CAP Talk

I know we have talked about this before...but it has been a while and it was brought up in the new 60-1 discussion.

I feel we have a problem with what to do with the over 18/under 21 crowd.

The overlap between who is a cadet and who is a senior member often raises a lot of angst and Knuckel-biting with these members.

The problem is that we often make a lot of assumptions when we write regulations or set policy.

The word "cadet" often is attached to a mental picture of a 12-14 year old.  While some of those cadets are legal adults, living on their own, driving cars, working, voting, and generally doing everything that adults do.....and then they go to a CAP activity and they are treated like "children".

I have had a lot of conversations with over 18 cadets who resent being treated like children...but the bottom line is that the regulations are written in such a way that Cadets are in fact children.  Right, wrong or indifferent that is the way things are.

So here is my proposed solution to the problem.

1.  Set a hard and fast age for membership in the cadet program and the senior program.   Elimintate the option area.....so if we set the age at 19 (for instants) all 18 year olds are cadets and all 19 year olds are senior members....no more over lap.

2.  If we set the SM age for anything less than 21....either eliminate the FO ranks or integrate them into the normal progression of the SM program.  This eliminate the stigma of FO's being seen as old cadets or second rate citezens.

I don't know that there's an easy fix, but it is kind of strange when you can have an 18 year old Flight Officer supervising or otherwise responsible for cadets who can be 19 or 20 years old.

Another answer is to reinstate the Officer Training Corp that was in use in the 1950's. Here an OTC member was given what amounted to a transition to Senior membership and included higher level leadership training than offered in the cadet program. The problem with the current 18-21 year olds is they often want to earn Earhart and Spaatz before they join the dark side. So the answer is to join OTC and allow the OTC members to take both Senior and Cadet training. By cadet training I mean allow taking tests etc in the cadet program while also taking level 1 and level 2 Senior training. Transfer to OTC would not be optional at age 18, but manditory so basically it becomes a third level of CAP membership having the advantages of both the cadet program and the senior program.

I believe that somewhere it's stated that for legal/insurance reasons that no one under 21 can hold officer rank.  I don't even know where to look for a cite.

The way it's set up now, I think the two membership classes are set up with distinct purposes.

Cadets who are 12-17 have the same purpose in Civil Air Patrol as the cadets who are 18-20.  They are still developing under the Cadet Program.  While they are adults in the legal sense, they're refining their higher-level leadership skills, maybe striving to finish that Spaatz or Eaker, and beginning to learn upper management stuff - still students. They should still be participating in the five components of the Cadet Program and anything they're contributing back is "gravy".  Think of them like upperclassmen.

Senior members have a very different purpose.  As a senior member, the emphasis is now on your service back to CAP - through ES, through leadership roles, through CP management, through AE - whatever duties the SM picks up.  The role is different.

For those members ages 18-20 who become Senior Members, I think it's very clear that their role has changed.  For those members ages 18-20, I think it's less clear sometimes that their role is still primarily a learning one.  This isn't to say that senior members don't learn and cadets don't "give back" at all - but rather those are the primary purposes of that class of membership.  Each member can make the choice, though, which is the beauty of the current set-up.  At any point during that 18-20 period, they can decide they're done focusing on learning and want to change their focus to primarily giving back.

I love the Officer Training Corp idea.

Great points, Pylon, but I still think that the "higher-level leadership skills" and the "upper management stuff" isn't given enough credit (or sufficiently guided to maturation).  If the Senior Member Program focused more on those skills and knowledge during Levels I and II, I think we'd be better off.   

The problem with older Cadets is that they typically are going to school and working, which doesn't leave a whole lot of time to be as involved in the squadron as we'd like.  Ideally an older Cadet (especially a Cadet Officer) should be holding a staff position (at least as an assistant) in the squadron.   

I believe if Cadet Officers are given responsibility and an opportunity to prove themselves, there would be less frustration. 

Quote from: Psicorp on June 24, 2008, 01:37:45 PM
The problem with older Cadets is that they typically are going to school and working, which doesn't leave a whole lot of time to be as involved in the squadron as we'd like.  Ideally an older Cadet (especially a Cadet Officer) should be holding a staff position (at least as an assistant) in the squadron. 

Ditto on Pylon's comments as well.

I don't really see any issue with the way things are today, assuming a basic level of respect and a real program / plan at the unit.

Our grade structure is wishy enough without bringing in 18 year olds to make things wishy-er.

18 year old Cadets have simple math to do - assuming a similar level of participation, will they get more from CAP as a cadet or  senior member? In my experience, generally its remaining as a cadet - whether its a run at Spaatz, some NCSA, or a leadership position.

As mentioned above, the "perfect storm" is cadets who convert to SM and then go off and have a life, many times away from the unit - so right at a time when they are in CAP transition, they are in life transition as well.  They aren't around as much, so they can't participate in a program that at the same time they don't understand (as well) - add in that older cadets are usually top of the food chain in the CP, and are now likely near the bottom as SM's and you've got real issues.  Add further the attitudes of some SM's who don't respect each other, let alone some "kid who thinks he's gonna tell me what to do..." well, we know where that goes.

We're not going to be able to change the transition issues, but we can change attitudes.

A real simple fix would be;

anyone who is 18 is an Officer (flight officer, or 2nd Lt. etc.)

However, there would be a clause that if you are a cadet and you turn 18 while still attending High School, you stay a cadet until you Graduate.  Just like we had the clause about joining the cadet program (6th grade or 12 years old, which gave us 11 year old cadets). 

It is rather jacked up that we have 18 year old FO's supervising 20 year old Cadets. 

Maybe we should just run the cadet program out to 21 and get rid of FO's altogether.

They just have to make it so that if you want to do adult things and be treated like an adult, you have to stop being a cadet.  No more cadet aircrew, GTL's etc...Those that choose to remain cadets to 21 get treated the same as a -18 cadet.  Make them sign some sort of legal waiver or something as a condition of continued cadet membership.

OTC idea sounds good; there was a version back in the 70s called Senior Transition Program (or possibly Cadet Transition Program); either way, much like the description of OTC (which is a better term!).....also fits with recent adoption of cadet milestone awards as fulfilling some aspects of SM training program.

^ Maybe it would not be a bad idea to end the Cadet program at 18.  I have 4 Cadets that attend meetings regularly in my SQd that joined shortly before their 18th birthday, and are hoping to use CAP as a way into the Service Academies.  I don't agree with that, but I have to follow the rules and let them join.  I have to say though, having a 19 year old go to Encampment this summer seems strange.  The oldest Cadet I have ever had up to this point attend ENC was 17.

I am all for cutting off cadet membership to prospective members if they are within 6 months of their 18th birthday.  I am also for doing away with Flight Officers.  We can create a better program for SENIOR MEMBERS that just happen not to be 21 yet. 

I met an Army Guard 2LT, who was a FLIGHT OFFICER in CAP because she was not yet 21.  In fact, she was a CAP Cadet until the day she received her Commission then chose to become a CAP FO, because being a Military Officer and a CAP CADET was a little strange to her, and I can completely agree with her decision.  What I don't agree with is the fact that she can not hold CAP Officer rank (2nd Lt) yet has a military Commission.

The program needs a cutoff at 18 rule.  You are an adult, sorry....you can't play with the Cadets like other Cadets can.  There are many legal things us Senior Members have to be aware of having 2 (yes two) different groupings of Cadets.  We have 12-17, and 18-21 groups.  The 18 to 21 group can do different things than the 12-17 group can in the real world.  Then comes into play what happens if something criminal takes place (statutory issues).  I would rather have all minors in the Cadet program, not minors and adults together.  Physical, mental and social aspects are completely different between adults and children.  That is why I think the law says a person is considered an adult at 18 in this country. 

Maybe I am getting to deep into it, but I never cared for having the cadet program open to ADULTS!   

Would someone be kind enough to restate the "problem" we are trying to "solve" by throwing several thousand cadets out of our highly successful program?

Did Gen Curry and the rest of those guys simply get it wrong when the cadet program was created during WWII?  And did every single subsequent National Commander for the last 60+ years simply fail to notice this issue?



(Remember, every single branch of our armed forces has cadets over and under the age of 18.  If they don't care, why should we?)

But if we simply must have a rule that says every CAP member under the age of 21 is a cadet, we could learn to live with it, I guess.

Ned, you're saying that about 1 out of every 12 cadets is 18-21?  I don't think so. 

As with many issues we discuss here, it isn't a major one, but....

I agree with lordmonar.  Cadet program should end at age 19.  I would say 18, but I do think we should allow them to finish high school at least, and many kids are 18 at that time.  As to what rank they would be, I say let them start in the regular senior member program as a SM and advance like everyone else. 

Quote from: RiverAux on June 24, 2008, 10:25:16 PM
I agree with lordmonar.  Cadet program should end at age 19.  I would say 18, but I do think we should allow them to finish high school at least, and many kids are 18 at that time.  As to what rank they would be, I say let them start in the regular senior member program as a SM and advance like everyone else. 

We're you ever a cadet?  Do you have a cadet programs rating?

Yes.  Earned Mitchell.  What difference does that make?

Quote from: Ned on June 24, 2008, 10:04:27 PM
Did Gen Curry and the rest of those guys simply get it wrong when the cadet program was created during WWII?  And did every single subsequent National Commander for the last 60+ years simply fail to notice this issue?

Totally different program, and totally different time in our country.

Quote
(Remember, every single branch of our armed forces has cadets over and under the age of 18.  If they don't care, why should we?)

Yes, under 18, they are not in the Armed Forces (JROTC), over 18= ROTC and a signed enlistment contract.  Army does have Early Commissioning program where a 17 year old and his or her parent(s) could sign the enlistment contract.  If you were just talking about the Academies and ROTC, then yes you could have a 17 or 18 year old Cadet, but they also have signed that contract.  Our CAP Cadets are not incurring military service, so apples and oranges. 

Not exactly correct -- you can be in ROTC without a contract.  As I recall (it used to be at least), it was the first two years unless you were on a scholarship. 

^ You are correct. 

Quote from: mikeylikey on June 24, 2008, 11:38:15 PMOur CAP Cadets are not incurring military service, so apples and oranges. 

Nope.

Every dictionary I've ever seen defines a "cadet" as a military student, usually in training to be an officer.  If you have some other definition, let us know.

That's why we have cadets in CAP and Uncle Sam has a bunch of cadets.  There are cadets in each of the academies today over the age of 25, I believe.  Take a moment, and go to West Point and  look up a 24 year-old prior enlisted Iraq vet and tell her/him that they meet your personal definition of a "child" since they are a merely a cadet.

Tell me how that goes.   ::)



but, guys -- you are the ones proposing a major change to our program -- the burden is on you to tell us exactly why we should toss all these cadets out on their collective backsides.

So, I repeat:  What is the "problem" you are "solving' here?


And please tell me it is something more than minor supervision issues in ES which could be fixed with minor regulation tweaking.


Talk about babies and bathwater . . .


Ned Lee

(At COS and surrounded by 120 of our finest cadets -- nearly half of which are 18 and older.)

And just how are we tossing them out?  Lordmonar's proposal would open things up to giving them more responsibility and opportunities than they have now. 

Quote from: RiverAux on June 25, 2008, 01:54:16 AM
And just how are we tossing them out?  Lordmonar's proposal would open things up to giving them more responsibility and opportunities than they have now. 

All Patrick did was to propose drawing a line in the sand at 19.

If I were a college student and was told I couldn't be a college student anymore, I probably feel like I was tossed out.

A cadet who is forcibly removed from cadet status and forced to turn senior will lose most or all of their scholarship and  NCSA eligibility.  They would be forcibly deprived of their ability to earn higher cadet awards (which in turn affects their attractiveness for academy appointments, ROTC scholarships, etc).

You are talking about taking education money from our best and brightest.

And why?


Please, somebody tell me why we should even talk about doing such a petty and mean-spirited thing?

Quote from: Ned on June 25, 2008, 02:04:39 AM

You are talking about taking education money from our best and brightest.

And why?

Please, somebody tell me why we should even talk about doing such a petty and mean-spirited thing?

I'm with you on that one.  I happen to be an over 18 cadet and these opportunities shouldn't just stop because you reached an age right after high school.  Most of to these opportunities are needed after high school anyhow. 

Now in terms of the regular discussion, I personally do feel that those that enter the CP right before their 18th birthday aren't going to get the full on experience.  Their COFs chances are limited and they can't necessarily interact sociably with their own age group at a place such as encampment or other CP heavy events due to rank.  Some of these 'adults' don't feel they belong with a flight of cadets eight years younger than them.  Of course there are exceptions, and some cadets find they love the program and continue all the way until they're 21, even almost to Spaatz. 

Now, majority of over 18 cadets are usually going to have been in the CP for a while.  There's no point in denying a cadet an important milestone they couldn't earn before their 18th birthday.  Also, the amount of leadership opportunities open up as they progress in the CP and it's pointless to deny a cadet an encampment C/CC position because they just simply passed a certain age. 

Is there a solution to all of it?  I can't think of one, but I'm willing to hear any arguments that don't take opportunities away from cadets.  Even the cadets that join right under 18, still have 3 years to make the most of the program.  Why take it away?

Quote from: Ned on June 25, 2008, 01:25:41 AM

Every dictionary I've ever seen defines a "cadet" as a military student, usually in training to be an officer.  If you have some other definition, let us know.

But can you reference the CAP REG that says we are training Cadets to be Officers (of the Senior Member or military variety, not the Cadet Officer variety). 

There is no Officer Training Program in CAP that makes a Cadet a CAP Officer.  We are not training our Cadets for military Service (though, the training we do can be applicable to the military, it is not our mission). 

Now if we made everyone 18-21 a FO, and developed a CAP Officer training program for them, I would support that.   

Quote from: Ned on June 25, 2008, 02:04:39 AMA cadet who is forcibly removed from cadet status and forced to turn senior will lose most or all of their scholarship and  NCSA eligibility.  They would be forcibly deprived of their ability to earn higher cadet awards (which in turn affects their attractiveness for academy appointments, ROTC scholarships, etc).

Im with you here Ned.  Its good that we have a cusion.   Cadets who join later (i.e 16 or 17) don't have as much time to achieve their goals and refine their leadership skills as someone who joins right out of middle school.  The overlap gives latecomers time to grow without creating a three year pause in the progress of the earlybirds who have gotten all they want from the cadet program .

Quote from: mikeylikey on June 25, 2008, 02:34:30 AM
But can you reference the CAP REG that says we are training Cadets to be Officers (of the Senior Member or military variety, not the Cadet Officer variety). 

