Shuttle Run Moratorium

[Майор Хаткевич]

As per the release of the Cadet News (http://www.capmembers.com/file.cfm/media/blogs/documents/News_Innovations_2015b_2716B9803C8A9.pdf), the shuttle run is to be immediately suspended as a PT event.


I'm not going to go into the pros and cons on this, or the assertion that the "shuttle is harder" and "few cadets use the shuttle run to pass the CPFT", because I have first hand experience as a cadet and a CP officer, but needless to say, did I miss some sort of announcement about this?


I JUST ran a PT night on Tuesday, and had cadets ONLY do the shuttle as the temps outside were not conductive to a mile run. I've also never seen a cadet actually hurt in my time as an active cadet or while administrating it to cadets as a SM.

[Ned]

(Stuck on a layover heading home after COS)

The Cadet News is the announcement of an impending ICL.

Short version:  during our research conducted in support of the upcoming significant modification of the CPFT (draft of which is due out for comment in a couple of months, with likely effective date of about a year from now - whic deserves its own thread or two), we discovered that no researchers now believe that the shuttle run is an effective measure of cardiovascular fitness.

Which is the only reason we have it - as an alternative to the mile run.

Plus, looking at the data, we injure about twice as many cadets doing the shuttle run as we do on the mile run.

So, if it doesn't measure what we need to measure, and it actually causes injuries, then rudimentary ORM suggests that we suspend it pending the comprehensive CPFT revisions.

Right now it is a request / suggestion to commanders.  Draft ICLs to the 52-16 and 52-18 are in coordination and should appear soon.  Then it will be official.

More when I get a real keyboard.

Ned Lee
CP Guy

[Майор Хаткевич]

Thanks Ned!

While it's certainly phrased as a request...does that leave it open to attempts?

I've got some newer cadets who struggle on the mile, but can pass the shuttle, and this will certainly be bad news for them. If we're truly a year out from the rollout of a changed program, will the stop gap "banking" go in effect for this winter? What if a cadet is not able to pass the current mile standards by winter?

As a side note, I never realized we had the shuttle considered a cardiovascular activity. Agility/burst strenght is what I always understood it. The pacer makes sense as a replacement, but creates its own problems with the required size of track and time in the winter months.

[arajca]

So, those units without access to a track or a safe road course will basically be SOL as far as promotion go when this takes effect, correct?

[NIN]

So, those units without access to a track or a safe road course will basically be SOL as far as promotion go when this takes effect, correct?

Yes.

Find a track, get a road course, make a deal with the local Y, something.

I realize that's a crappy answer (speaking as a guy in a Northern tier squadron where running outdoors isn't the best 4-ish months a year) but Ned is right: the shuttle run is in no way a measure of cardiovascular fitness like the mile run is, and we were breaking a lot of cadets doing it.

It's literally -not- a "mile run equivalent"

Yes, this will force some (many?) units to modify how they administer PFT. There may be ways around that, too, depending on the results of the staff coordination and member feedback. 

[A.Member]

 :clap: :clap: :clap:

Shuttle run is and always has been a crap PT measure.  Glad to see the mile run becoming the standard.  This common sense change is long, long overdue.  Strongly support the decision!  (I'd also support having more of a stretch goal and push cadets to 1.5 miles but that's another discussion; a mile is fine). 

And for those that may say a mile run is a "challenge", I say b.s.  The mile run has long been a standard part of many elementary school Phy Ed programs.  I know kids as young as 9, perhaps even younger, are required to complete it in my area.  To be blunt, barring physical disability and true medical issues, virtually anyone should be able to complete a mile run.

[Spam]

Likewise, the sit and reach is far more a measure of anthropometric dimensions (measure of limb lengths) and scapular abduction (skeletal shoulder/arm reaching ability) than it is a valid relative yardstick measure of cardio fitness or lower back/hamstring flexibility for individuals against their age cohorts, and should be retired as a selective/promotion measure (although the literature supports continued use as a metric for individual fitness and performance, when measuring individual progress).

