Hazing

Started by flyguy06, December 22, 2007, 02:50:00 PM

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

flyguy06

Quote from: BillB on December 23, 2007, 11:44:03 PM
Hazing and making a cadet drop for pushups are part of CPPT. However, CPPT doesn't apply to the large majority of cadets, in fact they are not required to take CPP training until they are 18. As often mentioned by cadets, teenagers join CAP for the military aspect not found in Scouting. I also agree that making a Cadet Airman drop and do pushups does not really have a place at Squadron meetings. But an Encampment is a different animal. There, it's very military and doing the pushups has been in the cadet program since the 1940's. On average, most cadets do not mind doing the punishment, the only ones horrified by the idea are seniors with little experience in the Cadet Program.

I wish you could come to my squadron wher etalking nice and aaking cadets to do something doesnt always work the way you think it does. Again, it goes back to the background of the cadets and the community you serve.

BlackKnight

Quote from: flyguy06 on December 22, 2007, 02:50:00 PM
I dont think there was anything wrong with push ups if administered properly.I dontthink there is anything wrong with yelling if administered properly. The problem is we as Senior Member cadet leaders have failed in directing our senior cadet staff. We just give them the ball and let them run with it without giving them guidence.

As a DCC, I find yelling and physical punishment of cadets to be an inefficient means of discipline.  It works, but I believe there are better methods. We teach our cadet officers and NCOs to develop "command presence" such that they rarely have to raise their voices.  Except when working with the newest cadet basics, I can usually enforce discipline with a directed glance without having to say a word.  So can my cadet officers.   It takes a lot more time and effort to develop this command environment but I believe the results are well worth it.  It sets the cadet corps up for the "laisse-faire" leadership environment where everyone is competent in their jobs and can be depended upon to execute their tasks without step by step direction. When I observe something that needs correction I mention it to the cadet commander and it gets addressed.  I council our senior staff that we're the CAP, not the "See Cadets".  [As in "I see a cadet and I'm going to discipline them"].

We have a training flight for the cadet basics.  We use a bit more "noise" with them to help build esprit de corps.  We've never had to resort to physical punishment, although there are times when a cadet may be asked to do some additional drill practice, accompanied by his element leader or flight sergeant. On occasion I've taken cadet basics aside and offered them the choice of complying with CAP customs and courtesies or turning in their uniform and going home.  In nearly every case those cadets changed their attitude and became some of our most reliable and courteous members.
Phil Boylan, Maj, CAP
DCS, Rome Composite Sqdn - GA043
http://www.romecap.org/

BlackKnight

Quote from: BillB on December 23, 2007, 11:44:03 PM
...However, CPPT doesn't apply to the large majority of cadets, in fact they are not required to take CPP training until they are 18.

I've wondered why CPPT is required only for members over 18.  Perhaps it's a legal complication- agreements being unenforcable on minors, etc.  Or perhaps it's that CAP doesn't have the inclination to develop appropriate age-based variants of CPPT. 

I cover the Cadet Protection rules with all our cadets heading off to encampment for the first time, regardless of age.  I explain to them that most of the staff at the encampment are "learning" too.  They're learning leadership, and they will sometimes make mistakes and overstep the limits.   I explain that as cadet doolies it's important they know what those limits are.  That way, they remain mentally "in control" because the ultimate decision to file a complaint rests with them.   Human nature being what it is, they can take a lot more "abuse" and enjoy encampment a lot more (from day one) because they know there are procedures available to protect them if they decide they have to use them.
Phil Boylan, Maj, CAP
DCS, Rome Composite Sqdn - GA043
http://www.romecap.org/

flyguy06

Quote from: BlackKnight on December 24, 2007, 05:17:31 PM
Quote from: flyguy06 on December 22, 2007, 02:50:00 PM
I dont think there was anything wrong with push ups if administered properly.I dontthink there is anything wrong with yelling if administered properly. The problem is we as Senior Member cadet leaders have failed in directing our senior cadet staff. We just give them the ball and let them run with it without giving them guidence.

As a DCC, I find yelling and physical punishment of cadets to be an inefficient means of discipline.  It works, but I believe there are better methods. We teach our cadet officers and NCOs to develop "command presence" such that they rarely have to raise their voices.  Except when working with the newest cadet basics, I can usually enforce discipline with a directed glance without having to say a word.  So can my cadet officers.   It takes a lot more time and effort to develop this command environment but I believe the results are well worth it.  It sets the cadet corps up for the "laisse-faire" leadership environment where everyone is competent in their jobs and can be depended upon to execute their tasks without step by step direction. When I observe something that needs correction I mention it to the cadet commander and it gets addressed.  I council our senior staff that we're the CAP, not the "See Cadets".  [As in "I see a cadet and I'm going to discipline them"].

