CAP Basic Instructor Course

[SARDOC]

Under CAP University, NHQ recently just rolled out a "Basic Instructor Course".   Does anybody know what the purpose of this course is other than just Grins and giggles.   Is this class going to be a required prerequisite for anything else...what's the long term thinking on this?   Thanks

[SarDragon]

IMHO, this is a long awaited effort. I think that if it is properly executed and implemented, it can dramatically improve CAP training. But that's a big if. I have been pushing for something like this since I resumed participation 11 years ago, and have provided materials up the chain that could be readily adapted, instead of having to totally reinvent the wheel.

Well, I looked at it, and I'm not impressed. The content is pretty good, but this is not something that can be adequately taught by just a 20 page online presentation. How to be an instructor is NOT something that can be learned without having been been taught in a classroom environment.

The Navy and AF take an entire month to prepare their instructors for the job. USNR Aviation has a two day abbreviated course that puts out the very basic information needed, but it is still taught in a classroom. Like SLS and CLC, there needs to be instructor-student, and student-student interaction to reinforce the book learning.

I worked in the business both on AD and after, so I have more than just a passing knowledge of the subject.

Final grade: C-

Disappointing.

[RiverAux]

I thought the very short lived ES Train-the-Trainer course was pretty good -- for what you could do in a single weekend.  Despite the title, it was basically about how to prepare for and give training classes.  I was disappointed that it just went away entirely when we went to the SET system (which is worthless). 

[RADIOMAN015]

Well, I looked at it, and I'm not impressed. The content is pretty good, but this is not something that can be adequately taught by just a 20 page online presentation. How to be an instructor is NOT something that can be learned without having been been taught in a classroom environment.

Unfortunately in CAP it may not always be the best person capable of instructing BUT the one who readily volunteered his/her time to do the instruction.   Now if you come out with ANOTHER policy that requires every instructor to take an instructors course in residence, than you may create more a problem (member time constraints) and likely less instructors.
RM 
it may be an issue with time availability

[Robert Hartigan]

I completed the Civil Air Patrol Instructor Program that was a beta test through Air University back in May 2008. It was three stages like technician, senior and master. It was not a easy. It was great information.

I am a little disappointed with the current course offering only because it is too simplified. The difference between the Pedagogical approach and the Andragogical approach is night and day and I don't think the current offering is sufficient to achieve a measurable level of success for instructor and/or student based on those differences. Though, it is a step in the right direction.

[MSgt Van]

I wonder if my Air Force Technical Training Instructor Course would count.

[PHall]

I wonder if my Air Force Technical Training Instructor Course would count.

Or my Central Flight Instruction Course (KC-135 Instructor) and Line Instruction Course (C-141 Instructor)?
Or any of the many Military Instructor courses.

[arajca]

I emailed the course proponent. The idea is to provide SOME instructional information to members, not to create well trained instructors. Given that many, if not most, of the members instructing CAP courses have no instructional training, this is better than nothing.

[SarDragon]

We don't need any more half-assed instructors than we already have. There are dozens of Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) out there that are pretty clueless about how to share their expertise with others. The TTT course I took was a laugh. The content was OK, but in my experience, Train The Trainer is a higher level course to produce qualified instructors. That course was not geared for that result.

Putting out a handful of knowledge in 20 pages, and giving an online open book test is NOT the way to produce competent instructors. The nature of the endeavor demands classroom instruction, and a short period of practical work.

[SARDOC]

20 pages...what 20 pages?   I just took and passed the test    I have years of experience as a Fire and EMS Instructor and the material itself isn't bad...but It's not like the classes I've ever had to take to teach.  The process should be something along the lines of any potential instructor should complete a Basic Instructor Class then take a Train-The-Trainer for the specific discipline being taught.

[SarDragon]

Well, I took the test absolutely cold, and just missed the cut with a 78. It's been 7 years since I've had any exposure to the material, and there were just enough minor differences between USN and USAF terminology to trip me up. I fully expect that a quick review of those 20 pages would enable me to ace it.

[jks19714]

I suppose that it is better than what most university instructors receive.  All I ever got was a course description (one paragraph) and forty students.   

Sink or swim baby!  Educational techniques via successive approximation...

[SarDragon]

I suppose that it is better than what most university instructors receive.  All I ever got was a course description (one paragraph) and forty students.   

Sink or swim baby!  Educational techniques via successive approximation...

You did this without having taken any Education courses, ever?

[Spaceman3750]

I suppose that it is better than what most university instructors receive.  All I ever got was a course description (one paragraph) and forty students.   

Sink or swim baby!  Educational techniques via successive approximation...

You did this without having taken any Education courses, ever?

A lot of college/university instructors/professors (especially adjuncts) haven't received instructional training. They typically have a Master's degree in whatever they're teaching and someone to email when they get stuck...

[SARDOC]

I suppose that it is better than what most university instructors receive.  All I ever got was a course description (one paragraph) and forty students.   

Sink or swim baby!  Educational techniques via successive approximation...

You did this without having taken any Education courses, ever?

Frequently Yes...No Education training or experience teaching necessary, it helps but not necessary.  They usually just ask that you have at least a Bachelors or Masters in the subject being taught.

[manfredvonrichthofen]

I am glad to see that they are trying to provide a more solid set for trainers, however I agree with most and this is something that should be taught in a classroom. One reason that I think it should be performed in a classroom is that there should be two days for the course and then two days to allow each student to get in front of the class and actually give at least 15 minutes of instruction to the class so that the instructor can determine if the course sunk in well and the trainer is satisfied with the student's ability.

Disclaimer, I have not yet seen the course, I am about to take it now... regardless though, I think this kind of instruction should be in a classroom setting.

[SarDragon]

The USNR course I spoke of earlier is two days - all day Saturday and Sunday morning are classroom lecture, Sunday afternoon is the practical part. It primarily covers the teaching technique section of the longer course, with only a brief mention of lesson development. The idea is to get qualified SMEs 'on the stump' who can present previously prepared lessons. Our ROA courses are prime examples of this technique. SLS and CLC also fit the mold.

[sarmed1]

I equate this to more like the American Heart CPR instructor course.  It is the basic entry level of instructor courses....just enough to point you in the right direction so to speak.  You still need to be under the control of an experienced instructor/coordinator....... you may teach one portion of the course but the overall picture is still someone elses show.

mk

[JC004]

I thought the very short lived ES Train-the-Trainer course was pretty good -- for what you could do in a single weekend.  Despite the title, it was basically about how to prepare for and give training classes.  I was disappointed that it just went away entirely when we went to the SET system (which is worthless).

You suck.  Why did you have to mention TTT?  I took CTTT at the National Board meeting, preceded by a second TTT (prerequisite to take that one) for a total of I believe 16 hours of training.  The next day, they dissolved TTT and implemented SET.

I think that TTT was generally good.  The instructor course has long been in waiting.  We had one in the short-lived PAWG E-Learning site that was based on the same materials but we got it out much sooner.   Then wing lit it on fire, much like the NB did to TTT/CTTT.  Apparently only the materials produced by NHQ are acceptable in the wing and only in the format in which they come - put it in an online course and they light YOU on fire.  Both NHQ and wing have done a great job of implementing e-learning at the speed at which we did on a grassroots level, starting here on CAPTalk.  Oh, wait...

I continue to point out the power of grassroots developments in CAP and hope that some of those in high places will recognize them and make the conditions conducive to seizing on this extraordinary potential.