The US Air Force Academy’s Cutting-Edge Character Development Program MAJ BRIAN F. HALL, USAF with COL DAVID A. WAGIE, USAF I NTEGRITY FIRST, service before self, and excellence in all we do—in sum, doing what is right and doing so for the right rea ­ son—are lofty aspirations that represent our Air Force core values. In essence, our core val ­ ues represent the funda mental building blocks of personal character. While few, if any, Air Force members would argue against the worth of these values, many might suggest that internalizing such guiding principles is not something that can be taught or trained. The question remains, how - ever, whether values can be successfully devel - oped in college-aged men and women. Because the leaders at the United States Air Force Academy (USAFA) believe that character can be taught and developed, they established the academy’s Center for Character Development. The academy’s philosophy concerning character 35 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 3. DATES COVERED 1996 2. REPORT TYPE 00-00-1996 to 00-00-1996 4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 5a. CONTRACT NUMBER The US Air Force Academy’s Cutting-Edge Character Development 5b. GRANT NUMBER Program 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) 8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION Air and Space Power Journal,155 N. Twining Street,Maxwell REPORT NUMBER AFB,AL,36112-6026 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 18. NUMBER 19a. NAME OF ABSTRACT OF PAGES RESPONSIBLE PERSON a. REPORT b. ABSTRACT c. THIS PAGE Same as 5 unclassified unclassified unclassified Report (SAR) Standard Form 298 (Rev. 8-98) Prescribed by ANSI Std Z39-18 36 AIRPOWER JOURNAL SUMMER 1996 development holds that cadets continue to develop 2. Officers who are selfless in service to their all their traits (academic, athletic, military, and country, the Air Force, and their subordinates. character) during their four years at USAFA. Selfless officers know how to prioritize their loy ­ The academy’s cadet development policy em ­ alties so that their loyalty—in descending or ­ phasizes that cadets develop best (1) when they der—is to the moral principles reflected in the are in an environment of trust and respect; (2) Constitution, the profession of arms, the mission, when outcomes are specified; (3) when they are and individuals. People who serve selflessly re ­ challenged beyond their current abilities, yet sup - sist the natural tendency to focus exclusively on ported in their quest to extend those abilities; (4) self-serving desires; thus, they do not take ad- when they realize everyone around them (fellow vantage of situations for personal pleasure, cadets and the academy staff) is also developing; gain, or safety at the expense of the unit or mis ­ sion. They share in the dangers, hardships, and and (5) when they learn to develop themselves discomforts of subordinates. They commit and take responsibility for that development. themselves to duty and responsibility to others The academy defines character as “the sum of rather than to claims of personal privilege or ad - those qualities of moral excellence that stimulates vantage. a person to do the right thing, which is manifested through right and proper actions despite internal 3. Officers who are committed to excellence in the performance of their personal and profes ­ or external pressures to the contrary.” The chal ­ sional responsibilities. Such officers strive to do lenge for the academy was to determine which their best in everything they are capable of ac ­ behaviors consistent with a person of character complishing. They measure their self-esteem and also embody the core values espoused by the Air sense of accomplishment not by comparing their Force. A team of officers—specialists in human works with those of other people, but by noting development—researched this question and ar - their achievements, based on a realistic assess ­ rived at eight specific “character outcomes” ment of what they are capable of accomplishing. based on measurable, definable behaviors. The 4. Officers who respect the dignity of all outcomes reflect the team’s efforts to articulate the human beings. Officers who respect human dig ­ academy’s expectations of its officer graduates. nity believe in the value of individual differences The team concluded that the outcomes reflect of race, gender, ethnicity, and religion. Officers the academy’s ideals—what it hopes cadets and who respect and value other people support and members of the academy community strive to do encourage them to develop to their fullest poten­ and to be. Additionally, the outcomes elaborate tial; they do not demean or debase other people. the core values of the institution. They serve as They also accept the value that individual differ ­ the basis for evaluation of USAFA’s effective ­ ences add to an organization, and they contribute ness in its quest for excellence. Furthermore, they to an environment in which all people can fully provide criteria for personal assessment, as well utilize their skills and abilities. as a means to evaluate the programs and activi­ 5. Officers who are decisive, even when they face ties indigenous to the academy . The outcomes high risk. Decisive officers make timely and are as follows: resolute decisions. They do not let self -serving 1. Officers with forthright integrity who vol ­ desires prevent them from making decisions that untarily decide the right thing to do and do it. are necessary for mission accomplishment. Such officers do the right thing in both their pro ­ They are not afraid to com municate their beliefs fessional and personal lives. They do not choose about the best way to achieve mission accom ­ the right thing by calculating what is most advan ­ plishment to their superiors. However, decisive tageous to themselves but by having