DTIC ADA509884: Reevaluating the Marine Corps Recruiting Standards

Reevaluating the Marine Corps Recruiting Standards

Captain Brian R. Davis

Major Donald Wright, CG5

February 20, 2009

Report Documentation Page

Form Approved

OMB No. 0704-0188

Public reporting burden for the collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and
maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information,
including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington

VA 22202-4302. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to a penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it
does not display a currently valid OMB control number.

1. REPORT DATE

20 FEB 2009 2 ' REPORT TYPE

3. DATES COVERED

00-00-2009 to 00-00-2009

4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE

Reevaluating the Marine Corps Recruiting Standards

5a. CONTRACT NUMBER

5b. GRANT NUMBER

5c. PROGRAM ELEMENT NUMBER

6. AUTHOR(S)

5d. PROJECT NUMBER

5e. TASK NUMBER

5f. WORK UNIT NUMBER

7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES)

United States Marine Corps,Command Staff College Marine Corps
University,2076 South Street, Marine Corps Combat Development
Command,Quantico,VA,22134-5068

8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION

REPORT NUMBER

9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES)

10. SPONSOR/MONITOR'S ACRONYM(S)

11. SPONSOR/MONITOR'S REPORT
NUMBER(S)

12. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENT

Approved for public release; distribution unlimited

13. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

14. ABSTRACT

15. SUBJECT TERMS

16. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF: 17. LIMITATION OF

___ ABSTRACT

18. NUMBER 19a. NAME OF

OF PAGES RESPONSIBLE PERSON

a. REPORT b. ABSTRACT c. THIS PAGE Same 3S

unclassified unclassified unclassified Report (SAR)

16

Standard Form 298 (Rev. 8-98)

Prescribed by ANSI Std Z39-18

Proper enlistment and screening and job placement are
prerequisites for efficiencies in training, retention of skilled
personnel, and mission performance. Any deficiencies in the
selection and classification system lead to increased training
times and cost, dissatisfied personnel with concomitant
decreases in morale, productivity, and retention, and critical
shortages of skills caused by failure to achieve optimal
assignment of available manpower into the various occupations.

-A Department of Defense report to Congress (DoD, 1981a, p. 5)

2

Marine Corps recruiting has always been a daunting task,
but four new potential recruiting pitfalls are now threatening
the fabric of the Corps. First, the Marine Corps is currently
accepting the most uneducated recruits of all the service
branches in order to meet recently increased enlistment goals.
Second, potential recruits show less interest in joining the
military now than any other time in recent history. Another
potential shortfall is the undereducated minority groups that
are continuously targeted to meet recruiters' guotas. Finally,
the Marine Corps has had to lower not only its educational
standards, but its moral standards as well. In order to meet the
technological demands of today's battlefield while maintaining
its principles, the Marine Corps needs to reevaluate its
recruiting standards.

History of Screening

The Army leadership realized the importance of aptitude and
education screening during World War I. Subsequently, the Army's
Alpha and Bravo tests were developed primarily to judge the new
recruits' potential ability and for job placement purposes. By
World War II, the test had been improved and was renamed the
Army General Classification Test (AGCT). After the war, every
service had its own aptitude test, but every test had the same
content, so in 1948 a working group was formed to develop a

3

uniform aptitude test that met certain criteria agreed upon by
all the services. What was created in 1950 became known as the
Armed Forces Qualification Test (AFQT). This test was used as a
screening device to measure "general mental ability to absorb
military training within a reasonable length of time" and
"potential general usefulness in the service, if qualified on
the tests." 1

In order to increase efficiency, the Department of Defense
developed the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB)
in 1976, which combined qualification and classification
testing. This multiple choice test improved the ability to match
applicants with available job positions and allowed guaranteed
occupational specialties for the qualified applicants. 2 Of the
nine subsets of the ASVAB, four are used to determine
eligibility for enlistment and are referred to as the modern day
AFQT. These four subsets are arithmetic reasoning, mathematics
knowledge, paragraph comprehension, and word knowledge. The AFQT
scores represent a person's trainability as compared to the
general youth population and are compiled as percentiles.
Therefore a score of 75% represents an applicant doing better

1 Sheila Kirby, Enlisted Personnel Management: A Historical Perspective (Santa Monica: Rand Corp, 1996)

2 Kirby, Enlisted Personnel Management

4

than 75% of the test-takers. Six categories are used to further

divide the scores as shown in Figure 1. J

Tier and Mental Group Definitions

CNA

Number of accessions is unconstrained

Tier

Who Qualifies?

