Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
August 22, 2017, 05:10:00 AM
Home Help Login Register
News:

CAP Talk  |  Cadet Programs  |  Cadet Programs Management & Activities  |  Topic: Cadet Demotion Question
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Pages: 1 [2] 3  All Print
Author Topic: Cadet Demotion Question  (Read 4280 times)
NC Hokie
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 873
Unit: MER-NC-057

« Reply #20 on: May 10, 2017, 11:37:47 AM »

I appreciate all of the advice, but my request was for confirmation that I was reading the regulations right, and that was answered several weeks ago.  However...

Some of you are making the mistake of assuming that I have not tried other ways to address the cadet's behavior.  I went far, far down the verbal reprimand, written reprimand, talk with parents road, and I have a good understanding of why the cadet has been acting out.  None of that made any positive difference in the cadet's behavior, and the cadet finally did something so blatant, public, and extreme that the only appropriate responses were suspension, demotion, or termination.

The suspension has been served and the clock is now ticking for the cadet earn the missing stripe back or be terminated from CAP.
Logged
William Hess, Maj, CAP
Tar River Actual
Chappie
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,041

« Reply #21 on: May 10, 2017, 11:58:36 AM »

NC Hokie....I am not questioning your intention or action.  Based on your postings, it is evident that you are on the right track and doing what is good for the cadet and the program.     My posting this morning is just an observation based on experiences over the past 20 years dealing with similar issues where cadets are pushed through the system...which is harmful to them and their peers.  In re-reading my remarks, I apology for making the post sound personal.  I was attempting to look at a principle....so let me rephrase my observations/questions:

Why do cadets get promoted in the first place?   Is it because of demonstration of leadership skills, behavior or attitude???   Is it because they simply have all the boxes checked with the time frame for promotion???  Does the Squadron Commander mentor the cadet???  We may do our youngsters a great disservice in promoting them too early in their development personally and/or professionally -- just a thought.

I know that this process causes a lot of headache and heartburn...especially to those in command who have the vested interest in our cadets.   We do want to see them excel and succeed in the program.  Again, my apologies in the way I framed my comments and for any additional hurt I may caused you.
Logged
Disclaimer:  Not to be confused with the other user that goes by "Chappy"   :)
Spam
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 873
Unit: GA-001/CV

« Reply #22 on: May 10, 2017, 06:09:41 PM »

I have on occasion used the tool of demotion, although I vastly prefer the tool of promotion, from the operant conditioning toolkit. I also love public praise over private correction - but will use both. Sadly, I've had to terminate several people over the years, as well (both cadet and officer).

Accordingly, never say "never"... I concurred with the recommendation of my unit membership board to impose a three Achievement demotion this past year on one of my cadets (when a Squadron/CC) and the result so far has been very satisfactory. That cadet turned around a very negative trend and is on track to test for Spaatz.

I completely agree with coudanos point: after following a path of progressive discipline, the demotion step is a fork in the road. Beyond the conditions set for regaining their lost grade, lies separation from the program, although that itself could be the ending lesson to help someone change.  Hokie, good luck to you and yours.

V/r
Spam

Logged
Starbux
Recruit

Posts: 42
Unit: SWR-NM-030

« Reply #23 on: May 10, 2017, 08:09:32 PM »

I suppose I may have sounded like I jumped the gun.  I guess its prior experience seeing SM's jump the gun as well and sometimes make a mountain out of a mole hill, both as a prior cadet and SM many years ago.  In fact I was once on the business end with a few other cadets with some over-zealousness 19 years ago.  Some rumor went around saying we did some stuff and what turned out to be a miss understanding evolved into a volcano of SM's not even privy for the thing that occurred calling for us all to be 2B'd or demoted.   Eventually the wing commander stepped in and quashed it.

As for promoting too early.  That depends.  In my past I have seen it go both ways.  I have seen cadets who were in their shell come out of it once they were promoted to Sgt (I know old school) and given a leadership position.  I have also seen cadets do absolutely nothing wearing silver dots in other squadrons.  Those were usually in squadrons where cadets did not really have ownership of the cadet program.  As a RAPO I went to a few squadrons where the cadets did not really do anything other than listening to senior members give briefings for an hour and a half.  These units the cadet officers were only doing the most basic things like supervising the cadet drill time, not much more. 

