Training the Leaders of Cadets being required....

[Senior]

A little blurb from my Wing HQ stated that National HQ is going to
require cadet/composite sq. to have at least two TLC graduates.
Does this seem like overkill or just more rules to follow with diminishing returns?  I am thinking from a time spent away from family/more required training point of view also. 

[Eclipse]

I believe the word used is "should", not "will", which means it is a good idea but no regulatory ramifications
if no one is interested in doing it.

Properly done, the TLC is worth the time.

[jimmydeanno]

Why would requiring that a squadron that has cadets have highly-trained competent leadership be overkill?  In reality, I would argue that the majority of our cadet leaders don't really know what they're doing or why they do it.  We hear about squadrons that don't do the SDA program because they don't understand it, or do activities they shouldn't, etc.

When it comes down to it, the success of a cadet unit is dependent on the leadership there.  Certainly not a waste of time to ensure that every squadron with cadets have a few people with trained cadet programs staff.

[tsrup]

Why would requiring that a squadron that has cadets have highly-trained competent leadership be overkill?  In reality, I would argue that the majority of our cadet leaders don't really know what they're doing or why they do it.  We hear about squadrons that don't do the SDA program because they don't understand it, or do activities they shouldn't, etc.

When it comes down to it, the success of a cadet unit is dependent on the leadership there.  Certainly not a waste of time to ensure that every squadron with cadets have a few people with trained cadet programs staff.

Because in order for that to happen there needs to be a more aggressive training requirement for the Wings to conduct them.  AFIK there hasn't been a single TLC offered here in the last 2 years.  I guarantee you that as soon as there is one I will most certainly attend, but what would be the adverse action if the squadron didn't have the program?

Wanna make it mandatory?  Make it online.  That is the only way to make sure it gets done.

[SarDragon]

IMHO, TLC is one of those courses that derives great benefit from the "face time." An online course doesn't allow for the exchange of ideas and experience that is available in the classroom.

[Phil Hirons, Jr.]

IMHO, TLC is one of those courses that derives great benefit from the "face time." An online course doesn't allow for the exchange of ideas and experience that is available in the classroom.

What he said.

[tsrup]

IMHO, TLC is one of those courses that derives great benefit from the "face time." An online course doesn't allow for the exchange of ideas and experience that is available in the classroom.

Thats all great and everything, but if there is no classroom class offered, and it becomes mandatory, then less than ideal will have to suffice. 

In a perfect world It should be mandatory,   
but in this perfect world SLS, CLC, OBC, TLC courses are taught on a weekly basis no more than 30 minutes away from a person's home.


Otherwise there is nothing wrong with the way it's mandated now. 

[MIKE]

TLC is even better when Uncle Curt teaches it. 

[jimmydeanno]

Lets clarify.  Here's the sections being referred to in the "soon to be published" 52-16:

c. Standard of Training. Because no cadet unit can succeed without adult leadership, every cadet unit should have at least two graduates of the Training Leaders of Cadets course assigned (see paragraph 2-2a). If a unit does not meet this requirement, the commander must develop a plan for doing so.

So, it places the onus of providing training on the commander.  Training isn't a bad thing, is it?  Is it bad to have someone accountable for ensuring that it is provided?

a. Training Leaders of Cadets. The centerpiece of the Cadet Programs Officers' specialty track is the Training Leaders of Cadets (TLC) course. It prepares seniors to lead cadets at the squadron level. TLC is administered at the group level or higher and should be conducted at least once per year in each wing. The commander of the host echelon selects the course director, who should possess a master rating in the Cadet Programs Officer specialty track. To foster a learning environment that encourages open discussion among seniors, cadets are prohibited from participating in TLC. Students must complete 80% of the course to graduate. They receive credit for graduating when their course director submits a CAPF 11, Senior Member Professional Development Program Director's Report, to National Headquarters and their record is updated in eServices. For course materials, see capmembers.com/tlc.

So, it should be provided at least once per year, per wing.  That seems to be a "mandate" and places some accountability on the wings to provide the training.

