OTS as Professional Development

[Eagle400]

I have an idea: CAP Officer Training School as part of CAP Professional Development.  Each region would host one twice a year.  OTS would be a prerequisite to SLS and CLC and would include Level I in the curriculum. 

I think Iowa Wing's OTS is the best, and it would be terriffic if National used that one as a model.  CAP needs something like this nationwide.       

[RogueLeader]

1st off, Have you taken IAWG OTS?  It really only works due to the WTA's, which require a paradigm shift from normal operations.  Most Wings are not remotely in the position to do this.  It only works in IAWG due to the relatively small size.  Region would be way to big.  A Group or Super-Squadron would work much better.  The concept is sound, but the details and logistics need to develop some more.  Keep thinking and try again.

[RogueLeader]

NHQ wants us to use the IAWG model nationally, but as on numerous threads- see Iowa Cap and Future of the Iowa Cap, is has shown that most wings are not in the position to follow it. 

[Eagle400]

No, I haven't taken the Iowa Wing OTS. 

There has to be some way for this to work nationally.  IIRC, the Iowa Wing OTS takes place over a series of weekends.

Maybe groups could administer OTS's (squadrons for those wings that don't have groups).  That sounds like a better idea than having regions or National do it.  Seems more logistically feasible. 

I think National should issue an organization-wide census to see just how far away an OTS as PD is from reality.     

[Flying Pig]

Oh good lord.....

Just what we need....another mandatory school. I swear some of you must get paid to be in CAP.  What about those of us with past CAP and or military background?

[flyguy06]

I already have a tough time trying to get members to take time out of their "regular" paying job schedules to go to SLS and CLC. If you add another requirement then I would guess that my members would never make it past level I

[Eclipse]

NHQ wants us to use the IAWG model nationally, but as on numerous threads- see Iowa Cap and Future of the Iowa Cap, is has shown that most wings are not in the position to follow it. 

Please cite the reference from NHQ that they want / expect to use the Iowa model nationally...

[mikeylikey]

NO.........I could perhaps be OK with a "distance ed program that is COMPUTER BASED.  Jointly created by the AF and CAP.......it would incorporate AFIADL 13, SLS, CLC and whatever else they find a new CAP Officer needs to know.  Then they do specific tasks at the SQD during this COMPUTER BASED Distance Education, that the SQD CO has to sign off on.  If it would last 6 months or less I would be happy.

.......I hate traveling for CAP courses that usually end up being a waste of everyone's time!  Lets move CAP into the twenty-first century. 

Now I am off to get raped by Vanguard, good day everyone!

[floridacyclist]

I hate computer-based training. I recognize the convenience of it, but it seems like everyone that does that just clicks through the courses and uses the find feature to answer the test questions. Based on the differences that I've seen in ICS and Level 1/CPPT programs between the sit-down courses and computer-based, I would say that the vast majority of computer-based courses are useless, especially if the practicum is skipped. Most people that sit through our level1/CPPT/ICS courses say they learn so much more in a real classroom with a real instructor and student-to-student interaction than they ever did staring at a computer screen. My other issue with CPPT/Level 1 being on the computer is that it takes away from some of our earliest interactions with new members and I think that the CAP Officer corps suffers from that lack of mentoring.

A really clear example can be seen in an ICS300 course where you can really tell the difference between students who took their 100/200/700 online vs those who took a real class. The ones who took it online can barely spell ICS, wheras the classroom students recognize the tabletop exercises as extensions of the ones they did in 200.

Instead of claiming that courses are a waste of time,  raise the bar on the training standards.

[Pylon]

Level I needs to be beefed up and worked on, for sure.  Is a residential OTS the answer?  Maybe, maybe not.

Consider another option:  A rigid curriculum instructed by the squadron or group level.  TLC is an example of a very defined course curriculum that's new and is put on by any unit Group-level or higher. 

Downsides: Inconsistent applications at lower echelons, inconsistent offering schedules, adds burden to units over current Level I setup.

