# ROTC Scholarships vs GI Bill



## AThornquist (Aug 27, 2009)

Let me preface this post by stating that I don't know if it is God's will for me to join the military *and* I would never do so for the benefits anyway. I ask these questions purely from a practical standpoint if I do in fact join. 

I have _so_ many opportunities and options, I am trying to sort through them. I ask this with Army Infantry officership in consideration and perhaps eventual chaplaincy. I would do college work before becoming an officer including ROTC but I would also want to continue my education in a number of ways.

So, here is my main question:
What would be the most "bang for my buck" - ROTC Scholarships now or GI Bill later? If I take ROTC scholarships now I would have to serve my 4 years and then an additional 3 years to be eligible for the GI Bill. Since I don't know if I would stay more than 4 years (as I want to eventually work in vocational ministry), the ROTC scholarships seem risky. On the other hand, I may go into a little debt in order to go through my undergraduate/ROTC on my own expense with the hope of eventually benefiting from the GI Bill. 

Especially if you have military experience and/or know what you are talking about: which financial path would you choose? Does the financial gain either way make much of a difference in the long-run?

Thank you.


----------



## matt01 (Aug 27, 2009)

AThornquist said:


> So, here is my main question:
> What would be the most "bang for my buck" - ROTC Scholarships now or GI Bill later? If I take ROTC scholarships now I would have to serve my 4 years and then an additional 3 years to be eligible for the GI Bill. Since I don't know if I would stay more than 4 years (as I want to eventually work in vocational ministry), the ROTC scholarships seem risky. On the other hand, I may go into a little debt in order to go through my undergraduate/ROTC on my own expense with the hope of eventually benefiting from the GI Bill.



ROTC if you are successful in getting a scholarship. Enlisted if you want to serve, and don't make the cut for the officer programs.


----------



## AThornquist (Aug 28, 2009)

Thank you. Just so I can further see your thought process and the pros and cons in all of this, would you be willing to share why you would make that decision, Matt?


----------



## Pergamum (Aug 28, 2009)

I did ROTC. I was able to have college paid for up front. The life of an officer is much better than being enlisted, and I had more opportunities for development. Plus offcier pay was better and the army paid for my college and while in the army I saved money for seminary...not a bad deal. PM me or call me and let's talk if you don't want to type.


----------



## SolaScriptura (Aug 28, 2009)

Don't say you're not doing it for the benefits in a thread in which you're asking for the pros and cons of each decision. Pros are benefits.

I do grow weary of those who act like it is somehow wrong or less honorable to be in the military because it is a good job with a good, steady, secure paycheck with great benefits and an unbeatable retirement plan. It is all of those things. 

Definitely do ROTC if you can. Having college paid for up front and then getting a great job in which the repayment of your loan is invisible to you is great. If, once you finish ROTC, you decide you'd like to become a chaplain you can get an "education delay waiver" and you can go straight to seminary. 

One thing though: you aren't guaranteed infantry branch. In fact, you aren't even "pretty good bet" on infantry. You're a "maybe" and that is it. Prior to commissioning you'll submit a "dream sheet" with your request for a branch. That's as much choice as you get, unless you're top of your class at West Point. Do some people get what they ask for? Sure. But it is hardly a sure thing. I'm not trying to dissuade you, but I do want you to have an accurate picture.

Being an officer is great. And if, like Rich, you stay in and do very well, you can become a giant among men and be in charge of things at a massively large level.

-----Added 8/28/2009 at 12:49:04 EST-----



AThornquist said:


> Does the financial gain either way make much of a difference in the long-run?



Absolutely... Officer pay is leagues above enlisted pay. For example: I'm a Captain whose been in a handful of years. The only enlisted folks making as much as me are the few who rise above their peers to become a Sergeant Major... and even then, the pay scale is such that it is a Sergeant Major with 24 years in who finally achieves the pay that I get just a few years into my career. 

Really, when it comes to pay, there is no comparison.


----------



## Bald_Brother (Aug 28, 2009)

*Hmmm...*



sans nom said:


> AThornquist said:
> 
> 
> > So, here is my main question:
> ...



