More CCF expansion

Adult Staff Execs
21

If the CF were promoted as a matter of course and cadet achievement fully recognised in schools, then there would be no need for this. This has been a failing IMO of years of AOC/Commandant AC not attending headmaster/mistress conferences to say this is who we are, this is what we do/offer and these are the things your pupils can do and achieve. We can do it locally, but because each school is its own little world, we have to repeat ourselves.

I make a special point of emailing headmaster/mistresses of schools, with a this what one of your pupils has done and only once, has there ever been the slightest recognition. This is on top of bits in the local press.

I have had cadets as LLC and representing Region and Corps at sport which have been ignored by the schools, whereas kids doing a speech day or district sports and so on, get all the plaudits. Parents have just taken their kids out to go Region and Corps events. The LLC I had was not recognised by the head or her college, until she introduced him to the LL at a function and said he was the head of the college she attended, despite the fact he had given her dispensation to do things in school time but only if she kept up with her ‘schoolwork’. The LL then went on to eulogise about what a credit she is etc, etc. She told me she thought it was amusing, that after this (some 6 months into her stint) the head made a point of speaking to her, ironically just before she left. Her employer after college thought it was brilliant her being a LLC and gave her all the time she needed fully paid to attend functions and no need to make it up the time or anything.

The only way that CCF is the better model is because schools can just carry on as little worlds and not have to do anything or recognise the achievements of their pupils other than in that microcosm.

22

All good points, well made, however - when all is said and done - the community CF model doesn’t meet the needs of all potential cadets; and in particular, arguably those who might benefit most (i.e. the more recalcitrant, less well-motivated, more challenging behaved students - and predominantly male).

These students are much less likely to seek out a community CF unit (either due to a lack of knowledge, wherewithal, or motivation); and thus having a CCF in school, or easily accessible immediately after school, increases the chances they will attend and engage. Once DfE’s target audience have gone home, knocked about with their mates for a couple of hours, or hit the Xbox; they are unlikely to then pull on a uniform and make their own way to a community unit.

CEP is all about engagement. Once cadets are engaged their is a chance that under-achieving students will be motivated by higher achievers, will become more self-disciplined in an environment with a military ethos; and will therefore carry those behaviours into the classroom, and in turn raise participation and achievement in-school.

CEP cannot be seen simply through the prism of the community CF perspective; there is a bigger picture at work - it isn’t simply about increasing cadet numbers or increasing CF infrastructure/resources - it’s about outreach; extending the “cadet experience” and, crucially, the benefits thereof to an audience which until recently may not have had access to it.

I believe - as previously stated - that’s there’s room for both in the market, and that the market will do its work. The more self-motivated will be attracted to the “fuller” and more immersive experience offered by a busy and well-run community CF unit; less well-motivated cadets, happy with the - likely - more restricted (due to time, staffing, expertise, etc.) and more military orientated experience on the school CCF.

However, I foresee another effect, and here i will be controversial. “Coasting” community CF units will need to up there game, if they are based near to newly formed CEP CCFs; otherwise they will struggle to recruit, because they will not be offering a different product. In my local area, community CF units may face the prospect of no less than 3 CEP CCFs opening their doors over the next 12-18 months. Some of those community units will need to significantly better the experience they offer if they are to survive. Some community CFs need to recognise - and recognise quickly - that they are operating in a new marketplace, and; as always the law of supply and demand will determine which units survive and thrive.

Personally, I don’t see this as a bad thing. There are far too many poorly run and coasting community units - of all services - out there, who exist as though it is their God-given right; complaining that CEP is a threat to their existence. In those cases, it will be. My belief is that well-run and active community units have little to fear from CEP.

I can think of several Sqn’s in my Wing that - by rights - ought to be closed as a waste of resources. In some cases these are on or very near major local schools, where demand could - arguably - be much better supplied by an in-school CCF.

A controversial opinion I’m sure, but - if I were looking at the MOD and looking at making savings within the CF - I would be asking hard questions about the viability of a great many community CF units that are under-establishment (how many Sqn’s do we have - with Sqn status - that have less than 30 enrolled cadets?) and located near to one of the new CEP CCFs. I suspect that one would have a hard time justifying lobbying for the closure of an active Sqn with 40, 50, 60+ cadets; but one would have to question the viability/efficiency of a unit of under 30 enrolled cadets …might that investment be better placed elsewhere?

Food for thought.

