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.

[Eclipse]

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.

Now you're just throwing text, you know very well who is responsible in any circumstance involving cadets.

Let's at least speak in the facts and practical realities of the real program, not the brochures.

[Elioron]

Let's at least speak in the facts and practical realities of the real program, not the brochures.

Phase III cadets need to be taking charge of their program.  If they aren't, they aren't meeting the Leadership Expectations.  Phase IV cadets need to be managing their program.  If they aren't, they aren't meeting expectations.  The fact is that if you don't believe that cadet is capable of the leadership expectations, you should not promote them.  There is no excuse for not showing their ability, either.  Even in a small squadron, there are activities outside the squadron.  Cadets are required to attend outside activities to promote, otherwise they shouldn't get past C/CMSgt.

If the senior  leadership isn't allowing cadets to do this, they are crippling them.  That's on the senior members.

[Eclipse]

If the senior  leadership isn't allowing cadets to do this, they are crippling them.  That's on the senior members.

I don't disagree, that doesn't change "required" vs. "desired".

The fact is, cadets are only "required" to attend one encampment as a student, complete 2 SDAs, and participate as a student in an RCLS (or ECI13) between
stripes and diamonds.

That's it.  No encampment staff, unit staff, major activity staff, CAC, whatever, nothing else.  Frankly this has been an issue IMHO since I did the math
on it years ago.  CAP invests a lot of time and effort into a cadet by the time they get to Phase IV, and while the expectation is, and should be, that the cadets
start giving back for all they have received, we can't force a cadet who is otherwise performing well pm academics and PT.

And that goes especially for struggling units where you might only have a handful of active cadets at all.

I've said before that encampments or equivalent activities, including staff service or similar, should be required for every milestone, especially Spaatz,
the 1-hit wonder cadets that are never seen again outside their units after they go to encampment that first year are a disappointment, if not outright
failure of the program.

But as it exists today, they are more common then you might realize.

[lordmonar]

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.

Yes Capt I do understand the point of all phases of CAP cadet program.
And I say again....in CAP terms....just because you have completed all or parts of the Cadet Program does not make you automatically qualified to manage said program......even at a tech rating.

As for crippling cadet's development.....again sorry got to disagree with you here.  CAP regs clearly indicate that cadets of any age and rank are not to be trusted.   Even if they are fully qualified Mission Pilots.....ergo....no matter how capable or mature or trained a cadet may be in absolute terms....in CAP terms he/she has never been completely on his own.

Again there material is not there.....no cadet has ever.......ever, been responsible for test security......if he has....then there has been a failure in test security.   Only the TCO or appointed Test administrators can handle tests.   

Second.....the Cadet Programs tech rating requires.....requires outside of the weekly meeting staff involvement......which is NOT.....I SAY AGAIN....not a requirement for any cadet phase.   It may be implied....but it is not required.....ergo it is possible for a cadet to get Spaatz and not have done the requirement's for the tech rating.

My basic point still stands......we do not award a advanced PD for anyone who may be well qualified to do it......but we do give it to cadets who have completed Level IV.   Not necessary, not fair and I don't like it. 

As I said before.......If during the cadet career they were required to "earn the CP tech rating" then I'm on board.  If you want to waive the TIG requirements for the tech rating........I'm on board....but just saying....oh your a Spaatz, here's your Capt and your Tech rating.....that I don't agree with .

[Майор Хаткевич]

MSgt, after four years in college, I was appointed as an assistant testing officer. That said, I'm really the cadet testing officer.  It took me one week turnaround time read the reg, and I was fully aware of all my responsibilities by the following meeting. The difference between me and a SMWOG? I knew what our tests look like, how to fill out the scantron, and how to identify and give the correct test between L21C and L2L. Oh, I could also administer and score a drill test on my own, finding that my standards were (aligned with the test) higher, and that in the past a cadet SME would do it, and the SMs would accept the cadet's grading. That is fully allowed, except again, I found them to be too forgiving.

As to being tech level capable, I have no doubts that if necessary, I could take on a CDC role. If I don't know something, I know where to look it up. I can't say the same about other off the street members with a tech rating.

[lordmonar]

MSgt, after four years in college, I was appointed as an assistant testing officer. That said, I'm really the cadet testing officer.  It took me one week turnaround time read the reg, and I was fully aware of all my responsibilities by the following meeting. The difference between me and a SMWOG? I knew what our tests look like, how to fill out the scantron, and how to identify and give the correct test between L21C and L2L. Oh, I could also administer and score a drill test on my own, finding that my standards were (aligned with the test) higher, and that in the past a cadet SME would do it, and the SMs would accept the cadet's grading. That is fully allowed, except again, I found them to be too forgiving.

