The regs aren't exactly clear to me so forgive me if this seems foolish:
The Information Technology Senior candidate must have served at
minimum of twelve months (non-cumulative; in addition to the
Technician rating service requirement) in a unit IT position listed
below as a Senior level candidate.
1. Squadron ITO
Does this mean you simply had to be a squadron ITO for 12 months or you have to wait an additional 12 months after you've earned your technician rating (kinda silly considering I've already passed the Senior exam...)
Quote from: etc on August 20, 2013, 10:13:45 AM
The regs aren't exactly clear to me so forgive me if this seems foolish:
The Information Technology Senior candidate must have served at
minimum of twelve months (non-cumulative; in addition to the
Technician rating service requirement) in a unit IT position listed
below as a Senior level candidate.
1. Squadron ITO
Does this mean you simply had to be a squadron ITO for 12 months or you have to wait an additional 12 months after you've earned your technician rating (kinda silly considering I've already passed the Senior exam...)
technician + 1 year...
Yes, you have to serve a year after you receive your tech rating.
No, it just means you took the exam early, and got it out of the way.
Technician + 12 Months is what it wants.
Quote from: a2capt on August 20, 2013, 04:19:06 PM
No, it just means you took the exam early, and got it out of the way.
Technician + 12 Months is what it wants.
Yeah, I did Technician, Senior and Master in one day...still waiting for time to get my Master.
I did that with the CP tests. May 2006. I was a 16 year old C/2dLt.
Still got a few requirements for my Senior CP badge to do.
Tech + 12 months.
I passed the Master Comm test easily but I got a got a bunch of things to check off first before I get the Master rating. That is just the way we do it here at CAP.
yeah, I'm at my senior rating on both comm and IT... It won't even let me take the test until I get the actual rating in eServices.
CAPP 227, Page 5:
QuoteOnce the trainer or unit commander is satisfied that you have met
all knowledge requirements, you may take the specialty track test
corresponding to the rating you are pursuing.
IMHO, you're doing it wrong.
Quote from: johnnyb47 on August 21, 2013, 05:45:19 PM
CAPP 227, Page 5:
QuoteOnce the trainer or unit commander is satisfied that you have met
all knowledge requirements, you may take the specialty track test
corresponding to the rating you are pursuing.
IMHO, you're doing it wrong.
I've met the knowledge requirements for all three levels, and just waiting for time to pass to meet the other requirements.
Quote from: JeffDG on August 21, 2013, 06:20:07 PM
Quote from: johnnyb47 on August 21, 2013, 05:45:19 PM
CAPP 227, Page 5:
QuoteOnce the trainer or unit commander is satisfied that you have met
all knowledge requirements, you may take the specialty track test
corresponding to the rating you are pursuing.
IMHO, you're doing it wrong.
I've met the knowledge requirements for all three levels, and just waiting for time to pass to meet the other requirements.
You met with your commander or trainer, discussed and satisfied the knowledge requirements for all three levels and then took all three tests in one day?
(I realize that looks REALLY argumentative.... please believe me when I say that it's an honest question.)
Quote from: johnnyb47 on August 21, 2013, 06:58:39 PM
Quote from: JeffDG on August 21, 2013, 06:20:07 PM
Quote from: johnnyb47 on August 21, 2013, 05:45:19 PM
CAPP 227, Page 5:
QuoteOnce the trainer or unit commander is satisfied that you have met
all knowledge requirements, you may take the specialty track test
corresponding to the rating you are pursuing.
IMHO, you're doing it wrong.
I've met the knowledge requirements for all three levels, and just waiting for time to pass to meet the other requirements.
You met with your commander or trainer, discussed and satisfied the knowledge requirements for all three levels and then took all three tests in one day?
(I realize that looks REALLY argumentative.... please believe me when I say that it's an honest question.)
I work closely with my commander and trainer. I have over 20 years of IT experience in Fortune 500 environments, the CAP specific knowledge was acquired and demonstrated rather quickly. That demonstration occurred over a period of a few weeks, I just did the exams in one shot.
For example, here are the knowledge requirements for Master IT:
QuoteKnowledge verification will be done via written examination. As a
minimum, a Information Technology Master candidate should
possess extensive knowledge of the following:
1. CAP's IT programs including CAP's IT materials, testing
and evaluation forms, award requirements, record
keeping, and performance certification procedures.
