Part of that is what use to happen in our Squadron Mess, oh well another good idea gone.
1 Like
Whilst the mandatory training can be done online, and we could deliver other training via Teams, I don’t personally feel that it’s the best option.
New staff need to interact with their peers. We need to ensure that the people we bring in are capable of standing up in front of other people to instruct (and if they can’t yet then we must help them get there). The social element is one of the biggest selling points of CFAV service.
None of those key requirements are served by sitting at home, alone, in front of the PC for a weekend training course.
3 Likes
Some? Yes.
All? No.
Have they?
Advertised where?
SharePoint - not sure if national or regional
Bit of a thread bump but the Staff Exodus post got me thinking.
We should look at the things that make it difficult to volunteer / continue to volunteer.
There’s a tendency to go back to the ‘old ways’ whereas Covid should have been a chance for change.
The question about training weekends for example. Not everyone can give up a weekend at a time (especially younger staff who might have younger kids). If you can, it’s usually shared billets in a horrible MOD transit camp, not a chance to stay in a station mess. And they are often in hard to reach places.
It’s all a bit National Service 1950s style.
Could we for example use a better mix of Teams (or even a better online platform) mixed with centrally located commercial conference venues / hotels? Daytimes only?
Yes it might cost money but it would be an investment.
Scouts have done this for some of their training.
2 Likes
I nearly added this in the staff exodus thread as it was kind of related to my response over there and if any analysis was performed on leaver but felt it better here rather than cause a thread drift.
I often see comment on the forum about lack of understanding from above functions above wing and the reposonse to the qualification question on VoV did raise some questions for me with the generic ‘not very popular’ response
I may be doing someone a disservice but I do wonder if that response is low take up by CFAV cadre and relevance but has anyone ever asked CFAV why they are not taking up the quals?
I know I didn’t take up as, in my opinion and for my circumstances at my more advanced years, they add no value to what I can offer the cadets and are of no relevance to me in my day job.
Do they feel quals are bit like scout badges and will just be collected?
If they did offer something relevant to youth leading and/or working with young people that I would have taken advantage of that as it is more relevant to my volunteering and would potrntially help me add more value to what I can offer.
1 Like
Personally, I’ve looked at the CVQO qualifications as an opportunity to spend ~ £100 (IIRC) and several hours writing in return for a qualification that I don’t want and won’t benefit me.
I might consider it if it was free. Maybe. Although I still probably wouldn’t actually do the write-up.
2 Likes
I looked at the ILM - similar, doesn’t count for anything in my line of work, and is no longer free
1 Like
This piqued my curiosity so I went to have a look at the response.
And the complete apathy and instant dismissal the suggestion got reminded me why I deleted the channel in the first place. Far too many HQ people are completely detached and have no idea what sqn personnel need and want.
4 Likes
Going back a few years, I started looking into the paid Youth Work sector, somewhat enthused by experience.
The chances of starting without a qualification were very slim, on a not survivable salary for an established worker even with the minimum levels of qual, without means to adequately re-enter education.
It felt strange that a youth organisation didn’t offer/push anything sector-relevant.
Do you mean a qualification such as this?
I don’t know why we don’t consider offering this (or including it as part of PU training)
Edit to add: just looked at the VoP post & it’s this SCC course is what started the debate! 
4 Likes
Do not give up hope!
2 Likes
So it could likewise be tailored to us, or a less specific but relevant course.
I’d imagine the bulk of the actual content in terms of topics and theory is in fact standard, but themes, scenarios, and application have been tailored.
2 Likes
I’ve had a brief chat with somebody who’s done this course. They did it within 6 months of signing up as an SCC instructor. They were an ex-cadet, joined the RN, served for 9 years, then left to pursue a different career path. They thought they knew a lot before because they’d been a cadet - but this course gave them the underpinning knowledge of WHY the cadets worked for them, and how to maximise the impacts of cadets in the lives of the young people in touches.