Ummm, how about the 52-16 and the 35-5?  Cadets who earn the Mitchell and above have completed the necessary training for CAP officer status.  Spaatz awardees are eligible for direct appointment to Captain, just like a CFII, a physician, or a university professor with five years experience.

That's how valuable our CP training is to CAP.

Quote

There is no Officer Training Program in CAP that makes a Cadet a CAP Officer.  We are not training our Cadets for military Service (though, the training we do can be applicable to the military, it is not our mission). 

And yet the military recognizes CAP CP training with advanced grade upon enlistment, and advanced placement in ROTC, and places special value on cadet milestones for admission to the various academies.  Uncle Sam won't give you the same deal upon enlistment for a Level I or II completion, or even a Garber or Wilson Award.

I wonder why.   ::)


And Mikey (and anyone else), I repeat for the third time:

What is the "problem" that we are "solving" with your meat-axe approach to our successful cadet program?



(crickets chirping . . . . . )

Quote from: lordmonar on June 24, 2008, 06:52:25 AM
I know we have talked about this before...but it has been a while and it was brought up in the new 60-1 discussion.

I feel we have a problem with what to do with the over 18/under 21 crowd.

The overlap between who is a cadet and who is a senior member often raises a lot of angst and Knuckel-biting with these members.

The problem is that we often make a lot of assumptions when we write regulations or set policy.

The word "cadet" often is attached to a mental picture of a 12-14 year old.  While some of those cadets are legal adults, living on their own, driving cars, working, voting, and generally doing everything that adults do.....and then they go to a CAP activity and they are treated like "children".

I have had a lot of conversations with over 18 cadets who resent being treated like children...but the bottom line is that the regulations are written in such a way that Cadets are in fact children.  Right, wrong or indifferent that is the way things are.

So here is my proposed solution to the problem.

1.  Set a hard and fast age for membership in the cadet program and the senior program.   Elimintate the option area.....so if we set the age at 19 (for instants) all 18 year olds are cadets and all 19 year olds are senior members....no more over lap.

2.  If we set the SM age for anything less than 21....either eliminate the FO ranks or integrate them into the normal progression of the SM program.  This eliminate the stigma of FO's being seen as old cadets or second rate citezens.

You know Patrick, the one thing that concerns me is that you feel this way and you're a Composite Squadron Commander.

Do you have any over 18 year old cadets in your squadron?

Or were they shown the door....

ok easy solution, you can become a cadet as long as you are under 21, you can only be a senior if you are over 21.

Will this drop our new senior membership? probably not by much.
Will this drop the number of 19-21 y/o that join? again not by much, it actully may increase it, but then again not many 19 y/o want to be a C/AB with a 14 y/o flight sergeant.
Does it solve the problem? Probably.

As far as how the program currently is, my policy is: if you are over 18 and get mad that your treated like a kid, tough, you have the choice, STFU, become a senior or deal with it.

Quote from: 2d Lt Rudin on June 25, 2008, 05:13:04 AM
As far as how the program currently is, my policy is: if you are over 18 and get mad that your treated like a kid, tough, you have the choice, STFU, become a senior or deal with it.

But you still get those types that get treated as kids as FOs. 

I don't think 18 should be the magic number in CAP

12-21: Cadet
21-    : Senior Member

Yes there are gonna be the older less experienced cadets that won't be to partial to the younger flight sergeant/staff, but it shouldn't be treated as the superiority factor. With the maturity level at the late teen ages, they should be expected to display mature adult behavior for the older cadets in the squadron by showing respect for the experienced cadets(reguardless of age).

aaaaaaaaaaand...
Flight officer should be done away with entirely...
Cadets who don't recieve grade increase incentive from their previous cadet grade start at Senior Member. Transition time should be the grade of senior member, simple as that. Cadets who get grade increase when crossing over should not need much time for the conversion therefore hit the ground running as soon as the grade is pinned on.

I have to say I am mixed on this.  I do have to admit that the Flight Officer Rankings to have to go away though.

I think giving cadets the chance to go after their Spaatz until they are 20 is ok.

However I admit when an 18 year old came to the squadron meeting and I talked with them, I encouraged the Officer Program to them.  Even if it meant they had to wait to sign the paperwork to join CAP.  I probably talked to 10+ people this way, and maybe lost only 2 or three.

[drifting.....]

Flight officer ranks (IMO) are useless.  Its like saying you are old enough to be an Officer, but not old enough to hold officer grade or rank.  The only good thing about flight officer ranks is that you promote faster.

Quote from: CadetProgramGuy on June 25, 2008, 09:01:15 AM
I have to say I am mixed on this.  I do have to admit that the Flight Officer Rankings to have to go away though.

I think giving cadets the chance to go after their Spaatz until they are 20 is ok.

However I admit when an 18 year old came to the squadron meeting and I talked with them, I encouraged the Officer Program to them.  Even if it meant they had to wait to sign the paperwork to join CAP.  I probably talked to 10+ people this way, and maybe lost only 2 or three.

[drifting.....]

Flight officer ranks (IMO) are useless.  Its like saying you are old enough to be an Officer, but not old enough to hold officer grade or rank.  The only good thing about flight officer ranks is that you promote faster.

Flight Officer grades are not useless. I am currently twenty years old, and I jumped into the grey when I was 19. Basically, due to college and the two jobs I work, I didn't have time to be a cadet, and I had no motivation or reason what so ever to go for the Spaatz, none of the NCSA's were really worth the time and money for me, etc etc etc. It was unfair for me to show up every few weeks with my C/2d Lt. pips and not really have anything to do.

Infact, since I got my FO stripes, I've been more active in the squadron, and I work on more things.

If a perfect world, I would say only keep cadets over 18 above a certain rank.

I don't really care about 'officer grade.' It's just not important. But, I'm one of those crazies that believes that an All Officer program is just foolish.

Quote from: CASH172 on June 25, 2008, 05:53:20 AM
But you still get those types that get treated as kids as FOs. 

That is not a problem with the FO program, but with the professionalism of those officers who treat them as kids.

Quote from: 2d Lt Rudin on June 25, 2008, 05:13:04 AMAs far as how the program currently is, my policy is: if you are over 18 and get mad that your treated like a kid, tough, you have the choice, STFU, become a senior or deal with it.

I feel like I need to clarify my position.

Not every senior member is going to treat an 18+ cadet like a child, yes there are a few who do. However if a cadet notices that most seniors treat them like a child maybe it's time to take a step back and evaluate if they are acting like a child.

Quote from: Hookedonlemons on June 25, 2008, 06:17:44 AM

Yes there are gonna be the older less experienced cadets that won't be to partial to the younger flight sergeant/staff, but it shouldn't be treated as the superiority factor. With the maturity level at the late teen ages, they should be expected to display mature adult behavior for the older cadets in the squadron by showing respect for the experienced cadets(reguardless of age).

I had a young man call me that was interested in joining.  He was 17 or 18.  I asked him if he would have a problem with the younger cadets (14-15) telling him what to do.  He said no problem.  He was used to that from when he was in the AF JROTC (if I remember correctly).  Now, I have to remeber if he is the new cadet that has joined or if I'm still waiting to meet him.   ??? :-[

Quote from: Ned on June 25, 2008, 04:34:08 AM

And Mikey (and anyone else), I repeat for the third time:

What is the "problem" that we are "solving" with your meat-axe approach to our successful cadet program?

(crickets chirping . . . . . )

Perhaps we thought that the opening post in the thread gave the thumbnail version of why this is an issue (and why it has been discussed in much more detail in past threads). 

Quote from: RiverAux on June 25, 2008, 04:44:18 PM

Quote from: Ned on June 25, 2008, 04:34:08 AM

And Mikey (and anyone else), I repeat for the third time:

What is the "problem" that we are "solving" with your meat-axe approach to our successful cadet program?

(crickets chirping . . . . . )

Perhaps we thought that the opening post in the thread gave the thumbnail version of why this is an issue (and why it has been discussed in much more detail in past threads). 

OK, then.  Now that we are clear. Let's take a look at the "problem."

QuoteI feel we have a problem with what to do with the over 18/under 21 crowd.

The overlap between who is a cadet and who is a senior member often raises a lot of angst and Knuckel-biting with these members.

The problem is that we often make a lot of assumptions when we write regulations or set policy.

The word "cadet" often is attached to a mental picture of a 12-14 year old.  While some of those cadets are legal adults, living on their own, driving cars, working, voting, and generally doing everything that adults do.....and then they go to a CAP activity and they are treated like "children".

I have had a lot of conversations with over 18 cadets who resent being treated like children...but the bottom line is that the regulations are written in such a way that Cadets are in fact children.  Right, wrong or indifferent that is the way things are.

So here is my proposed solution to the problem. (. . .)

Which boils down to . . .


"The problem is that we often make a lot of assumptions . . . "


"The word "cadet" often is attached to a mental picture of a 12-14 year old. "


"I have had a lot of conversations with over 18 cadets who resent being treated like children."


which leads to "angst and Knuckel-biting ."



Nope, maybe I'm just being dense today, but I'm still not seeing a problem here.  No assertions of missions unfulfilled, persons injured, or resources wasted.

At best, the author was suggesting that sometimes some folks' feelings get hurt by others who do not understand our regulations and show respect for our cadets.

Not exactly a mandate to tossing cadets out of the program, is it?



If that's the best statement of the "problem," then we're pretty much done here.

Ned Lee

I hashed and rehashed this earlier in the CPPT thread 6 months ago.

A kid can join at 12 and leave at 21. That's nine years to complete a program you can possibly complete in what, 3.5, 4 years?

On top of that the organizations's playing games with legal adults making them pretend they're minors when they're not.

The cadet program needs to end at 18, period. A cadet at 18 who doesn't have his Mitchell needs to be handed an Adult application or shown the door.

The cadet who has at least his Mitchell should be automatically made a Senior member. Earhart's get FO immediately, Eaker's get TFO and Spaatz's get SFO.

These new seniors could either follow the established professional development paths or (IMHO) continue on the old cadet course of AE, leadership labs and SDA's just like when they were cadets. It would be just like they were still in the cadet program, just no cadet rank earned and they wouldn't work with cadets directly.

This simplifies so much it isn't funny.

Quote from: Johnny Yuma on June 28, 2008, 08:35:22 PM
The cadet program needs to end at 18, period. A cadet at 18 who doesn't have his Mitchell needs to be handed an Adult application or shown the door.

I agree with you, but I would allow those that are still Cadets and still in High School when they turn 18 to continue in the Cadet program until they graduate from High School.  Then I would immediately hand them the Senior Member Application. 

 

How about this:

Make the flight officer program an optional bridge between the cadet and senior programs.  Cadets would progress through the CP until they turn 18 or graduate from high school.  At that point, they have the option to move into the flight officer program to continue working on their cadet achievements or move directly into the senior program.  Cadet grades would convert to flight officer grades as follows:

Flight Officer = C/2d Lt and below
Technical Flight Officer = C/1st Lt and C/Capt
Senior Flight Officer = C/Maj and C/Lt Col

Cadet colonels would move immediately into the senior program by virtue of the fact that they will have completed all of the cadet program.

New members between the ages of 18-21 would join as senior members.

I'm sorry but I just can't agree with any of what you guys say regarding converting membership upon high school graduation.  I just don't see that much of a point doing it.  Maybe I just can't think objectively because I'm in the same group you guys are talking about, but why would you want to do such things.  It would take so many opportunities away.  Also, with the option of joining until 18, a cadet still had 3 years to get something out of the cadet program.  What's a 17 and a half year old supposed to do.  Join as a cadet for 6 months, that doesn't make sense.  The current set up is good for giving a buffer zone for new cadets no matter when they join. 

Quote from: mikeylikey on June 24, 2008, 06:22:25 PM
^ 

I met an Army Guard 2LT, who was a FLIGHT OFFICER in CAP because she was not yet 21.  In fact, she was a CAP Cadet until the day she received her Commission then chose to become a CAP FO, because being a Military Officer and a CAP CADET was a little strange to her, and I can completely agree with her decision.  What I don't agree with is the fact that she can not hold CAP Officer rank (2nd Lt) yet has a military Commission.

IF you check with National you may get their opinion as to whether 2LT/FO can be appointed as a 2LT in CAP, due to holding a Federal. Commisson in the Armed Forces. I believe that despite her age she is entitled to the grade of 2LT.

Quote from: Cecil DP on June 29, 2008, 02:31:15 AM

Quote from: mikeylikey on June 24, 2008, 06:22:25 PM
^ 

I met an Army Guard 2LT, who was a FLIGHT OFFICER in CAP because she was not yet 21.  In fact, she was a CAP Cadet until the day she received her Commission then chose to become a CAP FO, because being a Military Officer and a CAP CADET was a little strange to her, and I can completely agree with her decision.  What I don't agree with is the fact that she can not hold CAP Officer rank (2nd Lt) yet has a military Commission.

IF you check with National you may get their opinion as to whether 2LT/FO can be appointed as a 2LT in CAP, due to holding a Federal. Commisson in the Armed Forces. I believe that despite her age she is entitled to the grade of 2LT.

Here commission was not a federal one....but a state commission......so technically they were correct to keep her a FO....but it just illistrates my point that our membership rules for those between 18 and 21 are screwed up.

I woulld like to see the cut off age be 18 (....for get about the finishing high school).  I would either eliminate the FO ranks or incorporate them into the system so that everyone has to be a FO, TFO, SFO at one point....otherwise we keep the FO's as second class citezens.

Terminating membership because a cadet graduates from HS is rediculous. What if you have a cadet that has worked particularly hard and graduates at 16. Are we supposed to say 'see ya, come back in two years' and kick them out, basically punishing academic excellence?

Quote from: DC on June 29, 2008, 04:41:34 AM
Terminating membership because a cadet graduates from HS is rediculous. What if you have a cadet that has worked particularly hard and graduates at 16. Are we supposed to say 'see ya, come back in two years' and kick them out, basically punishing academic excellence?

I believe the concept should have been worded:
Turns 18 or graduates high school, if turned 18 prior to graduation.

So turning 18 is the magic point. Graduation from HS is only used if the cadet turns 18 before graduation. In the example you gave, the cadet would remain a cadet until they turn 18.

Quote from: PHall on June 25, 2008, 04:56:33 AM

Quote from: lordmonar on June 24, 2008, 06:52:25 AM
I know we have talked about this before...but it has been a while and it was brought up in the new 60-1 discussion.

I feel we have a problem with what to do with the over 18/under 21 crowd.

The overlap between who is a cadet and who is a senior member often raises a lot of angst and Knuckel-biting with these members.

