Basic Ground Team School - Feedback Requested

Started by winterg, March 01, 2015, 04:04:56 AM

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

winterg

I have been working on a standardized curriculum for a few months now to help my students move efficiently into ES training through the GTM3 specialty certification. Most of you have already seen my training manuals combining the most of the required information.  I think I am in a good place with what I have come up with and I would very much like other members here to give it a look and let me know if you have any suggestions that might make it work better or see tasks that could be grouped differently.  It is designed around a 1 to 1.5 hour block of instruction at the weekly meetings over a few weeks to accomplish many of the Familiarization & Preparatory tasks with the the hands-on tasks conducted at a weekend training session.  Alternatively, the weekly training blocks could be combined into another weekend of training.  But that may rushing things since the best use of the limited time available hinges on the student being prepared for each block by reviewing the required material prior to the class.  Any constructive criticism or feedback is greatly appreciated.

Thank you.

Capt Thompson

Very thorough manual. Very straightforward guide that outlines exactly the steps a new student should take. Coming back to CAP after 14 years off, I had to do a lot of digging to find answers to all of my questions, and a few were still unanswered, but I found them easily with this, very good job!

I think blocks at weekly meetings would be the best way to go, since members are committed to going to them anyway. That's how my Squadron is currently tackling the training. If you do everything on weekend exercises, you're right in that students will have to do a lot of prep beforehand, but you also run the risk of running into conflicts with other activities they may have outside of CAP. The only downside to meetings is, if you space the training out over 7 or 8 weeks, and someone misses week 4, you're playing catchup, so the commitment to attendance has to be made up front, or something put in place to catch up absentees.

I will forward this to our ES trainer and see if he has any input, he's on CT as well.
Capt Matt Thompson
Deputy Commander for Cadets, Historian, Public Affairs Officer

Mitchell - 31 OCT 98 (#44670) Earhart - 1 OCT 00 (#11401)

stixco1

It looks good to me. The only problem for our Squadron is finding the time at every meeting to dedicate to ES.  As it is now we struggle to get out on time every meeting night.

winterg

Quote from: stixco1 on March 01, 2015, 02:21:26 PM
It looks good to me. The only problem for our Squadron is finding the time at every meeting to dedicate to ES.  As it is now we struggle to get out on time every meeting night.

The weekly blocks do not need to be conducted every week.  You could devote an hour at a meeting every other week, or once a month to ES.  The drawback comes when there is too large of a gap between the early classroom blocks and the later hands on sessions.  But it is still possible to work it in when you can find the time.

Finding time for any training in CAP requires the squadron staff officers to decide to focus on that training and make a plan.  If you are not getting out of your meetings on time, perhaps a better time management plan is in order.  You have identified a problem, using that, make a list of possible ways to correct that and then choose one (or more) and try them out to see if the problem gets better or worse.  Wash, rinse, repeat.  Move on to the next problem. :)  I know.  If it were only that easy.

Capt Thompson

Agreed, a weekly schedule needs to be created and adhered to. If someone is given a half hour to present a class, it can't run 45 mins without cutting into someone else's time, or causing the meeting to run over. Prioritize, schedule, and then hold people to the plan.

My squadron decided to make ES a priority, and so we have an hour block a week scheduled for GTM3 tasks. The Wing has SAREX's planned for April, May and June, so we can have someone completed with all tasks and 2 missions by Summer. I agree that waiting too long in between the familiarization tasks and the hands on might create issues. If a Squadron decides to do it, make it a priority and get it done, rather than dragging it out.

The way we have it set up, I can get my GTM3 qualification just in time to attend MIWG SAR Academy in July and work towards GTM2 and GTL.
Capt Matt Thompson
Deputy Commander for Cadets, Historian, Public Affairs Officer

Mitchell - 31 OCT 98 (#44670) Earhart - 1 OCT 00 (#11401)

sarmed1

One of the methods I used years ago (more geared towards seniors vs cadets) was a CD rom that ran web based, that had the PPT's with notes for the classroom only portions as well as all of the reference material.  They could work on those sessions at their leisure, reserving meeting times for those areas that require a more hands on approach.

mk
Capt.  Mark "K12" Kleibscheidel

winterg

UPDATE

I began teaching this GTM3 curriculum in June using the weekly meetings, usually a one hour class, twice a month.  Everyone was provided with the Student Handbook and the GTM3 Training Manual which contains all the tasks and the Reference Text chapters for GTM 3.