A cadet with a 98th percentile seated acromial height, a 98th percentile functional arm length, and a 30th percentile buttock knee length could easily pass the sit and reach even if he/she had a gut to shame a varsity pie eater contestant, while a track star with short arms and trunk but long legs will perpetually score low on this event, just because of genetics. The analogy is King Kong (long arms, short legs) vs Godzilla (short arms, long legs). Kong will win every sit and reach, without ANY valid measure of how "fit" the individual is.

When in the late 90s we rewrote MIL-STD-1472F (Human Factors Engineering Criteria for DoD Systems, etc), Dr. Joe McDaniel of Wright Labs (WPAFB) and I discussed the strength vs. anthropometry relationship, and he confirmed that there was very poor correlations for most, if not all, values. Short arms and trunk/long legs make for poor sit and reaches, but does NOT equate to poor fitness!

Just my 'pinion.

V/R,
Spam

[jdh]

Likewise, the sit and reach is far more a measure of anthropometric dimensions (measure of limb lengths) and scapular abduction (skeletal shoulder/arm reaching ability) than it is a valid relative yardstick measure of cardio fitness or lower back/hamstring flexibility for individuals against their age cohorts, and should be retired as a selective/promotion measure (although the literature supports continued use as a metric for individual fitness and performance, when measuring individual progress).

A cadet with a 98th percentile seated acromial height, a 98th percentile functional arm length, and a 30th percentile buttock knee length could easily pass the sit and reach even if he/she had a gut to shame a varsity pie eater contestant, while a track star with short arms and trunk but long legs will perpetually score low on this event, just because of genetics. The analogy is King Kong (long arms, short legs) vs Godzilla (short arms, long legs). Kong will win every sit and reach, without ANY valid measure of how "fit" the individual is.

When in the late 90s we rewrote MIL-STD-1472F (Human Factors Engineering Criteria for DoD Systems, etc), Dr. Joe McDaniel of Wright Labs (WPAFB) and I discussed the strength vs. anthropometry relationship, and he confirmed that there was very poor correlations for most, if not all, values. Short arms and trunk/long legs make for poor sit and reaches, but does NOT equate to poor fitness!

Just my 'pinion.

V/R,
Spam

I agree about the sit and reach, as a cadet I always had a problem with it. I have a 36in in-seam and 23 in long arms (shoulder to wrist). When standing at the position of attention my closed hand is a good 11in from my knee. That is measure on my long arm (broke my left arm badly while in middle school destroying a growth plate) which is 3in longer than the other, which was a problem all of itself trying to keep the fingertips together. But then you have cadets (including some in my current unit) that can scratch the bottom of their knees while at attention without enough movement to catch most peoples attention. We have a cadet with an upper body similar to mine but with an in-seam somewhere in the 20in range (a xs/s bdu trouser is very long on him). He can max the sit and reach every time without even having to bend.

[Eaker Guy]

Likewise, the sit and reach is far more a measure of anthropometric dimensions (measure of limb lengths) and scapular abduction (skeletal shoulder/arm reaching ability) than it is a valid relative yardstick measure of cardio fitness or lower back/hamstring flexibility for individuals against their age cohorts, and should be retired as a selective/promotion measure (although the literature supports continued use as a metric for individual fitness and performance, when measuring individual progress).

A cadet with a 98th percentile seated acromial height, a 98th percentile functional arm length, and a 30th percentile buttock knee length could easily pass the sit and reach even if he/she had a gut to shame a varsity pie eater contestant, while a track star with short arms and trunk but long legs will perpetually score low on this event, just because of genetics. The analogy is King Kong (long arms, short legs) vs Godzilla (short arms, long legs). Kong will win every sit and reach, without ANY valid measure of how "fit" the individual is.

When in the late 90s we rewrote MIL-STD-1472F (Human Factors Engineering Criteria for DoD Systems, etc), Dr. Joe McDaniel of Wright Labs (WPAFB) and I discussed the strength vs. anthropometry relationship, and he confirmed that there was very poor correlations for most, if not all, values. Short arms and trunk/long legs make for poor sit and reaches, but does NOT equate to poor fitness!

Just my 'pinion.

V/R,
Spam

+1000000 this.

