Senior member Professional Development/Grade advancement

[Major Carrales]

Perhaps the teachers who we give Capt bars to and are then underutilized could be put into an instructor specialty track. They could be used for curriculum developers, instructors and instructor trainers.

It would be interesting to see the numbers regarding professional educators who have received special appointment to 1LT, CPT, and MAJ nationally.  Might very well be an untapped source of expertise regarding instructor training.  Would also wonder if educators would want to spend time doing additional curriculum development and instructor training as part of their involvement.

I am a professional educator as well as trained historian, and did not get special promotions.  I, however, would one day like to apply my trade to an instructor program in CAP.

[Al Sayre]

This is probably going to get me flamed big time, but like Boortz says, "Somebody's got to say it". 

I have no problem with the idea of using professional educators as CAP instructors, but I think they need to become subject matter experts before they start teaching a given course. 

[Rant]This is a large part of what I see wrong with our school systems today.  There are far too many people teaching our children with a degree in education that have no background in or in depth knowledge of the material they are teaching.  From what I have seen of the education curricula, it is really 2 years of general studies and 2 years of how to teach.  Some states will let allow people to teach with not much more than a high school diploma and a teaching certificate. 

I expect someone who is teaching H.S. Mathematics (Algebra, Geometry, Trigonometry) to have at least taken Calculus so they understand why some of the concepts are important, and someone who is teaching Chemistry to have taken a couple of Physics courses so that they understand heat transfer etc.  I expect an English teacher to have a passing familiarity with literature beyond Tolkien, Shakespear and Dickinson, and a History teacher to be familiar with the Anti-Federalist Papers (I had one tell me that no such thing existed... sad) [/Rant]

[Major Carrales]

This is probably going to get me flamed big time, but like Boortz says, "Somebody's got to say it". 

First of all, while I have great deal of respect for Mr Boortz (fair tax), he is way off the  mark on his agendistic rants about public education and the majority of educators.

The United States is among the only nations in the world that tries to educate every single student.  Some nations, most actually, only educate the rich and "give up" on the rest.  Thus, they have an education "gap" that often breeds revolution.  Ignorant fools are excellent sheep...and while governments are apt to control such folks...they are often taken in by Hitler types and other fanatics.  At lease in America even the majority of dropouts get something.

I have yet to hear Mr Boortz provide any viable solution to this problem.  Vouchers and the rest are not viable. They take away from the resources of already struggling schools and converts private schools into public ones. 

If you think that students "fall through the cracks" of Public Education, implement a voucher program and watch the following happen...

1) State defacto control of Private Schools...which would now be getting public money and...if performance drops, the Populace will call for accountability from these schools.  Likely some politician will call for government regulation of Private Schools.

2) Loss of Private School ability to "turn folks away..." with vouchers a Private school will have to take everyone, even the gangbangers.  One lawsuit will establish the precedent...then everything that make private schools beneficial over public schools will be lost since they will be PUBLIC. 

3) Students that constantally change schools...parents will shop around until they find a school that, contrary to the popular preception of looking for a good education, will instead try to find a school that will best babysit their child.

Shall I go on?

Private Schools are great, mostly because they can refuse the "rejects" and "expel" the major disruptors.  I have, in the last 9 years, taught students who (had they been two years older) would be defined as criminals.  Would a Private School accept a 17 year old 8th Grader on probation?

[Al Sayre]

See, and I was just refering to the title of one of his books... 

My point had nothing to do with the public vs. private school issues and all of the rest of Boortz's opinions.  I agree with some, not with others.  I simply believe that if you are going to teach a subject, you ought to know a bit more about it than is presented in the teachers edition of the workbook.

[Al Sayre]

Would a Private School accept a 17 year old 8th Grader on probation?

How about a 16 year old 4th grader with no social skills and dumber than a box of hammers?  I had one in my 4th grade class at a private (Catholic) school back in '69...  You really don't want to get me going on the whole social promotion rant...

[Major Carrales]

See, and I was just refering to the title of one of his books... 

My point had nothing to do with the public vs. private school issues and all of the rest of Boortz's opinions.  I agree with some, not with others.  I simply believe that if you are going to teach a subject, you ought to know a bit more about it than is presented in the teachers edition of the workbook.

I agree, too many time the idea is that "we need a coach for some sport let's see...can you theach history?"   Knowledge of the subject is less than the need to make district.

[Major Carrales]

Would a Private School accept a 17 year old 8th Grader on probation?

