Level 4 Leadership requirement question

[vento]

The Leadership requirement for Level 4 (per Attachemnt 1 of CAPR 50-17 19AUG2013) states:
"Serve as a director or staff member of a CAP course or educational activity OR National, Region, or Wing Conference"

So the question I have:
What constitutes a staff member of a CAP course or educational activity?
Are instructors (SLS or CLC for example) considered part of the staff?

Thanks

[THRAWN]

Yep.

[Storm Chaser]

There's a requirement that the course must have 12 hours of contact time, which mean some of the newer forms of SLS and CLC, with the majority of the course being online, self pace, don't qualify. (Ref. CAPR 50-17, Attach. 3)

[Tim Medeiros]

There is a listing on one of the last pages of CAPR 52-16 50-17 which has the answers you seek.


Edit: This is what I get for responding just after waking up for work.

[tonyairplane]

It also says to write to NHQ because the list changes.  Well I wrote to them and got a reply along the lines of "why are you writing to us?"

Plus yes, as was mentioned here and in another thread, the courses that one will be able help with are getting to be fewer.

They will probably have to change the requirement as things move toward online training.

[a2capt]

Hey, at least you got an answer.

I'm actually surprised there is such a comment. A change would be an updated release of the publication. Why does that one need to be different?

[Eclipse]

Plus yes, as was mentioned here and in another thread, the courses that one will be able help with are getting to be fewer.

Fewer?  Cite please.

This requirement keeps getting looser and looser.  When I joined you had to be the course director, and it was basically only SLS/CLC.

Now it's pretty much any course with the appropriate contact hours:

Squadron Leadership School

Corporate Learning Course

Unit Commanders Course

CAP Safety Officer College

Region Staff College

National Staff College

Wing, Region and National Cadet Courses and Education/Training Activities (includes encampments)

Wing, Region and National Aerospace Education Courses and Education/Training Activities

National Emergency Services Academy (NESA) including its subordinate schools

Airborne Real-time Cueing Hyperspectral Enhanced Recon (ARCHER) Operator Training

Satellite-transmitted Digital Imaging System (SDIS) Operator Training

Intermediate Incident Command System Training: ICS-300

Advanced Incident Command System Training: ICS-400

National Check Pilot Standardization Courses

Mountain Flying Clinics/Mountain Fury Course

Pilot Continuation Training

Critical Incident Stress Management Training

Individual Crisis Intervention & Peer Support

Group Crisis Intervention• Pastoral Crisis Intervention I & II
Advanced Crisis Intervention

Community Emergency Response Team (CERT) Training

Advanced First Aid / First Responder Training

National Operations Center Augmentee Training

Chaplain Corps Region Staff College

Training Leaders of Cadets

National Legal Officer College

CAP Inspector General College

The "newer" classes are exceptions and not considered the preferred way to participate in these activities.
If you can't find an hour to teaching something from that list above, you're not active enough to deserve Level IV

[tonyairplane]

It is funny that you should say that.  It actually took me writing to them twice before  I got a reply.  Now I sent a followup question and wrote again after that and still no answer.

[tonyairplane]

Yes, fewer.  As we discussed in the other thread, some Wings are having SLS and CLC done in part online with a shorter (less than 12 hours) capstone portion in person.

Other courses will certainly follow.

That is what I meant.  There will be fewer opportunities for a 12 hour contact course.

[Eclipse]

Other courses will certainly follow.

Cite.

Much (most?) most of that list cannot be accomplished online.

Repeating, SLS/CLC is the >only< online PD course, there have been no public indications that is changing, and
it is in very, very limited use, requiring Wing CC approval (which has sometimes been denied according to
messages here).

[tonyairplane]

Why do you keep saying "cite"?

It is obvious that more courses will move to online completely or hybrid.

It certainly will not be fewer.

[Eclipse]

The SLS/CLC is a special case because many wings were / are shirking their responsibility to run
them timely and accessible to their membership.

I suppose here's no arguing that more curriculum will move online, but that doesn't mean those
classes won't count, nor that there will be reduced opportunities to be an instructor as required for
Level IV.   There's also the issue that participation is somewhat circular anyway.

In other words, if you aren't participating in those classes or activities indicated in the non-exclusive list, the
odds of getting to the master level in most of the "mainstream" specialties is pretty low, anyway.

I got my master in CP as a side benefit of what I was doing anyway - one day I did the math and
realized "oh, this is done".

[EMT-83]

I have agree with Eclipse. There are far more, and much easier, ways to complete this requirement than in the past. In residence SLS and CLC are still here, and they're only two of the many courses on the list.

[arajca]

I got my master in CP as a side benefit of what I was doing anyway - one day I did the math and
realized "oh, this is done".