Tier 1

High School Dbloma

Graduates (HSDGs)

Adult Education Diploma,
Completed 1 Semester

College

Tier II

GEDs, Home School, National
Guard Youth ChalleNGe
Program Graduates,

Certificate of Attendance, etc.

Tier III

Non-HSDGs

Mental

Group

AFQT

Scores

Cat. 1

AFQT>= 93

Cat. II

65<= AFQT<93

Cat. IIIA

50<= AFQT<65

Cat. IIIB

31<=AFQT<50

Cat. IVA

21<=AFQT<31

Cat IVR & C

1fK=AFOT<?1

Meeting the Minimums

The first three categories of the AFQT shown in
are typically viewed as high quality scores and have
limitations for eligibility. While category V, those
less than ten, typically read at the 5 th to 7 th grade
are excluded from military service.

figure 1
no

scoring
levels and

3 Kirby, Enlisted Personnel Management

5

The National Defense Authorization Act of 1981 limits the
proportion of Category IV recruits to twenty percent. 4 It also
mandates that those individuals without a high school diploma
score a minimum of thirty one on the AFQT which is equivalent to
at least category IIIB. 5 Currently, a high school diploma is
desirable, but not required for service entry. However category
IV recruits must be high school diploma graduates. Moreover,
every service places an additional minimum AFQT for enlistment
consideration. The Army's minimum is thirty one, the Marine's is
thirty two, the Navy standard is thirty five, and the Air Force
and Coast Guard are thirty six. 6

The Department of Defense mandated in DoDI 1145.01, dated
20 September 2005, that no more than four percent of an
accession cohort can be Category IV, sixty percent must be
Category IIIA or better, and ninety percent of all accessions
must be Tier I. The Marine Corps has raised the bar further to
limit category IV active duty accessions to one percent and
requires ninety five percent of accessions to be Tier 1.

However, these figures can be improved upon as the Air Force has

4 Kirby, Enlisted Personnel Management

5 Dana L. Bookshire, Anita U. Hattiangadi, and Catherine M. Hiatt, Emerging Issues in USMC Recruiting: Assessing
the Success of Cat. IV Recruits in the Marine Corps. (Alexandria, Virginia: CNA Corporation, August 2006)

6 Wikipedia. December 10, 2008. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ASVAB (accessed December 10, 2008).

6

already proven with their exemplary standard of ninety nine
percent Tier 1. 7

The Center for Naval Analysis (CNA) conducted an assessment
of the success of Category IV recruits in the Marine Corps in
2006 and found the Marines accepted the highest percentage of
Category IIIB recruits of all the services in the year 2004.

This was the first time since 1995 that the Marine Corps has led
all services in this unimpressive category. This grouping is the
bottom half of test takers scoring from thirty one to fifty on
the AFQT. 30.5% of Marine Corps recruits in 2004 were in this
bottom category. Once again, the Air Force currently sets the
standard having only eighteen percent of their recruits in this
bottom category. 8 The Corps is being drained by these poorly
educated recruits and this issue is easily resolved by simply
not accepting poor performers.

Doing More With Less

Another major problem recruiters are facing is that there
are fewer young men to select from. According to several DOD
surveys, interest among young men in joining the Marines is at
its lowest point in history, currently at eight percent. 9 One of

7 Bookshire, Hattiangadi and Hiatt, Emerging Issues in USMC Recruiting.

8 Bookshire, Hattiangadi and Hiatt, Emerging Issues in USMC Recruiting.

9 Andrew Tilghman, "Tough times for today's recruiters." Marine Corps Times, April 14, 2008.

7

the largest contributors to this generation's lack of military
interest is the large number of young people who attend college.

Andrew Tilghman, a journalist for the Marine Corps Times,
wrote an article in November 2008 about how difficult it is to
recruit in this day and age. The main point of his article is
that today's quality of recruit is declining. He furthermore
describes that recruiters are handing out more waivers than ever
before as the standards of education are lower than they were
years ago. Mr. Tilghman states, "For the troops in uniform, that
means the new cohort of youngsters coming out of boot camp may
have more health and disciplinary problems and more trouble
quickly learning the skills needed to perform today's
missions . " 10

