Professional Development Credit for Prior Cadet Service

[mikeylikey]

Interim Change Letter – CAPR 50-17, CAP Senior Member Professional
Development Program and CAPR 280-2, Civil Air Patrol Aerospace Education Mission

http://level2.cap.gov/documents/2008_06_04_Officer_credit_for_cadet_service_.pdf

I don't agree with the awarding of SLS, AFIADL 13 and Level 2 to Eaker Cadets, but it looks like I may be in the minority. 

[MIKE]

The only thing that should transfer is if you took AFIADL 13 as a cadet for Eaker.  So, I basicly do not agree with anything in this ICL, and I think I said that when it was first proposed.

[dwb]

Wow, what a bad idea.

I'm sorry, but even as a senior cadet, I didn't have a grasp on how a squadron ran, or the job of a senior member that oversees a cadet program.

To award SLS and CP rating credit to former cadets is an acknowledgement that the NEC doesn't understand the difference between the role of a senior cadet and the role of the CP senior member.

Thumbs down on this one.

[dwb]

BTW, awarding Level II credit to Eaker cadets makes them eligible for Captain after 18 months... thereby removing yet another incentive to take the Spaatz.

"Don't worry, Mr. Eaker Cadet, you'll get Captain without having to do anything, just wait your turn."

Nice.

[Flying Pig]

BTW, awarding Level II credit to Eaker cadets makes them eligible for Captain after 18 months... thereby removing yet another incentive to take the Spaatz.

"Don't worry, Mr. Eaker Cadet, you'll get Captain without having to do anything, just wait your turn."

Nice.

So a cadet works for years climbing the ladder, and they are going to stop at C/LTC because they now have SM Capt. wrapped up?  Im sorry, could I get a show of hands from any Spaatz cadet that was salivating over a set SM Capt. bars as their motivation?   

[kpetersen]

I'll actually agree with it with some caveats. 

Pro:

• Part of the reason we have SDAs are to teach the senior cadets the operations on the senior member side of the house.
• A cadet program officer isn't really that much different from the higher-up cadets.  Particullarly if the cadet had time after being cadet commander.  It depends on the maturity of the cadet, the seriousness they apply to the job, and other positions they may hold (wing cadet commander or assistant to cadet programs).  It also depends on how much responsibility you give to the cadets in your squadron.

I still would recommend a cadet attend CLC and TLC.  They may know most of the stuff (I did), but the refresher is good.  Also, just because a former cadet has the ratings doesn't mean they should automatically be placed as a DCC.  Give them a subordinate job until they get it down.

BTW, awarding Level II credit to Eaker cadets makes them eligible for Captain after 18 months... thereby removing yet another incentive to take the Spaatz.

There's enough other discentives to take the spaatz that the "becoming a captain" is a minor one.  Most Eaker cadets I know either weren't able to pass the spaatz/ran out of time, or just didn't want to do anything more with the program, and left.  Personally, the reason I didn't want to take it is because I didn't want to be associated with the self-focused, over induldged Spaatz cadets.

[Psicorp]

There's enough other discentives to take the spaatz that the "becoming a captain" is a minor one.  Most Eaker cadets I know either weren't able to pass the spaatz/ran out of time, or just didn't want to do anything more with the program, and left.  Personally, the reason I didn't want to take it is because I didn't want to be associated with the self-focused, over induldged Spaatz cadets.

Put me in that catagory.  I'm grateful for not having to take the ECI-13, but I will still take the SLS as there is always something new to be learned from more experienced Officers.   I'm not sure if I'm happy about making Captain or upset that now I have to order Captain insignia sooner than I had planned.   There has to be a Vanguard conspiracy in this somewhere.   

[dwb]

For sure, a senior cadet is going to be comfortable with some of the knowledge requirements for a Technician-level CP rating.  I would hope a cadet officer would be able to explain the minimum requirements to progress in the cadet program, or how to wear a uniform.

However, they also need to be able to discuss the cadet protection policy as it relates to adult supervision, define and discuss mentoring, describe procedures for safeguarding cadet tests, know about safety policies, and ideally, have an understanding for how the program elements are interrelated (all of these items taken from CAPP 216, pg 6)

I'm willing to bet the average C/Lt Col doesn't have all of that knowledge.  So we're bending the rules by saying they don't need to have that knowledge before they're rated.

Furthermore, SLS covers topics such as Officership and the Public Trust and Intro to Professional Development, two topics that a cadet probably wouldn't get a lot of exposure to.

Perhaps even more importantly, attending SLS puts the former cadet amongst his new peers, a room full of other senior members.  I attended SLS after being a senior member for less than a year, so I still had a lot of cadet left in me.  It's important for young senior members that are former cadets to spend time with other senior members, to get them out of cadet mode.

Ultimately, this isn't an Earth-shattering policy.  I'm just stating why I think it was the wrong way to go.

[Pylon]

I guess my overarching question is: Why reduce the amount of prof. dev. for any officer?

We need better trained, more rounded and more aware CAP officers across the board.  Why are we reducing simple PD courses that don't take a lot of effort to complete, are readily available and offer opportunities for young new SMs (heck, all SMs) to meet and share conversations with peers, learn new tricks and ensure every officer is seeing the big picture.

Added to that, cadets with the Mitchell already get Level I orientation course waived.  How much more should we really be added to that?   What is covered in SLS is not necessarily learned through SDAs and experience as a cadet officer.

We don't waive SLS for military PME equivalents, we don't waive it for JROTC MSI's or anybody else.  I guess I don't see it as a big added incentive for cadet officers to become senior members, so why did we do it?   

[Timothy]

They do seem to be very focused on waiving quals in the hope that it will increase recruiting... I think that in most cases these are just bonuses to people that would have done it anyway.

