruits — for the 2005 recruiting year, which ended Sept. 30.

In 2004, the Army accepted 440 soldiers from the lowest category, or about 0.6% of 70,000 recruits.

In addition, the Army is beginning to see an erosion in the percentage of soldiers reenlisting. Some analysts blame repeated deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan.

[Lacero]

Read my lips: No new drafts!

[skunk]

No drafts, just a burgeoning army of corporate mercenaries responsible to noone but their shareholders.

[tristan]

How hard are the army tests that people are having trouble passing them? Anybody here ever take one? I'm curious. I'm sure it's not the GMAT - my personal measure of self-worth. :-)

[zimv20]

How hard are the army tests that people are having trouble passing them? Anybody here ever take one? I'm curious. I'm sure it's not the GMAT - my personal measure of self-worth. :-)
during my senior year in HS, we took some kind of army aptitude test. i've no idea if it was the same as what's given to those trying to enlist, or how much it's changed over the years (this was a while ago), but the one i took was dead easy.

[OnceUGoMac]

during my senior year in HS, we took some kind of army aptitude test. i've no idea if it was the same as what's given to those trying to enlist, or how much it's changed over the years (this was a while ago), but the one i took was dead easy.

I was in the army. It's fairly easy. The army's decision to take more Category IV recruits is nothing new. Like the article says, it was just one month, October, that they took more IV recruits. The policy clearly states no more than 4% annually. Unless the L.A. Times can provide evidence that this is a transitioin of that policy, then this is nothing different.

[aquajet]

during my senior year in HS, we took some kind of army aptitude test. i've no idea if it was the same as what's given to those trying to enlist, or how much it's changed over the years (this was a while ago), but the one i took was dead easy.

I took the aptitude test given by the Marine Corps in 1998. It was dead easy as well.

[zimv20]

Unless the L.A. Times can provide evidence that this is a transitioin of that policy, then this is nothing different.
i think the point of the article, and certainly my take from it, is less "there may be illegal recruiting" and more "look at the measures being taken to meet recruiting goals".

[silverback66]

I think the heart of a man or woman and their desire to serve their country ought to be on equal footing with their mental capacity. Obviously, some may not be qualified for combat roles, but there are other jobs that can be done.

[Ugg]

I think the heart of a man or woman and their desire to serve their country ought to be on equal footing with their mental capacity. Obviously, some may not be qualified for combat roles, but there are other jobs that can be done.

Someone who can't pass a basic test probably has little chance in the real world. I would imagine that some of them see it as a meal ticket with bennies involved. Obviously without actual profiles of these low performers it's impossible gauge how closely the bottom of the barrel is being scraped. As far as serving their country is concerned, your flag waving is gettin a little oppressive.

Also, it's a high tech army these days, the food service in Iraq has been contracted out to Halliburton. What kind of "other" jobs did you have in mind?

[silverback66]

Someone who can't pass a basic test probably has little chance in the real world. I would imagine that some of them see it as a meal ticket with bennies involved. Obviously without actual profiles of these low performers it's impossible gauge how closely the bottom of the barrel is being scraped. As far as serving their country is concerned, your flag waving is gettin a little oppressive.

Also, it's a high tech army these days, the food service in Iraq has been contracted out to Halliburton. What kind of "other" jobs did you have in mind?


Sorry, I'm not going to apologize for loving my country.

I don't know what other jobs I have in mind. Maybe something stateside like helping out with cleaning up New Orleans.

[Ugg]

Sorry, I'm not going to apologize for loving my country.

I don't know what other jobs I have in mind. Maybe something stateside like helping out with cleaning up New Orleans.

Doesn't that miss the entire point though? The army needs soldiers not glorified santitation workers. Soldiers that can read write and communicate with increasingly high tech equipment. If they don't have these skills, and surely they don't if they can't pass a basic test, then they're really little more than cannon fodder.


So, what exactly do you love about your country? How many other countries have you been to? I find that those who have travelled are much more likely to see through propaganda.

