# New Cadet Courseware (Green Star released)



## cdn031 (3 Jul 2008)

CIC folks - and senior cadets if you have read it:
What are your thoughts on the new Green Star Army cadet content?

Is this even teachable? (I'm a little concerned that the kids will slip off into a coma) 

A particular surprise was the complete lack of testing of any kind (advancement seems to be by 60% attend.)

Please someone convince me that this is the right way to go...


----------



## Neill McKay (3 Jul 2008)

I'm not familiar with the Green Star training but I have read the sea cadet Phase 1 materials -- which I assume are somewhat similar -- and they seem to be a positive change (and that's the consensus among those I've discussed it with).  What in particular do you find troubling?


----------



## wannabe SF member (4 Jul 2008)

Any links??


----------



## Burrows (5 Jul 2008)

GridNorth said:
			
		

> A particular surprise was the complete lack of testing of any kind (advancement seems to be by 60% attend.)


  Personally I don't see why in cadets we shouldn't do advancement through attendance.  Especially knowing the unit you're involved with - I would suggest that attendance IS the key thing for those green stars to do.

I'm sure you know what I'm getting at, GridNorth - if not, feel free to PM me.

Would you really make someone an RSM if they were the most qualified cadet but only showed up once a month?


----------



## Neill McKay (5 Jul 2008)

Kyle Burrows said:
			
		

> Would you really make someone an RSM if they were the most qualified cadet but only showed up once a month?



Definitely not; you have to look at the whole cadet.

In the sea cadet programme -- and it's almost certain that the other two elements will do it the same way, as a feature of the CPU is to align the elements where appropriate -- a cadet's first promotion will require that he or she has completed phase 1, served a minimum time in rank, and been recommended by his or her divisional officer).  Completion of phase 1 is defined as having attended at least 60 per cent of parades _and_ having completed certain of the EOs in each PO.  For example, a cadet is considered to have completed PO 106 Fire the Cadet Air Rifle if he or she has participated in a famil shoot.   Most EOs are assessed on a "participated" basis.

The intention is to use different assessment methods for the higher phases, to match up with the learning style most suited to cadets of the various ages we expect to find in each phase.


----------



## cdn031 (7 Jul 2008)

Here's the linkage

Green Star  Cadet Program Update
http://www.cadets.ca/_docs/CPU/ACRCCP701PG001_E070101A%20Reduced.pdf

The above is a big document but an essential read for those involved in the Program. No testing or evaluation.

More alarming is the elimination of the National Star Certification Exam by 2011 - 
*Letter*
http://www.cadets.ca/armcad/national%20star%20info/Future%20of%20NSCE_letter.pdf
*Fact Sheet*
http://www.cadets.ca/armcad/national%20star%20info/FS%20Future%20of%20NSCE.pdf

It appears to be that we have eliminated all objective testing / evaluation from the entire program.
The result is that we will have no objective criteria by which to evaluate Cadets.

Complications
1) How to award awards (often based on testing results  rather than good looks)
2) How to promote Senior cadet positions (WO & above) (Not that marks are ALL the story - just part)
3) How to deal with self image problems that result among "driven" cadets when their is no relationship between effort and achievement.
4) Family Pets and Pet rocks will be awarded star levels and ranks based entirely on 60% attendance.

I suppose my favorite quote of late is *"The NSCE is approaching the end of its usefulness, as a means to assess senior cadets because it is not in line with the more modern assessment policies and practices that will be introduced by the CPU (Cadet Program Update)." * 

"More Modern Assessment Policies" mean don't Assess at all, at least not in an objective fashion.
This is a wonderful piece of double talk - DCDTS  4 has revised history and declare the new to be far superior - work that has not been completed, beyond the Green Star level - and the green star content is at best underwhelming and at worse, coma inducing. 

