Over 18 Cadets

[Eclipse]

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..."

[ZigZag911]

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.

[mikeylikey]

^ 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.    

[Eclipse]

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.

[lordmonar]

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.

[ZigZag911]

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.

[lordmonar]

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

Should 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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

[Eclipse]

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.

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.

[Eclipse]

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.

[Ned]

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.

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.

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?

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.

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".

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.

[mikeylikey]

  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.   

 

[Ned]

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

[Eclipse]

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.

[kpetersen]

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. 

[Nathan]

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.

[Johnny Yuma]

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.

[mmizner]

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

[mikeylikey]

^ 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. 

[Nathan]

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.

[mikeylikey]

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.   

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.