[OnceUGoMac]

Doesn't that miss the entire point though? The army needs soldiers not glorified santitation workers. Soldiers that can read write and communicate with increasingly high tech equipment. If they don't have these skills, and surely they don't if they can't pass a basic test, then they're really little more than cannon fodder.


So, what exactly do you love about your country? How many other countries have you been to? I find that those who have travelled are much more likely to see through propaganda.

Even though your post wasn't directed towards me, as a veteran of Operation Iraqi Freedom I'll attempt to answer your snobbish blanket statements a.k.a. questions.

I've worked with many soldiers that scored low on the apt test. Although their "booksmarts" were not up to par with many, they were excellent resources in terms of the skills that they had learned before and after training. For every combat soldier, there are ten support soldiers. My grandfather would have scored low on the apt test, as he left school at 13 and began working. He was a brilliant machinist, and through his skill became a manager for a large steel corp. Through his natural ability of administration, he became the first mayor of Beech Bottom, WV, a former steel town. You ridiculous assumption that these soldiers are nothing more than cannon fodder is baseless, offensive, and ignorant.

As for your second statement, I've lived (not just visited or toured via the military) in England, Canada, Mexico and the U.S. Guess what? I still love my country and am proud to be a citizen.:rolleyes:

[silverback66]

I went to Canada once eh?

I thnk OnceUgoMac 'it the nail on the 'ead eh govna?

[Ugg]

I went to Canada once eh?

I thnk OnceUgoMac 'it the nail on the 'ead eh govna?

The fact that the armed services are scraping the bottom of the barrel is a pretty good indication that the overall quality of the armed services is probably going to go down hill. bushco's much lauded but unfunded and penalty rich no child left behind penalises schools whose students don't pass and yet those same students are deemed fit for service. There's a lot of hypocrisy hiding behind such actions.

The armed services in the US have a long history of putting the least qualified on the front lines. My assertion is by no means ignorant, baseless, snobbish and whatever other adjectives that ougm used but a matter of history. buscho is simply trying to avoid the draft on his watch. The continued occupation of Iraq means that a draft is inevitable so it's quite obvious that the pentagon is doing everything possible to maintain troop levels as long as possible by crook or hook.

[skunk]

buscho is simply trying to avoid the draft on his watch.He's had plenty of practice there.

[solvs]

Edit: You know, on second thought, I'm just going to stay out of this one.

[takao]

hm hardly surprising .. after all they have some goals to achieve.. was similiar here in austria.. where they sort out all those who aren't "fit" enough.. some years they take nearly everybody and other years when they are plenty they are more picky

i had the "luck" to get a spring date .. (which normally means: hardly any students) and we had lots of HiDis ("Hilfsdienst" = "Support Service" ) who had to mow lawns, clean windows, etc. and were available for doing random things if one of us writers/assistents needed a helping hand like with washing out food container etc.

an army can use a lot of low scoring recruits... it's always possible to find something to do ... that's why you learn how to "look busy" pretty good in an army ;)

[pseudobrit]

Ah, a story that just begs for the byline writer to typeset:

An Army of Dumb?

[pseudobrit]

during my senior year in HS, we took some kind of army aptitude test. i've no idea if it was the same as what's given to those trying to enlist, or how much it's changed over the years (this was a while ago), but the one i took was dead easy.

I scored a 95 or something on a pre-ASVAB test. My algebra was very rusty.

[pseudobrit]

I don't know what other jobs I have in mind. Maybe something stateside like helping out with cleaning up New Orleans.

That's not a job for the active federal military. Neither practically nor legally.

I think the heart of a man or woman and their desire to serve their country ought to be on equal footing with their mental capacity. Obviously, some may not be qualified for combat roles, but there are other jobs that can be done.

What if those jobs are filled?

I tried to enlist and was denied because of my history of (very controlled) asthma. Should my heart and desire to serve have been on equal footing with my physical capacity?

[miloblithe]

Obviously, some may not be qualified for combat roles, but there are other jobs that can be done.