[NIN]

And then a guy showed up with all the medical data. Ouch.

[TheSkyHornet]

I wouldn't be opposed to this at all.

I, personally, was never big on "exercise" when I was at the cadet age. But I've grown to understand the importance of it as I got older, especially venturing into the military arena. I especially hated running. Still not a fan of it. But it's an excellent way to improve your body and measure those improvements.

A lot of cadets try and duck out of fitness challenges by passing only with the minimal effort and using the shuttle run as the Option B to get out of the mile run. It's been an easy substitution to steer clear of the mile on hot/rainy days, but I see the potential for increased injury with nearly no lasting physical improvement from this "exercise." PT has been limited to one session a month for maybe an hour and a half at the most (including bathroom/water breaks), of the typical stretching, push-ups, curl-ups, sit-and-reach, and shuttle run for the past several months in our squadron. And that is not going to improve anybody's fitness performance as there is such minimal activity compared to the long time span between PT sessions. And most cadets aren't working to improve on their PT in-between PT days, meaning very little personal input resulting in almost no change in physical performance. PT is done as a "meet the standards" event with no regimental workout to sustain those standards and work to exceed them over a prolonged time period.

I will say that we had three new potential cadets who came to one of our PT sessions (I think for all of them it was their second or third face-showing). They were all pretty young, 12-13, mixture of two females and a male. They were fairly quiet, but they paired up during PT and really pushed it. I was impressed to see them get into it the way they did and motivated each other. I'd like to see that expanded on down the road with whatever restructuring comes into the CPFT or the proposed PYFP.

[CAPDCCMOM]

I applaud anything that will reduce Cadet injuries  :clap:.

What other changes are coming with the CPFT? Is the stretch going to be removed as well? I understand the point that several have made regarding the mile run. When I was in school, and dinorsaurs roamed the Earth, the Elementary PE program required a completed mile run. Today however, in our school district PE is offered at the elementary level once a week, if they can find a licensed teacher. Middle School offers PE as an elective, but students only need one semester. At the High School level PE is only required for one year. Many Cadets are coming to us with no fitness and no real knowledge of how to exercise correctly and safely. It then becomes up to us to teach it, this is not a bad thing as we teach life skills and build character. We can not, however, expect any Cadet to pass the PT Test if we only have them active once per month, but then we take time from Drill, Leadership, AE, ES, Partridge in Pear Tree.

This could lead to people running to a Doctor to get Waivers to avoid PT for their Cadets in order to bypass a requirement. I have not seen the proposed changes. Does anyone have a link that I could look at?

Thanks

[TheSkyHornet]

I applaud anything that will reduce Cadet injuries  :clap:.

What other changes are coming with the CPFT? Is the stretch going to be removed as well? I understand the point that several have made regarding the mile run. When I was in school, and dinorsaurs roamed the Earth, the Elementary PE program required a completed mile run. Today however, in our school district PE is offered at the elementary level once a week, if they can find a licensed teacher. Middle School offers PE as an elective, but students only need one semester. At the High School level PE is only required for one year. Many Cadets are coming to us with no fitness and no real knowledge of how to exercise correctly and safely. It then becomes up to us to teach it, this is not a bad thing as we teach life skills and build character. We can not, however, expect any Cadet to pass the PT Test if we only have them active once per month, but then we take time from Drill, Leadership, AE, ES, Partridge in Pear Tree.

This could lead to people running to a Doctor to get Waivers to avoid PT for their Cadets in order to bypass a requirement. I have not seen the proposed changes. Does anyone have a link that I could look at?

Thanks

The proposals are on Page 6 of the Cadet News+Innovations document:
http://www.capmembers.com/file.cfm/media/blogs/documents/News_Innovations_2015b_2716B9803C8A9.pdf

I do agree that physical fitness is on the decline in schools, which is why I would highly support a new structure to CPFT, to include not just sustaining physical to meet standards, but a long-term improvement to exceed those standards at the squadron level.

Running a PT test once a month is not a sufficient way, in my personal opinion, to maintain physical fitness.

