Idea: Junior Cadet Program

[ZigZag911]

You understand the Gp CC isn't involved with this. It's an advisory board of phase IV cadets conducting the review & giving a report to the Sq CC to aid in his decision. The Gp CC never sees it or even knows it happened, neither does the Sq CC have to read it much less follow the advice. All they're asking for is the ability to interview the kids & provide their input to ensure standards are being met & deficiencies addressed. That's pretty reasonable really. I still think they're doing it for the wrong reasons & it isn't going to fly, but there is some logic behind it.

If this is solely, or primarily, a cadet officer initiative, then it probably is a terrible idea....I WAS a cadet officer, and we came up with some truly ridiculous notions at times...if the phase II/IV cadets are looking to improve the quality of cadet officers, perhaps they could offer to mentor some of their juniors?

[DNall]

Two sides to this & then I want to let it go....

Side1: Regs not only permit, but specifically encourage promotin boards to advise the CC, & make no rule defining how they should be made up or if that structure can be defined or supported beyond the Sq. The same provision covers the promotion boards that exist at Wg/Reg level for adult promotions. It is permited. Now, most Sqs have little experience w/ phase IV cadets, most Sq CCs even less in making those evaluations. What he sees is a kid that does a great job locally, not if that person meets the standards to be a wing-wide leader in cadet programs. It's appropriate to have experts evaluate those people & advise the Sq CC if they are ready or if any deficiency needs to be addressed. The Sq CC can take that advice or toss it in the trash w/o looking at it, but if the Gp CC says the cadet has to meet with the board, then the Sq CC has to send them.

If this is solely, or primarily, a cadet officer initiative, then it probably is a terrible idea....I WAS a cadet officer, and we came up with some truly ridiculous notions at times...if the phase II/IV cadets are looking to improve the quality of cadet officers, perhaps they could offer to mentor some of their juniors?

Side2: I agree with you. I don't think this particular effort is really being done for the right reasons. This is a bunch of cadets that have been given a lot of free reign & think they shouold be able to take steps to consolidate power over the cadet program. This flows from an attitude by some that CP officers are glorified babysitters & should put the wieght on cadets & let them learn from their failures.

While that's true to an extent, it must be practiced w/ a considered approach. Any baseball fan out there can tell you if you bring a pitcher up to the majors before they're ready you can ruin them for life, not to mention losing the game & wasting the effort of everyone else out there. You can't throw a cadet into the fire before they're ready. Not only can you harm their development, but when you let them outright fail it wastes the time & effort of everyone under them & you lose a lot of those people. You have to focus on quality & build people up with individual attention to their development, and move them around thru the process till they are ready to face challenges. You should give them a vision & have them execute it under your guidance. Sorry, sliding off into a little tirad there, BUT this is a case where cadet leaders have been allowed to exceed their authority & they are reaching for more... in my opinion, and I might well get in trouble for saying that, but based on being a cadet programs officer since I joined 13 years ago, and a respectable record of people I've turned around & made something out of, a record of programs I've operated, that's my considered opinion.

With that understanding, I don't think this review board option should proceed, but that's not to say there isn't some legitiamte theory in it & basis in regs to make it happen.

[BillB]

I've seen a Group level cadet promotion board. And the cadet that appears before the Board is on best behavior, uniform follows 39-1 to the letter and makes a great impression on the board. However in his home squadron he causes problems, often on ego trips and in general a pain in the (censored). So the concept didn't work when tried in the past.
Plus what do you do in Wings that don't have Groups? Ship the cadet several hundred miles to Wing Hq?

[Spogden]

I actually have come from a Wing that requires boards for promotion (supplement from WK). And no, they didn't ship cadets 100s of miles for board. They would convene a board close to the cadet(s). Most of the time the boards are held for multiple cadets. And all boards had atleast one sr member. Each board was also required to have a cadet or former cadet of equal grade or higher for the requested promotion.

Each cadet may be on their best behavior and as polished as can be, but if they cannot answer comprehensive questions about what they have learned, not studied to this point, then they are not ready for promotion no matter what their test score may say. A test can be something that is regurgitated and not actually absorbed. The supplement states that the cadet must pass the board for major promotions before the commanders are able to promote.

I don't know of a commander in the Wing that would have recommend the cadet for board if he didn't already feel they were ready. Nor did any of these commanders feel their power or authority was overridden by the WK.

But i think the point has been stated yet missed in this whole thread. Yes they can promote as stated in the regs by completing the necessary requirements and TIG. However, each commander has the right to deny or delay promotion based on maturity. So while we have some 12yo that have completed everything to promote to officer grade, if they don't have the maturity, then they shouldn't be promoted until they do. Therefore, I'm not sure a Jr. Cadet Program would be warrented.