The students are told in advance what task we will be learning and what chapter to read in the Reference Text.  We are just about finished with the Fam & Prep portion and ready to move to the Advanced Tasks.

I updated the material based on how some of the classes went and thought I would provide them here for anyone who is interested.

https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B2CzkgrZ6hyMV2JLTHQ3NDIxUU0&usp=sharing

Feedback is always welcome.

Spam

You've put a lot of effort in this, and it shows. Very nice.  My command has folded the prep and fam tasks into our basic training flight curriculum in a similar fashion and is a graduation requirement from the flight, so we do something similar.


One comment: the field sanitation prep and fam tasks cannot by definition be signed off as complete on a unit training night (a field training exercise is required with an overnight) and a wooded 600 meter compass course is required for the Compass Course task, which is rarely found or performed at most unit meeting sites. You might consider making that clearer in the student manual, lest people start lining up to be signed off without the required eval to standards:


"This task is tested over the course of an overnight field exercise. The exercise should include at least
two miles of dismounted movement." "Choose a wooded area where a course can be established that is at least 600
meters long. Choose a start and a finish point and turning points along the course..."


V/R,
Spam





winterg

My squadron meets at an air park, so setting up a 600m course that gave a chance to become familiar with taking bearings was pretty easy.  Other squadrons most likely won't be able to do that on a meeting night.

Spam

Our unit just did this task yesterday in the woods and fields of Dawson Forest (former USAF/Lockheed Georgia Nuclear Aircraft Laboratory... what do you get when you give rednecks plutonium).

The combination of open-sight-line trails plus thick woods (which drive the student to the legs around the obstacles) work great. The thing I don't like is that this task really does NOT belong in the prep and fam task set for GTM3 - and it is up front without and before the Pace Count task and other land nav tasks.  When Spam is NHQ/CC (grin) Spam will revamp the GTM curriculum to keep the GTM3 prep and fam limited to the true safety stuff (e.g. hug a tree actions on lost task, heat/cold, field hygiene, etc.) and will move all land nav tasks to be functionally grouped in GTM2. It makes no sense to teach Use a Compass totally out of context up front, at the same time while we tell newbies to sit down and be safe if separated, when they might be tempted to apply their halfway trained skills to go mobile and become even more lost.

But I digress...

V/R,
Spam


winterg

Spam,

I agree. Some of the tasks in the Fam/Prep section either need to be moved to advanced or modified to be more realistic.

As I have mentioned before, the gear task in the Fam/Prep needs to be for just trainee items with a complete set required in the advanced section. And the compass work would be better grouped with similar tasks in the advanced sections you mentioned.

If we agree that the Fam/Prep section of the GTM3 training is designed to provide a basic familiarization to allow safe training as the student moves forward, why do we mandate that we must conduct an overnight bivouac as part of one of the required tasks? While almost every other task can be completed through classroom, discussion, and tasks able to be accomplished with a qualified trainer at the local unit.  The amount of equipment required by every participant as well as basic skills needed that are not part of Fam/Prep means that this one task alone ensures that the majority of students are not able to complete the basic training necessary to sign off as a GTM3 trainee and participate in a SAREX. Never mind that 95% of the actual missions we conduct do not use any type of bivouac skills or digging of catholes.

And why are does the universal precautions task recommend a full moulage when the entire tasks is focused on wearing gloves, not actually performing assessments. Every Basic First Aid course I have taken stresses universal precautions. But that is not until the advanced tasks.

I agree that teaching cadets (and many seniors) as early as possible about proper foot care and hygiene is essential. But do we really need to go camping to do it?

Capt Thompson

Quote from: Spam on August 19, 2015, 11:11:49 AMMy command has folded the prep and fam tasks into our basic training flight curriculum in a similar fashion and is a graduation requirement from the flight, so we do something similar.

I have to agree and disagree with this statement.......I like the idea, but how can we require Cadets who come in having no interest in ES put together the 24 hour gear list and purchase BDU's as a requirement for promotion? Ideally I would love for all Cadets to become ground team members, but it can't be a requirement of the program, and the only uniform they're required to have is a set of Blues. If the squadron has the means to supply the BDU's and 100% of the field gear, then that's awesome, but if they don't get signed off on all the tasks we still can't prevent them from graduating Great Start/Tango Flight and moving on in the program.