a consis - officers are not disloyal when their advice and tent and spontaneous inclination to do the right recommendations are not adopted. thing. Not only are they prompted to do what is 6. Officers who take full responsibility for right, they actually do it. their decisions. These officers voluntarily give full USAFA'S CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM 37 and honest accounts of their actions and decisions The Human Relations Division develops and to people who are entitled to know about them. executes programs intended to emphasize the impor­ When loyalty requires them to take actions that tance of valuing individual differences. Diversity are unpopular with their subordinates, they nei ­ management training, equal opportunity, and fa ­ ther blame their superiors nor shirk responsibility cilitator training are primary areas targeted by the for the decision. division. During their four years at USAFA, ca ­ 7. Officers with the self-discipline, stamina, dets receive a total of 39 lessons covering sexual and courage to do their duty well under even the harassment, discrimination, cultural aware ­ most extreme and prolonged conditions of na ­ ness, and interpersonal communications. tional defense. Officers with these traits do what The Honor Division deals with both honor is right, whether the consequences involve per­ education and administration of USAFA’s honor sonal peril or potential harm to their careers. Of ­ code system. The division creates training pro - ficers with a strong sense of duty also embrace grams to engage cadets in honor a nd ethics is- the mental toughness and discipline vested in our sues in order to help them internalize relevant oath of obligation “to protect and defend the Con ­ concepts. The division is also responsible for stitution of the United States against all enemies, handling honor violations, as well as the honor foreign and domestic.” They understand that ful ­ probation/counseling program. During their four fillment of that oath may require great personal years at the academy, cadets receive 43 lessons sacrifices. Officers who do their duty accept that covering the honor code as it applies to their profession may require self-discipline, stam ­ USAFA, officership, the Air Force, and service ina, and courage to attain the highest level of to the country. competence. Using the eight character development outcomes 8. Officers who understand the importance of as criteria for internalizing core values, the acad­ spiritual values and beliefs to their own character emy’s Center for Character Development began development and that of the community . Offi­ crafting programs to educate and challenge ca ­ cers with this understanding are clear in their dets to grapple with issues involving character. own convictions and respect the convictions of From the moment new cadets (“basics”) arrive at others. They understand that their leadership role USAFA, they are required to contemplate situ ­ requires sensitive awareness of the importance of ations that test their commitment to core values. religion in people’s lives and know that they need During their basic training, incoming cadets re ­ to accommodate and support individuals’ free ­ ceive 12 “character reflections” led by cadets in dom to exercise faith. charge of training. These scenarios contain ac ­ To accomplish these outcomes, USAFA or­ tual case studies of cadets and junior officers who ganized the Center for Character Development had to choose between self-centered actions and into three distinct divisions: Character and Eth­ those consistent with Air Force core values. The ics, Human Relations, and Honor/ Honor Educa­ basics then engage in dialogue concerning the tion. The Character and Ethics Division is decisions made, the consequences of those deci ­ primarily responsible for educating cadets, fac ­ sions, and the sometimes difficult task of choos ­ ulty, and staff on how to deal appropriately with ing to do what is right. moral issues. Additionally, the division imple ­ Each semester, the center hosts character de­ ments training programs designed to increase ca ­ velopment seminars that address one of the eight det awareness of and growth toward the outcomes. The seminars are designed to expose institution’s eight character development out - cadets to a sizable number of military and civilian comes. These programs include experiential professionals who have personal experience with training activities (high- and low-ropes course the topic. Additionally, the center sponsors an initiatives), character development seminars , annual character development and leadership community service projects, guided focus ses­ symposium based on one outcome. These sym ­ sions, and cadet/staff training. posia are for all cadets and attract many academy 38 AIRPOWER JOURNAL SUMMER 1996 staff and local community attendees. Guest ferings when it constructed a high-ropes chal­ speakers and panels from around the country lenge course, used to reinforce the more didactic share their unique perspectives and personal ex ­ character training methodologies previously de - periences. Speakers such as Secretary of the Air scribed. A 50-foot climbing tower and climbing Force Sheila E. Widnall and Gen Ronald R. Fo ­ wall serve as the centerpiece of the program. On gleman, Air Force chief of staff, provide keynote this course, cadets and staff/faculty groups alike addresses to all cadets . experience the need for courage, decisiveness, sup - The center also offers a number of mandatory port, teamwork, interpersonal communications, character training and education events for cadets. and respect in a risky environment. Research has Each year, cadets receive approxi mately 35 hours shown that adventure-based methodologies tend of honor education discussions and 25 hours of to have greater lasting effects than classroom training