[Dragoon]

Of course you could go back to the original CAP Cadet program. And leave promotions up to the Squadron Commander without respect to how many achievements have been completed. The cadet would still earn the ribbon but NOT the promotion. Or the Commander could promote up to C/CMSgt even if the cadet has only completed 2-3 achievements. Promotions based on either duty assignment for the cadet or the really gung-ho cadets could earn promotions. All that changes when the cadet earns the Mitchell but Squadron Commanders could promote up to C/Maj again depending on duty asignment. (C/LtCol and C/Col reserved for Earhart or Spaatz)
Jack Sorensen told me once, sitting at the O-club at Maxwell, he made a mistake by tieing promotions to achiecvements. But he said it was to late to change it.

I would so go for this - it would allow for the inevitable mismatch between test taking ability and leadership ability (within reason), and allow cadets to be recognized for their strengths while still working on their weaknesses.

[mikeylikey]

They should extend time in grade.  Less time in grade at the earlier achievements and more TIG at the later achievements.

[MIKE]

They should extend time in grade.  Less time in grade at the earlier achievements and more TIG at the later achievements.

I'd argue that cadets need more mandatory time in grade in phase 1 and 2... and 3 and 4.  I also think a manning document/table should be applied to cadet grade.

[CAP428]

Why make more mandatory time in grade?

If the squadron commanders are doing their job, everything should be fine.  At least I'm pretty sure, it's the sqdn. commanders, maybe DCC I'll have to check the regs, but whichever it is doesn't really matter:  they have the authority to hold back promotions from those who are not ready.

So if they are ready, let them go.  If they're not, hold them back.  Just because a cadet finishes a checklist of tasks doesn't mean they should be promoted.

People have different learning speeds.  If someone has the maturity and determination to learn all they need to know for Phase I in the minimum time, more power to them.  There's no reason to hold back somebody that has done the work and knows their stuff.

[MIKE]

If the squadron commanders are doing their job, everything should be fine.  At least I'm pretty sure, it's the sqdn. commanders, maybe DCC I'll have to check the regs, but whichever it is doesn't really matter:  they have the authority to hold back promotions from those who are not ready.

Emphasis mine.

So if they are ready, let them go.  If they're not, hold them back.  Just because a cadet finishes a checklist of tasks doesn't mean they should be promoted.

That's the ideal, but I've seen my fair share of instances where cadets were routinely promoted at minimum TIG.

[CAP428]

I agree, I've seen it too.  But I don't see why a cadet who is learning rapidly should be held back for the faults of a squadron commander.

[MIKE]

I agree, I've seen it too.  But I don't see why a cadet who is learning rapidly should be held back for the faults of a squadron commander.

Two months is not a lot of time to actually learn what's in the achievement, or apply what you've learned for that matter. How much of that time was spent just doing promotion requirements?

[ZigZag911]

They should extend time in grade.  Less time in grade at the earlier achievements and more TIG at the later achievements.

Actually, a standardized 3 months per achievement (instead of the current two) could put the brakes on the real "fast burners" (what, after all, is the rush?)....it would also have the benefit of giving each cadet a little more experience at each level

[Smitty]

I think that having the minimum be two months is correct.  Yes it is a short period of time but as it has been said time and time again.  Individual people learn at different speeds.  A cadet may learn all he/she needs to be capable of performing at the level of the next acheivement in three weeks or in six months.  It all depends on the individual.  Having the minimum TIG at two months allows the fast movers to move on to the next level in a reasonable amount of time while those that are not ready can be held back until they are ready.  I have also been asked why there is a set time if cadets learn at different speeds.  There is a simple explanation for that.  Completeing the requirements for most of the Phase I and II acheivements can take up as little as a single day.

All it would take is a simple weekend bivouac where on the first day the Leadership and Aerospace tests as well as the CPFT could be done in the afternoon with moral leadership being conducted that night.  The next morning cadets could have O-Flights and then go home.  They have just completed all the requirements for promotion.  Under those circumstances it would be possible for a squadron that actively did this to have several Mitchell cadets within a year.  

That said it is the job of the Sq/CC and the Sq/CDC to make sure cadets are ready for promotion.  Sadly many just sign off whenever all the boxes are checked.  If the Sq/CC just signs off on the promotion they are simply harming that cadet, but if the TIG was lengthened it would be unfair to those that would simply be sitting at a lower grade when they are ready for more responsibility.

[CAP428]

I agree, I've seen it too.  But I don't see why a cadet who is learning rapidly should be held back for the faults of a squadron commander.

Two months is not a lot of time to actually learn what's in the achievement, or apply what you've learned for that matter. How much of that time was spent just doing promotion requirements?

That, I am afraid depends solely on the speed at which the cadet learns.  Not whether one thinks it is a "long" or a "short" time, since those are not definitive, quantitative terms, but rather rest on the relative scale of things.  For instance, simply for illustration, if we are talking in terms of milliseconds, an entire day would be a "long" time.  But if we are talking years, a day is a "short" time.


