On 08 November, the Cadet Program Team published the latest version of the Cadet Staff Handbook, CAPP 60-31.
After a quick look, it looks pretty good.
It's pretty interesting / frustrating / disappointing / not actually surprising how many members are unaware
this even exists - same goes for "Squadron-in-a-box".
Excellent resources, especially for the "new" or "lost" commanders and staff.
I knew about this, but what is this "squadron-in-a-box?"
http://www.capmembers.com/cadet_programs/library/squadron-in-a-box/
Page 34, "accouterments" really looks weird. I'll pass it along for correction.
Quote from: Mitchell 1969 on November 10, 2016, 07:01:23 PM
Page 34, "accouterments" really looks weird. I'll pass it along for correction.
Now, you boys go put on yer accouterments and "git er done"!
Oh my goodness. For some reason I thought it was like an actual box that NHQ sends to units that request it(more coffee is in order for me.) I was on that site last month.
Many thanks.
It jumps from page 55 to 58. Where are pages 56 and 57? ???
Page 22:
"Remember, the CAPF 60-90 is a tool for helping cadets improve their
leadership skills..."
Page 23: "...see the reverse side of the CAPF 60-90..."
Here: http://www.capmembers.com/file.cfm/media/blogs/documents/CADET_PUBLICATIONS_BY_OLD_E54E9F160DD57.pdf
"CAPF 90 No Used"
It should, presumably be
""Remember, the CAPF 60-90 series of Leadership Feedback forms, are is a tools for helping cadets improve their
leadership skills..."
"see the reverse side of the respective CAPF 60-90 series form..."
Page 24:
"Meet in private. Criticizing someone in front of the squadron is
humiliating and therefore counter-productive."
The last thing we want is cadets reprimanding other cadets "in private", or worse,
a senior member doing that.
As a reasonable adult I fully understand what the intent here was. As a CAP member with
a few years behind me, I know for a fact that there will be members who either use this
as an excuse for breaking 52-10....sorry...60-2...or can't reconcile CPPT with proper
mentoring.
Again, I'd say the highest risk is with cadet / cadet reprimands "in private". There should be
verbiage here that either refers to 52-10 60-2 or simply states that reprimands should
never be done 1-on-1.
Page 34 - the uniform scorecard is shown as a full page per cadet.
It should be this version with 4-up per page: https://www.capmembers.com/media/cms/Inspection_Cards__4up_E36E6839CE6C4.pdf
I like the organizational structure suggestions, but was it necessary to provide very detailed
descriptions of 3 cadet staff roles which indicate within themselves "usually not needed"?
Quote from: Eclipse on November 10, 2016, 08:25:53 PM
I like the organizational structure suggestions, but was it necessary to provide very detailed descriptions of 3 cadet staff roles which indicate within themselves "usually not needed"?
For when they are needed?
Glad to see this publication receive a facelift. :clap:
Now if only the Encampment curriculum as a whole could receive the same treatment... That would be OUTSTANDING.
Quote from: Shutterbug on November 10, 2016, 11:08:11 PM
Glad to see this publication receive a facelift. :clap:
Now if only the Encampment curriculum as a whole could receive the same treatment... That would be OUTSTANDING.
Give it time... I'm actually somewhat impressed at the progress they are making.
You are aware that the curriculum got revised a couple years ago right?
Quote from: Starfleet Auxiliary on November 10, 2016, 11:56:18 PM
Give it time... I'm actually somewhat impressed at the progress they are making.
Progress? It's rife with typos and outright errors that affect test scoring and hasn't been corrected for over 2 years
(after being in development for 3).
Quote from: Eclipse on November 11, 2016, 01:10:26 AM
Quote from: Starfleet Auxiliary on November 10, 2016, 11:56:18 PM
Give it time... I'm actually somewhat impressed at the progress they are making.
Progress? It's rife with typos and outright errors that affect test scoring and hasn't been corrected for over 2 years
(after being in development for 3).
And there is now a form you can use to send in corrections.
They were sent directly to the OPRs 2 years ago when we found them, one would have to presume others have found them
and / or ignored them as well.