"Memory Work"

Started by Ron1319, November 29, 2010, 10:26:32 PM

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Ron1319

The name makes me shudder as my brain does not like the entire concept of memory work.  Google brings me many examples of squadrons and wings having different requirements of things to memorize.  I like this squadron's the best of what I've found online as the objectives are clear:

http://www.mtairy-cap.org/promotion/memory.htm

I'm interesting in learning how different squadrons utilize memory work and what people's thoughts are on the subject.  I've noticed that some of our cadets are more focused on memory work than achievement testing, and that so far is my biggest tangible argument against it.  The next major problem is that I believe if asked for a definition of leadership in quiz bowl at NCC the memory work answer may be incorrect.  How do you ensure that your memory work agrees with the cadet achievement test material?  I appreciate input.

Thank you,
Ron
Ronald Thompson, Maj, CAP
Deputy Commander, Squadron 85, Placerville, CA
PCR-CA-273
Spaatz #1319

coudano

well all cadets need to be able to recite the cadet oath from memory
and identify the cap core values as well.

ol'fido

The entire "I love the smell of napalm in the morning" monologue from Apocalypse Now. Although I thought the Charlie Sheen version that plays after the credits of his move "The Chase" was hilarious. ;D
Lt. Col. Randy L. Mitchell
Historian, Group 1, IL-006

Al Sayre

And the in flight emergency checklist...
Lt Col Al Sayre
MS Wing Staff Dude
Admiral, Great Navy of the State of Nebraska
GRW #2787

Ron1319

Quote from: coudano on November 29, 2010, 11:08:28 PM
well all cadets need to be able to recite the cadet oath from memory
and identify the cap core values as well.

Please provide references as to where it says that in the regulations.  Do you know that or were you just told that?  Do you know that the Learn to Lead Core Values are different than the ones listed at the link above? 

Learn to Lead: http://www.capmembers.com/media/cms/L2L_Mod1_Ch1_AF_Tradition_B81658040C0E9.pdf
Integrity First, Volunteer Service, Excellence in All We Do, and Respect

Website:
CAP Core Values:  (Sir / Ma'am / Sgt.), the CAP Core Values are Respect, Integrity, Volunteer Service, and Excellence, (Sir / Ma'am / Sgt.).

I would say that the website that cadets are being directed to only has two of the four correct based on the new material.  What are *you* doing to address this?

Ron
Ronald Thompson, Maj, CAP
Deputy Commander, Squadron 85, Placerville, CA
PCR-CA-273
Spaatz #1319

coudano

Quote from: CAPR 52-16 2-4.g.Knowledge of the Cadet Oath. Cadets must recite the Cadet Oath from memory to qualify for promotion.

Quote from: CAPR 52-16 fig 2-2 Leadership ExpectationsAware of the Core Values[/u] ; honest; wears uniform properly; practices customs and courtesies

This is an interpretation measure but basically the way we implement this is:
Phase 1:  Cadet must be able to recite the four core values from memory.  That certainly proves that they are aware of them, doesn't it?

NC Hokie

Quote from: Ron1319 on November 30, 2010, 02:29:04 AM
Please provide references as to where it says that [the cadet oath must be recited from memory] in the regulations.
Since you asked...

Quote from: CAPR 52-16 2-4 g
Knowledge of the Cadet Oath. Cadets must recite the Cadet Oath from memory to qualify for promotion. The Cadet Oath is: "I pledge that I will serve faithfully in the Civil Air Patrol Cadet Program, and that I will attend meetings regularly, participate actively in unit activities, obey my officers, wear my uniform properly, and advance my education and training rapidly to prepare myself to be of service to my community, state, and nation."
NC Hokie, Lt Col, CAP

Graduated Squadron Commander
All Around Good Guy

DakRadz

Seriously:

Did this come up on CT? That our Core Values had changed?

Last time I checked them, they were Integrity, Volunteer Service, Excellence, and Respect. In that order.

However, the new L2L books changed them. Or list them as changed.

Hold the phone, folks....
http://www.capmembers.com/media/cms/P050_002_C64238751B2E9.pdf
The CAP Core Values Pamphlet, which is current as of APRIL OF THIS YEAR, still lists the Core Values as what I have posted above.

What is going on? :-[

Ron1319

See?

Now how about the definition of leadership?  I can't find a definition of leadership anywhere in the first chapter of Learn to Lead.  I've gone through it twice, but it's possible that I missed it somewhere.  Maybe it's later on.  I haven't gotten further than the first chapter, yet.  For some reason if I ask all of the cadets in my new unit, they all spout off the same thing, though.

Ron
Ronald Thompson, Maj, CAP
Deputy Commander, Squadron 85, Placerville, CA
PCR-CA-273
Spaatz #1319

PHall

Quote from: Ron1319 on November 30, 2010, 04:53:12 AM
See?

Now how about the definition of leadership?  I can't find a definition of leadership anywhere in the first chapter of Learn to Lead.  I've gone through it twice, but it's possible that I missed it somewhere.  Maybe it's later on.  I haven't gotten further than the first chapter, yet.  For some reason if I ask all of the cadets in my new unit, they all spout off the same thing, though.

