Attendance Policy for Cadets

[PeterHansen]

I've been unable to attend weekly squadron meetings too regularly due to academic commitments at school. However, I also serve on a staff position at my squadron which holds to a 90% compulsory attendance policy for cadet staff members. Obviously I am unable to make it to 90% of the meetings, and am likely to do quite poorly on my review board for my Mitchell test because of it. With all of that said, the questions I'd hope to have answered are:
Is the squadron allowed to set their own attendance requirements?
Is there a strict regulation definition for "regular attendance"?
And is there anywhere in the regulations or manuals that allows for exemption from attendance issues due to academic or school commitments?


Thank you!

[abdsp51]

Here are some answers to your questions

1) Yes

2&3) CAPR 52-16 4-4. Attendance and Retention.
a. Expectations of Cadets. Cadets are required to participate actively in their local unit if they are to progress in the Cadet Program. Excessive, unexcused absences may be cause for termination from CAP (see CAPR 35-3, Membership Termination). Any school-related activity is considered an excused absence. Cadets are responsible for informing their leaders in advance if they expect to be absent. School-related absences do not excuse cadets from promotion requirements.

A question to pose to you.  Have you kept your leadership informed of the situation involving your academics and missing meetings?

[Eclipse]

Is the squadron allowed to set their own attendance requirements?

Yes, especially in regards to staff.

Is there a strict regulation definition for "regular attendance"?

No.

And is there anywhere in the regulations or manuals that allows for exemption from attendance issues due to academic or school commitments?

No.

#2 & 3 are "Commander's discretion"

52-16 references that school should be considered the priority in regards to cadet participation and attendance, however
with that said, that doesn't mean that you can accept an important role in the squadron, and then use "school" as the excuse for
not doing the work / attending and still expect to keep the job.

The majority of the leeway is intended in regards to progression and basic participation.  And in all cases, the proper way to handle it
is to discuss the matter directly with your CC or CDC vs. just "going dark" for weeks at a time and expecting "some other dude" to pic up the slack.

[a2capt]

Then .. maybe you shouldn't be on staff right now, if you can't perform the duty.

The "need" doesn't "go away" because you can be there. School comes first.

[lordmonar]

Since the attendance policy is for the staff position and not the milestone award.....IMHO assuming you meet the requirements in 52-16 then you should be good.

However....it is to your chain of command you should address your concern.

[Walkman]

A former CC of mine handled a situation like this very well. Cadet shooting for Chief. Solid cadet for sure, on WG color guard team and attending that CG practice regularly on Saturdays. Cadet was in HS marching band and for 1/2 of July and all of August, had band practice that got in the way of regular meetings. Outside band season, pretty much perfect attendance.

During the review board, the issue of attendance was brought up. Cadet pleads that band had to take priority during the season and they were still doing Wing CG regularly as there was no time conflict on Saturdays. CC's point was that they weren't able to contribute and provide leadership to the squadron. On top of this, another top cadet was also up for Chief at the same time and attended absolutely everything. Some thought this smacked of double standards. CC says this is an opportunity for the cadet to learn about making choices, priorities and time management.

In the end the CC made a deal. Since for the rest of Sept. & Oct. said cadet would be in band and couldn't make meetings regularly, he made an assignment for them to make sure that the unit was kept up to date on all events. The cadet was to email everyone weekly with meeting notes, UOD, etc, and keep other calendar items top-of-mind for everyone. After that, another review and promotion. The cadet did a great job of keeping everyone informed, finished band season, merited a promotion and continued to be a great cadet. 

<edit for typo>

[lordmonar]

You think that was handled well?

I think that it was in violation of 52-16.....YMMV

[Walkman]

Here's the way I look at and it let me know if its out of regs:

In order to promote the cadet needs to be attending regularly. Normally not a problem with this cadet. They passed the required online tests, had a valid CPFT, and met all the requirements for promotion except attendance.

The CC gave her an opportunity to still be of service and actively participate in the running of the cadet program while being able to meet her obligations to school. Cadet attended a couple of regular meetings after band season, had another review board and was good to go.

I could see where some might look at this as adding unique requirements to promotions in violation of the regs. Is that what you were thinking?

I honestly thought it was a balanced, wise and creative solution. But if I'm way off base, how would it have been better handled? I had put it in the back of my mind as a leadership lesson, so if its off track I want to learn from it.

