Category: Military science

Hide Assignment Information TurnitinTM TurnitinTM enabledThis assignment will be submitted to TurnitinTM. Instructions Assignment Directions: Describe the roles and responsibilities of the Executive Branch, Congress, and defense industry in Defense Acquisition, and where defense acquisition authority is derived. For this paper, you will need to find an article in the library that relates to the roles and responsibilities of at least one branch of government where acquisition authority is derived. Write a two-page paper, plus the title page and a reference page. Writing Instructions (Please do read this): Written communication: Written communication is free of errors that detract from the overall message. APA formatting: Resources and citations are formatted according to APA style and formatting. Length of paper: typed, double-spaced pages with no less than a two-page paper. Font and font size: Times New Roman, 12 point. RESEARCH and WRITING APUS Online Library Tutorial Center [webpage] PLAGIARISM Avoiding accidental and intentional plagiarism [webpage] Be sure to review the following prior to submitting your assignment: Academic Integrity Guidelines [content page] Assignment Rubric If you do not see the rubric, in the blue horizontal navigation bar select Course Tools, then Assignments. Select the appropriate assignment, and the rubric will be located near the bottom of the page. This assignment aligns with the following: Course Objective: 1 [content page] Lesson Objective: 1.1, 1.2 [content page] Assignment Resources & Supports

This assignment is to encourage critical thinking and evidence-based analysis of team

effectiveness in the Republic of Singapore Air Force (RSAF), especially in the light of emerging frontiers, specifically about Sustainability.

Part 1: RSAF Context and Mission

Part 2: Emerging Frontiers and Current Team Leadership

Drawing on the context established in Part 1, critically analyse how current understandings

of team effectiveness, particularly through the RSAFs Leadership Framework are being challenged, reshaped, or potentially rendered insufficient by emerging frontiers. You should focus on Sustainability.

Your analysis must go beyond description to evaluation. Participants are expected to examine

tensions, limitations, and implications for current team leadership practices, supported by

relevant academic research. Assertions should be evidence-based rather than opinion driven,

demonstrating critical engagement (not mere absorption) with the literature and its

relevance to the SAF context.

Part 3: Updating the SAF Concept of Team Development

Propose how the RSAF can update its current approach to team development and team

effectiveness in order to respond more effectively to the emerging frontier identified in Part

2. Your recommendations should be forward-looking, evidence-based, and grounded in the

operational realities of the RSAF.

Part 4: Implementation Challenges and Solutions

Identify and critically analyse the key challenges that may arise when implementing your

proposed updates to team effectiveness. Consider organisational, cultural, structural, and

operational constraints within the RSAF. Your analysis should demonstrate realism and an

appreciation of how change operates in complex systems.

For each major challenge identified, propose practical, evidence-informed strategies to

mitigate or overcome it. Strong responses will balance ambition with feasibility, showing how

recommendations can align with SAFs existing systems, structures, and command realities

while still enabling meaningful progress.

Key Expectations

Provide well-supported, evidence-based arguments

Example: Instead of saying, Diverse teams perform better, cite research such on operational

teams, and explain how the findings apply to your context.

Critically evaluate literature, practice, and the SAF context

Example: Compare what academic literature says about team leadership with actual Singapore Armed Forces frameworks. Discuss alignment, gaps, and possible reasons for differences.

This assignment is to encourage critical thinking and evidence-based analysis of team

effectiveness in the Republic of Singapore Air Force (RSAF), especially in the light of emerging frontiers, specifically about Sustainability.

Part 1: RSAF Context and Mission

Part 2: Emerging Frontiers and Current Team Leadership

Drawing on the context established in Part 1, critically analyse how current understandings

of team effectiveness, particularly through the RSAFs Leadership Framework are being challenged, reshaped, or potentially rendered insufficient by emerging frontiers. You should focus on Sustainability.

Your analysis must go beyond description to evaluation. Participants are expected to examine

tensions, limitations, and implications for current team leadership practices, supported by

relevant academic research. Assertions should be evidence-based rather than opinion driven,

demonstrating critical engagement (not mere absorption) with the literature and its

relevance to the SAF context.