With that said, I'm now convinced that new Cadets should go through UDF before starting GTM3. I agree the compass task as an F&P for GTM3 is a little out of place, but if they already went through UDF they would already have the knowledge. The gear list is smaller, and after only 2 tasks they can become trainees and are assets in the event a mission comes up. When they do get to GTM3, they already have map and compass skills, and more importantly triangulation skills that normal GTM3's don't posess, that could be invaluable on a real mission.

winterg your curriculum is on point, and I agree the effort and attention to detail shows greatly. Thank you for the resource.

Capt Matt Thompson
Deputy Commander for Cadets, Historian, Public Affairs Officer

Mitchell - 31 OCT 98 (#44670) Earhart - 1 OCT 00 (#11401)

Spam

LT, the logic behind including the prep and fam tasks for GTM3 in our basic cadet training flight curriculum (along with the Great Start elements, which many cadets seemingly chuck in the back of their closet) is this:  we provide detailed briefs on these initial, safety related tasks (such as recognizing and responding to heat injuries and cold injuries, which are directly related to safe operations whether cadets are in the field on ES activities or on the ramp at an airshow.  We have a locally derived (note: derived from the task book and Great Start, not invented from whole cloth) test which we administer and a passing score is necessary for the trainee to be awarded our Squadron patch and graduate to our Advanced Flight.

Although they do get the gear list brief in the first module, our trainees are not required to buy gear to win the patch. For those interested in ES, we take their test result and add the practical/demo elements to give them SQTR task credit - and then get them in the field ASAP.

This local implementation of basic training is part of a nominal six week rotation of classes, during which trainees also get the CD intro, are fitted with uniforms, etc. The local test is NOT linked to the National requirements for the Curry Achievement, which is awarded purely on national level criteria. This is similar to how my unit has run THREE miles, not one, for decades, but only counts the first mile for CPFT purposes - we expect more, and we don't 'pencil whip' requirements. We've been doing it this way for a few decades, with updates now and then (SQTR mapping, Great Start, etc.). 

On the BDU issue, I guess we differ; CAPR 52-16 5.2(a)2 requires cadets to have a uniform to promote, and NHQ provides a Curry voucher only AFTER they promote. We do require that cadets get in a complete BDU set before promoting, - as it IS required for encampments - and we've never had an objection. With a string of cadets at the academies, an unbroken record of quality cadet unit awards, eight GTLs and a dozen or so qualified cadets, and a number of us who turned SM and entered the military/aerospace, it seems to work.

V/R,
Spam





Capt Thompson

Spam,

Thank you for the clarification, and please don't think that I was questioning your judgement, or the effectiveness of your program, just curious as to how it's implemented.

Our Squadron is currently in the process of revamping our Cadet Program, including promoting a new C/CC, CDC, myself as Leadership etc., and implementing a new schedule and training curriculum. If you happen to have a copy of your training schedule for basic training, I would be very interested in seeing it, and seeing how we can possibly implement a version at our Squadron.

As for BDU's, I agree they should be required for every Cadet, regardless. When I was a Cadet, we were required to purchase BDU's, and obtain Blues before Encampment. Currently, my Squadron is in a position to issue most of the components to new Cadets, so it's not really an issue for us.

For GTM training, our Squadron did a fundraiser several years ago, and purchased six fully outfitted 24 hour packs. Just school backpacks, nothing special, but they meet requirements. Trainees can sign out packs, add water/mre/personal meds, while they're doing their F&P's and deciding if ES is right for them. If they decide they want to persue Ground Team, they have to present their own gear before being awarded the badge.
Capt Matt Thompson
Deputy Commander for Cadets, Historian, Public Affairs Officer

Mitchell - 31 OCT 98 (#44670) Earhart - 1 OCT 00 (#11401)

winterg

Lt Thompson,

You bring up an interesting point as far as the gear is concerned. The Task requires a member to have a full kit to be signed off. I have always taken this to mean that a member who wants to be qualified as a GTM3 must purchase and assemble a complete kit themselves.

But what if a squadron has multiple complete kits that are kept ready for deployment? A GTM3 must be familiar with a complete kit and how to correctly use the items in it. Could a person theoretically be signed off using a squadron kit?

TheSkyHornet

Only skimmed through the manual you posted very briefly, but I really appreciate the professionalism and detail in it. It seems like there are some areas people suggest for tweaking, but, so far, I like what I see.

Kudos.

Capt Thompson

Technically, they can't get signed off unless they have all of the gear. You could supply the gear while they're doing F&P's, and leave that task for last, not allowing them to advance to the advanced tasks until they present gear. That at least gives them some time do decide if ES is right for them before making the investment. I've had a few Cadets decide to get into ES, then realize how much work is involved, or how boring it can be at times, and decide not to make the investment in gear and continue on with the program.