It seems like you're just angry because your wing hasn't offered it.  The draft publication doesn't make some sort of unrealistic expectation or overwhelming training requirement.  What it does is ensure that our cadets have properly trained cadet leaders, which they deserve.

[tsrup]

Lets clarify.  Here's the sections being referred to in the "soon to be published" 52-16:

c. Standard of Training. Because no cadet unit can succeed without adult leadership, every cadet unit should have at least two graduates of the Training Leaders of Cadets course assigned (see paragraph 2-2a). If a unit does not meet this requirement, the commander must develop a plan for doing so.

So, it places the onus of providing training on the commander.  Training isn't a bad thing, is it?  Is it bad to have someone accountable for ensuring that it is provided?

a. Training Leaders of Cadets. The centerpiece of the Cadet Programs Officers' specialty track is the Training Leaders of Cadets (TLC) course. It prepares seniors to lead cadets at the squadron level. TLC is administered at the group level or higher and should be conducted at least once per year in each wing. The commander of the host echelon selects the course director, who should possess a master rating in the Cadet Programs Officer specialty track. To foster a learning environment that encourages open discussion among seniors, cadets are prohibited from participating in TLC. Students must complete 80% of the course to graduate. They receive credit for graduating when their course director submits a CAPF 11, Senior Member Professional Development Program Director's Report, to National Headquarters and their record is updated in eServices. For course materials, see capmembers.com/tlc.

So, it should be provided at least once per year, per wing.  That seems to be a "mandate" and places some accountability on the wings to provide the training.

It seems like you're just angry because your wing hasn't offered it.  The draft publication doesn't make some sort of unrealistic expectation or overwhelming training requirement.  What it does is ensure that our cadets have properly trained cadet leaders, which they deserve.

Wait does this even cover Composite squadrons?  Or just Cadet Units?
And 2 is the number no matter what the squadron's size is? 
from a squadron of 15 members to a squadron of 100+? 
That just doesn't make sense. 

Is it 2 active members or could we just keep 2 on the books? 
Do these two even have to be the people working with cadet programs within the squadron?
How would this be enforced? 
What is the grace period? 
What happens if the commander makes a "plan" to get it done and doesn't follow through? 

It seems like undue responsibility placed on the squadron commander, especially when it can just be a challenge in some areas to get members just to show up to weekly meetings.

I like the idea of this proposal, and It makes sense to want to have qualified people for the jobs they occupy, but an arbitrary "2 person" requirement and just the overall nature of a volunteer organization will make this hard to enforce.  Since it has no teeth, it will eventually just fall to the wayside and will be seldom kept up with.

Instead we should just give the people dedicated to making CP work the benefit of the doubt and hope that they attend a course because they just want to be the best that they do.

[SarDragon]

Since it says "cadet unit," in lower case, I would say all units having cadet members.

Having two graduates should be a minimum. They can pass on their knowledge to others. In a larger unit, more is better, but not necessary. They do need to be active members, for that reason. Otherwise, it's a waste of assets.

[lordmonar]

IMHO, TLC is one of those courses that derives great benefit from the "face time." An online course doesn't allow for the exchange of ideas and experience that is available in the classroom.

Thats all great and everything, but if there is no classroom class offered, and it becomes mandatory, then less than ideal will have to suffice. 

In a perfect world It should be mandatory,   
but in this perfect world SLS, CLC, OBC, TLC courses are taught on a weekly basis no more than 30 minutes away from a person's home.


Otherwise there is nothing wrong with the way it's mandated now.

The "requirment" is being driven by the proposed Quality Unit program.

When your cadet/composite squadrons decide that they would like to in fact earn the quality Unit award....then they are going to start pinging Wing to put on a TLC.

Just like SLS and CLC the demand will drive the frequency of the course.  CAWG/TXWG/FLWG could have one each quarter and still not meet up with demand.  NVWG could have one every two years and never fill the seats.

Having said that.....we hold them 2-3 times a year and do a lot of agressive recruiting to fill the seats.

If you want one......ask your Wing CP guy to help get it started......get all your seniors into the class and then you are golden.

