What is your definition of "Cadet Run?"

Started by jimmydeanno, May 14, 2007, 07:07:41 PM

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

jimmydeanno

Howdy Folks,

This seems to be something that comes up fairly regularly in my CAP travels.  What exactly is meant by, "the CAP cadet program should be cadet run..."  I am a cadet programs guy, and always seem to get various interpretations of that statement.

I have been witness to squadrons where the Squadron Commander demands that the seniors are more or less "baby-sitters," and the cadets make every decision regarding the cadet program. Stopping only to get the required signatures.

I have been witness to squadrons where the DCC sets the local policies and procedures and the cadets say "yes sir" and execute them.  The cadets in these ones tend to "clear" all decisions through the DCC before executing.

I have also been witness to squadrons in which the DCC tells the cadets specifically what to do and how to do it, with no decision making authority given to the cadets.

I'm just looking for a good discussion about what "boundaries" should be made for the cadets, how much "officer involvement" there should or shouldn't be, and what your definition of "cadet run" is.
If you have ten thousand regulations you destroy all respect for the law. - Winston Churchill

dwb

A few years back, I wrote an essay on this for CadetStuff (linky).

Basically, it depends on the cadet staff.  Experienced, well-trained cadets need a different kind of supervision/mentoring than green cadets.

It is the responsibility of the senior members working with cadets to find that line, and start working with cadets to give them more and more responsibility in manageable chunks, allowing for failure here and there.

I can't really answer the question of where the boundry belongs, because it depends on the people involved.

Psicorp

Great topic.

I was a Cadet in a squadron that was "Cadet Run", taken to an extreme.  We'd plan and execute every meeting and reported the plans and results to the CC (or whichever Officer happened to show up and unlock the building for us that night). I don't think that should ever have happened, and I jump squadrons to help out if I heard of a unit where that was happening.

That being said, I also don't believe that Officers should ever "baby-sit".  That's insulting to the Cadets and insulting to the Officers.

If you've got a group of mature dedicated Cadets with some experience behind them, then you are in a position to be able to sit down with them, list objectives they need to meet and allow them to come up with a schedule/plan to meet those objectives.  Always be available to offer guidance/advice and be prepared to step in  and re-direct if things slide.  There are always things Cadets don't know, don't understand, don't have access to, and can't do on their own. 

Naturally, this is highly dependent on the Cadets you have.  The more "ownership" they take in their own program, the better it will be.  What I mean by that is, if the Cadets take initiative and participate in the planning and execution of meetings and activities, the more successful and more fulfilling it will be.     If you have a squadron full of younger/less experienced Cadets, then this isn't as possible, but you can instill in them your expectations and before long they should be stepping up all on their own.   Set your expectations high and see if they rise up to meet them.

Jamie Kahler, Capt., CAP
(C/Lt Col, ret.)
CC
GLR-MI-257

LtCol White

I agree that it depends on the ability of the cadet leadership. Its very important that the cadets have ownership in the program. They are treated like "kids" in everything they do right now. CAP provides them the opportunity to start having adult responsibility. I have told my senior cadets and CAC in the wing that " I dont want to run cadet programs. I want you to run it." We shoud lay out the framework and guidelines and let them plan and execute and consult with the seniors for approvals and support. Senior members should no more be baby sitters than a teacher in school should be. As with teachers, we are there to instruct, mentor, develop and build the cadets. With our supervision, they need to be allowed to break things and be given the opportunity to fix them.  If they are never allowed to make mistakes (ones that won't get us sued or cause injury) then they will never learn or really appreciate leadership roles. When they are in school each day, they are told what to do and how to do it all day long. They don't need that when they come to a meeting. They need to see that we have confidence in them and will help and guide them.  I have seen this work over and over. It also builds a strong relationship between the cadets and senior members which translates to a better program.

Be a mentor !
LtCol David P. White CAP   
HQ LAWG

Admiral, Great Navy of the State of Nebraska

Diplomacy - The ability to tell someone to "Go to hell" and have them look forward to making the trip.

DNall

We could talk about this forever, but it comes down to an on teh ground assessment. You test cadets to theri capabilities, not set them up for failure for the sake of calling it "cadet run." Balance is the key word & all extremes are bad.

You cannot be a babysitter, hence the required signatures... the DCC is ultimately responsible for everything regardless of whos fault it is. You should be handing them a visiion which is part of a larger Sq vision that hopefully was constructed from seeing where Wing & so farth are trying to take the organization. You hand them a vision with goals they need to accomplish & then it's a matter of balance. If they can take it from there & get the job done or even struggle thru in mediocre fashion, then by all means let them take it & limit yourself to mentor & adminstrate. If on the other hand oyu don;t have a competent NCO, much less officer (and that's almost always attrition & not failure to train people up), then it may well be that you need to give them a plan & do some more directing or even direct training as necessary to jumpstart the process.

Certainly we want them to learn with as much hands on opportunity as possible, but we also don;t want to put to much on them & break them, or take their lives out of balance, or teach them a pattern of failure, or allow failures that can be learned from on one level to waste the time of everyone underneath. Ultimately, it's just balance & knowing when & where to do how much is how expert of a cadet programs officer you are.

mikeylikey

My definition of Cadet Run.........is lining them all up in formation and running them 5 miles.  Other than that.......nothing is "cadet run", CAP Officers run everything.  You can try to give the appearance that the cadets are running their program......but in the end, it is better if they actually don't.  I visited a few SQD's that had the cadets doing their own thing in one building with no adult supervision while the adults were doing the typical Senior Member BS session and donut eating contest!
What's up monkeys?

MIKE

I've seen a lot of instances where you wouldn't want to let the inmates run the asylum, but having to spoon feed the program to cadets is not ideal even in the worst case scenario.

Mike Johnston

LtCol White

Quote from: mikeylikey on May 14, 2007, 10:29:23 PM
My definition of Cadet Run.........is lining them all up in formation and running them 5 miles.  Other than that.......nothing is "cadet run", CAP Officers run everything.  You can try to give the appearance that the cadets are running their program......but in the end, it is better if they actually don't.  I visited a few SQD's that had the cadets doing their own thing in one building with no adult supervision while the adults were doing the typical Senior Member BS session and donut eating contest!

I disagree here. CAP officers don't run everything. Here in LA, we have the cadets planning and executing the program. This is of course with oversight and supervision. It is also not better if the cadets don't run it. on the contrary, the program is MUCH better if they do. Again, the caveat is that the cadets in charge are capable of doing this. This again is accomplished by proper mentoring.

