OTS as Professional Development

[Eclipse]

Has anyone thought of proposing to National that OTS be instituted as part of professional development, just like SLS and CLC?  I'm not sure how feasible it would be, but if SLS's and CLC's can be held, I don't see what the trouble would be in holding an OTS.   

The trouble is creating, approving and implementing a curriculum which is not necessarily needed.

As I beat the drum constantly, this OTS idea is another reaction to failed local programs.  Engaged, knowledgeable commanders should be able to train their own people in the basics of the program, and
bring resources to bear for things not available locally.

That's their job.

[Pylon]

Has anyone thought of proposing to National that OTS be instituted as part of professional development, just like SLS and CLC?  I'm not sure how feasible it would be, but if SLS's and CLC's can be held, I don't see what the trouble would be in holding an OTS.   

The trouble is creating, approving and implementing a curriculum which is not necessarily needed.

As I beat the drum constantly, this OTS idea is another reaction to failed local programs.  Engaged, knowledgeable commanders should be able to train their own people in the basics of the program, and
bring resources to bear for things not available locally.

That's their job.

Bob - wouldn't a standard template for a beefier Level I (after all, this OTS thing is nothing but a fanicer name for a Level I training course) help the local commander implement training for their own people like they should be?

You say that local training for new members fails in many cases, and this can be very, very true.  So why not beef up the Level I training by giving commanders and PD staff better tools in the form of training templates, class outlines, a true curriculum, associated powerpoints that are up-to-date, and slap it all together in a kit, ready to be "deployed" when your unit needs it.

I think we all can agree on one thing, and that's the fact that Level I, as it is currently applied, fails many new members of CAP.  Let's give the local units the tools they need to implement a more robust, more up-to-date, and more effective welcome to Civil Air Patrol.  They can take 6-months to finish the training, just like current Level I, and not miss out on any promotions/opportunities for advancement - so I don't think it'd put any undue strain on local resources.

[JohnKachenmeister]

My suggestion would be to create a chartered unit as a direct reporting unit to the wing.  ALL new members would be assigned initially to this unit, regardless of where they live or which unit recruited them.  They would report for the next class, and serve one weekend a month for 3-6 months, depending on how ambitious you want the program to be.  I wrote up a 3-month proposed schedule that covered all the basics.  If you want more stuff, like form 5 rides, ACUT, etc. you will have to make it longer.

So you recruit them into YOUR unit, and then send them off to Wing for their attitude to be shaped by people they will likely never or rarely see again.

Until the entirety of the organization is based around a wing model, something which will doubtful happen within my CAP career, I want to insure my people are trained my way, because they are my problem.

When my people need an SLS or CLC?  I hold one.  Same with radio classes, ES, whatever.  its only when you start getting into the field grades that this can't be done at the unit or group levels.

Yes.  You recruit them, and then Wing trains them in basic drill, military courtesy, wear of the uniform, CPPT, ES, and other basic subjects.  Then they come to you ready to serve.

I would have sympathy with you if I hadn't JUST run an SLS and saw the many and flagrant uniform violations coming out of certain squadrons.  YOU may be a professional about training, and YOU may have the time and resources to conduct comprehensive training of people who have never been in the military, but most units are doing a poor job.

[Eagle400]

I wonder... what does the Coast Guard Auxiliary do to ensure that new members know what is required of them right off the bat?  My guess is they have something similar to Level I, but more in-depth and longer.  Hawk200, MIKE, please help me out here.

Perhaps CAP can use the approach that the Coast Guard Auxiliary uses.     

[Major Carrales]

I wonder... what does the Coast Guard Auxiliary do to ensure that new members know what is required of them right off the bat?  My guess is they have something similar to Level I, but more in-depth and longer.  Hawk200, MIKE, please help me out here.

Perhaps CAP can use the approach that the Coast Guard Auxiliary uses.     

The application for the Coast Guard Auxiliary is multiple pages and asks for much more information (including finances). Plus, you would have to take a boating safety course.  The USCGAux is not really "aviation" centered...they are nautical in nature.

Tedda and some of the Auxie's could tell you more.  I've wanted to join up for a while, but one Auxiliary at a time is the name of the game for me.

[Hawk200]

I wonder... what does the Coast Guard Auxiliary do to ensure that new members know what is required of them right off the bat?  My guess is they have something similar to Level I, but more in-depth and longer.  Hawk200, MIKE, please help me out here.

Perhaps CAP can use the approach that the Coast Guard Auxiliary uses.     

I'm not even familiar with what the Coast Guard Auxiliary uses, and it's most likely not even relevant to us. CG Aux members work alongside their active duty counterparts, accomplishing the same mission, or missions of extremely similar nature.

CAP gets a mission handed over to them, and told to get it done, at least as far as ES is concerned. We don't use much in the way of USAF resources after the handoff, or we essentially operate on our own. Our Level 1 needs to reflect that.

I still think the Level 1 needs to be set up more in the function of an OTS, with major emphasis on the "Training" portion. I'm not looking to build AF officer clones, just to build Officers. Unfortunately, the competence levels in CAP are so varied, you can't guarantee that you'll get the same result. I think part of our officer training should include training the next generation.

The Iowa Wing model seems to be useful, it could be tailored to local use easily. Or National could produce a program (or accept a good one if someone submits it). Three hours of training and new clothes does not an officer make.

And something that's been bouncing around in my head, and finally stuck to something was this: "Just because an organization is an auxiliary does not mean it should function just like any other auxiliary." We're not the Coast Guard Auxiliary, we need to figure our own practices, instead of using or trying to use the practices of another with a completely different mission.

[RiverAux]

No, the CG Aux application is not multiple pages --- you're confusing the extensive security check required for certain operational duties and other situations with the membership application.

CG Aux doesn't really have anything like Level 1 or any sort of generic professional development program.  Lots of training available for various staff jobs, but thats about it. 

Overall, they aren't a good model for CAP in regards to PD and need some of the stuff we're talking about here. 

[MIKE]

There is/was a new member course and test, and an interview that I took prior to application.  It was basically a brief overview of the Aux... AUXMAN lite as it were.

That and a boating course gets you Basically Qualified (BQ), as opposed to Initially Qualified (IQ) IIRC.  

[floridacyclist]

How about something like this?

(Note: Most of our active cadets are away at Special Acts and will finish their part when they get back)

http://www.tallahasseecap.org/newmembers.shtml