AFIADL 00013

davedove · January 23, 2007, 08:56:52 PM

Can any of you give any suggestions on ways to inspire folks into taking the AFIADL 00013 course? I don't understand what the big deal is. You just study the material and take a little test. I'm currently taking the course myself.

However, if there is one stumbling block in the my squadron's PD program it's the completion of this course, and I've heard that's common. All of our 1st Lt's still need to take this course. For about half of them, if they completed it they would be immediately eligible for promotion to Captain as they have satisfied all the other requirements.

Monty · January 23, 2007, 09:19:09 PM

Well, there are two lines of thought; the regular way and the road less traveled.

The regular way that the majority of seniors complete CAPSOC is memorize the end-of-chapter questions.
---I can spot these folks a mile away

The other way is to actually learn the material and attempt to integrate what you've leaned (usually with some help of copied notes) into what you are doing in CAP (and maybe life also.)
---These are as common as a blue moon

I know what my mentor expected of me when I took this (and I had one HECKUVA CAP mentor.)

Shoot for the latter!

If you and your comrades try the latter, especially together, you might find yourselves becoming "checks and balances" on the other, so as to reinforce the material.

shorning · January 23, 2007, 09:23:46 PM

I know it sounds obvious, but have you asked them why they don't want to take the course? Perhaps there is some misconception about the course. Perhaps they see it as a waste of time. Perhaps they don't see how they could apply it to the real world. Perhaps they are just busy. Perhaps they aren't interested in promotions.

I dunno. I'm a big fan of any PD/PME courses. I just can't always find the time to fit them in.

SarDragon · January 23, 2007, 10:35:49 PM

I, for one, learn much better in a classroom environment. Correspondence courses in general, and AFIADL 13 specifically, are boring, and I quickly lose interest. With little interest, I don't retain the material. Another factor was the repetition of material from other times and places. Had it all been new, I think it would have gone better.

DNall · January 23, 2007, 11:22:58 PM

Quote from: shorning on January 23, 2007, 09:23:46 PM
I know it sounds obvious, but have you asked them why they don't want to take the course? Perhaps there is some misconception about the course. Perhaps they see it as a waste of time. Perhaps they don't see how they could apply it to the real world. Perhaps they are just busy. Perhaps they aren't interested in promotions.

I dunno. I'm a big fan of any PD/PME courses. I just can't always find the time to fit them in.

Speak of, how's SOS goin sir?

IIRC I took mine pretty quick after getting in. Stayed pretty busy with one thing after another alternating between PD or spec track or ES. Didn't have time to stop & think about getting lazy. I actually learned the material, multi-color highlighters & all. Didn't bother with the review questions. Didn't know they were the same till you guys were talking about it. Best thing I can recommend is get a group of people to enroll at the same time & work it together, maybe even get a more experienced member to review it & teach it as a class. Some of it's a little dry - linebacker II & all, but I liked the comm stuff alright. I can't remember think any of it was a challenge & I was maybe 19 at the time. It's not remotely scary. Just spend some time & do it. Hell, burn a weekend & be done with it.

shorning · January 23, 2007, 11:40:59 PM

Quote from: DNall on January 23, 2007, 11:22:58 PM
Speak of, how's SOS goin sir?

Never have taken SOS. No time for a third tier of PME right now.

DNall · January 23, 2007, 11:49:23 PM

Sorry bout that, thought you'd said a couple months back you were taking in just to see the funny looks having it on the wall. My bad.

O-Rex · January 24, 2007, 01:54:52 AM

Some of my compatriots and I took SOS and ACSC with the intent of getting exposure to at least some of the knowledgebase that a USAF Captain/Major would have (checking the boxes for Levels III & IV was a plus.)

The idea that members don't care to learn the history or fundamentals of their organization (and their sponsor) is beyond me.