Not only CAN it be done, it IS being done, and it is working very well.
LtCol David P. White CAP   
HQ LAWG

Admiral, Great Navy of the State of Nebraska

Diplomacy - The ability to tell someone to "Go to hell" and have them look forward to making the trip.

DNall

Quote from: LtCol White on May 14, 2007, 11:17:50 PM
the caveat is that the cadets in charge are capable of doing this. This again is accomplished by proper mentoring.
Absolutely, and that works well on a Wg level, but an individual unit with 12-20 cadets may or may not have such people. It may be a process to create them & during that process the balance shifts the other way somewhat.

LtCol White

Quote from: DNall on May 15, 2007, 01:13:13 AM
Quote from: LtCol White on May 14, 2007, 11:17:50 PM
the caveat is that the cadets in charge are capable of doing this. This again is accomplished by proper mentoring.
Absolutely, and that works well on a Wg level, but an individual unit with 12-20 cadets may or may not have such people. It may be a process to create them & during that process the balance shifts the other way somewhat.

Oh absolutely. Cadets on the sq level can be assessed as to their ability and mentored accordingly with more responsibility being released to them as they improve in their ability. Clearly it is more difficult on the sq level but even the smallest steps can be taken here where possible.

I used to start off with having the cadets teach the chapters from leadership and aerospace to the other cadets after they had passed their own tests and demonstrated a sufficient knowlege of the material. This helped them gain confidence and ability in speaking and teaching. It also demonstrated to the other cadets that the cadet teaching knew his material which helps to generate further respect.

With field activities, the cadets were brought into the planning and allowed to design the mission scenarios and then questioned on what equipment and supplies were necessary to meet the goals. They were coached as needed when they missed things with details on why those items were important and trained to see the bigger picture. Eventually we reached the point where the activity was completely planned by the cadets, brought to the seniors for presentation and review  and resulting in the activity being held.

All of this helped to instill ownership on the part of the cadets. You could visibly see the results and at multi unit activities we would overhear them telling the other cadets that they had planned out their activities and meetings.
LtCol David P. White CAP   
HQ LAWG

Admiral, Great Navy of the State of Nebraska

Diplomacy - The ability to tell someone to "Go to hell" and have them look forward to making the trip.

ZigZag911

The first factor to take account for is the age, grade, and experience of the cadet leaders.

If your cadet staff is young and inexperienced they are going to need a lot of guidance, and perhaps even some direction.

With more experienced cadets, there can be less guidance....but there always needs to be supervision, which in this case means reviewing plans sufficiently in advance to fix any major mistakes (i.e., failing to take the need to feed & hydrate personnel into consideration; safety concerns; CAP or base regs).

Part of this is senior leaders setting a good example for cadet leaders; planning events, reviewing one another's plans (we all make mistakes! and others also have good ideas), working to gether to carry out the activity, showing flexibility and adaptability as conditions change.

Another factor to consider is the nature of the event -- a new problem is going to require fresh insights....your cadet leaders may be great at organizing unit meetings & training....but might never have experienced a bivouac or awards ceremony from the leading end of things.

To use a metaphor, we as seniors are the 'training wheels' for the truly inexperienced cadet staff, the 'safety net' for those more able to work semi-autonomously.




LtCol White

Its sounds to me that most of us seem to agree that with proper mentoring/guidance, based on the ability of the cadets involved, cadets should be allowed to run things to the degree of their ability and competence and increase proportionally as their ability increases.

LtCol David P. White CAP   
HQ LAWG

Admiral, Great Navy of the State of Nebraska

Diplomacy - The ability to tell someone to "Go to hell" and have them look forward to making the trip.

dwb

Quote from: mikeylikey on May 14, 2007, 10:29:23 PMI visited a few SQD's that had the cadets doing their own thing in one building with no adult supervision while the adults were doing the typical Senior Member BS session and donut eating contest!

Let me balance your anecdote with a counter-anecdote.

I had a Cadet Commander that could basically do anything.  I would only have to mention an idea, and at the next meeting, I'd find out that the plan had been put in place and was actually on the path to being smoothly executed.

I'm not a sit-in-the-office-with-the-doughnuts kind of s'member, but I very well could have been, because this cadet was responsible enough to run the weekly meetings, accomplish the program objectives, train her staff, and still have some time left over for long-term planning.

However, those cadets don't come from nowhere.  They're nurtured, trained, and mentored by senior members who know what their role is.

Cadets can have ownership and responsibility for their own program, but that's not the same thing as just dumping a pile of 52-16s on them and retreating to the office to drink coffee and trade war stories.

I can't stress enough that being truly "cadet run" is a point far down the continuum from where most squadrons are today.  But that doesn't mean it can't, or shouldn't, be a goal.

jimmydeanno

Great, we all seem to be on the same page about varying our direct instruction based on the situation we have in our squadrons, but what do you do when your highest ranking cadet is say a C/CMSgt.  Say this C/CMSgt is mature enough and capable enough of operating at a more administrative C/CC level.

Would you advocate having the cadet serve as the C/CC even though the program recommends that position for a C/Lt Col?  Would you say this is more of a time for the DCC to "play" C/CC and keep the C/CMSgt as a C/Flt CC or C/1Sgt?

If you do put the C/CMSgt as a C/CC what does that leave them later on in the program to work towards (besides say CAC Chair).  What types of alternatives would you provide to ensure this cadet doesn't get bored as a C/Flt CC or the like if they are capable of much more...?
If you have ten thousand regulations you destroy all respect for the law. - Winston Churchill

MIKE

Mike Johnston

ZigZag911

The grade/position correlation is a guideline.

Phase approrpiate roles are wonderful when you have that luxury....some units start off small enough that their sole cadet NCOs can serve as flight CC & flt sgt, and that works fine for awhile.

Bottom line, I'd let a cadet NCO with her/his act together be the cadet commander....I'd expect to need to give more guidance than to, say, a C/Capt!

LtCol White

LtCol David P. White CAP   
HQ LAWG

Admiral, Great Navy of the State of Nebraska

Diplomacy - The ability to tell someone to "Go to hell" and have them look forward to making the trip.

jimmydeanno

Boy, not too much explanation there... :-X  Why are we seeing such variations though, we have a little bit of everything.  We have a "wait until the cadet reaches the appropriate level," and a "well if that's what you've got."