You will also see lots of rationalization around how the Gold star level is ignored due to the NSCE test. Hmmmm Anyone around that remembers that the NSCE _IS_ the Gold star test???? they simply "moved it" away from the gold star level some years ago

Last - have a look at the Comparison of the current program vs the new program
http://www.cadets.ca/support/trg-instr/CATO%2011-04/Army%20Cdt%20Prg%20Comp%20Chart%20English%20final.pdf
this also begs a few questions - Here we have eliminated much of the local Corps training discretion , and introduced Regionally Directed Activities (RDAs) and Nationally Directed Activities (NDAs).  Yet no discussion of Budget or staffing for these.  Looks great on paper but I cannot imagine the funds coming forward to support this. If the funds are available the talent will not be. 

Have a read and let me know what you think - I'm at a loss of how to "Help".  I'm not an advocate of "starting a revolution" - I far prefer to work within the system. But for the first time in a long time I'm genuinely concerned about the viability of a program such as this.

Take good care all


----------



## cdn031 (7 Jul 2008)

One other update  - this may be obvious to others but news to me

Turns out that the three sets of POs in the new Cadet Program Update are virtualy identical across the three elements
PO sections 1-9 (of only 12 in the Army program) are identical. 

Sea Cadets A-CR-CCP-601/PG-001 
Army Cadets A-CR-CCP-701/PG-001 
Air Cadets A-CR-CCP-801/PG-001 

Guess this saved alot of money.... no wonder they are not printing manuals


----------



## Neill McKay (7 Jul 2008)

GridNorth said:
			
		

> It appears to be that we have eliminated all objective testing / evaluation from the entire program.
> The result is that we will have no objective criteria by which to evaluate Cadets.



Remember, though, that only the year 1 QSP has been published.  The year 2-5 QSPs will, in all likelihood, employ different evaluation methods.  I don't think you'll see anything like a 60 per cent attend and participate system in the higher levels.  One of the goals of the CPU is to adjust cadet training methods to be more suitable to the age of the cadets in each level, and higher levels will bring more challenging training methods.



> Complications
> 1) How to award awards (often based on testing results  rather than good looks)



No change there for my unit; we've never based any awards on enabling objective marks except the top cadet in each phase -- and even that can be done objectively without reference to marks.



> 2) How to promote Senior cadet positions (WO & above) (Not that marks are ALL the story - just part)



A new CATO is expected out in the fall to address promotion criteria for all ranks.  I've seen a draft and, speaking generally, promotions in the junior ranks will be based on completion of the training level (e.g. star level for army cadets), minimum time in rank, and recommendation from the divisional officer, platoon commander, or flight commander.  More senior ranks will be more stringent.



> 3) How to deal with self image problems that result among "driven" cadets when their is no relationship between effort and achievement.



Achievement comes in other areas than on the written performance check: appointment to desirable positions in the corps, leadership opportunities, end-or-year awards, etc.



> 4) Family Pets and Pet rocks will be awarded star levels and ranks based entirely on 60% attendance.



Attendance and recommendation from the responsible officer -- and again only the first level has been released.  I doubt very much that you will see the same ease of achievement in the higher levels.

Are you a member of Cadet-World.com?  If not you may want to have a look at some of the discussions in the officers' forum there.  There's been quite a lot of it.


----------



## cdn031 (7 Jul 2008)

Neill McKay said:
			
		

> Remember, though, that only the year 1 QSP has been published.  The year 2-5 QSPs will, in all likelihood, employ different evaluation methods.



Neil, I have read the developmental theory behind this and I hope you are correct. However, drawing from the briefings so far, I am not comforted. I think they have found a hammer and everything now looks like a nail... a convenient, low effort nail, and a cheap nail because it does not require tests to be written or manuals to be produced. Just a bunch of kids sitting around enduring CIC lectures (Because no where in here are we encouraging the Gold Stars to teach - they are off listening to other CICs drone on about master cadet things - that will never be tested)

or - I could be wrong - hope I am

Take care


----------



## rwgill (7 Jul 2008)

GridNorth said:
			
		

> More alarming is the elimination of the National Star Certification Exam by 2011 -
> 
> It appears to be that we have eliminated all objective testing / evaluation from the entire program.
> The result is that we will have no objective criteria by which to evaluate Cadets.


NSCE, as it currently exists, will be eliminated by 2011.  It has served its purpose and done so well.  It does not fit in with the CPU.

It is my understanding that it will be replaced with something better which can be conducted at various points within a cadet's career.