Having the kits onhand also helps in those situations where a member shows up for an actual mission or Sarex, and something is missing/broken from their own gear. It's easy to dig into a pack and issue out a compass or safety vest if needed.
Capt Matt Thompson
Deputy Commander for Cadets, Historian, Public Affairs Officer

Mitchell - 31 OCT 98 (#44670) Earhart - 1 OCT 00 (#11401)

winterg

Good points. But what I am say is, where in the Tasks or Regs does it say that the gear a member uses for a mission must legally belong to them or be purchased by them?

If Squadron X has 6 complete 24 hour packs, why not train and certify as many GTM3 personnel as want to complete the training using the squadron equipment? Thus ensuring a larger pool of potential responders for a mission?

If the squadron in question only has 4 people total who have the $$$ to assemble a complete 24 hour pack, but only half of them are available at any given time, what is gained?

But if the squadron is able to assemble 4 each 24 hour kits and has 8 people trained as GTM3 and half are able to respond at any given time, it becomes a net win for mission readiness.

Capt Thompson

I see where you're coming from. Looking through the regs, you are correct, it doesn't actually say that the member has to own their own equipment.

I would say in the event of an actual mission, I wouldn't hesitate to issue out a pack if needed.

My concern would be if 8 members show up needing gear, and we only have 6 packs. Members should still be encouraged to purchase their own gear, with the Squadron packs as emergency backups.

My other issue, is that for most of us, gear is a personal preference. The way I carry and pack my gear is different from the way you do it. It's hard to become familiar and proficient with your gear if it's not your own, especially if you're issued a different pack each time.

Either way, good call out.
Capt Matt Thompson
Deputy Commander for Cadets, Historian, Public Affairs Officer

Mitchell - 31 OCT 98 (#44670) Earhart - 1 OCT 00 (#11401)

winterg

On the other hand, if every person carries the same gear in the same way it breeds familiarity. A standardized load layout means people can be rotated as well. 

If a team returns from a long or difficult sortie, and you have replacement personnel ready to go, gear can be signed over.

I agree that the ideal is for each member to own and maintain their gear. But we don't always make it to the ideal level in CAP and sometimes need to think of ways to get the mission done.

I'm just spit balling here. 

winterg


Capt Thompson

Ideally, if we could have a standard set of gear, packed the same way between all team members like the military would do it, but still have them take it home and maintain it themselves, we would have the best of both worlds.

What happens though, when they go for GTM2 and 1? Do we issue a 72 hour pack, tent/shelter half, sleeping bag etc to maintain uniformity, or leave them to come up with a solution they can integrate their issued 24 hour pack into? How much money should be the Squadron's responsibility, and how much should the team member be responsible for? Some Squadrons would never be able to pull this off, while others could take care of it with a single fundraiser.

Although it will never happen, I would love to have CAP come up with a single 24 hour and 72 hour pack solution, and be completely uniform. Unfortunately, they'd hand it to VG, quality would be low and prices would be astronomical.
Capt Matt Thompson
Deputy Commander for Cadets, Historian, Public Affairs Officer

Mitchell - 31 OCT 98 (#44670) Earhart - 1 OCT 00 (#11401)

winterg

The ones who have the drive to participate will find a way to acquire the items. And if a squadron can afford to maintain 72 hour kits as well, bully for them. But i think we all know how many could or would actually do that.

But I still think we can find a way to include those members who have the basic quaifications but who can't afford to maintain the full 24 hour kit.

Capt Thompson

Agreed....financial situation should never keep someone from participating. There should always be a way to figure out how to include them.
Capt Matt Thompson
Deputy Commander for Cadets, Historian, Public Affairs Officer

Mitchell - 31 OCT 98 (#44670) Earhart - 1 OCT 00 (#11401)

Spam

Quote from: 1st Lt Thompson on August 31, 2015, 06:21:28 PM
Agreed....financial situation should never keep someone from participating. There should always be a way to figure out how to include them.


If by that you mean members should be free to go raise funds and save their money, sure, I agree and I'm totally with you sir. If you believe we should raise dues or impose Wing or unit dues to provide handouts, I'm dead opposed (and I vote that way).  I am completely amazed at how CAP, apparently following American society, has slid into the entitlement mentality that all of us are "entitled" to rights and benefits never set forth in the Constitution, nor in smaller scale in CAP bylaws.  For example, see the back and forth about free uniform programs... hello, they're FREE, smile and say thanks graciously for the gift.