I was a C/Lt Col in JROTC, and a C/3C in ROTC... <shrug> If there had been a magical waiver or early promotion available to me for any of that it would not have influenced my decision to join at all. As it is I'm more than happy to put in my 6 months for butter bar, and would not pass up the chance to take ECI-13 or SLS regardless.

I think that needing to take these Senior Member PD courses is also a good way to put the cadets in "senior mode," that their responsibilities are now different in the organization and help them fit into the senior structure.

[Pylon]

You'd likely get much better results with some targeted marketing including tracking cadets who "graduate" from the program and do not "cross over" to target them again right about the time they graduate from college and throw-in a waiver of first-year dues for those who "come back".

Unfortunately, that does take money and man hours to implement.  Waiving PD requirements does not.   I still think you'd get better results from the former.

[Trung Si Ma]

I'd rather they opened level II and III training - as it exists now - to cadet officers.  Let them earn - and wear - the Davis and the Loening as cadet officers.

[MIKE]

I don't think it's fair at all... Actually, think it gives some too much credit for their former cadetness, which I don't see as equivalent to their seniorness.  Smacks of a free ride, instead of benefiting both senior and cadet programs.

I'd rather they opened level II and III training - as it exists now - to cadet officers.  Let them earn - and wear - the Davis and the Loening as cadet officers.

I'd rather they just become seniors.

[mikeylikey]

^ Spot on Mike.  Especially when we see Cadets who are good test takers reach Eaker or SPAATZ, but never really contribute to the SQD.  This is a free ride, that in the end only really benefits a few (current members).  I am shocked it was even proposed, and even more shocked it was actually approved.

Every single Senior Member should be required to take the AFIADL 13, SLS and CLC at a minimum!  There should be no waivers, and no credit given for these three courses.  There are things even the most awesome Cadet will never see nor do because they are CADETS!  Lets not forget, Senior Members run the Cadet Program in the SQD's, Cadets may think they are running things, but they are not. 

As a former Cadet, should I be able to backdate my Professional Development Completion dates?  Is that fair to everyone else?  I don't think so. 

I am also the guy that believes everyone should come in as a 2nd Lt.  Even though I could have entered the program as a Capt, and been a Major by now, I choose to do the "traditional program", and start as a 2nd Lt, not a Captain.  Because of that there are people that are Majors now that joined after me, but I know when I am promoted in CAP, it means more than it would have. (totally off topic, but somewhat related, sorry)

[Flying Pig]

I'd rather they opened level II and III training - as it exists now - to cadet officers.  Let them earn - and wear - the Davis and the Loening as cadet officers.

Well Holy Cow!  This is an idea.  Give cadet officers a chance to attend the courses as cadets.  I like it.

[Psicorp]

I don't think it's fair at all... Actually, think it gives some too much credit for their former cadetness, which I don't see as equivalent to their seniorness.  Smacks of a free ride, instead of benefiting both senior and cadet programs.

I believe that's why the "free ride" is being done on a case-by-case bases with approval required by the unit commander.   I can't imagine a commander giving that approval to a member who wasn't making a valuable contribution to the unit.

[Psicorp]

I'd rather they opened level II and III training - as it exists now - to cadet officers.  Let them earn - and wear - the Davis and the Loening as cadet officers.

Well Holy Cow!  This is an idea.  Give cadet officers a chance to attend the courses as cadets.  I like it.

I'd much rather see the Cadet Officer School be conducted much more often and in far more places and have it's completion be a requirement for the Earhart Award.

[MIKE]

I don't think it's fair at all... Actually, think it gives some too much credit for their former cadetness, which I don't see as equivalent to their seniorness.  Smacks of a free ride, instead of benefiting both senior and cadet programs.

I believe that's why the "free ride" is being done on a case-by-case bases with approval required by the unit commander.   I can't imagine a commander giving that approval to a member who wasn't making a valuable contribution to the unit.

I can.

[smitjud]

Wow...when i saw this come out this morning I was shocked.

I don't have a problem with the AFIADL 13 waiver, I've long thought that if AFIADL 13 would substitute for RCLS or COS that it should work in reverse. i think thats fair and will be a good thing.

I'm not a big fan of the SLS waiver, but I'm ok with it.

Where I draw contention with this comes with the automatic Level II, freebie Yeager, and freebie specialty track ratings.

Like several of you have mentioned, even senior cadets are often in the blind when it comes to what it takes to make the cadet program work on the senior side of things.  I know whan I first crossed into the grey back in 2003, it was an eye-opening experience.  I think SLS is a good introduction to the senior program for new seniors, even if they were Spaatz cadets.  I think moving through the tasks associated with the specialty tracks is important  to having a "big picture"  understanding of the program and gives you knowledge that being in possession of that award doesn't automatically assume you have.

For instance, I'm good friends with a former cadet who earned their Spaatz only attending their basic encampment, never having attended an NCSA, and doing very little beyond that and the minimum requirements.  I would hope that in giving folks these "freebies" that they would be consideraby more well rounded.

While one or two things are nice with this, overall, its bad bad bad.

[Pylon]

I believe that's why the "free ride" is being done on a case-by-case bases with approval required by the unit commander.   I can't imagine a commander giving that approval to a member who wasn't making a valuable contribution to the unit.

How many promotions and specialty track ratings are approved at the squadron level for members who never contribute but kept their body warm and paid dues for the requisite amount of time? 

CAP has the mentality of "I checked the boxes, gimme the treat."  Very few and far between are the commanders who withhold promotions, ratings, and trinkets from members who have the TIG/TIS, or have checked the minimum boxes, but never actually helped the squadron.