Positives: Can be run when needed - if a unit has an open house and gains 6 new S'members, they can arrange through Group HQ to host an OTS.  If no new S'members have come in lately, they don't have to go through hosting an OTS.   Allows some flexibility for adding local information: aircraft scheduling procedures, facility usage rules (is there a checkdown before locking the office or hangar at night?), unit chain of command, and other local information useful to new members.

Ultimately, I think it would work best on the model discussed before on here of signing up members at pre-determined intervals at the local unit level.  Your members can get their paperwork ready, fingerprints done, make a folder of other stuff they need (old DD214s, copies of pilot certificates, medicals, college degrees, etc.), and read through the various CAP literature available in anticipation of the next in-processing weekend.

Your senior members and cadets who have expressed interest in joining them come that day to get everything taken care of.  They whip through a couple of stations (admin officer checks over your paperwork and gets your file setup, snaps your file photo, and puts you in SIMS; finance officer takes your money with a big smile; logisitics issues you uniform items from sq. supply and you sign for it).  In an hour or two, all of your prospective members are ready to go.  One packet of applications goes to NHQ and everybody gets the same join/renewal date.

After in-processing, the cadets and seniors split up.  Seniors go do CPPT and Level I/OTS.  Cadets go do the BCT (Basic Cadet Training).  Add a break in there for lunch, and everyone leaves before dinner-time.   All of your new members are now on the same page for training, renewals, etc. and are easier to manage overall.  Voilà.

[RogueLeader]

Basically what the OTS is this:
Foundations Course
CPPT
FA/CPR
B-CUT
GES
ES track
Spec. Trac
ICS
All in six weekends, 1 weekend per month.

[AlphaSigOU]

Basically what the OTS is this:
Foundations Course
CPPT
FA/CPR
B-CUT
GES
ES track
Spec. Trac
ICS
All in six weekends, 1 weekend per month.

And if you time it right... voila! All requirements for promotion to 2d Lt and then some completed.

[RogueLeader]

Can you promise to make six consecutive months?  I couldn't.  Most people I knew in OTS couldn't.  The thing it does do is allows for the lesser motivated people to get Level 1 done faster.  Had I wanted to, I could have had done most of that in two months, provided I knew what all I needed to do.

[Eclipse]

Basically what the OTS is this:
Foundations Course
CPPT
FA/CPR
B-CUT
GES
ES track
Spec. Trac
ICS
All in six weekends, 1 weekend per month.

How about, I don't know - that's what is supposed to be done as a normal part of unit participation!
Also, you are assuming a heavy emphasis on ES, which anyone who reads this board would know is not where lot of unit focus their energies.


As to Level 1, I don't know how many of you havce done the new version, but it is quite effective, and the opinion of those who have seen it is that it is about where it needs to be - instead of death by video, it is discussion  based, and requires the new member to do some homework, which means that they generally come in with questions.

[RogueLeader]

Now you know why I don't care for the OTS concept.  To be fair, the 2 yr retention is almost 100%.  I think 2 out of 50 had dropped IIRC.  That is for the entire wing.

[floridacyclist]

We are eliminating the ES parts of our OTS except for a GES class and ICS 100/200/700, but that's only because there are some good management concepts being taught there as well. We're going with 3 months of meetings plus 1 weekend a month (GES and ICS being taught on the weekends since they are optional) for those 3 months since our group is planning an ES academy starting in January and we can feed directly into that. For our OTS, we are mainly looking at Level 1/CPPT and SLS for our training materials with a couple of extra classes on choosing specialty tracks and duty assignments.

As always, this is a work in progress.

[NEBoom]

We are eliminating the ES parts of our OTS except for a GES class and ICS 100/200/700, but that's only because there are some good management concepts being taught there as well. We're going with 3 months of meetings plus 1 weekend a month (GES and ICS being taught on the weekends since they are optional) for those 3 months since our group is planning an ES academy starting in January and we can feed directly into that. For our OTS, we are mainly looking at Level 1/CPPT and SLS for our training materials with a couple of extra classes on choosing specialty tracks and duty assignments.

As always, this is a work in progress.

Sounds a lot like the approach we're taking.  Focus on officership and getting a firm foothold in Professional Development (specialty track, etc).

[JohnKachenmeister]

We beat this around on another thread.

