CAP Form 17 - What ACTUALLY needs to be filled out?

[Holding Pattern]

Perhaps it is just me, but CAPF17 asks for an absurd amount of data.

The good news: Blocks 5-13 are relatively unchanging. Block 14 can be hedged by putting the duty assignment, start date, and listing the end date as "present".
15. is also pretty static.
16,17, and 18 don't change very often. But why is 17 even needed?

But why on earth is 19 even on there? I could make the case for block 20 to some degree, but that too isn't terribly relevant for most activities.

21 should pretty much always say "See form 160".
22... I'm not quite certain what the use of 22 is.
23. "Why do you need all this information?" That is my remark.
24-26 should be there.

--

Am I the only one that thinks Form 17 needs a serious reduction in user fields?

Or a CAPF17A (for Abbreviated, killing 90% of the fields)

[Phil Hirons, Jr.]

I'm sure it started as a general purpose form. If your going for a week at National / Region Staff College perhaps they need it all. For SLS the next town over, not so much.
I'd bet it proceeded the CAPF-160 (or even the one that proceeded that) so the related questions are pure inertia

I think the much simpler solution would be for activity directors to say apply with a CAPF 17 Blocks 1 - 16.

[RogueLeader]

Do you think that maybe, just maybe that they want this information to know more about the experience of the students, and can tailor the delivery to make it relatible to them?  Would you deliver a course the same way to a bunch of High School grads versus a large group of Doctorate Grads?  I wouldn't.  What if most of the students are Level V members versus Level I members?  Does it make a difference depending on what a member actually wants to get out of the class (check the box vs truly wanting the most out of the course)?

I think they all make a difference, so- as a course director- I want that information to make it the best course possible for the group.  Other course directors may not care as much, and don't want it.  YMMV

[Eclipse]

Do you think that maybe, just maybe that they want this information to know more about the experience of the students, and can tailor the delivery to make it relatible to them?  Would you deliver a course the same way to a bunch of High School grads versus a large group of Doctorate Grads?  I wouldn't.  What if most of the students are Level V members versus Level I members?  Does it make a difference depending on what a member actually wants to get out of the class (check the box vs truly wanting the most out of the course)?

I think they all make a difference, so- as a course director- I want that information to make it the best course possible for the group.  Other course directors may not care as much, and don't want it.  YMMV

This is a form for senior members, not cadets.  Any activity they are going to staff is going to be centered around that curriculum, regardless of the level of
senior staff, and any activity they are going to attend as a student is going to be standardized and shouldn't be "tweaked" based on participants. SLS, CLC, TLC, UCC, RSC, NSC
all have expectations of the participants, if you're outside those on either end of the scale, that's fine, but that doesn't change the content.

Most of that info could be garnered via eservices, and yes, the POCs should have right based on the AOR.  Other then the sigs, I can't imagine why anyone would still use this.

With that said, you need to provide whatever the POCs say you need to provide.  In situations where there actually are choices for staff, proper
applications packets are a first-line test.

[RogueLeader]

Do you think that maybe, just maybe that they want this information to know more about the experience of the students, and can tailor the delivery to make it relatible to them?  Would you deliver a course the same way to a bunch of High School grads versus a large group of Doctorate Grads?  I wouldn't.  What if most of the students are Level V members versus Level I members?  Does it make a difference depending on what a member actually wants to get out of the class (check the box vs truly wanting the most out of the course)?

I think they all make a difference, so- as a course director- I want that information to make it the best course possible for the group.  Other course directors may not care as much, and don't want it.  YMMV

This is a form for senior members, not cadets.  Any activity they are going to staff is going to be centered around that curriculum, regardless of the level of
senior staff, and any activity they are going to attend as a student is going to be standardized and shouldn't be "tweaked" based on participants. SLS, CLC, TLC, UCC, RSC, NSC
all have expectations of the participants, if you're outside those on either end of the scale, that's fine, but that doesn't change the content.

Most of that info could be garnered via eservices, and yes, the POCs should have right based on the AOR.  Other then the sigs, I can't imagine why anyone would still use this.

With that said, you need to provide whatever the POCs say you need to provide.  In situations where there actually are choices for staff, proper
applications packets are a first-line test.

I never said that the curriculum changes, just the delivery and the tie-ins to make the point stick.