Additional Level V requirement -- research paper

[RiverAux]

Theres several ways it could be done from allowing each student to write about whatever strikes their fancy, to picking a small number of general topics from which the members would need to choose (and with each writing about their own take on that subject), to providing a suggested topic list but still allowing the students to write about something else if they'd like. 

However, to be really useful, I would think the papers would need to be relatively specific.  For example, asking participants to write a paper on something as broad as "the future of CAP" wouldn't be very good.  However getting it down to something like "the future of CAP's ground team program" or "Aerospace Education in the Cadet Program" as either an assigned or suggested topic would probably produce something fairly detailed. 

[Ricochet13]

There's that volunteer as a crutch thing again. I freakin hate that! AWC requires exactly such a  paper, which is done by correspondence while working full-time, possibly even deployed. For Guard/Reserve, they do that around their full-time civilian jobs, lives, and family concerns. The other services do the same. In fact, the Army does this to a much greater extent. I realize you are a volunteer & they get paid a little bit for their work, but do you realize they have the same or greater demands on their time/lives/jobs/etc as you do, quite a bit more in the reserve components. It's a matter of commitment to the organization & a desire to improve one's self & advance within that organization that make the difference. Never is it a case of pay or time available.

Been there, done that, will continue to be committed, but I "freakin' hate"    the idea of performing busy work because someone simply thinks there ought to be another requirement or hoop to jump through. 

The point of caution here is that time taken to prepare a paper as a requirement for NSC will take time away from other things, including time spent on CAP projects and activities.  If it were to be added — make it something worthwhile to do.

Now, getting past that issue, several posts have suggested positive and negative outcomes of such a requirement.  Are there others?   Let's hear from some more people and see if there is support for a "meaningful" requirements and the administrative structure which would have to be put in place to support this.

RiverAux has suggested somethings which could, and I emphasize "could" have a positive impact on the organization for which we spend much time , effort, and money.  Worth more discussion I think.   

[RiverAux]

I don't see the need for any additional "infrastructure" beyond designating an "editor" and some reviewers among the NSC staff and perhaps elsewhere in CAP who would be responsibile for working on the documents after submission and getting them in shape for distribution. 

[Al Sayre]

Remember,  many of our senior CAP folks haven't been in college for years, and some not at all.  If you are going to expect them to write a college level thesis paper, you are going to need to issue a pamphlet or writers guide with format instructions, how to do footnotes, bibliography, suggested length etc.  I can tell you that the writing standards changed between my 1st time at college in 1978 and when I went back in 1997, and again since my wife went back in 2005.  The other problem I forsee is that many people will see this as an insurmountable barrier and just not bother to progress (like a lot of folks do with ECI-13 unfortunately).

[jimmydeanno]

COS students get a copy of The Toungue and Quill, which coincidentally is also available on cap.gov.  Writer's guide, check.

[Al Sayre]

Handing someone who hasn't written a technical paper in 20 or 30 years a 383 page book on writing isn't going to do a lot for their self confidence.  I like the Tongue and Quill, but you also need the AU Style guide to go with it.
 
I'm thinking of a more concise "Here's what you need to know to write the paper". 
Things like:
How long should the paper be?
Minimum number of references?
Is this an opinion paper or a formal thesis?
Here are a few examples of well written papers.

As an Engineer, I write reports and position papers all the time.  Banging out 20 pages is no big deal to me.  Others I know would freak if they had to write a simple two or three page thesis.  Throw in a requirement for footnotes and a bibliography and they will just say "screw it".  I'm simply afraid that this would not serve any good purpose other than to place a fairly high hurdle at the end of the professional development program that would discourage a lot of people from participating.  Are we interested in getting a useful product or testing peoples writing ability?  Anyone with a two-year-college degree should have already passed the writing test. 

If you want something useful to CAP, then I think a collaborative project is the way to go.  Rather than fifty individuals attempting to display their writing prowess, have ten groups work on five different problems and see what they can come up with.   
     