Yes, an OTS would be a great idea.  I tried to get one going in my group, but our personnel and physical resources are simply not able to manage it at the group level.

This has to be at the wing level.  Region won't work, because the regions are too large, and the drive will be too far for most folks.

My suggestion would be to create a chartered unit as a direct reporting unit to the wing.  ALL new members would be assigned initially to this unit, regardless of where they live or which unit recruited them.  They would report for the next class, and serve one weekend a month for 3-6 months, depending on how ambitious you want the program to be.  I wrote up a 3-month proposed schedule that covered all the basics.  If you want more stuff, like form 5 rides, ACUT, etc. you will have to make it longer.

The problem will be in identifying, recruiting, and retaining good, qualified tactical officers to manage the military training.  We only had one or two in the group that were worth considering, and they were both unit commanders.

[Eclipse]

My suggestion would be to create a chartered unit as a direct reporting unit to the wing.  ALL new members would be assigned initially to this unit, regardless of where they live or which unit recruited them.  They would report for the next class, and serve one weekend a month for 3-6 months, depending on how ambitious you want the program to be.  I wrote up a 3-month proposed schedule that covered all the basics.  If you want more stuff, like form 5 rides, ACUT, etc. you will have to make it longer.

So you recruit them into YOUR unit, and then send them off to Wing for their attitude to be shaped by people they will likely never or rarely see again.

Until the entirety of the organization is based around a wing model, something which will doubtful happen within my CAP career, I want to insure my people are trained my way, because they are my problem.

When my people need an SLS or CLC?  I hold one.  Same with radio classes, ES, whatever.  its only when you start getting into the field grades that this can't be done at the unit or group levels.

[Eagle400]

Has anyone thought of proposing to National that OTS be instituted as part of professional development, just like SLS and CLC?  I'm not sure how feasible it would be, but if SLS's and CLC's can be held, I don't see what the trouble would be in holding an OTS.   

[Eclipse]

Has anyone thought of proposing to National that OTS be instituted as part of professional development, just like SLS and CLC?  I'm not sure how feasible it would be, but if SLS's and CLC's can be held, I don't see what the trouble would be in holding an OTS.   

The trouble is creating, approving and implementing a curriculum which is not necessarily needed.

As I beat the drum constantly, this OTS idea is another reaction to failed local programs.  Engaged, knowledgeable commanders should be able to train their own people in the basics of the program, and
bring resources to bear for things not available locally.

That's their job.

[Pylon]

Has anyone thought of proposing to National that OTS be instituted as part of professional development, just like SLS and CLC?  I'm not sure how feasible it would be, but if SLS's and CLC's can be held, I don't see what the trouble would be in holding an OTS.   

The trouble is creating, approving and implementing a curriculum which is not necessarily needed.

As I beat the drum constantly, this OTS idea is another reaction to failed local programs.  Engaged, knowledgeable commanders should be able to train their own people in the basics of the program, and
bring resources to bear for things not available locally.

That's their job.

Bob - wouldn't a standard template for a beefier Level I (after all, this OTS thing is nothing but a fanicer name for a Level I training course) help the local commander implement training for their own people like they should be?

You say that local training for new members fails in many cases, and this can be very, very true.  So why not beef up the Level I training by giving commanders and PD staff better tools in the form of training templates, class outlines, a true curriculum, associated powerpoints that are up-to-date, and slap it all together in a kit, ready to be "deployed" when your unit needs it.

I think we all can agree on one thing, and that's the fact that Level I, as it is currently applied, fails many new members of CAP.  Let's give the local units the tools they need to implement a more robust, more up-to-date, and more effective welcome to Civil Air Patrol.  They can take 6-months to finish the training, just like current Level I, and not miss out on any promotions/opportunities for advancement - so I don't think it'd put any undue strain on local resources.

[JohnKachenmeister]

My suggestion would be to create a chartered unit as a direct reporting unit to the wing.  ALL new members would be assigned initially to this unit, regardless of where they live or which unit recruited them.  They would report for the next class, and serve one weekend a month for 3-6 months, depending on how ambitious you want the program to be.  I wrote up a 3-month proposed schedule that covered all the basics.  If you want more stuff, like form 5 rides, ACUT, etc. you will have to make it longer.