That's how I got most of mine. The rest were "Golly, I just need one more thing and I got another."

[vento]

Why do you keep saying "cite"?

No disrespect to anybody, but THIS has to be the funniest thing I read today. 

Tim, thanks for the cite on CAPR 52-16. And thanks everyone for the input.  :clap:

[a2capt]

Must have been a slow day.

[Tim Medeiros]

Why do you keep saying "cite"?

No disrespect to anybody, but THIS has to be the funniest thing I read today. 

Tim, thanks for the cite on CAPR 52-16. And thanks everyone for the input.  :clap:

Just a note, I goofed, it should be 50-17, been working the CP side of the house a bit much lately and got mixed up.


Attachment 3 (page 35) has the listing.

[vento]

There's a requirement that the course must have 12 hours of contact time......  (Ref. CAPR 50-17, Attach. 3)

A follow up question if I may. What exactly does the course must have 12 hours of contact time mean?
1. The whole course is over 12 hours in duration (think CLC)? OR
2. The instructor must instruct for over 12 hours in the course?
Thanks

[Eclipse]

12 hours worth of classes based on whomever creates the curriculum.

Long-winded instructors don't count.

[a2capt]

The way I see it as having meant when it was a "course director" slot, was the course was significant investment from both the director and students time.

The way it reads now, is that the course must be that, for whoever lists it. So a weeknight training class won't work, but a weeks worth of nights in a series would. That still leaves the actual level of participation in the lurch.


"Staff"? .. coffee maker. Sign in roster taker, instructor, IT support.. all of the above. Some require lots of work, others.. not so.

[Storm Chaser]

There's a requirement that the course must have 12 hours of contact time......  (Ref. CAPR 50-17, Attach. 3)

A follow up question if I may. What exactly does the course must have 12 hours of contact time mean?
1. The whole course is over 12 hours in duration (think CLC)? OR
2. The instructor must instruct for over 12 hours in the course?
Thanks

The course must be at least 12 hours in duration (a two-day SLS or CLS would qualify, unless it's all/mostly done online) and the director/staff member must be present and have contact with the students the entire time; he/she doesn't have to instruct for 12 hours.

[EMT-83]

There's a requirement that the course must have 12 hours of contact time......  (Ref. CAPR 50-17, Attach. 3)

A follow up question if I may. What exactly does the course must have 12 hours of contact time mean?
1. The whole course is over 12 hours in duration (think CLC)? OR
2. The instructor must instruct for over 12 hours in the course?
Thanks

The course must be at least 12 hours in duration (a two-day SLS or CLS would qualify, unless it's all/mostly done online) and the director/staff member must be present and have contact with the students the entire time; he/she doesn't have to instruct for 12 hours.

Where did that come from?

[Eclipse]

There's a requirement that the course must have 12 hours of contact time......  (Ref. CAPR 50-17, Attach. 3)

A follow up question if I may. What exactly does the course must have 12 hours of contact time mean?
1. The whole course is over 12 hours in duration (think CLC)? OR
2. The instructor must instruct for over 12 hours in the course?
Thanks

The course must be at least 12 hours in duration (a two-day SLS or CLS would qualify, unless it's all/mostly done online) and the director/staff member must be present and have contact with the students the entire time; he/she doesn't have to instruct for 12 hours.

Cite please.

[a2capt]

I wish that was in there somewhere, but .. I've not found that, either. So..

[lordmonar]

There's a requirement that the course must have 12 hours of contact time......  (Ref. CAPR 50-17, Attach. 3)

A follow up question if I may. What exactly does the course must have 12 hours of contact time mean?
1. The whole course is over 12 hours in duration (think CLC)? OR
2. The instructor must instruct for over 12 hours in the course?
Thanks

The course must be at least 12 hours in duration (a two-day SLS or CLS would qualify, unless it's all/mostly done online) and the director/staff member must be present and have contact with the students the entire time; he/she doesn't have to instruct for 12 hours.

Cite please.

It is one of those "this is really stupid if you think about it rules".

The 12 hour rule came about....so that those who taught in other week end courses could get credit for teaching an SLS or CLC.

Okay so far so good.

But the regulation never really said how much particpation you had to have in the first place.

And we all know that they pack 8 or more instructors into a 12 hour SLS/CLC course.  So maybe the individual is only doing one block of instruction....maybe two.     So....why are we requiring it to be in a 12 hour course.....and not just say what we mean "Teach for XX hours on one of the following subjects or a subject approved by the wing PD officers".

See....that's why I'm not in charge. 

[tonyairplane]

Just some questions on what the intent of the rule is and food for thought if there is any hope of having it changed.