When I was cadet, we took full ownership of the unit and our program with the SM DCC just being a mentor and obviously the oversight.  I noticed that concept seems to have gone away. 

Oh well, I don't belong to a cadet or composite squadron anymore.  I am in a all SM one.  My only interaction with cadets ares simply letting them having the yoke past 1000 feet.
Logged
GaryVC
Forum Regular

Posts: 113
Unit: PCR-NV-070

« Reply #24 on: May 11, 2017, 02:45:32 PM »

When I was cadet, we took full ownership of the unit and our program with the SM DCC just being a mentor and obviously the oversight.  I noticed that concept seems to have gone away. 

I don't think this has gone away but it depends a lot on the squadron. Our cadets do take ownership of the squadron meetings, but the extra activities are a problem. We have only one active cadet officer and she is a C/2Lt. I hope in a year or two the number of cadet officers will have grown and that we will have more cadets in the 17-20 age range.
Logged
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time Award
***
Posts: 27,692

« Reply #25 on: May 11, 2017, 03:03:27 PM »

When I was cadet, we took full ownership of the unit and our program with the SM DCC just being a mentor and obviously the oversight.  I noticed that concept seems to have gone away. 

Few squadrons these days have the cadets capable of doing this in either number or ability.  The ones that do are lucky anomalies.

For starters, there's just "less" everything - Units, seniors, cadets, resources, activities, and independence.  Most squadrons and activities
are too far from a cadet's home for them to participate without a chauffeur, which means participation becomes a negotiation
with the parents' lives, which are equally or more complicated then ever before.

It is a different world, the expectations administratively are higher (though should be easier with all the online), and most
cadets have a far higher level of expectation and activities at their schools and extracurricular then BITD.

Every 7th grade basketball coach thinks he's running the Lakers, and the school plays act like they are Broadway.

The idea of "cadet run", while god on paper, din't really exist in a lot of CAP, certainly not in any areas I've been privy to,
and in some cases, those that were, generated stories, complaints, and x-cadets.
Logged

"Effort" does not equal "results".
The contents of this post are Copyright 2017 by eclipse. All rights are reserved. Specific permission is given to quote this post here on CAP-Talk only.

TheSkyHornet
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 839

« Reply #26 on: May 11, 2017, 03:57:45 PM »

When I was cadet, we took full ownership of the unit and our program with the SM DCC just being a mentor and obviously the oversight.  I noticed that concept seems to have gone away. 

Few squadrons these days have the cadets capable of doing this in either number or ability.  The ones that do are lucky anomalies.

For starters, there's just "less" everything - Units, seniors, cadets, resources, activities, and independence.  Most squadrons and activities
are too far from a cadet's home for them to participate without a chauffeur, which means participation becomes a negotiation
with the parents' lives, which are equally or more complicated then ever before.

It is a different world, the expectations administratively are higher (though should be easier with all the online), and most
cadets have a far higher level of expectation and activities at their schools and extracurricular then BITD.

Every 7th grade basketball coach thinks he's running the Lakers, and the school plays act like they are Broadway.

The idea of "cadet run", while god on paper, din't really exist in a lot of CAP, certainly not in any areas I've been privy to,
and in some cases, those that were, generated stories, complaints, and x-cadets.


I completely agree here.

And to add to it, I think many cadets, and former cadets who became seniors, don't understand the complexity of the Cadet Program and what it really takes to run a quality cadet unit (no, I'm not speaking about the award criteria). "Cadets running everything" excludes a lot of the coordinating functions that really goes into the strategic needs of the program---scheduling interfaces, reviews/feedback/counseling, the individual training needs, not to mention the wide world of individual issues that cadets bring with them from their home life (and they do bring those to the meeting). Let's not forget the logical demands of the program either.

I'm not saying cadets can't contribute to all of the above, and even "take ownership," but, as someone who is 100% on the idea that we coddle kids too much and give them way to many excuses and outs, I find that most adults can't even balance these areas, myself included at times.

We use terms like "oversee the program," but we really need to take that for what it is---managing the entire thing from "behind the scenes" and coaching cadets in a way that makes them feel like they're "running everything" when we know they really aren't; they may be running a tiny portion of it, but they aren't "running everything" by a long shot.

