![]() This new blood set the institution on a course to evolve beyond its traditional place as a highly prestigious officer-training academy to a top-ranked academic institution in its own right. Expanded classes of midshipmen from different demographic groups and new faculty recruited from civilian schools and the ranks of wartime veterans changed the institutional culture of the academy. The war period and the years immediately thereafter led to the creation of new curricula, new facilities, and new ideas about naval education. The war not only served to validate the academy’s very existence, but also brought about tremendous change. The overall loss rate for academy graduates serving in the war was 6 percent. ![]() The losses for the classes of 1934, 1935, 1936, and 1937 were 12, 14, 16, and 14 percent respectively. Between 19, the academy contributed more than 7,500 officers to the fleet. Altogether, alumni from 54 classes participated in the war. Nearly all of the war’s key naval leaders-including William Halsey, Class of 1904 Ernest King, ’01 Chester Nimitz, ’05 and Raymond Spruance, ’06-were graduates. While only 5 percent of the total number of serving naval officers in the war were academy graduates, the school produced the professional core around which the Navy’s unprecedented expansion from 119,088 uniformed personnel in 1938 to 3,405,525 in 1945 could occur. Naval Academy went into high gear to produce quality officer material for the two-ocean war. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |