One of our local stations did an undercover study on whether military recruiters are lying to young people in order to get them to enlist. Here's the story. Okay, do you think that this happens all of the time or that because the army and the marines aren't making their quotas lately (because of the Iraqi war), they've dropped their standards a level or two or three? Do you think that all high schools should allow recruiters to speak with their kids? ******************************************************** 05-23-05, 11:00 PM newnickname My son considered joining the army in the UK, seven or eight years ago (they'll take you at sixteen ). It was just the same - high pressure sales techniques, videos about water-skiing and travelling the world...
Maybe it's been like that ever since they invented armies - promising bored farm boys adventure, girls and glory.
The US military is maybe having special problems since Rumsfeld et al launched their pointless war - but aging populations are making army recruiters desperate in many countries.
05-23-05, 11:20 PM DorianGreyed "Do you think that all high schools should allow recruiters to speak with their kids?" - Kelleygirl
Yes, I do. Maintaining a standing armed forces is necessary, especially when we are under an administration that wants so much to go to war. However, that does not excuse outright lying, and those who have lied should face some serious punishment. (Re-training is not a punishment,it is merely an acknowledgement that the previous training was not enough for a specific individual.) I have no doubt that, despite the Army's spokesman at the recruiting command at Fort Knox saying that he believes the recruiters aren't deliberately making false statements, the recruiters lie knowingly. Perhaps a reduction in rank would be sufficient, a less than honorable discharge, and for a few that were mentioned in the article, possibly an all-expenses-paid year in the "safe" haven of Iraq.
05-27-05, 05:10 PM Rakuchild I have no trouble believing recruiters lie. When I was a senior in high school, the local recruiter called me up and asked me what I was thinking about doing with my life. I told him I really wanted to go to an art school become a potter and that I wasn't interested in any kind of military career. He informed me that the Army had great art schools, including pottery classes. I was a dumb kid, but not THAT dumb! Big Grin
I've recently discovered a national group working toward undoing that sneaky provision in the No Child act that demands student info from the schools. http://www.leavemychildalone.org
Leave My Child Alone is addressing the issue of family privacy and working toward a Student Privacy Act.
05-27-05, 10:06 PM coldfuse I have no problem whatsoever with service recruiters at high schools. That they are overzealous - quotas, maybe? - places them squarely on level ground with corporate recruiters where jobs must be "sold." Carry a good set of questions and skepticism along with your good attitude to a meeting with either.
Is there anyone who has been duped into thinking that the military prepares one to be - well - militaristic?
05-27-05, 11:36 PM Rakuchild Part of the problem with recruiters being in high schools is that high school kids are minors. In the case of the provision in "No Child Left Behind," recruiters are given home addresses/phone numbers/personal information of minors. Parents are not asked and many aren't aware this is going on. If you give out my home phone number so some one can contact my minor child, you have invaded my privacy.
I work for a community college. Recruiters are on campus out in the courtyard every sunny day. They're trying to hook into the young people by promising to take care of their educational costs. They're not having much luck because there are quite a few young men and women who have served to get that tuition money and they're letting others know it wasn't worth it. (And they're praying they don't get called back up.)
College students are adults though and more certain of what field they want to go into. High school students for the most part aren't so certain and their personal information shouldn't be available and recruiters shouldn't be allowed to talk to them without a parent being present.
05-27-05, 11:59 PM AMoore
quote: Originally posted by coldfuse: I have no problem whatsoever with service recruiters at high schools. That they are overzealous - quotas, maybe? - places them squarely on level ground with corporate recruiters where jobs must be "sold." Carry a good set of questions and skepticism along with your good attitude to a meeting with either.
Is there anyone who has been duped into thinking that the military prepares one to be - well - militaristic?
Corporate recruiters may be overzealous, and have the level of honesty we all associate with used car salesmen, but in general, the positions for which they recruit are unlikely to put anyone in harms way.
Other government agencies than the military have positions to fill that require no more than a high school diploma, but I haven't noticed them recruiting on the high school campuses, or demanding access to information...