Ron

Stuff like The Definition Of Leadership is not required by the 52-16. But memorizing it is one of the things you will be asked to do at a CAWG Encampment.
Take a look at the Activities, Encampment tab of www.cawgcadets.org  it's in the Encampment SOP.

Ron1319

I haven't been to an encampment since '95 when I was a member of the executive cadet staff.  Since the CAWG encampment SOP will never apply to me, why would I ask my cadets, or better yet why would CAWG's encampment planners require cadets to learn information unsupported by the current cadet training material?  "Because some planning an encampment 20 years ago thought it was a good idea" does not seem like an adequate resolution.  I can ask my cadet leaders to take it up through CAC, but that's not precisely my point.
Ronald Thompson, Maj, CAP
Deputy Commander, Squadron 85, Placerville, CA
PCR-CA-273
Spaatz #1319

Daniel

I notice to things,

1. When I answer a question to a superior, I got called on saying sir/ma'am/sgt before and after. We apparently don't say sir/ma'am/sgt before the answer, only after.. We are not nor have we ever been the marines..

2. The cadet honor code ( I will not lie, cheat, or steal, nor tolerate those among us who do) has been snabbed from the AFA which has the addition (Furthermore I resolve to do my duty and live honorably so help me god)

and personally I don't think id do well in a sqn that requires memorization of such things like the preamble of the Constitution and the mission statement of CAP

Seems like they make thier cadets memorize some pretty trivial information and some of which has been changed so that its useless outside of the sqn level...

Win some, lose some. right?
C/Capt Daniel L, CAP
Wright Brothers No. 12670
Mitchell No. 59781
Earhart No. 15416

Nathan

I always remembered the cadet oath, honor code, and motto. These are things cadets should know by definition, since they are fundamentals of the cadet program and CAP, and designed to guide the entire development of a cadet.

Things that most cadet should know are the 3 missions of CAP, the founding date, a little bit about the history, the national commander, and so forth. Not only is this kind of information useful just in interaction with other CAP members, but any cadet who wants to recruit should know enough about the program to talk about it in the level of detail a prospective member would want.

I have seen memorization work at encampments that I did not feel was particularly important. Understanding the chain of command all the way to the President, for instance, is just busy work, as the type of work that goes on above the wing level is rarely going to involve any individual cadet anyway. Things like "when was the USAF formed" and such is also not of particular interest to me. While this kind of information is valuable for cadet officers taking AE tests, the date of the USAF creation is not something that's going to play a huge role in the cadet program.

I find some memorization, like the "definition of leadership", actually harmful to the cadet program. Given that it is generally accepted that there IS no flawless definition of leadership, and the entire point of the cadet program is to give the cadets the skills they need to create their own definition, then force-feeding them a cookie-cutter version is just going to cement a counter-productive block in their mind. I want them thinking about leadership, not being told what it is.
Nathan Scalia

The post beneath this one is a lie.

nesagsar

When I started as a cadet we tried to get people to memorize as much as possible from the uniform, customs and curtosies, leadership, and aerospace books partly because we knew they would have to know it for advancement testing but also because we were planning to send a team to wing color guard competition the next year. At that competition we took the top 3 spots in the knowledge testing (the fourth and fifth members finished in the top 15). Our squadrons rep also took first place in the knowledge bowl at the wing winter encampment.

What you memorize is entirely based on your unit's goals. If you have no desire to compete in competition then all you really need is the cadet oath, core values, chain of command, and honor code.

Ned

Quote from: Ron1319 on November 30, 2010, 06:21:26 AM[W]hy would CAWG's encampment planners require cadets to learn information unsupported by the current cadet training material? 

Perhaps because the CAWG encampment planners believe that the requirement supports their training objectives?

After all, I haven't seen anything in the current cadet training materials about how to clean a barracks, make a bed, or brush their teeth.

And yet we make them do that, too.

The use of memory work is widespread, but certainly not required in most units or activities beyond the Cadet Oath required by the 52-16.

And obviously reasonable minds differ on the value of memory work, or at least on how much memory work is valuable.

Perhaps over time we can build a consensus by watching which cadet training methods are more likely to lead to success.

Fair enough?

Ned Lee

DakRadz

Quote from: DakRadz on November 30, 2010, 04:40:23 AM
Seriously:

Did this come up on CT? That our Core Values had changed?

Last time I checked them, they were Integrity, Volunteer Service, Excellence, and Respect. In that order.

However, the new L2L books changed them. Or list them as changed.

Hold the phone, folks....
http://www.capmembers.com/media/cms/P050_002_C64238751B2E9.pdf
The CAP Core Values Pamphlet, which is current as of APRIL OF THIS YEAR, still lists the Core Values as what I have posted above.

What is going on? :-[
Can we address this somewhere?

Really. A distortion of our Core Values is probably the worst Charlie Foxtrot I've seen from the National level so far...

Ron1319

Quote from: Ned on November 30, 2010, 05:45:03 PM
Perhaps because the CAWG encampment planners believe that the requirement supports their training objectives?

A wordy definition of leadership that although widespread doesn't seem to be documented anywhere else?  Perhaps.

Quote from: Ned on November 30, 2010, 05:45:03 PM
After all, I haven't seen anything in the current cadet training materials about how to clean a barracks, make a bed, or brush their teeth.