[Psicorp]

Wow...when i saw this come out this morning I was shocked.
I don't have a problem with the AFIADL 13 waiver, I've long thought that if AFIADL 13 would substitute for RCLS or COS that it should work in reverse. i think thats fair and will be a good thing. I'm not a big fan of the SLS waiver, but I'm ok with it.
Where I draw contention with this comes with the automatic Level II, freebie Yeager, and freebie specialty track ratings.

A cadet who's reached C/Lt Col has already taken an exam on every chapter of the entire aerospace textbook.  The Yeager is an open book test.  I don't see an issue with that "freebie", sir.

Granting the AFIADL-13, the SLS, and the Technician level completes the requirements for Level II,  so it really isn't anything additional.   On the speciality track I can sort of understand the apprehension.   The regs do allow time served in a cadet staff position to fullfill the service requirement for the Technician rating.  All that may be lacking is regulation knowledge, which really should be taught to senior cadets regardless.

[Psicorp]

I believe that's why the "free ride" is being done on a case-by-case bases with approval required by the unit commander.   I can't imagine a commander giving that approval to a member who wasn't making a valuable contribution to the unit.

How many promotions and specialty track ratings are approved at the squadron level for members who never contribute but kept their body warm and paid dues for the requisite amount of time? 

CAP has the mentality of "I checked the boxes, gimme the treat."  Very few and far between are the commanders who withhold promotions, ratings, and trinkets from members who have the TIG/TIS, or have checked the minimum boxes, but never actually helped the squadron.

I chaulk that up to a failure of leadership, sir, not just of the unit commander but also of the higher echelons.   They aren't doing members any favors with that mentality which also means that the members aren't really gaining enough knowledge and experience to be of real benefit to the squadron.   

[afgeo4]

I think there's a big difference between Cadet Programs senior members and cadet officers. That's why we have TAC officers at encampments and why we still have leadership officers even in squadrons with cadet colonels.

They're very different approaches to similar issues. Just because a cadet earns a Spaatz, doesn't make him/her a competent cadet programs officer and in my honest opinion should not qualify them for the Senior or Technician's rating.

That's like giving out observer wings to people who have private pilot's licenses. Sure, they'll probably be able to do the job once they get training and experience, but it's not a guarantee!

[RiverAux]

No special appointments or promotions -- NO EXCEPTIONS!

[mikeylikey]

No special appointments or promotions -- NO EXCEPTIONS!

I can't agree more with you! 

[afgeo4]

No special appointments or promotions -- NO EXCEPTIONS!

I can't agree more with you! 

This thread isn't about appointments or promotions.

Appointments and promotions for former cadets stand as they were before, unaffected.

This is about "wavers" for leadership and specialty track training.

[mikeylikey]

^ But it is about promotions.  By waiving PRO DEV......these former Cadets can promote faster than the rest of us.....right?

[SAR-EMT1]

No Pro Dev waivers, no freebies...  and I say this as a former cadink.
(Who didnt know jack until SLS, and jumped at the Yeager and took it closed book)

[lordmonar]

^ But it is about promotions.  By waiving PRO DEV......these former Cadets can promote faster than the rest of us.....right?

Not really.

A Earheart/Eaker cadet is automatically a 1st Lt.....but will only have a level I qualifiaction.....not the the Tech Rating and Level I qualifications any non cadet would have to have.  An Spaatz Cadet is automatically captain but does not have the Level II required for the rest of us.

Where this gives them a leg up is....they do not have to wait the 9 months to get a tech rating then the 12 months to get a Senior rating before they can start working on their Level III requirements.

Pluss it gives them a buy on the SLS...which everyone has to have (even prio-service military).

If you compare a normal Captain who pinned on the same day as a Spaatz Cadet turned 21.
 
The Spaatz would already have his Senior Rating while the normal captain may not have started his Senior Rating yet and would have to spend 12 months as a technican rated staff member.

Either way.....they both have to wait 3 years....so no one is going to get promoted early.

All this change does is give credit for the PD levels that they would have had to complete for the rank they are wearing.

[AlphaSigOU]

I came back to CAP in 2005 after a 17-year break in service. As a former cadet with the Earhart award, I was eligible for the special appointment to 1st Lt, so long as I completed all my Level I requirements. The special appointment is not automatic; approval rests on the promotion authority (in my case, the squadron commander). It had been too long since I had taken SLS and CLC, and I still needed AFAIDL 13, so I knuckled down and got 'em done as soon as I could.

I don't have a major problem with the new pro dev incentives for cadinks; perhaps it might encourage them to succumb to 'the dark side'?    I do agree with others on this thread that special appointments shouldn't be given out like candy; if you don't contribute to the squadron and/or CAP, you shouldn't get the appointment. I supported my squadron for over two years as admin/personnel officer.

[RickFranz]

Maybe this whole idea is a way to keep some of those (hopefully) highly trained young people from dropping out or  jumping to the Dark Side at 18. 

[smitjud]

Wow...when i saw this come out this morning I was shocked.
I don't have a problem with the AFIADL 13 waiver, I've long thought that if AFIADL 13 would substitute for RCLS or COS that it should work in reverse. i think thats fair and will be a good thing. I'm not a big fan of the SLS waiver, but I'm ok with it.
Where I draw contention with this comes with the automatic Level II, freebie Yeager, and freebie specialty track ratings.

A cadet who's reached C/Lt Col has already taken an exam on every chapter of the entire aerospace textbook.  The Yeager is an open book test.  I don't see an issue with that "freebie", sir.

I understand that.  However, it is the Spaatz Award or the Yeager Award.  Not the Spaatz-Yeager Award, which is essentially what it becomes now.

I would be better with granting a waiver for anything that requires the Yeager Award instead of just automatically awarding it, if they wanted to recognize cadet AE accomplishments.

