Staff Development

I have just returned from a Sector meeting and the current focus from our wing is staff development.
Some of the courses identified for staff to attend included shooting courses, AT Courses and safeguarding courses.

Personally, I believe staff development and having qualified staff is key to success on my squadron.

Doesn’t matter if it includes shooting and AT courses, but what courses have you found it useful to send staff on?

Including courses for inexperienced CIs and Young Staff?

If you could highlight any prerequisites as well, that would be great.

Thank you.

The best course HQAC could create is one which gives all CFAVs an extra 2 days per week to fulfil all of the now “mandatory” or “expected” training we are supposed to do.

It’s hard enough getting staff to turn up.
Let alone give up 3 to 4 weekends a year.

The higher ups need to get a grip and quick.


I’m very big on getting staff qualified but it needs to be in areas that are of interest to them, so I take a “what do you want to do?” approach.

The things that I as an OC like to see staff my going out and getting are AFA & LLA as it makes us self sufficient when it comes to stuff like DofE.


I’d like to see courses that help us walk before we can run.

As has been said, a 2 days to knock out all the general stuff everyone needs. Then no problems at the normal Cadet night. Maybe then throw in some extras to enable staff to do that bit more on a parade night.

Keep the more specialised courses trickling through over the year. But away from the stuff we must do, anything else can only be what the individual wants to do, this has always been my approach for my staff.

Wholeheartedly agree that staff dev underpins sqn success.

It’ll depend largely on your current needs as a sqn - so some self reflection and gap analysis would be useful starter for ten to get your own ideas of what’s missing.

First aid, MOI and IntroDofE would be first on the list for all staff - the latter as it helps give a wider perspective on one of our core (albeit voluntary) activities. Everything beyond becomes more specialised - shadowing Wg run courses (if you have then) radio/cyber, NCO, D&C, music, road marching, YFA, shooting days, plus any Sector or Wing activities fieldcraft or AT wise to help them find their feet, work out where their strengths and interests lie before launching on to any development pathways.

We’re in a relatively lucky position with regards most of the above with reasonable courses available at Wg and Rg level. Our SATT are pretty active and flexible in doing shooting stuff and (thankfully) our neighbouring SATT are also open up to us for courses.

However, one of the areas we lack as a Sqn, Wg and wider organisation - given that we’re so often referred to as a “training organisation” is the classification “training” for trainers. MoI has gone way to address the “how to teach” issue, however we continue to be stumped when it comes to delivery of more “technical” academic subjects. Actually, to be fair, delivering some of the first class and leading stuff - which not technical - can be a challenge!

Similarly, the continued “stem” bandwagon is, IMHO, leaving some squadrons far behind. Great if you’ve got staff interested, eager, enthusiastic and capable of engaging delivery of STEM subjects. But if you dont, your cadets can miss out.

If we could get day (or weekend) courses in place to deliver those activities - which underpin much of our Core offer - then that’d be super cool.

Whilst lots of our courses are essentially “inhouse”, the second you look towards AT and NGBs, dont exclusively look inside the organisation for courses. If your Wg doesnt run something, try contacting your RATTO - a neighbouring Wg might. They are often courses available at NACATC or CCAT. You can also buy in NGB courses externally from providers.

I think that you would gain more by saying let’s not run cadet courses for 6 months but utilise those weekends to run upskilling for staff to have a wider impact.

As said before I think this is what QAIC should be replaced with