Minimum Age Increase

[Cap'n]

Maybe in your part of the world. I started 7th grade at 11, and finished at 12, having started a year early. That would make the "normal" start at 12, and finish at 12 or 13, depending on when the birthday is. (Mine is in Feb.)

I also finished 7th Grade at the age of 12, and my birthday is the last day in April. I didn't skip a grade, but I've noticed I'm one of the youngest kids in my class- most of them are a year older then me.

Generally you will have 13, and sometimes even 14 year olds by 8th grade.

[Майор Хаткевич]

I came to the US 3 months shy of 12. In Latvia that meant I was in the 5th grade, but due to age I was moved to the 6th grade here.

So I finished 6th grade at 12, started 7th, and finished 7th at 13. B-day in February.

[Jaison009]

I joined at 12 in Sept of 1996 (turned 13 a few months later in Nov) starting 6th grade after becoming bored with scouting. Many of the cadets were in the same age range and classmates in the middle school on base at Fort Campbell, KY so it worked out well for me. I think the age was right at where it should be.

[UH60guy]

Just thought I'd throw a quote from the regs into consideration- Remember what CAPR 52-16 has to say on the matter?

Challenge. CAP challenges youth. It might be the physical challenge of conquering an obstacle course, an academic challenge to master aerospace and leadership concepts, a moral challenge to live the Core Values or a personal challenge to know oneself better and gain self-confidence. Because of these challenges, the Cadet Program is intended for young adults, not children. Every activity should challenge cadets in one way or another.
(Emphasis mine)

Now it may be up to others better versed in child psychology, those that have been around cadet programs for longer than my measily six months, or have children of their own- BUT- To me personally, 12 seems to be a pretty good starting place for differentiating a "young adult" from a child. Any younger and we're not getting much out of or really driving home the Challenge and Opportunity to Lead themes, and as others said, any older and we lose 'em to sports or other activities.

[AngelWings]

Throwing in my two cents, I think it should be based on age and maturity. There's many 12 year old's who are kids, and some 12 year old's who are young adults. Same for anyone else, even those in their 40's and up. But the idea of someone who is 11 or 10 being in the cadet programs is almost appalling.

Most 10 and 11 year old's don't have the mental capacity to participate effectively in an organization like Civil Air Patrol. We're the not Boy scouts, we're not the Young Marines. We're the US Air Force Auxiliary

There is no problem with being 12 and immature, you're 12. But there's a problem when you're forcing mature cadets to deal with immature newbies, or anyone. It detracts from the esprit de corps, the training, the experience, and the ability to move forward. Teenage years are short, and precious. I've learned that one first hand.

Why would a sane teenager want to be coupled with someone who is a child, which'd handicap the squadron from training my mentally demanding and mature subjects. We don't have a structure that is set up to deal with training two different age groups. If we did, than it'd be an entirely different story for CAP. If we could train children and let them become young adults, we'd be perfectly fine. We do not however.

Our best bet for lowering the age is to make a subgroup in CAP specifically geared towards children, not young adults. Otherwise it's unfair to all of the mature people in CAP.

[jimmydeanno]

Why would a sane teenager want to be coupled with someone who is a child, which'd handicap the squadron from training my mentally demanding and mature subjects.

Part of the cadet program is that those who are further in the program teach those below them.  Theoretically, a 19-year-old cadet would be responsible for helping train a 12-year-old cadet.  Also, they wouldn't be learning the same things, since the 19-year-old would be learning about strategic leadership, while the 12-year-old would be learning about personal leadership.

In real life, what 19-year-old (teenager) would want to hang out with a 13-year-old (teenager)? 

There is nothing wrong with having an immature airman.  They're young, they're airmen.  Having an immature 19-year-old C/Lt Col on the other hand...

Sometimes I think that we expect our youngest and newest cadets to behave and have the skill levels that our older and experienced cadets do.  I'm sure that if some of our experienced cadets looked at themselves when they first joined, they probably wouldn't want them in the unit either.

[Peeka]

Most 10 and 11 year old's don't have the mental capacity to participate effectively in an organization like Civil Air Patrol. We're [not] the Boy scouts, we're not the Young Marines. We're the US Air Force Auxiliary

FTFY

[AngelWings]

Why would a sane teenager want to be coupled with someone who is a child, which'd handicap the squadron from training my mentally demanding and mature subjects.

Part of the cadet program is that those who are further in the program teach those below them.  Theoretically, a 19-year-old cadet would be responsible for helping train a 12-year-old cadet.  Also, they wouldn't be learning the same things, since the 19-year-old would be learning about strategic leadership, while the 12-year-old would be learning about personal leadership.