[Storm Chaser]

Bottom line is this; school comes first. No one should expect you to put CAP before school. That being said, the squadron has to function even when you're not there. When you accepted a staff position, you made a commitment. If you can't meet that commitment, then talk to your commander or deputy commander for cadets and explain the situation. There are alternatives you can work out, to include assuming a position with fewer responsibilities such an assistant to another officer/NCO.

Either way, the one thing you don't want to do is just not show up. Always excuse yourself if you're going to be absent and ensure someone else can cover whatever job you would've normally done during that meeting.

[lordmonar]

52-16 has the standards......there is NO requirement for Cadet X to hold any particular staff position for very much time (cadet officers have to do the SDA time).

So....if they are able to operate....even if they have not actually did so during that time period.....at the level as described in 52-16 there is no reason to hold them back if they have not been participating due to school conflicts.

It is that simple.

If the cadet has NOT demonstrated the ability to operate at the level as described in 52-16 then it is 100% right that you hold them back.....but that is the reason why you are holding them back....not because they have school.

[Майор Хаткевич]

If school gets in the way of actively participating, why would they be promoted? If you have a cadet that shows up once a month, does his tests/pt/CD, etc, should he expect to be promoted? He checked the boxes, but he wasn't an active participant.

[Eclipse]

If school gets in the way of actively participating, why would they be promoted? If you have a cadet that shows up once a month, does his tests/pt/CD, etc, should he expect to be promoted? He checked the boxes, but he wasn't an active participant.

Agreed - and I'd be asking exactly "what" qualifies as academic activities.  A cadet who has decided to load up on sports and extracurricular activities but never comes to a meeting,
attends other activities, and generally isn't around, isn't likely to be able to perform in staff positions, and won't be promoting at the same clip as their peers because they've made a choice
that CAP isn't their priority.

You have to be reasonable, but you also have to be fair to the rest of the unit.  Referring back to recent conversations, it's not the "Correspondence Air Patrol" and in most cases, you're
either there, or you aren't.

[lordmonar]

If school gets in the way of actively participating, why would they be promoted? If you have a cadet that shows up once a month, does his tests/pt/CD, etc, should he expect to be promoted? He checked the boxes, but he wasn't an active participant.

If the absences are due to school.......and he meets the leadership expectations from CAP VA 52-100......then yes he is actively participating as defined by 52-16.

4-4. Attendance and Retention.
a. Expectations of Cadets. Cadets are required to participate actively in their local unit if they are to progress in the Cadet Program. Excessive, unexcused absences may be cause for termination from CAP (see CAPR 35-3, Membership Termination). Any school-related activity is considered an excused absence. Cadets are responsible for informing their leaders in advance if they expect to be absent. School-related absences do not excuse cadets from promotion requirements.
b. Cadet Retention. All cadet and composite squadrons will maintain attendance rosters and monitor their cadet membership retention rate, especially for first-year cadets. When first-year cadets do not attend any cadet activities within the previous 30 days, the unit commander will ensure someone contacts them to invite them to participate more actively or learn why they have not been attending CAP events. Any unit that can show it actively reaches out to absent cadets satisfies the intent of this rule.
c. Cadet Morale. During unit visits, officers may casually meet with cadets to gauge their morale and check the quality of cadet life.

You can't get any more black and white then that.
If the cadet can get away from school just enough to check his boxes.....and he is able to demonstrate his ability to meet the leadership expectations......then you must promote.

Having said that.....if he has not demonstrated his ability to meet the published expectation....then you don't promote.

[mwewing]

A former CC of mine handled a situation like this very well. Cadet shooting for Chief. Solid cadet for sure, on WG color guard team and attending that CG practice regularly on Saturdays. Cadet was in HS marching band and for 1/2 of July and all of August, had band practice that got in the way of regular meetings. Outside band season, pretty much perfect attendance.

During the review board, the issue of attendance was brought up. Cadet pleads that band had to take priority during the season and they were still doing Wing CG regularly as there was no time conflict on Saturdays. CC's point was that they weren't able to contribute and provide leadership to the squadron. On top of this, another top cadet was also up for Chief at the same time and attended absolutely everything. Some thought this smacked of double standards. CC says this is an opportunity for the cadet to learn about making choices, priorities and time management.

In the end the CC made a deal. Since for the rest of Sept. & Oct. said cadet would be in band and couldn't make meetings regularly, he made an assignment for them to make sure that the unit was kept up to date on all events. The cadet was to email everyone weekly with meeting notes, UOD, etc, and keep other calendar items top-of-mind for everyone. After that, another review and promotion. The cadet did a great job of keeping everyone informed, finished band season, merited a promotion and continued to be a great cadet. 