I haven't taught a cadet to brush their teeth, but I see your point.  If we were having cadets memorize a list of steps to brush their teeth word by word, I'd object to that.

Quote from: Ned on November 30, 2010, 05:45:03 PMAnd yet we make them do that, too.

They do those things, but not as memory work.

Quote from: Ned on November 30, 2010, 05:45:03 PMPerhaps over time we can build a consensus by watching which cadet training methods are more likely to lead to success.

But is this happening?  It seems very significant to me because it ties into a PRB process and cadets feeling unprepared to promote.  With unclear objectives, the cadets are essentially being held up.  We have a cadet at our unit who just reached c/SMsgt who has been a member for 5 years.  I had my Spaatz for over a year at the 5 year mark.  I'm working to understand what barriers got in the way of the cadets who are in this situation and I think it comes from the emphasis being on the wrong material.  In other words, if a long list of things that I would have to struggle for days to memorize was being held over my first or second promotion, I'm not sure I'd consider it to be worthwhile.  That's why I cited the website in the original post.  I liked the specific objectives for each promotion, many of which seemed to compliment the existing curriculum. 

The method that I've seen work is to encourage promotion.  We had a cadet very disappointed because they did not get a staff position at wing encampment.  Whereas I see the point that there were cadets with much less grade who did receive staff positions, and this cadet has a right to be a bit upset by this, my argument to the cadet was that if they were a c/LtC they would not have been passed over.  This cadet was a c/2Lt at the time and certainly could have much more grade with a more rigorous promotion schedule.

In other words, it only really matters to be as it was an undefined barrier to promotion in my new squadron when we first joined and I'm working on breaking down that barrier.

Hopefully this thread gets some cadets and seniors to consider the priority between the achievement curriculum and a  long list of things to memorize.   

Ron
Ronald Thompson, Maj, CAP
Deputy Commander, Squadron 85, Placerville, CA
PCR-CA-273
Spaatz #1319

jeders

Quote from: DakRadz on November 30, 2010, 09:44:05 PM
Quote from: DakRadz on November 30, 2010, 04:40:23 AM
Seriously:

Did this come up on CT? That our Core Values had changed?

Last time I checked them, they were Integrity, Volunteer Service, Excellence, and Respect. In that order.

However, the new L2L books changed them. Or list them as changed.

Hold the phone, folks....
http://www.capmembers.com/media/cms/P050_002_C64238751B2E9.pdf
The CAP Core Values Pamphlet, which is current as of APRIL OF THIS YEAR, still lists the Core Values as what I have posted above.

What is going on? :-[
Can we address this somewhere?

Really. A distortion of our Core Values is probably the worst Charlie Foxtrot I've seen from the National level so far...

Nope. L2L still has the same core values, they just added a few words to make it look better.

Quote from: Learn to Lead, Vol 1The Core Values are the four basic qualities
CAP expects all members to display at all times: Integrity
First, Volunteer Service, Excellence in AllWe Do, and Respect.
If you are confident in you abilities and experience, whether someone else is impressed is irrelevant. - Eclipse

DakRadz

#18
That's distorting them. Just like the Triangle Thingy is a distortion of our heritage- there's a true CAP symbol that looks quite a bit like it.

They replaced two of our Core Values with two of the USAF's. I have an issue because it isn't official, nor necessary.

Think the Triangle Thingy still looks the same and represents the historical and official version?

I think it's (the Core Values mod) a mistake- and I wonder if they even know they did it.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~`
Nuked after a very good point by FlyTiger.

PA Guy

Ron,

You seem to be saying that the only thing that matters is promotion and the only thing that should be taught is just what is on the test?  In other words the road to success is simply teaching the test and nothing more.  The cadet program is a lot more than promoting and teaching the test.

Lengthy non CAP related memory work is just a waste of time.  However, requiring someone to know a few items that are CAP related doesn't create an undue burden.

As for your example of the cadet not being selected for an encampment staff job, maybe just maybe, he wasn't the best for the job(s) he applied for?  I doubt his grade had little to do with it.  And telling him if he had been a C/Ltc they wouldn't have dared pass him over sends the wrong message.  It tells him that as long as he promotes he will get whatever he wants and that is just wrong.

FlyTiger77

Quote from: DakRadz on November 30, 2010, 10:09:53 PM
(Forgive me for bringing that topic in here, it is a comparison and I do not want politics coming up because of it...)

If I may paraphrase a certain chief justice of the Supreme Court: The best way to keep politics from coming up is to not bring politics up.
JACK E. MULLINAX II, Lt Col, CAP

DakRadz

Quote from: FlyTiger77 on November 30, 2010, 10:41:51 PM
Quote from: DakRadz on November 30, 2010, 10:09:53 PM
(Forgive me for bringing that topic in here, it is a comparison and I do not want politics coming up because of it...)

If I may paraphrase a certain chief justice of the Supreme Court: The best way to keep politics from coming up is to not bring politics up.
You're right sir. I removed them. This post is merely an acknowledgement that I made an error in judgement bringing a heated and unrelated subject into this discussion.