In real life, what 19-year-old (teenager) would want to hang out with a 13-year-old (teenager)? 

There is nothing wrong with having an immature airman.  They're young, they're airmen.  Having an immature 19-year-old C/Lt Col on the other hand...

Sometimes I think that we expect our youngest and newest cadets to behave and have the skill levels that our older and experienced cadets do.  I'm sure that if some of our experienced cadets looked at themselves when they first joined, they probably wouldn't want them in the unit either.

Very valid points. I see what you're saying, and agree to an extent. 

My point is that it is unfair to tailor CAP as a whole to be geared towards the younger audience, and it is unfair to have the younger audience be forced to learn what a 18-21 year old might be learning.

I'd love to see a program within CAP for younger kids. Almost like a CAP cadet probationary program or something, where they get taught the basics and are weeded out so kids who are not on par can be asked to come back in a year and kids who are can be put into a regular squadron flight and become young adults. Basically, a revision of what we already have for training flight programs.

[MIKE]

The Sea Cadets have age separated programs IIRC.

[AngelWings]

The Sea Cadets have age separated programs IIRC.

That they do! Their model would be a decent model to replicate until we find something that needs tweaking.

[Eclipse]

My point is that it is unfair to tailor CAP as a whole to be geared towards the younger audience, and it is unfair to have the younger audience be forced to learn what a 18-21 year old might be learning.

12 year olds are not expected to function at the level of 19 year olds.   As mentioned above, the older cadets are expected to mentor and lead the younger ones.
A lot of CAP's issues with retention are because that paradigm breaks down  older cadets "git there's" and then scram.

It's 3-5 years before a 12 year old cadet is expected to function at an advanced (Phase IV) level, and by then they should be pretty ready.

[Майор Хаткевич]

Pass probation, get A1C at 12?

[AngelWings]

My point is that it is unfair to tailor CAP as a whole to be geared towards the younger audience, and it is unfair to have the younger audience be forced to learn what a 18-21 year old might be learning.

12 year olds are not expected to function at the level of 19 year olds.   As mentioned above, the older cadets are expected to mentor and lead the younger ones.
A lot of CAP's issues with retention are because that paradigm breaks down  older cadets "git there's" and then scram.

It's 3-5 years before a 12 year old cadet is expected to function at an advanced (Phase IV) level, and by then they should be pretty ready.

A valid point, but what I've noticed at least at my squadron is that there's topics that some 12 year old's can't really grasp, maturity is an issue, and advancement is an issue.

There is one 12 year old who is mature enough to pass muster and advance himself, but there's two others who are really disappointing in terms of attitude. The best we can do is say knock it off, send them to the "back room" for disciplinary action, and let them come back. They're not getting it however, and I'm afraid it is just the mentality of most 12 year old's. In other words, I am afraid they're the standard, not the exception.

Pass probation, get A1C at 12?

Nah, they just get a cookie and a cool pin to wear on their TABU's.

[lordmonar]

One wonders what you are teaching your 12 year olds at your squadron?

I got 50+ cadets in my squadron....40% of them are 12 years old.....got no problem with any of them grasping the materials that 52-16 calls for us to teach them.

My point is that......sometimes we forget that we tailor the program to the cadet.....not the other way around.

I certainly don't tailor the program to my 18-20 year olds.....I only have a handful of them.  I tailor it to my target audience.  Young adults.


My suggest that we lower our recruitment age to match that of the BSA is so that we can better compete with them.

The point that you bring up is that there is a disconnect between the CP as written and as it is executed out in the field.

[AngelWings]

One wonders what you are teaching your 12 year olds at your squadron?

I got 50+ cadets in my squadron....40% of them are 12 years old.....got no problem with any of them grasping the materials that 52-16 calls for us to teach them.

My point is that......sometimes we forget that we tailor the program to the cadet.....not the other way around.

I certainly don't tailor the program to my 18-20 year olds.....I only have a handful of them.  I tailor it to my target audience.  Young adults.


My suggest that we lower our recruitment age to match that of the BSA is so that we can better compete with them.

The point that you bring up is that there is a disconnect between the CP as written and as it is executed out in the field.

Emphasis mine. Another very valid point. Sometimes it is easy to get carried away going 100% to the book versus getting people to understand what we're trying to teach. I've done that a few times before. Thanks for bringing that up actually, that is a very good reminder of what not to do when teaching something.

The main problem is that they don't truly understand the concepts of the Cadet Programs. There's a difference from remembering enough information to answer questions correctly and actually understanding what you're saying. For example, a child may go out and curse because they heard it, but they don't understand what they're saying.

