NCO Program update from the field

[Eclipse]

This idea that a military NCO is especially suited to be a "Cadet Specialist" has no factual or experiential  basis.

Military NCOs do not receive any special training in dealing with adolescents, not even Drill instructors, and in most cases I've seen the idea that they are somehow uber-mensches with cadets is exactly the opposite of reality.

One example being the offed heard encouragement to delay promotion in order to savor the non-existent "Chief Experience".

A late 20's year old E5 without kids of his own doesn't have any particular skills or experience in regards to a 14 year old who won't get a haircut and tells him to take his White Claw and go salute himself.

[Spam]

PS, Johhny, you may not hear it, but we do. Your statements do indicate a very clear anti-officer bias, which if culturally spread through cadets is indeed a problem in an officer training program:

Not a bias, an actual set of experiences. None of which I share with the cadets.

Now, maybe you could be the first to answer the questions I posed above?

... ?
I literally answered you by the numbers, above.
And, you certainly are sharing the bias and the experiences with cadets here on CT.

[JohhnyD]

They may have chosen to attribute a negative spin to what I reported. I'd suggest that, in the future, they assume respect as well as showing it.

It is very sad to see a criticism of your colleagues wrapped up in an appeal to our core values like that.

There was no disrespect implied in my question; and it came after giving the largest possible margin for the benefit of doubt. In the spirit of improvement and with all respect, allow me to suggest simply that if your intent is to give credit for the qualities of one group, then doing so without contrasting another is the better way to go.

Fair enough.

[etodd]

My heads spins reading these long threads trying to make heads or tails of them.

How many years now have y'all been debating this NCO issue?

Obvious it'll always be an issue. Will forever be differing opinions.

Happy to be a CAP civilian volunteer. Simpler, easier, just get my jobs done down here in the trenches.

[JohhnyD]

I literally answered you by the numbers, above.

My apologies, I did not see your response.

[JohhnyD]

This idea that a military NCO is especially suited to be a "Cadet Specialist" has no factual or experiential  basis.

Military NCOs do not receive any special training in dealing with adolescents, not even Drill instructors, and in most cases I've seen the idea that they are somehow uber-mensches with cadets is exactly the opposite of reality.

One example being the offed heard encouragement to delay promotion in order to savor the non-existent "Chief Experience".

A late 20's year old E5 without kids of his own doesn't have any particular skills or experience in regards to a 14 year old who won't get a haircut and tells him to take his White Claw and go salute himself.

You ignored what I said. Almost NONE of our SMs have the skills and experience you denigrate the NCOs for not having. What I said was:

"2 - Their ability to relate to the cadets, especially with regards to customs, courtesies and drill and ceremonies is FAR superior to other CAP members."

And I stand by that opinion.

[JohhnyD]

2. Yes, numerous times over the years - while commanding units on and off bases. I've worked with numerous AD and former NCOs (and officers) as fellow CAP members. With many of these we had to draw their background out of them, and it wasn't a Big Thing (i.e. they could care less about grade/status, they just wanted to fly or teach). Thus, I was interested in your specific focused recruiting via selling and presenting to vets groups, and the resulting retention and other factors. Thanks.

Too soon to have a personal opinion on retention. Anectdotal evidence suggests little difference from the norm. What was interesting was their reaction to the idea that there was a spot "reserved" for them based on their experience and training.

[JohhnyD]

Your statements do indicate a very clear anti-officer bias...

NOT an "anti-officer bias", rather personal experience with prior service officers who enter at their retirement grade (typically MAJ or LTC) and then exhibit the behavior I spoke of. And they have, in my experience, left the program after a year or two of NOT understanding that we are not the military.

Contrariwise the current and former Wing VC in my prior Wing are prior service NCOs who, in spite of their silver oak leaves, out-work any ten other members.

[Stonewall]

Contrariwise the current and former Wing VC in my prior Wing are prior service NCOs who, in spite of their silver oak leaves, out-work any ten other members.

Proof that it's not the rank you wear in CAP and each person, regardless of background, can  bring something to the table in their own way. Some don't bring anything to the table, regardless of their military service, or rank they held/hold.

[Spam]

Good Lord, you recruited retired NCOs from the Viet Cong, as well?
You certainly know your target audience!



Cheers!
Spam

[JohhnyD]

Proof that it's not the rank you wear in CAP and each person, regardless of background, can  bring something to the table in their own way. Some don't bring anything to the table, regardless of their military service, or rank they held/hold.

Of course, no one denies that. My point is that current and prior service NCOs are a vertical that we can recruit from that is often untapped and who bring a number of baked-in qualifications that have real value.

[Jester]

Ohhhhhhh this again.  Hooraaaaaaaayyyyy.

As far as NCOs not having any special skills/talents, etc with cadets I notice that we seem to win an awful lot of wing/region Sorensons, including the last 2 national ones.  A lot of annual awards in technical areas like comms too.  Interesting for such a small segment of the membership. 

I realize that this is the pancake breakfast and we do it every month, but come on already. 

[Eclipse]

1 - Sorenson?

2 - You'd try to show that NCOs are uber-members via the "of the nominated awards"?

[Spam]

So if a teacher wins an award from his teachers union, that doesn't document demonstrable improvement in his students outcomes, if my Dachshund wins the cute dog show prize that doesn't mean she is the smartest and can run fast, and if a rich guy wins an election that doesn't mean he's the best qualified person to lead. Award selections are very often based on who got put in and who is approving or voting - subjective, rather than on empirical criteria.

