If anyone gets to read this post, they will probably wonder why I’ve bobbed up here, so long after the thread has fallen asleep.

Well, another search got me here by accident, but sheer intrigue compelled me to read on.

I was there…yes me…a relatively poor kid with nothing beyond a Junior Public Examination (Qld) qualification. So much for a “sinecure for the privileged”!

I can only respond to this disappointing collection of rhetoric with a simple comment that I didn’t subscribe to the notion of war either – naivety wasn’t an issue - but I did have the intelligence to distinguish between the politics of the era and the personal commitment required under the National Service scheme. I certainly would never be able to get more out of it (for me or anyone else) than what I was prepared to put in...I figured as a platoon commander, I would at least be in a position to be able to help others.

Today, having enjoyed a successful business career, and a loving and balanced family life (singing and dancing included), I am happy to admit that my time at Scheyville remains one of the greatest personal development experiences of my life. I, like many of my fellow graduates, am hardly the product of some “conform or else sausage factory”!

Yes I was there…yes, I did understand what it was all about…and yes, I then had to step up the mark as a “snotty-nosed” second lieutenant. Despite the ill-informed put-downs appearing through this thread, to this day I have the utmost respect for those who shared that Scheyville experience. Those with whom I have remained in contact have proven that they were not just fine young men then – they have grown to be even finer older men now, sharing the enduring riches of that experience with family, friends, colleagues, and in some cases, a very wide public.

I am enormously proud to one of them, my only regret being that the “wannabees” weren’t up to doing it with us. How much better human beings they might have become

Charlie1, A slightly arrogant, self satisfied post but yes I see your point. I think you are a bit unkind to say "my only regret being that the “wannabees” weren’t up to doing it with us". I was encouraged at rookie training to do officer training. I turned down the offer because it was made plain to us that to do so required us to be enthusiastic about service in Vietnam. As I was opposed to invading other countries and killing the population I thought that officer training was not the way to go. I wasn't a "wannabe" I was a "notwannabe". If you think that Scheyville did something positive for your life and turned you into the fine upstanding citizen that you claim to be then good on you. If you still think that the American war on Vietnam was a good idea then it that is a sad, sad thing.

It is unfortunate that any discussion about Scheyville graduates seem
to always end up as an anti-Vietnam debate. Stephen's main point is the
contribution the Graduates made to Australian society as a spin off from the training and development of leadership skills at Scheyville and later at other establishments. The only comments I make about Vietnam is that of the 1800 plus graduates, only a minority of them actually served
there. The remainder filled various postings throughout the Service and
where possible, to a branch of their choice if vacancies exist.
I am personally very proud of these young men when they graduated and how they developed confidence in their ability to withstand the extreme
pressures they faced during the course at Scheyville. Skipper and Charlie 1 have dealt with the misconceptions stated in some posts
about the course. I will only concur that "bastardisation" was almost non-existent during my time there and at all times we tried not to take any action which may infringe on a man's dignity. This year I had the privelige to meet up with the Class of 1/71 and after 35 years
they proved to be fine men who have, in the main, had successful careers. They all paid tribute to the part their Scheyville experience had in their chosen careers, although they probably would have succeeded without Scheyville. If nothing else, Scheyville enabled them to know their inner strengths. Yes, Scheyville did have an unintended benefit to our society.

The anti-Vietnam war aspect of this thread is by and large my fault. Mia Culpa.
The advantage that some people got out of Scheyville is to me of little importance compared to the misery caused by the war so I'm sorry if I harped on about this aspect..enough said.
Remember, that to graduate from Scheyville in the first place your had to be.
1. Physically fit
2. Compliant to authority
3. Educated
4. Socially conservative
5. Middle class
These traits almost guarantee a person "success" in the kind of world we live in. I think you are right Alamo in assuming that these people would have been "successful" in any case.
Did Scheyville benefit society in general?
I guess this would depend on your personal model of reality. If you are a Scheyville graduate or a person who admires the above attributes then the answer is probably yes but I would still argue that military training in any form is only intended to make you a better soldier, not a better citizen. If you still think it made you a better member of society then I would like to know how this process came about

Thank you all for the preceding debate- I could not stop reading it as I enjoyed the honesty and liveliness of the comments! I came to the website after reading about "RMC,Portsea and Scheyville" officer graduates, in Peter Cosgroves book "My Story". I had heard of the first two, but only read an oblique reference to the latter on the OCS Portsea webpage, where they were bemoaning the loss of any significant sign [I presume in terms of buildings etc?]of the place and were worried that a similar fate would befall Portsea, which closed in the 80s, I believe. I was an officer cadet at OCS in 1962, but could not handle the pace and took discharge at my own request after completing the required 3 months.So, whilst I have had a successfull career in social work [including 6 years with Army Community Service in a civilian capacity] , I have often wondered how it might have been if I had soldered on, as Cosgrove did....

Just stumbled onto the forum after Googling Scheyville. I would like Priscillian to know that I was selected for officer training there after a series of very rigorous tests, despite being a tradesman with a Year 10 education.
I didn't notice too many privileged people when I was there. I doubt they were even in the army. I didn't graduate, I didn't end up bitter and the experience did make me a better person.
On the wider issue of Australia's involvement in the Vietnam war, I would like to contribute to the debate. Militarily it was an undoubted failure. Our decision to be involved was the correct one at the time. When Menzies and Hasluck made that decision in 1962 they had the responsibility for the security of this nation. Just 21 years earlier in 1941, in their recent memories, we had nearly lost this country with Japanese troops all through the islands to the north, Townsville and Darwin being repeatedly bombed and submarines successfully making it into Sydney Harbour. In this context, a strong American presence in south east Asia was very desirable for Australia's security. Yes the domino theory may have been flawed, but the 40 batallions of North Vietnamese that sacked the French from Dien Bein Phu had formed up and trained north of the Red River in China.