PORTFOLIO // CASE STUDY 01
C2 Integration
Course
Designing a formal Marine Corps course to train tactical command-and-control integration across systems, echelons, and warfighting functions.
I led the curriculum development effort for a course built to help Marines understand how command-and-control systems connect, exchange information, support decision-making, and move operational data from company and battalion levels up to regiment, division, and higher headquarters. The course is now formally taught by the MAGTF Integrated System Training Centers (MISTCs).
SEC 01 // PROJECT OVERVIEW
Integration is the skill the schoolhouse wasn't teaching.
The C2 Integration Course was created to address a real training need. Marines often learn individual command-and-control systems in isolation, but operational success depends on understanding how those systems work together across warfighting functions, tactical echelons, and command-post processes.
The course was designed to move beyond basic operator training and focus on integration: how information is passed, validated, displayed, acted upon, and synchronized across the command-and-control architecture. Students leave understanding not just which systems are used, but how the architecture behaves as a whole — and what to do when it doesn't.
SEC 02 // MY ROLE
Curriculum lead, from concept to formal instruction.
I led the curriculum effort that turned an initial course concept into a structured, teachable, repeatable curriculum. That meant developing the course framework, organizing the instructional flow, building student and facilitator materials, refining practical exercises, supporting system validation, coordinating with instructors and subject matter experts, and folding feedback from pilot iterations into the final course design.
SEC 03 // THE TRAINING GAP
The training gap
BEFORE
- Systems taught in isolation, one operator course at a time
- Buttonology without operational context
- No structured picture of how data moves between systems
- Integration problems discovered for the first time during live exercises
WITH THE COURSE
- Systems taught as one connected operational architecture
- Information flow tied to the commander's decision cycle
- Students validate real data paths and learn where they break
- Command posts arrive at exercises already thinking in integration terms
SEC 04 // COURSE DESIGN & LEARNING PROGRESSION
Crawl. Walk. Run.
The course follows a deliberate progression: students first learn the operational architecture and the purpose of the systems, then validate individual data paths, then integrate multiple systems across echelons, and finally apply the full architecture in a scenario-based capstone event.
-
CRAWL
Academics & Systems Context
Operational architecture, system purpose, echelon relationships, and information exchange requirements — the context for why systems connect.
-
WALK
Guided Labs
Hands-on validation of individual data paths: confirm information moves, displays correctly, and reaches the right node.
-
RUN
Practical Application
Multi-system integration across echelons — students connect the architecture and troubleshoot friction points as they surface.
-
CAPSTONE
Scenario Execution
A scenario-driven event applying the full course architecture end to end, from company-level inputs to higher headquarters reporting.
SEC 05 // DEVELOPMENT PROCESS
From training gap to formal course
-
Identify the Training Gap
PHASE 01
Marines needed more than individual system familiarization. They needed a structured way to understand how systems connect, how information moves, and how command posts use C2 systems to support operations.
-
Build the Instructional Framework
PHASE 02
I designed the course around operational integration, warfighting-function alignment, echelon-based information movement, and practical application — organized so students understand both the technical and operational purpose of each integration step.
-
Develop the Materials
PHASE 03
I produced and refined student-facing and instructor-facing materials: guides, practical exercises, system-context products, and capstone support materials — built to be teachable, repeatable, and usable by instructors across multiple MISTC locations.
-
Validate Through Execution
PHASE 04
The course was exercised through pilot iterations at MISTC locations, testing the instructional flow, system architecture, labs, practical exercises, student comprehension, and instructor delivery model.
-
Incorporate Feedback and Refine
PHASE 05
Feedback from instructors, students, system specialists, and pilot execution drove improvements: sharpening the academics, reducing unnecessary operator-level detail, improving lab flow, strengthening the link between systems and operational purpose, and making the course more hands-on.
-
Transition to Formal Instruction
PHASE 06
After refinement, the course moved beyond pilot status and became a real Marine Corps course taught by the MISTCs — a structured curriculum that supports repeatable instruction and improves how the Marine Corps trains command-and-control integration.
SEC 06 // SKILLS DEMONSTRATED
Skills demonstrated
SEC 07 // CASE STUDY SUMMARY
Executive summary
I led the curriculum development effort for a formal Marine Corps C2 Integration Course that teaches Marines how to integrate command-and-control systems across warfighting functions and tactical echelons. The project required translating complex technical architectures and operational workflows into a structured, repeatable, hands-on course. The final product moved from pilot execution into formal MISTC instruction and now supports Marine Corps command-and-control training.
"This project represents the intersection of operational experience, technical systems knowledge, curriculum design, and training modernization. It demonstrates my ability to take a complex mission problem, structure it into a teachable framework, and deliver a product that can be used across an enterprise training environment."