			
				GridNorth said:
			
		

> "More Modern Assessment Policies" mean don't Assess at all, at least not in an objective fashion.
> This is a wonderful piece of double talk - DCDTS  4 has revised history and declare the new to be far superior - work that has not been completed, beyond the Green Star level - and the green star content is at best underwhelming and at worse, coma inducing.


Don't pee in the wind.  It's words like that that set off the wrong reactions.



			
				GridNorth said:
			
		

> You will also see lots of rationalization around how the Gold star level is ignored due to the NSCE test. Hmmmm Anyone around that remembers that the NSCE _IS_ the Gold star test???? they simply "moved it" away from the gold star level some years ago


You have obviously never read the Gold Star CTP, Chapter 3.  

Also, please try reading the appropriate CATO (43-02   ).  All cadets must be Gold Star qualified in order to attempt NSCE.  If the Gold Star level was scheduled properly, it would have never been ignored.


----------



## Neill McKay (8 Jul 2008)

GridNorth said:
			
		

> Just a bunch of kids sitting around enduring CIC lectures (Because no where in here are we encouraging the Gold Stars to teach - they are off listening to other CICs drone on about master cadet things - that will never be tested)



What are you looking at that's given you that impression?  (To the best of my knowledge nothing's been written, much less published, in terms of a Gold Star QSP.)


----------



## cdn031 (8 Jul 2008)

rwgill said:
			
		

> NSCE, as it currently exists, will be eliminated by 2011.  It has served its purpose and done so well.  It does not fit in with the CPU.
> It is my understanding that it will be replaced with something better which can be conducted at various points within a cadet's career.



Rob,

How do you conclude that "It does not fit with the CPU", beyond repeating the statements issued by Dcdts et al? Yes I have read the Developmental period 1-3 materials. But that material does not exclude objective testing.

As I wrote, Yes, NSCE will be eliminated in 2011 - and replaced by something that we have not seen even an outline of (Red, silver, gold, Master Cadet) but is somehow deemed "better". What we have seen (the Green star docs ) are carbon copies (9 POs of 12) of the New Sea and Air program and are (in my opinion) uninspiring doubletalk. The fact that no handbooks are planned should also set off alarm bells. Effectively we are being asked to take an enormous leap of faith in buying into content that has yet to even be outlined in the light of day. Thankfully the Army League is starting to pay attention to this - but I hear they are being ignored by the folks at Dcdts.



			
				rwgill said:
			
		

> You have obviously never read the Gold Star CTP, Chapter 3.


Hmmm,  *Resume Time* - Been teaching Cadets at the Gold Star / NCSE level as CIL/CIC/CI off and on since 1982, both at the Corps level and the National Camp (Leadership & Challenge) as well as working on Gold Star & NSCE testing, so I'm pretty familiar with the program at the senior level, and more importantly the evolution for the program. 
My Point was that I have seen a steady decline in emphasis on Senior Cadets teaching Junior Cadets (you never master material till you teach it) - Complicated by the "New" program - in which there has been NO public discussion 



			
				rwgill said:
			
		

> Also, please try reading the appropriate CATO (43-02   ).  All cadets must be Gold Star qualified in order to attempt NSCE.  If the Gold Star level was scheduled properly, it would have never been ignored.



 ;D  As you went through the program in the 90's, here's some history you may not know - *The NCSE Was the Gold Star Exam. *. You could not achieve the Gold Star unless you wrote the National exam. The content of the Exam/ NSCE has not really changed in over 25 years. What we call it has. As best I can tell,  the "New Gold Star" as we know it today was inserted into the program as a "second prize" for those that could not pass the exam and the program extended by a year (one year for Gold star content , another one to study for  the NSCE).

It would appear that, from what has been explained at recent regional briefings, we are moving away from objective testing.

Have you read the New Green Star program? 
From an "Engaging & Retaining new Cadets" perspective do you think the released material adds good value?

I could be wrong here, Perhaps I lack "faith", But for all of the efforts and person hours expended on this project so far, I am not encouraged by the initial results.

CIC folks - where are you on this?