If I recall correctly, the new TLC really stresses the "phase appropriate roles," and favors the senior staff taking more control until there is a cadet to fill the role.  It speaks of having the highest ranking cadet be a first sergeant or flight commander and basing the cadet structure around that.  It makes sense to me.  As I said above, if your C/CMSgt is a C/CC before getting the Mitchell award, what is left after they are done being C/CC? 

Does it make sense to make the positions a "right of passage" so to speak, like holding the carrot out in front of the horse to get them to move on...

How often do we get cadets who get to be C/CC too early and never progress rank wise?  Is there a correlation?
If you have ten thousand regulations you destroy all respect for the law. - Winston Churchill

Al Sayre

I became a Cadet Commander as a 14 yr old C/Sgt back in the 70's.  I held the job for 4 years, I have to admit that while I did get my Mitchell (C/WO), I probably could have gone much farther rank-wise without the additional responsibility.  However, that being said, I did learn an awful lot about leadership, and running a squadron etc., I just never managed to get the bling that goes with the job.  All in all, it was probably a fair tradeoff.
Lt Col Al Sayre
MS Wing Staff Dude
Admiral, Great Navy of the State of Nebraska
GRW #2787

MIKE

#19
From what I have seen, putting a cadet at the top early on is BAD news.  Cadets tend to see it as the capstone, so you end up with "I'm here, now what?" and they aren't competing for grade anymore, because now they're the C/CC and what else is there?
Mike Johnston

mikeylikey

^  I have "imported" C/LtCol's into newly formed SQD's/flights.  Makes no sense to just pick one cadet with no experience over another cadet with no experience to fill the position.  I must also say that I believe those Cadets that are in college make better Cadet Commanders.  Possibly just an observation that is unique to my area.
What's up monkeys?

jimmydeanno

Quote from: mikeylikey on May 15, 2007, 07:46:35 PM
I must also say that I believe those Cadets that are in college make better Cadet Commanders.  Possibly just an observation that is unique to my area.

What makes them better?  Is it the increased age? Maturity? Other? Combination of all?  I think it would be ideal if all C/Cols had 7 years of experience, but that doesn't happen.  I really would like to hear more personal experiences involving all these scenarios, you can leave out the names of course...It is one thing to read about how things "should" be done in the regs, but another to see how they are actually implimented, and the reasoning behind the decisions.

(unless you're afraid of the black van...)
If you have ten thousand regulations you destroy all respect for the law. - Winston Churchill

LtCol White

Quote from: jimmydeanno on May 15, 2007, 07:54:38 PM
Quote from: mikeylikey on May 15, 2007, 07:46:35 PM
I must also say that I believe those Cadets that are in college make better Cadet Commanders.  Possibly just an observation that is unique to my area.

What makes them better?  Is it the increased age? Maturity? Other? Combination of all?  I think it would be ideal if all C/Cols had 7 years of experience, but that doesn't happen.  I really would like to hear more personal experiences involving all these scenarios, you can leave out the names of course...It is one thing to read about how things "should" be done in the regs, but another to see how they are actually implimented, and the reasoning behind the decisions.

(unless you're afraid of the black van...)

Ask away and I'll be happy to share as much as you need.
LtCol David P. White CAP   
HQ LAWG

Admiral, Great Navy of the State of Nebraska

Diplomacy - The ability to tell someone to "Go to hell" and have them look forward to making the trip.

ZigZag911

Bringing in a couple of experienced cadet officers and NCOs to a unit with mostly new and inexperienced cadets is an excellent approach, where the personnel needed are available and distances are not prohibitive.

Putting one 'on top' too soon can indeed have negative consequences....which is where the CC & DCC come in to keep motivating their cadet leadership to advance.

We always told the cadet leaders that there first duty was to lead by example in all things -- including advancement.

Back in the early 80s our squadron had a complete turnover in a very brief span of time....as DCC I found myself leading drill again for the first time since my own cadet days....after about two months I gradually started handing control during drill over to the cadets, letting them drill the flight by turns, under close supervision by seniors....kind of following the medical school model: "see one, do one, teach one".

As some of them began moving up the NCO ranks, more and more responsibility passed from us to them.

It can be done successfully, but the seniors need to keep firmly in mind that their purpose is to work themselves out of a job as quickly as is reasonably possible....and we always had a cadet in charge of the flight....for awhile we kept shuffling the roles around (flight commander, flight sergeant, squad leaders) much as is done in basic training.

Psicorp

Quote from: jimmydeanno on May 15, 2007, 05:22:38 PM
Great, we all seem to be on the same page about varying our direct instruction based on the situation we have in our squadrons, but what do you do when your highest ranking cadet is say a C/CMSgt.  Say this C/CMSgt is mature enough and capable enough of operating at a more administrative C/CC level.

Would you advocate having the cadet serve as the C/CC even though the program recommends that position for a C/Lt Col?  Would you say this is more of a time for the DCC to "play" C/CC and keep the C/CMSgt as a C/Flt CC or C/1Sgt?

If you do put the C/CMSgt as a C/CC what does that leave them later on in the program to work towards (besides say CAC Chair).  What types of alternatives would you provide to ensure this cadet doesn't get bored as a C/Flt CC or the like if they are capable of much more...?

If it were me in that situation, I'd probably make the C/CMSgt a 1st Sgt.  That position would make more sense, at least until he got his Mitchell.   It's really just semantics, though.  If he's your highest ranking Cadet, regardless of what you call his position, he's still at the top of the totem pole.
Jamie Kahler, Capt., CAP
(C/Lt Col, ret.)
CC
GLR-MI-257

jimmydeanno

^But as a 1Sgt you limit their role to not include what a C/CC does...yes, they may be at the top of the 'totem pole' but their job is 1Sgt, not C/CC...
If you have ten thousand regulations you destroy all respect for the law. - Winston Churchill

Psicorp

Quote from: jimmydeanno on May 16, 2007, 12:36:08 PM
^But as a 1Sgt you limit their role to not include what a C/CC does...yes, they may be at the top of the 'totem pole' but their job is 1Sgt, not C/CC...