I stridently believe that self reliance is a virtue that needs to be emphasized throughout CAPs training programs. Perhaps I'm exhibiting a knee jerk reaction to your phrasing, which in my mind echoes that of some of our current politicians who are pushing bigger government solutions rather than individual responsibility and local teamwork... if so, my apologies for the rant!

*Says the guy who, as a cadet 30+ years ago, mowed lawns and did odd jobs to buy his boots and gear, and turned in his squadron issue to be issued to new guys, and who has spent countless hours since fund raising.

V/R
Spam


Eaker Guy

Quote from: 1st Lt Thompson on August 31, 2015, 03:50:15 PM
Ideally, if we could have a standard set of gear, packed the same way between all team members like the military would do it, but still have them take it home and maintain it themselves, we would have the best of both worlds.

What happens though, when they go for GTM2 and 1? Do we issue a 72 hour pack, tent/shelter half, sleeping bag etc to maintain uniformity, or leave them to come up with a solution they can integrate their issued 24 hour pack into? How much money should be the Squadron's responsibility, and how much should the team member be responsible for? Some Squadrons would never be able to pull this off, while others could take care of it with a single fundraiser.

Although it will never happen, I would love to have CAP come up with a single 24 hour and 72 hour pack solution, and be completely uniform. Unfortunately, they'd hand it to VG, quality would be low and prices would be astronomical.

Pleas don't include VG and quality in the same sentence. It sends chills down my spine.

In all seriousness, I concur. Uniformity is good. It would also speed up the training process. Instead of letting the cadet figure it out, he/she would already have a packing list and standardized placement of items so packing/unpacking becomes more efficient. Also good for when cadets need to set up other cadets' gear.

Spam

Why in the world would you set someone else's gear up for them, as opposed to teaching them to do it for themselves - to the standard?  "Give a man a fish, he eats for a day, teach him to fish, etc etc"?


Our end goal (in my opinion, and I am one with my officers on this) isn't spoon fed pussy cats, it is self reliant young tigers of Americans who can think for themselves, are motivated to learn and achieve and innovate and prevail, and to adapt and weld themselves in with the team. Working to earn your gear, learning to rig and 4R it yourself is all part of that, and it leads to successful life skills.  ES is, for cadets, optional, but it is one of the most vital applied leadership labs possible. From that perspective, I can see the logical point of having "Team" rigs set up like a volunteer fire squad and prepositioned in a unit HQ, but equally from my perspective of using ES as a Lead Lab function I wouldn't do it.  There are plenty of other really good units in my Wing that don't "do" ES, or are perpetually interested in it but are noncommittal, so being up front with our recruits about the degree of commitment and involvement my unit expects acts as a certain selective and filtering factor for success in the field in and of itself.


I do see the attractiveness in a row of rigged gear, much like turnout gear for VFDs. Here's my units training aid: http://www.ga045.org/documents/CAP_Std_Gear_List.pdf and trainee gear http://www.ga045.org/documents/GTTraineeEquipmentChecklist.pdf, and our Powerpoint module on gear which is part of our Basic Flight training for cadets: http://www.ga045.org/documents/Field_Skills_I_v2011.pdf. That last is entering a revision cycle now, as I'd posted elsewhere... I want to realign our stuff to better fit with Great Start.  Quite frankly, I wanted to see how GS was working out with real units... and my feedback as a recent DCP is that most new cadets don't open the material, and most units around here haven't (a) read the material or (b) implemented it as a formal program - so I want to adhere to the intent and spirit of Great Start by folding it into what I know does work well locally.


Also, in my 29 AUG post, I mentioned that we're revising but will keep the prep and fam task briefs for new cadets which logically support safe ops at non-ES events (airshows, encampment, etc). That legacy brief is here: http://www.ga045.org/documents/Field_Skills_IV_v2011.pdf since you asked. (Warning: its a bit graphic).


Again, I really do like that locally derived GT3 school outline, Winter.