[MIKE]

IIRC, cadet officers don't cover everything in the AE text... while the Yeager does.

[jimmydeanno]

If it's any consolation, the AE stuff I learned as a cadet enabled me to pass the yeager exam, first try, closed book, 3 years after taking my last cadet AE exam (no C/Officer AE exams).

The yeager is a gimme for the former cadets, but as such, if it is such a gimme - why not just have them take the quiz online, it should take 20 minutes and they'll have actually met the requirement for the yeager award.

[Flying Pig]

^Same here.  As with another former cadet in my Sq.  When I rejoined after many years I took the Yeager and passed it the first go around.  I really like the idea of a lot of these courses being opened up to cadet.  SLS, Yeager, etc.  Now, granted, most cadets are pretty busy with just getting promoted themselves, but you may have a few who can do it.  I know we have several parent combo's in CAP and allowing their cadet to attend the same courses would/could make it easier for the Seniors to attend.

[arajca]

SLS, CLC have been open to cadets if space is available for a long time. Read CAP 50-17. I have never heard of cadets applying for these classes.

[smitjud]

SLS, CLC have been open to cadets if space is available for a long time. Read CAP 50-17. I have never heard of cadets applying for these classes.

Because they don't receive credit.  Would be lame to take it and then have to take it again as a SM.  Therefore, they don't go.

From CAPR 50-17 para. 2-7 (page

The Professional Development Program is designed to prepare senior members for immediate duty. Therefore, while cadets in good standing who meet the prerequisites may attend a professional development activity, space permitting, they will not receive credit for attendance as a senior member.

[afgeo4]

^ But it is about promotions.  By waiving PRO DEV......these former Cadets can promote faster than the rest of us.....right?

Wrong. The TIG requirements are the same as for the rest of us.

[afgeo4]

Maybe this whole idea is a way to keep some of those (hopefully) highly trained young people from dropping out or  jumping to the Dark Side at 18. 

Probably... but is it fair to everyone else in CAP? Seems that it isn't, according to responses on this board.

[ßτε]

For those of you who aren't aware, here is just one part of the Spaatz exam (CAPR 52-16 2-9 b. (1))

Aerospace. A 60-question, multiple-choice, closed-book aerospace test, with a 60-minute time limit, based on selected chapters of Aerospace: The Journey of Flight (see Figure 2-4). The passing score is 80%.

I would say this is at least comparable to the Yeager test.

[Major Carrales]

IIRC, cadet officers don't cover everything in the AE text... while the Yeager does.

The Cadet AE program is a long comprehensive process required for advancement in the Cadet program.  The Yeager Award is an on line test that can be done in an hour with zero "direct" prep.  

Not even close, in terms of comparison.  

[afgeo4]

IIRC, cadet officers don't cover everything in the AE text... while the Yeager does.

The Cadet AE program is a long comprehensive process required for advancement in the Cadet program.  The Yeager Award is an on line test that can be done in an hour with zero "direct" prep. 

Not even close, in terms of comparison. 

The lone fact that you're allowed to google the whole exam makes it pretty irrelevant (the exam is "open book")

[Major Carrales]

Maybe this whole idea is a way to keep some of those (hopefully) highly trained young people from dropping out or  jumping to the Dark Side at 18. 

Probably... but is it fair to everyone else in CAP? Seems that it isn't, according to responses on this board.

I think it is more than fair.  Cadets, to achieve those levels in the Cadet Program, have been in CAP for a considerable amount of time.  They are not newbies to CAP as many of our SM, including myself at one time, are when they come into CAP.  When I first joined it was CADET Officers and NCOs that actually guided me and introducted me to CAP.  In fact, it was a TFO who recruited me.

Then again, I believe that the CAP Cadet Program should be a form of "ROTC" for the SENIOR PROGRAM.  Thus, that training done in the Cadet Program should count for alot on the Senior Side, lest it be a waste.  

Now, flip it around. Would it be fair to a long time Cadet going "Senior" (who might be a GTL and Cadet Officer with a Eaker or Spaatz who attended encampments as a Cadet Staff and likely attended Wing Conferences and other, including National, level Activities) to be denied the simple rank of 2d Lt, while a bloke off the street makes it in six month with what some would consider minimal training?  Hummmmm?

[afgeo4]

Maybe this whole idea is a way to keep some of those (hopefully) highly trained young people from dropping out or  jumping to the Dark Side at 18. 

Probably... but is it fair to everyone else in CAP? Seems that it isn't, according to responses on this board.

I think it is more than fair.  Cadets, to achieve those levels in the Cadet Program, have been in CAP for a considerable amount of time.  They are not newbies to CAP as many of our SM, including myself at one time, are when they come into CAP.  When I first joined it was CADET Officers and NCOs that actually guided me and introducted me to CAP.  In fact, it was a TFO who recruited me.

Then again, I believe that the CAP Cadet Program should be a form of "ROTC" for the SENIOR PROGRAM.  Thus, that training done in the Cadet Program should count for alot on the Senior Side, lest it be a waste. 

Now, flip it around. Would it be fair to a long time Cadet going "Senior" (who might be a GTL and Cadet Officer with a Eaker or Spaatz who attended encampments as a Cadet Staff and likely attended Wing Conferences and other, including National, level Activities) to be denied the simple rank of 2d Lt, while a bloke off the street makes it in six month with what some would consider minimal training?  Hummmmm?

Major Corrales... please re-read regulations. Currently, cadets who earn the Eaker are allowed to come in as 1st Lt and those who earn the Spaatz, come in as Capt. I believe Earhart gives them 2nd Lt. Those that are under 21 wear the equivalent grades of FO, TFO and SFO and then transition into officer ranks at age of 21.