As to being tech level capable, I have no doubts that if necessary, I could take on a CDC role. If I don't know something, I know where to look it up. I can't say the same about other off the street members with a tech rating.

And I can't say the same thing about other Spaatz cadets........hence the importance of actually TESTING and CHECKING for required knowledge before automatically giving a tech rating.  And that's my point.  I know that phase IV cadets should be able to do the job.  I have even conceded that they should be given a pass on the TIG requirements.   I am only saying it should not be automatic.  The squadron PD officer through his CP mentors should be checking that the required knowledge in the CAPP is actually possessed by the member.  That the member actually has done outside activities.

Also....there is not "use before" date on this.  In theory a Spaatz cadet from the 70's could join today, be a Capt and a tech rated CP guy........52-16 has been rewritten three times since then.....and there was not CPP back then.  But he is just entitled to the rank and the rating as a 18 year old earning Spaatz tomorrow.

Then you have the possibility that the Spaatz is not really Spaatz.   You all remember that 13 year old Spaatz from a few years ago?  Remember how just about everyone was up in arms about how he did not deserve it?  But again.....it is non-discretionary...he gets his tech rating and his capt bars.

My basic premise still applies.....just because you passed the program does not make you qualified to teach the program.

[Майор Хаткевич]

MSgt, I'm an Earhart cadet.

While I agree that not ALL cadets will be able to perform, I just don't see how anyone who spent years in CAP, reached into Phase IV, and moved onto the SM side would NOT rate a tech rating. You seem to be focusing on what the Tech Rating requires of SMs. But think of it as the equivalency we give RM NCOs for their special training in the CAP PD. This is the same thing. What you had to do was much more "involved" than what the CAP PD calls for. Well looking at CP officers with Tech Ratings (and sometimes even reaching into the Senior ratings!), MOST of them simply do not know as much as a former cadet. I'm not talking Left Face from Right Face, I'm talking about execution. By Senior rating most CP Officers KNOW what the program is, but they often lack the "hands on" experience and "working" knowledge of how to implement it. Are there "vacuum" cadets who have never laid their eyes on anyone outside of their small, rural, 3 cadet unit? Perhaps. But that's still not the majority of Phase IV cadets.

Quite honestly, the BEST part about a Cadet turning SM is that we've made mistakes. I personally missed opportunities, made mistakes, didn't follow through on plans, etc. As a SM, I can help the current cadets avoid my pitfalls (or at least give them a leg up, the choice is still theirs), or if needed, I can step in as a SM and help them accomplish a project I may have contemplated/failed at as a cadet.

You've mentioned that you had years upon years of working with youth as a leader. But to use the cringe-inducing analogy, would the AF allow a Marine/Sailor/Soldier NCO to swap branches and become a TI? Of course not, not right away. But what about the SrA who gets promoted to SSgt and gets assigned to Lackland? Whole different story.

Going from cadet to SM is something like that. I got a lot of benefits out of CAP, and now I want to give back. Part of it is probably seeing the cadets grow and develop, and getting a "warm and fuzzy" because it brings back my own memories. I can still remember earning my first stripe. I hope I never forget. Seeing and helping new cadets get there, helps to ensure that I won't anytime soon.

[lordmonar]

Well you should not have gone there.....as a 22 year MSgt I would rate all of 2nd Lt.....geee thanks.....and I still had to do my six months staff time to get my tech rating.

Even someone with years in the military has to go to DI/MTI school before he can be a TI does not matter if he is a Brand new SrA or a CMSgt, no one gets a free pass.....even ex-MTIs have to go back to school if they have been out of the AFSC for awhile.

I do not discount cadet experience.......in fact I have stated several times...I got no problem with giving them credit for time served.   I simply have a problem with AUTOMATICALLY awarding the tech rating.

Cross over to gray, rejoin, get your Level I training done....do your Form 2a for your advanced promotion......sit down with your Cadet Programs Officer and/or your PDO....go through the required knowledge, show that you really know what you need to know, show where you have done the service requirements, make sure that they demonstrate that you really can do what a tech rated CP guys should be able to do.  Take the on line, open book test.....and presto blam-o you are a tech rated CP guy.