What is the purpose of the rule? Is it to show that you are expert enough to be asked to teach a subject area of interest to CAP? Is it to show that you're dedicated enough to give up an hour or two serving other CAP members? Are the total contact hours really important now that a lot of training (certainly more in the future) is moving to online, some with a hybrid set-up of online and in-person?

Maybe the number of hours of course length is not the right metric since it has no correlation tothe individual's level of effort or contact time?

[THRAWN]

Just some questions on what the intent of the rule is and food for thought if there is any hope of having it changed.

What is the purpose of the rule? Is it to show that you are expert enough to be asked to teach a subject area of interest to CAP? Is it to show that you're dedicated enough to give up an hour or two serving other CAP members? Are the total contact hours really important now that a lot of training (certainly more in the future) is moving to online, some with a hybrid set-up of online and in-person?

Maybe the number of hours of course length is not the right metric since it has no correlation tothe individual's level of effort or contact time?

The original intent was to make sure that FGOs were actually get out of their squadrons and interacting in a meaningful way with other members. Prior to the online chatroom courses, you really did have to get out and talk to people, and for some it courses, depending on the CD, it took a heckuvalot of work....

[Eclipse]

It's to get members involved as mentors in "larger-than-unit" scope activities and training.

[UH60guy]

Out of curiosity of how this is applied for others out there, how does encampment fit into this? Is it considered a course/educational activity? Starting to think I should record my week of TAC officer time as that was sure over 12 hours on a staff.

[Eclipse]

Encampments are on the list, so no reason not to, though some might consider it double-dipping
if you're using that TAC time for some CP award and the Level-Up.

At a minimum it would be a good idea to ask if it is acceptable to whoever will ultimately be approving things.

[Eclipse]

Starting to think I should record my week of TAC officer time as that was sure over 12 hours on a staff.

Just for clarification sake, it's not 12 hours of staff time, it's any staff position of an activity with 12+ contact hours.

As written, you could show up and teach an AE class (something sorely needed in the new curriculum going into effect 1 June, just sayin')
have lunch with the troops and go home, and that would count.

[a2capt]

When climbing the ranks, I was pretty specific about what activities/participation I used against which requirement for the Level I through V .. and never used anything against two different things. Based on my participation, when the time came to do the checklist for promotions, everything was all done.

[Storm Chaser]

Starting to think I should record my week of TAC officer time as that was sure over 12 hours on a staff.

Just for clarification sake, it's not 12 hours of staff time, it's any staff position of an activity with 12+ contact hours.

As written, you could show up and teach an AE class (something sorely needed in the new curriculum going into effect 1 June, just sayin')
have lunch with the troops and go home, and that would count.

If your interpretation is correct (which would make mine incorrect), then the 12-hour contact time in CAPR 50-17 doesn't make any sense. Based on that, the new versions of SLS and CLC in FLWG (and other wings), which only have 6 hours of contact time, don't count for credit even if the staff member spends all 6 hours with the students. So, what's the purpose of the 12 hours then? What was the intent of the regulation?

[Eclipse]

If your interpretation is correct (which would make mine incorrect), then the 12-hour contact time in CAPR 50-17 doesn't make any sense.

Can't argue that, but that's what it says.

Based on that, the new versions of SLS and CLC in FLWG (and other wings), which only have 6 hours of contact time, don't count for credit even if the staff member spends all 6
hours with the students. So, what's the purpose of the 12 hours then? What was the intent of the regulation?

Who told FLWG they could chop SLS in 1/2 and still have it count?  That shouldn't even count as SLS, let alone for instructor credit.

[Storm Chaser]

Who told FLWG they could chop SLS in 1/2 and still have it count?

The 6 hours I mentioned only cover the face-to-face time. The rest of the course is online.

That shouldn't even count as SLS, let alone for instructor credit.

So teaching a 6-hour block shouldn't count, but teaching a one-hour AE class should?

[Storm Chaser]

If your interpretation is correct (which would make mine incorrect), then the 12-hour contact time in CAPR 50-17 doesn't make any sense.

Can't argue that, but that's what it says.

I've read CAPR 50-17 and I'm not sure it does.

Serve in a director or staff member capacity in a CAP approved course or serve as a director or staff member of a national, region, or wing conference (reference Attachment 3).

COURSES AND EDUCATION/TRAINING ACTIVITIES MUST HAVE 12 HOURS OF CONTACT TIME WING/CC APPROVES CREDIT FOR LEVEL IV. REGION/CC APPROVES FOR LEVEL V.

I admit that yours could be one interpretation, but so could mine. Bottom line is that the wing (or region) commander decides what constitutes credit according to the regulation. As usual, CAPR 50-17 is vague enough to allow for multiple interpretations.