I'm fine with that. I'm NOT fine with allowing cadets not to have experience in RUNNING a squadron cadet program before say... getting a senior rating in CP (which indicates the ability of a member to perform Group CP Officer duties) or even getting a technician's rating in CP. All of those require experience in administering a cadet program, not being in it.

[Major Carrales]

Maybe this whole idea is a way to keep some of those (hopefully) highly trained young people from dropping out or  jumping to the Dark Side at 18. 

Probably... but is it fair to everyone else in CAP? Seems that it isn't, according to responses on this board.

I think it is more than fair.  Cadets, to achieve those levels in the Cadet Program, have been in CAP for a considerable amount of time.  They are not newbies to CAP as many of our SM, including myself at one time, are when they come into CAP.  When I first joined it was CADET Officers and NCOs that actually guided me and introducted me to CAP.  In fact, it was a TFO who recruited me.

Then again, I believe that the CAP Cadet Program should be a form of "ROTC" for the SENIOR PROGRAM.  Thus, that training done in the Cadet Program should count for alot on the Senior Side, lest it be a waste. 

Now, flip it around. Would it be fair to a long time Cadet going "Senior" (who might be a GTL and Cadet Officer with a Eaker or Spaatz who attended encampments as a Cadet Staff and likely attended Wing Conferences and other, including National, level Activities) to be denied the simple rank of 2d Lt, while a bloke off the street makes it in six month with what some would consider minimal training?  Hummmmm?

Major Corrales... please re-read regulations. Currently, cadets who earn the Eaker are allowed to come in as 1st Lt and those who earn the Spaatz, come in as Capt. I believe Earhart gives them 2nd Lt. Those that are under 21 wear the equivalent grades of FO, TFO and SFO and then transition into officer ranks at age of 21.

I'm fine with that. I'm NOT fine with allowing cadets not to have experience in RUNNING a squadron cadet program before say... getting a senior rating in CP (which indicates the ability of a member to perform Group CP Officer duties) or even getting a technician's rating in CP. All of those require experience in administering a cadet program, not being in it.

Good, now read those regualtions yourself and look at the intent of these "the new" measures. Coming in at a 2d Lt, 1st Lt or Captain with lots of "back fill" of those schools and courses is more of a hinderance, especially to fromer cadets at the University who are limited to travel and have barely enough time to be active on weekend.

So, you're NOT fine with allowing cadets not to have experience in RUNNING a squadron cadet program before say... but you will allow some "Johnny Off the Streets" to fill that role?  A person who knows only what brochures and CAP LEVEL I has to say about it?  When Cadets have "been there, done that" in their units for almost a decade?

I just don't see what your objection is and what constitutes being "unfair?" 

[RiverAux]

Well, we make other folks who get special appointments "backfill" their PD requirements before promoting, so why not former cadets? 

[Major Carrales]

Well, we make other folks who get special appointments "backfill" their PD requirements before promoting, so why not former cadets? 

Because Cadets have already done the work in CAP.  They know Civil Air Patrol history, a degree of tradition and even (gasp) some drill/military stuff, they have done the Aerospace Education and because they HAVE BEEN IN CAP TRAINING for a NUMBER OF YEARS.

A new CAP Officer granted the rank of Captain for being a pilot, lawyer, doctor or educator does not have this background...thus they actually need the courses and schools to know what the cadets have been hammering out for 6 to 8 years.  Oh, I believe they should get the rank because their "training" has been in their fields and they bring these skill to CAP.  But for advancement they need the training that I believe Cadets get as part of the program.

[mikeylikey]

^ 1 week of encampment, one multiple choice test per month, some SDA reports and passing a fairly easy PT test.  They also sit through a moral leadership presentation that may or may not last 20 minutes once per month as well.

So, they read fairly simple books (both Aerospace and Leadership) and take tests.  How does that prepare them to be a CAP Officer? 

4 years of attending half the SQD meetings (testing, PT, moral leadership) and they get their SPAATZ. 

I have to say, I don't like awarding any PRO DEV credit, unless the person took the time to actually complete the requirements. 

[Major Carrales]

^ 1 week of encampment, one multiple choice test per month, some SDA reports and passing a fairly easy PT test.  They also sit through a moral leadership presentation that may or may not last 20 minutes once per month as well.

So, they read fairly simple books (both Aerospace and Leadership) and take tests.  How does that prepare them to be a CAP Officer? 

4 years of attending half the SQD meetings (testing, PT, moral leadership) and they get their SPAATZ. 

I have to say, I don't like awarding any PRO DEV credit, unless the person took the time to actually complete the requirements. 

You don't know too much about how CAP Officers advance do you?  CAP Officers do not attend any encampment or orientation.  Level I consists of some on line tests and a "conversation" with another CAP Officer (it used to be a seires of videos)  There is no PT test for Seniors, no "Cadet Oath" for Seniors to recite their "mantra" of things to do.

SLS is a class taught over a couple of days with no final test.  Most seniors don't get to have it, or won't take it, for year because (especially in large Wings) they are miles away at a significant cost in hotel and travel. 

CLC is more of the same with a different focus.

Course 13, the CAP Senior Officers Course, doesn't require any "study sessions," classes or even meeting attendance requirements.  In fact, you needn't show up to anything at all to take it.  Any average person could read it critically over a month and pass it.

You can't seriously compare years of Cadet work...yes, years, to the CAP Officer program. 

As I said, I regard the Cadet Program as ROTC for CAP, thus I believe that that serivce as a cadet should be "rewarded".