I strongly want to mention that we really need to recognize that nobody is "running everything" from any post. Their responsibilities and accountability may shift depending on duty position and command role, but no single person "runs things." It takes cohesion and coordination---unity of command and espirit de corps.

Take all that at face value, but that's exactly what I want to consider when I look at a single cadet and try to assess if they "get it," and if I did what I could to get them to understand what I'm getting at; and if not, I need to start assessing if they're really demonstrating that they even want to make it work. If they aren't meeting the above, and aren't willing to run their assigned function with the intent on maintaining that cohesion, then maybe that's when the demotion does come into play.

I will say, I know of two cadets who were actually demoted at one point or another (one of them twice). I have never seen them rise back up to where they should be, or put forth the effort to show they really were affected by that demotion. I think when we hit a point where a cadet demotion is warranted, you really need to look at if this person is really in the game or not. Can you convince yourself that demoting this person will give them the butt kick they need to get with the program, or is this just a tool to make them want to leave at this point because you feel you can't do anything else with them?

Personally, I won't demote a C/2d Lt who isn't showing me officer-level performance so long as they have the will do get there. I may reassign their role, and I'll see where they can fit, but effort on their part begets effort on my part. If it comes with some extreme attitude and disrespect, and some coup effort within the cadet corps, I'll slap the demotion right there on the table as a firm reminder that I'm not bluffing on making a point about discipline and courtesy in our traditions. It's not negotiable. I haven't crossed the line to demote anyone yet, and it's not like I haven't had that conversation with my fellow cadre, but you need to do something at some point to fire a firm shot across the bow without being afraid to strike the hull if it comes to it.
Logged
Starbux
Recruit

Posts: 42
Unit: SWR-NM-030

« Reply #27 on: May 13, 2017, 01:45:36 AM »

Those are all valid points.  I suppose the world has changed quite a bit since I was a cadet.  Some the things mentioned like strategic planning and setting up the optimal program, I suppose is a philosophical mindset.  In my mind, and I am not sure if the HQ sees it this way, is that the cadet program should be close to what is modeled in AFROTC at the university level.  In some ways I think at one time that was the intent for a unit. My old one worked that way to some extent.  I can say the skills myself and other cadets got from running the cadet side of the house in CAP did a decent job preparing us for organizational leadership structures.  In fact in some respects I found AFROTC to be much easier in that realm I served as the the cadet wing commander in my last participatory semester in AFROTC. 

As CAP cadet commander many years ago, I had a balancing act of getting people to do their assigned roles while realizing other life priorities were there.  Kids back then also had band, football, track and every other thing involved with high school life including part time jobs.  In fact I has one back then.  We had a policy where if your grades were bad, we restricted cadets from promoting and achievements.  School was emphasized to be the most important thing you should be doing.  You can get the Spaatz, every award under the sun, and that ment nothing if you could not graduate high school with good grades. 

In AFROTC the role as a leader was much easier.  Your staff had no choice but to figure out how to balance life.  If they couldn't, the risk was losing your POCI or scholarship and being sent to Lackland to pay off your contract in the E ranks. 

In some respect those are the best skills to learn.  Even after college it doesn't get easier as everyone can attest.  It stays the same or gets harder.  As a reservist, I balance a job, reserve duty and CAP all while having to finish a masters and finish ACSC on time, which I am on attempt number 2 due to life as I decided to go back to flying for a living from a boring cubicle job as government contractor and yeah that got me task saturated.  I think if the cadet program doesn't at least attempt this, I feel it is really doing what seemed like it was intended.  If its an age issue I get it.   You are not going have a bunch of 12 and 13 year olds running an organization very well.   But at some point they should be starting to be groomed to do those things.  If parents don't see the value in their kids getting those life skills, then that's a shame. These things are not unique to the military. 
« Last Edit: May 13, 2017, 11:51:56 AM by Starbux » Logged
Mitchell 1969
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 634
Unit: PCR-CA-051

« Reply #28 on: May 13, 2017, 06:36:09 AM »


The idea of "cadet run", while god on paper, din't really exist in a lot of CAP, certainly not in any areas I've been privy to,
and in some cases, those that were, generated stories, complaints, and x-cadets.