Alan Moore
05-28-05, 01:02 AM DorianGreyed "Part of the problem with recruiters being in high schools is that high school kids are minors." - Rakuchild
While I am still in favor of allow the armed forces to make their pitch on high school campuses, I feel that the above comment raises a good point. Even police are limited in questioning a minor child. Maybe their recruiting at the high school level should be limited to in-class presentations, with a teacher present. In a college setting, however, I think that recruiters should be 'on their own,' so to speak, and neither the students nor the recruiters should be protected from the words of the other. This is not stating that lies by the recruiters of any career shopuld be tolerated, and documented evidence of any should be grounds for removal from campus. It is presumed that the employers of the recruiters will deal with those who "lost" a campus for the 'company.'
------------------ (Is it just my wishful thinking, or is the tone of this thread a cut above the usual in News & Refeence?)
05-28-05, 09:16 AM methos There has also been a controversy lately over whether colleges (especially public colleges) have the right to prevent recruiting on campus without repercusion. This is not a matter of whether or not military recruiters are being unethical, but rather the schools' decisions that the military does not conform to the anti-discrimination policies that the colleges require all their recruiters to conform to (because of don't ask, don't tell). Under federal law, the governmnet can, in turn, cut funding to the school, but this law is being challenged.
As far as recruiting in high schools, I do think it should continue, but (given that there are occasional confirmed cases of the recruiters lying and/or doing such things as helping the recruits cheat drug tests) there is obviously a need for better oversight of some sort or another.
05-28-05, 10:53 AM FredPuli Armies have always recruited on promises and recruits are commonly from the poorest areas.They always were. We too have shortages of manpower and we too find that the poorer areas are fertile ground.
We've long had somewhat misleading slogans too. A recruiting poster on the wall here is from 1915. It shows a Zeppelin airship, flying at night over London, lit by searchlights. And the slogan ?" Join the army and help stop an air raid." In 1915? Who are they trying to kid? Some deal: go to the trenches and stop a Zeppelin !
It's correct to say that 16 year olds usually sign on for 22 years here, guaranteeing a pension . It is surprising that they are committed to a minimum of 4 years post 18. (I expect they are not allowed to sign at 16 without the approval of their parent or guardian )
How does college come into it ? The British Army will teach a recruit a trade, in the course of and part of the service but it can't pay for someone's college education (which in any case here is done by official 'student loans').The university entrance and funding are wholly independent of the career. Once in the university the student may get a small lump sum for joining the army but that's the extent of it. If the only way a kid is going to get into a college or university is to enlist, then no wonder they join Smile
Obviously the British army has no right to recruit at state schools here. The most that a head teacher or education authority would allow would be a presentation, together with presentations by other employers, as part of careers assistance.
How can an Act, 'No Child Left Behind', enable the Army to demand details of every child in a school,right down to the phone number ? How did this, presumably unintended, consequence come about? What other bodies have a right to this information?
05-30-05, 10:16 AM newnickname Have Rumsfeld & co. 'broken' the US army?
quote: "Part of the problem with recruiters being in high schools is that high school kids are minors." - Rakuchild
This is basically true , but the recruiters are there looking for the kids that are not going to college right away or ever, and give them a chance to have a military career, and have the opportunity to get an education through the programs that the Government supplies.
They are there to talk to the seniors who would be around the age of eighteen.
05-30-05, 11:07 PM AMoore
quote: Originally posted by Scotty:
quote: "Part of the problem with recruiters being in high schools is that high school kids are minors." - Rakuchild
This is basically true , but the recruiters are there looking for the kids that are not going to college right away or ever , and give them a chance to have a military career , and have the opportunity to get an education through the programs that the Government supplies.
Are you suggesting that these opportunites wouldn't be available if the recruiters didn't get access to every kids information?
And why don't they use the information they've got? My son is still getting sign-up ads from the Army and Navy after he's been in the service for five years!
Alan Moore
05-31-05, 10:00 PM Scotty
quote: Are you suggesting that these opportunites wouldn't be available if the recruiters didn't get access to every kids information?