Now I've brought the Triangle Thingy in. Well, it's CAP-relevant now... (May still be politics though >:D)
Quote from: DakRadz on November 30, 2010, 10:09:53 PM
That's distorting them. Just like the Triangle Thingy is a distortion of our heritage- there's a true CAP symbol that looks quite a bit like it.

They replaced two of our Core Values with two of the USAF's. I have an issue because it isn't official, nor necessary.

Think the Triangle Thingy still looks the same and represents the historical and official version?

I think it's a mistake- and I wonder if they even know they did it.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~`
Nuked after a very good point by FlyTiger.

Ned

Quote from: Ron1319 on November 30, 2010, 10:04:15 PM
It seems very significant to me because it ties into a PRB process and cadets feeling unprepared to promote.  With unclear objectives, the cadets are essentially being held up. 

All cadets should be regularly encouraged to promote, and all cadets should be easily able to identify requirements for promotions, and work to meet them.

Units are forbidden to add additional or arbitrary requirements before allowing cadets to promote, however commanders have the responsiblity of certifying that the cadet has the maturity and ability to perform commensurate with the new grade (CAPR 52-16, para 2-4), which is necessarily somewhat subjective.  Commanders use CAPF 50 to evaluate the cadet, and measure them against the Leadership Expectations of the new grade.

Commanders may use a promotion board to help them make that assessment, but the board should not re-test cadets on program materials or apply any standards inconsistently.


QuoteWe have a cadet at our unit who just reached c/SMsgt who has been a member for 5 years.  ( . . .)   I'm working to understand what barriers got in the way of the cadets who are in this situation and I think it comes from the emphasis being on the wrong material.  In other words, if a long list of things that I would have to struggle for days to memorize was being held over my first or second promotion, I'm not sure I'd consider it to be worthwhile.  That's why I cited the website in the original post.  I liked the specific objectives for each promotion, many of which seemed to compliment the existing curriculum. 

I agree that it would be improper for a unit to add significant additional requirements for promotion such as extensive memory work (other than the Cadet Oath).


Ron1319

Good, Ned, we agree.  That's where this stems from for me and what my point of contention is.  As far as me stating that I believe the only things cadets should be learning to promote is the material on the test, that's putting words in my mouth as I did not say that and do not believe that.  I am specifically referring to adding additional requirements for the first few promotions, making it unclear what is required of them, or making the promotion process more intimidating or complicated. 

As for my statement that if the cadet had been a c/LtC they would not have been passed over for ANY cadet staff position at CAWG encampment, I stand by it.  I did not say anything about them not daring to do it, I'm only stating that it wouldn't have happened.  Because it wouldn't have.  One of my primary tasks right now is getting a cadet who is certainly able to promote easily at minimum time in grade to be more active outside of the squadron and to get more from the program, so I certainly do not fundamentally disagree with what you're saying. 

I'm going to start a new topic on cadet promotions in 2010.  I'll link it here when I have it sorted out.  It might take me a little while to figure out exactly what I want to say.  And.. I realize I'm new to the forums and posting a lot all of a sudden.  It's just I've been looking for this outlet for some of the things I've been trying to reason through since rejoining CAP and I'm enjoying the conversation.
Ronald Thompson, Maj, CAP
Deputy Commander, Squadron 85, Placerville, CA
PCR-CA-273
Spaatz #1319

Ned

Ron,

I'm glad we agree on the main points.

Quote from: Ron1319 on November 30, 2010, 11:04:30 PM


As for my statement that if the cadet had been a c/LtC they would not have been passed over for ANY cadet staff position at CAWG encampment, I stand by it.

Well ,FWIW, I've helped select a couple of dozen cadet staffs at CAWG encampments and I can tell you that we certainly non-selected some C/Lt Cols in the past.  I wasn't there this year or the year before so I cannot speak to the specifics, but if a C/Lt Col shows up that has no experience outside the squadron and whose only encampent experience was a C/Amn, then there will be a significant chance of a non-select for that particular C/Lt Col.

The CAWG encampment folks work extraordinarily hard to pick a cadet staff based on a merit-based selection process.  Staff applicants are evaluated while drilling a flight, teaching a class, and working with others on a barracks maintenance excercise.  They also take an written test and appear before review board.

Any system can be improved, of course, but it is fair to say that the CAWG encampment selection is not "grade-dependant."

Please encourage your cadet to continue to study and promote.  And re-apply for 2011 staff.  We could use the help.

ol'fido

Quote from: Ron1319 on November 30, 2010, 04:53:12 AM
See?

Now how about the definition of leadership?  I can't find a definition of leadership anywhere in the first chapter of Learn to Lead.  I've gone through it twice, but it's possible that I missed it somewhere.  Maybe it's later on.  I haven't gotten further than the first chapter, yet.  For some reason if I ask all of the cadets in my new unit, they all spout off the same thing, though.