V/R,
Spam

winterg

Spam, I am right there with you in being very against the entitlement mentality that seems to be the norm in society lately.  Nobody has a "right" to be in ES.  They need to be willing to put in the work to meet the standards.  I get a lot of cadets and seniors that come to the squadron ES training and think they can show up, stand around, not participate, and get signed off on a task.  It is my job to work to keep them engaged and make them want to participate.  But at the end of the day, the motivation must ultimately want to come from within.  If we accept that CAP is a somewhat representative cross-section of society, then most will not be willing to go that far outside of their comfort zone to participate in Emergency Services.  The ones that do want to be part of ES, go out of their way to find a way.  We stay up late staying updated in practices and mission reports.  Creating lesson plans and continually tweaking our kits.  But we try to get as many members involved in ES as possible.  We expose cadets to it often and dangle a shiny GTM badge in front of them in the hopes they will take a liking to it and become the next generation of SAR professionals.  But in reality, a very few will actually catch the SAR bug.

I think I see where Lt. Thompson was going with the comment about cost not prohibiting a member from participating.  Some members, cadets and seniors, have a volunteer spirit but limited resources.  If they want to be involved we should, as mentors, help them to find a way.  Not give them everything they need, rather, assist them to make it happen.  I don't think it would be out of the realm of possibility for a squadron and dedicated members to fund-raise or beg for the funds to setup four 24 hour packs that belong to the squadron.  Allowing the squadron to train up multiple people as ground team members and giving multiple people the opportunity to get experience on actual missions. 

Members are obviously encouraged to set up their own gear in a manner that works best for them within the Task Guide requirements.  But standardized squadron kits would mean that, theoretically, any members trained on them could effectively utilize any of them at any time.

Thank you to all for the compliments and the feedback.  The update currently being worked on combines the Basic Ground School Curriculum and the GTM3 training guide into a single file with a hyper linked table of contents and page numbers.

Spam

I can see how nice it would be to have that on an iPad, and to be able to pull it out of my BDU leg pocket to do signoffs.  Currently I'm on my eighth or ninth weather beaten green book (which has been covered with black and yellow striped tape to hold it together).  Of course, there's a well known physical law: radio/laptop battery power varies inversely with distance from mission base, so I'll probably always keep an analog hard copy on hand (grin).

At work, we're engaged in a project for Air Mobility Command to take 400 lbs of paper pubs (Dash 1, EPs, etc) for the KC-135 series tanker and convert them into an indexed, searchable, crosslinked tool on the USAF issue iPads.  This is a result of the 2013 Shell 77 tanker inflight Class A, where the MIB found that pubs were a crucial factor. Would love to see your stuff work like that.

V/R,
Spam





winterg

#29
Spam,

I was looking at the training PDFs you posted and those are very helpful.  They give me some ideas to update the presentation I had made for the equipment training.

Here is mine:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B2CzkgrZ6hyMMk1rcE1BWVVDVzA/view?usp=sharing

EDIT: Ignore any sound icons. I am experimenting with adding sound overlays of the presentation and saving the PPT as a video that we can put on our webpage.  And it is also a work in progress with several more pictures of my equipment that I need to take and add to the presentation.

Eaker Guy

Quote from: Spam on September 01, 2015, 10:25:26 AM
Why in the world would you set someone else's gear up for them, as opposed to teaching them to do it for themselves - to the standard?  "Give a man a fish, he eats for a day, teach him to fish, etc etc"?


Our end goal (in my opinion, and I am one with my officers on this) isn't spoon fed pussy cats, it is self reliant young tigers of Americans who can think for themselves, are motivated to learn and achieve and innovate and prevail, and to adapt and weld themselves in with the team. Working to earn your gear, learning to rig and 4R it yourself is all part of that, and it leads to successful life skills.  ES is, for cadets, optional, but it is one of the most vital applied leadership labs possible. From that perspective, I can see the logical point of having "Team" rigs set up like a volunteer fire squad and prepositioned in a unit HQ, but equally from my perspective of using ES as a Lead Lab function I wouldn't do it.  There are plenty of other really good units in my Wing that don't "do" ES, or are perpetually interested in it but are noncommittal, so being up front with our recruits about the degree of commitment and involvement my unit expects acts as a certain selective and filtering factor for success in the field in and of itself.


I do see the attractiveness in a row of rigged gear, much like turnout gear for VFDs. Here's my units training aid: http://www.ga045.org/documents/CAP_Std_Gear_List.pdf and trainee gear http://www.ga045.org/documents/GTTraineeEquipmentChecklist.pdf, and our Powerpoint module on gear which is part of our Basic Flight training for cadets: http://www.ga045.org/documents/Field_Skills_I_v2011.pdf. That last is entering a revision cycle now, as I'd posted elsewhere... I want to realign our stuff to better fit with Great Start.  Quite frankly, I wanted to see how GS was working out with real units... and my feedback as a recent DCP is that most new cadets don't open the material, and most units around here haven't (a) read the material or (b) implemented it as a formal program - so I want to adhere to the intent and spirit of Great Start by folding it into what I know does work well locally.