2. Computer & Internet security, including cryptography,
intrusion detection, and vulnerability assessment.
3. Development and implementation of comprehensive IT
plans for units above the squadron level. 14 February 2013 17 CAPP 227
4. Identify sources and procedures for acquiring and
maintaining a variety of IT resources.
5. IT staff positions, job descriptions/responsibilities, and staff
relationships within CAP
A lot of ITOs met the knowledge requirements and demonstrated the abilities before there ever was an ITO track.
Same goes for a lot of the other tracks. More the a few conversations I've had were something like
"Hey, I want to be promoted."
"You need to level-up in something".
"Well, I've been the FM for 2 years, Ops officer for 4, and an MP / IC for 6." (etc)
"Well, write it up and take some online tests so we can get you to spend money at the Depot / Bookstore / Vanguard"
Eclipse's response is my rationale for advocating a promotion system to assign grade to members that reflects their assignments, the way we do with Wing Commander's and above. Something like: Group CC wears Lt Col, Squadron CC wears Maj, etc.
It doesn't even have to be that hierarchical, Col could be any commander, squadron and above... etc. My sense is by the time people are squadron CC's, they usually know what the real deal is with who's in charge or whatever. It's not so much the specific grades as the concept of grade aligning with responsibility.
Want to be promoted? Take a responsible position.
Quote from: JeffDG on August 21, 2013, 07:26:15 PM
Quote from: johnnyb47 on August 21, 2013, 06:58:39 PM
Quote from: JeffDG on August 21, 2013, 06:20:07 PM
Quote from: johnnyb47 on August 21, 2013, 05:45:19 PM
CAPP 227, Page 5:
QuoteOnce the trainer or unit commander is satisfied that you have met
all knowledge requirements, you may take the specialty track test
corresponding to the rating you are pursuing.
IMHO, you're doing it wrong.
I've met the knowledge requirements for all three levels, and just waiting for time to pass to meet the other requirements.
You met with your commander or trainer, discussed and satisfied the knowledge requirements for all three levels and then took all three tests in one day?
(I realize that looks REALLY argumentative.... please believe me when I say that it's an honest question.)
I work closely with my commander and trainer. I have over 20 years of IT experience in Fortune 500 environments, the CAP specific knowledge was acquired and demonstrated rather quickly. That demonstration occurred over a period of a few weeks, I just did the exams in one shot.
For example, here are the knowledge requirements for Master IT:
QuoteKnowledge verification will be done via written examination. As a
minimum, a Information Technology Master candidate should
possess extensive knowledge of the following:
1. CAP's IT programs including CAP's IT materials, testing
and evaluation forms, award requirements, record
keeping, and performance certification procedures.
2. Computer & Internet security, including cryptography,
intrusion detection, and vulnerability assessment.
3. Development and implementation of comprehensive IT
plans for units above the squadron level. 14 February 2013 17 CAPP 227
4. Identify sources and procedures for acquiring and
maintaining a variety of IT resources.
5. IT staff positions, job descriptions/responsibilities, and staff
relationships within CAP
Thanks for not responding to my snarky sounding post with a snarky response. :)
It could have gone either way!
I interpreted, due to the way the pamphlet reads, that the TIS should be followed by the demonstration of knowledge requirements which in turn should be followed by the test.
It never occurred to me to knock out all the requirements except TIS, wait out my time and then send the proper request for the change. It worked out the same for me but it was a bit more work tracking everything as an on-going project instead of just tracking the time.
I too am an IT guy by trade (professional nerd).
Been at this for about 18 years.
The past 8 years has been Fortune 500.
Prior to that... well... let's just say I spent a LOT of time cleaning "questionable materials" off of VP's laptops in my day.
Why is it ALWAYS the sales guy or the VP??
:)
Quote from: doodah5 on August 21, 2013, 08:02:51 PMMy sense is by the time people are squadron CC's, they usually know what the real deal is with who's in charge or whatever. It's not so much the specific grades as the concept of grade aligning with responsibility.