Richard Kohn, a military historian at the University of
North Carolina, claims, "There is almost no end to the ingenuity
of the Pentagon in attracting people. And if push comes to
shove, we will simply lower the requirements." One of Kohn's
main concerns however is that tomorrow's recruits may not be as
good as those in recent years." Kohn goes on to say, "We've gone
through a 20-year period when we've had a very high quality in
the American force," he said. "Maybe [military leaders] are
going to have to learn to live with a force that is less capable
coming in. Maybe they're going to have to learn to live with a

10 Tilghman, "Tough times for today's recruiters."

8

force that costs more in terms of training." If the Marine Corps
priority is quantity during this time of war and meeting new
recruitment goals because of the surge, then considerable effort
must go into weighing the risk of meeting those goals at the
expense of quality recruits. Peter Singer, head of the 21 st
Century Defense Initiative at the Brookings Institute, a
Washington think tank, said it best, "There is a battle for
talent in the 21st century. Finite resources are not just oil
and natural gas. It's also human capital — human talent. And the
military is going to have to be out there battling for it." 11

Significantly lowering recruiting standards would not be
out of the question. Historically, our military has relaxed
standards for enlistment during times of war to facilitate the
larger number of troops needed. World War I, World War II,

Korea, and Vietnam were all examples of when the military
lowered their standards to meet the minimum enlistment goals.
Recent facts and figures show that the United States is content
to lower the standards to dangerously low levels to meet the
expansion goals set forth by the Secretary of Defense to
continue to fight the Global War on Terror.

In 2007, Defense Secretary Robert Gates announced plans to
expand the military by 92,000 Soldiers and Marines by the year

11 Tilghman, "Tough times for today's recruiters."

12 Kirby, Enlisted Personnel Management

9

2011. The Marines will increase their numbers by 27,000 and are
currently already two years ahead of schedule, hoping to reach
that goal in early 2009. The goal for the end of fiscal year
2007 was 184,000 Marines, but the Marine Corps' strength was
actually 186,500. The goal for 2008 was 189,000, but the Marines
actually ended the fiscal year with 198,000. In fiscal year
2008, the Army signed up 80,517 new troops, while the Marines
signed up 37,991. lj Because the Marine Corps is ahead of its
expansion schedule, adjusting priorities from quantity to
quality should be the focus.

Targeting Marines, Not Quotas

With the current expansion pressing recruiters even harder
than before to meet quotas, recruiters are now targeting lower-
middle class minority groups from places with limited economic
opportunities. However, targeting underprivileged minority
groups is not a new practice. In 1996, Hispanics made up 11.2%
of the population, but only 6.9% of the military. The Marine
Corps made a concerted effort to recruit more Hispanics to
balance what they called an "underrepresentation." The only

13 Yochi J. Dreazen, "Marine Corps Speeds Ahead on Growth." Wall Street Journal, December 6, 2008: A 5.

10

problem with that drive was that only fifty five percent of
Hispanics had a high school diploma. 14

In 1996, African Americans made up twelve percent of the
nation's population, while representing twenty two percent of
the military's population. The American Civil Liberties Union
(ACLU) classifies this overrepresentation as racial targeting.

As with Hispanics, only seventy five percent of African
Americans had a high school diploma. These staggering numbers
have not changed much from the previous decade and the
undereducated minority groups continue to be targeted according
to several ACLU reports. 15 Recruiting from minority groups to
better represent the population is not a bad notion. Targeting
the uneducated, regardless of race, is where the problems arise.

Maintaining Our Moral Standards

Not only are we loosening our academic standards for
recruits, we are lowering our moral standards as well. The
Marine Corps allowed sixty eight percent more convicted felons
into their ranks in 2007 than they did the previous year. This
includes individuals convicted of armed robbery, arson,

14 Sherwood Ross, "www.opednews.com." www.opednews.com. November 30, 2008.

http://www.opednews.eom/articles/Pentagon-Recruiters-Target-by-Sherwood-Ross-081130-674.html (accessed

December 4, 2008).

15 Andrea Stone, "Military recruiters target underrepresented Hispanics." USA Today, January 21,1999: 5 A.

11

burglary, kidnapping, making terroristic threats, rape or sexual
abuse, and committing indecent acts or liberties with a child.