Also, in my 29 AUG post, I mentioned that we're revising but will keep the prep and fam task briefs for new cadets which logically support safe ops at non-ES events (airshows, encampment, etc). That legacy brief is here: http://www.ga045.org/documents/Field_Skills_IV_v2011.pdf since you asked. (Warning: its a bit graphic).


Again, I really do like that locally derived GT3 school outline, Winter.

V/R,
Spam

Just trying to cover all scenarios. Forgive me if I created a senario not applicable to reality. I'm new to ground team.

Spam

No sweat, MAJ Kiss - welcome to it, and I love reading your comments (your Vanguard one cracked me up)!  Those basic leadership principles inherent are why some of us have kept pushing Cadets in ES for decades, with success. Small unit leadership training just takes on another set of dimensions when you add that hands on field training aspect.

If we were all active duty, and if this were a life support shop, then we'd want a small team of professional NCOs to keep all the pilots ALSS gear (helmets, O2 masks, vests, etc.) properly rigged. If this were a VFD, we could have guys assigned to 4R all the departments (funded!) turnout gear and air bottles charged and ready.  Most CAP units aren't set up like that though, and its complicated when we introduce the cadet leadership factor.

V/R,
Spam



Spam

Winter, I really like those slides.  You've a great deal more detail in them than our current slides do, yet we have ours sized to fit within our two month training rotation, so as I update, I have to watch the size and length.

Interestingly, we seem to have arrived at almost identical team gear configurations. Convergent evolution?

V/R,
Spam

Holding Pattern

Quote from: winterg on September 02, 2015, 12:46:49 AM
Spam,

I was looking at the training PDFs you posted and those are very helpful.  They give me some ideas to update the presentation I had made for the equipment training.

Here is mine:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B2CzkgrZ6hyMMk1rcE1BWVVDVzA/view?usp=sharing

EDIT: Ignore any sound icons. I am experimenting with adding sound overlays of the presentation and saving the PPT as a video that we can put on our webpage.  And it is also a work in progress with several more pictures of my equipment that I need to take and add to the presentation.

Nice work!

One typo I noted:

Slide 3: "suite" should be "suit"

winterg

Quote from: Starfleet Auxiliary on September 02, 2015, 06:45:06 AM
Nice work!
One typo I noted:
Slide 3: "suite" should be "suit"

Thanks for the catch.  It's the little things that always slip through. 

I'm planning to go through my PPT presentations and redo them so they are not the run of the mill slide after slide of bullet points.  A good read is:

http://www.twistimage.com/blog/archives/powerpoint-doesnt-suck-you-do/

Spam

10-20-30 rule for using Phewerpoint that I try to adhere to:

- 10 is the optimal number of slides for a given topic.

- 20 is the number of minutes needed to present the 10 slides. Then, take a break, changing teaching methods to hands on or practical, and reset to next topic.

- 30 point font only. Eye charts are worse than meaningless, they destroy your credibility. I tend to try to crowd my sides too much, and I'm not alone there.


The 10-20-30 guidelines came from Guy Kawasaki... there's a good constructive critique with even more good suggestions here: http://sixminutes.dlugan.com/10-20-30-rule-guy-kawasaki-powerpoint/


V/R,
Spam

Spaceman3750


Quote from: Spam on September 03, 2015, 10:17:26 AM
10-20-30 rule for using Phewerpoint that I try to adhere to:

- 10 is the optimal number of slides for a given topic.

- 20 is the number of minutes needed to present the 10 slides. Then, take a break, changing teaching methods to hands on or practical, and reset to next topic.

- 30 point font only. Eye charts are worse than meaningless, they destroy your credibility. I tend to try to crowd my sides too much, and I'm not alone there.


