PT standards lowering

[sneakers]

In the latest issue of the Volunteer magazine, in the article on cadet fitness (pages 18-21), there was this statement: "The National Cadet Advisory Council is currently debating the fitness test standards."

The context of the statement make it sound like the standards may be lowered in the near future. Also, another cadet officer told me that he heard that fitness standards may be lowered when he was on a region conference call.

I am adamently opposed to standards being lowered (I actually think CAP should raise their pt standards). What would you guys think of that if it happened?

[HGjunkie]

The standards should have a different scoring system IMO. The 2/3 and 1/2 system we have right now works fine, but a scoring method that rewards cadets for excelling in certain parts of the test to make-up lower scores in other areas would help those who can't manage certain parts of it (Ex. a cadet who sucks at push-ups but can knock out a ton of sit-ups, or cadets who can run a really fast mile but do somewhat poorly on the shuttle run or pushups/sit-ups/sit and reach). At minimum, keep the standards the same, but implement a different scoring system.

Now, I'm all for the standards being raised, but I know that would cause certain problems in my squadron where some cadets already struggle with PT.

[AngelWings]

 I say raise em'. It was the major driving point of me actually exercising, and I've been losing weight ever since, the only bigger factor is that I wanted to impress my adopt a soldier with progress that he contributed to  (he is a hero). Lowering the standards isn't good when we have obesity/overweight problems in the U.S . It would also make us look "weak" IMO.

[Eclipse]

The CAC debates and considers a lot of things, I would not get too worried about it...

[jimmydeanno]

The current model that was adopted was done so because it is aligned with actual researched data from the President's Council on Physical Fitness.  Selecting another model leaves our fitness program to a group of people who magically decide what standards should be.  Why should a mile be run in 7:42 for a cadet earning the Lindberg Achievement, other than it 'sounds like a good number'? 

The current system takes into consideration biological differences at different ages and genders, as well as has scientific data to support the standards presented.

[lordmonar]

I would drop the entire system as it is right now.

The problem with it is....if you get a cadet with a weight/PT problem then they stop advancing.

We have cadets who have problems passing the Achievement 1 PT standars.....six months into the program and they are still C/AB.  So they get a doctors note saying they are CAT IV and then they never have to PT again.

I would rather adopt a program where each cadet is supposed to do exercise 3 days a week for 30 minutes a day.

They log their work out......and get their parents/gym teacher/sports coach to sign off and we are done.

That way every cadet even those on CAT IV will have to do something.

It will also relave the need to hold a PT tesing session.

[Майор Хаткевич]

That even makes more sense with the goal of promoting overall fitness/wellness.

[Eclipse]

Our program is about objective goals, not checking a box.

Remove proctored PT and you might as well make the whole thing a correspondence course and shut down.

[coudano]

The problem with it is....if you get a cadet with a weight/PT problem then they stop advancing.

We have cadets who have problems passing the Achievement 1 PT standars.....six months into the program and they are still C/AB.  So they get a doctors note saying they are CAT IV and then they never have to PT again.

That sounds to me like an attitude problem for your cadet,
and possibly a culture problem for your unit.

My cadets (and they aren't all skinny) pass their PT tests almost universally every month.
If someone fails, they don't repeat fail the following month.
And the typical failure is after someone changes pt phase and/or increases in age and the standards adjust

The NCO's and officers are in a competition to see who can do the most pushups and situps and run the fastest,
and the airmen see that and follow on accordingly.

Even "fat kids" can meet the phase 1 standards...  they are really just that easy.  If they aren't meeting them, then they aren't trying, most likely because they don't care.  Shouldn't we be teaching our cadets how to motivate their subordinates to do something that is /completely/ attainable?

The only cadet I have in cat 4 is in it because of a permanent medical condition, not obesity.

[cap235629]

otivate their subordinates to do something that is /completely/ attainable?

The only cadet I have in cat 4 is in it because of a permanent medical condition, not obesity.

which points to the problem. Obesity is a medical condition, not just a motivation issue.

so in your view, an obese cadet has no business in CAP because they can't do PT?

[RADIOMAN015]

The current model that was adopted was done so because it is aligned with actual researched data from the President's Council on Physical Fitness.  Selecting another model leaves our fitness program to a group of people who magically decide what standards should be.  Why should a mile be run in 7:42 for a cadet earning the Lindberg Achievement, other than it 'sounds like a good number'? 

The current system takes into consideration biological differences at different ages and genders, as well as has scientific data to support the standards presented.

Also looks like it is gradual conditioning the longer you are in the program/higher achievements and is based upon percentile (ranging from 25 to 75%) of the national presidential committee testing results   (I can't seem to find the internet source our standards are based upon).

IF there were any changes I would assume that they would decrease the percentile for certain achievements based upon that standard.

Information on the definition of statistical percentile can be found at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Percentile

RM

[PHall]

otivate their subordinates to do something that is /completely/ attainable?

The only cadet I have in cat 4 is in it because of a permanent medical condition, not obesity.

which points to the problem. Obesity is a medical condition, not just a motivation issue.

so in your view, an obese cadet has no business in CAP because they can't do PT?

If you can get an MD to sign the letter saying that an obese cadet's condition is a permanent medical condition. Then they can be put in Cat IV.

[Skydude61]

At our squadron we have several cadets who really struggle to meet the PT regs, but excell at all other aspects. I hate watching them remain Airmen Basics because of PT.