In 2007, 350 recruits had felony convictions on their records,
up from 208 the previous year. Recruits convicted of burglary
also rose to 142 from 90, and those who had committed aggravated
assault increased to 44 from 35. The Chairman of the House
Committee on Oversight and Government Reform Representative
Henry A. Waxman said, "It raises concerns. An increase in the
recruitment of individuals with criminal records is a result of
the strains put on the military by the Iraq war and may be
undermining our military readiness." 16 Senior military officials
are quick to point out that only a small percentage, about two
percent, of Marine recruits require a criminal waiver. Major
General Milstead, the Marine Corp's top recruiting chief, said,
"the Marine Corps granted waivers to 46% of its recruits in
fiscal 2008." Most of these waivers were for drug use however
and not felony charges. 17 One could argue that General Milstead
does not alleviate concern by saying forty four percent of the
Corps is currently serving on drug waivers. There is no reason
for the Marine Corps to compromise its fundamental principles by
allowing so many moral waivers each year.

16 Lizette Alverez, "Army and Marine Corps grant more felony waivers." New York Times, April 22, 2008

17 William H. McMichael, "Shaky economy helps recruiting, retention." Marine Corps Times, October 14, 2008.

12

Counterargument

Not everyone in the United States is concerned with the
quality of our recruits. James Jay Carafano of the Washington,
D.C. Heritage Foundation claims, "The enlistment of lower-
scoring and less-educated people is not a cause for worry." He
believes people make too much of the argument that more educated
and higher scoring recruits make better soldiers. In some
situations, he claims, there is nothing better than having sheer
numbers on the ground regardless of their education levels. 18

As the recent quality of recruit has been slipping, there
is hope in the very near future to turn this trend around.
History reveals that during times of economic hardship, many
individuals who would not have considered the military as an
occupation in better times are walking through recruiters' doors
ready to enlist. With a larger pool of potential recruits, the
military services will enjoy higher quality recruits, if only
for a short period of time until the economy rebounds.
Calculating the effect of the current financial crisis on
recruitment is premature according to some military recruiters;
however, just as before, they expect the weak economy to help

Dogen Hannah, "Armed Forces face challenge filling ranks in time of war: Some concerned military sacrificing
quality for quantity by lowering enlistment standards." Tribune Business News, March 18, 2007:1.

13

their efforts. Lt Col. Mike Zeliff, the assistant Chief of Staff

for Marketing and Recruiting is quoted as saying, "The economy
is probably making more people think about other options, and
we're probably benefiting from that." 19

Conclusion

Combat power is no longer measured by how many men are
dressed in uniforms on the field of battle. The Marine Corps'
edge comes from its superior technological war machines and
those highly skilled and trained minds driving them. As
technology continues to advance, the Corps' fighting men and
women must advance with it. Instead of lowering the recruiting
criteria, the Corps should reevaluate the standards to ensure
the most capable and qualified individuals this country has to
offer are the ones being enlisted.

19 Dreazen, "Marine Corps Speeds Ahead on Growth."

14

Works Cited

Alverez, Lizette. "Army and Marine Corps grant more felony
waivers." New York Times, April 22, 2008.

Bookshire, Dana L., Anita U. Hattiangadi, and Catherine M.

Hiatt. Emerging Issues in USMC Recruiting: Assessing the Success
of Cat. IV Recruits in the Marine Corps. Alexandria, Virginia:
CNA Corporation, August 2006.

Dreazen, Yochi J. "Marine Corps Speeds Ahead on Growth." Wall
Street Journal, December 6, 2008: A 5.

Editorial. "A Real-World Army." New York Times, Dec 24, 2006:

4.7.

Hannah, Dogen. "Armed Forces face challenge filling ranks in
time of war: Some concerned military sacrificing quality for
quantity by lowering enlistment standards." Tribune Business
News, March 18, 2007: 1.

Hilburn, Matt. "Growing the Force." Sea Power, September 2007:

14 .

Hilburn, Matt. "Recruit & Retain." Sea Power, September 2007:

18 .

Holmes, Erik. "AF Recruiters Were Highest Quality in DOD."

Marine Corps Times, October 22, 2008.

Kirby, Sheila. Enlisted Personnel Management: A Historical
Perspective. Santa Monica: Rand Corp, 1996.

McMichael, William H. "Shaky economy helps recruiting,
retention." Marine Corps Times, October 14, 2008.

Ross, Sherwood, "www.opednews.com." www.opednews.com. November
30, 2008. http://www.opednews.com/articles/Pentagon-Recruiters-
Target-by-Sherwood-Ross-081130-674.html (accessed December 4,
2008).

Stone, Andrea. "Military recruiters target underrepresented
Hispanics." USA Today, January 21, 1999: 5 A.

Tilghman, Andrew. "Tough times for today's recruiters." Marine
Corps Times, April 14, 2008.

15

Wikipedia. December 10, 2008. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ASVAB
(accessed December 10, 2008).

16