We have a training flight for the cadet basics.  We use a bit more "noise" with them to help build esprit de corps.  We've never had to resort to physical punishment, although there are times when a cadet may be asked to do some additional drill practice, accompanied by his element leader or flight sergeant. On occasion I've taken cadet basics aside and offered them the choice of complying with CAP customs and courtesies or turning in their uniform and going home.  In nearly every case those cadets changed their attitude and became some of our most reliable and courteous members.


I understand but its a little different working with cadets in the inner city where verbal words have very little meaning. The cadets dont mean to be insulent. Its just the background they are accustomed to. Its all good though.

Discipline worked for me and  think I turned out alright. But we will always follow the rules and regs (until they change)  ;D

DNall

This is going to take a minute, plz just stick with me. I want you to look at things from another perspective...

CAP exists because the AF funds & supports it. It cannot exist in any form without that support. They do not decide to take those needed taxpayer funds away from legitimate military needs & give them to CAP because it's a nice community service program. They do so for real & meaningful mission objectives. They expect to get their money's worth & will make funding decisions based on the results.

The cadet program was founded to prepare teens to enter the AAF, specifically by growing the pool of qualified candidates they could draw from. It exists today for the same reason. CAP sends more individuals (per capita of our program size) to service academies & the military in general than any other organizaiton in the US. If it did not deliver such numbers of highly qualified people to the military, it would not be supported & would be shut down.

AE supports two AF objectives. When directed at cadets & externally to other kids, it produces aerospace minded individuals inspired to seek a career in military aviation. When directed at adults, both internally & externally, it produces aerospace minded taxpayers more supportive of AF budgets & more free to say so at the gressroots level than anyone in the military is.

And ES exists because it saves the govt money to task those missions to CAP rather than fund the same resources & training to each individual state. That cost savings over CAP's history adds up to enough to pay for the entire F22 program from R&D to purchase of the planned final airframe. That's the only reason CAP does ES, and if it ever is not the case (due to offset DHS funding & mission shift) then it will go away.

To the AF & Congress, CAP is all about a cost benefit analysis. They don't give one crap why you volunteer, that you think you're doing some good, or what you say your objectives are or are not. They allow CAP to exist, and have allowed it for 60-odd years, because they are getting something out of it. That, and not how CAP describes itself or what it sets into policy, is ultimately our real mission & the sole determiner of our support & survival.


I just want you to keep that in mind when you say we are not training people to be in the military. You're right, we're not training people to go into combat. But, we will take them into the field where real lives depend on performing with the same teamwork, character, discipline, attention to detail, situational awareness, and professionalism that are required in combat. We are teaching them those same basic military skills that will one day serve them in the military. If they choose not to serve in that capacity, then those same skills will be of equal benefit on another career path too, but that's not why the program is here. We don't force or pressure people into the military. We give them an opportunity to be part of a military program & gain the tools they need to be successful in life.

Hazing has absolutely no place in that process. But, any discipline measure can be hazing or can be highly constructive depending on how it's used. Taking the one tool out of the box doesn't reduce hazing, it just takes away a tool to reach different personalities. I'd actually argue that it makes it harder to spot hazing & correct the leader before the situation gets out of hand.

Not having the training is not an adequate excuse. I don't need to drop a cadet to succeed, and he doesn't need to be dropped to succeed, but not having the leadership training that'd make it an acceptable practice sets too many of our members up for failure. I believe that leadership failure results in cadets we don't reach & lose to attrition, and to more hazing that goes on under our noses. I don't think we're really doing justice to our people right now, and that's one of the biggest things I'd like to see changed about CAP.

ZigZag911

Quote from: flyguy06 on December 24, 2007, 12:39:23 AM
I wish you could come to my squadron wher etalking nice and aaking cadets to do something doesnt always work the way you think it does. Again, it goes back to the background of the cadets and the community you serve.

It is possible to be stern, blunt, and effective without raising one's voice or engaging in verbal abuse.

Sometimes cadets need to be chastised or corrected regarding their behavior.

The focus should always be on the action.

Consequences should be clear.

Don't make empty threats.

In fact, don't make any threats....make simple statements of "cause and effect".

Then apply the standards fairly and without favoritism.

Finally, the squadron  commander and the squadron senior staff need to set unit disciplinary policy within the parameters of CAP regulations.

Then the DCC and cadet staff need to develop a  plan for applying the policy, securing the unit commander's approval before putting it into effect.

Eclipse

Quote from: ZigZag911 on December 27, 2007, 03:27:52 AM
It is possible to be stern, blunt, and effective without raising one's voice or engaging in verbal abuse.