in human relations and equal opportunity training alone. and treatment. Additionally, all sophomores re ­ With several character development initiatives ceive a number of character discussions as part of in place, the final step for the center was to create Military Arts and Science 220—Foundations of an assessment program to determine the effec ­ the Military Profession, a required academic tiveness of its efforts. The center’s assessment course. All juniors take a required course, Phi ­ experts determined that a multifaceted approach losophy 310—Ethics—in which they discuss ma ­ was necessary. This entailed constructing an en ­ jor moral theorists and their application to military vironment audit survey to determine if programs issues. In addition, cadets take numerous courses (academic, military training, flight training, ath ­ in management, behavioral science, law, and so letic, etc.) were creating an environment condu ­ forth, requiring discussion of character issues. cive to character development. Further, the To provide a more comprehensive, academy- center developed numerous survey instruments wide environment for character development, for implementation at regular intervals through- USAFA also instituted a Character Development out a cadet’s four years at the academy. These Commission. Chaired by the dean, the commis ­ surveys include preadmission character assess ­ sion includes senior officers from all mission ele ­ ments and program critiques as well as honor and ments of the academy: Chaplains, Athletics, social climate surveys. Such instruments are use ­ Preparatory School, Admissions, Center for ful in measuring the degree to which cadets have Character Development, and so forth. It meets internalized Air Force core values as well as the monthly and provides a cross flow of information academy’s character development outcomes. and visible support for each agency to emphasize Lastly, the center designed a comprehensive per ­ and actively engage in activities that further the sonal character inventory to evaluate cadets’ as ­ character development of cadets. similation of the eight outcomes adopted by the Focusing exclusively on programs to increase institution. The center’s attitude about survey de ­ cadet awareness of character development, how - velopment is that instruments must complement ever, is an incomplete approach. The center also one another to facilitate accurate evaluations of a provides skill training in leadership and character cadet’s progress (or lack thereof) in internalizing development for all faculty and staff members. the outcomes. The training consists primarily of case studies, Although the character development program lectures, role playing, and experiential exercises at USAFA is relatively new, preliminary feed - to further illustrate concepts presented in the back is encouraging. Instilling a desire within ca ­ classroom. The training seeks to enable faculty dets to live professional and personal lives that and staff members to engage cadets in moral dia ­ adhere to the tenets found in Air Force core val ­ logue when such a need arises. ues is challenging. The fact that both the Air The center recently added a cutting-edge, ad - Force and the academy have invested considerable venture-based learning program to its list of of ­ effort and resources in building a character devel - USAFA'S CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM 39 opment program speaks to the critical nature of character who can be trusted to do what is in the the expected outcome: “air and space leaders of best interests of our nation.” Contributors Col David A. Wagie (USAFA; MS, Standford University; MS, University of Southern California; PhD, Purdue University) is a permanent professor and director of the Center for Character Developm ent at the USAF Academy. Previously, he was deputy commandant for military instruction at the academy. In his early c areer, he served tours as a KC-135 pilot, an EC-135 research pilot, an instructor of astronautics, and deputy for labs and research in the Department of Astronautics at the USAF Academy. As deputy commandant for military instruc tion, he directed the military education and professional development training for the entire 4,000-member cadet wing. As director, Cen­ ter for Character Development, he develops and integrates character development progr ams across the academy, in­ cluding cadet education and training, program review, and staff development. Colonel Wagi e is a distinguished graduate of the USAF Academy, Squadron Officer School, and Air Command and Staff College. Maj Brian F. Hall (BS, Pepperdine University; MA, Central Michigan University; PhD, State University of New York Albany) is assigned to the Center for Character Development at the USAF Academy, a s chief of charac­ ter and ethics program assessment, as well as chief of adventure-based learning. Previous as signments include in­ structor, missile combat crew commander; member of the 91st Strategic Missile Wing Missile Combat Competition Team; chief of leadership development programs, USAF Academy; AFIT graduate student; and as sistant head base- ball coach, USAF Academy. Captain Hall is also an adjunct faculty member at the Center for Cre ative Leadership, Colorado Springs branch, and an adjunct trainer/advisor for experiential learning activit ies. He is a graduate of Squadron Officer School and Air Command Staff College. Disclaimer The views and opinions expressed or implied in the Journal are those of the authors and should n ot be construed as carrying the official sanction of the Department of Defense, the Air Force, Air Educati on and Training Command, Air University, or other agencies or departments of the US Government. Articles may be rep roduced in whole or in part without permission. If they are reproduced, the Airpower Journal requests a courtesy l ine.