The 10-20-30 guidelines came from Guy Kawasaki... there's a good constructive critique with even more good suggestions here: http://sixminutes.dlugan.com/10-20-30-rule-guy-kawasaki-powerpoint/


V/R,
Spam

To avoid crowding, I was taught 6x6 - 6 bullet points, 6 words each.

winterg

Quote from: Spaceman3750 on September 03, 2015, 02:40:00 PM
Quote from: Spam on September 03, 2015, 10:17:26 AM
10-20-30 rule for using Phewerpoint that I try to adhere to:
- 10 is the optimal number of slides for a given topic.
- 20 is the number of minutes needed to present the 10 slides. Then, take a break, changing teaching methods to hands on or practical, and reset to next topic.
- 30 point font only. Eye charts are worse than meaningless, they destroy your credibility. I tend to try to crowd my sides too much, and I'm not alone there.
The 10-20-30 guidelines came from Guy Kawasaki... there's a good constructive critique with even more good suggestions here: http://sixminutes.dlugan.com/10-20-30-rule-guy-kawasaki-powerpoint/
V/R,
Spam
To avoid crowding, I was taught 6x6 - 6 bullet points, 6 words each.

This is my point exactly.  I am sure all of us have become so used to powerpoint presentations being slides of bullet points that this is what we expect.  And we even come up with rules to make them "better".  But this is a huge waste of powerpoint's potential.

Spam

I break the rules constantly, but generally, a design should be split into functionally related chunks to fit the intended topic, be aimed at the intended audience with just enough text at the right reading level (and watch the acronyms), and be shaped/sized for the presentation venue (long conference hall vs. small room at the local unit).

So many "briefs" are not at all brief. I try to combat this by analysis before I start writing - information chunked into separate briefs allows for presentation - hands on practice - discussion/Q&A - break - repeat.

The best slide deck I ever did was ten slides with non animated graphics only, with the only words on the title slide and the security markings on each slide. It was the hit of the event... a pics worth a thousand words, and you should know your topic enough to be able to present it with NOTHING, in the first place, or, you shouldn't be the one to present it.  Of course, when we assemble topical classes intended to be presented by other personnel, we need to ensure that the right qualified people are the ones assigned to teach with those slides. I have walked in to audit and quality check our modules, to find the assigned instructor diverted and an unqualified person struggling to simply read the slides, which is a vast disservice to students who can read the things themselves.


There should be no shame in telling a member (cadet, senior, or active duty) that they might be qualified in a certain area, they might even be a check pilot or SET qualified evaluator, but that we need the best available INSTRUCTOR.

V/R,
Spam









Capt Thompson

Wow I'm off here for a few days and miss a lot.

Spam, my point wasn't one of entitlement, but in line with what winter said, if a Cadet really wants to participate, but doesn't have the means to do so, it's our job as leaders to help them troubleshoot and find a way.

Our Squadron runs several successful fundraisers throughout the year, which are almost entirely run by the Cadets. Some of the money raised by the Cadets goes toward scholarships the Cadets can apply for, to put towards Encampments, NCSA's and other activities.

If a Cadet doesn't have the means to attend an activity, the Squadron has a way they can earn it. No free handouts, but a Cadet that works hard to raise funds deserves to have an Encampment or some field gear paid for if needed.
Capt Matt Thompson
Deputy Commander for Cadets, Historian, Public Affairs Officer

Mitchell - 31 OCT 98 (#44670) Earhart - 1 OCT 00 (#11401)

SarDragon

I like slides with bullet points, without the bullets. To go along with the slides, I have a lesson guide, or at least a set of notes to refer to. Sometimes I'll run the points on one at a time, sometimes I'll show them all at once, and just talk about them in succession. I depends on the material, and how much time I want/have to spend making the slides.
Dave Bowles
Maj, CAP
AT1, USN Retired
50 Year Member
Mitchell Award (unnumbered)
C/WO, CAP, Ret

TheSkyHornet

Quote from: SarDragon on September 04, 2015, 08:16:00 AM
I like slides with bullet points, without the bullets. To go along with the slides, I have a lesson guide, or at least a set of notes to refer to. Sometimes I'll run the points on one at a time, sometimes I'll show them all at once, and just talk about them in succession. I depends on the material, and how much time I want/have to spend making the slides.

I agree on the bullet points without the bullets.

If you've taken any of the online FEMA courses, I like how their "slides" (it's actually a navigation web page, but close enough for comparison) are set up visually. Quick, to the point, and simple to understand without cluttering everything. And they print very nicely (when they actually fit).

SarDragon

Another thing I learned as a Navy instructor is - Tel them what your are going to teach them, teach them the material, and tell them what you just taught them. Intro, Lesson, Summary.
Dave Bowles
Maj, CAP
AT1, USN Retired
50 Year Member
Mitchell Award (unnumbered)
C/WO, CAP, Ret