[Elioron]

Well you should not have gone there.....as a 22 year MSgt I would rate all of 2nd Lt.....geee thanks.....and I still had to do my six months staff time to get my tech rating.

Even someone with years in the military has to go to DI/MTI school before he can be a TI does not matter if he is a Brand new SrA or a CMSgt, no one gets a free pass.....even ex-MTIs have to go back to school if they have been out of the AFSC for awhile.

I do not discount cadet experience.......in fact I have stated several times...I got no problem with giving them credit for time served.   I simply have a problem with AUTOMATICALLY awarding the tech rating.

Cross over to gray, rejoin, get your Level I training done....do your Form 2a for your advanced promotion......sit down with your Cadet Programs Officer and/or your PDO....go through the required knowledge, show that you really know what you need to know, show where you have done the service requirements, make sure that they demonstrate that you really can do what a tech rated CP guys should be able to do.  Take the on line, open book test.....and presto blam-o you are a tech rated CP guy.

I'd love to watch the interaction of a 19-year-old SM with a tech rating trying to mentor a 21-year-old Spaatz on the cadet program.  Laughable!!  Of course the Spaatz probably has plenty of experience dealing with SMs that don't have a clue trying to tell them what to do.

[lordmonar]

And there you are showing your contempt for all senior members.

[RogueLeader]

And there you are showing your contempt for all senior members.

No more than I've seen many RM NCO's deal with fresh butterbars.  And it's not aimed at ALL Senior members but those who act like they know more than a cadet that has lived the program vs brand new to it.

[Storm Chaser]

As I said before.......If during the cadet career they were required to "earn the CP tech rating" then I'm on board.  If you want to waive the TIG requirements for the tech rating........I'm on board....but just saying....oh your a Spaatz, here's your Capt and your Tech rating.....that I don't agree with .

Former Spaatz cadets actually get a Senior Rating in Cadet Programs.

[Elioron]

And there you are showing your contempt for all senior members.

lol  My self deprecation is legendary!

I think my acknowledgement rates far less than your contempt of cadets.  I've only been in for three years and I've met such SMs.  Luckily they are a minority and are, generally, quickly corrected.  Kind of like Phase IV cadets that don't have more capability than a Tech rating in CP.

[lordmonar]

As I said before.......If during the cadet career they were required to "earn the CP tech rating" then I'm on board.  If you want to waive the TIG requirements for the tech rating........I'm on board....but just saying....oh your a Spaatz, here's your Capt and your Tech rating.....that I don't agree with .

Former Spaatz cadets actually get a Senior Rating in Cadet Programs.

  Yeah.....don't get me started on that. 

[lordmonar]

And there you are showing your contempt for all senior members.

No more than I've seen many RM NCO's deal with fresh butterbars.  And it's not aimed at ALL Senior members but those who act like they know more than a cadet that has lived the program vs brand new to it.

Yes I agree...that we are talking about extremes some in this debate.   There is always the prototypical "Know it all cadet" who has nothing but contempt for all those fat and lazy seniors.  They have been there and done that and don't understand why they still have to pay their dues when they convert from Cadet to Senior.

And then they wonder why those of use who had to "come up through the ranks" have heart burn about these "kids" who just skip right in ahead of us.

And it is a problem to a point.......so much to a point where the typical advice to most cadets is to take a break from cadet programs when they cross over to the Gray.   

But my point still stands....I got nothing against giving them credit for time served......but I still think that they need to prove that they possess the required knowledge before they are given the rating.

[Storm Chaser]

If/when a MSgt receives a line commission in the Air Force, he/she gets credit for time in service, but still gets commissioned as a 2d Lt, regardless of experience. And while he/she may wear any badge earned, he/she must go back to an appropriate school before assuming his/her new duties, again regardless of previous experience.

The reason for that is simple; the roles of NCOs and officers are different, just like the roles of CAP cadets and senior members are also different.

[Майор Хаткевич]

And there you are showing your contempt for all senior members.

No more than I've seen many RM NCO's deal with fresh butterbars.  And it's not aimed at ALL Senior members but those who act like they know more than a cadet that has lived the program vs brand new to it.

Yes I agree...that we are talking about extremes some in this debate.   There is always the prototypical "Know it all cadet" who has nothing but contempt for all those fat and lazy seniors.  They have been there and done that and don't understand why they still have to pay their dues when they convert from Cadet to Senior.

And then they wonder why those of use who had to "come up through the ranks" have heart burn about these "kids" who just skip right in ahead of us.