Which doesn't prove anything pro or con: we haven't seen any evidence based on other than anecdotal evidence that being an NCO makes a difference to cadet outcomes one way or the other. What I am hearing in this thread thats new (and worthwhile, to me) is some (anecdotal) evidence as to a good recruiting technique for members, which may be useful in and of itself.

Which is a good thing, when it works, right?

V/r
Spam

[edit: yes, we do have a Dachshund, a rescue in fact, who occasionally reminds me of the CT Wing patch. Its a good thing she's so cute because she's dumb as a brick, definitely not a SAR dog].

[Jester]

Shrug.  I can't control who is put in and who isn't.  The only thing I can assume is that the ones who are put in are doing better work than their peers. 

For a population that is 10% or less of the senior membership, I just notice a trend in that particular indicator of quality.

I don't think that the cadet program is an officer training program, it's a phased, progressive leadership program.  NCOs model and demonstrate NCO leadership, which is something we lack as an organization. 

In my squadron, the squadron NCO is part of the command team with the commander and both deputies.  The NCOIC of cadet programs works with the deputy commander for cadets, handling the tactical level items (training schedules, quarterly training plans, cadet feedbacks) while the CDC handles operational/strategic items and interfaces with the commander. 

That's the same concept we teach cadets and expect them to perform.  Walk the walk and model it on the senior side.

[Spam]

Shrug.  I can't control who is put in and who isn't.  The only thing I can assume is that the ones who are put in are doing better work than their peers. 

For a population that is 10% or less of the senior membership, I just notice a trend in that particular indicator of quality.

From my perspective, having experienced the controversial [mis]use of the old CAP-MAP data in the 80s and 90s to reward favored units and individuals, and the favoritism I've seen in discarding actual performance data in favor of personal bias for annual "best of" awards, I have learned to have little confidence in the CAP award system, unless I know for a fact that the selection team were evaluating actual comparative data rather than old boy/girl systems. So, with respect, I don't see that trend you observe as a valid index of worth. I just can't assume it, based on experience. Sorry...

I don't think that the cadet program is an officer training program, it's a phased, progressive leadership program.  NCOs model and demonstrate NCO leadership, which is something we lack as an organization.

Agreed, it is a progressive program, in which cadets learn direct (NCO) leadership, and then move on to indirect (officer) leadership. That progression means that we don't have built in off ramps and we don't endorse "parking" people at C/SNCO grades. There is no program element for "professional CAP Cadet NCO". Those who linger/stop there are stalling out. CAPR 60-1 lists officership as a Phase III requirement, defining the cadet program as an officer training program, and further states in "CHAPTER 5. CADET ADVANCEMENT, 5.1.1. Core Curriculum. The set of learning activities all cadets participate in along their journey toward the Spaatz Award constitutes the core curriculum". So, yes, the cadet program is in fact an officer training program in fact, and always has been (c.f. the former "cadet contract" to complete the program).

In my squadron, the squadron NCO is part of the command team with the commander and both deputies.  The NCOIC of cadet programs works with the deputy commander for cadets, handling the tactical level items (training schedules, quarterly training plans, cadet feedbacks) while the CDC handles operational/strategic items and interfaces with the commander.

That's the same concept we teach cadets and expect them to perform.  Walk the walk and model it on the senior side.

That's a great model there, I would say. It is exactly what I've done for decades, having the Cadet First Shirt present at all staff meetings. It also goes hand in hand with the goal of socializing him/her to indirect leadership principles as the next step in his progression. It fits well with participative leadership principles, and the concepts of openness and fairness (to ensure that the enlisted cadets have visibility into policy making, analysis, goal setting, and even personnel decisions by the Commander based on analysis and recommendations by cadet staff through the C/CC).

With the new "Org of CAP" revision, I was displeased to see that position definitions were removed (including cadet PDs). Every six months when in command billets, when we rotated cadet staff jobs, I historically had printed off one pagers for the selectees *(including the C/1SGT) and we'd have a staff meeting to read them out and set expectations/establish a battle rhythm. I really wish that we still had that resource of official position descriptions to help guide us.

Good discussion. Thanks Jester!

V/r
Spam

[JohhnyD]

I don't think that the cadet program is an officer training program, it's a phased, progressive leadership program.  NCOs model and demonstrate NCO leadership, which is something we lack as an organization. 

Exactly!

[Jester]

With the new "Org of CAP" revision, I was displeased to see that position definitions were removed (including cadet PDs). Every six months when in command billets, when we rotated cadet staff jobs, I historically had printed off one pagers for the selectees *(including the C/1SGT) and we'd have a staff meeting to read them out and set expectations/establish a battle rhythm. I really wish that we still had that resource of official position descriptions to help guide us.

Good discussion. Thanks Jester!

V/r
Spam

Supposedly when 20-1 was renumbered as 30-1 there was supposed to be a corresponding CAPP 30-1 with duty positions.  That hasn't materialized to my knowledge.

I hand out the one-page duty descriptions from the cadet staff handbook stapled to a 60-90 when I put a cadet in a new duty position, then tell them we'll talk about it next meeting.  Seems effective.

[Eclipse]

The only thing I can assume is that the ones who are put in are doing better work than their peers. 

You would do well to disavow yourself of this notion.

[Jester]

The only thing I can assume is that the ones who are put in are doing better work than their peers.

You would do well to disavow yourself of this notion.

Maybe yes, maybe no, but what I'm not going to do is automatically crap on the achievements of every award winner just because they were unfortunate enough to be recognized by their leadership. 

Your wing just had a posting for a new commander and from what I can tell you meet the criteria.  Please step up and fix this problem because the automatic assumption that the award program has no integrity is pretty problematic in an organization that constantly touts that awards are one of the ways we "pay" volunteers.