The problem is that we often make a lot of assumptions when we write regulations or set policy.

The word "cadet" often is attached to a mental picture of a 12-14 year old.  While some of those cadets are legal adults, living on their own, driving cars, working, voting, and generally doing everything that adults do.....and then they go to a CAP activity and they are treated like "children".

I have had a lot of conversations with over 18 cadets who resent being treated like children...but the bottom line is that the regulations are written in such a way that Cadets are in fact children.  Right, wrong or indifferent that is the way things are.

So here is my proposed solution to the problem.

1.  Set a hard and fast age for membership in the cadet program and the senior program.   Elimintate the option area.....so if we set the age at 19 (for instants) all 18 year olds are cadets and all 19 year olds are senior members....no more over lap.

2.  If we set the SM age for anything less than 21....either eliminate the FO ranks or integrate them into the normal progression of the SM program.  This eliminate the stigma of FO's being seen as old cadets or second rate citezens.

You know Patrick, the one thing that concerns me is that you feel this way and you're a Composite Squadron Commander.

Do you have any over 18 year old cadets in your squadron?

Or were they shown the door....

No of course not....I am asking the question because I have cadets over 18 and have worked with several......also here on CAPTALK we have seen time and again some cadet get bent out of shape over some regulation (like the new 60-1) that says Cadets will not not do such and such....even though they are just as qualified (if not more) than some 18 year old SM.

This is also tied in to the the gray area of the FO's status as 2nd class citezens.

Let me state emphatically that I am not in the buisness of throwing out any cadets.....and if I were to come up with some new system...It would be grandfathered in so cadets currently in the program would still be allowed to finish.

But bottom line...in my way of thinking CAP's Cadet program is for children....and I don't consider anyone over 18 a child any more.

Quote from: Ned on June 25, 2008, 05:06:47 PM
Nope, maybe I'm just being dense today, but I'm still not seeing a problem here.  No assertions of missions unfulfilled, persons injured, or resources wasted.

At best, the author was suggesting that sometimes some folks' feelings get hurt by others who do not understand our regulations and show respect for our cadets.

Not exactly a mandate to tossing cadets out of the program, is it?



If that's the best statement of the "problem," then we're pretty much done here.

What mission is being unfulfilled if we end the cadet program at 18?

It looks like basically everyone is saying an 18 year old should turn senior. I disagree to an extent and think the transition program that used to be called OTC resolves the problem. At age 18 the cadet joins the OTC program. Since he is no longer a cadet the regs like 60-1 treat him as a senior. But at the same time, the OTC member has the option of testing in the cadet program to earn Earhart Ecker or Spaatz. Call them Flight Officers if you wish, but get rid of the ROTC looking grade insignia and go to the old USAF WO insignia.
Putting in a transition program resolves the age problem of 18 year old adults in a children's program. It also allows growth in both cadet and senior activities for the OTC member. If I were on the National Cadet Committee, I'd push for such a program to be reinstated.

I don't like the OTC program because it just makes the FO program even worse.

FO's are supposed to be full members of the Senior Program.....but are sometimes treated as senior cadets. (heck they can't even drive CAP vehicles).

An OTC program will only make the FO's into 2nd class citezens for real.

QuoteThe cadet program needs to end at 18, period.

I completely disagree with this, from several angles.  Here goes:

First; I was a cadet that choose to stay in the program until I was 21.  I did this for several reasons, but mostly because as a cadet I could still receive primary flight training in CAP aircraft, but as a senior (even a Flight Officer) I couldn't.  I was able to receive CAP Flight Scholarships, and earn my private pilot license. 

Second point, I joined as a cadet when I was 12 (almost 13).  I earned my Spaatz award when I was 18.  About 3/4 of the really cool things I did as a cadet, and the biggest life lessons I learned from the program came AFTER I had gotten my Spaatz Award (and its not like I wasn't active before I got it).  Yes, it was a little weird being a Ground Team Leader and having to have a Senior Member "babysitter" with me, but I was able to work well with said senior member BECAUSE of the training I received in the Cadet Program.  Learning how to work with people in awkward situations like that has also been a huge help in what I've done later in CAP as well as in life.

Thirdly, it is each individuals choice as to what he/she wants to do once he/she hits that magic 18 number.  My choice to stay a cadet was one of the best I ever made in CAP.  However, there are two FO's in my squadron right now that the decision to turn senior was probably one of the best ones they made.  The choice is there for a reason; each individual has different priorities and wants different things from the program, we need to make sure that each person has an option that will fit what they want and what the unit needs the best.

My fourth point, now speaking as the Deputy Commander for Cadets of a large squadron, I currently have 3 cadets over 18 that are active in my squadron.  One is going after his Spaatz, two others just recently joined.  Before they joined, I laid out what their options were as either a senior member or a cadet.  Both choose to become cadets so that they could learn to fly in CAP aircraft, and be eligible for a wider variety of CAP Flight Scholarships.  All three are also currently working on their Scanner/Observer ratings, and participating actively in the program.  I've had zero problems with the two 18 year olds being led by a flight sergeant who is 14.  I'm fortunate in that I have a mature cadet staff, as well as mature 18 year olds who know what my expectations for their behavior are, and they have yet to fail to completely impress me with their performance.

Finally, there already exists a program to give former cadets more credit to completing senior member professional development criteria once they reach the dark side.  For those that haven't seen that yet, log onto eServices and look at the interim change letter from 5 Jun 08 posted there.  This gets rid of the need for an "OTC" program, etc. 

To address this issue:

Quote"The problem is that we often make a lot of assumptions . . . "
"The word "cadet" often is attached to a mental picture of a 12-14 year old. "
"I have had a lot of conversations with over 18 cadets who resent being treated like children."
which leads to "angst and Knuckel-biting ."

I've learned that what you get out of CAP is what you put into it.  If you're an over 18 cadet who resents some of the restrictions placed on cadets in the regs, then turn senior or stop complaining.  If you resent getting treated like a child by other senior members, guess what, it won't get better once you're a senior!!  I'm personally young enough to be the grandchild of many of the other seniors that I work with on a routine basis.  But personally, I've had almost no problems as either a cadet or a senior with this.  If you conduct yourself in a mature manner, you generally won't have a problem.

So please, to repeat what's been said numerous times already, lets not fix something that's not broken.  Sorry for the rant, but this is an issue that is obviously very near and dear to my heart.

Ending the cadet program at 18 isn't something I thought of lightly, but needs done.

First: The age of adulthood in every state is 18. CAP needs to recognize this and bring the program in line to accept this as just that.

Second: Cadet protection. If the program ends at 18 then the cadet/officer relationship taboo is clearly defined. CAP has ZERO business telling ANYONE over the age of majority who they can or cannot date.
Making  everyone over 18 an officer eliminates 90 percent of the CPP issues.

Third: Personal Experience. I was a TAC at a Region encampment several years ago where in attendance was an 18 year old cadet basic. He joined at 18, or was signed up by his parents. His father was a CAP staffer and his brother was a former cadet turned senior.

This guy really had no desire to be in CAP and didn't want to be at the encampment, but was browbeat into going. He was there about 48 hours and wanted to go home.

His father and brother flew in and spent several hours (in the presence of the encampment CC and commandant) berating the kid and threatening to disown him, throw him off the family farm and terminate his job with the family business if he went home. Finally the encampment staff offered to put him on staff in the PAO shop to keep him there, doing something he liked (photographer) and placate his "family".

Had this been any other CAP member that did this they'd have been 2b'd for abuse but since it was family it was overlooked. But the fact remains is that we coerced a legal adult into de facto imprisonment for several days and used the excuse he was a cadet and it's what his family wanted. Never Again.

Quote from: Johnny Yuma on July 10, 2008, 08:28:14 PM
His father and brother flew in and spent several hours (in the presence of the encampment CC and commandant) berating the kid and threatening to disown him, throw him off the family farm and terminate his job with the family business if he went home. Finally the encampment staff offered to put him on staff in the PAO shop to keep him there, doing something he liked (photographer) and placate his "family".

Ya......that family sucks.  If I were the Enc Commander I would have said.....your 18, See-YA!

So your ENC Commander rewarded this Cadet for crying and let him be on staff.  Well, not only does that family sucks, that Enc Commander also stinks.   

I seriously hope he didn't get Encampment Credit for that. 

Quote from: Johnny Yuma on July 10, 2008, 08:28:14 PM


First: The age of adulthood in every state is 18. CAP needs to recognize this and bring the program in line to accept this as just that.

Except of course your statement is incorrect.

The age of majority is not the same in all the states.  Nebraska and Alabama use the age of 19, and Mississippi is still at 21.  Really.  See the WikiPedia article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_majority).  And you might be interested to know that in Puerto Rico (where we have a fairly large cadet contingent) the age or majority is 14.

But even if the age of majority were 18 everywhere CAP has cadets, so what?

Remember, every branch of the Armed Forces has cadets over and under the age of 18.  If they don't care, why should CAP?

Cadethood and adulthood are simply unrelated concepts.

Quote

Second: Cadet protection. If the program ends at 18 then the cadet/officer relationship taboo is clearly defined.

Is it really undefined now?  Do you really not understand that you cannot date a cadet?

Would you like some help?

Quote
CAP has ZERO business telling ANYONE over the age of majority who they can or cannot date.

I can only accept your emphatic statement of personal opinion.  It should go without saying that you are entitled to hold such an opinion.

But you should know that it is not a widely held opinion.  Every single public high school in the country has rules that prohibit teachers from dating students; even those students who are over 18. 

How is this any different?  Cadets by definition are students; senior members by definition are leaders and teachers.

And it's not just us.  Every major youth organization in the country has similar rules.  Talk a look at the Scouts, Venturing, DeMolay, Big Brothers/Big Sisters, etc.

Quote
Making  everyone over 18 an officer eliminates 90 percent of the CPP issues.

Interesting assertion.  As a former legal officer, I would have to say I must strongly disagree based on the investigations and complaints I have been involved with -- the great majority of which involved seniors over 21 and cadets under the age of 18.

But even if what you say is true, you'd have to admit that making everyone under 21 a cadet would have the same effect.  Why isn't that OK?

Quote

Third: Personal Experience. I was a TAC at a Region encampment several years ago where in attendance was an 18 year old cadet basic. He joined at 18, or was signed up by his parents. His father was a CAP staffer and his brother was a former cadet turned senior.

This guy really had no desire to be in CAP and didn't want to be at the encampment, but was browbeat into going. He was there about 48 hours and wanted to go home.

His father and brother flew in and spent several hours (in the presence of the encampment CC and commandant) berating the kid and threatening to disown him, throw him off the family farm and terminate his job with the family business if he went home. Finally the encampment staff offered to put him on staff in the PAO shop to keep him there, doing something he liked (photographer) and placate his "family".

Had this been any other CAP member that did this they'd have been 2b'd for abuse but since it was family it was overlooked. But the fact remains is that we coerced a legal adult into de facto imprisonment for several days and used the excuse he was a cadet and it's what his family wanted. Never Again.

Sounds like a bad situation all right.  I'm a little disappointed that you stood by and allowed anyone -- adult or minor -- to be "berated" and "coerced" into "imprisonment" (to use your words) for several days.  But that's water under the bridge, I guess.

But surely you must see that making major changes to the program and forcibly terminating good cadets should not be done on the basis of one or more isolated incidents?

And perhaps more importantly -- all of our members should be treated with respect and dignity.  Not just the seniors.

But since this seems important to you, could you again please tell me the problem you are trying to solve here?

Ned Lee

Ned says:

QuoteBut even if the age of majority were 18 everywhere CAP has cadets, so what?

Remember, every branch of the Armed Forces has cadets over and under the age of 18.  If they don't care, why should CAP?

Because we're not the military and not subject to UCMJ.

Ned also says:

QuoteIs it really undefined now?  Do you really not understand that you cannot date a cadet?

Would you like some help?

Just where do you get off feeling like you have some supreme authority to tell anyone over the age of majority who they can or cannot date?

I find it interesting how a CAP member can get drunk after a meeting and crash their POV and CAP would have no real interest in the matter, yet an 18 year old cadet and an 18 year old senior can go home to an apartment they share together legally and it's a 2B offense.

Would YOU like some help understanding the word hypocrisy?

More from Ned:

QuoteEvery single public high school in the country has rules that prohibit teachers from dating students; even those students who are over 18.

I've explained this to you before: Public High Schools are cumpulsory attendance, which means that greater scrutiny must be placed on staff as the students have no choice in attendance.

QuoteEvery major youth organization in the country has similar rules.  Talk a look at the Scouts, Venturing, DeMolay, Big Brothers/Big Sisters, etc.

BB/BS don't deal with people over the age of majority by and large, same with Scouts with few exceptions.

Exploring/Venturing isn't a real good example you want to use. The rules on this branch of scouting has always been more "flexible" as most posts have little oversight from the Council and more on the sponsoring agency. As a former Explorer, BTDT.

Demolay: Really bad example. Secret societies, pedophiles and young people are recipes for disaster. The group in Topeka had several scandals tht finally were made public back WIWAC.

QuoteSounds like a bad situation all right.  I'm a little disappointed that you stood by and allowed anyone -- adult or minor -- to be "berated" and "coerced" into "imprisonment" (to use your words) for several days.  But that's water under the bridge, I guess.

The TAC's were out of the loop on it, I didn't find out until days later what transpired in the meeting. Both the Encampment CC and commandant probably made the best of a bad situation but not the call I'd have made. The kid was talked into staying by the encampment commander but he was ready to walk away from his family over this.

I'm sorry, but we have a 3.5 year program. You can join at 12. If CAP feels it needs to treat every cadet like a juvenile then the cutoff must be at the age of majority. If that  means 21 in one state, 19 in another and 14 in PR then that's the way it should be.

Spacing - MIKE

Quote from: Johnny Yuma on July 10, 2008, 10:13:17 PM
Because we're not the military and not subject to UCMJ.

But of course neither JROTC cadets or instructors nor the great majority of senior ROTC cadets are subject to the UCMJ, either.  Heck, a lot of the senior ROTC instructors serving in uniform these days are retired officers on contract.  They are not subject to the UCMC, either.

Try again.

Quote
Just where do you get off feeling like you have some supreme authority to tell anyone over the age of majority who they can or cannot date?

Dude, chill.  It's not just me.  They are many, many situations where folks over 18 are restircted in just whom they can "date."  Many are law, some are just rules kinda like what we have in CAP.

• Every single state has laws that say that folks over the age of majority cannot "date" folks under the age of consent (which varies even more widely than the age of majority.)
  