Well, which was it? "...a lot of CAP...?," or "...in any areas I've been privy to...?" You do. know there are 51 Wings besides yours, right? Not only does the concept exist on paper, but it exists in "...a lot of CAP...," likely in most of it. And many of us, across a wide spectrum of locations and eras, are products of it.
Logged
_________________
Bernard J. Wilson, Major, CAP

Mitchell 1969; Earhart 1971; Eaker 1973. Cadet Flying Encampment, License, 1970. IACE New Zealand 1971; IACE Korea 1973.

CAP has been bery, bery good to me.
Starbux
Recruit

Posts: 42
Unit: SWR-NM-030

« Reply #29 on: May 14, 2017, 02:34:09 PM »

I think you and I are on the same page.  This is an age old attitude that I have seen and I am sure you as well. "Cadets need constant guidance from the all mighty SM staff."  When that should not be the case.  That might be true for the young kids.  But if the program is done right, cadets getting near high school graduation and college entry, should be very close.  Will they be perfect?  No, but I can say as a former CAP-USAF neither are our fellow SM's.  If that were true then every wing would be getting high excellents and outstandings on their op evals.  I can say that hardly the case with a few wings I evaluated out of five.  One wing we had to be very creative just to give them a successful once.  In some cases we had cadets that had more SA on what was going on versus their SM counterparts, so yeah. 

I think that the older cadets should be working towards this mindset of taking charge of various aspects of the squadron.  In some cases they should have that chance to even take on SM roles, as some squadron's are very thin on SM membership where there is enough jobs to go around.  Its a leadership lab for a reason.  If they make mistakes and have occasional missteps that's a good thing.  This is where you want them to make those errors.  At least in CAP the consequences short of a blatant violation are small.  Whereas in real life you don't too many chances to make errors.  I know as cadet in my past, some SM's in the wing took a huge offence when they saw over proactive cadets.  Some of them made their mission to tear down those cadets.  We used to have a running joke.  You did not truly earn your Eaker or Spaatz unless you had been threatened a 2B or demotion at least once in your cadet career.  That meant you were not trying hard enough :) Of course his was not for a serious violation that was cut and dry.  This usually resulted in someone using the regs as a weapon and tried to find some hidden nebulous thing you might have broke and tried to make a major scandal out of it.
Logged
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time Award
***
Posts: 27,692

« Reply #30 on: May 14, 2017, 02:43:41 PM »


The idea of "cadet run", while god on paper, din't really exist in a lot of CAP, certainly not in any areas I've been privy to,
and in some cases, those that were, generated stories, complaints, and x-cadets.

Well, which was it? "...a lot of CAP...?," or "...in any areas I've been privy to...?" You do. know there are 51 Wings besides yours, right? Not only does the concept exist on paper, but it exists in "...a lot of CAP...," likely in most of it. And many of us, across a wide spectrum of locations and eras, are products of it.

"Being a product of it", from nearly 40 years ago, as your handle implies, doesn't make it relevent today.
The world of 1969 was a very different place, as was CAP.  Very different, for not the only reason, but certainly
an important one of significantly less draws on adolescent times and attention.

Parsing out NHQ, 999s, and 000s, there are less then 1200 charters that have cadets. Of those, give each wing the
benefit of the doubt of 5 units per wing that are "cadet run" in the way being discussed, that's about 20%,
and I would say that's benevolent on the high side. There are certainly wings that have much less then that, if any at all.

20% isn't enough to be influential on the whole, it's an anomaly.

My message acknowledges there are likely some who run squadrons that way, it also says those are "few".

Which they are.
« Last Edit: May 14, 2017, 02:54:41 PM by Eclipse » Logged

"Effort" does not equal "results".
The contents of this post are Copyright 2017 by eclipse. All rights are reserved. Specific permission is given to quote this post here on CAP-Talk only.

Spam
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 873
Unit: GA-001/CV

« Reply #31 on: May 14, 2017, 03:35:41 PM »

Cadet membership and staffing is a dynamic function. The number of "cadet-run" units should constantly be in flux, I believe, as cadet age cohorts graduate and depart the pattern, leaving the potential for maturity and experience gaps. Adult officers should (if they're following the program) monitor for this and be available to step in to provide more, or less, of both indirect and direct leadership to keep the unit on track.