----------



## rwgill (8 Jul 2008)

Rather than quoting you, I will address certain points:

HANDBOOKS:  These will, and are being developed, however, IMHO, they are not required for Green Star.  Most of the training is based on participation and being a follower.  A cadet will (well should  ) do what they are told.  While studying the IG, I see that there is room for more local type training, especially if we look at the Complimentary EOs.  It is my understanding that binders will be issued for cadets to place relevant handouts.  Am I afraid that this may be wrong for Green Star?  No.  Can I make this work?  Yes and I started experimenting last training year with very positive results.  We are only at Green Star, remember?!?

RESUME TIME:  I wrote the old Gold Star test in '92 and was taught under the old system of the 80's.  NSCE was implimented in 1993, or perhaps 1994.  The Gold Star Test of the 80's became the NSCE.  NSCE is NOT the Gold Star test under the current CTP.  I was a cadet under the old system, an officer under the current system and a League member/volunteer under the to-be-implimented CPU.

TEACHING:  If you see a decline in cadets teaching cadets, I will agree, but this is due to improper implimentation of the Gold Star program.

SECOND PRIZE:  lol, that's cute.  If we look at what should happen:  12yrs old - Green Star, 13 yrs old - Red Star, 14 yrs old - Silver Star, 15 yrs old - Gold Star, 16+ yrs old - NSCE.  Cadets can not be employed as staff cadets until they reach 16, by January.  Cadets normally cannot be accepted for exchanges if they are not 16.  So how could Gold Star be "second prize"?  It's a star level.  Would that make Green Star fifth prize?  What's the purpose of pushing a cadet to write NSCE?

NO PUBLIC DISCUSSION:  I am not sure of what exactly you are implying here.  The entire CPU has been discussed and created by people at all levels and involved all organizations concerned.  The individual writing boards have included people from the Class A LHQ officer, to the RCIS instructor, to RSCU staff, to CSTC staff.  The Cadet site is currently down, but my understanding is,  the Memorandum of Understanding makes it clear that training is a DND item and not the Leagues'.

It seems like you are just afraid of the CPU?  I am fully supportive of the CPU.  At least CPU was and is being written by CIC officers who know the program.


----------



## cdn031 (8 Jul 2008)

rwgill said:
			
		

> It seems like you are just afraid of the CPU?  I am fully supportive of the CPU.



No, I'm not taking that bait...  ;D  I too have used - "change is good. Are you afraid of change?" - as a chant to justify whatever measure one tries to invoke.
I understand that you like the quality & direction of the Green Star materials - We differ on that and that's cool.

I am, however, VERY interested in any & all other views from the CIC community...


----------



## Neill McKay (8 Jul 2008)

GridNorth said:
			
		

> No, I'm not taking that bait...  ;D  I too have used - "change is good. Are you afraid of change?" - as a chant to justify whatever measure one tries to invoke.
> I am, however, VERY interested in any & all other views from the CIC community...



Like all decent and proper naval officers I view any change with the utmost suspicion, but my feelings on the CPU as it applies to phase 1 of the sea cadet programme are almost universally positive.  The things I like include:

- greater emphasis on hands-on training;
- replacement of outdoor adventure training with more nautical content;
- an Instructor's Guide that is superior to the old master lesson plans;
- the new summer courses, as presented in the Phase 1 IG, look like a big improvement over our current trade-centric system;
- rank names now aligned with those in the navy while historical insignia are preserved.

I share your concern about the elimination of the national exams (PO1 Performance Check in the case of the sea cadet programme) and hope that something suitable will replace them.  For the time being, I take the word of those concerned that we will not see a "60% attend with selected EOs completed" standard for passing every phase.


----------



## rwgill (8 Jul 2008)

GridNorth said:
			
		

> No, I'm not taking that bait...  ;D  I too have used - "change is good. Are you afraid of change?" - as a chant to justify whatever measure one tries to invoke.
> I understand that you like the quality & direction of the Green Star materials - We differ on that and that's cool.


No bait.  It's an honest assumption.  I saw the same sort of "attitudes" from officers, as a senior cadet, when the CTP came into effect.  That program, as history has told us, was written by someone who had absolutely no idea of what cadets did.  The CPU, IMHO, swings the pendulum back from the left, more towards the centre.  It tries to stay away from boring lectures and gets Army Cadets out of the classroom and into the field.