  
• Psychiatrists cannot date even their adult patients.  It's unethical, and in some states illegal.
  
  
• Most college professors are prohibited by rule from dating their adult students.
  
  
• Every large corporation has rules that discourage or prohibit sexual harassment between managers and subordinates, including dating and asking for a date.

And so on. 

We were not the first youth organization to have such a rule.

In fact, to our shame, we were among the last.

Quote
I find it interesting how a CAP member can get drunk after a meeting and crash their POV and CAP would have no real interest in the matter, yet an 18 year old cadet and an 18 year old senior can go home to an apartment they share together legally and it's a 2B offense.

And your point is?

I'm pretty sure that any commander worth her/his salt would take some administrative actions in either situation.  If I were the drunk's cc, the member would lose their CAP license and probably be asked to take a break from CAP to attend to their alcohol problem.

Curiously enough, mere sharing of a residence between a cadet and senior -- without more -- is not prohibited or discouraged by any regulation or doctrine.  Otherwise, my daughter would have had to move out as soon as she joined! 8)

But if the cadet and the senior are engaged in an intimate relationship, then I would of course take action.  Commander's have a lot of discretion in these kinds of situations, and there are a whole lot more options than a 2B.  The senior in question could become a patron member, the cadet could turn senior, the two could "pause" their relationship, and probably a whole bunch more options before reaching for the 2B.

But ultimately, if the senior member knowingly broke an important rule designed to protect our cadets, maybe she/he would be more comfortable being a non-member.

Quote[Concerning high schools}
I've explained this to you before: Public High Schools are cumpulsory attendance, which means that greater scrutiny must be placed on staff as the students have no choice in attendance.

Except that no high school is compulsory after 18, and yet the teachers still cannot date the adult students.

Try again.

Quote
Exploring/Venturing isn't a real good example you want to use. The rules on this branch of scouting has always been more "flexible" as most posts have little oversight from the Council and more on the sponsoring agency. As a former Explorer, BTDT.

Demolay: Really bad example. Secret societies, pedophiles and young people are recipes for disaster. The group in Topeka had several scandals tht finally were made public back WIWAC.

OK, then.  Why don't you find a reputable youth training organization where it is OK for the adult leaders to "date" the students.

I'll wait . . . .



The "adult leaders don't date students" rule is the mainstream rule here.  It is in fact the norm, and accepted nationwide.  CAP just caught up, that's all.

Quote from: Ned on July 10, 2008, 11:05:47 PM
The "adult leaders don't date students" rule is the mainstream rule here.  It is in fact the norm, and accepted nationwide.  CAP just caught up, that's all.

Wow....I agree with you Ned.  I had to sit through an hour presentation on what I can and can not do with ROTC Cadets while at Fort Knox.  The very first thing the Region Commander said was "No Officer in any of my Schools will ever, for any reason date a student, no matter what age". 

Some people just don't understand that concept, both in CAP and the Military.  A few years ago a West Point Professor was cashiered when it was learned that he was dating a Senior.  The Officer was 35, the Cadet was 23.  Almost 10 years ago, a member of my CAP SQD was dating a Cadet.  The Guy was 25, the cadet 18.  It was both weird and kind of sick.  The Wing Commander took no time showing the Senior Member the door.  (they were doing things, that normally are not allowed at CAP activities, thus the rush to remove the member). 

The least compelling argument I've heard for the status quo is "the military has cadets over the age of 18". 

The obvious counterargument to that is that the military cadet programs don't have cadets as young as 12.  None of the military cadet programs actually include young children. 

Also, please note that the military actually separates their programs for kids (JROTC) and adults (ROTC/service academies).  Its not like each town has a single ROTC unit in which high school and college students are mixed together.   

I also don't buy the "The CAP cadet program is training cadets to become CAP officers" argument.  All it really takes to become a CAP officer is to do Level 1 and wait six months.  Those who have completed certain CAP cadet achievements do receive higher rank, but they're no more qualified (in the eyes of CAP) than all the other people who get special appointments in the senior program.  Are former cadets better prepared to be CAP officers than some guy who got a radiotelephone license?  Sure, but if the purpose of the program was to produce the kind of officers we want, we would make EVERYBODY do it. 

Actually making the end age of the CP to 18 may make the senior on cadet portion of the CPP worse not better.

Assume you have a 17 year cadet dating a 16 year old....one year later we now have an 18 year old SM dating a 17 year old cadet...at least with the current system we can forstall this particular scenero until the older cadet turns 21.

We will never really fix this particular problem unless we create a manditory gap in the two programs....which I am not advocating!!!!!

The only real fix for the "no seniorswill date/see/etc any cadet" rule is to change the wording to say no senior members invilved in the "Cadet Program" may date a cadet within his/her unit.

This would allow for otherwise legal relationship to contiune by forcing the SM into another squadron or into a position that he/she has not normal contact with the cadets.

Again this is not a reral good fix.....I honestly liked the old rule...wherer you left it vague so you could deal with the issues you had to deal with and ignore those that were not really problems.

Again....I am only talking about relationships that would otherwise be considered legal and the over riding philosophy that no relationship of any sort should interfere with the safety of the cadets or the accomplishment of the CP mission.

And just to restate my postion on CAP's Cadet program....is that it is a program for children.....once you turn 18 you are not a child any more.

ROTC's and the academy's cadet programs are for adults.

Quote from: Johnny Yuma on July 10, 2008, 10:13:17 PM
Just where do you get off feeling like you have some supreme authority to tell anyone over the age of majority who they can or cannot date?

That's easy - as soon as a person signs their name voluntarily to join an organization which has clear rules,regulations, and standards for membership.

If AARP said "90 year olds could not date 80 year olds", that's their sandbox and their rules. Don't like it?  Don't join.

Want to continue accepting the benefits available to a cadet, while abdicating any responsibility for your self or others within CAP?  Then follow the rules.  Want to come and go as you please and date your CDC?  Then transition, but accept that you can't be encampment cadet commander this year, or make your Spaatz.

While the line must be drawn somewhere, this is less about age and more about the mentor/student or authority / subordinate relationship which should never move into anything beyond respectful friendship, and even "friendship" can be an issue in many situations where objective decisions have to be made.

Bottom line, it is inappropriate and unprofessional to have a romantic relationship with a subordinate, no matter what the situation, and for every anomalous "success story" you might be aware of, I can show you ten where it was a bad idea.

Quote from: lordmonar on July 11, 2008, 01:14:00 AM
And just to restate my position on CAP's Cadet program....is that it is a program for children.....once you turn 18 you are not a child any more.

hmm...not sure about this, 12 years olds are not "children", they are adolescents, most being capable of some level of independent activity and even accepting responsibility, while the majority of 18 years olds I have had experience with, especially those without the benefit of a BMT "reality sandwich" are far from being "adults" in any real sense of the ability to function on their own or make appropriate life choices.  Most are head-strong and "indestructible" (in the negative sense of the word).

But then again I regularly encounter senior members with a decade on me who are less mature than some cadets I know.

Quote from: lordmonar on July 11, 2008, 01:14:00 AMAnd just to restate my postion on CAP's Cadet program....is that it is a program for children.....once you turn 18 you are not a child any more.

Careful Patrick, your Boy Scout orientation is showing.

And this may be the reason for our differences in opinion on this.

Your "experience base" is mostly working with the Boy Scouts. Which is fine and good and such.

My (and a few others) "experience base" is working with CAP.

Different cultures that don't exactly mesh sometimes.

Something to think about maybe?

Eclipse,

THANK YOU for what you said. We in CAP (for the most part) are dealing with adolescents and young adults as cadets....NOT children.

Adolescents and young adults can do a lot under 18 that children cannot, for example drive a car at 16, fly planes solo at 16....gliders and balloons at 14, in Indiana become state EMS First Responders at 14.....adolescents are not adults but they are also not children.

Sadly many people think there are 2 choices ADULT and CHILD.....my advice, take a human development or life span developmental psychology course. There are many phases to life. On a side note...what do we do with the members who are really too old for CAP????

Even the legal age of childhood has been questioned in the last 15 years with 12 year olds being put on trail as adults for crimes. Recent research has found the human brain is not completed devlopment until a young person is in their ealry 20's....ie they don't truly think as full adults.

Now as to the topic.....leave the age of cadet membership alone and start training senior members or adult officers or whatever we are in things like human development so we understand at least the difference between children, adolescents, and adults.

PBS Frontline has an episode which dives into the issue of "adulthood" in relation to how crimes are charged in Colorado.  "When Kids Get Life" http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/whenkidsgetlife/view/

The issues in the documentary go far beyond the things we have to deal with (thankfully) in CAP, but one attorney makes an interesting point.

"...The legislature has determined that adolescent brain development prohibits kids from being able to plan and focus and deliberate, and so in the state of Colorado, it's illegal for a teenager to drive with another kid under 18 in the car with them.

At the same time, this same legislature has said these kids with the same adolescent brains can form the culpable mental state or the intent to commit murder and be locked up for the rest of their lives. And so while Andy couldn't drive in a car with his two co-defendants, he can go to trial with his two co-defendants and face life in prison as an adult..."

I firmly believe we need to have it one way or the other....either senior member status starts at 18 or at 21, for everyone.

My own preference (and I was 19 1/2 y.o. when I moved from cadet officer to senior).

It won't resolve all problems -- we'll still need to deal with fraternization between 16-17 year olds and the 18 plus crowd -- but the maturity difference between younger cadets and older ones is sufficient that it really calls for separate programs.

^ Sounds very similar to the whole "what age should we allow someone to drink at" debate.

A decision should be made......you are either an Adult at 18 or an adult at 21.  Does not make sense that you can do most everything a 90 year old can do when you are 18, except drink.  

I watched a special on generation Millennium "Gen M", and the experts said that more children today will live in their parents homes until their late 20's, within the next 10 to 15 years.  That the American family and living situation is shifting quicker than at any other time in American history.  So perhaps in 20 years, a person won't legally be considered an adult until they reach 25.  

What was also interesting was the way these experts said the employer will need to adapt to work with these up and coming Gen M's.  

Totally off topic, but I thought it was noteworthy to point out.    

If we cut off cadets at 18, would we also limit the entry age to 14 or 15? (assuming the minimum time to Spaatz is 38 months - please correct if I am wrong on that)

Should we allow cadets to join who cannot physically complete the program?

Is there any value to 1-2 years of CAP with a "glass ceiling" of grade and achievement?
considering that some of the better opportunities in CAP are limited to cadets
of a specific grade or higher, we'd also be limiting those as well.

Most of the argument for the 19-21 yro cadets today is the allowance for late-starters or slow movers to have the chance at completing the program.

Even if we didn't actually limit entry to 15, in practice we'd probably lose most recruits over 15 or 16.

Oh...I whole heartedly know where my experience base is coming from.

But bottom line is......there is NO REASON why cadets cannot finish the program by 18.

We offer almost NOTHING for older cadets...except more of the same.

I don't have any numbers....but the number of cadets over 18 can't be more then 1-2%

I think one of the reasons why we don't produce more Spaatz is that we created an illusion that the cadets have "plenty of time" to finish the program...and then they grow up and stop doing children stuff and move on.

Eclipse....let's not turn this into a semantics argument. ;D

Eclipse, I grant the validity of your point -- in which case senior membership ought to begin at 21, period.

In  many ways, less of a problem....as darn few 18-20 year olds will want to join as cadets and submit themselves to the authority of cadet officers & NCOs years younger.

However, there remains a need for some sort of separation of the age groups....I'm not sure exactly how, let's leave that open for discussion for now.

Quote from: Eclipse on July 11, 2008, 03:56:25 AM
If we cut off cadets at 18, would we also limit the entry age to 14 or 15? (assuming the minimum time to Spaatz is 38 months - please correct if I am wrong on that)

Not limit it.....those cadets would just have to accept that they cannot complete the program......but only something like .01% of all cadets ever make Spaatz....so this is not really LIMFACT

Quote from: Eclipse on July 11, 2008, 03:56:25 AMShould we allow cadets to join who cannot physically complete the program?

Sure....as I pointed out there is still a lot to learn even if you can't "complete" the program.

Quote from: Eclipse on July 11, 2008, 03:56:25 AMIs there any value to 1-2 years of CAP with a "glass ceiling" of grade and achievement?  considering that some of the better opportunities in CAP are limited to cadets of a specific grade or higher, we'd also be limiting those as well.

If you are saying that there would not be enough under 18 cadets to got to say IACE or the Civics NCSA......easy fix for that would be to remove the rank restrictions.   I thought we had those restrictions just as a way of cutting down the number of applications.

Quote from: Eclipse on July 11, 2008, 03:56:25 AMMost of the argument for the 19-21 yro cadets today is the allowance for late-starters or slow movers to have the chance at completing the program.

Even if we didn't actually limit entry to 15, in practice we'd probably lose most recruits over 15 or 16.

Well they tried to help with this problem by allowing older new cadets to challenge the lower portions.....but if I recall....there was a lot of hatred for that idea.  Also do we really have a lot of 15-16 year old recruits?   Why have they been ignored for the first three years of eligibility?  That is a recruiting problem.

Quote from: lordmonar on July 11, 2008, 03:58:48 AM
I don't have any numbers....but the number of cadets over 18 can't be more then 1-2%

I think one of the reasons why we don't produce more Spaatz is that we created an illusion that the cadets have "plenty of time" to finish the program...and then they grow up and stop doing children stuff and move on.

Eclipse....let's not turn this into a semantics argument. ;D

I don't disagree with the numbers, not the probable cause of why cadets don't make it, but you can't argue that a cadet over 15 can't make it to Spaatz by 18, even at full blast.

So what do we tell the 16 & 17 year olds?  Work hard, progress, but you'll likely time out before you can become an officer, so maybe you should just come back in 2 years?

I think you could argue that the road to Chief is where a lot of the more objective growth occurs, but you still need about 18 months for a high-speed to make that.

Quote from: lordmonar on July 11, 2008, 04:10:28 AM
Well they tried to help with this problem by allowing older new cadets to challenge the lower portions.....but if I recall....there was a lot of hatred for that idea.  Also do we really have a lot of 15-16 year old recruits?   Why have they been ignored for the first three years of eligibility?  That is a recruiting problem.

I can't argue with that, "best kept secret" and all that, but for whatever the reason they were missed, it would still limit or preclude their participation.

It would also, obviously, artificially lower the over age group of the program, by how much, hard to say, but kids being kids, whatever they view as the "end", when they start doing the "end game math" on how far they can get, they'll be dropping off even earlier.

