It was nine in my time, but programs do change slightly.
As far as your question is concerned, Mr. Chair, as it relates to the balance and the academic versus the military culture going there, we need a balance. We do have some military professors on the faculty. The faculty delivers the academic program. It operates in the tradition and framework of usual universities, with academic freedom, a senate, and a structure that supports it. That is mainly largely populated by civilian university teachers with a small number of military faculty.
The military training wing that starts up with the commander as the head of the unit is there to provide the framework, the coaching, the mentoring, and the coordination of activities for all the other elements in ensuring that the leadership development goes on par. We need the balance of the two. There will always be tension. It's like any organization; there are cultures and subcultures. I'm a submariner. Surface fleet officers and submariners are different cultures. Army, navy, air force are different cultures. Fighter pilots and helicopter pilots are different cultures. There are always some tensions. Academic...needs more focus at this point for a whole bunch of valid reasons, or we need to do this military activity for a whole bunch of valid reasons, and there needs to be coordination. We'll always have folks who are focused on what they do, and there are some university teachers who believe that RMC is just any other university, and they're there to teach as if they were in any other university.
Through the process of modernization, we bring our military staff in and we orient them. We have opened the orientation period to the faculty members, too, to reassert why RMC is different from other universities, and in order for them to understand better what we're trying to achieve for the cadets through the training year. That helps reduce the tension. We're hoping through time that will help reduce the tension between the two.