The problem is that this only works in and "up or out" culture. CAP's is circular, so even if you reboot, unless the grades are provisional, in 3-5 years you're back in the same place.
You could move back to manning tables like they used to have, but that still needs an "up or out" system or all this does is slow down the problem, but doesn't fix it.
Quote from: doodah5 on August 21, 2013, 08:02:51 PM
Want to be promoted? Take a responsible position.
Well, that's essentially what we have today. Other then special appointments, getting to Lt Col requires 10-12+ years
of steadily increasing responsibilities. At least that's what's on paper. The problem comes in when more attention is
paid to the check boxes then the performance.
"I was posted as "X" Officer of record for 4 years, make me a Master of the specialty so that I might wear the silver leaf!"
"What did you accomplish during that time?"
"I was posted as "X" Officer of record!"
Quote from: Eclipse on August 21, 2013, 08:25:37 PM
Quote from: doodah5 on August 21, 2013, 08:02:51 PMMy sense is by the time people are squadron CC's, they usually know what the real deal is with who's in charge or whatever. It's not so much the specific grades as the concept of grade aligning with responsibility.
The problem is that this only works in and "up or out" culture. CAP's is circular, so even if you reboot, unless the grades are provisional, in 3-5 years you're back in the same place.
You could move back to manning tables like they used to have, but that still needs an "up or out" system or all this does is slow down the problem, but doesn't fix it.
Quote from: doodah5 on August 21, 2013, 08:02:51 PM
Want to be promoted? Take a responsible position.
Well, that's essentially what we have today. Other then special appointments, getting to Lt Col requires 10-12+ years
of steadily increasing responsibilities. At least that's what's on paper. The problem comes in when more attention is
paid to the check boxes then the performance.
"I was posted as "X" Officer of record for 4 years, make me a Master of the specialty so that I might wear the silver leaf!"
"What did you accomplish during that time?"
"I was posted as "X" Officer of record!"
All good points. I guess I proposed a solution to a problem I haven't defined yet. Plus, I think the OP was referring to an attempt to align what appears to be a competency rating with his actual skills, not to attain a certain CAP grade.
Within CAP, I'm not sure if grade is a retention tool, encouragement for professional development, symbol of authority, acknowledgment of time served, or a hybrid of all the above. It's also unclear to me whether we intend technician/senior/master ratings to reflect competency or time served. If both grade and specialty rating level reflect competency and time served, I'm not sure why we have both.
Could we have a 2d Lt with a master rating, who is highly competent in a technical field such that he could teach the material, yet doesn't have the longevity of service to be considered for higher grade?
Quote from: doodah5 on August 22, 2013, 02:15:38 PM
Could we have a 2d Lt with a master rating, who is highly competent in a technical field such that he could teach the material, yet doesn't have the longevity of service to be considered for higher grade?
Since 1st Lt is 2nd Lt + Technician + 1 year, I don't know that you can get to Master in any field in less than 18 months (SM+6 to 2nd Lt+12 to 1st Lt). Now, you could have plenty of 1st Lt. Master rated folks, as they could just not do SLS or OBC and thus not qualify for Level 2 required for Capt, but 2nd Lt would be tough.
This thread really jumped the shark.
I'm not sure how much of this was addressed to be other others. Our flight is starting out from scratch so I'm trying to accomplish what I can as soon as I can... since I'm an IT Consultant/Administrator by trade it seemed natural as a starting point.
But,I'm also involved in ES and Comm.
Some of those publications and regs made for more difficult reading than my industry certifications exams! :) Just trying to get everything cleared up.
Quote from: etc on August 23, 2013, 07:21:15 AM
This thread really jumped the shark.
I'm not sure how much of this was addressed to be other others. Our flight is starting out from scratch so I'm trying to accomplish what I can as soon as I can... since I'm an IT Consultant/Administrator by trade it seemed natural as a starting point.
But,I'm also involved in ES and Comm.
Some of those publications and regs made for more difficult reading than my industry certifications exams! :) Just trying to get everything cleared up.
Good luck! If you ever have any specific questions about things you can do etc. don't hesitate to ask!
(And FYI, I'm currently Senior in IT-Master in January, Technician in ES-Senior next month, and Technician in Comms), so I'm involved in basically the same areas as you are...