IT Specialty Badge

[swilliams]

is it just me, or are we missing some of the technology in Information Technology officer?

I'm not saying the tests need to be A+ or MCSE, but, I think we should require & test on basic IT knowledge.

Am I being too picky by wanting my ITO's to be able to identify computer parts 2/3 times?

[TankerT]

is it just me, or are we missing some of the technology in Information Technology officer?

I'm not saying the tests need to be A+ or MCSE, but, I think we should require & test on basic IT knowledge.

Am I being too picky by wanting my ITO's to be able to identify computer parts 2/3 times?

We don't require finance officers to be a CPA, or an AEO to be a licensed teacher, etc...  And, at the same time, their specialty track ratings do not have knowledge exams that cover those skill tasks.

The IT Officer track isn't to train CAP members to be IT professionals.  It is to train IT professionals to be familiar with CAP's processes and procedures.  (Assuming that your IT person has some rudimentary IT skills...)

If your commander is appointing a non-IT person to fill the IT slot... well... yeah... that's not ideal. 

Yes, not everyone is a skilled IT professional.  And, many IT professionals don't have a background in an area that makes them useful for our IT operations... and... as such... your unit might not have a person with the proper skills to be an ITO. 

But, to resolve that problem requires selective recruiting... and not a training program from NHQ.

[Matt]

Well, at least one question has the wrong answer listed as correct.

With regards to the Technician exam, yes - I think so, too.

That makes three, B@$7@rD$!  You'd think that when you're dealing with the geeks in CAP they'd exert a little more effort to make sure we wouldn't know that they are wrong!

[swilliams]

is it just me, or are we missing some of the technology in Information Technology officer?

I'm not saying the tests need to be A+ or MCSE, but, I think we should require & test on basic IT knowledge.

Am I being too picky by wanting my ITO's to be able to identify computer parts 2/3 times?

We don't require finance officers to be a CPA, or an AEO to be a licensed teacher, etc...  And, at the same time, their specialty track ratings do not have knowledge exams that cover those skill tasks.

The IT Officer track isn't to train CAP members to be IT professionals.  It is to train IT professionals to be familiar with CAP's processes and procedures.  (Assuming that your IT person has some rudimentary IT skills...)

If your commander is appointing a non-IT person to fill the IT slot... well... yeah... that's not ideal. 

Yes, not everyone is a skilled IT professional.  And, many IT professionals don't have a background in an area that makes them useful for our IT operations... and... as such... your unit might not have a person with the proper skills to be an ITO. 

But, to resolve that problem requires selective recruiting... and not a training program from NHQ.

I'm not suggesting that we make CAP ITO's IT Professionals, and you're right - it should be the job of the Unit CC to appoint a fairly competent IT officer. However, to be in an "operational" position, i.e. ES Specialties, etc - you do need specific skill sets. I guess I envisioned the ITO as a mix of an operational specialty (you have 30 minutes to get that network up & running) and a 'staff officer' (make sure you fill out that paperwork & provide some opsec training).

I'm not saying it's totally broken, I just expect my ITO's to be fairly competent in IT, not just CAP policies. I definitely don't think CAP needs to provide this training, but it would be nice to have some reference resources identified, and some level of knowledge assessment.

This may all be for nothing, NHQ may be working on this for the Senior & Master rating. I've not heard yet.

[floridacyclist]

Yahoo.. passed the test first try!  Didn't even need to do open book.

Same here. I went looking for the Senior and Master tests to blow away take as well (maybe try opening a book on those since hopefully they would be harder), but they weren't there yet.

We'll see how this thing goes. I still have at least a year before I can finish up Master in my current specialty tracks, and then maybe I can change to IT and PAO

[Lancer]

While I agree that an ITO does not need to be an IT professional, it certainly does help. At best, the person who is the most technologically apt in your unit should be tasked with this position. If there are deficiencies, then it should be up to the new ITO to come up to speed, double-time like.

As far as the tests are concerned, yes, there is a 'broken question' and hopefully someone is working on correcting it. The technician test was quite easy and there were no real 'technical' questions on it. As I'm sure there will not be on the senior and master tests when they appear. Due to the nature of the technology industry and how slow changes are made internally to CAP, there is no way to put any real current technology questions in the tests.

As of this past week, I've been asked to be the assistant wing ITO, and so far we have published our first 'IT' newsletter to the wing mailing list with some fairly good feedback. I look forward to providing my support in whatever way I can 'technologically' to the wing, and that this speciality track gets the focus it deserves.