YMMV

[jeders]

Having just finished writting defending and rewriting a 240 page thesis (most of which was appendices) I hate the idea of writting more research papers. That being said, I think that this is a good idea. The purpose of it shouldn't be to showcase your writting ability, but rather your research and analytical thinking abilities. There should be editors to handle the grammar. Personally, I'd be a lot more willing to put a little blind faith in higher ups if I new that they had to pass something that really tested their ability to do research and to reason something out and then come out with a good position on it based on that research. Hopefully it would lead to fewer changes in regs that come about "just because."

However, I wouldn't make it a part of NSC or RSC. I would make it a separate requirement, and here's my reasoning. First, we make cadets write an essay and present it in order to get two of their achievements. This isn't because we're testing how much they learn in English class, but rather we're testing their ability to do research, think through an issue, and come out with a position. This same line of thinking should be able to carry over to the senior side.

Second, with all of the time constraints that the average CAP SM has going for Level 5, it would be much easier to spread the work out over the course of 6 months to a year, especially when you factor in that they must first do research. Having a set timeframe, lets say 1 year, in which to do research and write the paper with periodic submittals to check your work and make sure you're on track would be best, in my opinion.

So making it be a part of NSC/RSC wouldn't work so well. As far as writting guides and style guides, those are easy to produce. Under my plan, however, there would be some new infrastructure requirements. You would likely have to hire one or two new people at NHQ whose sole job it was to edit and review these papers. Also, you would need a new server to upload the papers to so that national can review them and then send you feedback. But still, these are minor things.

It can work, and I think maybe we should try to do something like this. If NSC is supposed to be for the top leadership of CAP, let's make sure that we have very well qualified leaders.

[RiverAux]

I'm ok with it being a separate requirement from NSC.  The only reason I was linking them was because one of the main things they're supposed to be doing there is discussing high-level issues and I thought the papers would be a good catalyst for these discussions.  But, I'm not married to the idea.  You've explained my reasons for suggesting this better than I did. 

[DNall]

There's that volunteer as a crutch thing again. I freakin hate that! AWC requires exactly such a  paper, which is done by correspondence while working full-time, possibly even deployed. For Guard/Reserve, they do that around their full-time civilian jobs, lives, and family concerns. The other services do the same. In fact, the Army does this to a much greater extent. I realize you are a volunteer & they get paid a little bit for their work, but do you realize they have the same or greater demands on their time/lives/jobs/etc as you do, quite a bit more in the reserve components. It's a matter of commitment to the organization & a desire to improve one's self & advance within that organization that make the difference. Never is it a case of pay or time available.

Been there, done that, will continue to be committed, but I "freakin' hate"    the idea of performing busy work because someone simply thinks there ought to be another requirement or hoop to jump through. 

The point of caution here is that time taken to prepare a paper as a requirement for NSC will take time away from other things, including time spent on CAP projects and activities.  If it were to be added — make it something worthwhile to do.

Now, getting past that issue, several posts have suggested positive and negative outcomes of such a requirement.  Are there others?   Let's hear from some more people and see if there is support for a "meaningful" requirements and the administrative structure which would have to be put in place to support this.

RiverAux has suggested somethings which could, and I emphasize "could" have a positive impact on the organization for which we spend much time , effort, and money.  Worth more discussion I think.   

I don't believe it was suggested as an additional arbitrary hoop, and certainly is in no way busy work.

The point of requirements is two fold. It's a gatekeeper to keep less than capable people from being able to advance, and it's a developmental tool to ensure those that do advance are capable at the next level. NSC is supposed to prepare officers for national staff assignments. Can you really say that every graduate is fully-qualified to serve in that role? Same for RSC at the region level? If not, then they need to be changed, and if that means the courses below need to be changed to develop people adequately, then that sounds pretty good too.

As far as application, I thought that was fairly implied. The point is to develop policy positions & ideas in an academic setting & have those professionally discussed with visibility of good ideas moving on to policy makers. Members don't have input in the organization. Less input that a junior enlisted airman is capable of having in fact. And the decision making levels are more encapsulated with less training or competence than would be standard in a military structure. That's all a bad thing.

Giving members a way to put idea in front of serious discussion with serious people, with decision makers looking at the cream of the crop (both ideas and people) is a great thing. Preparing members for staff roles at Wg/Reg/nat by having them create & pitch ideas or work thru serious issues or future plans of the organization, even in a theoretical sense, is highly appropriate - that's exactly their job as a staff officer. Compounding the best of those ideas into an annual professional journal in magazine format sent out to our adult members is an excellent idea. Fostering discussion of those articles in forums like this or a national professional development site would also be a good way to extend those concepts to the general membership.