Part 3: Updating the SAF Concept of Team Development

Propose how the RSAF can update its current approach to team development and team

effectiveness in order to respond more effectively to the emerging frontier identified in Part

2. Your recommendations should be forward-looking, evidence-based, and grounded in the

operational realities of the RSAF.

Part 4: Implementation Challenges and Solutions

Identify and critically analyse the key challenges that may arise when implementing your

proposed updates to team effectiveness. Consider organisational, cultural, structural, and

operational constraints within the RSAF. Your analysis should demonstrate realism and an

appreciation of how change operates in complex systems.

For each major challenge identified, propose practical, evidence-informed strategies to

mitigate or overcome it. Strong responses will balance ambition with feasibility, showing how

recommendations can align with SAFs existing systems, structures, and command realities

while still enabling meaningful progress.

Key Expectations

Provide well-supported, evidence-based arguments

Example: Instead of saying, Diverse teams perform better, cite research such on operational

teams, and explain how the findings apply to your context.

Critically evaluate literature, practice, and the SAF context

Example: Compare what academic literature says about team leadership with actual Singapore Armed Forces frameworks. Discuss alignment, gaps, and possible reasons for differences.

Write a discussion reply post:

Camryn Bales posted Feb 18, 2026 2:15 PM

With the intelligence failure of Pearl Harbor still in mind, it became abundantly clear that it was necessary to develop an organized intelligence enterprise that could keep decision makers advised of emerging challenges to the U.S. (Tromblay 2015). This led to the passing of the National Security Act of 1947, which intended to unify the U.S. Intelligence Community and pull away from drastic isolation of agencies. The National Security Act of 1947 had the greatest impact on the U.S. Intelligence Community (IC) because of the way it modernized the foundation of intelligence through creation of a centralized power and allotment of agency responsibilities as well as the role of the Director of Central Intelligence (DCI).

The intelligence failures in the events of Pearl Harbor in 1941 can be attributed to a substantial disconnect between those collecting and analyzing information and the decision-makers, in this case the U.S. Commanders in Pearl Harbor. The surprise attack could have arguably been blunted if the various commanders and departments had coordinated their actions and shared their intelligence (CIA n.d.). In hopes of preventing any future errs of this sort, several governmental powers worked to create the National Security Act of 1947, which established several new foundations of the US IC.

The Act created a National Security Council, a Secretary of Defense, a statutory Joint Chiefs of Staff and a Central Intelligence Agency. The NSC and CIA were set to replace the National Intelligence Authority and the Central Intelligence Group, for functions including intelligence collection, analyzation, and informed decision-making (CIA n.d.). The establishment of the CIA made it the nations first independent organization, responsible for all aspects of intelligence, from collection to dissemination. Although it would conduct both analysis and covert action, the CIA would have no law enforcement powers and stay separate from armed and civilian intelligence divisions (CIA n.d.). The reason for this was to create a united IC without the worry of having too much centralized power.

Another important aspect of the National Security Act of 1947 was the creation of the Director of Central Intelligence (DCI) position. There were a series of National Security Council Intelligence Directives (NSCIDs) written into the Act outlining the responsibilities of the DCI, specifically the NSCID-1 Duties and Responsibilities (CIA n.d.). The DCI was set to make recommendations for intelligence activities as accurately as possible, given his position to coordinate and overview the IC. However, due to the ambiguity imposed by this directive, there was grey area between coordination and control. This ultimately led to a loose oversight on IC issues, and lack of opportunity for the CIA to become an integrator of US intelligence (CIA n.d.).

Revisions to the NSCID-1 were ultimately made after many concerns were raised about it, some characterizing it as uncoordinated efforts and ambiguity written into law (Tromblay 2015). These changes included pushing the DCI to exert more control in common IC issues and programs (1958 version) and maintain his four major responsibilities; (1) plan and review all intelligence activities and spending, submitting annually to the White House the communitys overall program/budget; (2) to produce national intelligence for the President and policymakers; (3) to chair all community-wide advisory panels; (4) and to establish intelligence requirements and priorities (1972 version) (CIA n.d.). After these revisions, the National Security Act of 1947 was able to enforce a more productive and efficient US IC with properly allocated responsibilities and coordination.

