Questionable Testing Practices

[DBlair]

Not naming names/units, I have encountered something that is quite bothersome and I wanted to see whether this is a common thing in the Cadet Program, and suggestions of what should/can be done about it.

A certain Cadet Squadron has some questionable testing practices such as the following:

- If a Cadet changed their answer and the original answer was correct, they are given credit.

- If a Cadet fails a test, the test/answer sheet is forwarded to the unit Commander, who then decides on whether to pass them for it or not.

- If a Cadet informally claims to have difficulty with testing or has ADD (etc), then they are often passed if they came within a few questions of passing the exam. (As such, almost all the Cadets claim to have such difficulty)

- On occasion, if they fail, the unit Commander allows them to be given the answer key to correct their exam as long as they look up the reference and then are given a passing grade for the exam. This especially goes for if/when a Cadet fails an Aerospace exam, because it is "too hard" for them.

As a former Cadet, I take issue with this as I had to go through it the legitimate way, why should other Cadets be allowed to coast through the program. Also, as a SM involved with the Cadet Program, I feel that when such practices are done, it cheapens the program and the Cadet's progress in the program- not to mention is contrary to the idea of integrity that we try to instill within our Cadets.

I am understanding if someone cannot understand the question due to limited English skills (and so needs help to understand the question) or certain accommodations if there is a legitimate learning disability (such as extra time, etc), but for policies to just nonchalantly be bent by the Commander and Cadet Programs staff to such a unit-wide norm, I find this to be quite bothersome.

Any thoughts/suggestions?

[Eclipse]

Sounds like some fairly serious test compromise going on there.

Might be time to light someone up.

[notaNCO forever]

 I guess that is one problem we will be done with once the online testing is up and running for cadet programs. To me that sounds like a major breach of integrity that needs to be dealt with; it is not fare to all the other cadets that studied and passed the tests to let this happen.

[Pylon]

If someone were personally aware of this happening (i/e: not hearsay), I'd say it would be unethical not to contact the IG.  Though it would be fairly difficult to "prove" except through a boatload of interviews, if the above listed things were happening, I'd say they are a pretty serious regulation violation.  And at the same time, those wrongfully giving passing grades to the cadets really aren't doing them a favor (as they might think they are).

[BrandonKea]

If someone were personally aware of this happening (i/e: not hearsay), I'd say it would be unethical not to contact the IG.  Though it would be fairly difficult to "prove" except through a boatload of interviews, if the above listed things were happening, I'd say they are a pretty serious regulation violation.  And at the same time, those wrongfully giving passing grades to the cadets really aren't doing them a favor (as they might think they are).

+1, although if the cheating (and that's what this is, cheating) is fairly extensive, as you say, the investigation should be fairly quick...

[IceNine]

At this point now that you have shown that you recognize the issue, your choices are

-Get ahold of the IG at the next echelon

- Potentially be 2B'd

Test compromise in CAP is a big deal, and this is exactly the type of thing that get's commander's and their staff fired/ kicked out.

A group commander turning a blind eye on this type of thing is worse than a unit doing it in the first place.  Same goes all the way up the line.

[Always Ready]

Send an e-mail (using a fake nickname or something, not using your normal e-mail account) to the commander or IG at the next higher echelon immediately. This way you don't run the risk of being 2B'd for doing the right thing.

[BrandonKea]

Send an e-mail (using a fake nickname or something, not using your normal e-mail account) to the commander or IG at the next higher echelon immediately. This way you don't run the risk of being 2B'd for doing the right thing.

1.  Purpose of the Civil Air Patrol Inspector General System.  The purpose of the Civil Air
Patrol Inspector General System is to create an independent and objective system to:

a.  Provide leadership and coordination and recommend policies for activities designed to
promote economy, efficiency, and effectiveness in the administration of the Civil Air Patrol.
b.  Provide a means for keeping the Board of Governors and the Commander of the Civil
Air Patrol informed about problems and deficiencies relating to the administration of programs
and operations and the necessity for and progress of corrective action.
c.  Provide a leadership tool  that indicates where command  involvement is needed to
correct systematic, programmatic, or procedural weaknesses to ensure resources are used
effectively and efficiently.
d.  Assist commanders in resolving problems affecting Civil Air Patrol missions promptly
and objectively.
e.  Create an atmosphere of trust in which issues can be objectively and fully resolved
without retaliation or the fear of reprisal.
f.  Ensure the existence of responsive complaint and inspection programs characterized by
objectivity, integrity, and impartiality.
g.  Ensure the concerns of Civil Air Patrol members and the best interests of the Civil Air
Patrol are addressed through objective fact-finding.
h.  Ensure that the personal behavior of inspector general personnel is above reproach.
i.  Enhance openness and approachability by the briefing of the Civil Air Patrol Inspector
General Program at meetings of the CAP National Board, region and wing conferences,
commander's calls, staff meetings, and any other gathering of CAP personnel where inspector
general briefings would be appropriate.
j.  Educate Civil Air Patrol members and commanders regarding the privileges of and
protection for those contacting an inspector general.
k.  Assure that inspectors general avoid self-investigation and the perception of self-
investigation.
l.    Ensure inspectors general, inspector general staff members, and investigating officers
are trained to conduct thorough, unbiased investigations and assessments based on fair and
objective fact-finding.

