Making up drill commands

[The Infamous Meerkat]

If the ability to call commands is the thing in question, the cadet should be dinged appropriately for using wrong commands. I'm not dockin him for the flight being too fast, I'm docking his lack of knowledge on the material. I have yet to see a cadet halt the flight, face them towards him, and instruct them to slow their pace, but I would be more than happy if one would, as it would show knowledge of proper commands.

Trust me, I've read that material, and I can't see it supporting what you're trying to say. They called commands wrong, that is grounds for docked points.

[Майор Хаткевич]

If the ability to call commands is the thing in question, the cadet should be dinged appropriately for using wrong commands. I'm not dockin him for the flight being too fast, I'm docking his lack of knowledge on the material. I have yet to see a cadet halt the flight, face them towards him, and instruct them to slow their pace, but I would be more than happy if one would, as it would show knowledge of proper commands.

Trust me, I've read that material, and I can't see it supporting what you're trying to say. They called commands wrong, that is grounds for docked points.

Maybe you need to RTFM quote posted above again.

You test / ding them ONLY on what is on the page. If we were going out and judging every.single.little.thing the cadets were doing wrong, I would be removed from my position for failure to do my job right.

[Walkman]

If the ability to call commands is the thing in question, the cadet should be dinged appropriately for using wrong commands. I'm not dockin him for the flight being too fast, I'm docking his lack of knowledge on the material. I have yet to see a cadet halt the flight, face them towards him, and instruct them to slow their pace, but I would be more than happy if one would, as it would show knowledge of proper commands.

Trust me, I've read that material, and I can't see it supporting what you're trying to say. They called commands wrong, that is grounds for docked points.

The use of made-up drill commands (aside from a little humor here and there) is to throw a little curve ball at cadets during drill practice to help them get the hang of really listening and reacting to the correct commands. This is just a little thing to drop in once in a while, trick question kinda' stuff.

[The Infamous Meerkat]

If they relieve you for upholding a decent standard, that's your wing's problem. The reason the command in question doesn't have a section in the book is because it doesn't exist, and therefore is unsatisfactory in every sense of the word. With that in mind, a cadet that passes all of his drill tests while also throwing out non-existant commands all willy-nilly as he/she pleases does not understand drill and ceremonies, as the purpose of drill and ceremonies is order and precision in movements. One cannot make it up as they go along, there is a drill manual that clearly defines what you can and cannot do. Curveballs are okay in moderate use during practice, but not testing.

Unfortunately, the Learn to Lead manual could never be all encompassing, but wouldn't common sense tell you that if they can't use proper commands during testing then 'significant deficiencies exist that would preclude the cadet from marching with other proficient cadets'? He can't march a flight that is going to be confused about his random, incorrect commands (and he needs to demonstrate that he can do it correctly before he throws curveballs at other cadets). They also 'doesn't meet the basic requirements', in that they don't adhere to the drill card and the tests provisions. One also simply cannot 'perform the maneuvers acceptable standards' if the maneuver has no place in drill at all.

But hey, I'm wrong, and since it's not on the drill card we'll just have to let them do whatever they want, right?

[Майор Хаткевич]

We don't let them do what they want. We do test on the published test, nothing else.

[NC Hokie]

Unfortunately, the Learn to Lead manual could never be all encompassing, but wouldn't common sense tell you that if they can't use proper commands during testing then 'significant deficiencies exist that would preclude the cadet from marching with other proficient cadets'?

You're right that the testing book isn't all encompasing.  In fact, it specifically states that "testing officers evaluate cadets only on the standards listed, even though those standards cannot possibly encompass every last facet of a drill maneuver."  It also defines satisfactory performance as meeting "all of the acceptable standards for the maneuver, as shown on the scorecard."  If the scorecard measures using correct commands, you can ding them on that ONE item, but you CANNOT ding them each and every time they make the same mistake, and you CANNOT ding them for something that's not on the scorecard.

It's a very narrow box with no room for common sense interpretation, but that's the box NHQ expects us to play in.

But hey, I'm wrong, and since it's not on the drill card we'll just have to let them do whatever they want, right?

Nope.  Hold them to the standard defined by the test and grade them on that.  If you notice other deficiencies during the test, notify the appropriate people and let the rest of the promotion system work.  Your job as testing officer is to administer the test and report the grade, not determine if the cadet is ready to promote or not.