Cheers
BTI

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

1 Like
23

At the risk of being more controversial perhaps we should be asking the question why did we have community based units at all ? My guess is that it is all to do with school leaving ages. Back in 1860 leaders would come from the public schools (Jnr Division Officer Training Corps) with the other ranks drawn from the general population. Wind forward to pre WW2 with the officers for all 3 services mainly coming from the public schools but with a school leaving age of 14 a need to outreach and engage with teenagers already in full time work-hence the community based ATC. Post WW2 and basking in success no need to change (school leaving age up to 15 in 1947 and not to 16 until 1972) school children too young to exercise the snr cadet responsibilities - up to age 20? in the ATC.
Now we have over 72% of 16-18 year olds in full time education or training. In England you must now. stay in some form of education or training until your 18th birthday if you were born on or after 1 September 1997.The current PM seems to believe that the expansion of CCFs in state schools will solve a number of problems. I don’t believe it is that simple but the following will look good in a well presented policy paper: more discipline, use of existing buildings but no additional maintenance costs, link to parent services retained but off loading of child protection and staff discipline issues, continued use of activity centres and camps VGSs and AEFs but no other community based infrastructure, probable savings in volunteer costs and certainly in full time support staff… As good - probably not, workable - certainly.
Unless community based units can develop a robust USP (and some political momentum) the shape of the cadet world may be vastly different in the not too distant future.

24

^ what he said!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

25

[quote=“bti” post=25641]Makes perfect sense if we do our research!

CEP is not primarily an MOD initiative, the lead Dept is DfE; and the wider context is the Military Ethos programme in schools, to which CEP contributes.

DfE see CCF as a means to improve self-discipline in schools, and thus improve attendance and achievement.

Cheers
BTI

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk[/quote]Whilst many schools that have CCFs have little or no serious disciplinary problems it is a gret leap of logic to presume it is the presence of the CCF that is the catalyst here. Maybe the lack of serious disciplinary problems is attributable to the regime imposed by the head teachers or the aspirations of the parents for their progeny academically. And that is something that cuts across class and race barriers too. Exceptions abound, but is it not the case that the pupils who seem to lack discipline in schools are some boys of Afro-Caribbean parentage, who have shocking exclusion rates and white working classes, whose sense of entitlement blinds them to the fact they are being overtaken and replaced by a generation of a different ethnic background from themselves by working harder and achieving more academically.

All very controversial, and of course some stereotyping there but ask any teacher who is honest and not blinkered by PC dogma to the point of being blind to the stark staring truth and they will likely agree. There is a problem in British schools and a few badly turned out long haired herberts with shocking weapon handling skills* are not going to make much, if any difference to the real problem.

I have worked in deprived Inner city detachments, where camp money was paid a pound a week because the usually single mum was on benefits or a part-time/low wage and a consent form would have 3 different surnames on it as divorce and breakups were common for people whose lives are so grim and stressful.

But now am in a rich white leafy commuter town. Most of the cadets get dropped off and picked by one or both smiling parents in a nice big German car and are dripping with money and gucci kit to go to camp

Academically a significant number of the deprived inner city kids could run rings around the kids in my detachment leafy suburban det, full of princes and princesses who are often lazy and aloof. You should see them sweep up or clean a tea cup. It’s clear they must have a maid at home to do that for them, or mum, because she doesn’t have to go out and scrub floors to make ends meet like their inner city peers

*and that is blatant stereotyping for which I make no apologies as I am contractually obliged to peddle this line as a member of the ACF :wink:

26

…And I see that the CEP is a DfE initiative…

How long before that gets kicked into the long grass and forgotten about in the next bout of wholesale political meddling in our children’s education courtesy of the Tory party?*

*I could say Labour, but we now live in a one-party state thanks to Milliband’s dynamic leadership of his party, and that’s likely to continue for the next 15 years until the Tories get mired in the usual sleaze and thrown out by the electorate

27

At risk of losing my anonymity here I could tell you of the many factors completely outside of my control as to why I command one of these failing units (in numbers terms, but not achievements) and I wonder how many apply to the ones you are aware of too. However, no-one is blaming me and an action plan is in place to address the 3 key issues that currently limit growth.

I will PM you,and you can slip these points in at your discretion

28

Staffing of new CCF units will be an issue, unless they come up with a way of making teachers do it and then training said teachers. I find the comment, ‘more “military” cadet experience’ interesting. What is meant by this? Is it the Army model as my mates who joined the Army described as, lots of shouting and being told how, when and where to do things, compared to the RAF which seems a lot more business like and grown up in comparison, based on comments of those have been seconded to RAF units have made.