Ron
Definition of Leadership??...Basically, everyone has one and they are all different. The best on I've ever heard comes from the Infantry and the Isrealis: FOLLOW ME!!!
Lt. Col. Randy L. Mitchell
Historian, Group 1, IL-006

Ron1319

The primary problem specific to this cadet was that they were unable to invest the $100-200+ and 16 hours of travel to make it to the in-person selection process.  Her resume is excellent as is her ability.  My other complaint is that the phone review board called a 15 year old girl at 10pm after her bedtime, but we've strayed a bit from the topic of memory work.  I'm considering becoming involved with the 2011 CAWG encampment.  It's possible I'd be more of a pita than help and rock the boat too much, though.  :)

We can abandon the previous topic in this thread I suppose..  Thoughts on a NorCal encampment in the future?  We're building the future cadet staff for it and I'm fairly sure someone has figured out where we would have an adequate facility.
Ronald Thompson, Maj, CAP
Deputy Commander, Squadron 85, Placerville, CA
PCR-CA-273
Spaatz #1319

Ron1319

Quote from: ol'fido on December 01, 2010, 12:49:07 AM
Definition of Leadership??...Basically, everyone has one and they are all different. The best on I've ever heard comes from the Infantry and the Isrealis: FOLLOW ME!!!

:)  That is essentially my point.  Memory work, in this case having them specifically learn the exact words of a definition of leadership, seems pointless compared to giving them opportunities to lead.  I don't know how it works in "your" squadrons, but leadership opportunities come with grade.  As a cadet starts to get 2 or 3 or 4 stripes, they start to stand out and start to get more responsibility.
Ronald Thompson, Maj, CAP
Deputy Commander, Squadron 85, Placerville, CA
PCR-CA-273
Spaatz #1319

nesagsar

If I remember correctly there was a question on one of the cadet advancement tests in phase 1 about the definition of leadership, something along the lines of manipulating a group towards a common goal. This was years ago though, it may have changed or been removed from the tests.

Ron1319

Quote from: nesagsar on December 01, 2010, 01:55:37 PM
If I remember correctly there was a question on one of the cadet advancement tests in phase 1 about the definition of leadership, something along the lines of manipulating a group towards a common goal. This was years ago though, it may have changed or been removed from the tests.

We have brand new online leadership testing and brand new leadership manuals, now.
Ronald Thompson, Maj, CAP
Deputy Commander, Squadron 85, Placerville, CA
PCR-CA-273
Spaatz #1319

nesagsar

Quote from: Ron1319 on December 01, 2010, 11:11:29 PM
Quote from: nesagsar on December 01, 2010, 01:55:37 PM
If I remember correctly there was a question on one of the cadet advancement tests in phase 1 about the definition of leadership, something along the lines of manipulating a group towards a common goal. This was years ago though, it may have changed or been removed from the tests.

We have brand new online leadership testing and brand new leadership manuals, now.

Online whoja whaja? BLACK MAGICK! When I was a cadet you had to dress up in your nicest inspection blues to take the written test while a senior member stared at you. Then you had to demonstrate proper reporting procedure to turn in the test answer sheet. If you got done before the other cadets you got to stand at parade rest in the hallway.

SarDragon

Well, you're not a cadet any more, and things have changed. Your olde unit appears to have been as screwed up as Hogan's goat. I have never participated in such nonsense in all the time I've been active in cadet units.
Dave Bowles
Maj, CAP
AT1, USN Retired
50 Year Member
Mitchell Award (unnumbered)
C/WO, CAP, Ret

HGjunkie

I'm starting to think it was a joke.  ::)
••• retired
2d Lt USAF

nesagsar

Quote from: HGjunkie on December 02, 2010, 01:34:35 AM
I'm starting to think it was a joke.  ::)
Unfortunately we actually did all of that, no joke. My squadron had a few problems and I really hope all of that has cleared up in the last 5 years.

HGjunkie

Quote from: nesagsar on December 02, 2010, 02:26:48 AM
Quote from: HGjunkie on December 02, 2010, 01:34:35 AM
I'm starting to think it was a joke.  ::)
Unfortunately we actually did all of that, no joke. My squadron had a few problems and I really hope all of that has cleared up in the last 5 years.
:o
••• retired
2d Lt USAF

DakRadz

Quote from: nesagsar on December 02, 2010, 02:26:48 AM
Quote from: HGjunkie on December 02, 2010, 01:34:35 AM
I'm starting to think it was a joke.  ::)
Unfortunately we actually did all of that, no joke. My squadron had a few problems and I really hope all of that has cleared up in the last 5 years.
Sir, this is not an insult- but I thought you were talking about 20-50 years ago... Wow. The fact that they did that so recently...

nesagsar

No insult received. I got out in April 2005. Had some great times at wing and national activities but the squadron was not so good.

the conqueror

  I was that c/2nd Lt. 
  The reason was that "you didn't make the effort to make it to the staff selection activity."   It was 5 hours away, and I'm a 16 year old with out a car or job.  I requested a phone interview that I was woken up for at 10 PM.   There was a C/A1C selected on staff, and if that cadet was a C/A1C, and you have to have been to encampment as a basic before you can staff one, and you have to be at least a C/Amn to attend, that means that-that cadet promoted only one time in a whole year.  Don't we want C/Staff to set the example?  Is that really setting the example?
 
   Mary

Major Carrales

"Memory work" will only go so far.  I can have cadets recite the word "Integrity" and make them memorize a definition of it from a text...but that is no guarantee that the concept of "Integrity" will come across.  After all a parrot can be taught to repeat sounds sans meaning.