But I think the military has changed a lot and has fewer of those kinds of roles. We have so many civilian contractors for the support roles (food, laundry, etc). The idea seems to be to reduce the military down to combat/logistics/leadership and contract out for everything else. Not much room there for the unqualified.

Of course, this works for the army and air force but not so well for the navy. You still need Navy cooks on the ship.

[joepunk]

How hard are the army tests that people are having trouble passing them? Anybody here ever take one? I'm curious. I'm sure it's not the GMAT - my personal measure of self-worth. :-)I took both the little in-recruiting office and the main text at a naval base in 1999. It was very easy for me. If I had passed the physical and actually had joined I probably would have gotten stationed anywhere I would want (I would have like to be stationed in Germany as most of my family lives there). I was that good.

[Sdashiki]

Dumb people can still be damn good at what they do.

THis is not a personal knock to anyone but a huge NON-PC stereotyping:

plumbers, electricians, car mechanics etc can ALL do stuff most people have no idea where to begin at. And yet they arent going to be inventing the next cancer drug or scoring high on an aptitude test.

Thats what the army is, well trained ONE skill people. One major skill, KILL, engineer, shipping, medic, food service etc etc. And they do it well. There is no point in training cannon fodder to do more than one major thing. So in the end we have alot of good soldiers, but not smart people.

Or something like that.

[aquajet]

THis is not a personal knock to anyone but a huge NON-PC stereotyping:...

To say the least :rolleyes:

[pseudobrit]

plumbers, electricians, car mechanics etc can ALL do stuff most people have no idea where to begin at. And yet they arent going to be inventing the next cancer drug or scoring high on an aptitude test.

And most doctors or chemists could take an equivalent amount of training and be able to do a mechanic's or a plumber's job.

But I get your larger point. Different people have different strengths and interests. It's just that many people with low intelligence tend to have limited or very weak strengths, in which case their utility for the armed services is limited. The military knows this and that's why they will only take in a small handful of low scoring applicants each year.

[zimv20]

regarding everyone's defense of low-scoring enlistees being able to make good soldiers -- it's a noble effort, but let's keep in mind that most of the time, even the army doesn't want them.

[pseudobrit]

regarding everyone's defense of low-scoring enlistees being able to make good soldiers -- it's a noble effort, but let's keep in mind that most of the time, even the army doesn't want them.

Those liberal fags!

[blackfox]

What are the requirements for cannon fodder anyway?...


Seriously, while I understand how a system like the military may be able to mitigate/manipulate individual soldiers' deficiencies even to an aggregate advantage, I do wonder about the potential of fallout from lack of quality in the ranks.

These soldiers are representatives of our country in the eyes of others, and there is a great potential for bad things to happen when they are not up to snuff. hearts and minds, remember?

Despite all this, I am in agreement with those who have said (or implied) that intelligence is measured in many ways, not just via testing - and someone who is unable to do algebra or write above a 4th grade level, may still be an excellent soldier. Although, I do wonder about the potential lack of critical-thinking skills those who test poorly might have (as applicable to the field).

just a couple cents.

[takao]

Thats what the army is, well trained ONE skill people. One major skill, KILL, engineer, shipping, medic, food service etc etc. And they do it well. There is no point in training cannon fodder to do more than one major thing. So in the end we have alot of good soldiers, but not smart people.

well that's the US army approach because they have such a huge amount of volunteers... since in austria we have very little volunteers the core staff has to a do a lot more

[takao]

Despite all this, I am in agreement with those who have said (or implied) that intelligence is measured in many ways, not just via testing - and someone who is unable to do algebra or write above a 4th grade level, may still be an excellent soldier. Although, I do wonder about the potential lack of critical-thinking skills those who test poorly might have (as applicable to the field).

personally while i would say that every army can find a job for everyone thanks to outsourcing and the changes in doctrine it's slowly chancing

soldiers will have to do more than ever in the future

[pseudobrit]

I do wonder about the potential lack of critical-thinking skills those who test poorly might have (as applicable to the field).