How is ‘more “military” cadet experience’ achieved? Unless all these CCF units are going to be staffed not by teachers but by Army or ex-Army bods, paid by whom, there is not going to be a ’more “military” cadet experience’ than any community CF unit. Which then gets into the nitty gritty of salary. One of my old school mates has worked in comprehensive schools for years initially as teaching support and now pastoral and he has never complained of being over-paid. I’ve looked at pastoral jobs in school and given I can’t reconcile a drop of between £19K and £12K in salary, even with all the extra holiday, I won’t be doing it. The salaries look good and have the words ‘pro rata’ after them, which effectively seems to mean 60-75% of the FT salary for a 37 hour/wk term time plus a week. Given the instructors will be doing no more than 5-6 hours a week, so something akin to ‘dinner ladies’ in the playground, would it be worth it? Even if they do 2 schools, which then gets into conflicts of interest and potentially confidentiality. As a result it would be very, very cheap. If they are paid externally schools might think good, but then where is there loyalty and priority? My mate has said he found out that he is partly paid from pupil premium because of the group of kids he invariably works with, which is the same pot as I understand state CCF unit’s wiill/are funded from. I suppose the schools could employ someone in a pastoral role who then does the CCF thing, but this would dilute their authority, given as my mate says they have to be professional friends to some of these kids, which might not gel with the shouty bloke/bird persona. If the school was to employ them in this way, the CCF work would be effectively unpaid, given my mate hardly gets a lunch break and attends meetings with and about pupils after school, all part of his days work. One of the major issues with after school clubs as I understand is teachers not doing them as they have a lot of ‘admin’ around what they are employed to do ie teach and many just won’t do the after school clubs, as it’s not part of their primary T&C.

What happens in school holidays, especially summer? In the private sector the “Tarquins and Tabithas” go home to mater and pater and probably have little or no expectation of the CCF (if they’re in it) offering anything, but in the state sector there will be an expectation I imagine of regular ‘meetings’ and activities, just like community CF units. If the state CCF is supposedly going to attract the lower achievers and school shy, can you really see then trotting up to the school during the holidays? How is their interest maintained? It’s bad enough for us, as the summer holidays are a bit of an unknown quantity with family holidays and general days out and we still open for 2 nights and do things at the weekends. I have had several cadets, from families where there has been divorces etc, over the years spend a month of the 6 weeks away with a combination of parents. The target group in state schools will potentially have a higher proportion of these kids.

I don’t know if this is nationally the same, but the 3 local schools have a lot of kids bus in from outside the traditional catchment, which would require if, these kids joined the CCF, would need additional buses and these aren’t cheap. Locally these cost between £400 and £600 pa for parents. Kids bussing in like this would have an effect. There is also a large number who are ‘parent taxi’ in from outside the area. It’s one of the factors that affects us, which I hadn’t considered until a couple of years ago. I thought I was ‘appealing’ to c.600 local kids when it wasn’t.

The minimum number model for squadrons (not sure how ACF dets work) harks back IMO to a bygone age. The squadron I’m on has in 25 years has had an average of 26 enrolled. For whatever reason between 2004 and 2008 we had a group of 9 join along with the normal 8/9 and all being mates stayed and when they hit 17/18 left almost as a body. We haven’t changed what we do in terms of the main things in the Corps except fitting in First Aid, to appease SJA. Yet the numbers remain about the same; some join, some leave, sometimes you get more join than leave and vice versa. I struggle to see how we could do more to attract more without 4 or 5 more staff, but then keeping them ‘employed’ to ensure their interest is maintained becomes problematic and something given I work for a living isn’t something I or anyone else needs.

29

[quote=“glass half empty 2” post=25743]
The minimum number model for squadrons (not sure how ACF dets work) harks back IMO to a bygone age.[/quote]

Some people quote 15, however the official number is I think actually 10, and it has to be below this for some time. Closing a detachment is very much a last resort and I have never actually seen it happen (even when I think it should in some cases!).

30

[quote]bucketofinstantsunshine wrote:

…And I see that the CEP is a DfE initiative…

How long before that gets kicked into the long grass and forgotten about in the next bout of wholesale political meddling in our children’s education courtesy of the Tory party?*

*I could say Labour, but we now live in a one-party state thanks to Milliband’s dynamic leadership of his party, and that’s likely to continue for the next 15 years until the Tories get mired in the usual sleaze and thrown out by the electorate[/quote]

Actually, to be fair, CEP has cross-party support …and the trial expansion of CCF into state schools began under Labour in 2007, followed up (after its success) by the Coalition’s CEP in 2012. The target now, for “CEP2”, is for 500 CCFs by 2020. The target of CEP1 to establish 100 new CCFs by Sep 15 has been smashed - and the level of interest probably means that CEP2’s target could be 75%+ of the way there already.

