Download eBook for Free

FormatFile SizeNotes
PDF file 0.8 MB

Use Adobe Acrobat Reader version 10 or higher for the best experience.


Purchase Print Copy

 FormatList Price Price
Add to Cart Paperback145 pages $38.00 $30.40 20% Web Discount

Research Questions

  1. How does USAF BMT GIT compare with USAF officer training, basic training in other U.S. services, and foreign military training?
  2. What options are available to increase GIT?
  3. How would these options affect proportions of integration, military training instructor models, scheduling, and facilities?
  4. How much will these options cost?
  5. How is GIT best monitored?

The USAF asked the RAND Corporation to assess ways to increase gender-integrated training (GIT) in Basic Military Training (BMT). RAND reviewed historical literature and the experiences of other services and devised five options for increased GIT. Options include integrating training activities, integrating flights to different male-female proportions both before and after fall out from sleeping bays, and modifying sleeping bays for full integration. This report provides a comparative analysis of these options, including costs for each one, as well as a monitoring framework to monitor the progress of any GIT option that the USAF might choose.

Key Findings

RAND found five options to increase GIT

  • Option One increases GIT by integrating select training activities.
  • Option Two integrates selected flights 50-percent male/50-percent female after the trainees leave their gender-segregated sleeping bays and are on the drill pad.
  • Option Three integrates selected flights 50-percent male/50-percent female, with trainees integrating after morning hygiene by switching to an opposite-gender sleeping bay.
  • Option Four integrates selected flights 75-percent male/25-percent female on the drill pad.
  • Option Five integrates the sleeping bays themselves.


  • Whatever option the USAF takes to increase GIT, it should communicate the purpose for the change.
  • A detailed implementation plan is necessary, along with specific accountability.
  • The USAF should ensure top leadership commitment to change.
  • Internal and external oversight of any change is important, along with a monitoring system.

Table of Contents

  • Chapter One


  • Chapter Two

    Review of Research Literature on GIT Effects

  • Chapter Three

    Service GIT Models

  • Chapter Four

    Options for Increasing GIT and Their Associated Costs

  • Chapter Five

    Applying Historical BMT Data to Current Facility Constraints and GIT Options

  • Chapter Six

    The Effects of Attrition on GIT Options

  • Chapter Seven

    Considerations When Implementing GIT

  • Chapter Eight

    Developing a Framework for Monitoring GIT in BMT

  • Chapter Nine

    Conclusions and Recommendations

  • Appendix A

    RAND Project Air Force BMT GIT Assessment Discussion Protocol

  • Appendix B

    Cost Methodology and Analysis of Options for Integrating Sleeping Bays

  • Appendix C

    Monitoring Framework for Implementing GIT in BMT

  • Appendix D

    RAND Flight Optimization Model

Research conducted by

The research reported here was commissioned by the commander of Second Air Force and was conducted within the Manpower, Personnel, and Training Program of RAND Project AIR FORCE.

This report is part of the RAND Corporation research report series. RAND reports present research findings and objective analysis that address the challenges facing the public and private sectors. All RAND reports undergo rigorous peer review to ensure high standards for research quality and objectivity.

Permission is given to duplicate this electronic document for personal use only, as long as it is unaltered and complete. Copies may not be duplicated for commercial purposes. Unauthorized posting of RAND PDFs to a non-RAND Web site is prohibited. RAND PDFs are protected under copyright law. For information on reprint and linking permissions, please visit the RAND Permissions page.

The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.