AFIADL Results

[Eclipse]

If it goes to the member you have a potential test compromise situation - what's to prevent them from opening it and making a bunch of copies?

Direct the unit TCO would be ok, though.

[NC Hokie]

If it goes to the member you have a potential test compromise situation - what's to prevent them from opening it and making a bunch of copies?

Put the test in a sealed envelope that is only to be opened by an authorized TCO.  If it's open when the TCO gets it, the test is compromised and appropriate action is taken.

[arajca]

Another issue is AFIADL uses Test Control Facilities (TCF). That's the number that is required on all applications (usually a zip code plus some numbers). That's where the tests are sent. Since CAP does not do a large amount - in the grand scheme - of testing, especially at the unit level, it does not make sense for AFIADL (or whatever their name is today) to send tests elsewhere. The member is responsible for contacting the TCF to arrange to take the test. The TCF is responsible to maintain the security of the test. Even the appearance of a compromise can cause great problems.

Given that most units use the unit cc's mailing address (based on my experience), everytime a unit changes commanders, AFIADL would need to change its records and deactivate one TCF and activate a new one. This includes updating the TCF for each student in the old one. I don't know what procedures they have to follow to do this so it could be a couple of minutes or a couple of weeks. 

We can say it's easy to send the test to the student and for them to keep it sealed, but given the institutional issues, why should AFIADL great a new test procedure just for CAP? If it doesn't work, it's an issue with the TCF, not AFIADL. I have taken several courses and have never had a problem getting the tests in a  timely manner.

If you are near an AFB or other TCF and can use that facility, submit a change of TCF request to AFIADL. The base education office should be able to help with that.

[davidsinn]

Here in INWG the procedure goes like this AFIADL->State Director(which is also the TCF)->Unit TCO. Wing never sees it.

[Short Field]

I bend over backwards for PAWG and I can't get a simple test that I could have passed years ago.  I don't appreciate it. 

CAPs biggest problem is lazy and incompetent leaders who are more concerned with the bling and power that comes from holding a leadership position than actually doing their job and taking care of the members.  I guess as long as you don't set standards, you don't have to worry about meeting them. 

I saw two very enthusiastic and active members quit last month because their squadron commander failed to advance them on time.  I am talking two senior members who qualified for advanced promotion to Capt due to special skills and were doing some of the harder jobs in the squadron.   The squadron commander had not even bothered to promote them to 2nd Lt months ago when their regular duty performance promotions were due. 

Just lazy and incompetent leadership.   And people wonder why we have the turnover in membership that we have...

[sarflyer]

Short Field,

Please please please don't generalize on the type of leadership we have in the organization.  You probably didn't mean to come off that way but I took it that way.  We have some people in CAP that are lazy and incompetent.   

That is the nature of a volunteer organization.  Anyone can join so your going to get people who are like that. 

Was the commander wrong for what he did, yep.  I agree with you but I try to empower my members to stay on top of what they are owed.  When you have a limited amount of time and a limited amount of members to do the paperwork.  A suggestion might be to have members fill out their own paperwork and help the admin and commander get things done?  Just an idea and no reason they can't do it. 

JFK said: "Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country."  The same applies to CAP.

We have now drifted a little.  Hopefully Moderator Mike won't slam the hatch shut!

[JC004]

I agree with your assessment in that we are digging a hole.  I think there are a lot of causes of the promotions and such not getting done, but the end result is a serious problem.  There may be causes like apathy, ignorance, burnout, lack of time, etc., etc., etc.  But the end result is that members get mad and go away.  

AFIADL has been a shining example of that in PAWG.  I do not want to say the cause, because I don't have all of the facts.  I have been especially careful not to place the blame on individuals because I don't know what is going on behind the scenes, and my assessment could be plain wrong.  

I can say that the setup isn't good in many of our departments.  Our members rely on these departments doing their jobs, and sometimes...they don't.  There are other departments with a single person at the helm, and some of whom are very old.  I am fairly sure that those members live in museums when they are not at staff meetings.  Others may have served at Gettysburg.  That kind of setup hurts a lot of people.  It BADLY damages our retention rate.

I'm not saying that Wing can just appoint a series of assistants, because as I discovered, they can't.  This should be a goal, but the problem has been that many people have feelings about Wing HQ and refuse to do work for them.  This often comes from Wing screwing them over.  There's a cycle here.