All aspects considered, the National Security Act of 1947 was the most impactful event to occur in the history of the IC. It reflected the recognition that peacetime intelligence support to national leaders was increasingly vital, and found a way to unify the agencies of the IC (Tidd 2008). Despite having some minor drawbacks, the Act as a whole created the foundation for what we know as the US IC today, collecting, analyzing, and aiding in decision-making to protect our national security.

References:

Central Intelligence Agency. n.d. “The Creation of the Intelligence Community: Founding Documents.” Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.

Tidd, John M. 2008. “From Revolution to Reform: A Brief History of U.S. Intelligence.” The SAIS Review of International Affairs (28) 1: 5-24.

Tromblay, Darren E. 2015. “The U. S. Domestic Intelligence Enterprise: History, Development, and Operations.” Taylor & Francis Group.

Overview

What You Will Learn: In this Touchstone, you will use the critical thinking skills that you learned in this unit by finding a credible source. You will practice those skills by determining why the source you chose should be considered credible evidence and then reflecting on your process. The goal of this Touchstone is to help you get comfortable with locating and evaluating research.

Why It Matters: Learning how to find credible sources and evaluate information is one of the most valuable skills you can develop. Whether you’re making a case at work, deciding how to vote, or researching a big personal decision, being able to spot reliable information and understand different perspectives gives you the power to think clearly and make informed choices.

What You Will Hand In: A 12-page paper that describes your research process, reflects on your experience as a researcher, and includes a reference page with an APA-formatted citation for the credible source you found.

Keys to Success:

• Use research strategies that demonstrate critical thinking.
• Choose a source that is credible, trustworthy, and reliable.
• Answer the reflection questions.
• Develop and submit your own original work. While AI tools can be helpful for brainstorming or organizing ideas, this assignment is meant to strengthen your own skills in research, reading, and critical thinking. Using AI to write your reflection or find and summarize sources takes away your opportunity to grow in these areas and can also lead to plagiarism flags. To stay within academic guidelines and get the most from this assignment, be sure all of your writing and analysis is your own.

Instructions

Step 1: Select and Evaluate One Credible Source

Review the tutorial for more help on how to find a topic. Locate one credible source that provides reliable, relevant information about your topic. Choose either:

• A scholarly source such as a peer-reviewed journal article, a book published by a university press, or research from a reputable organization.
• A credible popular source such as a feature article from a major newspaper, a report from a respected magazine, or a publication by a professional organization.

Consider what kind of source fits best for the early stage of your research. You’ll need to use the same topic for Touchstones 1.1 and 1.2, but you can change your topic for your final paper.

Step 2: Write a Reflection (150250 words)

Your reflection should include 3-4 paragraphs:

• Topic Selection: How or why did you select this topic to research?
• Research Process & Decision Making: What search terms did you use? What platform did you use to find the article or source? Why did you select the article you did? What is the journal or other source where the article was published? How did you determine that this source is credible?
• Critical Thinking: What made this source stand out as credible or useful? How did reading this source challenge or reinforce what you already believed? What is one thing from the source you didnt fully understand at first, and how did you clarify it?
• Personal Learning & Application: What goals do you want to achieve in your writing and research? What did you learn from this experience about your own research habits? How has this process changed the way you think about finding credible information? What is one skill you used or developed in this assignment that you can apply in other courses or at work?

Step 3: Create an APA Citation for Your Reference

• Create an APA-formatted reference for the article you read.

Step 4: Submit Your Source, Reflection, and Citation

• Review the rubric to confirm that you have met all the requirements of the touchstone. Once you are happy with it, you can submit it as a Microsoft Word (.doc or .docx) file. Your submission must include your name, the name of the course, the date, and the title of your assignment.