I remember a Squadron Commander who after a year of command, lobbied his Group Commander for promotion to Captain. The Group CC agreed on the condition that the Sqdn CC complete ECI-13 (also adding that the promotion was solely at his discretion, which is true.) The Sqdn CC refused to take the course, did an "end-run" around the Gp CC directly to Wing, and wangled the promotion anyway. That was an obvious chain of dysfunctional events, the heart of which was a guy who had no desire to learn about the organization that he supposedly helped lead. This guy was a Cadet Sqdn CC: how could he motivate cadets to progress in the program when his own membership development was stuck in 2nd gear??

Food for thought: if you had to send a handful of Seniors to actively participate in some kind of USAF leadership symposium, who would you send? Who would you NOT send? Which of the preceding categories has more people??

While it's true that in CAP rank and position are often disjointed, progressing through the PD program (and the rank that comes with it) indicates a committment to learning and teaching the workings of the organization. Folks need to round out their membership, as it lends more credibility when members try to communicate across CAP functional lines: a CAP Major might carry a bit more leverage when speaking to a group (CAP, Military or Civilian) than a 2nd Lt. would.

RiverAux · January 25, 2007, 03:58:31 AM

Probably the best thing they could do is actually re-write the texts and hire a professional to design the test questions.

I can honestly say that this was absolutely the worst thing I've ever read and the questions were horrible. I have a very hard time generating any enthusiasm to get other members to take it when my experience was so bad.

SAR-EMT1 · January 25, 2007, 08:32:44 AM

I had a retired command E-9 refuse to take the test for several months...he couldnt believe we were so backwards to have such a screwed up exam...he demanded we get him the corrected course/test. HE ended up taking it but has sworn off all other CAP type tests. He has all his NCO schools so his PME is done. He thought SLS was a joke too. But then again so did I.
That said, my SLS had over a dozen folks who had signed a check within a week of attending so for them I can imagine it had value.

Major_Chuck · January 25, 2007, 01:09:38 PM

I took the course way back in the early 90's and thought it was one of THE WORST courses I was ever subjected to. (And I've taken many military and civilian courses).

floridacyclist · January 25, 2007, 02:00:15 PM

I never took the course, just the test itself. Still not sure how some of those questions were relevant to CAP, but I guess I'll have to take their word for it.

DNall · January 25, 2007, 02:10:08 PM

It isn't HORRIBLE. It needs work for sure, and lots of it, but you need to get that basic comm stuff across. AFIADL13, SLS, & Lvl I combined are the equiv material of about a third to half the pre-course modules you're supposed to do BEFORE showing up to real OTS. RSC covers much of the same stuff from OTS. Just for frame of refrence.

I just project officer'd a SLS/CLC this past wknd & it was pretty good. Yeah most of the SLS students (19) were within 6-8 months in, some 1LTs. Everything we do locally though is enhanced from what natioanl requires. If you run their slides & literature, yeah it would suck bad. SLS does belong in Lvl I though FOR SURE! The CLC class I think got less out of it. People seem to take SLS pronto, but don't get to CLC till they have to, so there's a pretty good gap there & most of the sudents are beyond the material by then.

We all know new SLS/CLC material is coming out & that they are trying to incorporate teh material from AFIADL 13 into both Lvl 1 & SLS so the course can go away. I think that's fine, but I'd like to keep a DL course there & enhance the content to cover that aformentioned gap in development, and put some real strong practical leadership/mgmt material in it.

RiverAux · January 25, 2007, 11:36:46 PM

QuoteIt isn't HORRIBLE. It needs work for sure, and lots of it, but you need to get that basic comm stuff across.

I don't think anyone was commenting on the subject matter. It was just the way it was presented that was horrible.

SAR-EMT1 · January 26, 2007, 01:16:03 AM

Quote from: DNall on January 25, 2007, 02:10:08 PM

We all know new SLS/CLC material is coming out & that they are trying to incorporate teh material from AFIADL 13 into both Lvl 1 & SLS so the course can go away. I think that's fine, but I'd like to keep a DL course there & enhance the content to cover that aformentioned gap in development, and put some real strong practical leadership/mgmt material in it.

