Automatic PD progresions for Phase IV cadets

[Elioron]

This is from another thread - I think this is a better place to discuss the issue.  If I've missed a post, feel free to add it.

What about former cadets? I'm all for a clean start, but if someone rolls over a few years/right away after being a cadet, they are typically at least 1-2 years ahead in CAP knowledge than the general new off the street member.

You can have a pass to CP tech, but no grade if you make it to Phase IV.

-1
Just because you graduate high school does not mean you are qualified to teach middle school.  I have always hated the advanced PD for the higher grade cadets.  JMHO.

-1
Just because you graduate high school does not mean you are qualified to teach middle school.  I have always hated the advanced PD for the higher grade cadets.  JMHO.

Yeah, I'd have to agree.

Its sounds good on paper, but very little of what cadets experience or understand directly translates to being a senior member, and only
a small percentage ever are able to use that experience in a meaningful way when they first transition.  Most dark-siders struggle just to find their
place when they realize how much of the CP they were wholly unaware of.

There's always exceptions, but those are few and far between.

OK - back to everyone starts the same.

If a Phase IV cadet hasn't done everything a SM has to do for the Tech rating in CP, there's something very, very wrong.  Senior Rating is beyond some of them (it's also beyond many SMs involved in CP), but Tech Rating is a fairly low bar.

NON CONCURE.

It took me 20 minutes or so to learn and be able to do everything I need to do for the Tech Rating....and I still had to wait six months. (or what ever it is).

IF......and I say this with all sincerity we replaced the Phase IV SDA with earn the CP Tech Rating....then maybe you would have something....but as it is now...there is nothing that requires a Spaatz cadet to do or know any of the requirements of the CP Tech Rating.

NON CONCURE.

It took me 20 minutes or so to learn and be able to do everything I need to do for the Tech Rating....and I still had to wait six months. (or what ever it is).

IF......and I say this with all sincerity we replaced the Phase IV SDA with earn the CP Tech Rating....then maybe you would have something....but as it is now...there is nothing that requires a Spaatz cadet to do or know any of the requirements of the CP Tech Rating.

Have you looked at it recently?  Tech rating really only requires understanding what the Cadet Program is.  No SM with only a Tech rating in CP meets these requirements better than a Spaatz cadet.

Which requirements do you think they wouldn't have met?

The six months working with a mentor.
Taking the test.
Test Security.
Staffing two outside activities.

My point is.....if you make a SM jump through hoops......we need to make our Spaatz cadets jump through the same hoops.

Just going through the program.....does not mean you understand how the program is supposed to be managed.

Sure a Spaatz cadet has the ability to manage the program....but so did I when I came in as a SM in 2003.....but I still had to jump the hoop.

The six months working with a mentor.

Not a requirement.  #6 is to define "mentoring", but that's as close as it gets.  Either way, the the hell have they been doing if they haven't been mentoring cadets since at least becoming a SNCO?!?!

Taking the test.

They take a lot more tests than you did, and the Tech rating test is to ensure you have a vague idea of what they just lived.

Test Security.

Really?  By this time they have become quite familiar with test security.

Staffing two outside activities.

Again, how do you have a cadet who hasn't staffed two activities by the time they get their Earhart?!?!  How do you allow a Phase IV cadet to promote without being staff at something?!

My point is.....if you make a SM jump through hoops......we need to make our Spaatz cadets jump through the same hoops.

Just going through the program.....does not mean you understand how the program is supposed to be managed.

Sure a Spaatz cadet has the ability to manage the program....but so did I when I came in as a SM in 2003.....but I still had to jump the hoop.

A Spaatz cadet has far more leadership training and experience than most SM Captains.  The hoops you had to jump through for a Tech rating are nothing compared to what a Spaatz has to do.  Also, the Tech rating doesn't mean you can manage anything - that is more what the Senior rating is about - but a Phase IV cadet has been managing the program for at least a year.  If they haven't, it is a failure of their CDC and most cadets won't be able to progress anyway.