Good point, but I would do that for for two reasons:  Keep the position of C/CC for Cadet Officers, give the C/CMSgt another reason to want to get his Mitchell.  Since all of your Cadets are in the enlisted grades, have Flight Sergeants rather than Flight Commanders as well.  What better way to prepare the younger Cadets for leadership roles than to see those positions being held by someone who can do the job?  Anything has to be better than the "sink or swim" mentality I've seen employed far too often.
Jamie Kahler, Capt., CAP
(C/Lt Col, ret.)
CC
GLR-MI-257

ZigZag911

I understand the desire to hold 'cadet officer' positions open as motivational tools, but practically speaking, a lot of this is semantics....a 1Sgt & 2 Flt Sgts as your 'staff'  are, in everything but name, cadet commander & flight commanders.

Now, you might not expect as much out of them in the NCO roles as in officer positions....but when it comes right down to it, they're your cadet leadership.....call them High Commissioner and Deputy Chiefs of Mission, but the job is substantially the same!

jimmydeanno

^unless someone above is doing those tasks assigned to the "higher positions."  This plays into the "role of the DCC" and back to the first question.  If your DCC is doing everything that the C/CC and C/Flt CC are supposed to be doing to limit the responsibilities of the C/Flt Sgt and C/1Sgt, then it's not the same.
If you have ten thousand regulations you destroy all respect for the law. - Winston Churchill

ZigZag911

Quote from: jimmydeanno on May 17, 2007, 11:48:53 AM
^unless someone above is doing those tasks assigned to the "higher positions."  This plays into the "role of the DCC" and back to the first question.  If your DCC is doing everything that the C/CC and C/Flt CC are supposed to be doing to limit the responsibilities of the C/Flt Sgt and C/1Sgt, then it's not the same.

I'm probably showing my age here...I was a cadet in the early 70s....but I have a philosophical problem with the DCC acting as cadet commander....I'm just uncomfortable with the idea....performing some of the functions, especially planning and immediate supervision of the NCO leaders, I can accept...I can even see not filling in the 'officer' slots until you have some Mitchells....but the DCC or any senior serving in lieu of the cadet commander, getting out in front of the cadets and essentially behaving like a cadet officer disturbs me -- there is too much likelihood of a blurring of roles and boundaries.

mikeylikey

Quote from: ZigZag911 on May 17, 2007, 04:58:49 PM
Quote from: jimmydeanno on May 17, 2007, 11:48:53 AM
^unless someone above is doing those tasks assigned to the "higher positions."  This plays into the "role of the DCC" and back to the first question.  If your DCC is doing everything that the C/CC and C/Flt CC are supposed to be doing to limit the responsibilities of the C/Flt Sgt and C/1Sgt, then it's not the same.

I'm probably showing my age here...I was a cadet in the early 70s....but I have a philosophical problem with the DCC acting as cadet commander....I'm just uncomfortable with the idea....performing some of the functions, especially planning and immediate supervision of the NCO leaders, I can accept...I can even see not filling in the 'officer' slots until you have some Mitchells....but the DCC or any senior serving in lieu of the cadet commander, getting out in front of the cadets and essentially behaving like a cadet officer disturbs me -- there is too much likelihood of a blurring of roles and boundaries.

Wow...I hope thats not going on.  So it would be like "oh great here comes the cadet Commander, LtCol Smith, he's like 80 years old!". 
What's up monkeys?

jimmydeanno

Great scenario...you are a new squadron, you only have 10 C/Amn.  They all joined at the same time and have about a month in.  Are you going to divy out the jobs so you have a C/CC that is an C/Amn?  Probably not. 

Since all those positions are vacant, someone is still responsible for ensuring that those responsibilities are attended to.  Since C/Amn should be focusing on how to lead themselves, these aditional duties are defaulted onto the CP staff.  They are still the DCC, not the C/CC.

It doesn't mean that the DCC is acting like a cadet, but performing duties that are typically assigned to a cadet.  IMO, the DCC and CP staff should "pick up the slack" so to speak. 

It really infuriates me when I see a C/SrA from some podunk squadron calling himself a C/1Sgt.  How are you a First SERGEANT as a C/Sra?  It get's even better when they decide to wear the C/1Sgt Diamond above their 3 stripes... ???  Don't you think that grade appropriate roles matter?(question not directed at anyone in particular...)
If you have ten thousand regulations you destroy all respect for the law. - Winston Churchill

MIKE

Quote from: jimmydeanno on May 17, 2007, 05:55:48 PMIt really infuriates me when I see a C/SrA from some podunk squadron calling himself a C/1Sgt.  How are you a First SERGEANT as a C/Sra?  It get's even better when they decide to wear the C/1Sgt Diamond above their 3 stripes... ???

Shouldn't be happening anymore.

Quote from: CAPR 52-162-4. e. ... However, each squadron may appoint a C/MSgt, C/SMSgt or C/CMSgt to serve as the cadet first sergeant. Cadets serving in this special duty are authorized to wear the first sergeant diamond insignia.

Quote from: jimmydeanno on May 17, 2007, 05:55:48 PMDon't you think that grade appropriate roles matter?(question not directed at anyone in particular...)

Preaching to the choir.
Mike Johnston

ELTHunter

I have been in a scenario much like this one, where a there was a gap between several older, experienced cadets that left the squadron at once and handed it over to younger, inexperienced ones.  I have always had a designated C/CC even if they were a C/A1C.  I might have to "hold their hand" and basically tell them step-by-step how to do their job until they understood and were confident they could do it.  Gradually, you move back into an "oversight and consultation" position.  I always tried to maintain the cadet organization chain-of-command.  Otherwise, they get used to coming straight to you (the DCC) instead of going through their own "officers".

Quote from: jimmydeanno on May 17, 2007, 05:55:48 PM
Great scenario...you are a new squadron, you only have 10 C/Amn.  They all joined at the same time and have about a month in.  Are you going to divy out the jobs so you have a C/CC that is an C/Amn?  Probably not. 

Since all those positions are vacant, someone is still responsible for ensuring that those responsibilities are attended to.  Since C/Amn should be focusing on how to lead themselves, these aditional duties are defaulted onto the CP staff.  They are still the DCC, not the C/CC.

It doesn't mean that the DCC is acting like a cadet, but performing duties that are typically assigned to a cadet.  IMO, the DCC and CP staff should "pick up the slack" so to speak. 

It really infuriates me when I see a C/SrA from some podunk squadron calling himself a C/1Sgt.  How are you a First SERGEANT as a C/Sra?  It get's even better when they decide to wear the C/1Sgt Diamond above their 3 stripes... ???  Don't you think that grade appropriate roles matter?(question not directed at anyone in particular...)
Maj. Tim Waddell, CAP
SER-TN-170
Deputy Commander of Cadets
Emergency Services Officer

ZigZag911

Quote from: jimmydeanno on May 17, 2007, 05:55:48 PM
Great scenario...you are a new squadron, you only have 10 C/Amn.  They all joined at the same time and have about a month in.  Are you going to divy out the jobs so you have a C/CC that is an C/Amn?  Probably not. 