Rubric Advanced (100%)Proficient (85%)Acceptable (75%)Needs Improvement (50%)Non-Performance (0%)Credible Source Selection

Assesses the relevance, credibility, and appropriateness of the source selected. Students must choose a source aligned with their topic and demonstrate that it comes from a trustworthy publisher or organization. (20%)

Selects a source published by a recognized authority (e.g., academic journal, professional organization, or reputable media outlet); source is clearly aligned with the topic and useful at this stage of research.Selects a source published by a generally credible outlet; relevance to topic and stage of research is clear but may be limited.Selects a source with some relevance or usefulness, but with limited credibility (e.g., lacks publication transparency, author credentials, or recency).Selects a source that lacks credibility, relevance, or appropriateness for academic use (e.g., commercial blog, non-expert opinion piece).No source is submitted, or the source has no discernible credibility or relevance.Research Process & Decision Making

Evaluates the explanation of the search strategy and decision-making process. This includes the tools used, and how the source was chosen. (20%)

Describes search process, terms used, and rationale for selection; explains how credibility was determined using at least two specific criteria (e.g., author, publication, evidence).Describes search process and reasoning, with some reference to credibility criteria, though one may be missing or vague.Mentions some elements of the search and rationale but lacks specificity or clear explanation of credibility.Reflection is vague or incomplete; may list steps without explanation or overlook credibility.No reflection, or reflection is unrelated to the process.Critical Thinking

Ability to evaluate the credibility and usefulness of the source. (20%)

Evaluates credibility using at least two characteristics of trustworthy sources (e.g., objectivity, evidence, expertise); identifies a belief challenged or reinforced and explains how understanding was deepened or clarified.Evaluates credibility and engages with the content; may touch on belief or learning, but with limited detail or only one evaluation factor.Gives a general statement about credibility or learning but lacks evidence of deep engagement or evaluation.Minimal critical thinking; general or unrelated observations with no clear link to the source.No evidence of evaluation or engagement with the source.Personal Learning & Application

Connection of this research experience to future academic or professional goals. (20%)

Identifies and describes one specific research skill gained and how it will apply to future academic or professional tasks; links reflection to personal learning goals.Generally describes what was learned and makes broad connection to future goals or tasks.Identifies learning with vague or underdeveloped connection to future relevance.Reflection is unclear or superficial; lacks connection to goals or future use.No reflection on learning or future application.Conventions and Proofreading

Demonstrates command of standard English grammar, punctuation, spelling, capitalization, and usage. (10%)

There are few, if any, negligible errors in grammar, punctuation, spelling, capitalization, formatting, and usage.There are occasional minor errors in grammar, punctuation, spelling, capitalization, formatting, and usage.There are some significant errors in grammar, punctuation, spelling, capitalization, formatting, and usage.There are frequent significant errors in grammar, punctuation, spelling, capitalization, formatting, and usage.There are consistent significant errors in grammar, punctuation, spelling, capitalization, formatting, and usage.APA Citation

Formatted citation in APA style. (10%)

Citation is complete and error-free, following APA guidelines (e.g., author, date, title, source, DOI/URL if applicable).Citation is mostly correct; contains no more than two minor errors.Citation includes several errors in APA format but includes required elements.Citation is present but has major formatting or content issues.Citation is missing or not in APA format.

Write a master’s-level, 2,000-word double-spaced academic theory paper using footnotes (Chicago Manual of Style), Times New Roman 12-point font, use active voice, with a title, and answering the following questions. Utilize ideas and concepts from the theory and theorists (i.e., Clausewitz, Sun Tzu, etc.), evaluate the use of military power by the U.S. to achieve its political aims during the First Gulf War. What political aims did the U.S. seek? Did the U.S. use its military power effectively? If so, what demonstrates this? If not, why not? Use the attached articles as references, the sample paper outline, and the introductory template below and rubric for assessment. Ensure no used of AI detection and provide citations.

The paper should evaluate military theories and their applicability to joint warfighting in globally integrated operations in pursuit of national political aims.

Formatting instructions:

The body of the paper will be double-spaced, use Times New Roman 12-point font, and have 1-inch margins (top, bottom, left, and right).

Use footnotes (not endnotes) for citations in Chicago Manual of Style format; use Arabic rather than Roman numerals. Do not include a bibliography. Consult the Chicago Manual of Style quick citation guide.

A labeled introductory paragraph that at a minimum: 1) provides a clear easily identifiable thesis that answers the assigned question, and 2) outlines the arguments presented in support of the proposed thesis. These arguments can be numbered for ease of recognition. The paper may have as many or as few arguments as necessary for answering the question. Keep in mind the paper length when deciding this.

The paper should have the following:

A clear thesis that directly answers the question. The key element here: Did the

U.S. use its power effectively?