When teaching these things it is important to provide more than what the text presents, there is a need to provide examples, discussions and make "corrections" on behavior that will instill the core value.

"We have been given the power to change CAP, let's keep the momentum going!"

Major Joe Ely "Sparky" Carrales, CAP
Commander
Coastal Bend Cadet Squadron
SWR-TX-454

manfredvonrichthofen

Quote from: Ron1319 on November 30, 2010, 04:53:12 AM
See?

Now how about the definition of leadership?  I can't find a definition of leadership anywhere in the first chapter of Learn to Lead.  I've gone through it twice, but it's possible that I missed it somewhere.  Maybe it's later on.  I haven't gotten further than the first chapter, yet.  For some reason if I ask all of the cadets in my new unit, they all spout off the same thing, though.

Ron

I have seen that same problem in the new leadership books. The old books had it in either the third or fourth manual, I still remember it, and it is how I worded it when asked about the definition when I went for the soldier of the month board, "Leadership is the process of influencing others in order to achieve a common objective goal or mission." That is still how I define leadership, they were expecting the normal thing of Loyalty Duty Respect Selfless Service Honor Integrity and Personal Courage, the Army values. Needles to say they had never heard that definition until I came through the board, even though I didn't ace the board, I won purely on my professionalism and that definition. They said it was awesome, wanted to know where I got it from and if they could use it and paint it on the wall in the Battallion HQ. I just wish it were still in the cadet manuals.

the conqueror

  Even still,  I have a different definition of leadership.  I agree that there are good things on the cadet "memory work".  But how do we know that we are using the same "memory work"?  It's important to be the same throughout.   We need to have actual requirements in some manual or pamphlet that states clearly what is required. 
  Right now it's just "in my personal opinion..."  and that's not good enough.

Mary

davidsinn

Quote from: the conqueror on December 14, 2010, 01:20:52 AM
  Even still,  I have a different definition of leadership.  I agree that there are good things on the cadet "memory work".  But how do we know that we are using the same "memory work"?  It's important to be the same throughout.   We need to have actual requirements in some manual or pamphlet that states clearly what is required.  
  Right now it's just "in my personal opinion..."  and that's not good enough.

 Mary
If it's not in a 52 series reg, manual or pamphlet then it's not required.
Former CAP Captain
David Sinn

the conqueror

  Then why Can the squadrons require it?  Why aren't they told that they are not following the regulations and told to stop?   There needs to be some line. 
  Have any of you ever heard of the Safety Pledge?   I was/am required to know it by our squadron. 

Mary

a2capt

Wax on, Wax off. Sometimes there's a reason for the action without being blatant.

Ron1319

The best response I've gotten is that it's because California wing requires it of cadets at encampment. That brings us back to considering becoming involved in CAWG encampments so I can determine for myself if the focus of encampments in this wing is where I believe it should be.  If they're particularly wrapped up in cadets memorizing a bunch of what I consider to be outdated definitions, then I suspect there is a fundamental problem that ties into the previous post about memorization not equating to understanding.

Specific to our squadron, I would support whatever the cadets want to document in the squadron SOP.  I've also provided my advise to the group CAC that they should take it up to wing CAC with guidance on what requirements would be at what grade.  Given that it appears to be a widespread mess, in my opinion, it wouldn't bother me too much for it to go all of the way to national CAC.  I still hate the whole idea of memory work as anything past the cadet oath still seems to me to be entirely missing the point.

I suppose now is when I should remind everyone that I was particularly good at quiz bowl from my NCC training, and I assure you I memorized more questions and answers than most cadets.  The purpose and focus was different and it wasn't standing in the way of me promoting, as I feel unnecessary memory work requirements are for some cadets.
Ronald Thompson, Maj, CAP
Deputy Commander, Squadron 85, Placerville, CA
PCR-CA-273
Spaatz #1319

PA Guy

^^^
If you think memory work is a problem in your sqdn get rid of it, it is not required by CAWG/CP so it is an easy fix.  If the memory work required in your sqdn is not relavent you can change that also.

Unless things have changed recently the CAWG Encampment SOP requires 5 items of memory work, one of which is the Cadet Oath.  The other four items are related to the cadet program and not some inane thing like How's the Cow. If you don't agree with something like the definition of leadership come up with a better one but you and I both know if you ask 10 people for their defintion you will get 10 different answers. Memory work is just one small part of the CAWG Encampment it is not a major focus of encampment.




Ron1319

I'm not sure why the preference for just changing it in my unit rather than hoping the new group CAC chair could propose something that makes more sense for everyone.  Like I said, I'll support almost whatever the cadet staff comes up with in their SOP they're working on for our unit, but I don't see it as a solution.
Ronald Thompson, Maj, CAP
Deputy Commander, Squadron 85, Placerville, CA
PCR-CA-273
Spaatz #1319

jeders

Quote from: Ron1319 on December 15, 2010, 10:43:59 AM
I'm not sure why the preference for just changing it in my unit rather than hoping the new group CAC chair could propose something that makes more sense for everyone.  Like I said, I'll support almost whatever the cadet staff comes up with in their SOP they're working on for our unit, but I don't see it as a solution.