Since all those positions are vacant, someone is still responsible for ensuring that those responsibilities are attended to.  Since C/Amn should be focusing on how to lead themselves, these aditional duties are defaulted onto the CP staff.  They are still the DCC, not the C/CC.

It doesn't mean that the DCC is acting like a cadet, but performing duties that are typically assigned to a cadet.  IMO, the DCC and CP staff should "pick up the slack" so to speak. 

It really infuriates me when I see a C/SrA from some podunk squadron calling himself a C/1Sgt.  How are you a First SERGEANT as a C/Sra?  It get's even better when they decide to wear the C/1Sgt Diamond above their 3 stripes... ???  Don't you think that grade appropriate roles matter?(question not directed at anyone in particular...)

Put this way, it makes sense.....the goal is to develop internal leadership in a reasonable amount of time, allowing the cadets to grow naturally, and not dumping too much responsibility or authority on any of them too soon.

And you are correct, a 1 Sgt diamond on any cadet below C/MSgt is not desirable.

jimmydeanno

Ahhh, our meeting last night just made me think of this again...we meet on an AFB, and our relationship with the AF is very good - they love us. (Forgive me, this may be a hard read :) )

Most of the time (9 out of 10 dentists prefer type), we can trust that our cadets are going to run things and plan things pretty well.  Theres always something that gets left out.

Well, we have a new DCC.  The C/CC usually sends the monthly schedule to the DCC, but this week had for the leadership block "surprise."  Now, MY first instinct is "UH-OH," but this didn't raise any flags for the new DCC.

Well, that time in the schedule came up, and the leadership block began.  The cadets were learning about varying styles of leadership depending on the situation, and I must admit, the way it was being done was rather interesting. The cadet staff set up different live action scenarios to show the difference.  The "Authoritarian" one was the problem (no, not hazing).  The cadets decided that to show when authoritarian leadership was called for, they would use a "combat" model, with sound effects.  So they dragged out some big speakers and started blaring M-16 fire, helicopters, bombs dropping, explosions, etc.

Did I mention that our meeting place is within sight of the guard shack?

Fortunately one of us had enough sense to head the guard off at the pass and let them know what the noise was before it erupted into something it shouldn't have.  Cadets learned their lesson after a good stern talking to...

So I guess I re-itterate for you seniors...don't allow too much to go unchecked when the cadets are "running" things.
If you have ten thousand regulations you destroy all respect for the law. - Winston Churchill

IceNine

Cadet Run can take on any combination of the above listed interpretations the major deciding factor all comes down to 1 question, How strong is the cadet staff?  if you have cadets that are super strong leaders and have a track record of making good command decisions there is no reason for a senior to step in (with the obvious exceptions safety, moral issues, etc) When I was the C/CC for my unit I had that authority what I decided was the answer and it was a rare exception that I was overruled.  On the other end of the spectrum we currently have no cadets capable of making even half-baked command decisions so any thing the cadets want to do is run through the DCC.  And we have had everything in between.  The important thing to keep in mind is that there have to be local operating parameters typically in the form of an SUI to ensure that everything is done correctly.  AND, there must be time tested good judgement on the part of the cadets.  So, give the cadets just enough rope not to hang themselves and shorten and lengthen it as needed.
"All of the true things that I am about to tell you are shameless lies"

Book of Bokonon
Chapter 4

ZigZag911

Quote from: jimmydeanno on June 01, 2007, 07:50:28 PM
Well, we have a new DCC.  The C/CC usually sends the monthly schedule to the DCC, but this week had for the leadership block "surprise."  Now, MY first instinct is "UH-OH," but this didn't raise any flags for the new DCC.

Cadets learned their lesson after a good stern talking to...

I hope the new DCC learned some lessons too:
1) ALL plans need prior review
2) commanders HATE "surprises"!

flyguy06

I see my role as the Deputy Commander of cadets similar to that of a College ROTC instrcutor. My job is to teach, advise, and consel (TAC)  cadets.

cadets learn to lead, and we as cadet program officers teach the leaders the correct way to lead. I disagree withthe current policy on hazing in CAP and  I think the whole hazing issues stemed from a lack of proper Senior Member supervision. SM's just let cadet officers and NCO's run the cadet program without giving them proper guidence on how tolead. and it got out of hand and some cadet officers went to far thus we have the restrictions thatwe have today.

Senior Members should show cadets how to lead. they should show by example. By wearing the proper military uniform that cadets wear. I dont agree with SM's that work with cadets thatwear the blue shirt/grey slacks uniform. How can you inspect cadets or teach cadets if you cant wear what they wear. if you are outr of shpe then get into shape. Do PTR with the cadets lead by example is my philosophy. If I expect a cadet to do something I am willing and ABLE to doit myself. Thats what leaership is.

Senior member leaders should also be able to teach cadets to drill properly. I see so may times on my visits to other units cadets drilling wrong or just making stuff up as they go along. I have no problems standing in front of a formation and demonstrating the correct way to march, drill or condcut PT.

The cadet Program should be cadet run by Senior member supervised. Too many times All SM's do is sit around and make sure nobdy gets hurt. I refuse to take time out of my busy schedule to babysit asnyone. If I am going to train, then let me train.

mikeylikey

^^  Agree!  ROTC instructors do not babysit, they teach the proper way of doing something ONCE, then show the location of the instructions in case the CADETS forget what was taught. 

We could easily do that!
What's up monkeys?

IceNine

awesome thought I honestly never considered empowering them by teaching where things come from.  I always looked at it as I am training the trainers so whoever learned what I was teaching and did it well was the new expert in the subject matter, and they were the ones I showed where to find more Thanks
"All of the true things that I am about to tell you are shameless lies"

Book of Bokonon
Chapter 4

flyguy06

Quote from: mikeylikey on June 03, 2007, 05:27:18 PM
^^  Agree!  ROTC instructors do not babysit, they teach the proper way of doing something ONCE, then show the location of the instructions in case the CADETS forget what was taught. 

We could easily do that!