[lordmonar]

I'm NOT fine with allowing cadets not to have experience in RUNNING a squadron cadet program before say... getting a senior rating in CP (which indicates the ability of a member to perform Group CP Officer duties) or even getting a technician's rating in CP. All of those require experience in administering a cadet program, not being in it.

We got senior members who have master ratings in CP and do not have experince RUNNING a squadron cadet program.

And there is NO....NO requirement to have experince or prove the ability to run a Group or higher CP program to get a senior or master CP rating.

[lordmonar]

Well, we make other folks who get special appointments "backfill" their PD requirements before promoting, so why not former cadets? 

Or maybe the question is why do we require specdall appointment officers to backfill the PD requirments.

If we look at PD requirments as being absolutely necessariy for a particular grade.....then we should not give any advanced promotions (which I suppport). 

[RiverAux]

Don't expect me to defend the current system, just pointing out the discrepancy....

[Psicorp]

^ 1 week of encampment, one multiple choice test per month, some SDA reports and passing a fairly easy PT test.  They also sit through a moral leadership presentation that may or may not last 20 minutes once per month as well.

So, they read fairly simple books (both Aerospace and Leadership) and take tests.  How does that prepare them to be a CAP Officer? 

4 years of attending half the SQD meetings (testing, PT, moral leadership) and they get their SPAATZ. 

I have to say, I don't like awarding any PRO DEV credit, unless the person took the time to actually complete the requirements. 

That's all a heck of a lot more than we require of Senior Members who are put in leadership positions in squadrons.   What exactly is it that we do to prepare CAP Officers to be CAP Officers that is so much better?   

How many Senior Members not involved in CP even know what an SDA is?  How many have had leadership training of any sort?  Perhaps if Senior Members had to "sit through a moral leadership presentation that may or may not last 20 minutes once per month," situations like we've had in the past that garnered so much media attention might not have happened. 

Just because there is a failure to lead, mentor, and coach Cadet Officers to be future Senior Member leaders in some squadrons doesn't mean that it occurs everywhere. 

[afgeo4]

I'm NOT fine with allowing cadets not to have experience in RUNNING a squadron cadet program before say... getting a senior rating in CP (which indicates the ability of a member to perform Group CP Officer duties) or even getting a technician's rating in CP. All of those require experience in administering a cadet program, not being in it.

We got senior members who have master ratings in CP and do not have experince RUNNING a squadron cadet program.

And there is NO....NO requirement to have experince or prove the ability to run a Group or higher CP program to get a senior or master CP rating.

Having a Technician, Senior or Master rating requires specific length of service as a cadet programs officer, so unless it was fudged, you can't have Senior or Master rated CP officer who've never run a cadet program. Now understand please that by "run" I don't mean being a Cadet Sq CC or a DCC in a Composite. I mean administer a cadet program. That can be done as a Leadership or Activities officer as well.

Also, according to the CP Track pamphlet, a person who has a Senior rating should be able to run a cadet squadron or serve as a group level CP officer. Someone with a Master rating should be able to be a Wing CP director or above. I'm not saying that the individual is fit for command or the responsibility. I'm saying that someone who's earned those ratings should have the necessary experience and skill sets to do the job.

[Eagle400]

This is an interesting issue that deserves being brought up.


Should advanced PD credit for prior cadet service officers and NCOs be given?  Yes!

Why?


Last time I checked, senior members who complete an Air Force commissioning program (such as ROTC) and become 2d Lt's are eligible for advanced PD credit.

The CAP Cadet Program is the only Air Force-sanctioned youth cadet program in the United States that is very similar in quality to college AFROTC.  Cadets who have earned the Mitchell Award or above already know everything that is taught in the first year of AFROTC, and most of what is taught in the second year.

As long as AFROTC cadets with CAP cadet experience avoid the urge to be cocky or  pretentious, they will stand out among their class as being worthy of increased responsibility and opportunities to provide leadership.

Also, a memo came out recently allowing greater PD advancement bonuses for those with prior cadet service.

One of those bonuses is an automatic Technician rating in Cadet Programs for those with Earhart Award credit.


That would include me.  Woot!

[afgeo4]

This is an interesting issue that deserves being brought up.


Should advanced PD credit for prior cadet service officers and NCOs be given?  Yes!

Why?


Last time I checked, senior members who complete an Air Force commissioning program (such as ROTC) and become 2d Lt's are eligible for advanced PD credit.

The CAP Cadet Program is the only Air Force-sanctioned youth cadet program in the United States that is very similar in quality to college AFROTC.  Cadrets who have earned the Mitchell Award or above already know everything that is taught in the first year of AFROTC, and most of what is taught in the second year.

As long as AFROTC cadets with CAP cadet experience avoid the urge to be cocky or  pretentious, they will stand out among their class as being worthy of increased responsibility and opportunities to provide leadership.

Also, a memo came out recently allowing greater PD advancement bonuses for those with prior cadet service.

One of those bonuses is an automatic Technician rating in Cadet Programs for those with Earhart Award credit.


That would include me.  Woot!

If you're done tooting your own horn...

1. Senior Members with military officer grade MAY be promoted to the equivalent of their military grade up to LtCol. May not be. It's at the commander's discretion. No PD is given unless there's an equivalent PME (professional military education) course that was completed. This credit is offered to all military personnel. NCOs included. All other PD requirements have to be earned to get promoted in CAP grade.

For example: An Army 1LT could be credited for SLS/ECI-13 because of his/her PME credits, but would still have to complete Level I, Tech rating, and time in grade to earn Level II and be eligible for promotion to Capt in CAP.


2. How do you compare ROTC to CAP? I mean really... how? CAP isn't a military program. It isn't a commissioning program. ROTC does just one thing. Again, ONE THING. It prepares its cadets for service in the armed forces as commissioned officers. CAP doesn't do that. At all.