Well, I think of it this way: I outscored Bush on the SAT by 20 points IIRC. I took it once when I was 16. Now that scares me because I want a guy way smarter than me running things, and Bush is at least marginally dumber. I also haven't been a hardcore alcoholic for 20 years, so he may have tilted the ice a bit since then, too.

Now to think that I scored a 90-something on a pre-ASVAB test means I'm roughly 3 to 5 times brighter than these guys:

a "double digit" percentage of recruits who scored from 16 to 30

which is also disconcerting. I ain't that smart, but that's real dumb.

[3rdpath]

here's a recruitment story of a not-too-distant relative...dovetails quite nicely with the lower test score discussion.

my relative is a young male who, sadly, is not very bright. he didn't graduate HS but did manage to eventually get a GED. he also has very little common sense, ntm has a family history of mental problems. i know plenty of people who aren't book smart but have gone on to attain some astounding success...my relative will not be one of them.

so with the army's now larger quota of low percentile acceptance, he enlists. he fails basic training and yet they give him another chance. he finally graduates and they send him to ( deleted base destination) where he almost immediately has a mental meltdown. the army, if they had given him any sort of psych test upon enlistment, shouldn't be surprised..but yet they think he's faking and throw him in the brig. finally they discharge him and send him home.

this is what happens when you scrape the bottom of the barrel. a waste of everyone's time, energy and tax dollars. clearly there are some people that the army shouldn't be accepting and yet they are.

[JesseJames]

I took the ASVAB back in '92 and scored a 100 on it. I wasn't feeling that good on the day of the test so I knew I could've done better.
You have to score at least 110 to be able to do just about ANY job in the Army; even a helicopter pilot.
I wanted to be hardcore so I chose Infantry.
You get all kinds in the Army. I've met some incredible people; along with some truly thickheaded people.
I've always bristle when people consider grunts dumb "cannon fodder".
Just try to accomplish the tasks for the Expert Infantry Badge; or Airborne School; or doing a 10 digit grid coordinate dog leg and a map resection; or bracketing fire for an artillery strike. Equipment busted? Can't continue mission? Wrong freaking answer, IMPROVISE dog face. What's that? YOU'RE TIRED??? WRONG ANSWER. Ten more miles to go on this march then I want you to field strip your weapons, reassemble, and show me fifteen count manual arms and a weapons functions check.

[takao]

or doing a 10 digit grid coordinate dog leg and a map resection;

yeah i just what to vent a little: why o why is the NATO map standard that retarded ... the really funny thing is that the austrian map standard was like 4 times as precise but thanks to conformity (we are not _even_ a NATO member) we had to use that NATO standard as well...

or bracketing fire for an artillery strike. Equipment busted? Can't continue mission? Wrong freaking answer, IMPROVISE dog face. What's that? YOU'RE TIRED??? WRONG ANSWER. Ten more miles to go on this march then I want you to field strip your weapons, reassemble, and show me fifteen count manual arms and a weapons functions check.

you forgot all soldiers most loved command: "ABC ALARM" (in english: NBC alert or something like that) or the nifty howling light signals.. i think it was violett or white ( the other meant "Panzer Alarm" which wasn't very pleasing either ;) )

ahh the heavy nbc suit from the NBC scout course... god, do i miss it _NOT_ nearly falling to the ground because you fell dazzled because of the high sweat loss wasn't that funny... sadly our unit didn't have the suits with AC ;) ... and we did our course during summer at 35°

EDIT: that were my personal near death expierences ...


that aside in austria instructors aren't allowed to insult recruits ;)

[mactastic]

35? That's not hot! ;) (Remember, we lose spacecraft because we still are too stubborn to make the move to metric) :D

[tristan]

Well, from what little I know about the army it's getting more high-tech. I don't think you have to be a rocket scientist to fire a rocket launcher, but you probably should know how to read a basic manual and do a little simple math in your head (did i fire six shots or only five?)

But the real question - would Forrest Gump be allowed to serve?