Yes, that’s what I do and I know from this forum that a lot of work has gone into revamping some subjects to make them better and more engaging. That’s all good stuff.
on the subject of Senior/MAC subjects, if squadrons are struggling to deliver them, then why not look to be delivering it at Sector Level as parade night or weekend courses?
1 Like
Just because it’s practical, doesn’t mean that it’s not fundamentally technical.
I agree that we need more of the academic subjects, covering a much wider range - things like leadership theory or other parts of the RAF, eg Regiment, RAF Police and service law, etc.
i don’t disagree.
And the lesson , be it a traditional lecture mode or practical involved lesson cannot be achieved without technical understanding as the instructor.
but even when that technical ability is held, some still fail to make it meaningful and engaging, creating an uninterested class
Leadership theory is covered within the leadership syllabus, though. I’m all for reform, but not duplication.
1 Like
I’d be happy with a review and change to the classification system.
Once we went to Ultilearn open book exams, it lost all credibility as an ‘examined’ syllabus to me. So, I would propose that all ‘interest’ subjects, ie largely those at Senior and Master level, are no longer examined. Instead, ensure all lectures are attended, and there is a check of understanding, similar to the present First Class system. Frankly, I think it crazy we expect the Cadets to ‘learn’ some of that content, only for there to be an open book exam anyway, that they could all pass with no lectures if they have a bit of sense using the old pdf or have access to the PowerPoints alongside Ultilearn.
I would however have them examined on important stuff, for example basic navigation, initial expedition training, make sure they do know, and have taken a keen interest to learn the stuff that really matters, and could keep them out of trouble and danger when on an exercise.
Otherwise, then push forward with the PTS, and focus on giving the Cadets more training that develops the skills they need for life, that isn’t taught by school, or through an Ultilearn exam. My big bug bear is the way there has been a drive to put more and more academia into Cadets, I’m totally against it, teenagers nowadays are being loaded with more and more of this at school, is it any wonder we might struggle to recruit and retain when we ram more academia down their throats? There needs to more practical, interesting and real training to help them develop, not exercise the grey matter.
1 Like
Barely. And by having a theory subject, you could make it a pre-requisite for the higher-level practical stuff.
But trained and examined by whom? If we are saying they need skills to do this, which seems sensible why not use NNAS? (As per my navigation badge plan above?)
Have to admit I don’t know a huge amount about NNAS, but would want to ensure that core skills like these are not glossed over that’s all or forgotten about if classification system was changed.
A question.
In all of this discussion where are the things to / that make being a member of staff in the ATC an attractive and appealing thing to do?
About the only thing suggested so far is a move to parading one night a week. Although this gets mixed reactions as the argument comes up “how do we fit it all in?”, although I think HQAC needs to tone down expectations.
Before the cadet side gets “fixed” the adult side needs a lot more work to make it appealing and appealing to all, the “I just want to help”, the “I want to wear a uniform” and the “I want to do all the courses”.
3 Likes
Although one of my ex cadets (who was a scout leader) pointed out that the silver syllabus covered their basic lessons
You can remember as much leadership theory as you like, if you don’t put that into practice then it’s pointless. Just as you can do as many command tasks as you like, but unless you apply it to real life then it’s a waste of time.
1 Like
We use end of parade and other squadron 'tidy ups" as real life scenarios.
it’s not presented as a task a la command tasks, but we watch to see how it’s done. An NCO or cadet is appointed to do it. When we do anything such tidying / clearing the hut surrounds, tent checking and pitching/breaking camp practice we use these likewise.
We use this to give us an idea if what they’ve done has stuck we don’t look at it for box ticking purposes but the general process and because it’s what we do and no contrived stories, the cadets don’t even know they are doing it.
Doing them as non uniform; clearing of the surrounds, tent checking and pitching practice and because of this, the cadets don’t realise we are doing anything “formal”.
We’ve also used some STEM activities where there are multiple strands (which can worked) to see how these are divvied up and come together. Again not presented in the traditional manner.