Seconded.
when compared to the pre-PTS there are only three new activity badge available…
1 Like
“Too many shooting badges” is a bit of a weak argument when nobody is wearing more than one. Now, if you were to say that the system of shooting badges makes little sense…
5 Likes
There should be a drill badge as well, it’s a sqn activity and more common than radio or comms
1 Like
Iirc it’s being worked on.
Being a geek I’d like some formal acknowledgement of air recce, too, but that’s lower down the pecking order.
1 Like
I live air rec as well but it’s hard to do badges for
It’s 1/3 of the Leading badge, isn’t that enough?
3 Likes
There should be brassard badges for individual sport representation at each level. Getting on in sport is due to its competitive nature more of an accomplishment than the majority of the things badges get dished out for. The main thing about sport is it is open to every single cadet and you don’t need to have staff doing courses etc to deliver it, unlike shooting, comms etc.
1 Like
And drill is part of first class, but plenty of people want their own badge for that, what’s the difference?
(Besides, it isn’t, that’s aircraft knowledge based on a list of purely RAF aircraft, most of which are now retired. I’m talking about recognition, and moving beyond what’s ‘ours’ - hence a progression)
3 Likes
Too many of the badges seem linked to attending a course. If it was a drill badge it would attending various courses would get the various badges. But dill is a very esoteric and unless you sit a paper exam that everyone does where there are proper answers and a definitive pass mark which is the determining factor of pass or fail. It all gets a bit loose if there is a practical element open to interpretation by those marking it.
If it is a course attendance based badge, then you need to run ample courses to ensure that all those wanting to do it can.
Drill would be no less esoteric than leadership.
Arguing that any drill course should be determined only by a written exam is also lunacy.
I could actually understand a written test as part of the Gold (DI) badge. A test on how long a pace should be, how many steps per minute etc. But it should only be a small element.
I don’t want a Drill Badge either, nor do I agree with a. Fieldcraft Badge or an NNAS Badge.
I would keep the badging as it is with the only changes being adding a Blue Road Marching badge and getting read of the parachuting badge.
I would however make wholesale changes to the syllabus starting at Leading a short it is massively outdated.
3 Likes
Agree with this.
But I bet the thing that a lot would take out would be the airmanship part of Leading…
What else would they be linked to?
I agree on leadership. I was at a Wing day and managed to avoid a job, so I wandered over to the leadership task areas, where they had 3 tasks which groups did. I observed several people doing assessments and debriefs and not one of them or squadron was marked in the same way by different people, as they all interpreted things slightly differently. Some were more harsh and some not so, which when I spoke to the cadets on the next parade, I made an observation along those lines.
The problem is if you want it to mean the same year on year, then all in our case cadets should be marked by the same people wherever they are, or, you have a set test with written answers so there can be no argument that they have a degree of knowledge and practical assessments aren’t included, unless there is moderation by “the experts”. I recall that our youngest daughter’s GCSE Art work could have been required for moderation, had the examining body wished, to ensure consistency in marking.
This is especially if a badge is at the end of it, people will, potentially, expect a degree of “knowledge”, which is why I am so disillusioned by the “Staff Cadet” process and the general exam system we have now.
It shouldn’t just be about attending a course if it is to have any real meaning in terms of accomplishment, other than something that forms part of a collection of badges on a brassard. You may run a course and someone nearby in another wing run the same course. Same materials etc etc, cadets all get the same badge, but both courses have nuanced delivery, so while they have the same badge, they need not be in the same place in terms of knowledge and application of that knowledge.
How is that any different to any form of education in the world ever?
1 Like
Right, and your suggestion for a badge criterion that is somehow more consistent than that is what exactly?
In the education world you sit a defining exam in the subject, that is the same countrywide or coursework will be requested and moderated by the examining authority to ensure consistency in the ways teachers mark. Our new badge system, there is no defining process that means that cadets in all parts of the country are assessed / judged equally in the same way for the same badge. So we have a set test/exam which requires the subject matter to be covered to the same level and tested with a definitive exam that is the same for all. Practical tests can be done, but form no part of the final assessment.