Exactly, but it may take more than one time. I remember when I was college ROTC, we had an instructor (he was a MSG Ranger type). He would always be out there leading PT for a few weeks. Then as the year went on, the cadetdsgradually took over. but it wasnt overnight or after one session.

flyguy06

Cadets need supervising. Especially CAP cadets. Think about it, if in Colleg eROTC where you are dealing with 18-22 year olds, they need guidence from adult supervisors what would you expect for 12-18 year old cadets that meet once a week for two hours?

ZigZag911

Quote from: flyguy06 on June 03, 2007, 05:02:33 PM
I disagree withthe current policy on hazing in CAP and  I think the whole hazing issues stemed from a lack of proper Senior Member supervision.

CAPR 52-10 defines hazing as "...any conduct whereby someone causes another to suffer or to be exposed to any activity that is cruel, abusive, humiliating, oppressive, demeaning, or harmful."

Since I find it it mind-bogglingly unlikely that you favor cruelty, abuse, humiliation, oppression and so forth toward cadets by anyone, let alone their cadet leaders, I would appreciate it if you would expand on what precisely you object to in the CAP policy against hazing.

Also, while you are no doubt correct that lack of senior member guidance & supervision probably led to these problems in CAP, this does not explain why the service academies have also banned hazing -- it seems doubtful that it was due to lack of supervision by professional officers and noncoms overseeing the cadets/midshipmen.


Ned

Quote from: ZigZag911 on June 03, 2007, 08:29:47 PM
Quote from: flyguy06 on June 03, 2007, 05:02:33 PM
I disagree withthe current policy on hazing in CAP and  I think the whole hazing issues stemed from a lack of proper Senior Member supervision.

CAPR 52-10 defines hazing as "...any conduct whereby someone causes another to suffer or to be exposed to any activity that is cruel, abusive, humiliating, oppressive, demeaning, or harmful."

Since I find it it mind-bogglingly unlikely that you favor cruelty, abuse, humiliation, oppression and so forth toward cadets by anyone, let alone their cadet leaders, I would appreciate it if you would expand on what precisely you object to in the CAP policy against hazing.

Also, while you are no doubt correct that lack of senior member guidance & supervision probably led to these problems in CAP, this does not explain why the service academies have also banned hazing -- it seems doubtful that it was due to lack of supervision by professional officers and noncoms overseeing the cadets/midshipmen.

The problem is that we use the same definition as the DoD, but apply it in an arbitrary and unique manner, without providing sufficient guidance and training for our CP leaders.

Just one example:  After completing TLC, one is left with the strong impression that "yelling" is never appropriate in the CP.

Yet, the RealMilitary, using the same definition of hazing that we do, constantly engages in behavior that CAP would prohibit.  Just go to any service academy's Beast Barracks or equivalent, and see what it looks and sounds like.

Or USAF BMT, or Army Basic.

Sure, they have professionally trained DIs and are dealing with 18-20 year-olds and we have relatively untrained volunteers dealing with 13 year-olds.  I understand that.

But the problem, as you asked, is that we pretend to use the DoD definition, but in reality we do not.

This leads to significant confusion, loss of challenging training opportunities, and engenders fear in otherwise well-meaning seniors who become afraid to challenge our cadets to exceed their comfort zones.

That's the problem.

ZigZag911

So as I suspected, your concern is poor training, poor application and interpretation of regulations, and the misuse of CPPT to water down the cadet program.

My own observations have been that many members, senior & cadet alike, tend to take a somewhat cavalier attitude toward the nature of hazing....but, like your observations, mine are largely anecdotal, and may be characteristic of attitudes in NER rather than throughout CAP.

Yelling for its own sake does nothing but damage a potentially fine command voice...however, there are, I agree, that there are those occasions when volume is the only sure-fire attention getter to communicate a critical lesson....needs to be used sparingly.

flyguy06

Because idont see a problem with yelling or making cadets do push ups as punishment or motivation. Its just that some cadets took it out of hand and thats why they are band now. Push ups never hurt anyone but in CAP we are not allowed to administer them as a form of punishment. In fact we cannot punish cadets at all except 2b them which I think is extreme and uneccessary.

Youare right zigzag. yelling for the sake of yelling does no good , and thats what untrained leaders do. But properly trained leaders know when you yell and when not to. Thats what we as cadet program officers failed to instill in cadet leaders. We basically gave them the keys tothe house and left them alone with no instruction.

Some cadets dont understand yelling and treat it as a joke. Some cadets only repsond to physical remidial training such as push ups. Isee no problem with that.

Of course I dont agree with physiaclly trouching cadets or cursing or demeaning cadets. But I do believe in remedial training and teamwork exercises. We cant please all cadets. Military lifestyle is not for everybody. But because we dont want to "offend" anyone, we tend to lean toward trying to please.
people.

The service academies "say" they have a strict nohazing policy. But I am sure that is just to ease the public's mind. We have no idea what goes on during plebe period or during beast barracks summer camp.

jimmydeanno

Quote from: flyguy06 on June 04, 2007, 05:50:36 AM
In fact we cannot punish cadets at all except 2b them which I think is extreme and unnecessary.

Why do you say that?  There are plenty of other alternatives.  Here's some examples.

1) Retaining a cadet in grade or demotion.

2) Removal from a staff position.

3) Denied request to attend an activity such as encampment, NCSA, etc.

4) Removal from a team.

5) Make them instruct a class on their deficiency (you wouldn't say, you're having this class taught by so and so because he can't shine his shoes)

6) Counseling

7) Suspension from meetings or just extra activities.

Those are some examples, but IME it's pretty hard to get 2b'd from the program.  We had a cadet that accused seniors and some cadets of "sexually violating" them as well as racism (accusations that you can be held criminally liable for), got the seniors and cadets involved suspended, turns out the cadet doing the accusing was the guilty party and none of those accused had any findings, but that cadet still gets to show up...[/rant]

But there are plenty of other alternatives for 'punishment.' 
If you have ten thousand regulations you destroy all respect for the law. - Winston Churchill

MIKE

Many cadets I have known would probably just quit or try to transfer out rather than face being demoted or suspended.
Mike Johnston

jimmydeanno

Quote from: MIKE on June 04, 2007, 03:21:34 PM
Many cadets I have known would probably just quit or try to transfer out rather than face being demoted or suspended.