Quote from: RiverAux on July 11, 2008, 12:56:26 AM
The least compelling argument I've heard for the status quo is "the military has cadets over the age of 18". 

It is not my job to frame "compelling" arguments.  YOU are the one who wants to take the meat axe to a highly successful program and change the way it has been done for 60 years. 

I suggest it is time for YOU to come up with compelling arguments that mandate a change.

Quote

The obvious counterargument to that is that the military cadet programs don't have cadets as young as 12.  None of the military cadet programs actually include young children. 

Oh, I dunno about that.  A fairly well known nationwide military cadet program run by Uncle Sam -- JROTC - has hundreds of 12 year old cadets.  They're called "freshmen."

Really.

Quote

Also, please note that the military actually separates their programs for kids (JROTC) and adults (ROTC/service academies).  Its not like each town has a single ROTC unit in which high school and college students are mixed together.   

Because ROTC units are school based.    Obviously, the membership of the ROTC unit has to reflect the membership of the school in which it is based.  It is also worth remembering that folks as young as 16 are in senior ROTC units.

Now if you had a community based cadet program, you could have a much wider age group participate.  The cadets would benefit from being able to participate for as long as, say, 8 years or so, and not be arbitrarily limited to 4 years like in JROTC and ROTC. 

Hmm, a community based program lasting up to eight years . . . where could we find something like that?

Quote

I also don't buy the "The CAP cadet program is training cadets to become CAP officers" argument.  All it really takes to become a CAP officer is to do Level 1 and wait six months.  Those who have completed certain CAP cadet achievements do receive higher rank, but they're no more qualified (in the eyes of CAP) than all the other people who get special appointments in the senior program. 

Yup, for instance Spaatz awardees are recognized as equally valuable as CFIIs, physicians, and college professors with five years experience.  All can be appointed as captains.

Quote
Are former cadets better prepared to be CAP officers than some guy who got a radiotelephone license? 

Assuming completion of at least Phase II, the answer is clearly "yes".

Quote
Sure, but if the purpose of the program was to produce the kind of officers we want, we would make EVERYBODY do it. 

Well, I'm not against that, of course.  But no one has said that the CP is the only way to train officers.  Even the RM has multiple paths with Academies, ROTC, OCS, and direct commissions.  CAP is no different.

Quote from: Ned on July 11, 2008, 04:23:02 PM
  YOU are the one who wants to take the meat axe to a highly successful program and change the way it has been done for 60 years. 

Actually the Cadet program was something totally different in the 40's, and changed again completely in the 1960's. 

It was a program to make Officers.  Today it is not.  (other than the Cadet Officer variety).  Our goal in Cadet Programs is not to make the future leadership of CAP, although it should be!!  Some Cadets do transition over to the Officer side, but not because of some training program, but because they desire to serve as an Officer and continue in CAP.  There is no Officer Training Program in CAP for Cadets to Senior.  The Flight Officer program could have been a great success, but it seemed no one wanted to make it into a CAP Officer training program.

I think this argument has surely run its course.  We all have very different opinions about what constitutes an adult, who should be an adult, who should be a cadet etc.  I am going to concede and go with NED.  There most likely is no problem that needs fixing here. 

What would be more beneficial would be the creation of a transition course for those cadets that want to be CAP Officers, other than the Flight Officer program.  Laying out plans, programs and activities that the Cadet to Officer individual must do to actually become a CAP Officer, would be beneficial, and may raise the standard of CAP Officers.   

 

Quote from: mikeylikey on July 11, 2008, 04:45:05 PM

Actually the Cadet program was something totally different in the 40's, and changed again completely in the 1960's. 

You're correct.  I wasn't clear in my response.  I meant to point out that the maximum age for cadets (21 years) hasn't changed since the program was first established during WWII.

We have tinkered with the lower age a bit over the years, but the max has stayed the same.

But clearly CAP has reworked the curricula of our program several times.  And probably will again at some point.

Thanks for the correction.

Ned Lee

The cadet program is working to build good leaders and good citizens, and hopefully some of the best will stay on
as Senior members as pay back to the program for the benefits they received.

Yes, we are building future CAP officers - not in the sense so many people get caught in, the shoulder grade, but in the sense  of the true meaning of officership.

However I find the ongoing comments here and elsewhere about the "meaninglessness of our grade" insulting and counterproductive.  Like the Holy Trinity, it is one of the "mysteries of our faith" - those that "get it, get it", those that don't perhaps should find another outlet for their service.

Those that make those statements are rarely doing so for any reason other than to raise the heat on the discussion and dissuade the real issue.

In most cases our special apppointments are no different than military special appointments for Dr.s and other professionals.
A few weeks of "salutin' school" does not an officer make any more than our level 1, but then a new CFI-Captain should not be put in a position of impactful authority anymore than a salutin' school MD.

If we're doing that, and we are, that is a failure of leadership and personality, not the program itself.

Quote from: lordmonar on July 11, 2008, 03:58:48 AM
I don't have any numbers....but the number of cadets over 18 can't be more then 1-2%

As of my most recent CAPWatch database download for NEWG (6/6/2008), the total number of cadets over 18 in NEWG is 39 out of 251, or 15.5%.  I could go to the effort to download a new one, but I'd prefer to not do that simply for an online debate.

We also lose the ability for cadets to do a lot of programs: a decent portion of the NCSA's require cadets to be 16 or 17 (IACE, NFAP).  If a cadet turns 18 in the middle of the activity for IACE, they can never attend.  (They are not yet 17 by the time it starts one year, and over 18 by the time it ends the next year).

Some fo the leadership skills that are to be taught to cadets cannot fully be appreciated until a certain level of maturity is reached--age is one of those things which helps maturity.  I learned more as an older cadet about leadership, than I ever learned under the age of 18.  I also was able to do more (by not living at home) as an older cadet. 

I will also mention, as being such a cadet (20 years old) that the idea of MOST cadets getting the Spaatz award before turning 18 is a little insane. I joined when I was fourteen, and I am just now about to take my second run at the last portion of the test I need to take. It's not because I was lazy at any point of the program, and it's not because I was held up because I couldn't pass any portion of the program.

It had much more to do with school, outside committments, starting college... to be honest, the types of cadets that aim at the Spaatz tend to be somewhat active in ALL aspects of their life, not just CAP. It's highly unrealistic to expect any cadet to get the Spaatz in the minimum time allotted when some would argue it's highly unrealistic to expect every cadet to get the Spaatz alone. So in order to give most cadets a fair run at completing the program, it's almost necessary to leave those extra three years tacked on to the end, lest the entire program be revamped in order to churn out the same numbers of higher-ranking cadets, which we are so desperately in need of.

I am curious how many Spaatz recipients are over 18...

I am not one of those who usually supports the argument of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it", due to the fact that non-broken things can be really outdated and can use improvements. However, in this situation, it just doesn't seem like the 18-20 year olds in the program are enough of a detriment (or any sort of a detriment) to warrant the MASSIVE amount of work it would take to rewrite the cadet program to exclude them.

Oh... and my argument does not come from the fact that I am one of these 18-20 year old cadets... I'm the guy who wants to do away with the entire C/Officer system and go to a purely C/NCO rank structure, and I'm a C/Lt Col. ;)

WIWAC...

Nearly every Spaatz was at least 19, many got their certificate days before their 21st birthday. More than a few got them while wearing a Senior Member uniform with Captain's bars on the epaulets. This was back when you had to have completed 6th grade to join and you could be a c/Ltc in 24 months.

The Cadet program is something that should not be taken lightly and it seems that if we cut the age limit down to 18 then a young person is going to miss out on a lot of opportunities.

Being a Senior Cadet officer give someone at a young age the opportunity to lead in a way they may have to wait 20 years to do again.  The opportunities to find activities and to step up and try out leadership in a fashion that will not cost them significantly if they make a mistake.  It gives a young person time to mature and gain critical leadership and people skills which they will not get from the Senior program, ROTC, or virtually any other program available.  (I will put a CAP c/LTC up against any other programs c/LTC any day)

Lets not forget that there are lots of things to do as a cadet over 18 ... (IACE, National, Regional Activities, SAR)  there is a real place in the program for cadets of that age. Not to mention the program should be ran entirely by the cadets.  When you have a 16 year old Cadet he is not capable of running the program to the level of a 19 year old, so as a senior you have to keep you hands on a lot more.

Sorry to be so blunt here .... If you don't see how older cadets fit in then you really need more exposure to CAP and the options for Cadets.

Rant over...


Mike

^ I have to disagree with you on the ROTC thing (and c/Lt Col thing) as well as the 16 year old and 19 year old situation.  There are many 16 year old more capable of being a Cadet Commander in a SQD, than a 19 year old.  Maturity is NOT related to age, as most people think it is. 

Quote from: mikeylikey on July 18, 2008, 04:36:15 AM
Maturity is NOT related to age, as most people think it is. 

That is SO incorrect.

No doubt that there is the occasional sixteen year old who can outperform a twenty year old in the realm of maturity. I am currently working with one who shows maturity that surprised me for someone his age.

However, it DID suprise me, and the reason is surprised me is because I rarely see the ability to think as abstractly as he is capable of in such a young age.

To say that maturity isn't linked with age is ridiculous. Maturity is DEFINED as aging. And I would challenge someone to say that there is a period of more change in someone's life in terms of maturity than there is in the 12-20 age range.

The occasional fluke cadet that everyone likes referring to is just that. To base an entire population of cadets off of a single sample is ludicrous.

If you don't believe me, take a developmental psychology class, like I am. ;)

Quote from: Nathan on July 19, 2008, 01:55:46 AM
If you don't believe me, take a developmental psychology class, like I am. ;)

Dude......I thought I knew everything too after I spent one semester away at College.  My professors really opened my eyes.   >:D

WHAT?!?!

If we followed your thinking, then when you are my age, you will know how wrong you are. 

Maturity is not something that just "clicks on" when you turn 18.  Don't forget about your Western Civilization class.  It was common for children to marry and have children of their own before their 15th birthday, and hold down a job and provide for the welfare of their family 500 years ago.  It has only been the past 300 years that we started to classify people that had not reached thier 18th birthday as children.  A fairly new concept in the whole scheme of the world.  We have artificialy extended childhood, mostly due in part to lifespans being extended.  I would predict like many philosophy studiers would that as populations get older, childhood will be extended past the arbitrary age of 18.

If you reasearch the American Culture from its earliest beginings in the 1600's, you will see that it was very common for 13 and 14 year olds to leave home and be an apprentice or journeyman of some type.  Today 13 and 14 year olds have the instinctive cognition to be mature, but our cultural environment promotes childlike behavior until they reach that magic number of 18. 

So, as a psychology student my first year at Penn State I did take classes you refrenced.  I also have a degree in History and my Masters in World Cultures.  Then there is my useless Business Admin degree, which really does not relate to this argument.  (To note, not one of my degrees has any relative signifigance to me being an Army Officer).

Either way, the possibility for someone younger than 18 to be more mature than someone older than 18 is there.  I can go on and on, but no one wants to do read that.  So I will concede to you that there are factors that determine maturity, but I have to reiterate that age is only one of those factors in a large list, and would rank further toward the bottom. 

Many people confuse physical maturity with mental maturity.  It does not work that way.   

   

Quote from: mikeylikey on July 19, 2008, 04:14:08 AM
...
So, as a psychology student my first year at Penn State I did take classes you refrenced.  I also have a degree in History and my Masters in World Cultures.  Then there is my useless Business Admin degree, which really does not relate to this argument.  (To note, not one of my degrees has any relative signifigance to me being an Army Officer).
...

World Cultures, eh?  Is that why you like exotic places with lots of sand?

Quote from: mikeylikey on July 19, 2008, 04:14:08 AM
Many people confuse physical maturity with mental maturity.  It does not work that way.   

   

Exactly, as a developmental psych. class may teach you. Currently working in a middle school, I see 12 year olds who are very mature physically, but still have the mental reasoning of a 11-12 year old. It's a characteristic of adolescence to think one is "grown up" mentally because the body is grown up, when in reality the two are not connected. One may not reach a mental level of adulthood until well into the 20s, and maintain some aspects of adolescence until much later in life.
Watch "Jerry Springer" as an example. ::)

Quote from: mikeylikey on July 19, 2008, 04:14:08 AM
Dude......I thought I knew everything too after I spent one semester away at College.  My professors really opened my eyes.   >:D

Sorry, let's go with, "You should take up being a developmental psychology major like I am." Is that more credible?

Quote from: mikeylikeyMaturity is not something that just "clicks on" when you turn 18.  Don't forget about your Western Civilization class.  It was common for children to marry and have children of their own before their 15th birthday, and hold down a job and provide for the welfare of their family 500 years ago.  It has only been the past 300 years that we started to classify people that had not reached thier 18th birthday as children.  A fairly new concept in the whole scheme of the world.  We have artificialy extended childhood, mostly due in part to lifespans being extended.  I would predict like many philosophy studiers would that as populations get older, childhood will be extended past the arbitrary age of 18.

You're confusing the legal idea of adulthood with the psychological idea of adulthood. Just because you call someone a child does not mean that they are a child, and just because they are called an adult does not mean they are an adult, regardless of what age they are.

Given that, though, the argument isn't whether or not cadets 18+ are CHILDREN, because cadets aren't necessarily children as far as the argument is concerned. It's whether or not they can benefit from the cadet program, and whether or not the program can benefit from them. The answer to both is "yes."

Quote from: mikeylikeyEither way, the possibility for someone younger than 18 to be more mature than someone older than 18 is there.  I can go on and on, but no one wants to do read that.  So I will concede to you that there are factors that determine maturity, but I have to reiterate that age is only one of those factors in a large list, and would rank further toward the bottom. 

I was going to point-counterpoint the whole thing, but it seems pretty summed up here...

Yes, as you said, the POSSIBILITY of someone younger than 18 to be more mature than someone over is there. However, a "possibility" is not necessarily good enough, especially when we're relating this to a radical restructuring of the entire cadet program. We'd have to come up with better than a "possibility."

BTW, with your rather sociological point of view, wouldn't it follow that because our society TRAINS those under 18 NOT to be adults (as you said earlier with the whole extended lifetimes and stuff) that we shouldn't EXPECT the cadets to have a higher maturity level? It kind of goes against your own argument.

Keep in mind that just because children were getting pregnant and taking up jobs at the age of fifteen doesn't mean that it is the ideal way of doing things. I could easily counter that those kids did not need the education or experience to exist in today's world, and therefore easily did not need the "maturity" level that our adults today need. Who knows? They could have been the EXACT same way our own fifteen year olds are. But who cares when your main tasks are farming and raising a kid in the adobe hut your entire family lives in? What's the use of having that maturity? Not to mention that during those times, babies weren't known for being particularly... durable? (Yeah, I actually DID take Western Civ...)