<edit for typo>

I think this was very well handled, and I see no 52-16 issue whatsoever.

We all understand that school comes first, but there is a big difference between schoolwork and all extracurricular activities hosted by the school. It is important that cadets learn how to manage their time, juggle commitments, and think about the consequences for each choice they make. Choosing to prioritize marching band is a fine decision, however it does mean that your activity in CAP will slow during the time period. I assume that choosing CAP over marching band would have similar consequences within the band. Neither is right or wrong, but the cadet needs to consider the consequences carefully and evaluate the choices against his/her goals.

I would say that this issue should be addressed sooner than later. I would encourage cadets facing similar situations to consult their CoC earlier, and try to develop alternative solutions before there is a problem to address. In the event that an attendance issue is noticed, leadership should immediately address it with the cadet and work on a plan of action. This should take place well before the promotion board. Nothing should ever be discussed for the first time during an evaluation of any sort.

52-16 has the standards......there is NO requirement for Cadet X to hold any particular staff position for very much time (cadet officers have to do the SDA time).

So....if they are able to operate....even if they have not actually did so during that time period.....at the level as described in 52-16 there is no reason to hold them back if they have not been participating due to school conflicts.

It is that simple.

If the cadet has NOT demonstrated the ability to operate at the level as described in 52-16 then it is 100% right that you hold them back.....but that is the reason why you are holding them back....not because they have school.

There is a requirement that cadets participate actively, and for the most part, that is open to the interpretation of the commander. As long as the commander's requirements are fair, consistent, and known, I see no problem requiring satisfactory performance in a chosen staff position, or meeting an attendance requirement.

Also, 52-16 Chap. 5-2b states:
"Significance of Promotions. By approving a promotion, the commander is attesting to the
cadet's ability to accept the increased responsibilities that accompany the promotion"

If a cadet isn't attending, and/or isn't performing in a staff position, I would have some doubts about their ability to function at a higher level. Not saying it becomes a deal breaker, but it is worth some discussion.

In Walkman's situation, the cadet seems to have had attendance issues in July/August for marching band. It was at the review that a plan was made for "the rest of Sept. & Oct." which indicates that it took place in early Sept. Therefore, we are talking about an issue that has affected the cadet during the promotion period, not one that is coming after. It is not unreasonable then to retain the cadet with a plan in place. Had the cadet approached leadership with this problem when it arose, I bet this commander would have made the same accommodations ahead of the initial review board, and the cadet would have been evaluated based on the new expectations. A cadet promoting to Chief shouldn't need to be hand held into advocating for themselves ahead of problems like this. In this case, the cadet learned a lesson and continued to grow in the program, all while the integrity of the promotion board was preserved. Job Well Done.

To the OP... if your commitments are academic, they are excused absences and should not be held against you. If you are in fact prepared to be a cadet officer, you should know that you need to address these concerns with your CoC. Explain the situation, listen to their feedback, and establish a plan of action ahead of the review board. There are many many different ways you can still be successful in the program, or perhaps some good reasons to wait a little while on your promotion. Since your commander is the one to sign off, he/she is the best person to work with to resolve the issue... through the chain of command of course.

[Майор Хаткевич]

My argument is that showing up for a PT/CD class and online tests doesn't give a cadet the chance to demonstrate their skill level. Sure it may be a good reason to check participation, but not in good faith as the cadet literally is NOT participating. School work? Fine, but you still have to somehow prove that you are progressing in CAP when you are not there. Band, football, IM sports, movie club? Not so much.

I wanted to try out (and was encouraged by the coach) for football in high school. Unfortunately that would severely limit CAP participation, as every meeig night was also the football night (as well as many other nights). I had to make a choice, and so I did. I chose CAP, but others choose the "other". I don't really see a cadet who is not there being as high speed as those that are always there. Maybe there are exceptions, but Ive personally always found the cadets who disengage for whole seasons quote lacking of their peers, who most often quite rightfully end up passing them in grade.

[mwewing]

If the absences are due to school.......and he meets the leadership expectations from CAP VA 52-100......then yes he is actively participating as defined by 52-16.

Certainly Not!

Stripes to Diamonds is a VISUAL AID not a regulation. It should be used as a guide, or a snapshot look at cadet progression. 52-16 also addresses these leadership expectations, and states that they are "broad terms" and that "Commanders will use those goals as a guideline (not a definitive, absolute list of required skills) when making promotion decisions and mentoring cadets."

I would also suggest that these are skills, traits, and abilities. One can possess these qualities and still not be an active participant. They are separate things, in fact "Participate Actively" is listed above under activities.