I am fairly sure that my Wing CC doesn't care about my FIVE-YEAR AFIADL ordeal.  I'm not saying he is "lazy and incompetent," because again, I don't know that to be true.  But I am still fairly certain that he isn't interested in my issue.  The problem is that it isn't my issue.  It's several PAWG members who I can name, and it's probably dozens more.  So many of us will leave and we will have a talent gap.  I have been loyal and dedicated, but I have also made it clear that I am not going to continue to jump through hoops of fire for PAWG HQ if I am going to continue getting burned.  Enough is enough.

So now I feel like many members who have left.  I see things from their point of view now, and I understand where our talent is going.  Whatever the causes, it's not good and it has to stop before nobody is left except the people who don't care because they are here to pad their resumes.

My view is that there are two main kinds of people in CAP - the types who actually care about the mission, and the types who are here to pad their resumes.  If the people who care leave because they don't see any progress, then the people who are in it for themselves move up with less resistance, take positions of great responsibility, and the cycle continues.

My contention is that we have a great deal of talent available (for now) to fill the gaps.  There are great ideas out there among the average members.  By the time you get to Group and Wing levels (at least here), you see the ideas squashed and unused.  Talent goes unused.  I am a proponent of taking a member from the squadron level who is interested in doing a particular thing, and assigning them a project that will impact the membership.  That way, members stay involved, get retained, the organization improves, and potential future staff members are found.  In addition, you don't rob the local units of all talent and move it all to Wing, where it sits.  Yes, volunteers have limited time, but there are plenty of willing members who can share the load.  It is just that we need an effective way of involving them.

We need to focus on our people.  If we don't do it now, we will end up with staffs full of self-seeking individuals, driving out those who want to accomplish something.

But, what do I know?  I never took the AFIADL 13 and I'm just a 1st Lt.   

[Short Field]

It was not a generaliztion.  We have some great leaders and then we have some others.    The AFIADL issue and the members quiting were not due to great leaders.

Besides, it has been a bad week here with leadership issues....must be the high humidity (at least 25%).

However we much we gripe and moan and groan about a lots of things - most of them are small beans in the overall scheme of things.  As they say in the military, if the troops aren't griping something is really wrong.

The heart and soul of our organization is the membership.  Good leadership takes care of the memberships needs.   It values each individual's worth.  Good performance is recognized - and poor or mediocre performace has to be recognized as well.  To praise good performers and poor performers equally is an insult to the good performers.   To ignore your members needs is about the worse thing a leader can do.  If you have a problem getting something done - bring them into the problem to help solve it with you.  But don't ignore them and their problem. 

The case that really frosted my corn flakes would have taken a max of 10 minutes to solve.  For the lack of 10 minutes time, we lost two every talented people who are now poster childs for "why not to join CAP".   Ten Minutes over almost a year!!!

[mikeylikey]

I took ECI 13 as a Cadet (shows how old I am getting), and it took almost a whole year to get it to me then.  This is not a new problem.  This part of CAP will become much better when the new "Officer Basic Course" is finalized. 

The course should have been moved on-line a few years back anyway!  Honestly, I found the course to be (and I hate to say it) useless for a person who had already been in CAP for 5 years.  I skimmed it, and took the test, missed one question.  IT was that one everyone missed until 2001 when they corrected the text.

I think Wing Kings should be a waiver authority for members who have held a Wing or Group Staff position for over 2 years. 

Sorry to stray off topic.  What was this originally about?? 

[DogCollar]

I took the test on 7 August and got my results in the mail yesterday!!  I passed.  I did have to request the test twice before it reached my squadron, but otherwise, it was pretty smooth.  My one concern about the course is that there are major parts of it that are pretty out of date.

Even though requirements for chaplains advancing through the professional development levels is a bit different than other specialty tracks, I think it is important for chaplains to also go through the normal procedures for advancement.  I was given the rank of Captain when I was appointed as a chaplain, now I have appropriately "back-filled" the requirements for that rank.  I hope other chaplains are doing the same.

[Hawk200]

I used to think that the AFIADL 13 would be more appropriate for higher ranks. I don't believe that anymore.

I hadn't heard of this Officer Basic Course for CAP, but it sounds like a good idea. Locally taught or online, either way the information gets out there. As long as it's usefull legitimate info, it's good.

Another course for later ranks would probably not be a bad idea. Maybe a course to start with that channels into RSC. The RSC would cover a lot of the hands on and "workshop" kind of stuff that were shown as principle and theory in the correspondance course. Call it a "Part 1" (for correspondance), and "Part 2" (for the in residence).