Because your unit is the only thing that you have any control over. If the CAC chooses to take up the issue, great. But first worry about getting things done in your unit before trying to get the whole group/wing doing things you're way.
If you are confident in you abilities and experience, whether someone else is impressed is irrelevant. - Eclipse

PA Guy

Quote from: Ron1319 on December 15, 2010, 10:43:59 AM
I'm not sure why the preference for just changing it in my unit rather than hoping the new group CAC chair could propose something that makes more sense for everyone.  Like I said, I'll support almost whatever the cadet staff comes up with in their SOP they're working on for our unit, but I don't see it as a solution.

How about because it isn't a CAC issue?  Many sqdns. in CAWG don't have a memory work requirement. Your sqdn for whatever reason decided to have memory work so that is an issue to be solved in your sqdn.  Solve local issues locally.

a2capt

Quote from: Ron1319 on December 15, 2010, 03:28:49 AMThat brings us back to considering becoming involved in CAWG encampments so I can determine for myself if the focus of encampments in this wing is where I believe it should be.
Good luck with that, too, if it's all about "I".  Barging into "encampment" (staff, planning, whatever) with a bull in a china closet like attitude isn't going to go very far in getting you support from your soon to be peers.
I say this based on the tone of your own comments in this thread.
It's not about "I". As it's been echoed, start local.

Ron1319

- I believe there is a severe lack of phase IV cadets in Northern California, as there may only be one or two and most of the cadets in my unit have not been exposed to them.  If they've never seen a c/Col, how are they supposed to aspire to complete the program?
- I believe there is a lack of ES training available to me and that training is extremely hard to schedule and when you do, the trainers have been inadequately prepared
- There is only one cadet in the group known for being the "cadet who's into ES and goes on missions."
- We've gone from about 4 cadet officers in the group to about 10 with 3-4 more on the way in the next few months.  I've been doing everything we can to encourage them to promote.
- I believe that standardization of expectations is one of the roles of the CAC and that inadequately defined memory work goals prior to encampment make it very difficult for me to know what we are supposed to be expecting at our unit.  This is most certainly a CAC issue and if you don't think so, I'd be interested in knowing what you think defines a CAC issue.

Interesting that all of those statements have "I" in them, but none of them have anything to do with me.  I believe there is something fundamentally wrong in order to arrive at the situation that CAP in Northern California is in.  I don't like the bull in the china cabinet analogy because a china cabinet is a beautiful thing used to display things of beauty.  Your implication is that I would be wrecking the display of beautiful things.  My intention is to build something beautiful, not destroy it.  I don't know if there is any blame to be placed on CAWG encampments for this situation or not, as I haven't been to one. 
Ronald Thompson, Maj, CAP
Deputy Commander, Squadron 85, Placerville, CA
PCR-CA-273
Spaatz #1319

RobertAmphibian

Quote from: Ron1319 on December 16, 2010, 09:32:23 AM
- I believe there is a severe lack of phase IV cadets in Northern California, as there may only be one or two and most of the cadets in my unit have not been exposed to them.  If they've never seen a c/Col, how are they supposed to aspire to complete the program?
- I believe that standardization of expectations is one of the roles of the CAC and that inadequately defined memory work goals prior to encampment make it very difficult for me to know what we are supposed to be expecting at our unit.  This is most certainly a CAC issue and if you don't think so, I'd be interested in knowing what you think defines a CAC issue.

First off, while having Phase IV cadets available as mentors is obviously ideal, it's really not completely necessary for a cadet. A cadet can aspire to be a Spaatz cadet without ever seeing a C/Col... I know that's how I started. I used the Phase II and III cadets I knew as inspiration to complete Phases I and II, and once I started attending more wing and region activities, I could use the Phase IV cadets I met there as motivation to continue promoting.
Also, it's really not a CAC issue. There really isn't anything that CAC could or should do to standardize the way that all the units in your group or wing are run. If you want to know what memory work is at encampment, get a copy of the SOP/OI/etc from a cadet who graduates and base your training off of that.
That said, part of encampment is adapting to new situations. There's nothing wrong with going to encampment with a limited knowledge of possible memory work.

the conqueror

#52
  "First off, while having Phase IV cadets available as mentors is obviously ideal, it's really not completely necessary for a cadet. A cadet can aspire to be a Spaatz cadet without ever seeing a C/Col... I know that's how I started. I used the Phase II and III cadets I knew as inspiration to complete Phases I and II, and once I started attending more wing and region activities, I could use the Phase IV cadets I met there as motivation to continue promoting."


  I have been in CAP as a cadet for 4 years now, when I joined my sq, there were not even any phase III cadets.  I had no doubt in my mind that I would "never" get to be a  cadet officer.  It was too far away.  It took me 11 months to become a cadet airman, and that was because I had a PRB scheduled for me.  It took me another 2 years to get to C/SAmn.  At that point I went to the CAWG encampment.  I did get motivation there from my awesome staff and now a little over a year later, I'm a C/2nd Lt, one week out from C/1st Lt.   
   I calculated it, I spent over 7 hours (and that's being generous) in my SOP.  That thing was long!  I think that there are a whole LOT of better things that the encampment staff can have the cadets doing instead of standing there making the cadet's arms fall asleep while holding the SOP in front of their faces.
   Having phase III and IV cadets is VERY important!