> I am, however, VERY interested in any & all other views from the CIC community...


Join us at Cadet-World


----------



## Jabrwock (9 Jul 2008)

Back in the mid-nineties, we crammed our gold-stars a bit, but that was so they would have their gold level before attending NSCE. So there was a very short transitional period between getting your gold and getting your master gold, but you still had to do both. No gold star, no attending NSCE.

I like the new Green star stuff. Kids are bored enough with school, so being thrust into a classroom as soon as they join would definitely turn them off. More hands-on gets them hooked, and promotes class participation.

402 would be the only one I'd keep a written test for, but even then, unless you teach it and test them on it within the first month or two, they will have already been "tested" on it shortly after they get their uniform issued. I know I was. Issued my uniform on a parade night, and two days later, when we were prepping for Annual Inspection, I got the crash course in ironing, badge sewing, beret forming, and boot polishing.


----------



## gun runner (14 Aug 2008)

I found the whole thing confusing to tell the truth, the cadet manuals had all the PO/EO info for the star level, and now those are being phased out in favor of a bigger manual? These kids need more hands on materials and courses to keep the interest going not a boring lecture on cleaning an air rifle that ahs to be crammed in betwwen drill classes and such. The templates were supposed to make the new program easier to implement, correct. But the new format of the lessons has left me in a tailspin. Where did half of them go? And what about the cadet fitness testing?? I didnt see that anywhere in the new programs. Help?!? Ubique


----------



## Jabrwock (14 Aug 2008)

gun runner said:
			
		

> the cadet manuals had all the PO/EO info for the star level, and now those are being phased out in favor of a bigger manual?


Revised green star manuals will be developed after the program has been 'fleshed out' so to speak, so the basic concepts in the old green star manual will still be valid.  It's mostly just the PO numbers and organization that will change, due to their reorganization into various "chapters". IE with the overall goal of participating in an ACR, we have all the lessons needed to accomplish this (drill). etc The manuals won't really be needed though, most of the first year stuff is as hands-on as possible, to cut down on the number of hand-outs needed.





> But the new format of the lessons has left me in a tailspin. Where did half of them go?


Look at each chapter heading, and think of where your missing PO might go. Anything specific you can't find?


> These kids need more hands on materials and courses to keep the interest going not a boring lecture on cleaning an air rifle that ahs to be crammed in betwwen drill classes and such.


I didn't see that. The example training schedules show the air rifle lessons being done on a weekend ex. And actually, the focus has been to try to *increase* the amount of hands-on training as much as possible, to keep it interesting.





> And what about the cadet fitness testing?? I didnt see that anywhere in the new programs.


Fitness testing is not a pre-req for getting your green star (although a discussion of physical fitness is), so it would likely be up to the Trg O to schedule fitness testing at their discretion. This is likely why they took it out of the star program, as like other qualifications such as marksmanship, first aid, band, etc, these are not mandatory (although heavily encouraged) activities. The only one that ever required minimum physical fitness levels in the last decade was NCSE, and that's being turned into an overall evaluation system rather than a star level.


----------



## gun runner (14 Aug 2008)

Ok, but I thought that the cadet fitness program was for all star levels...my bad I guess. And what are the kids (greenstar) supposed to use for ready reference materials during a hands on project that requires such reference? That is going to be the interesting thing I will watch for. I know I sure needed my manuals when I was a cadet, and also into my short but lively career as an artilleryman. do you know about how long this process will take? Or do we just see when we'll see?


----------



## cdn031 (14 Aug 2008)

Well , we finally recieved our hardcopies of the CPU in the mail , and having poured thru all 2 inches of this 81/2x11 coma-inducing tome I don't feel any better.

The Air Sea and Army CPUs are virtually identical - and as best I can tell the Army got the worst of it.
It's completely unteachable without heavy additions, which we will have to do.  (and are already planning)

My disappointment is it aims far too low... yes this is for 12/13 year olds but the coin exercises are straight out of a grade 3/4 curriculum.
Its just not engaging... yes there is a luke warm orienteering  section (common curiculum Air/Sea/land) and a diluted winter living section , but beyond that - little I would be proud of. 