Emphasis mine...

[IceNine]

Send an e-mail (using a fake nickname or something, not using your normal e-mail account) to the commander or IG at the next higher echelon immediately. This way you don't run the risk of being 2B'd for doing the right thing.

Absolutely don't do that...

This is a potentially serious issue that needs to be addressed.  Unpopular with the offenders ?you bet, easy to discuss? not for the most seasoned commander, necessary? without question.

Hiding, running, or disguising only makes your complaint less believable.  The idea is to run a program that is compliant not only for the sake of compliance but to ensure consistency.  If this is truly happening like it is said to be then these cadets are being cheated and taught to take the easy way out.

[Always Ready]

I would hope that the OP has already addressed his concerns with the Testing Officer in question and the SQ/CC. If not, that should be his first move. Some people just don't know the rules and they need someone to point things out.

Send an e-mail (using a fake nickname or something, not using your normal e-mail account) to the commander or IG at the next higher echelon immediately. This way you don't run the risk of being 2B'd for doing the right thing.

1.  Purpose of the Civil Air Patrol Inspector General System.  The purpose of the Civil Air
Patrol Inspector General System is to create an independent and objective system to:
(snip)
e.  Create an atmosphere of trust in which issues can be objectively and fully resolved
without retaliation or the fear of reprisal.
(snip)

Emphasis mine...

This is what should be happening at every level of CAP, from squadron members to the National Commander, not just with CAP IGs. We both know this is not always the case.

Hiding, running, or disguising only makes your complaint less believable.

Not true...the military has had "anonymous" IG complaint programs for years. "Anonymous" Crime Stopper programs around the nation have helped local and federal police catch criminals for years.

We all earn a reputation from working with people. Sometimes good, sometimes bad. IGs and commanders alike are more inclined to ignore a serious problem reported by a member with a bad reputation, than something that isn't a problem from a member with a good reputation. It happens on a daily basis. By taking the reputation out of the equation, the situation gets solved quicker and more rationally without people getting involved too personally.

I recently had to make a phone call to a higher echelon to address some issues in my unit. The higher echelon requested that I not identify myself and that I not use my regular e-mail account to communicate with him about the issues. He said that he has learned from previous experiences that knowing names makes him get too personally involved in the issue. This way he stays on track. Prior to him saying that I feared reprisal, now I don't. It also made me trust him more.

[BrandonKea]

I would hope that the OP has already addressed his concerns with the Testing Officer in question and the SQ/CC. If not, that should be his first move. Some people just don't know the rules and they need someone to point things out.

Send an e-mail (using a fake nickname or something, not using your normal e-mail account) to the commander or IG at the next higher echelon immediately. This way you don't run the risk of being 2B'd for doing the right thing.

1.  Purpose of the Civil Air Patrol Inspector General System.  The purpose of the Civil Air
Patrol Inspector General System is to create an independent and objective system to:
(snip)
e.  Create an atmosphere of trust in which issues can be objectively and fully resolved
without retaliation or the fear of reprisal.
(snip)

Emphasis mine...

This is what should be happening at every level of CAP, from squadron members to the National Commander, not just with CAP IGs. We both know this is not always the case.

Hiding, running, or disguising only makes your complaint less believable.

Not true...the military has had "anonymous" IG complaint programs for years. "Anonymous" Crime Stopper programs around the nation have helped local and federal police catch criminals for years.

We all earn a reputation from working with people. Sometimes good, sometimes bad. IGs and commanders alike are more inclined to ignore a serious problem reported by a member with a bad reputation, than something that isn't a problem from a member with a good reputation. It happens on a daily basis. By taking the reputation out of the equation, the situation gets solved quicker and more rationally without people getting involved too personally.

I recently had to make a phone call to a higher echelon to address some issues in my unit. The higher echelon requested that I not identify myself and that I not use my regular e-mail account to communicate with him about the issues. He said that he has learned from previous experiences that knowing names makes him get too personally involved in the issue. This way he stays on track. Prior to him saying that I feared reprisal, now I don't. It also made me trust him more.