I once heard that AFIADL had once considered a DL version of ASBC.
However, when I asked one of the ILWG's Res. Assistance Officers about it, he had no idea what ASBC was and for all practical purposes thought i was full of warm brown organic matter. $:-\$

arajca · January 26, 2007, 02:05:34 AM

The first two/three part of SOS DL cover the materail from ASBC. Or so I've been told.

O-Rex · January 26, 2007, 02:28:25 AM

ASBC is designed to be a resident course and ALL new 2nd Lt's attend regardless of component, so a correspondence version really isn't needed.

ASBC was still in its infancy when I took SOS: at that time, there were still entry-level officer curriculum modules like "Officership and The Profession of Arms" (which is a bit redundant, because AFROTC and OTS covers the material anyway.)

Pretty soon, all USAF 1st Lt's/Capt's will have taken ASBC (priors who haven't will by then have moved on to Maj, or left the service) so SOS's curriculum focus will shift a bit, and probably won't include some of the USAF-101 courses.

AWC was recently overhauled, with a more intensive writing requirement. I wouldn't be surprised of ACSC follows suit.

SAR-EMT1 · January 26, 2007, 03:41:46 AM

OK, but the question remains: WHEN (hopefully not IF) the 00013 gets absorbed into SLS / OTS we still need an entry-level PME course.

So if its not ASBC what could we use? Although I HATE the "INC" that is CAP Ill go on a limb and ask this: could NHQ or AU fund a management/ leadership CERTIFICATE -through an online college perhaps- or CCAF or AFIADL... certificate being the level below associates degree

arajca · January 26, 2007, 05:08:25 AM

The commander of AU (or AETC?) has offered assistance to help CAP develop professional education courses (no TDY monies, though). Why hasn't NHQ taken them up on this offer? Or have they and just didn't tell the rank and file members?

DNall · January 28, 2007, 12:56:19 PM

Quote from: arajca on January 26, 2007, 02:05:34 AM
The first two/three part of SOS DL cover the materail from ASBC. Or so I've been told.

First 2 parts: Profession of Armns & Military studies. Doesn't include AF-101 aspects at all. Remember a lot of non-AF people (other services, civilians, contractors, foreign officers) take the SOS correspondence course also.
ASBC has some other critical material. The point of that course is for NEW officers to convert the theory they just learned in their commissioning program to practical field leadership skills w/ a mission centric attitude. It's assumed that's worked itself out by the time you reach Captain so that just hit the major academic toipics.

The in-res SOS course adds a significant practical portion. It covers dealing with the media & requires actually doing briefings, highlights a few other major extra duty job fields all officers should understand, again in that individually evaluated hands-on way. Basically what our SLS should be. And, during thsi whole process you're being watched like a hawk to see who should be plucked & groomed for command versus people that have just been getting by on the hype.

Far as an entry level PME, some of us here have been working the idea in the background of a CAP specific Officer Basic Course for Lts. The idea being like that of ASBC that turns theory to practical & lights the fire on mission-first, executing 10 priciples of leadership, etc. The idea was to make this also serve as the transition course for military officers coming over in grade, people like doctors taking advanced promotions but locked to a non-line career field (CFII would sitll do the regular entry level OTS like everyone else before being bumped up in grade, then would do this course), and for Reserve personnel coming over to work w/ CAP (ECI13 was once used for that purpose).

Quote from: arajca on January 26, 2007, 05:08:25 AM
The commander of AU (or AETC?) has offered assistance to help CAP develop professional education courses (no TDY monies, though). Why hasn't NHQ taken them up on this offer? Or have they and just didn't tell the rank and file members?

AU. Made a special effort to deliver the message too. A lot of the OTS & OBC concepts we're working lean heavily on that offer. I'd be willing to spend within reason from the CAP budget to cover the low personnel costs that may be incurred.