I agree, but when it comes to that, there is usually a larger issue involved for the cadet, where it might be a benefit to leave the program to get their life straightened out.  I have seen cadets get demoted, some leave, some chalk it up to life experience and press on.  Of course knowing the cadets and determining what will actually work for them is key...
If you have ten thousand regulations you destroy all respect for the law. - Winston Churchill

flyguy06

Quote from: jimmydeanno on June 04, 2007, 01:59:47 PM
Quote from: flyguy06 on June 04, 2007, 05:50:36 AM
In fact we cannot punish cadets at all except 2b them which I think is extreme and unnecessary.

Why do you say that?  There are plenty of other alternatives.  Here's some examples.

1) Retaining a cadet in grade or demotion.

2) Removal from a staff position.

3) Denied request to attend an activity such as encampment, NCSA, etc.

4) Removal from a team.

5) Make them instruct a class on their deficiency (you wouldn't say, you're having this class taught by so and so because he can't shine his shoes)

6) Counseling

7) Suspension from meetings or just extra activities.

Those are some examples, but IME it's pretty hard to get 2b'd from the program.  We had a cadet that accused seniors and some cadets of "sexually violating" them as well as racism (accusations that you can be held criminally liable for), got the seniors and cadets involved suspended, turns out the cadet doing the accusing was the guilty party and none of those accused had any findings, but that cadet still gets to show up...[/rant]

But there are plenty of other alternatives for 'punishment.' 

It really depends on the make up and culture of your unit. These exmples are more long term then solving the immmediate problem.


Retaining a cadet in grade: A lot of cadets dont care about grade and rank or either will send the paperwork into National Themselves or will get pissed off and leave CAP. I dont want someone to quit for some little offense.


Removal from Staff position: In my squadron, we donthave enough cadets to even have a staff. I was referring to cadets in the ranks.

Denied to participate in encampments: Again, they will fill out the form 31 themselves, get their parents to sign and send it to Wing for the WIng CC's signiture. A lot of Wing CC's dont have a relatioship with Squadorn CC's and have no idea about issues at the Squadron level.

Plus, these are all punishiments that are long term for something serio0us. I was taling about minor things, like talking in formation, wearing the unifrom improperly. Things like that. I am not going to deny a cadet an encampment because he talked in formation. Make him do ten push ups and move on. Thats what I would do.




Major Carrales

Here is my take on "CADET RUN," of I would better call it "Cadet Driven."

A Cadet driven Unit is one where a CP Program CAP OFFICER closely supervises the activities of a CADET STAFF.  The Cadet staff builds it leadership from Curry on up.  Basically, the CAP Officer runs it all until Cadets can take these roles.  CADETS are introduced to the the appropriate REGS and given responsibility via those dictums.

By Wright Brothers a "fresh unit," one that started from scratch, should have a motivated Cadet FLight/Squadron Commander with a staff that is setting its own basic direction under 1) the Regs and 2) The CAP Officer in Command as part of 3) The Squadron Commander's vision for the Unit.

Thus, the Cadet Commander has input...the staff is functional (as the Senior Staff should be also).

The CP CAP Officer has veto power, as does the Squadron Commander.  But the cadet's reach a point where they "run themselves."  The CP CAP Officer becomes a "guide on the side" instead of a "sage on a stage."

This creates "ownership" of the program.  The CP CAP Officer should also be there to mitigate the political meshegas that often arises in these situations.  Cadets can appeal to the high power in the unit to resolve matters.

That is how I see it...
"We have been given the power to change CAP, let's keep the momentum going!"

Major Joe Ely "Sparky" Carrales, CAP
Commander
Coastal Bend Cadet Squadron
SWR-TX-454

flyguy06

I am in a Squadron where we have 5 cadets. The highest ranking being a cadet Airman. We also have a school program with 15 cadets. They dont do any actitivities outside of school due to finances.

jimmydeanno

Quote from: flyguy06 on June 05, 2007, 04:54:03 PM
I am in a Squadron where we have 5 cadets. The highest ranking being a cadet Airman. We also have a school program with 15 cadets. They dont do any actitivities outside of school due to finances.

???  So...what does that mean in terms of being "cadet run?"  Is this situation caused because the adult staff gives too much discretion to the cadets?  How does this relate to the topic? <-- not trying to be a jerk, but I had a disconnect in trying to associate this with the topic...
If you have ten thousand regulations you destroy all respect for the law. - Winston Churchill

flyguy06

It realtes, by saying that becaus ewe are smal and have inexperienced cadets, I as the DCC have to "run" or "drive" as you will the cadet program. I am essentially the pusedo cadet commander.

jimmydeanno

Do you have any association with the school program cadets?  How does the instructor interact with those cadets, how much is 'cadet run' vs. 'instructor run'?

Personally, I am glad to see that you didn't make the C/Amn a C/CC.  Thank you for clarifying for me, I'm not always the sharpest knife in the drawer...
If you have ten thousand regulations you destroy all respect for the law. - Winston Churchill

IceNine

Quote from: flyguy06 on June 05, 2007, 02:29:18 PM
Quote from: jimmydeanno on June 04, 2007, 01:59:47 PM
Quote from: flyguy06 on June 04, 2007, 05:50:36 AM
In fact we cannot punish cadets at all except 2b them which I think is extreme and unnecessary.

Why do you say that?  There are plenty of other alternatives.  Here's some examples.

1) Retaining a cadet in grade or demotion.

2) Removal from a staff position.

3) Denied request to attend an activity such as encampment, NCSA, etc.

4) Removal from a team.

5) Make them instruct a class on their deficiency (you wouldn't say, you're having this class taught by so and so because he can't shine his shoes)

6) Counseling

7) Suspension from meetings or just extra activities.

Those are some examples, but IME it's pretty hard to get 2b'd from the program.  We had a cadet that accused seniors and some cadets of "sexually violating" them as well as racism (accusations that you can be held criminally liable for), got the seniors and cadets involved suspended, turns out the cadet doing the accusing was the guilty party and none of those accused had any findings, but that cadet still gets to show up...[/rant]

But there are plenty of other alternatives for 'punishment.' 

It really depends on the make up and culture of your unit. These examples are more long term then solving the immediate problem.


Retaining a cadet in grade: A lot of cadets didn't care about grade and rank or either will send the paperwork into National Themselves or will get pissed off and leave CAP. I didn't want someone to quit for some little offense.


Removal from Staff position: In my squadron, we don't have enough cadets to even have a staff. I was referring to cadets in the ranks.

Denied to participate in encampments: Again, they will fill out the form 31 themselves, get their parents to sign and send it to Wing for the WIng CC's signature. A lot of Wing CC's didn't have a relationship with Squadron CC's and have no idea about issues at the Squadron level.