[quote]GHE2 wrote:

Staffing of new CCF units will be an issue, unless they come up with a way of making teachers do it and then training said teachers. I find the comment, ‘more “military” cadet experience’ interesting. What is meant by this? How is ‘more “military” cadet experience’ achieved? Unless all these CCF units are going to be staffed not by teachers but by Army or ex-Army bods…[/quote]

The majority of new CEP CCFs will be Army, supported by the local Army Bde CTT (and in some cases Bde Outreach Teams); and in all cases, affiliated to a Regiment - some of whom may offer considerable support in the form of their individual Regt Support Teams. If you read JSP313, the CCF staffing arrangement is somewhat different to the community CFs, and the MOD pays a daily rate for a School Staff Instructor (SSI) for up to 38 days per year (one day per week, plus a couple of extra days). Additionally, under CEP, there is now greater flexibility in staffing a CCF, and CIs can be appointed in addition to Officers and SSIs (JSP313 says you can have more than one SSI, but only one gets paid - per day - by the MOD) …therefore if the school wishes to employ staff to run their CCF specifically, they can, but their role is likely to be combined with other school duties.

Given the above, and given that most CCFs will only parade for 1.5hrs (the minimum requirement) to 2hrs per week, normal school-time training is likely to concentrate on the sSvc syllabus, supplemented by annual and occasional weekend camps; rather than the normal community unit mix of sSvc syllabus, sports, DofE, etc. For example, I’d wager that most schools that will raise a CCF will already run DofE, and will want their students to go through the school, rather than the CCF …so a CEP CCF is likely to (a) concentrate on the more military-orientated sSvc syllabus, and (b) provide fewer AT/DofE/sports opportunities/experiences; as these are already provided through the school - and do not need to be replicated as in the community CF model.

[quote]bucketofinstantsunshine wrote:

Whilst many schools that have CCFs have little or no serious disciplinary problems it is a gret leap of logic to presume it is the presence of the CCF that is the catalyst here. Maybe the lack of serious disciplinary problems is attributable to the regime imposed by the head teachers or the aspirations of the parents for their progeny academically. And that is something that cuts across class and race barriers too.[/quote]

I don’t disagree with you, however, there is now a substantial body of academic research (e.g. the University of Southampton report) which backs up what we in the CF have always known - being a cadet is character building (see the concurrent DfE “character education” agenda), provides life skills such as self-confidence, communication, and teamwork; and increases self-discipline. This stuff is life-changing, and gold-dust in the school environment where examples abound - and we’ve probably all worked with them - of children who are disengaged, recalcitrant, and under-achieving at school; but who are well behaved, well-motivated, and disciplined at cadets. So, how to bring those benefits - most efficiently - to a wider audience? CCF is the existing, off-the-shelf, and seemingly fit for purpose delivery model (backed up, politically, by the fact that most of the current - and Coalition - Govt were CCF cadets at the independent schools they attended). Arguably, some of the differing behaviour - where the cadet attends a community CF unit - can be attributed to it “not being school”, and this may be the Achilles Heel of DfEs interest in CEP …the new CCFs will very much be (correctly) “school” in the minds of students, especially if they are primarily staffed by teachers or those who work in / are connected with the school. I am not aware of any public research on this particular aspect of the equation, but the 2007-2012 trial CCF expansion into state schools was certainly judged to be a success - so perhaps CCF is seen as being sufficiently “different” to “school” to have the desired effect…

[quote]
GHE2 wrote:

What happens in school holidays, especially summer? In the private sector the “Tarquins and Tabithas” go home to mater and pater and probably have little or no expectation of the CCF (if they’re in it) offering anything, but in the state sector there will be an expectation I imagine of regular ‘meetings’ and activities, just like community CF units. If the state CCF is supposedly going to attract the lower achievers and school shy, can you really see then trotting up to the school during the holidays? How is their interest maintained?[/quote]

I would imagine the majority of state school CCFs would close for summer, just like the independents.

…however, as previously stated, I think much of this is missing the point. CEP is happening, its a Ministerial priority, and the community CFs cannot change that. As a result, some community units are going to face so serious challenges in their local marketplace, and will need to (in some cases) up their game and firmly establish how their “cadet experience” is different / better than an in-school CCF; then sell that to their potential customers. Additionally, it is unlikely that schools raising CEP CCFs will allow community CF units to visit the school and run the traditional recruitment assembly…

Cheers
BTI

31

As I’m (a) very easily identifiable and (b) involved in the CCFA I won’t say everything I want to on here, but a lot of sense has been talked above. The problem is DfE is trying to achieve something laudable but I suspect an element of cargo-cult: if we make school A, which is failing, superficially like school B, which is a successful established school with a smart uniform, CCF, rugby team, &c., it will get the same results. It might work but to steal a phrase, ‘I think you’ll find it’s a bit more complicated than that.’