They confirmed that @Giminion description is spot on. The course content is very easily tweakable to reflect ANY youth group. It was also done in collaboration with the NYA (which might be why we don’t follow it!!).
But going back to the Statement in VoV, why does the training have to be nationally accredited??? It’s not like our mandatory training is.
I certainly think there is scope for this sort of training within RAFAC - and without CVQO being lumped into the mix because it absolutely DOES NOT have to be accreditted (nice if it was - but that often limits the scope of the award, and increases the costs - which then get passed on via CVQO to the CFAV).
Reflecting on my experiences over the last 20+ years, absolutely NONE of the training I have done through RAFAC has actually been about working with young people. How do we understanding things from their perspective. No understanding of how they function; no child psychology. No understanding their perceptions of the modern world. How to energise a group. No guidance on how to coproduce and active and engaging training program. No doing “with not too”. And very limited training around SEN and behaviour management (limited to one x one-way webinar and “here read this ACP” or the new specific support guidance on Sharepoint).
All the stuff I’ve done has come through work or personal learning - because that stuff motivates me. Others have been and gone - and some would really have benefited from that stuff - but don’t have the same learning style as me - they thrive of courses and being taught, rather than having the hunger for self directed learning or learning for the sake of learning.
I just flicked back to the staff training and induction process - just for an insight - and it was very telling. In the current induction process for new staff we’ve got the following as AVIP topics…
- SECTION 1 - RAF Air Cadets Knowledge
- SECTION 2 RAF Knowledge
- SECTION 3 Visiting your Squadron
- SECTION 4 Information Technology and Communications
- SECTION 5 Health, Safety and Environmental Protection
- SECTION 6 Safeguarding and Child Protection
- SECTION 7 Equality, Diversity and Inclusion
- SECTION 8 Security
With mandatory training cycles around the following…
- PREVENT
- ACTO10
- Fire
- Climatic Injuries
- HSE
- Security
- First Aid
- Responsible for Info
- Safeguarding
The ONLY task within the AVIP booklet AND the mandatory training which has any form of cadet engagement is Section 3: Meet the cadets (which then goes on to say “explain various cadet roles, a quick overview of classification and introduction to PTS” (so nothing about actually meeting the cadets at all!!!).
Comparing that to the massive volume of tasks talking about RAF Stations you may never visit, listing locations of VGSs which may be entirely irrelevant if you live too far away, completing HS&EO Form 18, who the Wing Chaplaim and Regional Commandant is…
There’s NOTHING which can help a new starter work with teenagers. There’s some very big assumptions being made within the training system that our noobie member of staff knows and understands young people. The checks and balances about this are a DBS and a Wg Staff interview to see if they get heebie-jeebies about a candidate. No observations of them around young people, no senior cadet on the boarding panel to see if they get heebie-jeebies (and they will have very different feedback from Wg Staff!!) and then complete your probationary X months (without any training on how to engage and interact with young people).
Whilst other elements of RAFAC are evolving (RAF Aspire for example), I think our recruitment and induction processes are very out of step with other youth organisations. I also think our on going staff development processes are very far behind the curve too - which, perhaps, is why we also have retention issues further down the line.
Maybe it’s time for an evolution/revolution.
34 Likes
If I could like this post 10 times I would. Really well said.
3 Likes
This is the best post that I have ever read on ACC.
Please also share it up the CoC and, more importantly, to senior volunteers and any volunteers on here with influence at HQAC. Teaching staff how to work with cadets would be hugely helpful and will evolve over time. Personally I’d find this really useful, despite being a CFAV for ‘cough’ many years…
7 Likes
Yep, well said. I actually tried to secure a role doing initial/ongoing staff training in my Wing, as it related strongly to my day job. They weren’t really interested, preferring to let the existing mishmash of ad-hoc training proceed with little guidance (mostly fell on the local OC to handle everything). Maybe a proper directive from the top to sort this out properly and make sure SMEs get heard would improve things.
6 Likes