[Eclipse]

I can't argue the point since I didn't make up the rule.

This is what happens when you take a program with a specific intent - in this case the requirement used to
be that you had to be the course director, which meant in most cases you probably had to do at least
3 orbits, one as a student, one as an instructor, and then one as a directer.

To me the intention was always clear - participate as a mentor in a scope larger then the unit
to show your knowledge and commitment.  That prepares you for FGO.

But couple the effort needed with many wings not running enough SLS/CLC's to meet the demand
(for both student and staff), and you have people "sad" they can't progress.

And in typical CAP fashion, instead of using leadership and command imperative to
require wing PDOs to do their jobs and meet the demand, NHQ just opened the floodgates
to allow pretty much anything to count.

So now the time requirement doesn't fit the service requirement.

The majority of the activities on the list now have nothing to do with running a squadron
or serving as staff at any echelon, which was the whole point, but there you go.

I still would like to know why FLWG thinks it is "special" - just DO IT RIGHT, but that's a separate thread.

[Eclipse]

Another thing that chaps me about this, but was also an issue before as well.

Twice-a-year members who wake up one weekend and realize they need this to get promoted.

They aren't invested in what CAP is doing nationally or locally, are clueless about most of the program
outside the flight clinic they fly for or the activity they attend once a year, but still think they
can just show up and teach, based largely on 10-20 year old assumptions they never fully understood
back then.

This takes a program intended to be a networking and legitimate staff-development exercise
and turns it into one big check box for everyone involved, while at the same time
propagating misinformation and wives tales.

Easy to fix, but it requires making people "sad".

[Storm Chaser]

I still would like to know why FLWG thinks it is "special" - just DO IT RIGHT, but that's a separate thread.

I can't disagree with your other points, but what makes you think FLWG is doing it wrong. Many (maybe most) wings are doing SLS and CLC online. FLWG requires that in order to complete the course, in addition to the online portion, members do a face-to-face capstone. How is that doing it wrong?

[Eclipse]

I still would like to know why FLWG thinks it is "special" - just DO IT RIGHT, but that's a separate thread.

I can't disagree with your other points, but what makes you think FLWG is doing it wrong. Many (maybe most) wings are doing SLS and CLC online. FLWG requires that in order to complete the course, in addition to the online portion, members do a face-to-face capstone. How is that doing it wrong?

Because they just made it up on their own when there's a perfectly good standard plan.

"Many" wings are >not< doing SLS/CLC online. The Online program is a limited release
situation that requires per-member wing CC approval.  NHQ had published that that the in-face
method is still preferred way to complete these classes and I agree.  Most of the value is in the
discussions between members outside your normal scope.

I understand the reasoning behind the online situation, though I don't agree with it, but
if you're able to get people somewhere to accomplish 6 hours, then just do it the right way and stop
being "creative".   The online portion in this case might as well just be dropped as
it will be 1/2-attention in one window while people are playing Farmville and or otherwise
goofing off.

[lordmonar]

Starting to think I should record my week of TAC officer time as that was sure over 12 hours on a staff.

Just for clarification sake, it's not 12 hours of staff time, it's any staff position of an activity with 12+ contact hours.

As written, you could show up and teach an AE class (something sorely needed in the new curriculum going into effect 1 June, just sayin')
have lunch with the troops and go home, and that would count.

If your interpretation is correct (which would make mine incorrect), then the 12-hour contact time in CAPR 50-17 doesn't make any sense. Based on that, the new versions of SLS and CLC in FLWG (and other wings), which only have 6 hours of contact time, don't count for credit even if the staff member spends all 6 hours with the students. So, what's the purpose of the 12 hours then? What was the intent of the regulation?

In my reading of the reg and looking at the time lines.....it does count.   The 12-hour contact time for course length was the bar set by the PD guys before we started offering SLS and CLC with a mixed on-line/in-residence stand point.

So the CLC and SLS are still 12 hour courses.......they just only have 6 hours of face-time......consequently where before you could get upto 12 members credit for staffing a course.....now you can only legitimately do 6.   

But as pointed out before.....there was no minimum participation threshold set in the regulations......it is up to your PD officer if it counts or not.

This is one of those things where the we really really really need to know what the true intent is.......and to get some guidance on how engaged a member is supposed to be to get credit for staffing an SLS type course.

[tonyairplane]

It does not count.  12 hours of contact time means face to face time.  As I posted earlier, in my graduate classes, contact time is class time, homework, studying, etc. do not count.

[Eclipse]

It does not count.  12 hours of contact time means face to face time.  As I posted earlier, in my graduate classes, contact time is class time, homework, studying, etc. do not count.

Your graduate classes have zero relevance to CAP or this discussion.