For example, if a units cadet complement consists mainly of junior high cadets of lower grades (Cadets Basic up through C/TSGT, say) it would be inappropriate for the unit/CC to appoint one of them (however capable) as a Cadet Commander, or even a Flight Commander, or even to appoint one to the Wing Cadet Advisory Council, as all three of those roles are (by the approved program - not my opinion) designed for and aimed at development of indirect (cadet officer) leadership. In that case, the adult leadership should step in and provide program goal setting (leadership), planning, scheduling, and a degree of execution (management). They should be encouraging and developing the Cadet NCOs to perform and master direct troop leadership tasks and prepare themselves to transition to be cadet officers, and gradually assume those indirect leader roles (as Flight Commanders, as CAC reps, and as Cadet Commanders respectively as they gain grade, per the Cadet Staff Handbook).


See:
https://www.capmembers.com/cadet_programs/?cadet_staff_handbook__2016&show=entry&blogID=1802
https://www.capmembers.com/file.cfm/media/blogs/documents/Cadet_Staff_Handbook__Nov_16_802A2D2F952CC.pdf

Ref: p. 3, 1.4 THE CHANGING ROLE OF SENIOR MEMBERS.


Many of us have had experiences from "cadet-run" programs (to various degrees) and equally as many have probably had or have seen the other side of the coin. Both are, I would submit, NORMATIVE to the cadet program in its various phases. So, lets step back, take a reflective look at our respective local situations in the context offered by the national program of record, and keep an open mind to readjust when necessary.


R/S, Respectfully Submitted,
Spam




Logged
coudano
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,109

« Reply #32 on: May 14, 2017, 05:51:44 PM »

I prefer the term "facilitate" for myself as a CP officer, of a mature and well-functioning cadet unit.  I enable and encourage the program to happen, shape processes, and restrict the program from crossing boundaries and help cadets in the learning process of maintaining standards themselves and let the clock run (it will).  However I am not the driving force, nor the "show central" if i'm doing it right.  That's backed up by the fact that when I (as an individual) go away and don't participate anymore, the machine continues running, and producing outstanding outputs.  If losing me as CPO all by itself crashes the program, then i'm doing it wrong.

I would use great care in how much you involve your phase 2 and 3 cadets in squadron commander level disciplinary action (retention of grade, suspension, demotion, termination) but they should definitely be involved in the background stuff that goes on around and leading up to those things, when they do happen (and it really should be rare).  (we used a performance feedback worksheet for every in-phase advancement or every 6 months, whichever happens more often-- and a promotion review board for phase changes //all conducted by cadets).  Knowing where and how to draw that line is an unfortunately under-emphasized but key component of being a CPO...  How much do you let your cadets exercise, and where do you "control" them for their own protection and the protection of the program?  That's a raw per-situation judgment call that you just have to use good sense and experience to make.  Personally I err on the side of [strike]letting[/strike] (eh, demanding) the cadets do it unless I can anticipate some sort of perceivable /damage/ to the cadet, or the program, but i'm a little more comfortable running that 'loose' than perhaps most CPO's.

Sure a dead, or nearly-dead unit will require some extra hands-on, at first.  But as the unit gains capability and maturity, the CPO direct manipulation of the program should back off accordingly.  There is, at this point, a verifiable, repeatable formula that has produced results in units across the country. It's really not some sort of mystical "unknown" anymore.  This particular code has pretty well been cracked. IMnsHO, a squadron level CPO should be spending pretty much the entirety of their time teaching and mentoring their top tier cadets who will then take care of turning the cogs of the rest of the program.  If that's not what you are doing, you are working way too hard (burning yourself out...)  And you are wasting A LOT of potential.

The challenge of consistent high performance in the CP, in my opinion, is expressing the program that i've described, in a way that is accessible to more CPO's, and training them better to focus on achieving the above outcomes.  Good work is being done every day in that direction, but we certainly have a ways to go.  As it is, we get success in pockets.  We get what LOOKS LIKE success (but kind of misses the mark) in pockets.  We get kind of crappy returns elsewhere.  It's not the program that doesn't work... It's implementation (which boils down to definition and training).
« Last Edit: May 14, 2017, 06:23:27 PM by coudano » Logged
coudano
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,109

« Reply #33 on: May 14, 2017, 05:57:53 PM »

dangit
Logged
Starbux
Recruit

Posts: 42
Unit: SWR-NM-030

« Reply #34 on: May 14, 2017, 07:14:25 PM »



20% isn't enough to be influential on the whole, it's an anomaly.