I don't think we're talking about a masters thesis level paper here, but certainly a couple three pages of a professional journal kind of thing. I don't think that's an overwhelming requirement.

[Ricochet13]

Now you're talking DNall!   :clap:

Can see many great benefits to this.  But 2-3 pages?  Not sure that's the standard, but I'm sure willing to be convinced.

Seems we have some general consensus about the value such a requirement could have for CAP. 

Still want to hear more, although I can already think of two topics that I would pursue.

[RiverAux]

2-3 pages would be totally inadequate.  Heck, the post that started this thread would be almost a page in length by itself and I certainly wouldn't say it would be worthy of such consideration (as it is now).  I'm looking for serious discussion and analysis, preferably involving gathering some data on at at least a wing or maybe even regional level.  Earlier I had suggested 20-30 pages and I still think that is about right, but could perhaps be talked down to 15, which is about what you would expect out of a lot of college-level papers. 

[DNall]

20 pages is far overboard. Maybe with lots of charts/graphs & including the bibliography. They need to write a professional paper. They need to create and develop an idea, analyze a problem & propose solution(s), etc. They don't need to cure cancer or anything. We had a thread here recently that I think is a good example of the kind of things I'd expect for this.

It was discussion on the make up of our future air fleet, given need for increased sensor payloads over the next 20 years. You could equally talk about sensor packages. You could write a pitch for a funding proposal, develop a concept for a NCSA, reform of our professional development pgm, fix the system by which uniform changes are considered & adopted, etc. There's dozens of threads we've had here on this site that would make great papers.

[DogCollar]

I am going to add my $.02.  The reason I would be resistent to submitting a research paper to Civil Air Patrol has nothing to do with wanting to or not, but has everything to do with what happens to the paper after submission and acceptance.  Does it become the "property' of Civil Air Patrol?  If a paper I submitted contained the outline for a new program or service, or a new methodology of accomplishing an existing purpose, would CAP have to come and request my permission to inact, as the author of the idea?  Intellectual property rights is a tricky cuss to navigate around.  It would need to be spelled out

[DNall]

Are you serious? If you come up with an idea right now why would anyone need your permission to enact it? You'll get cited as the author of the paper & the credit you're due since the citation is linked to the idea, both of which are vastly better that what you get right now. The whole point, other than professional development, is the chance to influence policy and improve the organization on the national scale. Making those contributions where you have the ability to do so is your duty as an officer.

[jeders]

When you right a thesis or dissertation, you are generally given a choice on releasing your work. When I wrote my thesis the choices were, and I'm paraphrasing here;

1. Release to the public completely

2. Release for ressearch purposes only and then release to the public after 1 year

3. Hold for one year while copyrights are secured and then contact after 1 year for further release

The same sort of thing could be done here.

[Ricochet13]

Copyright occurs when a work is fixed in a tangible medium of expression.  Any paper becomes the author's work as 1)  It is not a "work for hire" nor, 2)  part of the expectations of a job description.  If the author wants to further register the copyright, it a very simple process.

Writing a paper for NSC would not involve the document ending up as "corporate property".

[Cecil DP]

There have been several attempts at starting a "Professional" Journal in recent years. Curt LeFond who is now at National Headquarters attempted one about 5 years ago. It went well for a short period and it died for lack of input. How is this one going to be different? 

[DNall]

Because it's driven by a promotion requirement. And because it's a tangible route for common members to put well developed & tested ideas before decision makers to influence policy - mostly the promotion req.

[arajca]

No promotion requires Level V. It's purely an extra step that some members take.

IMHO, it should be a requirement for Lt Col (or a duty perf. promo to Col)

2d Lt -> Level I
1st Lt -> Level II
Capt -> Level III
Maj -> Level IV
Lt Col -> Level V

[RiverAux]

I don't think we would really have the need to have every potential Lt. Col. do one of these sorts of things.  I'm looking more for quality rather than quantity. 

However, I wouldn't have a problem with some other sort of writing assignment for those going for that rank.  Maybe in the 5 page range examining some issue specific to the wing.