[Storm Chaser]

While CAPR 50-17 only mentions the minimum length of the course (although it does say the activity "must have 12 hours of contact time"), one could interpret that to mean that serving on a "director or staff member capacity" would require that minimum amount of contact time (although not necessarily teaching). After all, a course "director" would coordinate the entire course, not just a class or two. Why would a "staff member" not assist with the entire course as well, even if only teaching one class? In my opinion, thinking that an instructor who teaches an hour class meets the requirement is as much interpretation as saying that the "staff member" should be there for then entire course. Unfortunately, CAPR 50-17 does not cover this requirement in much detail, leaving the requirement open to interpretation. At the end, it's going to be up to the corresponding wing to determine whether the requirement was met.

[Eclipse]

A course director could coordinate the entire day and not even be there, or open the doors in the morning,
being in lunch, and show up on Day 2 to sign the certs, or anything in-between.

As to staff, a given individual may have expertise in a specific area, and be brought in to teach facilitate
only one or two of the classes, may only be available for one day, or anything in between.

As you, in the end it's the subjective decision of the approve, but considering the vector (from director of only SLS/CLC to
staff of just about anything of consequence) I'd say it would be hard to justify a mandate of being there the entire time.

I can tell you that's never been the case (since the change) in my wing, or, AFAIK, my Region.

[Storm Chaser]

And I'm not arguing that. I'm merely saying that NHQ could have been more clear on the intent by specifying the criteria to receive credit, as "staff member" is too broad. If the regulation was more specific, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

[Eclipse]

^ Honestly, I think that is by design to facilitate people getting promoted, which in turn facilitates retention.

I didn't like or agree with it when they made the change, and viewed it as one more dilution of the program,
but didn't care enough to give it anther thought.

I agree that it would be nice if someone with the actual authority would be specific in cases like these.

In my opinion, anytime a question is asked twice, it's time to publish the answer.

[tonyairplane]

It does not count.  12 hours of contact time means face to face time.  As I posted earlier, in my graduate classes, contact time is class time, homework, studying, etc. do not count.

Your graduate classes have zero relevance to CAP or this discussion.

The definition of contact time is the pertinent point.  But as usual you are too busy poking holes in everything that anyone else on here posts to realize that.

[Eclipse]

The definition of contact time is the pertinent point. 

Fair enough.  Which CAPR contains that?

[THRAWN]

It does not count.  12 hours of contact time means face to face time.  As I posted earlier, in my graduate classes, contact time is class time, homework, studying, etc. do not count.

Your graduate classes have zero relevance to CAP or this discussion.

The definition of contact time is the pertinent point.  But as usual you are too busy poking holes in everything that anyone else on here posts to realize that.

Poking holes in arguements and points that don't hold water is pretty important to validating, or in this case, invalidating, your point.

[tonyairplane]

What was invalid? Contact time is face to face time with instructors.  Online training time doesn't count.

An online class, even if it is 20 hours, and a six hour in-person capstone session is six hours of contact time.

One just can't get twelve hours out of a six hour class.

What isn't clear?

[THRAWN]

Injecting your graduate classes into the mix. It's got no bearing on the discussion. More like comparing hand grenades and snow tires. Sure, they're both round....

[Eclipse]

What was invalid? Contact time is face to face time with instructors.  Online training time doesn't count.

Really?  And your source for that would be?

[tonyairplane]

Are you saying that the online portion of a hybrid class should count toward contact time?

If yes, that would be great.  But we'll need you to cite that for us.

Thank you.

[EMT-83]

And once again, the regulations are out of date with current technolgy. Honestly, I don't have any heartburn either way, but it would be nice to have clarification from above.

[tonyairplane]

Injecting your graduate classes into the mix. It's got no bearing on the discussion. More like comparing hand grenades and snow tires. Sure, they're both round....

That is a little fresh and not called for.  I was trying to illustrate what the definition of contact time is at a real school.

[Eclipse]

Are you saying that the online portion of a hybrid class should count toward contact time?

I'm not even having that conversation.

[sogden]

As a Director of PD in one of the Mega Wings and one of the individuals that has created a hybrid SLS (which is the model for most of them now), my model had to be approved by NHQ and fulfill the required "Contact" time of a minimum of 12 hours. They reviewed and dissected it prior to giving us approval to use it. If you take one of the online courses, or my hybrid course, you will find it is actually more time consuming and harder than sitting through the face-to-face course. Anyone can be a wallflower and get credit. In the online, you cannot. (Col Skrabut, nor myself would ever let them complete the course if that were the case)

I have the ability to see how often the students are accessing their material and how long they are spending on it. I require them to not only post an answer to every single discussion question, but they also must reply to a set amount of other classmates. That, along with the course material, (which is the same taught in the face-to-face) does more than fulfill 8 hours of online course work. We complete the final 4 in person. Trust me when I say that not only have my in residence facilitators earned their credit for instructing, so have my online facilitators. It may sound like a serious cop out, but it is far from it.