A Spaatz cadet has far more leadership training and experience than most SM Captains. 

Some?  Maybe.  Most.  No way.

Even the oldest ones are still kids maturing, and none has ever had the responsibility that the senior members do.
For example, being the Cadet Commander of an encampment does not equal being the commander, etc., etc.

A Spaatz cadet has far more leadership training and experience than most SM Captains. 

Some?  Maybe.  Most.  No way.

Even the oldest ones are still kids maturing, and none has ever had the responsibility that the senior members do.
For example, being the Cadet Commander of an encampment does not equal being the commander, etc., etc.

Most SM Captains haven't been commanders either, nor have many had any command or organizational responsibility at all.  All that's required is SLS and a Tech rating in something.  Oh, and hanging around for three years.

Spaatz cadets must attend more training and have been involved in command within their unit at the very least.  They have managed projects and followed through, which is more than most SMs.  If they haven't, whoever approved their promotions has no business in cadet programs.

[Eclipse]

Most SM Captains haven't been commanders either, nor have many had any command or organizational responsibility at all.  All that's required is SLS and a Tech rating in something.  Oh, and hanging around for three years.

My point was that many cadets believe they "get it" and have a rude awakening when they discover just how much different and
more work and responsibility it is to be a senior member.  By design, cadets >take< from the program and senior >give< to the program.

The other issue is that most senior members are adults, and join well after their college years.  They have real-life experience that being a cadet
cannot provide.

Spaatz cadets must attend more training and have been involved in command within their unit at the very least.  They have managed projects and followed through, which is more than most SMs.  If they haven't, whoever approved their promotions has no business in cadet programs.

Cite please. 

From "stripes to diamonds" requires no command or other staff posting.  An Apprenticeship is required for Earhart and Eaker, and
you have to attend one encampment (as a student) and one RCLS (as student).

http://www.capmembers.com/media/cms/Personal_Cadet_Tracker_560825314F0F6.pdf

[Elioron]

Most SM Captains haven't been commanders either, nor have many had any command or organizational responsibility at all.  All that's required is SLS and a Tech rating in something.  Oh, and hanging around for three years.

My point was that many cadets believe they "get it" and have a rude awakening when they discover just how much different and
more work ad responsibility it is to be a senior member.  By design, cadets >take< from the program and senior >give< to the program.

The other issue is that most senior members are adults, and join well after their college years.  They have real-life experience that being a cadet
cannot provide.

Most SMs I know, particularly associated with Cadet Programs, are parents with little or no supervisory experience of any kind.  I didn't see where being 27+ with a college degree was a requirement for a Tech rating.

Spaatz cadets must attend more training and have been involved in command within their unit at the very least.  They have managed projects and followed through, which is more than most SMs.  If they haven't, whoever approved their promotions has no business in cadet programs.

Cite please.  http://www.capmembers.com/media/cms/Personal_Cadet_Tracker_560825314F0F6.pdf

What, exactly, do your cadets do?  By the sound of it, they sit around and do what a SM says.  That isn't the Cadet Program.  The Cadet Program involves the cadets running meetings, organizing events, and teaching (Ref CAPR 52-16).  If a cadet doesn't get involved in these activities, it is likely they won't promote anyway.  If you have a cadet officer that hasn't had some command position within the squadron you're doing it wrong.  If they haven't staffed an event, you're doing it wrong.  If a Phase IV cadet isn't involved in managing the program, you're doing it wrong.  Why would you promote someone who does not meet the leadership expectations for their grade?

[Майор Хаткевич]

I got a rude awakening at the senior CP level. Tech rating questions and requirements? Sure. Senior? Had to crack the books.

[NCRblues]

From "stripes to diamonds" requires no command or other staff posting.  An Apprenticeship is required for Earhart and Eaker, and
you have to attend one encampment (as a student) and one RCLS (as student).

Not even the RCLS is a total requirement yet. We still have cadets that fall under the old ECI13 rule.