One Idea our squadron has come up with for a replacement (note, this is only an idea, we do not do this) is to have everyone's first pt #s recorded, then pass them for their curry. they would then need to improve thise numbers to pass the next time. this would allow those who are less able to advance farther into the cadet program.

Opinions on this??

[jimmydeanno]

^ That was one of the initial ideas I had when thinking about what could replace our current PT program.  However, I quickly realized that cadets and seniors would realize that all they have to do is tell the cadet to run the mile in 18 minutes the first time.  Then they only need to do it in 17:58 the next.

So then if you try to fix that problem by establishing a baseline, where do you come up with those numbers?

If you try to fix it with a % improvement for each achievement (say 5%) then you have a mathematical nightmare for every PT night.  Plus, who says that 5% is the right number?

So, you end up trying to find researched information, which brings you to the study conducted by the PCOPF which says that this is how kids performed in a nationwide study, based on gender and age.

[BGNightfall]

I'd say a 5% improvement is reasonable for a two month period.  In this particular case, Excel Spreadsheets (or Open Office, or a Google Doc for that matter) are your friend.  Set up a spreadsheet with all of your cadets, their current fitness scores and create an equation that subtracts 5%.  Mathematical nightmare?  Hardly.  On the other hand, if you do implement a system like that, then you may see a corresponding increase in your staff cadets' math scores in school, if you make them do it the old-fashioned way.  Not a shabby system.

Having said that, I'm personally in favor of an absolute standard, as opposed to a subjective one.  A point system would not be a bad idea, however.  I'd agree that as cadets grow, and age, their physical fitness strengths and weaknesses are going to change.  A point system while maintaining the same percentiles would allow for an "average" fitness level while maintaining an objective standard.

Just my $.02 (in 1985 money, adjusted for inflation).

[SarDragon]

otivate their subordinates to do something that is /completely/ attainable?

The only cadet I have in cat 4 is in it because of a permanent medical condition, not obesity.

which points to the problem. Obesity is a medical condition, not just a motivation issue.

so in your view, an obese cadet has no business in CAP because they can't do PT?

There are people who are obese because of a medical issue, and those who are fat because their lifestyle sucks.  Put the first group in Cat IV if needed,and tell the second group to manage their diet and start exercising. Those are the folks we are addressing here.

[SarDragon]

Before I moved to a senior squadron, I was in a composite squadron. I would get out and do the PT test with them. It was really sad to be an out-of-shape, 55 yo who-runs-twice-a-month-whether-he-needs-to-or-not, who could run a mile faster than half the cadets in the unit.

[coudano]

otivate their subordinates to do something that is /completely/ attainable?

The only cadet I have in cat 4 is in it because of a permanent medical condition, not obesity.

which points to the problem. Obesity is a medical condition, not just a motivation issue.

so in your view, an obese cadet has no business in CAP because they can't do PT?

That's a pretty strong jump from my position don't you think?

I have, have had, and expect to have in the future, obese cadets in my squadron.
They failed at first, but worked their butts off and now pass their PT test; and lead subordinate cadets in doing the same.  I'd call that having a place in CAP, wouldn't you?

For the record, passing a CPFT once a month isn't going to fix a cadet's weight, diet, and exercise issues.
However the confidence of working for and attaining fitness goals, even small ones, not to mention fitting in and identifying with a program and a group of people that profess and practice physically fit lifestyle, is *CERTAINLY* one component of what they need to work for a healthy lifestyle.

If you can get an MD to sign the letter saying that an obese cadet's condition is a permanent medical condition. Then they can be put in Cat IV.

Realizing, that if you look hard enough, you can find /some/ doctor to say and prescribe almost anything...
*IF* a doctor says they can't exercise, then they can't exercise.
Otherwise, suck it up, run, and push!

[sneakers]

 

The NCO's and officers are in a competition to see who can do the most pushups and situps and run the fastest,
and the airmen see that and follow on accordingly.

Even "fat kids" can meet the phase 1 standards...  they are really just that easy.  If they aren't meeting them, then they aren't trying, most likely because they don't care.  Shouldn't we be teaching our cadets how to motivate their subordinates to do something that is /completely/ attainable?

The only cadet I have in cat 4 is in it because of a permanent medical condition, not obesity.

Same with my squadron. All staff have friendly competitions every pt test to do better than the next person. This definitely sets a good standard for basics to follow.

[Skydude61]

I'd say a 5% improvement is reasonable for a two month period.  In this particular case, Excel Spreadsheets (or Open Office, or a Google Doc for that matter) are your friend.  Set up a spreadsheet with all of your cadets, their current fitness scores and create an equation that subtracts 5%.  Mathematical nightmare?  Hardly.  On the other hand, if you do implement a system like that, then you may see a corresponding increase in your staff cadets' math scores in school, if you make them do it the old-fashioned way.  Not a shabby system.

Having said that, I'm personally in favor of an absolute standard, as opposed to a subjective one.  A point system would not be a bad idea, however.  I'd agree that as cadets grow, and age, their physical fitness strengths and weaknesses are going to change.  A point system while maintaining the same percentiles would allow for an "average" fitness level while maintaining an objective standard.

Just my $.02 (in 1985 money, adjusted for inflation).

The only problem with the 5% improvement is that i do very well on pt, (i.e. 116 push ups) and a 5% increase would be harder to attain. maybe a 5% increase if you do not meet a numerical standard? so you would have pt passed first time with your numbers recorded. this would then have to either be improved by 5%, or meet the regs that are existing for the next promotion.