If you think this is just an academic exercise for me you couldn't be further from the truth.  My daughter was recently held back because the Leadership Officer did not think that she was proficient in leading a formation, even though he (as Assistant Testing Officer) gave her a passing grade on her drill test.  He documented his concerns on a CAPF 50 and gave her a plan to attain the level of proficiency that he expected.  As her father, I recused myself from the discussion.  As the Deputy Commander for Cadets, I fully supported his decision to use the tools at his disposal to address a deficiency that was not measured by any of the tests.

[The Infamous Meerkat]

I guess the issue is that I was unaware that a filing recommendations on a CAPF 50-1 was under the drill test purview. I already have more than enough people telling me that one person can't fix the system, so in the interest of fixing the annoying lack of knowledge on drill, C&C, uniform wear, etc. in my squadron, I tend to be a little more straightforward about obvious problems. It is a slippery slope, not for one cadet, but for the hundred that come after them, which is the point my squadron stands at. The learn to lead series is fine, even the grading for drill is fine, but leaving out judgement calls for things like this is a major problem, as it allows obvious problems to slip through the cracks in the rubric, simply because 'it's not on the test'.

In any case, you dug my somewhat jesting statement up and then went after the square yard of dirt around it. Our drill system has problems (in most cases I've seen), but I'll just have to work more actively on it, since the tests obviously won't do it all.

[Майор Хаткевич]

The tests check proficiency. The cadet being evaluated should not be, and is not allowed to be learning on the spot. WIWAC (sigh), we didn't have drill tests each achievement. But I honestly feel most cadets knew how to drill better because we dedicated time to it, as opposed to "teaching to the test" that IMO it has become.

[The Infamous Meerkat]

There is definitely something to be said for that ^. Nowadays it's moreso that we hand them the book, tell them to 'learn', then give them a test they have barely practiced at. It's actually my fault for expecting to much out of it, because that's exactly what we did WIWAC in 2007. I only made it to C/SSGT, but I thought the drill tests were cheap and easy because I was a dual JROTC Cadet, and a C/MAJ at that.... The only reason most of the younger cadets knew drill so well is that we had senior cadets that had worked really hard on it and perfected the art of it. now that we have cadets that have been taught the test for so long, they have no grasp of it, and make a lot of really easy mistakes very frequently.

It also doesn't help that our only prior military Senior member above 2LT is a light Colonel in his late 60's (I believe) who really hasn't much time for drill and such. He'll occasionally check it out, but he doesn't actively help out with it. The rest of the Senior members shouldn't be wearing Mil-style uniforms (IMO) and probably have yet to glance at a drill manual...

My fellow newer senior members and I will be putting a lot more work into it now that the thermometer has hit fifty degrees for the first time in many moons, but it's going to be a lot of work.Also, I sense that a lot of people are going to come down on us for 'instructing the cadets too much' and not letting them do their own thing...

[Майор Хаткевич]

Depending on how new a member you are, and your history with the unit, I would work with the CDC, not try to steam roll. After I reactivated after college at my old unit, it was a tough balance. I had 5 active cadet years behind me,  giving me a good idea of how things *should* be, but then program HAD changed. I wasn't even aware of the drill tests each achievement. When I did figure my way around the new program, And AFTER getting a CPO assignment, only then did I directly begin interacting with the cadets. But for the first month or so, I limited my involvement to being the only SM outside when the cadets were outside, and talked only with the Commander and the Deputy regarding issues/observations I had.

[The Infamous Meerkat]

I have been restricting myself in that exact manner, I voice the occasional opinion to the chain, watch the Cadets while we're outside, but nothing is brought up or changed. I have enough history in the squadron to know that it wasn't always that way, and that a lot of things have changed... but certainly not for the better. Myself and most of the Junior Lt's are just kind of fed up with no one up the chain putting any sort of consideration into our concerns after at least six months of voicing them. It's not that we're steamrolling, stepping on toes, or being annoying about it... we are simply not being heard.

It's an ongoing project, and we're working the problem. It's just going to take more time and effort, I think.

[Майор Хаткевич]

Welcome to the FNG world. You're my age, so don't expect to be considered an equal, especially of there was a lot of leadership turnover.

[aceofspades]

At my squadron meetings, the flight sergeant assigns 2 cadets from the flight to bring out the garbage we created. It started off with just saying '2 for garbage, 'blank' and 'blank'". One day, I decided to spruce things up. "'Blank', Blank' GARBAGE HARCH!"  It stuck, and now its a big joke.

Moral of this story, everythings better with a harch.