So you recruit them into YOUR unit, and then send them off to Wing for their attitude to be shaped by people they will likely never or rarely see again.

Until the entirety of the organization is based around a wing model, something which will doubtful happen within my CAP career, I want to insure my people are trained my way, because they are my problem.

When my people need an SLS or CLC?  I hold one.  Same with radio classes, ES, whatever.  its only when you start getting into the field grades that this can't be done at the unit or group levels.

Yes.  You recruit them, and then Wing trains them in basic drill, military courtesy, wear of the uniform, CPPT, ES, and other basic subjects.  Then they come to you ready to serve.

I would have sympathy with you if I hadn't JUST run an SLS and saw the many and flagrant uniform violations coming out of certain squadrons.  YOU may be a professional about training, and YOU may have the time and resources to conduct comprehensive training of people who have never been in the military, but most units are doing a poor job.

[Eagle400]

I wonder... what does the Coast Guard Auxiliary do to ensure that new members know what is required of them right off the bat?  My guess is they have something similar to Level I, but more in-depth and longer.  Hawk200, MIKE, please help me out here.

Perhaps CAP can use the approach that the Coast Guard Auxiliary uses.     

[Major Carrales]

I wonder... what does the Coast Guard Auxiliary do to ensure that new members know what is required of them right off the bat?  My guess is they have something similar to Level I, but more in-depth and longer.  Hawk200, MIKE, please help me out here.

Perhaps CAP can use the approach that the Coast Guard Auxiliary uses.     

The application for the Coast Guard Auxiliary is multiple pages and asks for much more information (including finances). Plus, you would have to take a boating safety course.  The USCGAux is not really "aviation" centered...they are nautical in nature.

Tedda and some of the Auxie's could tell you more.  I've wanted to join up for a while, but one Auxiliary at a time is the name of the game for me.

[Hawk200]

I wonder... what does the Coast Guard Auxiliary do to ensure that new members know what is required of them right off the bat?  My guess is they have something similar to Level I, but more in-depth and longer.  Hawk200, MIKE, please help me out here.

Perhaps CAP can use the approach that the Coast Guard Auxiliary uses.     

I'm not even familiar with what the Coast Guard Auxiliary uses, and it's most likely not even relevant to us. CG Aux members work alongside their active duty counterparts, accomplishing the same mission, or missions of extremely similar nature.

CAP gets a mission handed over to them, and told to get it done, at least as far as ES is concerned. We don't use much in the way of USAF resources after the handoff, or we essentially operate on our own. Our Level 1 needs to reflect that.

I still think the Level 1 needs to be set up more in the function of an OTS, with major emphasis on the "Training" portion. I'm not looking to build AF officer clones, just to build Officers. Unfortunately, the competence levels in CAP are so varied, you can't guarantee that you'll get the same result. I think part of our officer training should include training the next generation.

The Iowa Wing model seems to be useful, it could be tailored to local use easily. Or National could produce a program (or accept a good one if someone submits it). Three hours of training and new clothes does not an officer make.

And something that's been bouncing around in my head, and finally stuck to something was this: "Just because an organization is an auxiliary does not mean it should function just like any other auxiliary." We're not the Coast Guard Auxiliary, we need to figure our own practices, instead of using or trying to use the practices of another with a completely different mission.

[RiverAux]

No, the CG Aux application is not multiple pages --- you're confusing the extensive security check required for certain operational duties and other situations with the membership application.

CG Aux doesn't really have anything like Level 1 or any sort of generic professional development program.  Lots of training available for various staff jobs, but thats about it. 

Overall, they aren't a good model for CAP in regards to PD and need some of the stuff we're talking about here. 

[MIKE]

There is/was a new member course and test, and an interview that I took prior to application.  It was basically a brief overview of the Aux... AUXMAN lite as it were.

That and a boating course gets you Basically Qualified (BQ), as opposed to Initially Qualified (IQ) IIRC.  

[floridacyclist]

How about something like this?

(Note: Most of our active cadets are away at Special Acts and will finish their part when they get back)

http://www.tallahasseecap.org/newmembers.shtml