I see a lot of older men and women stop by meetings, some parents, some grandparents, or relatives, and remark about "When I was in the Boy Scouts" or "When I was in the military..." and they usually get responded to with "This isn't the military." Nobody is saying 14-year-olds should be susceptible to boot camp-style remedial physical training ("getting beat"), but I think we're entering an era where we're starting to avoid adequate fitness altogether with this idea that physical activity is becoming too risky and causing injuries. And this is an extension of the military, just at the childhood level....in regard to cadet programs obviously, not seniors.

Bottom line---
I don't want to see anyone get hurt. And you certainly won't get hurt if you sit in a chair and don't move, at least not in the next hour. But if they are going to perform any level of physical activity, from running to push-ups to sprints, there will be an inherent increase in the risk of injury.

A kid can't play soccer without being vulnerable to taking a shot to the groin...

That's why we have safety briefs and structured programs to address these potentials for injury. But we shouldn't cut back just because two out of a thousand rolled an ankle.

[THRAWN]

I applaud anything that will reduce Cadet injuries  :clap:.

What other changes are coming with the CPFT? Is the stretch going to be removed as well? I understand the point that several have made regarding the mile run. When I was in school, and dinorsaurs roamed the Earth, the Elementary PE program required a completed mile run. Today however, in our school district PE is offered at the elementary level once a week, if they can find a licensed teacher. Middle School offers PE as an elective, but students only need one semester. At the High School level PE is only required for one year. Many Cadets are coming to us with no fitness and no real knowledge of how to exercise correctly and safely. It then becomes up to us to teach it, this is not a bad thing as we teach life skills and build character. We can not, however, expect any Cadet to pass the PT Test if we only have them active once per month, but then we take time from Drill, Leadership, AE, ES, Partridge in Pear Tree.

This could lead to people running to a Doctor to get Waivers to avoid PT for their Cadets in order to bypass a requirement. I have not seen the proposed changes. Does anyone have a link that I could look at?

Thanks

Look up. It's in the thread.

If you're only doing it "once a month", you're doing it wrong. While it is "up to us to teach it", that's only in a limited way. The physical fitness program is mostly an individual effort. It's designed that way. It's presented that way. PF activities during CAP meetings is no substitute for reading the program and implementing it on your own, as it is designed. As for your local schools: call your board, get active in your district because you're allowing them to rob you of your tax dollars.

[Ned]

Since I was fat-fingering my first response on the phone, I was (uncharacteristically) brief.  I am back in the office post-COS and can provide some additional information.

First, the shuttle moratorium at this point is a request directed at commanders who will make the final decision on a unit-by-unit basis until the ICL hits the streets.  As I mentioned, we are in the final stages of the "staff coordination thing" on the language, but you should see it sooner than later.  We follow regulations in CAP, so until the reg changes, the moratorium request is just that - advice and recommendations to commanders.  No unit or cadet will be "wrong" if they continue to conduct a shuttle run as described in the regulations, until such time as the regulations change.

Second, I can only agree that many of the injuries we have seen related to the shuttle run could have been avoided if local leaders had more carefully considered local hazards and conditions using standard ORM techniques.   We had cadets injured after falling on loose gravel on an asphalt surface in a parking lot, falling after slipping on a polished concrete floor in a National Guard Armory, falling because they were permitted to perform the test barefoot, and even one where a cadet was performing the test in a carpeted squadron hallway when another cadet unexpectedly came out of a doorway and collided with the testee running full tilt down the hall.   Indeed, our first thought was simply to send out some pointed guidance to CP leaders to only perform the test on a suitable athletic surface (like a gym floor) , with cadets wearing appropriate athletic footwear, etc..  IOW, reminding CP leaders to use common sense when administering the test.

But when we realized that the shuttle run was not in any sense really an alternative to the mile run, it just made more sense to suspend it until the new CPFT comes out.

Third, even as a Californian, I fully understand that most units experience the phenomena known as "weather," especially during something you people call "winter."  So you will see language in the ICL that talks about "run banking."  This will allow units to permit a cadet to use a previously recorded run time if weather or other conditions do not permit a mile run during a scheduled CPFT test.