How about a 16 year old 4th grader with no social skills and dumber than a box of hammers?  I had one in my 4th grade class at a private (Catholic) school back in '69...  You really don't want to get me going on the whole social promotion rant...

What do you do with students like that?  For the most part I have seen that it is not developmental or skill related more than it is apathy.

[Ricochet13]

Just astonishing . . .

Well perhaps members who are professional educators could be closely scrutinized and the "good" one's ferreted out.   Maybe those individuals might want to spend time helping with curriculum and developing an instructor training program?  There must be one or two nationwide who would be capable??

By the way . . here's a link to the Anti-Federalist Papers http://www.constitution.org/afp/afp.htm.

[ZigZag911]

  Would also wonder if educators would want to spend time doing additional curriculum development and instructor training as part of their involvement.

Are you suggesting that they teach the instructor courses?

That makes a lot of sense.

Or are you suggesting they take instructor courses?

Speaking as a professional educator who has endured TTT type classes on occasion,  the average CAP/military instructor course does not have much to offer an experienced classroom teacher.

[Ricochet13]

  Would also wonder if educators would want to spend time doing additional curriculum development and instructor training as part of their involvement.

Are you suggesting that they teach the instructor courses?

That makes a lot of sense.

Or are you suggesting they take instructor courses?

Speaking as a professional educator who has endured TTT type classes on occasion,  the average CAP/military instructor course does not have much to offer an experienced classroom teacher.

I would agree with your conclusion and was suggesting professional educators teach the instructor courses.  Of course, there must certainly be non-educators who would be able to develop and teach such a program too.

[ZigZag911]

This is probably going to get me flamed big time, but like Boortz says, "Somebody's got to say it". 

I have no problem with the idea of using professional educators as CAP instructors, but I think they need to become subject matter experts before they start teaching a given course. 

You, Sir, are absolutely correct!

CAP needs to help its professional educators learn about CAP, especially those areas in which they will instruct. Technically members who receive officer appointments as professional educators are supposed to be assigned as AE officers.

Unfortunately many, perhaps most, have no background in aerospace education....it is this knowledge gap that needs to be closed.

My point is that CAP does not need to be instructing educators in how to teach (anymore than we teach JAGs or CFIs how to do their thing).

[Ricochet13]

This is probably going to get me flamed big time, but like Boortz says, "Somebody's got to say it". 

I have no problem with the idea of using professional educators as CAP instructors, but I think they need to become subject matter experts before they start teaching a given course. 

You, Sir, are absolutely correct!

CAP needs to help its professional educators learn about CAP, especially those areas in which they will instruct. Technically members who receive officer appointments as professional educators are supposed to be assigned as AE officers.

Unfortunately many, perhaps most, have no background in aerospace education....it is this knowledge gap that needs to be closed.

My point is that CAP does not need to be instructing educators in how to teach (anymore than we teach JAGs or CFIs how to do their thing).

Just a follow-up on this point.  I have observed many "subject-matter" experts in CAP. Many are good at presenting information, but could be much better at teaching the subject.  That is to say there is a difference between "presenting information" and "teaching".  The same problem can be found in many fields, including education.  A successful teacher always needs to be aware that they are "teaching" people/students the "subject" they have mastered.

[Al Sayre]

By the way . . here's a link to the Anti-Federalist Papers http://www.constitution.org/afp/afp.htm.

Thanks, I read the Borden book many years ago and used it as a source document for several papers I wrote in college.  It opened the eyes of a couple Professors...

[SarDragon]

  Would also wonder if educators would want to spend time doing additional curriculum development and instructor training as part of their involvement.

Are you suggesting that they teach the instructor courses?

That makes a lot of sense.

Or are you suggesting they take instructor courses?

Speaking as a professional educator who has endured TTT type classes on occasion,  the average CAP/military instructor course does not have much to offer an experienced classroom teacher.

I realize I'm getting into this a little late, but will post anyway.

There ISN'T an average CAP instructor course. As for military instructor courses, we can talk. I have a little BTDT there.

I make a distinction between teachers and instructors when discussing the exchange of knowledge, as do I when comparing education and training. Teachers teach/educate and instructors/trainers train. The former deal more in concepts and general information in increasing levels of complexity. F'rinstance, math teachers teach math - from 1 +1 on to calculus and above. English teachers teach English in much the same way.

OTOH, instructors do training - teaching specific skills and knowledge in a narrow field. The broad concepts are the same; the specific skills are a little different. The biggest difference is that instructors need to be Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) in their narrow field.