Well, I'm not sure if you meant it this way but that seemed rather ungracious, at least to this enlisted guy. I have had every opportunity to switch from enlisted to officer. I get pressed often to either go to Officer's Basic Course (I have met the requirements my entire career, I could have switched upon completing Basic Training) or go Warrant Officer. But, I have no desire to do either. I love working with soldiers, I love training soldiers, and I love being a Non-Commissioned Officer. It has never been a matter of "making the cut." The majority of my fellow _senior_ NCOs have one or more degrees and no disciplinary action against them in their careers, yet they remain NCOs. For us, it's just not what we want.

*AThornquist*,

Having served in the Army for ten years so far, this is the advice I would offer you. It depends on what you want to do and what branch you intend to get into.

Both career paths offer leadership experience, though you will get there almost immediately as an Officer. It's not as likely that you would get real leader experience if you only stay for four years, at least in the Army, Navy, or Air Force. The Marines expect more out their junior enlisted, making them recognized leaders as E-3s (Lance Corporal), whereas the Army generally, depending on mission requirements, waits until at least E-4 (Specialist/Corporal) and usually E-5 (Sergeant) to entrust leadership of soldiers. As a general rule, in the Army, Sergeant takes about 3-4 years to make, depending on experience, job performance, board performance, and the Army overall requirements for the rank in the MOS (military occupational specialty).

Enlisted leadership is a lot more direct interaction with junior soldiers, and the soldiers depend on on the enlisted leader more than they do Officers. An Officer's rank and position commands more respect, but, trust me on this, it is harder for an Officer to earn the actual respect of soldiers than it is for a Non-Commissioned Officer. In the junior soldier and junior NCO's mind, the Sergeant above him has earned his stripes, whereas the Officer got his rank by virtue of being an Officer. That _IS NOT_ the true case, only the way that the majority of soldier's view things (probably because a junior enlisted guy can relate better to an enlisted leader than to an Officer. Just a matter of positional relationship is all, in my opinion at least).

But, there are great benefits to being an Officer, the much better pay being the least of them. Leadership is almost always assumed from day one. The responsibility is greater and the fruit of the Officer's labor is often more immediately evident. Planning, on the grander scale, is most often the Officer's resposibility and the results of the planning are evident when acted upon by the soldiers within the Officer's unit. Officer's hold command (the only experience of an Officer that has nearly convinced me to switch more than once) and the training, competence, and welfare of the soldiers under the Officer's Command - though delegated - are the Commander's responsibility and pride.

From an outsiders perspective, there is too much positioning and politicking in the Officer Corps for me, aspects which generally don't exist in the enlisted arena.

Hmmmm... Bang for your Buck? Well, either way - ROTC or Enlistment - you get college paid for. If you want to get a degree, get out, and get more school... maybe ROTC is the better choice. I don't know, though, I had a soldier get a Bachelors in International Studies and started on her Masters all in her first four years.

No matter which you choose, be sure you want to serve. There are great benefits to serving, but there are great tolls to pay, also. No sob story here, but I am currently in Kuwait (a cake assignment) entering into my 45th month (non-consecutive) away from my family in the last six years. So, there is that, too. I'm not trying to scare you away, I personally wouldn't change a thing.

Ask Semper Fidelis, too. He's a Marine Corps officer.

-----Added 8/28/2009 at 01:09:42 EST-----



> Let me preface this post by stating that I don't know if it is God's will for me to join the military and I would never do so for the benefits anyway.



I don't see why not. The benefits are great! To match my current pay and benefits as a civilian I would have to get a job _starting_ at $75K. It's not a bad deal, really. But, I've been in a while. For better pay and benefits, the obvious choice if Officer.


----------



## SemperEruditio (Aug 28, 2009)

Prior Navy enlisted puke here. 

I would recommend you go for the ROTC money. If you are able to earn a place then you get school paid for. Come in for 4 years and pay into the GIBill. At the end of your obligation you have some options. At that point you are a military officer with 4 years experience and you have the GI Bill which you could use. You could opt to perhaps stay in and take classes at say RTS-virtual. The church you are a member of could partner with the school and you pay 1/3 the tuition. Some schools offer military discounts in tuition or other such little things. One way they do that is to offer you instate tuition. I will say that the military has programs from within that are not available to civilians or vets. So if you do decide to join up begin to get information on those programs. Since you are interested in vocational ministry do some talking with the Chaplains and the like. Don't be fooled into thinking that everything you need to know about the military is available online.