Actually , what I am suggesting is that they are there to get recruits for their particular branch of service ,and build up the armed forces of the US.
Where you get your ideas I do not know.
05-31-05, 10:45 PM AMoore
quote: Originally posted by Scotty:
quote: Are you suggesting that these opportunites wouldn't be available if the recruiters didn't get access to every kids information?
Actually , what I am suggesting is that they are there to get recruits for their particular branch of service ,and build up the armed forces of the US.
Where you get your ideas I do not know.
Mostly, I get them from my own experience, by following the news, and from discussions I overhear, or in which I'm a participant.
My own son is in the military, about to get out. He didn't get there because recruiters came to his school, or because they had information about him from his school. I also have two stepsons, neither of which will go into the military. So in all of the instances with a direct personal connection, military recruiters having access to schools and school information are irrelevant, and that includes cases of kids entering the military and kids not entering the military. The costs of providing such information and giving them access to the schools appear to be wasted. The fact that they continue to try to recruit my son, even though he's already in the service suggests that waste is a major factor in the recruitment effort. Since recruitment efforts aren't meeting the needs of the services at present, eliminating ths waste would seem to be a worthwhile endeavor. Perhaps the recruiting services should focus on things that will bring in qualified recruits, instead of whatever it is that they're doing now.
Alan Moore
06-04-05, 12:47 PM Rakuchild FP- in answer to your questions-
quote: Originally posted by FredPuli: How does college come into it ?
People who serve can earn money for college- I'm not sure but it may still be called the G.I. Bill. It's a big marketing tool to pull young people in. Otherwise students, like my daughter, wind up applying for state and federal grants and loans to finance higher education. _____________________________________________
How can an Act, 'No Child Left Behind', enable the Army to demand details of every child in a school,right down to the phone number ? How did this, presumably unintended, consequence come about? What other bodies have a right to this information?
It's all about funding. Schools wanting the federal dollars have to comply with the rules. That's why recruiters can go into public schools-because the public schools get funding from the government. Also many high schools will have a junior ROTC program offered. My high school had a Navy ROTC program with about 15-20 students (out of about 1200) involved at any time.
The college I work for is a state college that receives federal and state funds. When I worked at a private university, recruiters could only come if invited for career days. (It's possibly the same at private high schools, I've never been involved with one.)
And it's not just the "No Child Left Behind" that requires info gathering on students. My friends homeschooled their only child. He was able to start college level math classes when he was 16. His parents paid his fees and they received no student loans or grants. When he turned 18, he was still attending the college but he was barred from even registering for classes until he registered with Selective Service, though his parents were still covering all his fees. Until he provided a registration number, the state college blocked him from registering for classes.
A young man cannot receive student financial aid until he provides a Selective Service registration number. At this time, females are exempt from registering. There is an organization- Leave My Child Alone- that is educating parents about the "No Child" act and how to remove their children's names from the lists.
06-05-05, 07:26 PM Rakuchild More explanation on "No Child Left Behind" and school funding and why parents are against recruiters in schools.
(If anyone has problems logging into a news website, sign in as dailykos with the password dailykos- more info on this here- http://dailykos.com/section/Daily_Kos )
06-06-05, 01:33 AM FredPuli Here no school would give out the address or phone number of any pupil or parent to anybody.It is privileged information for the school alone, for school use e.g in emergencies or if the child fails to appear. My own daughter's school doesn't freely publish the addresses of parents for parents. Parents have to consent to have their address in the list which is circulated exclusively to other parents. ( How British that is ! Big Grin )
So (1) parents can, in fact , opt out of being listed but the burden is on the parent. (2) the list is open on demand to college recruiters as well as to military ones. So the position is not quite as bad as it first appears but the wonder is why any school or any government should regard this list as a public document. We aren't keen on having children's phone numbers, their ages, and their addresses freely open to view by so many. There are individuals out there whose interest in the child would not be purely educational
This message has been edited. Last edited by: DorianGreyed,
Posts: 5569 | Location: south of Cincy | Registered: 07-12-02