That's my point. Psychologically, there are stages of development, and while no doubt there are other forces at work, it does not necessarily change the fact that the switch is sometime within the 12-20 year range. The extra forces just affect where that switch is. Under your sociological perspective, we could train a five year old to lead an encampment. :D

Quote from: Nathan on July 19, 2008, 02:18:45 PM
..........we could train a five year old to lead an encampment. :D

CAP is starting to promote that grade school initiative program in some Wings.  So, we may actually see a 10 year old c/COL in the very near future.   <-----Kidding, more like 12 year old c/COL

Quote from: JC004 on July 19, 2008, 10:21:13 AM
World Cultures, eh?  Is that why you like exotic places with lots of sand?

ummm......I can surely go without sand for a few more years.  PLUS COLGAN.......your Philly Cheese steak made me freaking sick.  Wait until my cellphone start working again, you will get an earful. 

Anyway.......maturity, over 18 cadets, under 18 cadets, Flight Officers, 21 year olds, adolescents.......blah....blah.....blah. 

I think we are just running this thread out now. 

As NED pointed out previously, there really is nothing here to fix.   

Currently there is little mechinism for the transition of CADETS into CAP OFFICERS.  I have long held the idea that our Cadet Program should serve as a sort of CAPROTC where the future leaders of CAP are groomed.

I too would support the OTC model.

Currently, as has bene pointed out early in this thread.  A second class citizen status exists for Flight Officers.  I have seen it before.  A 7-8 year CAP TFO being patronized by CAP Officer 2d Lts and advanced Promotion Pilots et al. It is quite disgusting to watch those that likely are the most dedicated of CAP...having pledged in the Cadet Oath on a weekly basis to do what that implies...looked down on and cast aside by a host of relative newbies (some of which might just be there for free flying).  Is it a wonder why we don't have good transition rates.

Retired (?) cadets seem to have a real hard time of the transition.  We ned up losing a lot of them.  Those in College also get lost in the crowd.

Is this an area we need to look at with policy?

Perhaps policy should be made to some effect of the ideas suggested in several comments above.

I do firmly believe that the cadet program is a place to groom future CAP leaders. And not just leaders for CAP but other things such as military, government, and business. The cadet program is a system within which one learns leadership. It is IMO one of the best leadership training programs for youths in the country. And it is more than that still.

Further still, cadets over 18 should be offered opportunities unique to their age group, such as extended encampments, intense SAR academies, and a rigorous flight training curriculum. This will create stronger retention rates among these older cadets.

I think the age difference in the cadet program is too large. The younger cadets can't keep up with the older cadets so they shouldn't be held to the same standards. Case in point, the aerospace modules. There was a day when the aerospace requirement for cadets amounted to FAA ground school. Now the modules are essentially for 6th graders. I've seen 17 y/o cadets start promoting soon after they join (to get one good year before college) and they view the modules as a joke.

Another case, the leadership text. It is way too involved for a 12 y/o fully comprehend some of these topics. And if they don't pass the test, they feel held back and unmotivated.

Older cadets should definitely have 'heavier' coursework or more opportunities or something that will fit their age group well. Of course, good luck trying to create a plan like that. I am aware that is asking too much.

On another note...

I think senior member rank is sometimes handed out wastefully. There are some outstanding FO's and young level 1's but then comes someone with a bunch of FAA ratings and/or degrees and they get nice rank but they don't contribute beans. But they act like a real big shot because of their rank.

I personally don't care about my rank. I know my abilities, my potentials, and I am here to contribute to a wonderful organization. My only regret was not staying longer as a cadet.

^ It is a shame when FO's are treated like crap.  I once watched as a new CAPT (special promotion) tried to tell a SFO to go stand in formation with the Cadets (most likely because the CAPT had no idea what the SFO was or thought he was a cadet because of his young appearance).  I walked over to the CAPT, and told him (very sternly) that he was a disgrace and should learn about the program he joined before he comes back to any activity.  I also pointed out that the SFO had just under 10 years in CAP, and asked the CAPT how long he had been in.  Big surprise.......he was in just at 6 months!  He only attended two SQD meetings in that 6 months, one to join and one to do level 1.  

^See what I mean? Special promotions, huh? Sure, for downright special people.

Quote from: mikeylikey on July 19, 2008, 08:44:00 PM
^ It is a shame when FO's are treated like crap.  I once watched as a new CAPT (special promotion) tried to tell a SFO to go stand in formation with the Cadets (most likely because the CAPT had no idea what the SFO was or thought he was a cadet because of his young appearance).  I walked over to the CAPT, and told him (very sternly) that he was a disgrace and should learn about the program he joined before he comes back to any activity.  I also pointed out that the SFO had just under 10 years in CAP, and asked the CAPT how long he had been in.  Big surprise.......he was in just at 6 months!  He only attended two SQD meetings in that 6 months, one to join and one to do level 1.  

I was an FO for a good while, and was never really treated like crap ever. I usually had to educate people on what those little white lines on my collar/shoulder meant, but other then that, I never had any problems. Maybe I'm just lucky  >:D

Quote from: SJFedor on July 19, 2008, 11:39:14 PM

Quote from: mikeylikey on July 19, 2008, 08:44:00 PM
^ It is a shame when FO's are treated like crap.  I once watched as a new CAPT (special promotion) tried to tell a SFO to go stand in formation with the Cadets (most likely because the CAPT had no idea what the SFO was or thought he was a cadet because of his young appearance).  I walked over to the CAPT, and told him (very sternly) that he was a disgrace and should learn about the program he joined before he comes back to any activity.  I also pointed out that the SFO had just under 10 years in CAP, and asked the CAPT how long he had been in.  Big surprise.......he was in just at 6 months!  He only attended two SQD meetings in that 6 months, one to join and one to do level 1.  

I was an FO for a good while, and was never really treated like crap ever. I usually had to educate people on what those little white lines on my collar/shoulder meant, but other then that, I never had any problems. Maybe I'm just lucky  >:D

Too bad I didn't know you when you were a FO then.........   >:D

The comment that the cadet manuals are written for the 12-15 year old cadets gets to the heart of the problem. If you can find it on eBay, the 1949 cadet manuals Volume one book one and book two were written for older cadets. These were way above the current cadet manuals in scope, but at the same time were used by younger cadets who were given a challenge to learn.
With manuals written for the younger cadets, the concept of a transition program such as the OTC mentioned previously has great value in retaining older cadets, those 18-21. The FO insignia needs to return to it's roots of using the old USAF warrent officer grade insignia, the silver bar with one, two or three blue stripes across the bar (not metal insignia)
The OTC program would have advanced leadership, ES or other training as required but still allow the OTC member to test inthe cadet program to continue advancement. So the OTC member would be in a dual program, both cadet and senior, this would provide CAP with well trained senior members when the OTC member hits age 21.

^Yeah this OTC idea sounds good. Definitely, a cadet over 18 should start being looked at as a future senior member with emphasis on leadership and CAP traditions. Older cadets are definitely keepers of tradition--so long as in check with regs.

I'm a 23 y/o Capt, I'm still regarded as a kid by (some) senior members. I was a SFO and I thought it was a good experience. Getting treated like a kid by seniors is inevitable. However, if a cadet smarted off to me and I was a FO, I'd sure as hell put him in his place. In every case I've seen a FO (and I've seen a few, as a cadet and as a senior), they didn't catch [mess] because of the insignia they wore, they caught it because of who was wearin' it.

Besides, it's only 3 years, max. How about working toward Capt during that time to make up for it when ya hit 21?

How about someone write out a 'white paper', post it up here, we comment, vote, whatever, and then sent it up chain of command. I think it is a problem that needs fixin' and it would benefit CAP immensely. I just made the transition and I'm still not sure about a lot of things, learning, and such. I would like to contribute more but just waiting to gather up more ratings and stuff. Maybe thos over 18 could start gathering up those ratings so as soon as gray epaulets go on, BOOM, ready to hit the floor runnin'!

Just a thought.

Quote from: stratoflyer on August 22, 2008, 05:23:16 AMI think it is a problem that needs fixin' and it would benefit CAP immensely.

I'm sorry, but could you state the "problem that needs fixin'"?

I'd be happy to help with the white paper, but none of us can get started without a problem statement of some sort.

Ned Lee

Quote from: stratoflyer on August 22, 2008, 05:23:16 AM
Maybe thos over 18 could start gathering up those ratings so as soon as gray epaulets go on, BOOM, ready to hit the floor runnin'!

If they want to work in CP as a senior, they don't need gray epaulets:

http://level2.cap.gov/documents/2008_06_04_Officer_credit_for_cadet_service_.pdf (http://level2.cap.gov/documents/2008_06_04_Officer_credit_for_cadet_service_.pdf)

Quote from: Eebdog on August 22, 2008, 03:20:44 PM

Quote from: stratoflyer on August 22, 2008, 05:23:16 AM
Maybe thos over 18 could start gathering up those ratings so as soon as gray epaulets go on, BOOM, ready to hit the floor runnin'!

If they want to work in CP as a senior, they don't need gray epaulets:

http://level2.cap.gov/documents/2008_06_04_Officer_credit_for_cadet_service_.pdf (http://level2.cap.gov/documents/2008_06_04_Officer_credit_for_cadet_service_.pdf)

Huh? What do Cadet Milestone recipients getting advanced promotion as SMs have to do with wearing grey epaulets? Or working in Cadet Programs, cadets the go senior get the advanced rank no matter what their specialty track is...

Quote from: DC on August 22, 2008, 06:33:21 PM

Quote from: Eebdog on August 22, 2008, 03:20:44 PM

Quote from: stratoflyer on August 22, 2008, 05:23:16 AM
Maybe thos over 18 could start gathering up those ratings so as soon as gray epaulets go on, BOOM, ready to hit the floor runnin'!

If they want to work in CP as a senior, they don't need gray epaulets:

http://level2.cap.gov/documents/2008_06_04_Officer_credit_for_cadet_service_.pdf (http://level2.cap.gov/documents/2008_06_04_Officer_credit_for_cadet_service_.pdf)

Huh? What do Cadet Milestone recipients getting advanced promotion as SMs have to do with wearing grey epaulets? Or working in Cadet Programs, cadets the go senior get the advanced rank no matter what their specialty track is...

He's saying that a former cadet can earn ratings while they are still a cadet and they aren't required to have "grey epaulets" to start because the stuff they're doing now counts when they switch.

I was referring to stuff such as scanner training, or IC training, or something that only seniors do.

Look, rank is good, but the way it works in CAP is it ends up meaning little. So I got gold bars...I've been in CAP since '00. I know a heck of a lot about a lot of things, and not so much about other things, such as ES stuff. One thing I was pointing at is cadets over 18 could start specialized training towards becoming a full blown senior member officer with a hefty knowledge on ES.

As far as the problem, I was thinking about educating senior members more on what FO's are, and emphasize customs and courtesies, and know what is a chain of command and how it works, especially at activities involving cadets.

Another problem, a more structured, more clear transition to to senior member that would include more ES stuff.

CAP members in general don't have to do any ES at all, so I don't see a problem there.  Also, ES isn't restricted to senior membership in any real category, so any cadet can start working toward higher quals.  They just wouldn't fully earn a lot of the higher quals such as IC as a cadet. 

In terms of the FO and rest of the senior world relationship, it's a whole other issue that doesn't need to involve transfering cadet membership at 18. 

Cadets do NOT earn a CP rating as a cadet. They earn it when they transition to seniordom, if their commander approves.

Cadets do not earn PR ratings period. They may earn some speciality track badges (ES basic, ITO basic, and Comm - all three), but they do not earn the ratings. Once they transition and backfill the senior requirements, they earn the rating.

I figured I'd put my two cents in...I'm a former Mitchell cadet, 5 Year Type 7 AFROTC scholarship recipient (it would be 4 year, but I had a Secretary of the AF approved engineering major), former AFROTC cadet , and I am a FO. I made the transition to SM soon after my 18th b-day. I was a cadet commander and I spent most of the two years I was a cadet doing ES stuff. I hated cadet programs (too focused on CP, not enough on ES ;D), but I did it because I had to in order to participate in ES and because in real life you still have to do things you don't want to do.

There are two main reasons to keep the FO grades. One, legal issues. For example, in some states, the age that you are considered an adult can be anywhere from 18-21. As far as the military argument is concerned, the AF will let you join AFROTC (including scholarships) as early as 16...possibly earlier I'll have to pull up the reg. The rule is you can't get your commission until you are 18 and if I remember right there is a 17 with parental consent loophole with that too. That doesn't count in this situation. The second reason is that it give former cadets a time to transition between cadet life and SM life. You have to cut a lot of your ties with your cadets and build them with the SMs. Not only are you leaving the familiarity of cadet programs, but you are going into uncharted territory. Cadet programs is fairly organized. SM "programs" is "fairly" organized. But the FO ranks are completely confusing especially if you are a former cadet. Most squadrons don't know how and when to promote you.

I believe that cadets should be able to remain cadets until they are 21. This gives them time to finish any goals they had not completed and to think about if they want to continue to in CAP. Most cadets quit during this time because they don't see any reason to continue. They hear about how difficult it can be to transfer to SM if they are younger than 21 and some don't see a point. Some of my friends have said they quit because they could no longer be a cadet. These individuals were generally only involved in CP and not in AE, ES, etc. They saw no point in continuing especially if they were going to join the military. The ones I know that went on to be a SM are the ones who were involved in something outside of CP and the ones that developed close ties to SMs during the 18-21 age range.

I enjoy being a FO. Cadets still see me as someone that they can talk to and depend on (lets face it...as a cadet most SM just cause roadblocks and drama) and SM don' t see me as that cadet who went to all of the ES stuff but couldn't do anything during the meetings for them. But, if I had the choice again to stay a cadet or go SM...I'd still go SM...less drama ::) >:D

Quote from: alwaysreadyneverhere on September 16, 2008, 06:25:21 AM
Most squadrons don't know how and when to promote you.

I echo that sentiment. When I went through all the FO grades, I kept track of my own PD, and when it was time I came to my CC with the form and the regulation and said "sir/ma'am, it's that time again"

The average SM looks at the FO grade insignia as being an "Advanced Cadet grade".  By that I mean, it doesn't look like a SM grade insignia. If it doesn't look like 2LT gade and above it must be a cadet grade insignia. So in many cases SM treat the FO grades as cadets and don't think about promotions or PD of FO's.
This could be resolved by going back to the original USAF FO grade insignia which looked like a 1LT bar with a blue stripe (or stripes) across the bar. To many a FO isn't a cadet and also isn't a SM becuase of grade insignia since it isn't included in the slide shows for level 1. Commanders often leave the FO members under the DCP for lack of understanding the role of the FO.