A clear political aim that provides a foundation for the argument. One means of evaluating the effectiveness of the U.S. use of power its power is to evaluate whether or not the U.S. achieved its political aims in the war examined, and how effective or not its leaders were in developing and implementing strategy and operations to achieve this aim or aims. Clear arguments, each examined in its own labeled section

supporting the thesis and are tied to it.

Developed arguments containing clear and substantive analysis while integrating relevant theoretical concepts.

Satisfactory use of provided materials and/or other sources.

A clear, labeled conclusion of at least one paragraph revealing the value and importance of what has been examined in the paper.

Sample Paper Outline

Introduction:

One paragraph.

This includes a clear thesis that directly answers the assigned question.

It also includes the arguments that will be addressed in the paper.

These arguments serve as the outline to the paper.

It is not necessary to provide background information.

Supporting Argument #1:

State your supporting argument and develop it using evidence from your readings.

The argument presented here should be linked back to the thesis.

Supporting Argument #2:

Follow the same approach as for Supporting Argument #1.

Supporting Argument #3:

Follow the same approach as for Supporting Argument #1 and #2.

Supporting arguments as needed:

Paper length restrictions mean it will be rare to have more than three arguments. Two may also be sufficient.

Conclusion:

One paragraph explaining what should be learned from the analysis presented.

Heres an example of the introductory paragraph template.

The United States employed military power in the Pacific Theater during the Second

World War to achieve its political aim of Japans constitutional surrender. The

U.S. waged a Corbettian campaign that: 1) prioritized control of maritime communications rather than decisive fleet battle alone; 2) used sea and air power to enable the progressive isolation of Japan; and 3) translated maritime and air control

into political coercion by incrementally restricting Japans freedom of action

until surrender became unavoidable.

ASSESSMENT RUBRIC

LEARNING OUTCOMES: Evaluate the use of military power by the U.S. to achieve its political aims during the Second World War (in the European and/or Pacific Theaters), the

Korean War, the Vietnam War, or the First Gulf War.

An insightful thesis revealing a particularly imaginative treatment of the question.

A clear political aim and concise explanation of its importance and/or value

Multiple, exceptional, clearly articulated arguments linked clearly to the thesis and possessed of exceptional – arguably original analysis.

Exceptional, insightful- perhaps original – arguments providing a superb, substantive answer to the question while creatively integrating ideas, theory, and examples of historical joint warfighting into a coherent analysis.

Exceptional use of provided materials and/or other sources.

An exceptional conclusion that distills the essence of the paper while conveying further valuable lessons, particularly for joint warfighting.

CRITICAL AND CREATIVE THINKING

Clear and comprehensive application of theory.

Comprehensive analysis of exceptional sources.

Unique yet plausible explanation of how military theory explains actions or fails to.

Effective use of prior learning applied to a new context.

SHORT WRITING: Purpose, Thesis & Content

Exceptionally clear and refined purpose and thesis.

Exceptionally developed arguments clearly connected to the thesis and form part of a whole.

Logical analytical approach presenting superb analysis of both theoretical ideas and historical events, thus enhancing the lessons learned by examining the topic chosen.

SHORT WRITING: Organization & Structure

Logic of approach is clear and easy to follow reflecting a sophisticated analysis and argumentation.

Paragraphs & transitions are creative & persuasive and substantially enhance main points.

WRITING: Sources & Evidence

Skillful use of high-quality, credible, relevant sources

Citations and references are formatted correctly.

WRITING: Language, Syntax & Mechanics

Clear & concise language skillfully communicates meaning to readers.

Main points are clearly identified

All sentences are well-written with varied sentence structure.

Virtually free of errors in grammar, punctuation & spelling.

Visual aids (i.e., figures / tables) are used (as needed) to greatly enhance assignment (no spelling errors, concise, readable).

