Surely the AVIP workbook provides the same sort of stuff as the old Staff Part 2 just with a system of learning as you go rather than an assessment. (Which always varies from Wing to Wing anyway).
AVIP is all we provide to our new staff as an organisation and they seem to survive so why would we expect our staff cadets most of whom have grown up in the organisation anyway.
If your Staff Cadets aren’t knowledgable maybe the person you need to blame is yourself and Maybe the person who needs to sort out the training levels of their staff/staff cadets is also yourself.
Nothing wrong with my Staff Cadets or NCOs, but the training at/quality of FS/CWO isn’t as consistent as it was with Staff Pt 2.
Perhaps there’s a failing with the delivery of AVIP within my wing (and the follow up work such as the workbook back on Squadrons), I don’t know, but hey ho.
Yeah, because that solves the problem of other people’s training levels?
I have realised since saying this that some of what I mentioned is included in the AVIP booklet, but if that was happening everywhere… and truthfully I haven’t used the booklet for Staff Cadets, although I have with our staff joiners - they aren’t issued on the course to either cadets or staff.
However, I do deliver such training to my senior SNCOs (and never suggested I didn’t) as part of their ongoing development - otherwise you end up with glorified Sgts. Staff 2 as it was isn’t really the right thing to call it, as content and style-wise it is minimally relevant to now.
Bringing things somewhat back on track, however, if PS and MOI is now open at an earlier stage, how many 16,17,18 year olds are going to stagnate and get bored on units where they run out of progression?
Quite possibly we will discover this is the next step to scrapping 18 year olds…
Let’s just backtrack here a little bit though, as the discussion was about cadets and not staff, and the point about Staff Pt2 was raised…
It was supported as a concept, but then argued that it was too much extra load on a cadet…
I showed that the load was no different to the old scheme, then it was pointed out that something does exist, just not in the same formality and concept as the old Staff Pt2…
So all this is now is… pointless. Unless you want to actually focus on the topics of MOI and the principle of Staff Pt2/better integration of the AVIP booklet into cadet training (there is an alleged promotion matrix in the works, after all).
Bringing back Staff 2 inc instructional technique with an added CP elenment. Cadets do it at whichever point they are age / rank.
Bin the MOI (never really understood the need) and BASIC/AVIP at a specific age point.
What I am not and never been in agreement with is so called “development” courses at a time when the cadet’s entire developmental focus should be on their real education and not the faux rubbish in the ATC, dreamed up by people who are clueless and just seeking to justify their reason to exist. I do not recall being bored etc when between the ages of 17 and my 22nd birthday as a cadet, because I didn’t have a wad of courses to go on. But of course this was when we had a proper RAF and the ATC got its opportunities like it always had. Also my and my mates had weekends to ourselves to develop socially.
We had a perfectly good instructional technique along with everything else in ACP 42, ergo I’ve never understood the need for MOI. Well apart from someone somewhere needing to prove a need to exist and then turning it into a course.
Not really sure how thousands of us managed to read the old inst tech and ACP42 and pass Staff 2.
We should go back to ACP42 and assessment style, with a CP bit in it, that can be done at any age/rank.
This fear of losing potential staff is why HQAC won’t lose cadets at 18, more’s the pity.
Lose cadets at 18 and HQAC might just have to look at the adult volunteering package and streamline it. I want new staff starting straightaway not weeks or months later, just like they do and not wait for months while gibberish paperwork moves around. A lot of places do supervised contact pre DBS clearance. The new staff will feel involved from the outset like they used to.
The system was in place long before I did mine and continued long after and I imagine many staff around the country did it that way and have been successfully delivering lessons etc ever since.