Level 4 Leadership requirement question

[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.