I then went off to Cadetworld to see if any insights were available there... not so much. seems like the fight has gone out of the CIC and everyone is accepting shoddy workmanship as "good".

Maybe there is a silver lining in not having any testing - we can "enhance" this at the local level any way we want.


----------



## Jabrwock (14 Aug 2008)

gun runner said:
			
		

> Ok, but I thought that the cadet fitness program was for all star levels...my bad I guess.


*Teaching* physical fitness is part of each star level. So there's the section about healthy living, healthy eating, developing a fitness plan, participating in organized sports, etc for greens, because they're just being introduced to the whole idea of physical fitness. It's just the actual fitness test that's been pulled out and put on it's own.



> And what are the kids (greenstar) supposed to use for ready reference materials during a hands on project that requires such reference? That is going to be the interesting thing I will watch for. I know I sure needed my manuals when I was a cadet, and also into my short but lively career as an artilleryman. do you know about how long this process will take? Or do we just see when we'll see?


The roll-out docs said 2-3 years before they issue new green star manuals. In the meantime, the reference material in the old pams is still valid (diagrams, pictures, etc). There's also other references listed in the IG. For example, the "parts of the daisy rifle" refers to material from CCP-177 "Marksmanship manual". Part 2 (pg 2-5) has a handout for characteristics and parts of the daisy rifle.

I highly recommend looking up each EO, seeing if any handouts are needed, and grabbing any convenient handouts from the listed ref. material, or creating your own if needed, and making a binder of those to have on hand. Or have each instructor do it as they teach, and keep copies of handouts for the next year. We're doing that with written mini-quizzes for classroom eval. We'll also be looking at the old overhead sheets, and seeing which ones we should keep, to assist as trg aids.

Any handouts you'd really like to see added in, send them up the chain. The foreword to the IG has instructions on where to send suggested changes.


----------



## Neill McKay (14 Aug 2008)

GridNorth said:
			
		

> I then went off to Cadetworld to see if any insights were available there... not so much. seems like the fight has gone out of the CIC and everyone is accepting shoddy workmanship as "good".



I think what you're seeing is an acceptance that this is the course we will be teaching to first year cadets starting in a couple of weeks.  We can carry on complaining, but to little benefit.

As has always been the case, it falls to the staff, especially the Trg Os, to take the reams of paper and implement them in an interesting and challenging way.  Let's see how it goes.


----------



## gun runner (14 Aug 2008)

Its gonna be an interesting year!!!


----------



## catalyst (15 Aug 2008)

GridNorth said:
			
		

> My disappointment is it aims far too low... yes this is for 12/13 year olds but the coin exercises are straight out of a grade 3/4 curriculum.
> Its just not engaging... yes there is a luke warm orienteering  section (common curiculum Air/Sea/land) and a diluted winter living section , but beyond that - little I would be proud of.
> 
> I then went off to Cadetworld to see if any insights were available there... not so much. seems like the fight has gone out of the CIC and everyone is accepting shoddy workmanship as "good".
> ...



I woudln't call it lukewarm - there's a lot you can do with orienteering. If you need suggestions let me know.


----------



## gun runner (15 Aug 2008)

Sure, Ill take a piece of that!! What can you suggest that can spruce up the rather bland orienteering classes for us? I am sure I will be teaching it this year and grading it in the bushcraft portions of the FTX's, can you make it a little more exciting for the kids? Ubique


----------



## Jabrwock (15 Aug 2008)

gun runner said:
			
		

> Sure, Ill take a piece of that!! What can you suggest that can spruce up the rather bland orienteering classes for us? I am sure I will be teaching it this year and grading it in the bushcraft portions of the FTX's, can you make it a little more exciting for the kids? Ubique


Hands on all the way. If they're just listening they'll tune you out but if you have something in their hands they'll pay attention.