Some would say that the military limits your options and in some ways it does. However if you're smart about it you can get as much out of the military as you put in. It ain't no cakewalk but it's the best time you'll love to hate. I say that tongue-in-cheek because I'm looking to go back in as a Chaplain. I'm on the General Lee plan.


----------



## Scott1 (Aug 28, 2009)

Big decisions.

You might want to spend one day of prayer and fasting.

I once had a major decision (two very different choices) and for the first time, fasted. As I came off fast early that evening, I got a telephone call from someone very official who almost verbatim told me what I was going to do. There were several good things connected with it as I listened also.

Seek God fervently on this and you have His promises for guidance for His will.


----------



## Puritan Sailor (Aug 28, 2009)

Pergamum said:


> I did ROTC. I was able to have college paid for up front. The life of an officer is much better than being enlisted, and I had more opportunities for development. Plus offcier pay was better and the army paid for my college and while in the army I saved money for seminary...not a bad deal. PM me or call me and let's talk if you don't want to type.



This is the path I followed as well, though in the Navy. I actually started out enlisted, then was selected for an ROTC scholarship, got my bachelors in nursing, and went back in as an officer. And I saved a lot in 4 years so that I could go to seminary when my required 4 years of active duty was up (and I also work part-time as a nurse while in seminary). Of course back when I was in ROTC, I also qualified to have my GI Bill at the same time due to my prior enlisted time. But they don't let you do that anymore... The pay and priviledges are much better as an officer, of course the responsibility is greater too. But strictly from a financial standpoint, you will be able to save up more money as an officer than enlisted, if you want to further your education. And it is soooo liberating to not have any school loans once your done.


----------



## SolaScriptura (Aug 28, 2009)

Bald_Brother said:


> sans nom said:
> 
> 
> > AThornquist said:
> ...



Thanks for that important post, brother!

You make several good points, too many for me to address quickly.

Perhaps there was once a day in which the educational difference between officers and (virtually all) enlisted was quite vast... this probably would have been in the same era in which officers were _expected_ to be true genetlemen, but we know that day has come and gone... But nowadays I have yet to meet a senior NCO who doesn't have a bachelor's degree and almost all of them have a master's degree - every CSM I know does, anyway.

While there are obvious pay and "treatment" differences between being an officer and being enlisted - in my opinion, the best thing about being an officer is that due to the built in degree of separation, there is much less of the peer pressure to be immoral. Between my time enlisted in the infantry and my time as a chaplain, I've been in long enough and in enough units to know that Soldiers put a lot of peer pressure on Soldiers in their squad to do bad things.... But I digress, I think you're right to point out that ultimately it isn't about one track being BETTER than another track, but rather it is about which is the one that fits you better.

If you are more of a hands on worker bee type... go enlisted. If you're more administrative/managerial... go officer. Of course, I'm painting in broad strokes.


----------



## matt01 (Aug 28, 2009)

AThornquist said:


> Just so I can further see your thought process and the pros and cons in all of this, would you be willing to share why you would make that decision, Matt?



*Officers make a lot more money than you would ever make on the enlisted side.
*Officers are gaining more management experience, and from an enlisted person's view, they do a lot less nonsense. There are still games, but not on the level of the enlisted.
*If you complete the program, you will have a degree.

If you were to enlist...

*There is a lot that can change in four years. You might not have the opportunity to go the school after getting out.
*You will play games and be treated like a child for the majority of your first enlistment. Yes, this depends on the unit, but I have both experienced and witnessed it in several units.

As has been mentioned before, make sure that you want to serve. I saw so many guys enlist for the wrong reason (couldn't find a job, wanted college paid for, etc) and they hated life. The military (especially the Marines) is not a 9-5 job. It is literally 24/7. You might have the weekend off, and find out you are on duty. Or spend weeks in the field, before deploying for months. It is a great time, but not for everyone.
Full disclosure: I served on the enlisted side of the Marine Corps


----------



## Edward (Aug 28, 2009)

My father was enlisted during WWII, and an officer during Korea. I was raised with the advice that it's better to be an officer than an enlisted man.