In fact, just recently my local area had a cadet go for Spaatz, and his entire training page of eServices said " one basic encampment, ECI 13". That's it...

Does that kid deserve advancement in the CP program? IMHO absolutely not...

[Eclipse]

What, exactly, do your cadets do?  By the sound of it, they sit around and do what a SM says.  That isn't the Cadet Program.  The Cadet Program involves the cadets running meetings, organizing events, and teaching (Ref CAPR 52-16). If a cadet doesn't get involved in these activities, it is likely they won't promote anyway.

It would be very nice if that was, in fact, the case.

If you have a cadet officer that hasn't had some command position within the squadron you're doing it wrong.

I don't disagree, however that's not what is required.

If they haven't staffed an event, you're doing it wrong.  If a Phase IV cadet isn't involved in managing the program, you're doing it wrong.  Why would you promote someone who does not meet the leadership expectations for their grade?

Do you know how many 1-hit diamonds there have been?

Define "leadership expectations".  The only thing you can hold a cadet to are what's in 52-16 and that chart link above.
Barring a disciplinary issue, if they check those boxes, they have done the work.  You can't require anything more then that, if you do,
you'll have the grounds for a very sustainable complaint.

[Storm Chaser]

I'm a former Earhart recipient and cadet commander and I can honestly say that, while I knew a lot about being a cadet leader, I knew very little about managing the Cadet Programs when I became a senior member. It took years of experience and training to really learn how to manage a good Cadet Programs and all the challenges involved in doing so.

Frankly, I'm sure many cadet officers become great senior members, but that's not a given. The paradigm between cadet and senior member is very different even within the Cadet Programs.

[Майор Хаткевич]

I'm a former Earhart recipient and cadet commander and I can honestly say that, while I knew a lot about being a cadet leader, I knew very little about managing the Cadet Programs when I became a senior member. It took years of experience and training to really learn how to manage a good Cadet Programs and all the challenges involved in doing so.

Frankly, I'm sure many cadet officers become great senior members, but that's not a given. The paradigm between cadet and senior member is very different even within the Cadet Programs.

Honestly, at a Tech rating most SMs have a general idea of the CP. Call it WBA level.

[Elioron]

What, exactly, do your cadets do?  By the sound of it, they sit around and do what a SM says.  That isn't the Cadet Program.  The Cadet Program involves the cadets running meetings, organizing events, and teaching (Ref CAPR 52-16). If a cadet doesn't get involved in these activities, it is likely they won't promote anyway.

It would be very nice if that was, in fact, the case.

If you have a cadet officer that hasn't had some command position within the squadron you're doing it wrong.

I don't disagree, however that's not what is required.

If they haven't staffed an event, you're doing it wrong.  If a Phase IV cadet isn't involved in managing the program, you're doing it wrong.  Why would you promote someone who does not meet the leadership expectations for their grade?

Do you know how many 1-hit diamonds there have been?

Define "leadership expectations".  The only thing you can hold a cadet to are what's in 52-16 and that chart link above.
Barring a disciplinary issue, if they check those boxes, they have done the work.  You can't require anything more then that, if you do,
you'll have the grounds for a very sustainable complaint.

It's part of the Super Chart.

Leadership Expectations for Phase III

• Conscious of own performance; takes initiative to develop new skills; self-motivated and able to motivate others
• Fair, just, and consistent in dealing with subordinates; exercises good judgment in knowing which matters should be referred up the chain
• Writes and speaks clearly; presents ideas logically; wins through persuasion
• Given an assignment, takes project from beginning to end; develops appropriate goals, plans, standards, and follows through in execution; demonstrates sense ofownership in all assignments
• Actively mentors NCOs; resolves conflicts fairly; criticizes constructively; dissents respectively when disagreeing with superiors
• Thinks in advance and plans ahead to meet the unit's short-term needs; imaginative and not tied to old ideas
• Delegates routine tasks effectively and works through NCOs; keeps people informed; makes expectations clear; supervises work of other leaders