Sometimes cadets need to be chastised or corrected regarding their behavior.

The focus should always be on the action.

Consequences should be clear.

Don't make empty threats.

In fact, don't make any threats....make simple statements of "cause and effect".

Then apply the standards fairly and without favoritism.

A great primer on dealing with cadets, and one's children as well.  I've found that yelling simply escalates the volume level and tension, while rarely achieving one's ultimate goal.

A direct look in the eye with the consequence bad behavior is all you generally need, but you also have to follow through (at least most of the time), or they will learn you are a paper tiger.

"That Others May Zoom"

RiverAux

QuoteCAP sends more individuals (per capita of our program size) to service academies & the military in general than any other organizaiton in the US.
Source citation please....

mikeylikey

Quote from: RiverAux on December 27, 2007, 03:52:58 AM
QuoteCAP sends more individuals (per capita of our program size) to service academies & the military in general than any other organization in the US.
Source citation please....

Actually the JROTC programs do.  You can go to each Academies website and see statistics for each class in attendance. 

PLUS what makes sending Cadets to the Academies so great?  I would bet that CAP sends more Cadets to College ROTC programs than the Academies. 

If you said more Cap Cadets become military Officers than anyother Cadet organization, I may believe you.
What's up monkeys?

dwb

I think CAP's hazing policies remove options from the "leadership toolbox" that aren't terribly effective anyway.  Even without CAP's hazing policies, hazing doesn't have a place in the organization, given its goals, core values, and membership pool.

IMO, most often, people who gripe about hazing are doing one of two things: 1. trying to make the organization something it isn't, or 2. frustrated because they can't find the right approach to motivating a difficult cadet.

The people who have misconceptions over what the CAP cadet program is (and therefore is not) are often difficult to convert.  This isn't the Young Marines, it's not Scared Straight, it isn't even a Boot Camp Prep School.

I know how it can be to work with difficult cadets.  I'm not so old that I don't remember being a cadet NCO or junior cadet officer, working one-on-one with cadets that aren't "getting it".  And, as tempting as it can be to drop someone for push-ups just to shut them up for a little while, or loudly chew them out in front of their peers, it's ultimately not useful.

That being said, I do have a problem on occasion with the interpretation of the hazing/abuse policies.

People who say "well, you can call anything hazing" are mistaken, plain and simple.  They join the crowd that says "you can't punish anyone for anything", which is also incorrect.  Those attitudes are counterproductive because they result in a watering down of the cadet experience.

SamFranklin

^ Helpful and wise advice from a grownup. Thanks.

mikeylikey

What's up monkeys?

Briski

Forget makin' cadets do pushups for punishment, there are some senior members I'd like to smoke...
JACKIE M. BRISKI, Capt, CAP
VAWG Cadet Programs Team

...not all those who wander are lost...

Eeyore


Dragoon

I will always obey CAP rules.  However, I believe that appropriately applied, mild physical punishment (like 10 pushups for an inspection violation or failure to salute) isn't particularly humiliating and is extremely good at getting a young person's undivided attention, which enhances learning.

Personally, I'm more concerned with someone being personally demeaning in public - not in a funny way like calling you a "maggot" but in a personally way like insulting your intelligence, competence, or perhaps parents in front of your peers - than I am about knocking out a quick 20 in a parking lot.

Whenever I got dropped as a cadet, I knew it wasn't personal - I'd done something wrong.  And within the hour, someone else was going be be dropped.  So it was hard to feel singled out.

And, as others have pointed out, I'd rather do a few pushups than have someone skip straight to written counseling or demotion/2B, which seems to happen all too often today.

Of course, there's always the worry about a lawsuit in today's world where "emotional damages" can result in $$$$, so we probably made the right corporate choice by banning anything the least bit stressful.

(and yeah, I recognize I'm a dinosaur.  Sorry for being old.  It WILL happen to you, too!  :))

mikeylikey

^ The only thing wrong with that is there are people that will abuse that, have abused that and that is the reason it is no longer allowed. 

I am all for physical fitness to include PU's.  In ROTC Land I will drop cadets to get their attention.  IF they are disruptive during class I have no problem doing that.  BUT in CAP, I would never dream of doing that.  My ROTC Cadets are adults, where as my CAP cadets are Children.  Big difference!
What's up monkeys?

Dragoon

#36
And yet, speaking as a parent.  It seems it's the younger ones that often need the more direct methods of discipline - they simply don't have the reasoning skills yet to respond to truly understand why their behavior is unacceptable,  but they DO get "if I do this I'm gonna get in trouble."

The older my kids get, the less often I have to even raise my voice. 

But yeah, I only got dropped about twice in ROTC. But each time it had the desired effect....