Just guessing at this point, but I don't think this is happening at DBlair's Squadron. This would make it difficult for him to show up at said Squadron to address these issues. The IG, however, would be a resource DBlair could realistically go to, voicing concerns over these allegations. Will an investigation ensue? Possibly. Could he report this anonymously. Absolutely. The IG program has provisions for maintaining anonymity. Either way, I believe this warrants at least a heads up to the IG, it's up to him/her if he/she wants to push it from there.

[RiverAux]

Another way to approach it, especially if you are a DCC, would be to contact the Group or Wing Cadet Programs Officer and write something along the lines of "I understand that Squadron X is doing ..... Is this acceptable testing protocol?" 

This gives the appropriate staff member an opportunity to get things straightened out without going through an IG process.  Contacting the IG about stuff for which you don't have personal first-hand information ("I saw Squadron X test in this fashion") doesn't quite seem right to me.

[dwb]

If you have personally witnessed test compromise of this nature, you should file a complaint with the Wing IG.

If this is second- or third-hand information, you should discuss it with your sources, who could potentially file the complaint themselves.

[AirAux]

Some of this stuff is not black and white but is somewhat gray.  Some CC's will read a test to a cadet with ADD or a learning disability.  Not always a bad thing.  If a cadet had a right answer and changed it and missed passing by one question and the CC questioned the cadet and the cadet knew what the answer was, perhaps, if all other conditions are good, he/she might pass the cadet.  On the other hand, no cadet should ever, ever be given an answer key to grade their or anyone else's test.  This compromises a national level test and places the whole program in compromise..

[FW]

Send an e-mail (using a fake nickname or something, not using your normal e-mail account) to the commander or IG at the next higher echelon immediately. This way you don't run the risk of being 2B'd for doing the right thing.

Please, don't be afraid of doing the right thing if you see something in major violation of the regulations.  First, go to the unit/cc and discuss this together in private.  If it doesn't change, go to the IG.  If the commander wants to 2B you for it, fine.  It goes to the group or wing/cc for final decision.  This is one of those cases where, unless you were making false statements, you would win; if not at the next level, at the MARB.  We do have a good system of checks and balances in CAP and fear of retalitation should no longer exist here.

CAP has very strong ethics regulations and cadets follow a very strict moral code of conduct.  I do not like anyone who tries to violate them.

BTW, where testing is concerned, it is black and white.

[dwb]

BTW, not every complaint to an IG is going to result in an investigation.  That's why I recommended talking to the IG if DBlair has first-hand knowledge of the above events.

If this is something his girlfriend's brother's uncle's niece said her best friend said her friend who's in CAP saw, then forget about it.

When an IG receives a complaint of this nature, they do some preliminary analysis to see if the claim is founded.  This would probably include interviewing the complainant, and the squadron commander in question.

It could be a big misunderstanding, it could be bad judgement calls by the commander, or there could be genuine test compromise.  That's what the IG will try to figure out.

People equate IGs with membership terminations, and while that is part of the job, it's a relatively small percentage of IG actions.

Getting an honest broker involved, instead of letting loose the Internet Peanut Gallery, is probably the best course of action here.

[jeders]

Some of this stuff is not black and white but is somewhat gray.  Some CC's will read a test to a cadet with ADD or a learning disability.  Not always a bad thing. 

I'm not sure, but I believe that that is allowed, although Commanders are not allowed to administer cadet tests.

If a cadet had a right answer and changed it and missed passing by one question and the CC questioned the cadet and the cadet knew what the answer was, perhaps, if all other conditions are good, he/she might pass the cadet.

So what if a cadet marks every bubble on an answer and then erases all but one. By the logic being used, the cadet got it rigfht at least once. When you turn in your answer sheet to the testing officer, you are essentially telling Regis, "that's my final answer." If you miss one, you miss it, end of story.

Unfortunately, what is going on here, however good the intent may be, is wrong. DBlair, I don't know what your role is in this, whether it's just hearing rumors or witnessing it first hand. If you're hearing rumors, my suggestion is to go to the commander with the regs in hand and ask him to clarify things that you have heard. If you've witnessed it first hand then you need to tell the commander to knock it off and again have the regs there to back it up.

Now, I don't mean that you should be confrontational. Anything you do or say must be measured and thought out so that you don't come across as being a know-it-all. But you must also make it clear that what he is doing is against regs and that if anyone outside the squadron, and particularly at a higher echelon, finds out, then there could be bad things happening to him, the testing officer, and the cadets. If that fixes it, then all is good. Otherwise, it is you responsibility to take it to the next higher echelon.