You say CAP training is similar to the first 2 years of ROTC? Well, maybe the senior CAP cadets have received similar training, but have you figured out why the military contracting in ROTC starts after the end of 2nd year? The real work in ROTC starts during your junior year. Everything before that is an orientation and that's all CAP cadets get when it comes to military training. An orientation. CAP isn't ROTC. Period.

The fact that cadets are authorized the PD waivers is what's being argued here and it seems that your argument isn't holding that much water against the arguments of all other posts.

[lordmonar]

Having a Technician, Senior or Master rating requires specific length of service as a cadet programs officer, so unless it was fudged, you can't have Senior or Master rated CP officer who've never run a cadet program. Now understand please that by "run" I don't mean being a Cadet Sq CC or a DCC in a Composite. I mean administer a cadet program. That can be done as a Leadership or Activities officer as well.

Also, according to the CP Track pamphlet, a person who has a Senior rating should be able to run a cadet squadron or serve as a group level CP officer. Someone with a Master rating should be able to be a Wing CP director or above. I'm not saying that the individual is fit for command or the responsibility. I'm saying that someone who's earned those ratings should have the necessary experience and skill sets to do the job.

That is what I was talking about.  To get a senior rating in CP you only need 21 months "running" the program.  Compared to the amount of time that a cadet who has gone through the program to the level where they get credit....it is about the same.  I would expect an Earheart Cadet  with at least 30 months (8 of them in clearly leadership positions) in the program to have the same knowlege of how the program was run as I would expect a CP Technician. An Eaker would have to have 40 months in the program would have more then enough expierince to be considered a Senior Rated CP guy.

Add to that many of these cadets usually have leadership experince at encampments and NCSCs they have more experince running the cadet program then a lot of squadron CP guys.

You can earn a Masters CP rating with out ever venturing beyond the squadron level...with the exception of having to be a staff member for at TLC class.  I would expect my Earheart and above to know everthing that my DCC knows about the ins and outs of the program.  Simply because they have been doing it for a long time and they would need that information to be effective leaders.

[lordmonar]

Hey CCSE.....don't try to help....you aren't.

[Eagle400]

If you're done tooting your own horn...

Say what you will, but the Earhart Award is a cake I had and ate a long time ago.

Nothing can take away the fact that I went from being among the bottom 99% of all cadets to the top 5% in only 4 years.

1. Senior Members with military officer grade MAY be promoted to the equivalent of their military grade up to LtCol. May not be. It's at the commander's discretion. No PD is given unless there's an equivalent PME (professional military education) course that was completed. This credit is offered to all military personnel. NCOs included.

Yes, but if a member with military experience is a member in good standing at his or her unit, the commander is highly obligated to award that member with PD credit equivalent to their military PME credit.

If the above holds true and the commander withholds advanced PD credit, he or she had better have a [darn] good reason for not awarding it.  Also, all members who are eligible for advanced PD credit and get it turned down may submit an appeal to National Headquarters to have their commander's decision overturned.

If that doesn't work, the member can either file a lawsuit for discrimination on the basis of military service, or come here and share his or her opinions about how seldom the application of common sense is in CAP.

All other PD requirements have to be earned to get promoted in CAP grade.

I refer you to the aforementioned memo by Brig Gen Courter:

http://level2.cap.gov/documents/2008_06_04_Officer_credit_for_cadet_service_.pdf

For example: An Army 1LT could be credited for SLS/ECI-13 because of his/her PME credits, but would still have to complete Level I, Tech rating, and time in grade to earn Level II and be eligible for promotion to Capt in CAP.

True, and there's nothing wrong with that.

2. How do you compare ROTC to CAP? I mean really... how? CAP isn't a military program. It isn't a commissioning program. ROTC does just one thing. Again, ONE THING. It prepares its cadets for service in the armed forces as commissioned officers. CAP doesn't do that. At all.

No, but there are strong similarities between what is taught in AFROTC and what is taught in CAP when it comes to leadership, aerospace, and military studies.

I suggest you compare AFROTCI 36-2017 with CAPR 52-16 and take a look at the similarities.

You say CAP training is similar to the first 2 years of ROTC? Well, maybe the senior CAP cadets have received similar training, but have you figured out why the military contracting in ROTC starts after the end of 2nd year?

That isin't entirely accurate.  AFROTC cadets on scholarship, regardless of what class they are in, are contracted with the military.  They just don't incur an obligation to serve until they are accepted to Field Training.

And when you say "senior CAP cadets", do you mean those with the Mitchell and above?  If so, I agree with you.

The real work in ROTC starts during your junior year.

Negative.  The real work in ROTC starts in Field Training, where those who have what it takes to be an officer may, and those who don't are dropped and must wait a few years until they can apply for a waiver to enroll in a commissioning program again.

Everything before that is an orientation and that's all CAP cadets get when it comes to military training. An orientation.

Where have I given you and indication that I would think otherwise?  I have said it before, and I will say it again:

There are strong similarities between what is taught in AFROTC and what is taught in CAP when it comes to leadership, aerospace, and military studies.

I said nothing about training to become an Air Force officer.

CAP isn't ROTC. Period.

If you are implying that I said it was, then please resist the urge to put words in my mouth in the future. 

If not, just ignore the above statement.

The fact that cadets are authorized the PD waivers is what's being argued here and it seems that your argument isn't holding that much water against the arguments of all other posts.

To you, it appears that way. 

To me, I will let the outcome of this thread be the ultimate judge of that!

[Eagle400]

Hey CCSE.....don't try to help....you aren't.

You do not know me, you do not know my level of experience, and you do not know the positive impact I have had on one female who became an AF fighter pilot and two men who commission next month and will go to UPT soon after.  Therefore, your assertion is invalid.  Especially considering I have made only two posts in the entire thread thus far.