Assignment Instructions: In todays operational environment, the U.S. Army is facing a range of problems and mission sets that are arguably more varied and complex then previously encountered. Forces face an array of demands that encompass geo-political, social, cultural, and military factors that interact in unpredictable ways. ADM leverages critical and creative thinking, innovation, discourse, and reflective practice to ask, What problem are we trying to solve? Reflection Post: Urban operational environments often mask deeper instability beneath surface-level symptoms. Drawing on the framing concepts in ATP 5-0.1 and the insights from O112, how would you, as a future sergeant major, guide your staff in identifying systemic root causes rather than reacting to symptoms? Reflect on the importance of mapping interrelated tensions, applying second-order thinking, and embracing non-linear analysis to frame complex problems. Consider how failing to understand these dynamics might lead to ineffective planning or misaligned efforts. * Use at minimum of 1 reference and cite material IAW APA standards to support your response. Journal Entry Guidelines Your journal entry should be a maximum of 600 words. The purpose of this entry is to provide the instructor with a clear and substantive understanding of the concepts and theories related to the reflection post prompt. Your reflection must demonstrate how you can apply these concepts and theories to leader development within your organization. Elements of a Strong Journal Entry A strong journal entry will have the following characteristics: Substantive Content: Your writing should present original thought, substantial depth, and be relevant to the topic. Demonstrate a strong understanding of course materials by making direct connections to readings or other resources. Logical Analysis: Your viewpoint should show strong logical thinking and reasoning, supported by evidence and examples. Clearly articulate the content of the lesson by using direct citations or paraphrasing from the module subject area. External Resource: You must provide at least one external resource to support your discussion, as required by the journal instructions. Writing Quality: The entry must be well-written, clearly articulated, and use standard English. This includes correct grammar, punctuation, usage, and spelling.

Assignment Instructions: In todays operational environment, the U.S. Army is facing a range of problems and mission sets that are arguably more varied and complex then previously encountered. Forces face an array of demands that encompass geo-political, social, cultural, and military factors that interact in unpredictable ways. ADM leverages critical and creative thinking, innovation, discourse, and reflective practice to ask, What problem are we trying to solve? Reflection Post: Urban operational environments often mask deeper instability beneath surface-level symptoms. Drawing on the framing concepts in ATP 5-0.1 and the insights from O112, how would you, as a future sergeant major, guide your staff in identifying systemic root causes rather than reacting to symptoms? Reflect on the importance of mapping interrelated tensions, applying second-order thinking, and embracing non-linear analysis to frame complex problems. Consider how failing to understand these dynamics might lead to ineffective planning or misaligned efforts. * Use at minimum of 1 reference and cite material IAW APA standards to support your response. Journal Entry Guidelines Your journal entry should be a maximum of 600 words. The purpose of this entry is to provide the instructor with a clear and substantive understanding of the concepts and theories related to the reflection post prompt. Your reflection must demonstrate how you can apply these concepts and theories to leader development within your organization. Elements of a Strong Journal Entry A strong journal entry will have the following characteristics: Substantive Content: Your writing should present original thought, substantial depth, and be relevant to the topic. Demonstrate a strong understanding of course materials by making direct connections to readings or other resources. Logical Analysis: Your viewpoint should show strong logical thinking and reasoning, supported by evidence and examples. Clearly articulate the content of the lesson by using direct citations or paraphrasing from the module subject area. External Resource: You must provide at least one external resource to support your discussion, as required by the journal instructions. Writing Quality: The entry must be well-written, clearly articulated, and use standard English. This includes correct grammar, punctuation, usage, and spelling.

Write an essay pertaining to the Army Leadership and the Profession. Essay will be written according to the information on ADP 6-22 Chapter 1. Resource will be provided, chapter is included please use the entire information for the essay. Essay needs to be knowledgeable on Chapter 1 as this is a leadership essay. Please see attachments.

Instructions. You are to prepare an essay addressing the importance of the role of a Human Resources Non-commissioned Officer (HR NCO) in the Profession of Arms. The paper must be at least two pages and written IAW the Army writing style. Use APA 7 format, Arial font, 12 pitch. Some key elements to consider: What are some roles and responsibilities of a Staff Sergeant NCO? What does it mean to be an HR NCO? What is the HR Sergeants Role in the Army Profession? How can you develop your HR section based on the two core competencies? Please use the Non-Commissioned officer guide (TC 7-22.7), Human Resources Support (FM 4-1), as well as AR 25-50 (Preparing and managing correspondence). References will be attached. Please take a look at the rubric as well. Thank you let me know if any questions.