My message acknowledges there are likely some who run squadrons that way, it also says those are "few".

Which they are.

That begs the question than, are the units who run this way, really running a cadet program?  Or are they simply running an after school activity where the kids where uniforms and look the part?  If so then CAP needs to take a step back and recage the ADI.  This can't be good in the long run.  I can see this leading down the path to failure.  What will make kids want to be in if all they do is show up every week do 30 minutes of drill and listen to SM's drone about different subjects.  Also how do these units measure performance in leadership?  Marching a couple flights around the parking lot is certainly not the sole metric in demonstrating leadership.  Okay so your kids can wear a uniform and do some drill.  So what?  What is that preparing them for.  Yeah they need to learn drill for BMT or some commissioning source.   Kids of the street learn that within a few days at basic so that's not really a huge thing.  You are not going to learn leadership by simply reading it from a book.  You need the chance to practice it and make errors and learn from them.

If you are right and this is the path that the program is headed.  I predict it will be gone in the next two decades or radically shift its emphasis and become just another version of the Scouts and that will be too bad.
Logged
Starbux
Recruit

Posts: 42
Unit: SWR-NM-030

« Reply #35 on: May 14, 2017, 07:15:53 PM »

I prefer the term "facilitate" for myself as a CP officer, of a mature and well-functioning cadet unit.  I enable and encourage the program to happen, shape processes, and restrict the program from crossing boundaries and help cadets in the learning process of maintaining standards themselves and let the clock run (it will).  However I am not the driving force, nor the "show central" if i'm doing it right.  That's backed up by the fact that when I (as an individual) go away and don't participate anymore, the machine continues running, and producing outstanding outputs.  If losing me as CPO all by itself crashes the program, then i'm doing it wrong.


You hit the nail on the head!
Logged
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time Award
***
Posts: 27,692

« Reply #36 on: May 14, 2017, 07:36:01 PM »

That begs the question than, are the units who run this way, really running a cadet program?  Or are they simply running an after school activity where the kids where uniforms and look the part?

More then a few are running rec centers, far too many are near the latter category, but the majority are somewhere in between.

If so then CAP needs to take a step back and recage the ADI.  This can't be good in the long run.  I can see this leading down the path to failure.  What will make kids want to be in if all they do is show up every week do 30 minutes of drill and listen to SM's drone about different subjects.  Also how do these units measure performance in leadership?  Marching a couple flights around the parking lot is certainly not the sole metric in demonstrating leadership.  Okay so your kids can wear a uniform and do some drill.  So what?  What is that preparing them for. 

Life as good citizens, possibly / hopefully with careers in tech or aerospace.  CAP isn't, and never has been, a recruiting arm of the military, even if it looks like one on paper, and a >lot< of
kids use CAP to find out the military isn't for them, as much as it is, which is fine, too.

When cadets are progressing and engaged in meaningful / interesting activities, then the "who is at the front of the room" is less important.
You want to allow cadets to try and sometimes fail in a benevolent environment, but in a lot of cases, there is simply no real opportunity for this
beyond larger activities like NCSA and encampments, and even a lot of those are just scripted reality television.

Yeah they need to learn drill for BMT or some commissioning source.   Kids of the street learn that within a few days at basic so that's not really a huge thing.  You are not going to learn leadership by simply reading it from a book.  You need the chance to practice it and make errors and learn from them.

If you are right and this is the path that the program is headed.  I predict it will be gone in the next two decades or radically shift its emphasis and become just another version of the Scouts and that will be too bad.

I don't think it's going to take two decades, and there are a lot more forces at work in CAP's demise beyond whether the CP is, or isn't, "cadet run".

I think on the mean the CP is about the same as it ever was from an execution standpoint, but the bubble is shrinking every year,
which means "less", adults, fully trained members, members with relevent experience, and opportunities and activities that attract
members in the first place.  There's a tipping point a lot of us can already see over the hill, the when is just a calendar exercise.

I want to be wrong on this, but the fix is going to take years, and no one has even started the discussion, let alone the work.