I really hope we are not suggesting that cadets can punch their way through online tests, participate only at their convenience, and still get promotions. This is a terrible idea that teaches no valuable lessons, and cheapens the program.

[lordmonar]

mwewing.......CAP does not compete with school.  End of statement.

52-16 explicitly says that all school activities are excused.
I agree......school dances and proms are not IMHO "school activities" as envisioned by 52-16.  But my daughter is a Junior in high school...on the Orchestra and the student council.   Both of them have "after school" activities that affect their grades.   Those are school activities....and are exempt.

But my son is in a competitive soccer club....not school related....that may or may not be exempt per each squadron commander's interpretation of the regulation.

As for your concern that if he is not there how can the cadet demonstrate his ability to meet the leadership expectations......is the only valid talking point.  But if the cadet is already operating at that level....then he is good to go.   Simply not being there does not mean the cadet does or does not meet the leadership expectations.   I agree it is difficult to evaluate a cadet who is not there.....but there you go.

YMMV.

[lordmonar]

If the absences are due to school.......and he meets the leadership expectations from CAP VA 52-100......then yes he is actively participating as defined by 52-16.

Certainly Not!

Stripes to Diamonds is a VISUAL AID not a regulation. It should be used as a guide, or a snapshot look at cadet progression. 52-16 also addresses these leadership expectations, and states that they are "broad terms" and that "Commanders will use those goals as a guideline (not a definitive, absolute list of required skills) when making promotion decisions and mentoring cadets."

I would also suggest that these are skills, traits, and abilities. One can possess these qualities and still not be an active participant. They are separate things, in fact "Participate Actively" is listed above under activities.

I really hope we are not suggesting that cadets can punch their way through online tests, participate only at their convenience, and still get promotions. This is a terrible idea that teaches no valuable lessons, and cheapens the program.

52-16 references the leadership expectations in CAPVA 52-100.....so it is regulatory.   It and actively participate are the only subjective criteria for promotion. 

Yes...but the promotion is a based on:
Time in Grade
CPFT
Leadership exam
AE exam
Character Development Participation
Leadership Expectations from CAPVA 52-100
And Active Participation.

It is left up to the squadrons to define "active participation" with the caveat that school is automatically excused.

So....if all other things are completed.....then you must promote.

[Eclipse]

A cadet who is not there, isn't there.  It's no more, or less complicated then that.

There is no way to evaluate them on any points which are not objective, because there's nothing to evaluate.
Using the VA, they will fail on the "guides, mentors, and supervising" aspects since they aren't around to do that.

[lordmonar]

A cadet who is not there, isn't there.  It's no more, or less complicated then that.

There is no way to evaluate them on any points which are not objective, because there's nothing to evaluate.
Using the VA, they will fail on the "guides, mentors, and supervising" aspects since they aren't around to do that.

But if he can do all those things.....and you observed him doing all those things.......but it was pervious the current promotion......you should promote him.

If you can't or you have not observed him doing it.....you should promote him.   

Long leaves of absences are allowed......and no promotion is automatic......but if the cadet has fulfilled all the requirements.....he should be promoted....and school should not be a reason to deny him.   The aim here is to eliminate the need for the cadet to choose between school and CAP.....we want him/her to go to school.

Don't get me wrong....the cadet can't do it.....or you don't know if he can do it.......don't promote him.   Nothing is automatic.

[Storm Chaser]

52-16 references the leadership expectations in CAPVA 52-100.....so it is regulatory.   It and actively participate are the only subjective criteria for promotion.

Actually, no.

The "Leadership Expectations" shown in CAPVA 52-100 outlines in broad terms what level of leadership skill cadets should be demonstrating during each phase of the Cadet Program. Commanders will use those goals as a guideline (not a definitive, absolute list of required skills) when making promotion decisions and mentoring cadets. (emphasis mine)

[lordmonar]

52-16 references the leadership expectations in CAPVA 52-100.....so it is regulatory.   It and actively participate are the only subjective criteria for promotion.

Actually, no.

The "Leadership Expectations" shown in CAPVA 52-100 outlines in broad terms what level of leadership skill cadets should be demonstrating during each phase of the Cadet Program. Commanders will use those goals as a guideline (not a definitive, absolute list of required skills) when making promotion decisions and mentoring cadets. (emphasis mine)

Okay....I grant you that it is not "regulatory".

But local commanders cannot make their standards too far outside of the guidelines set by CAPVA 52-100.