So when you say 2 months is a short time, you must be comparing it to something else.  What are you comparing that to?

For the record, I did in fact earn my first few stripes in the minimum time allowed, and yes I did learn what was needed to know for that acheivement.  No, I'm not talking in terms of promotion requirements;  I mean I took the time to read the pertinent manuals that would affect me at that grade and I learned them.

Your question was how much of that 2 months was just spent on promotion requirements:  relatively very little.  I took my PT test in about an hour, took the leadership test in about 15 minutes, and we have moral leadership about twice a month.  I went to both.  I attended all our squadron's activities for the time period, etc.  I would say in total, the time spent on promotion requirements within those 2 months was about equal to one day.  The rest was spending time in the [then] current grade and learning what I needed to know.

To hold back cadets simply because you don't believe they can learn that fast would not be a wise decision.  People really do learn and catch on to things at different speeds.

Age and school workload can also play a role.  An older cadet will most likely learn more quickly than a younger cadet because usually the older cadet has more experience in school, etc. where they must learn things at a quick pace.  If you then take an older cadet who takes a rigorous school workload, including college-level or concurrent college classes, it is likely that cadet is already used to taking many standardized tests, taking effective notes, and studying well, as well as working under deadlines.

So, in conclusion, I would say the amount of time actually spent on promotion requirements is very miniscule.  All the rest should be learning and applying knowledge.

[MIKE]

So when you say 2 months is a short time, you must be comparing it to something else.  What are you comparing that to?

Let's call it experience.  BTDT.

[Instructor Disbrow]

The Sea Cadets have a younger version and they are called Navy Leaguers.  The age range is between 10 and 14, with Cadets being 13 to 18 years of age.
In the last 2 years the Leaguers are being offered more and more opportunities for training similar to what the Sea Cadets are offered.
They have trainings on Navy bases, Coast Guard stations, and Nat Guard bases now.
I am impressed by the progress that has been made in what they offer.
Last year the Leaguers started a submarine training!  Actual Navy personel have a difficult time getting on board subs and these young kids are now given that chance!  Amazing!

I've long thought of the idea of CAP having a junior cadet program, just like the Sea Cadets.  I think 12 is too young an age for cadets with cadet supervisors who are 17, 18, 19 and 20 years old in charge of them.  The age gap is just too big.   

Instead, I propose that CAP have 2 cadet programs: a Junior Cadet Program, and an Advanced Cadet Program.  The Junior Cadet Program would be for cadets ages 12-16, while the Advanced Cadet Program would be for cadets ages 17-20.  I think this would solve a lot of problems associated with the age gap in the CAP cadet program we currently have.

Any thoughts? 

And you care about this how?

I'm serious: for a non-member, you sure have a lot of ideas, concepts, opinions, comments, etc...  If you're that highly motivated to effect the course of the organization, I suggest you rejoin. Otherwise, you're just blowing hot air on an internet message board.

Well sir, I joined CAP when I was 12 and stayed in until I was 21.  I chose not to re-join because I feel it's more important to focus on my education.  I also don't want to earn a commission in CAP until I earn my bachelor's degree and either commission in the AF or join my state's SDF (depending on my medical status... I may not be qualified to join the military).  If I can't join the military, I'll join the SDF. 

So with great respect sir, I don't think I'm blowing hot air on this board.  I care about a junior cadet program because I think it would work, and looking back, it would have benefited me more when I was a cadet.  There really is too much of an age gap in today's CAP cadet program.   

[BillB]

CAP had a "pre-cadet" program in the 1960's. It was called the Eaflet Program for 10-13 year olds. In 2002 a test program was approved totake another look at an Eaglet Program for Keystone Flight FL-202 in Florida Wing. It had a limited membership but worked out very well. The approved uniform was AF blue shirt and blue jeans with a black plastic name tag. Eaglets took part in many unit activities, and were given a modified aerospace education training. They were give O-rides in non-corporaet aircraft (via EAA's Young Eagles) I set up the program and may still have paperork and training materials unless I tossed everything.

[A.Member]

The entire cadet program IS a junior program!  We still have a lot of opportunities left to make that program reach it's potential.  The emphasis needs to stay there before any discussion even begins to occur about expanding to an even younger audience.

[HGjunkie]

CAP had a "pre-cadet" program in the 1960's. It was called the Eaflet Program for 10-13 year olds. In 2002 a test program was approved totake another look at an Eaglet Program for Keystone Flight FL-202 in Florida Wing. It had a limited membership but worked out very well. The approved uniform was AF blue shirt and blue jeans with a black plastic name tag. Eaglets took part in many unit activities, and were given a modified aerospace education training. They were give O-rides in non-corporaet aircraft (via EAA's Young Eagles) I set up the program and may still have paperork and training materials unless I tossed everything.

I'm confused: is it Eaflet or Eaglet?

[BillB]

Eaglet.          My keyboard is confused