Leadership Expectations for Phase IV

• Resilient; shows mental discipline in working to achieve long-term goals; welcoming of change; has habit of continual self-improvement
• Uses empathy; recognizes how Core Values relate to new and unfamiliar situations; makes sound and timely decisions independently
• Articulate; succinct; persuasive; varies message to fit audience; proficient in explaining complex issues
• Completes large projects with little supervision; follows and sets a command intent; self-starter
• Actively develops and mentors cadet officers; adapts leadership style to fit situation; calm under pressure
• Sets long-term goals for the unit; imaginative and visionary; recognizes unit's long-term needs; mentally agile when faced with unfamiliar problems
• Directs multiple teams and manages multiple tasks; assigns people to right jobs; delegates well and enables others to take charge

Are people just passing cadets on these if they don't give them the opportunities?

I'm a former Earhart recipient and cadet commander and I can honestly say that, while I knew a lot about being a cadet leader, I knew very little about managing the Cadet Programs when I became a senior member. It took years of experience and training to really learn how to manage a good Cadet Programs and all the challenges involved in doing so.

Frankly, I'm sure many cadet officers become great senior members, but that's not a given. The paradigm between cadet and senior member is very different even within the Cadet Programs.

Not all Senior Members make good Senior Members either, and most of the best Officers I know were former cadets.

I think if we're looking for guarantees, we're not going to find them.  Not with cadets or with new members.  My opinion and experience is that former cadets are ahead of the curve if they achieved more than the Wright Brothers over people off the street.  There will always be that person who we thought would be great/horrible that ends up doing horrible/great.

[Elioron]

Tech rating in CP, by the way, doesn't really teach you to manage the program.  It makes sure you're familiar with the program and the rules to follow, but that's about it.

[Eclipse]

Are people just passing cadets on these if they don't give them the opportunities?

Or more truthfully you can't hold them back when the opportunities don't exist.

A unit with 5 active cadets isn't going to present much opportunity for the above.

As I mentioned earlier, absent a disciplinary issue or a clear indication the cadet doesn't possess the abilities above, there's no grounds for holding a cadet back.

[lordmonar]

Tech rating in CP, by the way, doesn't really teach you to manage the program.  It makes sure you're familiar with the program and the rules to follow, but that's about it.

So....what's the big deal in making a newly minted Senior Member/Ex-cadet waiting six months, taking the tests and doing all the rest of the stuff?   

They made me.....and I was a bloody MSgt in the USAF for FSM's sake.  I've been working with youth programs AS A LEADER for 20 years at that point.

So....I said it back when they implemented it....and I say it again.....I disagree with awarding advanced tech ratings to former cadets.

[Eclipse]

Tech rating in CP, by the way, doesn't really teach you to manage the program.  It makes sure you're familiar with the program and the rules to follow, but that's about it.

So....what's the big deal in making a newly minted Senior Member/Ex-cadet waiting six months, taking the tests and doing all the rest of the stuff?

I'd have less heartburn about it if the TIG was waived but the other requirements still had to be met.

Move up as fast as you think you can and show us all you know.

Just like Army Rangers who still have to demonstrate map usage for GTM, if you really know your stuff, it's a non-issue.

A callback to another recent thread - interesting that cadet work counts for Senior PD, but cadet attendance of a conference does not.

[Майор Хаткевич]

A callback to another recent thread - interesting that cadet work counts for Senior PD, but cadet attendance of a conference does not.

Thanks for bringing it up again. :/

[Elioron]

Tech rating in CP, by the way, doesn't really teach you to manage the program.  It makes sure you're familiar with the program and the rules to follow, but that's about it.

So....what's the big deal in making a newly minted Senior Member/Ex-cadet waiting six months, taking the tests and doing all the rest of the stuff?   

They made me.....and I was a bloody MSgt in the USAF for FSM's sake.  I've been working with youth programs AS A LEADER for 20 years at that point.

So....I said it back when they implemented it....and I say it again.....I disagree with awarding advanced tech ratings to former cadets.