And it is a problem to a point.......so much to a point where the typical advice to most cadets is to take a break from cadet programs when they cross over to the Gray.   

But my point still stands....I got nothing against giving them credit for time served......but I still think that they need to prove that they possess the required knowledge before they are given the rating.

I'll agree to that when we stop giving CAP equivalency to Military Schools.

[lordmonar]

I would agree with that as well.

[Elioron]

If/when a MSgt receives a line commission in the Air Force, he/she gets credit for time in service, but still gets commissioned as a 2d Lt, regardless of experience. And while he/she may wear any badge earned, he/she must go back to an appropriate school before assuming his/her new duties, again regardless of previous experience.

The reason for that is simple; the roles of NCOs and officers are different, just like the roles of CAP cadets and senior members are also different.

It's not an equivalent analogy - not unless you're talking about cadet NCOs, which we're not.  Unlike NCO training, Phase IV of the cadet program is about management.  The Tech Rating for CP doesn't even go that far, that's more what the Senior Rating deals with.  The Tech rating is about oversight, which the Cadet Program is about from Phase III.

More is expected of a Phase IV cadet than is expected of a Tech in CP.  Whether or not those in charge hold their people to those expectations seems to be in question, but the expectations should be there.  The consensus of those here is that it's better to treat any former cadet as if they were part of a failed program than to acknowledge the experience in the very program you don't want them to oversee.

It seems to me like there's a chip on some shoulders.  Do you know why we have such a dismal retention rate for older, higher achieving cadets?  It's because they are commonly treated like they're nothing.  "It's nice that you worked harder in CAP than most Level II SMs, but welcome to being a wog."

It would be nice to have someone who works CP at the national level weigh in, but they're probably dealing with real issues.  We get what we get.

[abdsp51]

Most of the CAP PD has been a regurgatation of ALS/NCOA/SNCOA. 

[lordmonar]

If/when a MSgt receives a line commission in the Air Force, he/she gets credit for time in service, but still gets commissioned as a 2d Lt, regardless of experience. And while he/she may wear any badge earned, he/she must go back to an appropriate school before assuming his/her new duties, again regardless of previous experience.

The reason for that is simple; the roles of NCOs and officers are different, just like the roles of CAP cadets and senior members are also different.

It's not an equivalent analogy - not unless you're talking about cadet NCOs, which we're not.  Unlike NCO training, Phase IV of the cadet program is about management.  The Tech Rating for CP doesn't even go that far, that's more what the Senior Rating deals with.  The Tech rating is about oversight, which the Cadet Program is about from Phase III.

More is expected of a Phase IV cadet than is expected of a Tech in CP.  Whether or not those in charge hold their people to those expectations seems to be in question, but the expectations should be there.  The consensus of those here is that it's better to treat any former cadet as if they were part of a failed program than to acknowledge the experience in the very program you don't want them to oversee.

It seems to me like there's a chip on some shoulders.  Do you know why we have such a dismal retention rate for older, higher achieving cadets?  It's because they are commonly treated like they're nothing.  "It's nice that you worked harder in CAP than most Level II SMs, but welcome to being a wog."

It would be nice to have someone who works CP at the national level weigh in, but they're probably dealing with real issues.  We get what we get.

I think it is a perfect analogy.  More is expect of an USAF MSgt then a 2d Lt........but we still make the MSgt be a 2d Lt and his AFSC is still dropped down to 2 level....even if he stays within his AFSC group.

It is not about a chip.....not really....if there is a chip it is on both sides of the story....Cadets who think that they have BTDT vs SM who only see the new SM's age and wonders why he's getting a "free ride".

Sure an 18 year old brand new CAP 2d Lt with a minty new car smell CP Tech Rating may not know as much as the 21 year old Ex-Cadet.......but there is also the 38 year old (current USAF MSgt) who was a AFJROTC Cadet, AFROTC Cadet, BSA Eagle Scout, 20 years as BSA scouter.....who has to start at the bottom just like that 18 year old off the street vs Spaatz cadet who may have impressed his local leaders but shows questionable judgment.....(anyone want to say C/Col King?) who get's the free ride.

Like I said before.....got nothing with giving credit where credit is good.......but no free rides.....I'm just asking that former cadets show/demonstrate the required knowledge as spelled out in the CAPP before awarding the rating (Tech or Senior).

[Майор Хаткевич]

Hahaha (the reference). He took his Last name very literally.