To answer the question at hand, it doesn't specify in regulations exactly how much contact time constitutes the requirement for fulfilling the role of staff at the listed courses. It simply states how long the courses are required to be to meet the requirement of being on the approved list. It is the same for showing proof of Wing Conference attendance, or mentorship. There isn't anything in writing that specifies exactly how it is to be proven. That is at the discretion of the approving commander. Our Wing is working on providing further clarification so we are all on the same page.

I'm happy to answer any question on the courses so that a truly educated understanding can be reached. And, anyone that wants to facilitate my next round, let me know. I'm happy to have you come instruct in my online course and meet for our half day face-to-face.

[disamuel]

I took the online CLC through WYWG with Col. Skrabut in 2010. It was a rigorous eight week course. It's difficult for me to take off an entire weekend to devote to CAP, and I felt that the few weekends that I had available I preferred to devote to ES activities.

[a2capt]

..which brings up something I've heard from a few people after participating in an online SLS, is it true that everyone can see all the replies to the questions as it's progressing?

Because I've heard the complaint more than once, that answers tend to be very similar, to someones blatant copy and paste, and that they generally start appearing soon after the first one is posted.

The basic premise being that two or three feel like they're doing all the work, and being copied off by the rest.

No system is perfect. I get that. But face to face in one weekend sure has it's benefits.

[sogden]

Every system can be cheated. sitting face to face can end with someone skirting through and not answering a single question. And, all the materials can be downloaded straight from the NHQ website. It isn't perfect, but it sure does allow for those that can't take traditional classroom instruction to move forward with their PD.

That being said, the online course can be set any way the instructor wants. It can be set up where they have to answer before reading the other responses.

I know from taking Col Skrabut's course that he doesn't allow those individuals that copy and paste to get credit for the course. He monitors it pretty closely.

[tonyairplane]

... It simply states how long the courses are required to be to meet the requirement of being on the approved list...

No it doesn't say that.  Hence, this discussion topic.  It says that the classes must have 12 hours of contact time, not any overall length. Your classes as you described them do not meet this, no matter how rigorous. If you have given your online facilitators credit for that, they need to have their Level IV credit revoked, because you have clearly violated the regulation.  It doesn't matter how tough on the students you and your Colonel think you are, or how hard your class is, if it doesn't have 12 hours of contact time, it doesn't count toward Level IV credit. 40 hours of online time and 11 hours of contact time don't count, nor any other combination if the contact time is under 12 hours. As the reg is now, that is.  Hopefully National sees fit to change or clarify in light of modern instruction methods.
But for now, we are stuck with the 12 hour contact requirement.

[EMT-83]

^ Stop beating around the bush. How do you really feel about this?

[JeffDG]

If you have given your online facilitators credit for that, they need to have their Level IV credit revoked, because you have clearly violated the regulation. 

That's a pretty serious charge.

Can you back it up with a definition of "contact time"?

[sogden]

... It simply states how long the courses are required to be to meet the requirement of being on the approved list...

No it doesn't say that.  Hence, this discussion topic.  It says that the classes must have 12 hours of contact time, not any overall length. Your classes as you described them do not meet this, no matter how rigorous. If you have given your online facilitators credit for that, they need to have their Level IV credit revoked, because you have clearly violated the regulation.  It doesn't matter how tough on the students you and your Colonel think you are, or how hard your class is, if it doesn't have 12 hours of contact time, it doesn't count toward Level IV credit. 40 hours of online time and 11 hours of contact time don't count, nor any other combination if the contact time is under 12 hours. As the reg is now, that is.  Hopefully National sees fit to change or clarify in light of modern instruction methods.
But for now, we are stuck with the 12 hour contact requirement.

Actually I'm not wrong, nor is National. Given Merriam-Webster's definition of Contact, You will see that "An occurrence in which people communicate with each other" by definition does credit the online programs as meeting the requirements.

Why does one have to be in the same physical proximity of someone to constitute receiving credit? How does sitting in the same room mean two people are actively participating and learning material more than 2 people reading, responding and commenting in an online environment(where participation can actually be tracked)?