[Майор Хаткевич]

Define too far...is expecting 75% attendance bad? 50%? At what point is the cadet getting at least enough contact hours?

[lordmonar]

Define too far...is expecting 75% attendance bad? 50%? At what point is the cadet getting at least enough contact hours?

Oh.....no.....75% 50%....completely acceptable........."a cadet cannot miss more then 75% of the meetings and activities in a promotion cycle with out a valid excuse" is completely within the spirit of the regulation.

It is the "With out a valid excuse" that we are talking about here.

By regulation school is a valid excuse......so.....if the cadet has met ALL of the other requirements for promotion......then he MUST be promoted.  Even if he has not been there at all.  (of course if the cadet has not been there at all 0% it is very unlikely that he has met all the requirements.)

[Eclipse]

By regulation school is a valid excuse......so.....if the cadet has met ALL of the other requirements for promotion......then he MUST be promoted.  Even if he has not been there at all.  (of course if the cadet has not been there at all 0% it is very unlikely that he has met all the requirements.)

If he has not been there at all, it's not unlikely, it is not possible.

[Patterson]

The "any school related activity" blanket approach to attendance is horrible!  I had a Cadet go to the Wing Commander and demand a special program be built around his athletic schedule.  The Wing Commander tore me apart, scolding me for not creating a program tailored to this Cadets 1 meeting per month attendance plan. 

I am sick of "too much homework" or "coach makes us practice every night" excuses.  Seriously, I am very acomodating, but to change the Squadrons normal functioning for 1 Cadet, AKA meet his demands because he read the "school activities are excused absences" line in 52-16 is crap.  Academics should be excused, period.  Sports from my understanding are extra-curricular??  Am I wrong? 

[arajca]

There is a catch...If a cadet misses Character Development classes or CPFT or other promotion requirements because of his school activities, he does not promote.

[Eclipse]

52-16's use of the term "excused" is in the context of termination for excessive absence,  it is >not< a blanket waiver for non-participation.

Note the reference to 35-3 in the same line. 

52-16 also says that a cadet is required to participate actively, and has also been pointed out, very clearly states that those excused absences do not
excuse cadets from from promotion requirements, one of which is..."active participation".

All 52-16 is saying is that a cadet cannot be terminated solely on the grounds of being absent, >if< those absences are for legitimate school-related functions.
It does not, in any way, say that a commander is required to tailor special services and programs for one cadet, or accommodate that cadet in any way beyond not terminating them
(on those grounds).

Failure to promote would still be legitimate grounds for termination, and a cadet who never shows up is not going to be able to promote, since they will never rise to "active" participation.

[mwewing]

mwewing.......CAP does not compete with school.  End of statement.

I agree with that, we just have different understandings of what school includes. The language that is being quoted here from 52-16 is horribly vague, and is a large part of why there is even room for debate. It doesn't give much guidance to the process.

Having been in band, I do understand that attending exhibitions and home football games is often part of your grade. There is no question that activities that impact your grade would be school related. I guess my question is where do we draw the line? Athletics, while a good way to spend time, are generally not required as part of your school career. We could include them as school activities, but then do we also include boy scouts? Many troops are hosted by schools. How about student organizations and clubs, all hosted by the school but not required?

If the marching band practices every Tuesday, and the CAP meeting is every Tuesday at the same time, meeting the obligations of both is impossible. There are remedies for that, including taking a leave of absence until after the marching band season. The cadet can then return and pick up where leaving off. Many commanders also seem interested in accommodating cadets to continue participation if at all possible. Take Walkman's example of a cadet who participated remotely for a limited period of time.

I don't think a cadet should be able to stop participating in the unit, and still progress as though nothing happened. This is why I like attendance policies. I think 70% is more than accommodating and accounts for a fair number of absences. If a cadet has a temporary commitment that causes them to drop below the threshold, they can simply hold off requesting the promotion for a couple of weeks in order to rise back up to the 70% mark. For extended absences, I would suggest a cadet use a leave of absence.

At a certain point, a cadet needs to make a decision to commit to our program or not. Absences happen, short term circumstances can be overcome, even some extended issues can be addressed. However, we owe it to the cadets who are putting in the effort to make sure that everyone is held to a basic standard.

[lordmonar]

By regulation school is a valid excuse......so.....if the cadet has met ALL of the other requirements for promotion......then he MUST be promoted.  Even if he has not been there at all.  (of course if the cadet has not been there at all 0% it is very unlikely that he has met all the requirements.)

If he has not been there at all, it's not unlikely, it is not possible.

I believe I said that..