Having been in CAP when we had Warrant Officers, I kind of look at FOs in that light.

Bottom line is that we say in our regs that an SFO is equal to a Capt once he/she turns 21 but we don't treat them that way.

A major part of this is that they are so young....I am 42 and I am treated as the "young guy" by most of old hands in CAP.

But that goes back to my orginanal point....we already have a major age discrimination problem in CAP....the vast 18-21 gray area and the FO ranks only make it worse.

Quote from: lordmonar on September 16, 2008, 08:49:00 PM
Bottom line is that we say in our regs that an SFO is equal to a Capt once he/she turns 21 but we don't treat them that way.

A major part of this is that they are so young....I am 42 and I am treated as the "young guy" by most of old hands in CAP.

But that goes back to my orginanal point....we already have a major age discrimination problem in CAP....the vast 18-21 gray area and the FO ranks only make it worse.

Try being a 23 year old 2d Lt in command of the flightline with "seasoned" light colonels flying from your line that act like it's a normal FBO line. Nearly had a cadet wing walker taken out by the stabilizer once when the pilot disobeyed my direction and turned hard in the opposite direction because he thought he knew my job better than I did.

Well you know the best way to get a pilot to ignore you?     Start marshalling him!  ;D

Sadly, I'm inclined to agree when it comes to CAP FlOps.

Quote from: lordmonar on September 17, 2008, 04:07:34 AM
Well you know the best way to get a pilot to ignore you?     Start marshalling him!  ;D

Funny thing was we had been running a line with 7 aircraft for 6 hours at that point. The pilot in question did not like to make all the extra turns to comply with our one way traffic pattern and basically exited the in door.

Quote from: davidsinn on September 17, 2008, 01:11:34 AM
Try being a 23 year old 2d Lt in command of the flightline with "seasoned" light colonels flying from your line that act like it's a normal FBO line. Nearly had a cadet wing walker taken out by the stabilizer once when the pilot disobeyed my direction and turned hard in the opposite direction because he thought he knew my job better than I did.

BTDT. Grounded the wing/cc at a SAREX because he almost ran over a cadet on the flight line. Safety backed me up.

Quote from: arajca on September 17, 2008, 01:34:07 PM

Quote from: davidsinn on September 17, 2008, 01:11:34 AM
Try being a 23 year old 2d Lt in command of the flightline with "seasoned" light colonels flying from your line that act like it's a normal FBO line. Nearly had a cadet wing walker taken out by the stabilizer once when the pilot disobeyed my direction and turned hard in the opposite direction because he thought he knew my job better than I did.

BTDT. Grounded the wing/cc at a SAREX because he almost ran over a cadet on the flight line. Safety backed me up.

Safety Trumps the shoulder chickens....

The program we have is adequate. We just need to tweek it a bit. It is hard to write regs that will cover every situation. If you write them too large, they will not do anything.

If you join before your 18, you can stay a cadet till you are 21. Join after your 18th and you are a senior. The problem as I see it lies with training.

First, we need to have a specific Flight Officer training curriculum that would combine elements of the cadet program knowledge with more advanced training. These are actually senior-members-in-training. We treat them like seniors when it is convenient, "Hey, we need a TAC to go with the cadets to get haircuts." but we treat them like cadets when they screw up because they don't have the training that a Mitchell or higher cadet might have. I have been guilty of this myself so I'm trying to be part of the solution.  Let's set up  an FO training prgram that is distinctive from the CP or senior training programs.

I also think we need to follow the AFs lead and start a Senior Officer Basic Course that is more hands on and in-depth than a Level 1 or the ECI 13 or whatever it is designated now.

olefido
A trainbing program for 18-21 year old seniors has already been discussed. it's basically the old Officer training Corp program that CAP used in the 1960's. The OTC program was voluntary in that a cadet could stay a cadet or join OTC and be eligible for FO grades. Ideally it would come back as a manditory program for 18 to 21 year olds. However it would allow an OTC member to continue to progress through the cadet levels, while at the same time allow senior member professional development.

Quote from: olefido on September 18, 2008, 11:23:10 PM
The program we have is adequate. We just need to tweek it a bit. It is hard to write regs that will cover every situation. If you write them too large, they will not do anything.

If you join before your 18, you can stay a cadet till you are 21. Join after your 18th and you are a senior. The problem as I see it lies with training.

First, we need to have a specific Flight Officer training curriculum that would combine elements of the cadet program knowledge with more advanced training. These are actually senior-members-in-training. We treat them like seniors when it is convenient, "Hey, we need a TAC to go with the cadets to get haircuts." but we treat them like cadets when they screw up because they don't have the training that a Mitchell or higher cadet might have. I have been guilty of this myself so I'm trying to be part of the solution.  Let's set up  an FO training prgram that is distinctive from the CP or senior training programs.

I also think we need to follow the AFs lead and start a Senior Officer Basic Course that is more hands on and in-depth than a Level 1 or the ECI 13 or whatever it is designated now.

This is even worse.....by this definition FO's ARE NOT the same as regular officers.....but current philosophy is that they are the same....they are just not 21......hence the jump from SFO to Capt.

By creating a new program for the FO's that uses cadet curriculm...you are saying to the world that these SMs are just big cadets.

There is no jump from SFO to Capt at age 21 except for those who have earned the Spaatz award or who have 18 months TIG as SFO. If a SFO who has not earned the Spaatz award has less than 18 months TIG as SFO, the promotion should be to 1st Lt until a total of 18 months as SFO and 1st Lt combined is achieved. Then the 1st Lt would be eligible for promotion to Capt.

Oh how I wish the old days when we had warrant officers.  There was something about that little blue and silver bar. (If you get my drift)

lets not forget someone who joins CAP at 18, 19 or 20 as apposed to someone who joined at 21. There is no difference in lack of knowledge and some might ague the same maturity as some people loose a few years of it as soon as they turn 21....

Any training to bring that new 18-20 yr old up to speed is the same thing needed for any new member of any age. [not every old person is actually mature or has military experience]

Quote
If you join before your 18, you can stay a cadet till you are 21. Join after your 18th and you are a senior. The problem as I see it lies with training.

Did something change? I thought you had a choice until your 19th Bday... as in if you are 18 and join you CAN be a cadet if you WANT to be. If you are 19 you MUST be a senior member.


I know experiences differ everywhere... I still think it is a very bad idea to do this whole C/COL = Capt at 21.... This is used to keep cadets in? Seriously, what is the quality of the person if this is whats needed.... Yes I know bling chasers ultimately do a lot, but they also chase away many other members....

What happens when that C/COL who is basically demanding promotion to Capt gets told by the CC, "No"? Will they leave? Did we accomplish anything besides creating a issue where some commanders might feel they have to promote or are expected to make those promotions? Promotions that are made: Do they give some cadet who does not know how the Officer side of the program works, who still feels they are the commander [used to be cadet commander] something to power trip on?

I would really like to know how current cadets who made the transitions are handling it... in fact I think it should have been a requirement to test the new "option". That requirement being that the cadet who wants it and the commander who authorizes it, needs to report to NHQ on the results of it. [Set interval for at least 1 year] I'm sure there would be good and bad reports....

Something I have seen regarding C/Col -> Capt transition:
At a previous unit, many moons ago, we had two C/Col's transition. Each got 1st Lt and were told to demonstrate they deserve Capt. The first basically told the commander where to put it and quit. The other planned two activities in six months that were very successful. At the end of the second activity, he got his Capt's bars. When I left, he was still an active and productive member.

This approach makes sense to me.

I for one would not make a promotion without the cadet turned officer displaying they can perform at the requested level. Promotions are not rewards/pay for a job well done, it is a bestowing of greater responsibility etc... [and is NOT about checking boxes]

arajca that cadet you mentioned, having displayed that he could function at or beyond the minimal requirements as interpreted by your CC is fine with me. Direct promotion because they performed "well" as a CADET does not warrant automatic Capt, 1st or 2nd Lt. As displayed by the cadet who quit...there is a reason it should not be available right away.  [In the grand scheme of things, I don't think CAP will miss out on having that mis motivated individual not a part of CAP]

At a minimum, NHQ should have stipulated the normal 6 month waiting period a new officer has... This gives some time where a commander can see that transitioned officer perform in the new roles and responsibilities they have... Then they can make an educated decision as to what rank and what specialty level the individual should have...

Philosophy is one thing. Ground truth is another. We do tend to treat FO,s as advanced cadets except when we need them to fill a senior  function that nobody else wants to fill.  In other words they get the scut work that nobody older or more senior wants. We also do this with cadets who are 21, have turned senior, and do have Lt or Capt grade now. We still tend to think of them as cadets because that is how we have seen them for several years and until they start getting a little grizzled around the edges we keep doing it. I have seen it done countless times.

Cadets who transition into the FO grades after achieving the milestone grades don't need the basic training that someone joining at 18 or 19 does( and where I am if you join after your 18th birthday you go senior, no choice. I have never heard of it being any other way until this thread.)

The main thing i am trying to convey without getting bogged down in 20 or 30 nitpicking posts of regs interpretation is that we need to TRAIN!!! We have to train ALL!!! of our seniors to do some of the same things that cadets do such as drill, customs and courtesies, uniform wear. We have to get seniors out on the drill pads. This is what I meant about incorporating cadet training into the FO training program. In this day and age, we can't count on seniors having military experience. We need a Camp Curry type training program for seniors!

Hey here's one: at a PD event recently, there was a Col calling a few FO's as navy boys because of they're boat ranks.

Boat ranks?

I've been associated with Uncle Sam's Canoe Club all my life, and I have never seen Flight Officer or any of its variations used anywhere I've been. Got some more info on that? AF Col? CAP Col?

Maybe because of the look of FO epaulets? The narrow lines, I guess are somewhat similar to naval officer ranks. Sort of... I guess

Different color, different width, different style of underlying structure? Nah, no confusion here.

YMMV.

Why discourage an already difficult group to retain?  The average cadet who is dedicated enough to transition to the senior program in the first place, likely intends on participating.  The average cadet who has transitioned should not have to wait six months like a new senior member.  If you do not know the person or have doubts about them, I can understand why you might choose to do this.  However, by this time in the program, many of us have given 5 or 6 years of our life to civil air patrol, worked into the upper ranks of ES (including as high as a section chief), commanded encampments or activities with 50 or more cadets, earned the respect of our officers, and served through college when many of our peers simply left the program for greater priorities.  For anyone who thinks that a cadet has not earned the senior transition, take a closer look at the cadet program.  .05% of all cadets ever achieve the Spaatz.  Do you think the number of senior members that achieve 2d Lt, 1st Lt, or Captain is that low?  Doubt it.  By the time a cadet has earned the grade of C/Col or C/Lt Col RCLS, leadership manuals, and cadet experience cover far more than simple ECI-13 ever would.  The aerospace portion of the spaatz mirrors the SM Yeagar test, except, its closed book.  The Spaatz cadet also must complete a difficult essay and a PT test.  Keep in mind by this point, at a minimum, this cadet has also attended a one week encampment and a one week regional cadet leadership school or cadet officer school (in most cases).  Even a Senior Member Captain is not required to attend one or even two weeks of residential courses.  Does a person with this level of knowledge seem like he/she has the same CAP knowledge as a new senior member off the street?  I sure hope not.

Quote from: rightstuffpilot on September 26, 2008, 05:04:57 AM
Why discourage an already difficult group to retain?  The average cadet who is dedicated enough to transition to the senior program in the first place, likely intends on participating.  The average cadet who has transitioned should not have to wait six months like a new senior member.  If you do not know the person or have doubts about them, I can understand why you might choose to do this.  However, by this time in the program, many of us have given 5 or 6 years of our life to civil air patrol, worked into the upper ranks of ES (including as high as a section chief), commanded encampments or activities with 50 or more cadets, earned the respect of our officers, and served through college when many of our peers simply left the program for greater priorities.  For anyone who thinks that a cadet has not earned the senior transition, take a closer look at the cadet program.  .05% of all cadets ever achieve the Spaatz.  Do you think the number of senior members that achieve 2d Lt, 1st Lt, or Captain is that low?  Doubt it.  By the time a cadet has earned the grade of C/Col or C/Lt Col RCLS, leadership manuals, and cadet experience cover far more than simple ECI-13 ever would.  The aerospace portion of the spaatz mirrors the SM Yeagar test, except, its closed book.  The Spaatz cadet also must complete a difficult essay and a PT test.  Keep in mind by this point, at a minimum, this cadet has also attended a one week encampment and a one week regional cadet leadership school or cadet officer school (in most cases).  Even a Senior Member Captain is not required to attend one or even two weeks of residential courses.  Does a person with this level of knowledge seem like he/she has the same CAP knowledge as a new senior member off the street?  I sure hope not.

Wow!  What brand of soap was that?

For Grumps - Ivory Snow?

For Heidi - they're just jealous. "Illegitimi non carborundum (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illegitimi_non_carborundum)."

Thanks, Lol!  You made my night!  ;D  Fear not, I plan on crossing over come June 30th and giving back to the program that has given so much to me.

Ok so I am going to add my two cents to this conversation.

The issue is all about perspective.  As it has been said less that .05% of Cadets reach Spaatz and that is a very low percentage.  Spaatz Cadets are considered to be the cream of the crop and they should be considering all the training and tests that have to have been completed.  There is a reason that the MITCHELL Award is considered the equivalent of the Eagle Scout or Gold Award.  The Spaatz Award trains our cadets far beyond what the other "Youth Organizations" do.  As an Eagle Scout and a Eaker Cadet, I can honestly say that CAP better prepares our youth for entrance into the world.  The 12-18 Cadets can only learn so much.  But the 18-21 Cadets can learn so much more as they continue to progress through the program and gain experience in life.  This experience allows our Older Cadets to develop in ways that is truly second only to total immersion into the "real world".  I know many older cadets like myself that have had many doors opened to them due to their maturity and experience in CAP and in life due to CAP.  These cadets between the ages of 18-21 bring to the table a level of dedication that is rarely seen in Senior Member.  How many cadets or Senior Members between the Age of 18-25 are Rated IC3s or Ops Section Chiefs, or Ground Branch Directors/Air Branch Directors?  Very few.  The issue is not dedication of Cadets between the ages of 18-21 as a whole...it is dedication of Individual Cadets in Individual Units and that is where it needs to start and end.  If there is a problem with a cadet not doing his/her responsibility then it is up to the Unit to deal with it not NHQ to set forth a policy that prohibits 20y/o cadets to attend IACE!!  Lets remember that our Senior Cadets are the ones who run the cadet program.  Not the Senior Members.  Keep that in mind as you go to your next meeting and look around as you are at the next Encampment.