Plus, these are all punishments that are long term for something serio0us. I was taling about minor things, like talking in formation, wearing the uniform improperly. Things like that. I am not going to deny a cadet an encampment because he talked in formation. Make him do ten push ups and move on. Thats what I would do.





[/RANT] I'm sorry but nothing in this whole previous blurb makes any sense, Cadets bypassing command decisions?!?! cadets promoting themselves?!?!? cadets Not caring about grade!?!?  I have been in CAP for 10 years 8 as a cadet and I have traveled the country and met thousands of cadets not once have I heard on say oh I want to be an airman for the rest of my career or whatever.  There is the obvious reservation to being an officer by some, not many but some.  Now to the more serious things first off, if a cadet in my unit bypassed the CC's decision on punishment (i.e.-sent 31's to wing for activity without my signature) their world would get so much worse,  Because anytime a cadet is disciplined in my unit their parents are brought in on the situation (assuming it is bad enough) and there is a letter of reprimand placed in the cadets file with their signature, their parents, and the CC  If the cadet was to go around be and apply for encampment anyway i would send off a copy of the letter to the wing CC, the encampment commander and have a heart to heart with the parents again, then the cadet would be demoted and probably taken off staff (pending decision from a review board), as for cadets "promoting" themselves by sending paperwork to nationals, assuming they can get their hands on it and find where to send it props them, again in that situation I would rectify the situation by sending off the paperwork to demote them twice (so they get an actual demotion) and the punishment would start stacking up from there, (removal from staff, withholding activities, instructing classes monthly on integrity, honesty, the cadet oath etc.  So the fact that you brought up that cadets would do that tells me they probably have done that, and they were still slapped on the wrist because "we cannot discipline our cadets"  [/Rant]


NOW, to the original question... "we cannot punish our cadets" your right but we can motivate them, that being said here are some thoughts pushups in my experience are not a motivator for 13 year old xbox generation anyway.  To motivate these cadets you have to invade their comfort zone and push them outside of it.  Some ways to do this are make them give speeches/classes, establish a reward system for proficiency in all or some of the areas that cadets are evaluated on (i.e.-create a cadet of the month/cadet of distinction)  inspect the cadets weekly and provide feedback as to what can me corrected, keeping in mind that to get them to listen you MUST break them down and enough to get past the "tough" outer layer by showing them how disappointed you are that they did not correct those Irish pennants you pointed out last week etc, and then you MUST build them back up and show them what they are doing right, and the one thing I have always noticed (however, not military) is if you give them a handshake after inspection they will feel more like a human, and be willing to make you happy in the future.  again to throw cadets out of their comfort zone is HIGHLY effective motivator to not "mess up again"  the ideas and are endless just let your mind travel and stop trying to DISCIPLINE and start MOTIVATING!!!
"All of the true things that I am about to tell you are shameless lies"

Book of Bokonon
Chapter 4

flyguy06

Ok. if you have a Squadron of 20 or 30 cadets you could discipline one or two . But when you have a Squadron of 5 or 10 cadets. If you discpline to harshly they will leave.

If I demote a cadet or forbid him from an activity, he will just stop comming to meeting. If I had 20 cadets it wouldnt matter but since I have 7 cadets, that would make a significant impact.

We dont have a cadet staff.

And again, when I say punishment I amnot talking about the lengths that you are. I am talking moreso about on the spot corrections.

IceNine

one flaw in the previous argument "it wouldn't matter" everytime a member leaves it matters, regardless of wheter or not they are the best or the brightest, we have an opportunity to shape lives, and create leaders in some of the most unusual circumstances.  Some cadets come to us from private schools, and were raised by a Retired Marine General.  Others come to us from the the most povern stricken, dangerous societies on the planet.  All come to us for relief, and to help fulfil Maslow's triangle.  we have a chance with these young people to shape the rest of their lives, and just like anything else that has the potential to make your life better (school, work, military, YMCA) whatever there are rules that are enforced and they need to be taught that just because they are disciplined does not mean that they are not wanted or needed, and that regardless they still have the potential to be great in their own way.  I know all this sounds a little hopelessly romantic but thats just the way it is/should be.  We have to keep our heads held high despite the trials we will face and as long as we can present the illusion of seamless command we will be influencing these cadets through out actions and eventually words are considerably less effective than your eyes telling a cadet you are disappointed when you are talking to them.  It takes a lot of work to get to that point but it can be done.

Semper Gumby!!!
"All of the true things that I am about to tell you are shameless lies"

Book of Bokonon
Chapter 4

ZigZag911

Lt Hendricks hits the nail on the head: involve parents & the squadron commander in serious situations.

Motivate as far as possible.

Make punishment when required quick, related to the infraction -- and have a policy that the slate gets wiped clean....no throwing it in their faces forever afterwards.

My own practice is to quote Michael Corleone to them (As group CC I did it to squadron CCs on occasion, too!): "This isn't personal, it's business!"

As much as I sympathize with your situation, Flyguy, having lived through a squadron that simply would not grow & stabilize about 20 years ago, let me share this from my experience: unless you have clear, fair standards and expectations, you'll never get beyond a handful of cadets.

Also, it's fine not having a 'staff' if they are too inexperienced & junior....but start giving them, especially those that show promise, leadership opportunities as soon as possible, with in the limits of their abilities...taking turns forming the flight,  leading an opening ceremony, practicing facing movements, checking each other's uniforms (a 'pre-inspection').

The sooner you get them used to shallow water, the quicker they'll be ready for the deep end!

IceNine

bingo!  Its all about giving the cadets just enough rope to survive when they try hang themselves.  And it is ok to totally Alpha Foxtrot Uniform a task every now and then but if cadets "fail" all the time they will learn nothing just as if they "succeed" all the time.  This program is all about limbo, there is a point where every Airman Smith can go under the bar and there is a point where even General So and So cannot succeed so make the program just hard enough on important stuff where they can totally screw it up but still complete the objective and on less important stuff make it hard enough to where they will no succeed any you will see a vast improvement in even the chief "non-hackers" in your unit.
"All of the true things that I am about to tell you are shameless lies"

Book of Bokonon
Chapter 4

flyguy06

The original question was what is my definition of cadet run. My answer was a program where cadets lead other cadets with Senior member oversight.


I further stated that I believe there was nothing wrong with push ups and similar things as a form of correction.