"1con·tact noun \ˈkän-ˌtakt\
: the state or condition that exists when two people or things physically touch each other : a state of touching

: the state or condition that exists when people see and communicate with each other

: an occurrence in which people communicate with each other

Full Definition of CONTACT

1
a :  union or junction of surfaces
b :  the apparent touching or mutual tangency of the limbs of two celestial bodies or of the disk of one body with the shadow of another during an eclipse, transit, or occultation
c (1) :  the junction of two electrical conductors through which a current passes (2) :  a special part made for such a junction
2
a :  association, relationship
b :  connection, communication
c :  an establishing of communication with someone or an observing or receiving of a significant signal from a person or object <radar contact with Mars>
3
:  a person serving as a go-between, messenger, connection, or source of special information <business contacts>
4
:  contact lens

[Walkman]

...It says that the classes must have 12 hours of contact time, not any overall length. Your classes as you described them do not meet this, no matter how rigorous. If you have given your online facilitators credit for that, they need to have their Level IV credit revoked, because you have clearly violated the regulation.

Considering that NHQ reviewed and approved these courses, I don't think you can make that kind of bold claim. NHQ sets the standards, not us. If they approve this as "contact hours" then that's what counts. We can all have our opinions about what counts as "contact hours", but the plain and simple truth is that if it's approved at the top, they are just opinions, not fact.

One of my staff took Col. Skrabuts online CLC and reported it was a very good experience.

Regarding comparing CAP courses to university credits: My mother is a tenured professor and the department director at a state university that offers both undergrad and graduate level courses. Some classes on both levels are offered online and those classes have no in-person time at all. My wife is also enrolled in some online university classes.

I have observed with both my mother's and my wife's experience is that these classes require much more actual participation between the students and the instructor than what you would find in an in-person class. For example, in one class, there would be a reading assignment, then each student must post a 200-300 word response to the reading as well as having to write a 200-300 word reply to three other students postings. Aside from teaching in CAP, Scouts, Church and numerous other "non-academic" situations, I was a collegiate adjunct professor for five years. I can tell you there was many students in each class session that were able to pass the class because they finished assignments and passed the exams, but never spoke in class, asked a question, or responded to a discussion. As a CDI, do I not give credit to the cadets in my CharDev sessions that are shy or new that don't speak up?

Look at the robust and lengthy discussions we have here in CAPTalk. I would say that aside from arguing about getting ABUs, there is a respectable amount of interaction, learning and debate going on that is worthwhile. Online interactions are different than in person, but that doesn't mean they are invalid. Just because it doesn't look like what has been in the past doesn't mean it isn't effective.

That being said, I don't like taking online classes, personally. I'm an extrovert and prefer to be in a classroom setting. But I've seen people that can thrive and be successful in the online environment, so  more power to 'em.

[sogden]

Look at the robust and lengthy discussions we have here in CAPTalk. I would say that aside from arguing about getting ABUs, there is a respectable amount of interaction, learning and debate going on that is worthwhile. Online interactions are different than in person, but that doesn't mean they are invalid. Just because it doesn't look like what has been in the past doesn't mean it isn't effective.

Very well said.

[tonyairplane]

First, I didn't say that National was wrong.  I said that you were wrong and those that got credit for four hour contact time courses need to have it revoked, or else, many of us need to get credit for what we have done or will do in the same light.  National needs to make that decision, not some officer in a Mega-Wing, whatever that is.  As far as I know, that colonel sits at the same table as the CC of the smallest Wing, and neither has more decision making clout or ability to change regs than the other.

If your interpretation of contact time was true, which many of us wish it was, then moderating fully online interactive courses would count toward this requirement, and we wouldn't even need the four (or however many) hour in-person capstone.  Which would be great.  But it isn't so, at least not until clarification of the reg.

[tonyairplane]

Considering that NHQ reviewed and approved these courses, I don't think you can make that kind of bold claim. NHQ sets the standards, not us. If they approve this as "contact hours" then that's what counts. We can all have our opinions about what counts as "contact hours", but the plain and simple truth is that if it's approved at the top, they are just opinions, not fact.

If they approved them as far as instructor contact time, then fine, they count toward Level IV instructor credit and the discussion is over.

Let's see it in writing from National.  Please post if for us all to use as a reference.

More likely and based on what was posted, they were approved as course credit toward CLS or SLS for the students.  Which is of course completely different.

[a2capt]

Again, if NHQ reviewed the content, the curriculum and the method of conducting the class, and blessed it as "yup, this fulfills our definition", then take it up with NHQ. The course creators are not wrong in any way.

If you don't like it, use that "Ask the Commander" link, ask them. You, and your entire chain of commanders will get the answer. 

I will say that an online class, using the things we have access to that we did not 10-15 years ago, and 30 years ago the whole concept would have been a day dream, right up there with Shoe Phones and Communicators.

But contact time is interaction, contact time is thinking, contact time is exchange. The connection method matters not. Many good things have come from all ways of connecting. Many bad things, too. When you put people who don't agree in connection with each other, they'll snivel back and forth not matter the medium.