----------



## matt01 (Aug 28, 2009)

SolaScriptura said:


> the best thing about being an officer is that due to the built in degree of separation, there is much less of the peer pressure to be immoral.



I would change it just slightly to say that one of the greatest benefits on not being enlisted would be the ability to not live in a barracks. I didn't really mind the confined space, requirement to stand duty, and fire watch, the police calls of other Marine's cigarette butts, weekly and sometimes more often field days. What you really want to avoid is living with guys who are going to do all sorts of things that you want to avoid (profanity, p*rn, females over, etc...). Just having the option to live in town, away from this, (which you would not have on the enlisted side until you were either married, or a Sergeant with command approval) would be the reason to go the enlisted side.

Someone mentioned the option of doing college while enlisted. This is true; it is possible. But depending on your MOS, it will be highly unlikely. I was fairly motivated to accomplish some college, and ended up completing less than 30 credits over 4 years. Most of those credits were from boot camp. It is possible to finish a degree, maybe even start a master’s, but it is really not the norm. Given that you mentioned serving as an Infantry officer, I would imagine that you might consider enlisting for an infantry MOS. In that case, you can bet a ton of cash that you won’t be finishing a degree.

There is certainly a need for people to serve on the enlisted side, and I am grateful for many of my experiences there, but if you have the option to go for a commission, take it. If you go for enlisting, just be aware of what you are doing.



Bald_Brother said:


> sans nom said:
> 
> 
> > ROTC if you are successful in getting a scholarship. Enlisted if you want to serve, *and don't make the cut for the officer programs.*
> ...



I was referring to the qualifications for an ROTC scholarship. No offense to anyone on the enlisted side, as that was where my service was. 

If he applies for an ROTC scholarship, and is unsuccessful, he has not made the cut. If he still wants to serve, there may be options available on the enlisted side. This doesn't imply that service as an enlisted individual is any less arduous than that of an officer. There is no implication that you, or any other enlisted service person is not capable of serving as an officer.


----------



## Bald_Brother (Aug 28, 2009)

> I was referring to the qualifications for an ROTC scholarship.



Got it. Thanks for the clarification.


----------



## AThornquist (Aug 28, 2009)

Thank you all very much. I truly appreciate your insights in this matter.


----------



## Bald_Brother (Aug 28, 2009)

> You make several good points, too many for me to address quickly.



I made a lot of points, but, I also was painting in broad strokes. In rereading my post I read _"In the junior soldier and junior NCO's mind, the Sergeant above him has earned his stripes, whereas the Officer got his rank by virtue of being an Officer."_ Allow me to caveat that with: "...except prior enlisted Officers, Medical Officers, Chaplains, and most Colonels and above."

Also, very true about the exposure to peer pressure and temptation, especially in the barracks for the junior enlisted. I was married when I joined and only lived in the barracks for a about six months (messed up orders and command sponsorship issues at my first unit), but they were at times comparable to a den of harlotry and evil. Just kidding, but seriously, bad stuff happens in barracks. Boy, do I have some stories! 

-----Added 8/28/2009 at 07:59:27 EST-----

*AThornquist*,

One more thing. There is a saying in the Army that one hears on every deployment that lasts 12months or more, or when staying in trailers in Iraq with an A/C that sometimes works, or when sleeping in a hooch or under a lean-to in the Georgia summer, or inside a poorly heated tent during a Fort Drum winter: "Man, I should've joined the Air Force!"


----------



## kvanlaan (Aug 28, 2009)

What I remember from the Officer/Enlisted argument were some examples I saw in my infantry course: the sergeants (and even the master corporals) tended to have huge amounts of experience while the officer (in my platoon it was a fairly new 2Lt) was a bit of a pud. My sergeant was a veteran of Cyprus and had about 15 years of experience while the second lieutenant was not a career man and commanded about zero respect beyond the fear we had for him as an officer and us as private recruits. For some reason, we loved our somewhat brutal NCOs (I had a Master Corporal who was nearly sadistic in his quest for perfection, but he was one of the Gov General's Foot Guards, the guys in red at the Parliament Buildings with the tall bearskin hats, and he lived and breathed it.) Can't figure out why now...

Then again, we really never saw the officers.


----------