I've always assumed that it was abuse of the pushup in CAP that killed it. But in discussions with National folks, I've yet to uncover a single lawsuit related to pushups in CAP.  If there was so much abuse, you'd think somebody would have taken us to court about it.

I think we just adopted the kindler gentler approach because the general culture was heading that way, and many of our new senior members in the 80s had no prior military experience.  So military style discipline was a bit foreign to them.

JayT

Quote from: Dragoon on January 03, 2008, 08:40:14 PM
I've always assumed that it was abuse of the pushup in CAP that killed it. But in discussions with National folks, I've yet to uncover a single lawsuit related to pushups in CAP.  If there was so much abuse, you'd think somebody would have taken us to court about it.

I think we just adopted the kindler gentler approach because the general culture was heading that way, and many of our new senior members in the 80s had no prior military experience.  So military style discipline was a bit foreign to them.

If you were getting shot at, would you wait until you got hit to duck?
"Eagerness and thrill seeking in others' misery is psychologically corrosive, and is also rampant in EMS. It's a natural danger of the job. It will be something to keep under control, something to fight against."

Nathan

Quote from: dwb on December 27, 2007, 06:27:17 PM
IMO, most often, people who gripe about hazing are doing one of two things: 1. trying to make the organization something it isn't, or 2. frustrated because they can't find the right approach to motivating a difficult cadet.

1. Of course we are trying to make the organization into something it isn't. You can't make an organization into something it already is. ;D We have a problem with the way the program is now, and wish to change it.

2. True. And the way we deal we deal with difficult cadets now rarely works, at least in my opinion.

The problem is that the way we deal with difficult cadets now has not shown promising results, and rather seems to just show the cadets that we can't control them. CAP seems to, instead of trying to fix "broken" people to instead shove them out in a gentle way or a 2b. So when we come across one of those cadets that doesn't respond to the treatment outside of hazing definitions, then they either leave on their own accord, or they are 2b'd out of the program. Those are our options.

I'm not saying that we need to break cadets down Marine-style into their most animalistic state and then rebuild them. We aren't trying to create soldiers. But we are trying to create disciplined citizens who work well under stress and are capable of serving their community with an inner strength they didn't know they had. That doesn't sound a whole lot different than the goal of military basic training, and push-ups work out great for them.

I don't know if anyone actually read my earlier post in this thread, but I mentioned that our ideas of mentoring cadets only works on those who respond to that sort of treatment. Cadets are VERY different. I'm not saying throw the mentoring out completely. I'm a big fan of it, and even if push-ups were allowed, I would most likely never make use of them and let someone else do it. But, at least in my eyes, push-ups are effective in that they show real consequence to actions rather than us just wagging our finger and asking them not to do it again. Ten push-ups will not kill them, nor will fifty spread out through the day. But they learn that the more attention they pay to detail, the less push-ups they do. Kind of like in the real world. And in this case, push-ups are far kinder than what they can expect to get for screwing up in real life.

Mentoring ONLY works if you have some way to back it up. Really. You can't tell someone that what they're doing is wrong if you can't show them that any negative outcome results from their action. Push-ups are very, very trivial, but the cadets get the idea that they did something wrong, now they are dong a quick punishment for it that they won't even feel in two minutes, and then they go on about fixing their punishments. People say push-ups are ineffective, but I would love to see the documentation on that, considering that CAP hasn't recently allowed push-ups to be field tested for effectiveness.

JMHO
Nathan Scalia

The post beneath this one is a lie.

BillB

I joined the cadet program when it was totally military. (mid 1940's) The Air Force supported the cadet program as an introduction to military life and hopefully enlistment in the Air Force. In the 21st century, that program no longer would be applicable to the kinds of 12-16 year olds that join CAP. By the same token, the watering down of the military style training the modern cadet gets doesn't show good results. If you got 200 cadets together and asked would they want more military style discipline, you probably would get 150 say yes (this was done at an encampment four years ago and the results were approximately as given here as an example)
Many cadets fail to renew or drop out due to the lack of military training allowed under CPPT. (exit interviews cofirmed this) I'm not talking about Rambo type military training, but rather strict military standards. CAP has gone to the extreme of CPPT for fear of legal action. Somewhere there has to be a middle road. One possible answer is a National Committee of former cadets from several different periods of CAP history. In otherwords cadets from the 1950's, 60, 80's etc. And at the same time include current cadet officers (Earhart and Spaatz) Find what worked and see if it would apply to the modern era cadet program. With retention rates hovering at 50%, it's obvious that to the teenagers, CAP doesn't measure up to their expectations.
Gil Robb Wilson # 19
Gil Robb Wilson # 104