I've participated in a few online classes, both as an instructor, and captive student. Though admittedly, more so in the method that online presence was an extension to the students. Did I make friends and connections the same way? Perhaps yes, perhaps no. That's an answer I'll never know fully. I can only be in one place at a time. The exact experiences will never be recreated if I were to go back.

However, ideas, concepts, thoughts were exchanged, and the objective was completed.

When an online class is properly setup, PDFs are provided along side, or in place of any physical papers handed out to those present. You're free to create some negative ions burn your very own copy, or you can open them on a second monitor and scroll through them. Either way works.

Yes, I still put on a uniform, sat there and participated, went out for meals/breaks, though my "commute" at that point was to my kitchen and back.

Both when I've staffed these classes, and when I've attended, I've attended the entire session, as a student would, except when it was my turn to instruct, I took over control of the console.  Would being there be better? Most likely, yes. But, it is what it is. We have the ability to offer the material to a greater audience now, using the tools that modern advances have brought us, and that also means we have the ability to offer more classes, and bring in views other than the same old local ones, though in our case, it's more like we have the ability to get it done, period. Because we may not be able to find an instructor locally, but we can find someone who can do it, just not on site.

So why not take advantage of all that, and build on it, instead of shoot it down and crumble it?

In closing, clarification of the regulation has already been done. NHQ, the approving authority, has allowed these alternate methods to go through.

[Spaceman3750]

Which is of course completely different.

Not really. If NHQ approved the course, then it must have 12 contact hours with instructors. If students have 12 contact hours with instructors, then the instructors must have 12 contact hours with students. Therefore, the instructor has completed the requirement.

[lordmonar]

SLS and CLC are on the list......so it does not matter what the contact time (how ever you define it) of those courses actually have.

[sogden]

First, I didn't say that National was wrong.  I said that you were wrong and those that got credit for four hour contact time courses need to have it revoked, or else, many of us need to get credit for what we have done or will do in the same light.  National needs to make that decision, not some officer in a Mega-Wing, whatever that is.  As far as I know, that colonel sits at the same table as the CC of the smallest Wing, and neither has more decision making clout or ability to change regs than the other.

If your interpretation of contact time was true, which many of us wish it was, then moderating fully online interactive courses would count toward this requirement, and we wouldn't even need the four (or however many) hour in-person capstone.  Which would be great.  But it isn't so, at least not until clarification of the reg.

If by any means my involvement or mention of being apart of a Mega Wing seemed off-putting or offensive to you, then I apologize. It was not meant as a "higher-than-thou" statement. I started in Utah, one of the smaller wings. I learned as much there as I have in Texas. I am by no means putting down their abilities or their needs for accomplishments. I mentioned that because with our size, we need alternative methods of instruction just due to proximity. I run my minimum required by regs every year, striving to reach that requirement for each group in our Wing. Even with 7 each year, it still isn't enough. And my Col is not any better than anyone else's (well I might be partial and think she is, but that isn't the point). NHQ approved our course. And our course is the SLS, which fulfills the instructor requirements of CAPR 50-17.

[tonyairplane]

"In closing, clarification of the regulation has already been done. NHQ, the approving authority, has allowed these alternate methods to go through."

They approved the course for the students as SLS or CLC.  If they approved it for instructor credit for Level IV, please post that so we can all reference it.

Please don't get me wrong - I am all for it and hope it is approved.

[Storm Chaser]

I, for one, would like clarification on this as I received an e-mail from wing PD that led me to believe they were not giving credit for instructor time at these SLS and CLC capstones, but that there were other ways to receive such credit as listed on the regulation.

[sogden]

I, for one, would like clarification on this as I received an e-mail from wing PD that led me to believe they were not giving credit for instructor time at these SLS and CLC capstones, but that there were other ways to receive such credit as listed on the regulation.

Here is your clarification, and I quote... emailed 4/24 at 10:55am

"Sure they can receive credit for instructing."

BOBBIE-JEAN TOURVILLE
Chief, Professional Development
NHQ Civil Air Patrol

Straight form NHQ PD directly. I'm happy to forward the message to anyone that needs to take it to their Wing PD.

[tonyairplane]

That is great!  Thank you.

I wonder why they aren't distributing that to all of the Wing PDOs, so that they are all playing off of the same sheet of music?

[sogden]

I honestly never thought it was an issue tonyairplane until you brought it up. Most of us were working with the thought process that if it was listed on Attachment 3 and was approved by NHQ, then it was sufficient.

Is your Wing DPD not allowing credit for the online courses?

[AlphaSigOU]

And as the DPD for Alabama Wing, I'm good with that.