Mary

PA Guy

Funny thing about beauty, it is often in the eye of the beholder.  No single individual has a lock on what defines beauty.

If you feel you need to prepare your cadets for encampment download the SOP and have them read it.  It varies little from yr. to yr.

The CAC should be concentrating on things that impact all of the cadets at their level.  Memory work is apparently a problem in your sqdn.  You have the power to fix it today, right now.  This is not necessarily a prob in your group and it isn't a prob in CAWG as a whole.  The CAC should be working on things like how to improve safety in the cadet program or discussing the upcoming changes to RCLS. How about how to improve ES training for cadets in your group.  You don't think memory work is a good fit for your sqdn then axe it today, right now, don't burden the rest of your group with your  problem

There aren't enough Phase IV cadets anywhere in CAP not just NorCal but the solution is not to promote just to fill the gap. Fill that gap with quality cadets not just box checkers.  Having the chance to see or work with a Phase IV cadet, while ideal, it is hardly a requirement for a motivated cadet to succeed.

nesagsar

IL wing used to have a document available that was a study guide for competitions. Everything from the definition of leadership to the light pattern for a commercial helipad was on there. If that document still exists I would love to have a copy of it.

Ron1319

#55
Why is it that every time I bring up on CAPTALK that I'm working to get cadets to promote there's a backlash about how I'm supposedly creating bad, unqualified cadets?  Is there really a problem out there somewhere with c/LtC's and c/Col's who don't know what they're talking about and are bad leaders??  Of course, the best cadets are the ones who are promoting and will make excellent phase IV cadets when they get there.  Some of them are coming really, really soon.  I have yet to see an example in our unit of promoting a cadet past the point that they are ready for.  They typically step up when they've earned more grade and fill the role with excellence. 

I know that if I were in a unit where the atmosphere was "you don't want to promote too fast, you have to learn a lot more stuff first," then I would sit around like Mary suggested and take forever to get each achievement.  Whereas after 14-15 months I was a cadet officer, she just described that she's now playing catchup because she's seen that she has leadership ability of a junior cadet officer, and she can do it.  For the record, she's on my cadet staff, I'm not just guessing.  One of our first goals (my sister, her husband and I) when we joined the squadron was to identify blocks to achievements.  PRB's that were scary and attitude were the two main issues.  We've addressed both of them and now the cadets are promoting.

As far as the assumption that memory work is not a problem elsewhere in the group or in the wing, it obviously is.  As we've discussed here, it's clearly outdated, has no goals to say what should be learned at what achievement, and just the fact that there are BETTER examples out there means that it's a problem that should be addressed.  It's not nearly so much that it's a PROBLEM in our unit, only that it's unclear to them and to me what they should be focusing on and when.  There's a sediment within the unit that we want to send cadets to encampment who are top-notch and well prepared.  I agree with that, but I don't agree with handing new cadets a sheet of paper with a bunch of things and telling them that they're supposed to be able to recite it all back to me ASAP.  When I asked the commander a couple of months ago when they were supposed to know all of those things, the answer was "right away."  That's entirely not realistic along with the other material they have for their first achievement, especially considering that we have a Great Start program in place and we like to see them get their first stripe after Great Start.

As this thread is now about cadet promotions and not about memory work, and I started a different thread on the state of cadet promotions, I'm not sure there's much more value to be gained from this thread.  I would ask anyone to reconsider who thinks that standardization of training material and undefined goals should not throw up a red flag for a CAC chair and scream for their attention.  It is clearly one of their primary goals to identify such issues and propose a correction or improvement.

I guess the deal is that I was in a position as a cadet where I didn't just think in terms of changing things for my unit.  That's incredibly short sighted.  If there was a problem with CAP, I set off to fix it, get people behind fixing it, and make things better.  It's a bit disheartening and perhaps enlightening that so many others in this thread feel that just because it's bad doesn't mean that someone should spearhead doing something about it.  It's not like this is the only problem we're setting off to fix.  This one's more like a pet peeve for me as I strongly dislike memorizing things word for word.
Ronald Thompson, Maj, CAP
Deputy Commander, Squadron 85, Placerville, CA
PCR-CA-273
Spaatz #1319

ol'fido

The problem seems to be that someone at some point decided that before promoting cadets that they would require certain knowledge above and beyond that required by CAP in order to establish a objective benchmark for promotion. The problem with this thinking is that every decision is not quantifiable in this manner. If that were so everyone would just make decisions by plugging in the info to a computer and let it make the call.

Memory work is just memory work. It doesn't make a cadet qualified to promote if they can spout off a canned definiton of leadership from memory. Promotability is still a judgement call on the leadership's shoulders. If you think a cadet is promotable and they have completed the requirements set forth by CAP then promote them. If not, don't. Train them all with the idea that they will all become c/cols but realize that most wont get there. PUT THE DECISION FOR PROMOTING THE CADET ON YOUR SHOULDERS NOT SOME ARTIFICIAL, UNREALISTIC BENCHMARK.
Lt. Col. Randy L. Mitchell
Historian, Group 1, IL-006