In the regular armed forces there is a minimum educational standard before joining, normally GCSE for NCOs, A levels for officers, degree for specialist officers.
In cadet Forces world there are no minimum educational requirements when going into uniform.
This is for historical & cultural reasons & when the cadet forces was less technical there wasn’t much of a need.
But as the cadet forces gets more technical it is becoming more nuanced & needing a greater variety of skills,
As such should there be a minimum educational standard when going into uniform or commissioning?
Now the biggest argument against this is that we are struggling to recruit volunteers as it is so last thing you want to do is but another hurdle or blocker in particular if it doesn’t add to anything.
The built in elitism that is necessary in any hierarchical organisation tends to work on the higher the rank the more knowledgeable/ experienced the individual is.
Yet (& I’m generalising the ranks) we have Sgts with PhDs whilst at the other end you have Wg cdrs with only a single O-Level.
& as a final point, if an education standard is required, should the organisation offer something like the Level 4 in youth management.
Should the organisation be looking at raising the educational standards of its volunteers even if it does t have as a minimum requirement for roles.
I can see merits to the approach at the younger end of the CFAV spectrum, but overall I’d say it’s entirely unnecessary.
Of more importance is the experience that a person brings, rather than shiny pieces of paper. Perhaps, if recruitment ever becomes something that isn’t problematic, experience requirements for SME positions at Wing and higher could be implemented. My understanding is that these are currently local decisions, but a minimum standardised level of experience across RAFAC could help to ensure suitable personnel make it to the top. Rather than post-turtling their way up.
With those in the military who didn’t have it as it wasn’t a precursor to have it (but became afterwards, or for those doing apprenticeships) they do Key Skills Level 3. Perhaps if you don’t have some of those core qualifications (which could have been for a variety of valid reasons) you have to do them. Not only would we then be providing better instructors at cadets but also something they can use outside of cadets. But it would cost and money isn’t something we have at the moment.
It’s a bit like I do believe that everyone should do the BTEC Level 3 Training and Education if they haven’t already got something similiar. Completely changed how I looked at things and how I did not just academic teaching but also how I was in general. I think it’s still got the thoughts around it that it’s only available if you want to teach first aid.
But they do (did) with the linkage with cadet Vocational College, giving everyone going through CIC the opportunity of a NVQ, but if staff don’t want to take that up, that’s up to them.
I’ve managed a NVQ Level 4 and 6 through the CVO route.
No there’s still a fair number available - I just don’t think it’s well advertised so staff don’t know about it.
we’ve got the BtEC Lvl 3 Training and Education, ILM Level 3, and 4 levels of the Professional Recognition Award.
on the pages for those who can’t afford the prices (although a lot cheaper than doing it outside cadets) they give a link for a fund that you can apply for.
Air Training Corps - clue is in the name. We should be offering quals (like those listed above) instead of introducing blockers. HM forces is probably the number 1 engine of social progression in the country, we should be part of that
I agree we should also have access (although controlled access) to what ever AT/Educational/Career qualifications that are avaliable in the parent service. Its a source of personal development that will directly improve the output of the org.
We used to offer L4 in Leadership and Management for the Officers Initial Course, but that has since been pulled by CV College (the new worse name for CVQO)…
Damn shame as I’d have liked to pick one up, I imagine they made quite a difference in the past for young officers like me.
hey ho - I still have my ILM Level 2 Award for Young Leaders
“The joint venture will see cadets and volunteers invited to taster days on campus, plus bursaries to support university study, funded by The Friends of the Staffordshire and West Midlands (North Sector) Army Cadet Force Trust.”
i don’t disagree with you and know of similar examples - a local Squadron was run by a self-employed tradesman as Flt Lt OC, as although was legitimate (ie has all the necessary quals for the job) but was “behind” the rest of the (uniformed) staff team in terms of educational qualifications, be that simply in the number of quals, the result of those quals or simply outstripped by others with Degrees or PhD.
however not all PhDs are great CFAVs and sometimes those who have a “degree from the university of life” are the best CFAVS.
I therefore struggle to suggest what the “minimal” educational needs should be as it doesn’t = great CFAV. providing someone can read, write, is competent infront of a PC running Microsoft systems (sharepoint and Outlook email) the rest is “on the job training” in my opinion, either through experience or via courses made available by the organisation
leadership, organizing and planning skills, welfare understanding, child/youth awareness, “how to teach”/teacher training are all “skills” that a good CFAV will have but are not offered as a qualification at school and maybe only just touched upon on the right courses at college.
There is far too much focus on people with degrees theses days. The University of Life is far more important. For a generally good CFAV the biggest qualifications are life and common sense. Those don’t come from study and adding fancy post numerals. It’s debatable the ‘degree’ of life and common sense that CFAVs have/need but there are some brains amongst us that I wouldn’t trust to walk my dog, but as they have DBS and passed the interview we let them loose with kids!?
The two aren’t mutually exclusive, you can have both. We also need a mix of people to deliver what we do. If all CFAVs could be fit into one box we’d certainly be worse off for it.
I’ve also met people without degrees who I could say the same about
Level 7 and 8 STEM educational quals are beneficial in technical SME roles. I agree that people who work in customer-facing and caring roles at work may well make better CFAVs in terms of dealing with crying cadets and furious parents.
Hahaha. Nope. Thanks. I have enough of this in my day job, I come to cadets to escape the day job and utilise a different set of skills!!!
Whilst I’m not going to ignore a furious parent or crying cadet, I absolutely wouldn’t go out of my way to become an SME in that role! Likewise, I’ve not volunteered for Safeguarding roles, Mental Health team or other areas I could be qualified to do - purely as I use (and need) RAFAC as a personal outlet and escape.
Taking on similar roles within the organisation - especially with questionable levels of support and supervision within RAFAC - is a shortcut to professional burnout.
Likewise, I work in IT and there’s no way I’m going anywhere near the VSDT. In my spare time I prefer doing things completely different to what I do at work.
I do feel a little pang of guilt when I see how far behind we are with our technology but it shouldn’t be up to volunteers to sort out.
I don’t believe that a piece of paper necessarily demonstrates what is required of any CFAV. But I do believe that investment in our CFAVs is needed to retain those that can give time to the organisation.
Build a strong foundation of skilled and engaged staff and you’ll see that cascade through the organisation. Volunteer doesn’t mean amateur and we need a cultural change to facilitate that.
This doesn’t cost money, it just needs focus and a change of priorities. Focus on the basics fir a while and rebuild from there.