[Flying Pig]

Your unit Commander is screwed up.  What he is doing is creating his own version of the cadet program.  Nothing you listed is remotely acceptable under any circumstances and I could see testing being halted in your unit, and the cadets who were promoted using some of your examples demoted.
If a cadet changed the answer from the right answer to a wrong answer, they got it wrong.  I have seen a cadet being read the test questions because he a learning disability, but he was never given the answers.  Nor are the tests intended to be graded to 100%.  Sounds like someone needs to have a sit down with the CC.

[PlaneFlyr]

This needs prompt IG attention.  It sounds like this may be a pervasive problem with the unit, especially since more than one person is involved in violating the regulations.  Allowing it to continue makes both the unit and CAP look bad.  The majority of members in our organization are better than that, and allowing this to continue harms the integrity of all of us.

As for the comment about not telling the IG who you are, lest you be 2B'd for filing a complain... I don't even know where to begin on that.  I've been an IG for two wings and one region.  I've never known of anyone being 2B'd or receiving any discipline, for filing a complaint (unless it was false and done maliciously).  I've received complains from people with less than stellar reputations, but I still went throught the investigation process just like I would anyone else.  All members are entitled to fair treatment.

There have been several times where someone filed an annonymous complaint with me.  From the IG perspective, this often makes it more difficult to investigate since we don't know who to contact for more information.  I've had several that lacked sufficient detail to even do anything with, and I regretfully had to throw the complaint out.  If you fear retribution from somebody over the complaint, let the IG know this when you contact them.  There are already rules in place to protect you.  And a good IG won't divulge who filed the complaint anyway.

Good luck with this.  I hope it gets corrected.

[Eclipse]

As for the comment about not telling the IG who you are, lest you be 2B'd for filing a complain... I don't even know where to begin on that.  I've been an IG for two wings and one region.  I've never known of anyone being 2B'd or receiving any discipline, for filing a complaint (unless it was false and done maliciously).  I've received complains from people with less than stellar reputations, but I still went throught the investigation process just like I would anyone else.  All members are entitled to fair treatment.

Ditto - that comment smacks of a political statement, not advice.

Write this up or call an IG today.

[RogueLeader]

When I was a Testing Officer, if they failed the test ( by any # of wrong answers), they got a list of regrences that they needed to study.  If the test was passed, but not 100%, we discussed which questions that were missed, and what the correct answer is.  That being said, the score they earned was the score that was recorded.  We reviewed the material so that they next time they saw it, they should have remembered the information.

At no point did the Sq/CC or DCC have any imput into the Testing Section, other than who was the OIC.  we informed them if there was an outstanding test given (say 100% on a milestone etc) or a bad thing (C/SrA Smith failed wright Brothers for the 3rd time- that type of thing).

Over all we had a good group of Cadets, they always did pretty good.

[notaNCO forever]

 In my squadron if the correct score or higher to pass is not achieved the cadet is not passed. If they pass and do not get a hundred they correct it to a hundred, but the original score is the score used. If the cadet continues having trouble passing a cadet officer mentors them.

[majdomke]

In my squadron if the correct score or higher to pass is not achieved the cadet is not passed. If they pass and do not get a hundred they correct it to a hundred, but the original score is the score used. If the cadet continues having trouble passing a cadet officer mentors them.

+1 :clap:

[LtCol057]

When I was the Testing Officer for my unit, Like RogueLeader, I gave them a list of references for them to study. I didn't tell them what question they missed, just what section they needed to restudy.  Then at the next meeting, they could retest. If they passed, but didn't get 100%, they also got a list of references they needed to brush up on.  It took a little more time to write up, but wasn't really that hard, just a simple form letter.

I had a couple of cadets that either had ADD or were dyslexic. I'd give them the choice about the tests. They could read it or I would administer it orally.  Most wanted to read it themselves the first time. 

If a cadet had failed a test 3x, before they could test again, I would check to see that they had completed the questions in the book.  If they hadn't, they were not given the test until they had.

[BrandonKea]

When I was the Testing Officer for my unit, Like RogueLeader, I gave them a list of references for them to study. I didn't tell them what question they missed, just what section they needed to restudy.  Then at the next meeting, they could retest. If they passed, but didn't get 100%, they also got a list of references they needed to brush up on.  It took a little more time to write up, but wasn't really that hard, just a simple form letter.

I had a couple of cadets that either had ADD or were dyslexic. I'd give them the choice about the tests. They could read it or I would administer it orally.  Most wanted to read it themselves the first time. 

If a cadet had failed a test 3x, before they could test again, I would check to see that they had completed the questions in the book.  If they hadn't, they were not given the test until they had.

WIWAC, that was how things were. Missed questions, pass or fail, were directed to the reference for further study (we got ours on a sticky note usually instead of a form letter, TEHO). Reading the test to cadets seems to be a fair compromise for those who need it.