The main thing that has disappointed me is that CEP when it was originally announced was supposed to be about all forms of cadet expansion, including new school-based ATC units, for example; the SCEO was supposed to make recommendations to schools based on the profile of local units, for example. Yet I am not aware of ANY CEP units which are not 'C’CFs, and as stated, the majority are not ‘Combined’, but single-service (though some are RAF only, pleasingly!)

32

All the talk of poor behaviour, discipline etc in school as a rationale for CEP, the corridors of power should consider their culpability with respect to this and carry out an inquiry (they seem to love these to waste taxpayers money) and carry out a comparison of schools today with school up to, I suppose, the mid to late 80s.
Our kids came back with tales of kids who messed around were kicked out of class and sent to sit in a room with other naughty kids, kids who back-chatted teachers and to all intents just did what they wanted and teachers effectively unable to control the class. There were kids excluded for a day or days and sent to an external ‘unit’ for naughty kids. We went to the school to meet a teacher and they had kids sitting in corridors, kids running messages (as we found out) and others who just seemed to be walking around. Go back 25 or so years from our kids experience and if you were in school you were in a classroom (in line with your ability not a one size fits all approach), you weren’t not running errands or just allowed to wander around and while there were naughty kids but nothing like the sort of things our kids mentioned. You didn’t mess around as the consequences would hurt at school and potentially again at home.
The irony is over the last 30 years namby-pamby rules about can’t do this or that to kids and giving them respect, without the understanding of the responsibility getting respect requires. The consequence of taking kids out of a school who don’t want to be there, is just playing into their hands and solves nothing. It makes you wonder how the sort of kids they are looking to engage in this will react to some bloke shouting at them or saying they’re not up to scratch. I can’t see the Army bods employed being fluffy bunnies.
It makes you wonder if this move to try and improve discipline isn’t shutting a door once the occupant of the stable hasn’t already bolted, been slaughtered and consumed by several thousand pets.

But then we are dealing with politicians for whom coming up with something “new” is a better CV entry and headline, than supporting what is already there and our various leaders roll over for a belly rub.

33

Time to stick my half a crown in.
Having many years of both CCF (RAF) and ATC experience. It must be clear that although many on here say CCF(RAF) and ATC come under the same umbrella of the ACO. This is totally true. However, they are two totally different beasts. The management of, support to, both is totally different. CEP CCF is trying to find a place for those who are not in either. Traditional CCF’ are during or directly after school activities. ATC in the evening. Trying to “work together” to enhance the cadets experience is challenging to say the least. I’m in no way defending one against the other, teachers are teachers first and VR(T) second, as you would expect from the employers point of view. CEP CCF taps into this by having “Staff” available straight away, as so far as I understand it new CEP CCF’ have a mentor school with an already established CCF to back them up and to train the staff. Also a lot hinges on the uptake of “Soldiers to Teachers”, DofE wins on all fronts then as the teachers come with military quals and the setup time is significantly reduced.
Just food for thought as I sit comfortably on the fence watching the world go by.

34

With a few exceptions we are all CFAV of any colour second. Not that the ACO increasingly seems to fully understand / recognise that fact all of the time.

35

Your right, the point I was trying to make (and poorly at that) is most VR(T) in the ATC have a boss at work and another for ACO stuff. Teachers have an extra “layer” where the Head master/mistress, pays the wage for teaching and has a direct say in Cadet stuff before it even gets to the ACO. How much boat rocking can a teacher do over his / her ACO duties if the Head say’s no? To the point where they collect their cards from the office! Far to many chiefs in the chain. I’m back on my nice fence…

36

Quite right - my boss in my day job is also my boss in the CCF. In fact I am lucky enough to be allocated some work time and a responsibility allowance for CCF - this is rare - but in return of course he expects me to run it as he sees fit, and while he is pretty compliant about the ‘rules’ he has his ideas on things like compulsory membership, balance of activities &c all of which I must follow as his subordinate. And, of course, poor performance in my CFAV duties is poor performance in my job, and will affect my career.

This is one reason why the CCF are not keen on too much performance management in CFAV ranks - what happens if you fail it?