As mentioned, and related, the "Great Fallacy" is that NHQ can compel anyone to do anything, or that the programs,
no matter how tightly they are written, are actually executed as designed.

The military, and most private businesses, can compel action, move people to the organization's advantage despite the
protests of the individual, "grow" new people, and generally force the silly putty into whatever shape the model calls for.

In CAP, there's never enough clay, it's usually the wrong type, most of it is already hardened, or was left in the sun too long
and can't be changed, only used as-is, and far too much of it is only 1/2-listening to start with.

A unit of Phase I & II cadets isn't likely to be able to "run" anything without significant adult guidance, and in Phase III & IV, I
think I've known maybe 5-6 cadets who legitimately were capable of "running" a CP.  The others, and that includes the esteemed
Spaatzen, were not.  Many because of lack of ability, but more because of lack of time or interest.

Just stand up and look around at the units you personally know about - think about how many fully-capable pips and diamonds
you are aware of, and how many units are running with "hoping to get a cadet officer soon", and that will give you the
state of the program in that regard.

That doesn't negate the efforts, but it frames the discussion in reality.
« Last Edit: May 14, 2017, 08:31:19 PM by Eclipse » Logged

"Effort" does not equal "results".
The contents of this post are Copyright 2017 by eclipse. All rights are reserved. Specific permission is given to quote this post here on CAP-Talk only.

coudano
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,109

« Reply #37 on: May 14, 2017, 08:15:26 PM »

Yeah they need to learn drill for BMT or some commissioning source.

No.

That is *not* the desired outcome that we should be shooting for when we choose to spend our precious few contact hours on drill and ceremonies.

And that is something that needs broaching in the CP community.
Ask your closest 10 fellow CP officers and all of your cadet leaders what the purpose of spending time on drill and ceremonies is (what is the ultimate big picture desired learning objective).

Probably the most common answer besides scratched heads will be the one from the leadership test "uh, teamwork (i guess), because it's answer C, and that's the right answer???"  What does that actually mean?  Is it the only desired outcome?   This is the kind of 'strategic' or systematic thinking that is appropriate for a CPO to do, as they facilitate the program.  Not just for drill but for everything that we take the time to spend time doing.  Bring it up at your next TLC!


anyway, as you said...
Quote
Kids of the street learn that within a few days at basic so that's not really a huge thing.

(and they will probably learn it the "right" way, in the context for their basic training, as opposed to the nonsense CAP usually teaches them)
Logged
Chappie
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,041

« Reply #38 on: May 14, 2017, 08:24:00 PM »

Just my .002 - I am not fond of the term "cadet run".  The term "cadet driven" sounds more like what we should be trying achieve.   Kinda like the old days when many of us had driver's training in high school.  The student was behind the wheel -- yet the driving instructor had a steering-wheel and a pedals to operate in case of emergency.   The ultimate goal is to assist the cadets become leaders --- and that is done by providing instruction, mentoring and opportunities to succeed (and even fail) within the environment of supportive senior members.
Logged
Disclaimer:  Not to be confused with the other user that goes by "Chappy"   :)
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time Award
***
Posts: 27,692

« Reply #39 on: May 14, 2017, 08:29:27 PM »

^ I Like this "Cadet run", in some cases, is code for the adults abdicating their responsibility.

The senior are the constant thread that keeps the lights on, the cadets are the transient product,
the more they can do, the better for all involved, but ultimate the seniors will be there when the
cadets age out, move on, or dark side and become one with the force.

Again, if you 've got a diamond factory, cadet run or otherwise, it's hard to take issue with the execution,
but I've seen, and heard about, far too many units "cadet run" running on fumes, which means
"two adults to meet the spec, and the cadets over on the other side of the room doing their stuff, whatever that means..."

No progression, no retention, and "no one can figure out what the problem is..."
« Last Edit: May 14, 2017, 08:34:25 PM by Eclipse » Logged

"Effort" does not equal "results".
The contents of this post are Copyright 2017 by eclipse. All rights are reserved. Specific permission is given to quote this post here on CAP-Talk only.

Pages: 1 [2] 3  All Print 
CAP Talk  |  Cadet Programs  |  Cadet Programs Management & Activities  |  Topic: Cadet Demotion Question
 


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP SMF 2.0.13 | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.18 seconds with 20 queries.