When you do the lesson on types of maps, bring in the various types, and have the cadets handle them. Compare them. Class participation. Ask them about what kinds they use when they go places. Do they use Google maps? The coil-back one in the car? A GPS? Have a competition on who can fold a sheet of paper properly the quickest, or refold it to have a certain panel on "top". Bring in some map-tac, and get them to map-tac a 4x5" photocopy of of your favourite FTX location. Then they'll have something to take with them on the FTX.

Marginal info and signs. Symbol bingo! Divide into teams, and you describe what feature a symbol represents, and they have to match it to the actual symbol.

Contour lines, build a relief model with thick cardboard, to illustrate it in 3D. Have thick black lines on top of each contour, so you can turn it top toward them and show how the lines look on a 2D map.

Orient a map by inspection. Again divide into teams. Make minimaps of the classroom (with pictures of mountains and buildings on the wall), or the buildings/roads surrounding you.


----------



## gun runner (15 Aug 2008)

All very good suggestions, and thanks, I will do my best to implement these suggestions into my classes,both in the bush and in the classroom. Thanks for the info. Ubique


----------



## catalyst (15 Aug 2008)

YES - have things to touch. 

WHen you're running courses, theres nothign to say you can't go above and beyond what the basic minimum - remember htere are different types of orienteering:

Point to Point - they follow a course, fastest time wins
Score - have to get the most ina  set amount of time, each one has different point values
Long - 3 hours+, a combination
Ski/SS - self explanitory
Mystery - only get part of the map, at the next control there is more of the map
Night - at night...a combination of the aboe. 

I have more, just finishing up at Quadra, then I'll be able to add my .02 pennies!

- Mich
Orienteering Officer, HMCS Quadra


----------



## gun runner (16 Aug 2008)

These are all great points and I will try to involve it into my regimen during classes and the FTX's planned for the year. Thank-you for the advice! Ubique


----------



## rwgill (16 Aug 2008)

Jabrwock said:
			
		

> When you do the lesson on types of maps, bring in the various types, and have the cadets handle them. Compare them. Class participation. Ask them about what kinds they use when they go places. Do they use Google maps? The coil-back one in the car? A GPS? Have a competition on who can fold a sheet of paper properly the quickest, or refold it to have a certain panel on "top". Bring in some map-tac, and get them to map-tac a 4x5" photocopy of of your favourite FTX location. Then they'll have something to take with them on the FTX.


I have also enlarged maps to make things easier.  This can be done using a colour copier.  Makes it easier than using 1:50 000 maps when traveling under a km.  The Green Stars get discouraged easily...................just make sure that you copy the scale at the same time as the map


----------



## gun runner (16 Aug 2008)

Good tip, thanks again to all who have great suggestions on these topics... it is of tremendous advantage for those of us who really want to help teach a class in a more dynamic and spectacular fashion verses the same, old same old. Ubique


----------



## cdn031 (17 Aug 2008)

Catalyst - I'm open to all sorts of ideas around the orienteering. Its one of the few bits I can see hope on, so I'm looking forward to that

Gun Runner - PM me with an email address - two of us wrote the origonal CIL / CIC Orienteering instructor course in 89 - and if I look around I might just be able to find the manuscript to send on.

Once they have a little practice in, the kids respond really well to Night O's - its as simple as a glow stick hung inside the control flag - works well if you position it in a hollow so that its not seen for miles!

I don't know if Silva still makes control flags - I think I've seen other compass Mfgs get into the biz (Sunnuto I think?) Be sure to link up with the local Orienteering association - they have come along way.

Also the Ontario govt has a great set of 1:10,000s out there, most electronic , of just about everywhere, so printing your own is a nice option. (I'm still looking for 1:10,000 plastic  protractors!)


----------



## Jabrwock (18 Aug 2008)

GridNorth said:
			
		

> Once they have a little practice in, the kids respond really well to Night O's - its as simple as a glow stick hung inside the control flag - works well if you position it in a hollow so that its not seen for miles!


Or sink a coffee can with no lid to drop it in. You can see the glow from 10ft away, but any further and it's invisible. Oh, and criss-cross the routes, (team one uses bearing #1 at station1, team 2 uses bearing #2) so if you have multiple teams, they can't just follow each other's flashlights (even red can be seen at certain distances).


----------