Ex-cadet has been in CAP for years working hard to earn what they've achieved, the SM has shown ZERO commitment.

Were you an adult leader with CAP for 20 years when you joined?  Well, you certainly understood the Cadet Program when you joined.  The ex-cadet had been learning the CAP Cadet Program for years.  I'm sure you knew more about CP the day you became a SM than the cadet did.

[Eclipse]

Ex-cadet was never personally responsible for himself, anyone else, or the execution of any activity.

That, in and of itself, is a big deal. Anyone who's ever had a cadet simply "not show" for something
that cadet was "responsible" to do, understands.

And again, if they are really all that knowledgeable, then the academics and tests should be a breeze.

[Elioron]

Ex-cadet was never personally responsible for himself, anyone else, or the execution of any activity.

That, in and of itself, is a big deal.

And again, if they are really all that knowledgeable, then the academics and tests should be a breeze.

Why not?  By Phase IV they should have been.  If they weren't capable of that they shouldn't have been promoted through Phase III.

Here's another thing to think about.  Why was this done at all?

Retention of cadet members into the SM ranks.  Most former cadets have done a lot, seen a lot, and worked hard for what they earned.  To start over on the same level as know-nothing seniors who haven't a clue what's going on is insulting.  They've already proven their knowledge of CAP and the cadet program, but now they have to go through steps that, in the case of Phase IV cadets, insult their intelligence.

If we made people pass the Earhart or Eaker test to get Tech rating, there wouldn't be very many Tech ratings in CP.

[lordmonar]

Tech rating in CP, by the way, doesn't really teach you to manage the program.  It makes sure you're familiar with the program and the rules to follow, but that's about it.

So....what's the big deal in making a newly minted Senior Member/Ex-cadet waiting six months, taking the tests and doing all the rest of the stuff?   

They made me.....and I was a bloody MSgt in the USAF for FSM's sake.  I've been working with youth programs AS A LEADER for 20 years at that point.

So....I said it back when they implemented it....and I say it again.....I disagree with awarding advanced tech ratings to former cadets.

Ex-cadet has been in CAP for years working hard to earn what they've achieved, the SM has shown ZERO commitment.

Were you an adult leader with CAP for 20 years when you joined?  Well, you certainly understood the Cadet Program when you joined.  The ex-cadet had been learning the CAP Cadet Program for years.  I'm sure you knew more about CP the day you became a SM than the cadet did.

I didn't think we were talking about commitment....I thought we were talking about ability.

Again....my original statement stands.....a High School Graduate has shown a 12+ year commitment to education....does not make him eligible to teach middle school.  As Eclipse said.....certainly makes him eligible for and accelerate program....but that is all.   

[Eclipse]

Why not?  By Phase IV they should have been.  If they weren't capable of that they shouldn't have been promoted through Phase III.

Cadets are never responsible for themselves or others - we may give them some delegation, they are never ultimately responsible for anything, regardless of age, as long as it says
"cadet" on their ID card.

If we made people pass the Earhart or Eaker test to get Tech rating, there wouldn't be very many Tech ratings in CP.

Irrelevant - SM PD and Cadet PD are different focus and intent.

[Elioron]

Again....my original statement stands.....a High School Graduate has shown a 12+ year commitment to education....does not make him eligible to teach middle school.

As I have mentioned - by Phase IV of the cadet program, the cadet has more training and experience than required for a Tech Rating in CP.

Comparing high school with the cadet program is so off base I ignored it at first, but here it is again.  Do you understand the point of Phase III and Phase IV?

Cadets are never responsible for themselves or others - we may give them some delegation, they are never ultimately responsible for anything, regardless of age, as long as it says
"cadet" on their ID card.

Then you are crippling your cadets' development.  By the way, most seniors involved in CP aren't ultimately responsible either, but I guess because that doesn't matter.

Irrelevant - SM PD and Cadet PD are different focus and intent.

The material is there.  The Tech Rating for CP still doesn't cover as much as they've already proven.