V/R,
Andrew Theismann, 1st Lt, CAP
C/Lieutenant Colonel (Ret.) EAKER #1840
Assistant Chief (Operations), Embry-Riddle Emergency Medical Services
Chief of Operations, North Texas Search and Rescue Agency
Emergency Medical Services Instructor #EMT15846

Quote from: kd5vid on September 26, 2008, 06:03:49 AM
Lets remember that our Senior Cadets are the ones who run the cadet program.  Not the Senior Members.  Keep that in mind as you go to your next meeting and look around as you are at the next Encampment.

So the Cadet program can survive without Officers? I would love to see a cadet ask for anything, money/office space etc... and say... Don't worry, I'm a Cadet Col and I'm 20 years old. I have tuns of experience and I will be legally responsible for everything...You can trust me.... Oh and did I mention... My Bday is in 6 months... so someone else will be responsible. Why? Well when I turn 21, I wont be a cadet anymore... and cadets run this program.

Quote from: RiveraJ on September 26, 2008, 02:57:09 PM


So the Cadet program can survive without Officers? I would love to see a cadet ask for anything, money/office space etc... and say... Don't worry, I'm a Cadet Col and I'm 20 years old. I have tuns of experience and I will be legally responsible for everything...You can trust me.... Oh and did I mention... My Bday is in 6 months... soe someone else will be responsible. Why? Well when I turn 21, I wont be a cadet anymore... and cadets run this program.

Just to let you know.  It has happened.  Cadets are the driven ones.  If you don't like that go to a Senior Squadron and don't deal with cadets.

Quote from: RiveraJ on September 26, 2008, 02:57:09 PM

Quote from: kd5vid on September 26, 2008, 06:03:49 AM
Lets remember that our Senior Cadets are the ones who run the cadet program.  Not the Senior Members.  Keep that in mind as you go to your next meeting and look around as you are at the next Encampment.

So the Cadet program can survive without Officers? I would love to see a cadet ask for anything, money/office space etc... and say... Don't worry, I'm a Cadet Col and I'm 20 years old. I have tuns of experience and I will be legally responsible for everything...You can trust me.... Oh and did I mention... My Bday is in 6 months... soe someone else will be responsible. Why? Well when I turn 21, I wont be a cadet anymore... and cadets run this program.

That is not what he meant. Cadets should be running the Cadet Program. They should be planning the activities, and running the meeting. SMs have their own program to deal with. In a Cadet Squadron, it is their job to handle the higher functions that cadets cannot, whether by regulation, or inability due to age. But, the ideal squadron Cadet Program is run completely by cadets, with SMs serving only as advisors to the cadet staff.

Quote from: kd5vid on September 26, 2008, 03:04:19 PM
Just to let you know.  It has happened.  Cadets are the driven ones.  If you don't like that go to a Senior Squadron and don't deal with cadets.

You sound like a driven individual, or am I mistaken? From your signature, you are NOT a cadet. So to use your statement:

Are you driven and therefor a cadet or are you an officer and therefor NOT a driven individual?

My point is that sometimes Cadets and Retired Cadets choose to remain blind to things. If you have an issue with how the program is managed, try to effect change.

Instead of demanding something is a right? Ask yourselves why promotions are NOT a right and why they are at the commanders discretion. Officers do not have the right to any promotion and neither does any cadet. Earning a promotion is not a result of checking some boxes but rather the entrusting of one being able to perform at the level you were last promoted to.

A commanders expectation of performance, responsibility, respect etc should increase with every promotion he/she considers giving. 

Quote from: DC on September 26, 2008, 03:05:16 PM
That is not what he meant. Cadets should be running the Cadet Program. They should be planning the activities, and running the meeting.

Yes the program as designed by Officers is one in which Cadets SHOULD be running the Cadet Program.

Quote from: DC on September 26, 2008, 03:05:16 PM
SMs have their own program to deal with. In a Cadet Squadron, it is their job to handle the higher functions that cadets cannot, whether by regulation, or inability due to age.

In any squadron with cadets in it (Cadet or Composite) it is the Officers job to handle the "higher functions that cadets cannot, whether by regulation, or inability due to age." I point this out as I was directed to go join a Senior Squadron....

Quote from: DC on September 26, 2008, 03:05:16 PM
But, the ideal squadron Cadet Program is run completely by cadets, with SMs serving only as advisors to the cadet staff.

Yes, again, cadets should run the Cadet Program if at all possible. The cadet program as defined by regulation, leaves out a lot of things that happens at every level of CAP from NHQ down to a flight. (All those things that officers do) Lets not forget that....

 

It is important to remember that these are "ideal" squadron situations.  Situations where every squadron has a C/Lt Col as the C/CC and C/1st Lts at C/Flt CCs with ample NCO support and a C/1Sgt. 

However, I think we all know that we do not live in the ideal world and most squadrons have an average of 10-15 cadets on any given night.  We also realize that even bigger squadrons are usually either bottom or top heavy at any given time.

The bottom heavy ones or the ones without a cadet who's the appropriate grade neccesitates the need for more senior involvement until there are cadets who are capable of filling those roles.  If there is only a C/SSgt in the squadron, make them a flight sergeant and have the senior CP staff pick up the rest of the slack. 

So, ideally cadets should be able to impliment the CP, but no matter what you do, the senior members will always be responsible for the administration and oversight of that program.  Seniors call the shots in the end, no matter what the situation.

Even in the ROTC realm there is still oversight and involvement from the commandants, detachment commanders, etc.  There are still experienced instructors, advisors, managers, etc.  Because cadets are just that, cadets.  They are still learning and should have experienced responsible people to make sure that things are being done correctly.

The cadet program needs to have people who are responsible for the overall success of the CP, which includes being responsible to parents, to the law, to our corporation.  If the cadet program starts to fail we as seniors have the responsibility to ensure that it doesn't.

Now, of course there are methods to do this which don't include a hostile takeover, but sometimes it does involve reshaping the cadet staff and having more "direct" senior involvement until things get back to where they should/need to be.

The one thing that the cadet program doesn't teach you is the hands on difference between being a senior and being a cadet.  There is more transition than most cadets realize and more things to learn than they realize.  Being a senior requires you to really put those leadership lessons to use because there isn't a safety net anymore.

Could not have said it any better or clearer...  :clap:

Quote from: jimmydeanno on September 26, 2008, 03:50:51 PM
The one thing that the cadet program doesn't teach you is the hands on difference between being a senior and being a cadet.  There is more transition than most cadets realize and more things to learn than they realize.  Being a senior requires you to really put those leadership lessons to use because there isn't a safety net anymore.

I guess it really just depends on how you look at it.  The senior cadets are being trained to be officers and as officers they are trained to take a hands off approach to the running of the Cadet Squadron and Cadet Staff.  True there is a learning curve in the transition from Cadet to Senior, the issue isn't that though.  The issue is the difference in maturity from 18 to 21.  A cadet at 18 is normally not ready to join as a Senior.  Granted you have the FO corps to think about, but the majority of them became a Senior out of choice or lack of desire to complete the cadet program.  Those cadets who want to continue in the Cadet Program should be treated as such.  Adults who want to further their education in ways that others their age do not have available.  Yes, the regulations do prohibit some things and those are understandable, but if the regulations allow it and the commander approves it why is it an issue.  Promotions for example, a Spaatz Cadet can receive a promotion to Captain immediately after turning 21.  This is to not only recognize the accomplishments of those Former Cadets but it is also to recognize their level of knowledge and experience in CAP.  As C/Klein so aptfully pointed out, ECI 13 does not cover even half the material that Phase IV covers in CAP and it's missions.  By your thought process, a Certified Flight Instructor should not receive Captains Bars due to his experience in flight, or a Chaplain should not receive a promotion based of Professional Status.  While CAP is a Para-Military Organization, it is still that, An Organization that is run by volunteers who achieve alot in their own professional life.

I will not step off the Soap Box.

-Andrew

Quote from: kd5vid on September 26, 2008, 05:52:46 PMThe issue is the difference in maturity from 18 to 21.  A cadet at 18 is normally not ready to join as a Senior.

If that is so...and I am not debating it one way or the other....then NO ONE is is ready to join as a senior below 21.

I can live with this.....if we allow 19 year olds to join as cadets.

Like you said kd5vid....

If the regs allow... which they do...
if the commander approves ... which is the issue

The commander does NOT have to... and most cadets seem to think they are entitled to it.

Unless NHQ changes the wording that they placed their on purpose, there really shouldn't be much to argue about. The decision lies with the squadron commander.

You are an accomplished individual, as am I. One thing I've realized as I was making unheard of accomplishments at half the age other were doing it was that not everyone was like me. Not every cadet is like you were. Not every person who is the same age as you, has accomplished as much and some people might not ever.

The reason it is not a direct promotion without commander discretion is because not everyone who makes C/Col should also be a Capt in the CAP. Generalize all you want but looking at the names of people that won the award and went on to do things that got the award revoked should stand for itself.

Not every C/Col is the same. Not every C/Col should immediately be a Capt. Not every cadet should go directly from being in the cadet program to running it as a senior member...

The issue as I see it is simple. A C/Col is eligible and will make Capt if the Squadron CC feels that person can/will perform at the minimum level he/she wants from his Captains.

As far as other special promotions, that is the squadron commanders choice as to promote or not too...

Of course with all things, the CC should have a standard to which he basis those decisions on and hold everyone to that same standard. The CC should also let that standard be known and freely tell what that standard is if asked.

Quote from: RiveraJ on September 26, 2008, 06:16:52 PM


The commander does NOT have to... and most cadets seem to think they are entitled to it.

"Most Cadets?"  How many Spaatz cadets do you have in your squadron?

I know of at least one, but your statement that most believe they are entitled to it seems a bit . . . overstated.

And is it really any different than the CFI or lawyer who think they are "entitled"?

The problem is probably just one of perspective.  Most cadet units do not have to deal with many requests for initial appointment above 2d Lt except for the former cadet types, whereas senior units (and composite units with a significant senior program) have the full mix.


But I'm not disagreeing with the basic premise that the commander has the discretion; or even that not all Spaatz types are worthy of the advanced grade of captain.

But unlike the college professor, CFI, lawyer, or doctor walking in off the street who might qualify for appointment as a captain, a Spaatz cadet has a proven record of outstanding achievement in CAP stretching over a period of years.

(Afterall, some commander thought they were worthy of an award so rare that fewer than five in a thousand receive it.)

So, given the regulatory guidance, I'd think that the default lies with recognizing the proven sustained performance and appointing the former cadet to captain rather than starting with a clean slate and saying "prove to me that you should be a captain."

But I fully support a reasoned exercise of a commander's discretion to decline the appointment for good cause.



(For the record, I choose to remain a SMWOG for several years after turning senior.)


Ned Lee

Quote from: Ned on September 26, 2008, 06:36:59 PM
"Most Cadets?"  How many Spaatz cadets do you have in your squadron?

I know of at least one, but your statement that most believe they are entitled to it seems a bit . . . overstated.

Would you prefer I say "Some" okay... Some... :)

I didn't bring up the special promotion thing... I just pointed out that it does not matter that the CFI WANTS it... It is still the CCs discretion... If the CFI quites over Captains bars, did we really loose anything? [Maybe, maybe not]

I also don't think a cadet should be on the "clean slate"  deal... They can be a valuable resource if they handle the transition well.

Worthy of an award that so few get? I've never looked this up, but.... What are the requirements to be allowed to take the test? Which ones cover the character and attitude of the individual?

I see the cadet progression tests somewhat like military PME. When you are eligible to do a CDC or go in residence you can...unless the commander has reason to not send you. (thats probably a bigger issue)  So you did the CDC or inresidence course, got your TIG/TIS, etc... Does the commander have to promote you or give his recommendation? No! (No recommendation = no promotion)

Well if the commander didn't plan on promoting you why did he allow you to take the course? Maybe he does not mind giving you the opportunity to display knowledge, learn something new in preparation of completing the course, etc.... Maybe, they felt you should gain those things, and after x number of other things he wants to see... then he will promote you/recommend etc...  There are many people who test every year for promotion, there are some who will score high and never be promoted...

My only argument is that no one should expect or demand a promotion. They can request it if they want. They also shouldn't expect to never be demoted if they don't perform/act accordingly.

I would much rather give the time for me to know for sure that I should promote someone, then make a mistake and have to demote them because they refuse to get with the program...

By the way Mr. Lee... You said you declined promotion. Did the lack of rank make you less of a leader? I bet your decision gained you more respect then you would have gotten if they gave you Maj on day 1.

What I am seeing is a lack of understanding?

1. CAP Regulations require a CAPF50 per phase which is based on a Review Board and their judgement.  As with all promotions the Commander has to approve and in the case of Spaatz, the WING commander has to approve.  So when it comes to a question of character or attitude, if those were not in keeping with the highest traditions of CAP then the Commander should never have submitted that person for Promotion.

2.  As for the requirements to take the test, look in CAPR 52-16.

3.  If a Cadet Demands a promotion then, yes, the commander should think twice before promoting that person.  ALL PROFESSIONAL APPOINTMENT / FORMER CADET PROMOTIONS HAVE TO BE SIGNED BY THE WING COMMANDER.  It is in CAPR 35-5. 

4.  Your comment about getting to know the person before signing a promotion request is founded, but it brings up the question of Why do we have records then?  If we personally need to get to know the person or feel confident that they have met the requirements under our supervision, then why do we document their performance.  Is it not to facilitate a timely promotions or recognition for their actions at previous units?

Interpretation of the Regulations and taking the time to thoroughly read the regulations would allow you to understand how they are written and how they work.  One paragraph in a random part of the regulation will add onto or change what another paragraph says.

-Andrew Theismann

...And around and around we go... where we'll stop nobody knows.

Quote from: MIKE on September 26, 2008, 10:49:32 PM
...And around and around we go... where we'll stop nobody knows.

Actually Mike, you do know. ;)

I'm a 33 male in Charleston south Carolina like to know if i can still join cap I'm on the heavy side i like to join to make new Friends and all  i n my heart i know i can do this

At 33 you won't be joining as a cadet, you'd be joining as a senior member, what we call our adult members.

ok thank you so much sir