Many cadets noticeably differ from 12-14 to 15-17. 12-14 year old's are young, haven't truly hit the mental puberty of someone older, and are still somewhat innocent. 15-17 year old's start to hit the age where the mentality really becomes different. You've been on the earth just long enough to figure out that your future is important to work on actively, that you need to start becoming more and more responsible, and that you need to really step into high gear to begin becoming an adult. These are the years you're crafting the foundation for your success or lack thereof, in my opinion. A 12 year old who has the same mentality as 14-17 year old is NOT a child, they are another young adult.

An example of what I'm saying is that my squadron did a class on Character Development/Moral Leadership. We were using the example about a squadron that wants to get a building, and how the funds would be appropriated. The example said that the current building is functioning and that the funds would be taken from many programs, including the cadets. When asked about what entails getting a new building, most people's answers were along the lines of "if the current one is falling apart, we'll get one that isn't." Their answers were along the lines of "because it's better!".

Mind you, this isn't an insult to the particular cadets, 12-14 year old's, or anyone else, but it is an example of how our minimum age limit is already barely sufficient to understand what we're teaching.

[NC Hokie]

My suggest that we lower our recruitment age to match that of the BSA is so that we can better compete with them.

You've said this a couple of times, so I'm interested in your answers to a few questions:

1) Why should we want to compete with the BSA?  What would we win?  You're pushing for a pretty radical change to our program, but I really haven't seen any rationale other than, "More cadets!"  More is not always better, especially when you consider the fact that we lose cadets almost as fast as we bring them in.

2) Have you considered the fact than many (most?) of the boys that join BSA have already spent years in the feeder organization known as the Cub Scouts?  How would we compete with that?

3) The whole concept of, "Do X so that we can beat Y," is inherently reactionary.  Wouldn't our time be better spent looking for areas to improve our own program instead of cherry-picking attractive concepts from everyone else?

I'm not dismissing your idea outright, but I'm afraid that it fails to address the REAL issue we face in CAP, which is the revolving door of membership.

I did a simple analysis based on CAP IDs a while back and still cannot believe what I found.  If the current CAP IDs are sequential, then there were 100,000 new members added in the 6 years between the time I joined CAP and the time our squadron's newest member joined (428nnn vs. 528nnn).  In that same time period, CAP has has grown from 56,464 members (2007 Annual Report to Congress) to 60,686 members (current eServices cadet and senior member counts).  That's an increase of little more than 4,000 members, so...where did the rest of those people go?

Recruiting isn't the issue, retention is, and lowering our minimum membership age won't do anything to fix that.

[lordmonar]

Okay.....neither does raising it.

[AngelWings]

Okay.....neither does raising it.

Lower it, make a new program to deal with the younger cadets, and profit.

Keep it the same, no changes, eventually we'll find the problem.

Raise it, lose cadets, do not collect $200.

[Eclipse]

I don't agree that we compete with the BSA - we are a unique organization and have a different demo then the BSA
which has a much more casual and social membership expectation.  At least by design, CAP is much more structured and
career-focused.

Children much younger then 12 are not self-initiating or self-sustaining enough for a program like CAP.  Their attention span
is nearly zero, and even then it is only for loud/shiny things.   They require direct supervision at all times, and are not apt to lead
each other anywhere but the ice cream truck.

That requires an entirely different program and curriculum, not to mention a significantly higher number of adult leaders and
herders.  This is why Cub Scouts have Den Mothers.  They would not be capable of participating in ES, about 1/2 would be
potential liabilities in an aircraft, and you can only make so many paper airplanes before you lose them, as the fundamental forces
of flight in that age range are magic and superpowers.

It's not a space CAP needs to be in.

The argument about 12 or 6th works in a public school paradigm, but breaks down because of homeschoolers, which is why they went back
to a hard 12.  I agree it opens a wider recruiting demo, but not all that wide, especially when you consider how most units and even wings
grind to a halt over summer breaks. 

It would have more merit if we could show that we had mined the hard-12 demo to it's fullest, but we all know that isn't even true a little
bit.  What we need to do it actually start recruiting on a national scale, and making CAP into an organization that has its own inherent gravity and
doesn't have to beg for members or look to demos outside it's core.

[Eclipse]

Okay.....neither does raising it.

Lower it, make a new program to deal with the younger cadets, and profit.

Keep it the same, no changes, eventually we'll find the problem.

Raise it, lose cadets, do not collect $200.

The current paradigm allows for the leadership to be shared between the cadets and the seniors because of the
expectation of the age of cadets.  Unless you have a way to recruit leaders for an entire new program from the ground
up, this will never get out of it's own way, and could have serious negative membership and mission consequences.