Sorry, but them's da rules.

[lordmonar]

Hey CCSE.....don't try to help....you aren't.

You do not know me, you do not know my level of experience, and you do not know the positive impact I have had on one female who became an AF fighter pilot and two men who commission next month and will go to UPT soon after.  Therefore, your assertion is invalid.  Especially considering I have made only two posts in the entire thread thus far.

Sorry, but them's da rules.

Maybe if you had some experince as a Senior Member, then you would be of some help to this debate....but seeing as you are too busy to actually use your hard earned experince to help more cadets become AF officers.....

[Short Field]

Just need to clear up some misconceptions.

1.  Granting equivlent PD credit for Seniors based on PME is not an option for local commanders.  It requires a request to National stating what the PME was and what PD requirement you want to credit it against.   National then approves or disapproves the request (based on what you are using) and enters it in your record.   The request does not have to go through the chain of command.  It is purely an administrative function and I have done a handful of them.

2. There is no PME substitute  for SLS, CLC, or UCC.

3.  In AFROTC, two additional weeks of summer camp satisfies the requirement for the first two years of AFROTC on campus.  Two weeks equals two years.  I personally knew of no AFROTC Cadets who attended summer camp that "washed out".  I am sure there were a few who couldn't pass the physical or had problems adjusting - but most wash outs were due to things like sneaking out and getting drunk or drug use.  It really isn't that hard.   Compared to basic training, it was a vacation.

I really don't care one way or another if a cadet gets credit in PD for his past achievements.  However, if a cadet is coming out of a Cadet Squadron, they would have a heck of a time understanding how a Senior Squadron works and could really use SLS.  Cadets in a Composite Squadron "might" know how things work for SM PD and advancement.  But if they have credit for it, their call if they want to attend.

[Eagle400]

Maybe if you had some experince as a Senior Member, then you would be of some help to this debate....

Not only do I know people with Senior Member experience, I also LIVE with one!

but seeing as you are too busy to actually use your hard earned experince to help more cadets become AF officers.....

For the record, the positive influence I have had on the cadets I mentored and their subsequent successes in life is rock solid proof that I am an effective leader and that the CAP Cadet Program did NOT fail me.

Remember the saying, "The success of a leader is determined by the success of his people"?

It applies.

[lordmonar]

Maybe if you had some experince as a Senior Member, then you would be of some help to this debate....

Not only do I know people with Senior Member experience, I also LIVE with one!

I live with a sales woman....does not mean I have any experince in sales.

but seeing as you are too busy to actually use your hard earned experince to help more cadets become AF officers.....

For the record, the positive influence I have had on the cadets I mentored and their subsequent successes in life is rock solid proof that I am an effective leader and that the CAP Cadet Program did NOT fail me.

Remember the saying, "The success of a leader is determined by the success of his people"?

It applies.

And what have you done with that experince?  Nothing but bring down CAP just about every chance you get.   Stop sitting on your laurals and re-join and doing some real good.

[mikeylikey]

3.  In AFROTC, two additional weeks of summer camp satisfies the requirement for the first two years of AFROTC on campus.  Two weeks equals two years.  I personally knew of no AFROTC Cadets who attended summer camp that "washed out". 

Wow.  In Army ROTC if you want credit for the first two years of the program you have to go to Fort Knox for 5.2 weeks.  During that time you are treated like a basic trainee, with Drill SGTS controlling everything you do.  It is basically Basic Training compressed into five weeks.  You complete everything a basic trainee does in less time, plus added leadership events and classes (read lectures).  I have witnessed both AF and Army "summer camps", and have to say Army is much more physical, mentally demanding as well.  But, that is what differs between the two services, Army Officers are more likely to find themselves leading men an women in combat I suppose. 

[Eagle400]

I live with a sales woman....does not mean I have any experince in sales.

Not everything in life requires BTDT experience.

When I was in CAP, I worked with senior members on a regular basis.  There is no way I could have been oblivious to the senior member professional development program and how it works. 

I have also observed a Level I being conducted, for what it's worth.

And what have you done with that experince?

Let's see...

• I work at a Law Office and help people on a regular basis



• I am active in my church



• I am an Organizational Leadership major with a 3.0 GPA



• I continue to support those who have taught me how to be an effective leader



• I support the military and all servicemembers, both veteran and non-veteran alike



• I have spent time in the West Bank of Israel (Bethlehem), armed with only a pen and a pad of paper



• I have stood at the Northern border of Israel (Golan Heights), looking into Syrian territory.  I should also point out that this area is littered with thousands of landmines



• I have been to Lachish, a city only 5 miles away from the Gaza Strip



• I have served food to the homeless



• I have sent care packages to children in third-world countries



• I warn people about the dangers of hazing and abuse*



• I have served as a volunteer for my community

I am not saying I am better than anyone else, just proving beyond the shadow of a doubt that I have put my leadership experience to good use, and continue to do so to this day.

If there was such a thing as a "Perfect Person", and I met the criteria, I would be the last one to admit it. 

Nothing but bring down CAP just about every chance you get.

My postings on discussion boards in reference to CAP are directed at issues plaguing CAP, and either include proposed ways of solving an issue, or inquiry about what options are available to make a problem disappear.

Also, my internet activity does >not< qualify as even being a fraction of the overall picture when it comes to my character and the way I conduct myself in everyday life.

Stop sitting on your laurals...

I will let those who actually know me be the judge of that!

...and re-join and doing some real good.

All in good time, sir. 

But please realize that as a citizen, I have the right to opine on anything I want so long as it falls within the boundaries of protected speech.


*My introduction to CAP involved enduring such treatment