I taught test equipment calibration in the Navy. In one respect, a broad field because of the different types of measuring instruments, but still narrow when related to electronics in general. I worked with standard, canned lessons that might have been developed somewhere else, and were standard throughout the Navy. The new SLS curriculum is done that way.

A military instructor course has a few things to offer teachers. The biggest thing that comes to mind would be working with that canned lesson and not having to develop their own lessons. There are also differences in class management related to student status - voluntary or captive audience?

Which are better? Neither. Different arenas and students. I think both are valuable, and can work with each other in our organization.

[Dragoon]

If you tied PD progression (and grade) to attendance at classes taught by highly qualified instructors....

.....then you'll have to deal with the fact that many wings won't have the neccessary instructors on hand, and therefore no one will be able to get promoted!

My first rule of CAP improvement schemes is that most, if not all CAP units are understaffed.  Always have been.  Probably always will be.   Any plan for CAP improvement that depends on having a fully trained, highly motivated staffer with lots of free time to fill every staff position.....is DOA.  Unless the plan involves hiring someone to do the job for money.

[ZigZag911]

Some of this can be resolved -- or at least alleviated -- by creating more distance learning opportunities, some interactive, some asynchronous (DVDs, for instance).

It will take time, but it's worthwhile having the best training we can....standardized (at least core training) wherever possible.

[davedove]

I tend to think it would work better if you think in the opposite direction.  Instead of requiring the higher level positions to be filled in certain ways, turn that around and require the higher level positions before you can get the higher ratings.  So, for example, if you see an officer with a master rating, you know that he had some time at wing level in that specialty.  And since Level IV requires a master rating, and Lt Col requires level IV, an officer cannot be promoted to Lt Col until he has some wing experience.  This, of course, would also carry down to lower ranks. 

This would also encourage people to work at higher levels of responsibility.  If someone really doesn't want to work above squadron level, that's fine, but they won't be promoted above a certain grade.  They can still perform all the squadron functions, so their participation won't be limited that way.

[Dragoon]

I tend to think it would work better if you think in the opposite direction.  Instead of requiring the higher level positions to be filled in certain ways, turn that around and require the higher level positions before you can get the higher ratings.  So, for example, if you see an officer with a master rating, you know that he had some time at wing level in that specialty.  And since Level IV requires a master rating, and Lt Col requires level IV, an officer cannot be promoted to Lt Col until he has some wing experience.  This, of course, would also carry down to lower ranks. 

This would also encourage people to work at higher levels of responsibility.  If someone really doesn't want to work above squadron level, that's fine, but they won't be promoted above a certain grade.  They can still perform all the squadron functions, so there participation won't be limited that way.

Dave,

Yup that approach makes perfect sense.  And in fact a few of the specialty tracks (like ES) require service above squadron level to earn the advanced ratings.

But I'm afraid it will never fly accross the board as long as our members believe that they all deserve to be Lt Col's regardless.

Because someone's gonna argue "if you require Wing service for Lt Col, then you are discriminating against all the folks who live too far from Wing HQ to participate."

[Skyray]

Because someone's gonna argue "if you require Wing service for Lt Col, then you are discriminating against all the folks who live too far from Wing HQ to participate."

Not going to be too cogent an argument with me.  I spent the better part of a year on North Carolina staff as an assistant safety officer.  The Wing HQ is at Burlington, approximately 800 miles from my front door.  I made every meeting.  Of course, I already was a Lieutenant Colonel.

[Sgt. Savage]

I think you have the answer to the problem already. There are numerous NCO's in the CAP that are being underutilized. Likewise, the lack of enlisted grades in general makes the CAP a top heavy and cumbersome organization.

Try This:

Everyone starts out as Airman. They work their way up to SAmn while doing Level 1, GES, basic CAP stuff. Let's say it takes 1 year. At that point, you select a career track such as Officer or Enlisted and a specialty track. Officer candidates with take up FO grades and spend the next year in OCS. Enlisted will start formal NCO Development. NCO's are trained instructors. We are the ones that are trained to DO, officers are trained to tell. Officers are strategic, NCO's are tactical. It's a perfect fit. The only requirement is that there be a way to provide oversight to assure that the product is high quality.

The end produces members that have a good understanding of CAP before they assume duties they may not be ready for and a tactical force trained to implement the commanders policies effectively and efficiently.

Needs some work but it can work.