The old version of ACC had a thread regarding the Regional Training Officers meeting minutes, that suggested there would be a change to 1st class training. There would be a move to standardise it, with a “workbook” provided.
Drafts of said work book sections have started to appear on Sharepoint under the document library - Activities > Training > Cadet Log Book - DRAFT
Would be interested in opinions. I welcome the idea of a work book and it is something I’m looking to develop, but I am none too sure about getting recruits to fill out workbooks on say IET, when practical assessment if done correctly, would be far more enjoyable for all concerned.
I thought we were meant to move away from a “school” environment, hence all the touchy-feely COU bull.
Doesn’t a workbook remind you of school?
Frankly I get the impression they tinker for the sake of tinkering to make it look like that they are doing something and no other reason. What I’m waiting for is for the RTO to ASK what we at squadrons think, as opposed to dumping it on sharepoint in vague hope no one picks it up and criticises it and then as no one has said anything they roll it out.
Personally I think we should have an exam assessment just like all the others, with some non assessed practical elements, that I’m sure the majority of squadrons do.
Making it ‘less like school’ should concentrate on the method of learning, not a 10 minute exam at the end.[/quote]
You can have whatever method of learning you like, given the numbers of ways people learn it’s nigh on impossible in our setting to please everyone and professional teachers I know say the same in school. Ultimately you know where you are with an exam, as it’s cut and dried as opposed to all this cuddly “well sort of approach” of the COU. In an exam get x right and pass, don’t and you fail and you should retake the whole thing.
I don’t know about today, but could you imagine learning to drive and all that happens is the instructor signs you off after x lessons, with no test or if you fail the test, just turning up to do an emergency stop or 3 point turn. My point is anyone can do well in lessons or coursework or a cosy Q&A session, but when examined in a rigorous way, then you have to display knowledge and understanding.
Or alternatively, just see what you can get down on paper from what you can remember from the training.
1st Class Cadet Classification should be about equipping cadets with the skills they need to be competent cadets, not about ensuring they know everything about the history of the ATC, RAF and testing practical skills with a non-practical exam. (ie, does the cadet salute an Officer - YES, well done. Do they tick an answer paper then ignore the real thing)
My first class syllabus, while not just being Q&A based has a workbook which the cadets complete during their training. They fill in the sections and the sections reflect both the criteria for passing 1st Class, while also creating a good (in my opinion) aide memoir for their future cadet careers.
Much better they have the ability to use practical skills than be able to get 100% on a written test and not be able to put up a tent.
These changes have been made necessary by EdExcel. Currently, we don’t have an accurate system to gauge merit and distinction level passes at first class. It’s done on what the individual instructor thinks is the standard. (Nothing wrong with that per se, it’s just not quite good enough for an exam board.) Considering that first class is the first step on the way to the Aviation Studies BTEC, we need to standardise the training.
Secondly, the workbooks are only in draft form. A few squadrons in the region have been asked to trial the workbooks before the full release some time next year.
[quote=“Baldrick” post=574]These changes have been made necessary by EdExcel. Currently, we don’t have an accurate system to gauge merit and distinction level passes at first class. It’s done on what the individual instructor thinks is the standard. (Nothing wrong with that per se, it’s just not quite good enough for an exam board.) Considering that first class is the first step on the way to the Aviation Studies BTEC, we need to standardise the training.
Secondly, the workbooks are only in draft form. A few squadrons in the region have been asked to trial the workbooks before the full release some time next year.[/quote]
We don’t have a system of any worth at any level, anymore, IMO. I know that it’s not deemed as modern, but an exam where you display knowledge while having done the practical and displyed the ability in a ‘classroom’ environment that assists the exam knowlege. When I did O and A level Chemistry and Physics, you did the practicals in class and wrote them up with calculatons, graphs/plots (if appropriate) and conclusions as part of the subject and used this and theoretical knowledge in an exam. I make no apologies for my views that the current exam process don’t actually examine anything.
If you want an accrate system to gauge pass, merit and distinction, then an exam does this without any of the wooliness associated with a COU or visual check system. A pass is say 60%, merit 80% and distinction 95%. Given the sort of people the vast majority of us are, ie people with a desire to pass on knowledge, we need set information to pass on and then the cadets formally examined on it, in a properly invigilated exam. The only mark that counts is the first attempt, ie fail on the first attempt and you only get a pass, regardless. This latter part does require a robust exam system and if it’s online this must be upto the task. Currently Ultilearn is not and HQAC need to ensure this is the case, and either put money into it or have a support contract that puts the failure at the door of the supplier and they pick up the cost.