we teach 15 on a Wing level with three instructors - the class size is limited only by the availability of the assessors for the practical part.
I have taught 10 with two instructors on a Sqn level, i can’t see the issue in class size, it all depends how much time you have for assessments as it is one-two-one and is 10-15 minutes each there is no shortcut to be taken.
i am happy teach 12 in a IWT class, and have taught in larger classes but have at least one other SAAI as a second pair of eyes as its impossible to fault check everyone with a class so big. but the kicker is always the WHT part…
Had it been in the ACTO that you have to have a certain instructor to cadet ratio, then I would be kind of fine with it. But it does give off the impression of making up rules, which makes things harder to deliver.
It’s quite easy to find assessors to come over for a Sunday afternoon. Much harder to find people who want to sit in a classroom for a whole weekend and watch you teach something that they are already qualified on. It makes it only a marginally easier sell if you split the teaching!
Love this explanation. It makes zero sense at all.
Given how things are with shooting and flying, we should really be getting maximum support from the SME’s and wing contacts on the achievable items of our syllabus - In this instance the post is held by someone that just enjoys being a roadblock.
Shame really, wouldn’t it make them look good if they were enabling courses and cadets and badges galore?
i was in the odd position that me with 7 years of experience with the material having run in excess of 20 courses was not just considered “less qualified” but not worthy of “authorisation” whereas our CWO (who recently passed the Silver course simply and been ok’d by the WRCO) was approved to run a course even though he’d never done so previously because they’d seen the material in support of a Wing course more recently than me!
Ask the regional commandant on sharepoint if you don’t get anywhere. Highlight the rubbish practice (usually to that person’s boss), and keep going until you get there.
So you do two lots of six, passing the mistake on to as many cadets but that’s fine? Things like this, and the lack of flying, is why I’m starting to consider transferring out of the cyber cadets to an RN Section or the local SCC.
While there are risks (masts, high voltages), what dismays me the most is that the elitism seems to focus on voice procedures and arcane message formats, not on anything safely related. Most of the training is over complex and disconnected from what cadets actually use radio for.
This. And the syllabus is incredibly repetitive. There’s no reason why every cadet on every sqn shouldn’t be able to get their “full VHF”. That way they can use radios to actually help with communications at events instead of just playing battleships.
Too true unfortunately. Not many units use masts for VHF/UHF but it’s the best way of improving range and usefulness of radio kit. High voltages are mainly an HF issue at the ends of the antenna, but then even fewer units probably use HF.
Our radio came down in the wind a while back and hasn’t gone back up yet. We’ve not had anyone qualified for years - the last was under the old scheme.