Fourth, the new CPFT is aligned with the Presidential Youth Fitness Assessment which is the only evidence-based assessment available for youth in the CP age cohort.  We are not yet done adapting this scientific assessment to our program, but you can view our initial White Paper on the Cadet Proving Grounds page of the National CP website.  As described, it will be very familiar, and include a mile run, push-ups, curl-ups, a slightly modified sit-and-reach.  The biggest difference is that the shuttle run will be replaced by an event called The Pacer.  (I'm still a little worried by this event - I'm not sure the average unit can get enough cadets through during the time allotted to the quarterly CPFT.  But that's what the Beta testing data will tell us.)

CP takes input from the field very, very seriously.  We strive to be as transparent  as possible while we consider enhancements and changes to our beloved CP.

We will carefully consider each and every comment posted here and on the Cadet Blog.  We will then carefully Beta-test the program at unit who cares to try it and at the winter encampments, make any further modifications suggested as a result of the testing, and hopefully finalize it by next Spring, with and effective date several months after that.

I really do recommend that we split the discussion of the new CPFT into its own thread and leave this one to discussing the shuttle moratorium.

Ned Lee
Col, CAP
National Cadet Program Manager

[abdsp51]

I have personally seen cadets not advance due to PT and alot of it was one component or the other.  I have seen cadets struggle with the mile and usually its because they run one lap and then walk another and can't/won't start running again to meet their times. 

Personally I never cared for the shuttle run either as a kid or administrating it. 

CAPDCCMOM, your right cadets could go get a Dr's note for PT but depending upon the category they will be hurting themselves in the long run for their milestone achievements. 

Alot of what I have seen is cadets just not exercising enough outside of meetings to pass. 

[A.Member]

Alot of what I have seen is cadets just not exercising enough outside of meetings to pass.

Agreed...and that's what it comes down to - they have to put in a little work.

I have personally seen cadets not advance due to PT and alot of it was one component or the other.  I have seen cadets struggle with the mile and usually its because they run one lap and then walk another and can't/won't start running again to meet their times.

It is our role as leaders to challenge our cadets as opposed to throwing up our hands and asking if we can buy them an ice cream cone just because something is hard.  If a cadet is unwilling to put in the effort to improve, they shouldn't advance - plain and simple.  As I mentioned earlier, a 1 mile run is not an unrealistic expectation by any stretch, especially for young people that are typically in upper middle school and high school.

[Panache]

Can't say I agree with this.

I've never had the proper body structure as a runner, and I'm pretty sure that the extensive running I did in the Army has done some pretty serious damage to my knees and ankles.

I'm also sure that "yes, we know it's -10 degrees outside with a -30 windchill, but get out there and do your run" direction will be very... popular with both the cadets and their parents during the dead of winter.

I can see this negatively affecting the numbers of cadets we have.  But that shouldn't be a problem, right?  Since we're just overflowing with recruits...

[dwb]

Panache, did you read the letter from NHQ? They are working on interim guidance that allows cadets to "bank" a fair-weather mile run to get them through the winter. This is to prevent exactly the scenario you described.

As for the efficacy of the mile, two things: (1) the stated goal is to measure cardiovascular fitness, which they admit the shuttle run does not do, and (2) it's "only" a mile; we're not making them run a marathon or do other endurance challenges that will cause long-term harm.

[Capt Thompson]

I can see where banking a fare weather mile would benefit some, and hurt others. I joined as a lazy out of shape cadet in the 90's, and for the first 6 or 7 achievements I worked hard (outside of CAP) to get my scores above passing. I progressed month by month, and always passed the PFT all the way through Earhart, but it was always a struggle.

I would've been discouraged if, during the winter months, I progressed month by month, but couldn't pass the PFT because I wasn't allowed to do the mile due to weather, and the mile I ran for C/SSgt wasn't good enough to pass C/TSgt or C/MSgt etc.

That said, it would be good for Squadrons to build relationships with local schools that have indoor facilities where a mile could be run, and perhaps have an alternate meeting location on PT night through the winter so the mile wouldn't have to be excluded.