Some of the most inspirational words I have ever read came form a poster on the monochrome walls of the barracks at Fort Sill, Oklahoma.
Attributed to Major General John M. Schofield, they were excerpt from his graduation address to the class of 1879 at the United States Military Academy, where he served as superintendent at the time.
Schofield began his military career as a cadet at West Point, then served for two years as an artillery officer. He went on to teach until the outbreak of the Civil War, when he volunteered with a Missouri regiment. (Missouri, incidentally, sent troops to both sides of the conflict.)
While his career with the Army is not without blemish, he is remembered for his high-minded words to his students in 1879. As a professor and a warrior, he understood well the need for mutual respect between commander and troop, teacher and learner.
Too often in the Army, leaders want unqualified loyalty. Schofield knew that such loyalty had to be earned. He knew that harsh treatment-- the kind too frequently mistaken for authoritative expertise-- comes at the expense of performance.
He knew that hard-earned respect-- the kind that comes from compassion, empathy, and a commander's genuine interest in his subordinates-- makes men reliable in battle.
The General may have understood that because he was a teacher. In fact, he found his way into Nine Weeks precisely because he gave me hope in Army training when the NCOs drained it.
An interesting exercise is to substitute the descriptors of war with words that connote learning. The quote thus reads:
Isn't reliability what we're after? Commanders want reliability in battle. In the business of warfare, nothing else matters. In school, we want reliable students. Put another way, we want students to engage in the curriculum, take an active part in their learning, and perform the tasks that the instruction demands so that they learn material. Reliable students are creative, adaptive, and smart.
Reliability men are discovered and developed by truly great teachers and leaders.
That's what the poster said. And the poster was right.
“The discipline, which makes the soldiers of a free country reliable in battle, is not to be gained by harsh or tyrannical treatment. On the contrary such treatment is far more likely to destroy than make an Army. It is possible to impart instructions and give commands in such a manner and such a tone of voice to inspire in the soldier an intense desire to obey, while the opposite manner and tone of voice cannot fail to excite strong resentment and a desire to disobey…
Attributed to Major General John M. Schofield, they were excerpt from his graduation address to the class of 1879 at the United States Military Academy, where he served as superintendent at the time.Schofield began his military career as a cadet at West Point, then served for two years as an artillery officer. He went on to teach until the outbreak of the Civil War, when he volunteered with a Missouri regiment. (Missouri, incidentally, sent troops to both sides of the conflict.)
While his career with the Army is not without blemish, he is remembered for his high-minded words to his students in 1879. As a professor and a warrior, he understood well the need for mutual respect between commander and troop, teacher and learner.
Too often in the Army, leaders want unqualified loyalty. Schofield knew that such loyalty had to be earned. He knew that harsh treatment-- the kind too frequently mistaken for authoritative expertise-- comes at the expense of performance.
He knew that hard-earned respect-- the kind that comes from compassion, empathy, and a commander's genuine interest in his subordinates-- makes men reliable in battle.
The General may have understood that because he was a teacher. In fact, he found his way into Nine Weeks precisely because he gave me hope in Army training when the NCOs drained it.
An interesting exercise is to substitute the descriptors of war with words that connote learning. The quote thus reads:
“The discipline, which makes the students of a free society reliable, is not to be gained by harsh or tyrannical treatment. On the contrary such treatment is far more likely to destroy than make a society. It is possible to impart instructions and give lessons in such a manner and such a tone of voice to inspire in the student an intense desire to learn, while the opposite manner and tone of voice cannot fail to excite strong resentment and a desire to disengage…
Reliability men are discovered and developed by truly great teachers and leaders.
That's what the poster said. And the poster was right.
Interesting that you point out that the goal is "reliability" as opposed to something else like "excellence" or "commitment" or "creativity" or "sheer awesomeness." I think that sometimes in a non-battle situations, I'd actually prefer someone who's a little bit unreliable but capable of flashes of creativity and greatness.
ReplyDeleteHaving said that, I think that whether your goal is reliability or sheer awesomeness, you're more likely to achieve it with mutual respect.
Mo
And students want reliable teachers. Having had both, reliable and unreliable teachers, I know I perform better and expect more out of myself when I have a teacher I can rely on. There's nothing better than a teacher who loves to teach, who puts his whole heart and soul into what he does. That devotion rubs off on the students and drives us to do our best.
ReplyDeleteThat's interesting Mo. And I can agree, with caveats. "Sheer awesomeness" is the ultimate goal. I guess, as a teacher, "excellence" is what we're striving for. It's a given. So I should clarify by saying that "reliably excellent."
ReplyDeleteJust a thought, if you're a coach, say basketball. Would you prefer players who are reliable or sporadically excellent? I don't know.