[BillB]

In my opinion, the Squadron Commanders of Composite or Cadet Squadrons should be TLC graduates. To often I see Squadrons where the Commanders have no knowledge of CP, rather they leave the running of the cadet part of a unit up to the Dep. Commander for Cadets. Having at least two senior members that are TLC graduates is an absolute minimum for any Squadron that has cadet members. Obviously the two members should be the DCC and the CC

[lordmonar]

While I think it is a good idea for the DCC and CC to both be TLC graduates......I don't see a requirement for the CC to be a TLC graduate in a composite squaron.  The whole concept of the composite squadron is that they do a large specturm of operations.  The CC should be familure with what the CP is all about....but we have DCCs for the express purpose of manageing the CP.

The CC should be running the squadron...i.e managing the people running the various operations.  UCC is a must for them but they don't have to skilled in each and every aspect of all the operations that the squadron does.

Heck if we wanted to go there then the CC would also have to be an MLO, ES, AE, personnel, Adminstration, logistics, PAO, et al.

Each squadron should have enough TLC graduates to manage the Cadet Program....at a minimum two and leave it at that.

[EMT-83]

I think the wording of the proposed regulation is spot on. It states the desired goal of having TLC, without making it mandatory. The commander has to come up with a plan for people to attend TLC.

If that plan is for members to attend TLC if and when it is presented at a reasonable distance from the squadron, you've complied with the regulation.

[jeders]

Just like SLS and CLC the demand will drive the frequency of the course.  CAWG/TXWG/FLWG could have one each quarter and still not meet up with demand. 

Now if only TXWG would hold one once...period. I haven't seen a TLC on the calendar for quite some time, so I started pinging the Wing PDO. Now there's going to be a TLC at the Wing Conference next year. Is the wing holding a TLC because of me, probably not. Am I going to be at the next Wing Conference, you betcha.

But to get back to the original question, having TLC grads in the squadron is definitely not overkill. Right now I'm the assistant DCC and I have 10 years in CAP, half of which was as a cadet. The DCC, because I had to step way back for awhile after I stepped down as CC, has less than a year in CAP and 0 prior cadeting experience. He's learning, but having him go through a TLC would be great for him and the squadron.

[Offutteer]

Now if only TXWG would hold one once...period.

Texas Wing holds two TLCs a year and has for over 5 years now.  Also, national held one in San Antonio last year which was in addition to the ones that the Texas Cadet Programs hosts.  The last one was held at Camp Mabry, 24-26 Sept. 

[jeders]

Now if only TXWG would hold one once...period.

Texas Wing holds two TLCs a year and has for over 5 years now.  Also, national held one in San Antonio last year which was in addition to the ones that the Texas Cadet Programs hosts.  The last one was held at Camp Mabry, 24-26 Sept.

Well then they sure do a terrible job of advertising it (which isn't a big surprise), because I and a whole bunch of others out here in Group 1 have been waiting.

[Eclipse]

FYI - TLC is really supposed to be held at the Group level if your wing has them.

[jimmydeanno]

It seems like undue responsibility placed on the squadron commander

If responsibility of success doesn't lie in the hands of the commander, who does it lie with?  We can make excuses about why we can't do things all day long, or that "we're only volunteers," but in the end, every single one of our members volunteered to do the job they're doing.  As a leader, I expect those people to continue doing that job they volunteered to do until they "un-volunteer" themselves.

If a squadron commander doesn't see it in their scope of responsibility to work with the wing/group to hold training classes for their people, that is something that needs to be fixed.  If all we are doing is looking for the regulation loopholes to figure out if we really don't have to hold these because they say "should" and "may" I think it is a poor attitude to take.

The way things "should" be to me says it is the way things are intended to be.  Why we wouldn't want things to be the way they are intended to be?

Our cadets deserve a good leaders.  Those leaders deserve good training.  Someone needs to be responsible for ensuring that the leaders get training.  Those people are the commanders.  If a squadron commander doesn't think it's within their purview to put some pressure on their commanders to ensure training is held, they need to re-evaluate what their position actually is.

Commanders need to lead.  Commanders also need to be held accountable for the success of their units.