Author Topic: Primary Leadership Qualification Course (PLQ) Mega thread  (Read 643037 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Sheep Dog AT

  • The Fly in Someone's Ointment - Giggity
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 58,120
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,219
Re: Primary Leadership Qualification Course (PLQ) Mega thread
« Reply #525 on: February 09, 2016, 21:54:48 »
Quite unfortunate is an understatement.

This "soldier" should not be considered for leadership training for a number of years. He needs to regain the trust of his superiors and his subordinates. That will take time.
It's possible he was already filling a spot ie A/L and this course was just to cement it.
Apparently infamous for his one liners.
Oh Giggity Well...........Giggity

Offline George Wallace

  • Army.ca Fossil
  • *****
  • 436,675
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 31,552
  • Crewman
Re: Primary Leadership Qualification Course (PLQ) Mega thread
« Reply #526 on: February 09, 2016, 22:01:21 »
PLQ Common is likely the same as the CF PLQ that RCAF types take?


What is old is new again then.  CF PLQ was the "Part 1", with the PLQ(L) being the "Part 2".......or something to that effect (2003/04 timeframe).
DISCLAIMER: The opinions and arguments of George Wallace posted on this Site are solely those of George Wallace and not the opinion of Army.ca and are posted for information purposes only.
Unless so stated, they are reflective of my opinion -- and my opinion only, a right that I enjoy along with every other Canadian citizen.

Offline meni0n

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 22,105
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 922
  • Soldier of leisure
Re: Primary Leadership Qualification Course (PLQ) Mega thread
« Reply #527 on: February 09, 2016, 22:17:33 »
Eye, I  think it might be one of the reasons they are going back to support trades doing CF PLQ due to a large number of complaints of the last portion not having anything relevant to what todays reality of most support trades.

Online PuckChaser

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 949,760
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,742
Re: Primary Leadership Qualification Course (PLQ) Mega thread
« Reply #528 on: February 09, 2016, 22:25:16 »
Eye, I  think it might be one of the reasons they are going back to support trades doing CF PLQ due to a large number of complaints of the last portion not having anything relevant to what todays reality of most support trades.

The easy solution was to just remove the mod. The harder solution (that the Army ran and hid from), is to sit a QSWB to determine actual field skill requirements for Army support trades. The problem is compounded by the fact that we have Combat Support trades (Medics, Sigs, etc) that require significantly more field skills to provide that intimate support than our purple trade members. The chief complaint I heard was that people thought being assessed on patrolling wasn't fair for people who haven't been exposed to a lot of it. That's a simple fix on the PC to reinforce patrolling spirit and skills, while critical failures are leadership points such as planning, command and control, etc.

Offline meni0n

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 22,105
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 922
  • Soldier of leisure
Re: Primary Leadership Qualification Course (PLQ) Mega thread
« Reply #529 on: February 09, 2016, 22:46:17 »
Another solution would be to go back to the pre-2008 CANFORGEN time and put some of the purple trades on CF PLQ and keep PLQ-L for some hard army trades

Offline Jarnhamar

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 366,261
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 12,488
Re: Primary Leadership Qualification Course (PLQ) Mega thread
« Reply #530 on: February 09, 2016, 23:39:55 »
PO201 is a leadership check in the box.
You can evaluate a candidates leadership abilities without evaluating their actual skill when it comes to section attacks recce and the defensive.   

A cook can get lost 6 ways from Sunday doing a recce in the parking lot but if they remained in command and had control then that's leadership. 

A cook or supply tech may also get a better respect for how shitty a week doing patrols or in a trench can be.

There are no wolves on Fenris

Offline Eye In The Sky

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 241,805
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,351
    • VP INTERNATIONAL
Re: Primary Leadership Qualification Course (PLQ) Mega thread
« Reply #531 on: February 10, 2016, 00:13:37 »
What is old is new again then.  CF PLQ was the "Part 1", with the PLQ(L) being the "Part 2".......or something to that effect (2003/04 timeframe).

I am actually quite confused on what is what anymore WRT PLQ.  I did a PLAR for PLQ and ILQ around '07, as I did CLC and SLC but didn't have the 'new' Qual Codes on my MPRR.  During that time there was discussion over emails I was CCd on regarding 'which' PLQ I would get - the CF PLQ or the PLQ - Army or some other form of PLQ that the name eludes me.  It was a headache to try to understand.  Hopefully someone just says ENOUGH OF THIS BS! sooner than later and leaves well enough alone for atleast 5 years.  Thankfully, I was grandfathered PLQ and ILQ and have multiple copies of the letter from SSO NCMPD that states that so I don't have to worry about any personal butt-pain over CAF PLQ Game of Thrones. 

Lastly...didn't the PLQ go to PLP (Primary Leadership Program), and the same for ILQ to ILP?   >:D

« Last Edit: February 10, 2016, 00:18:28 by Eye In The Sky »

Online PuckChaser

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 949,760
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,742
Re: Primary Leadership Qualification Course (PLQ) Mega thread
« Reply #532 on: February 10, 2016, 08:58:55 »
I heard they changed the name a while ago, but it must have died. Army course calendar still says PLQ.

Offline George Wallace

  • Army.ca Fossil
  • *****
  • 436,675
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 31,552
  • Crewman
Re: Primary Leadership Qualification Course (PLQ) Mega thread
« Reply #533 on: February 10, 2016, 10:28:18 »
I am actually quite confused on what is what anymore WRT PLQ.  I did a PLAR for PLQ and ILQ around '07, as I did CLC and SLC but didn't have the 'new' Qual Codes on my MPRR. 

I know that feeling.  I was tasked to the Inf School to run the CAP CP, and on my Inclearance to the School I had to fill out a datasheet on what my Quals were.  They listed PLQ, and not knowing what it was, I did not check it off.  It is a "___________ Plot" to keep us in a constant state of confusion.   [:D
DISCLAIMER: The opinions and arguments of George Wallace posted on this Site are solely those of George Wallace and not the opinion of Army.ca and are posted for information purposes only.
Unless so stated, they are reflective of my opinion -- and my opinion only, a right that I enjoy along with every other Canadian citizen.

Offline Nerf herder

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 24,986
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,031
  • The usual suspect.
Re: Primary Leadership Qualification Course (PLQ) Mega thread
« Reply #534 on: March 08, 2016, 08:07:34 »
Another solution would be to go back to the pre-2008 CANFORGEN time and put some of the purple trades on CF PLQ and keep PLQ-L for some hard army trades

Got some info on this - not going to happen.

The next version of PLQ will be a CAF wide version which will be needed for everyone, regardless of purple or other colour trade. It's basically the PLQ land version. Infantry will carry on to their own module, just like it is now.

There has to be some commonality between trades and you never know when an Air Force clerk might have to lead soldiers. I did my CLC in the early 90s and a couple of them passed. Out of 32 that started, only 9 of us graduated.

I'll leave you all to return to ripping the stuffing out of your teddy bears now.

Regards
Those who beat their swords into plowshares usually end up plowing for those who kept their swords.--Ben Franklin

"Going to war without France is like going deer hunting without your accordion."
    -Norman Schwartzkopf

Online ballz

    ...

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 133,026
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,523
Re: Primary Leadership Qualification Course (PLQ) Mega thread
« Reply #535 on: March 08, 2016, 08:22:49 »
I'll leave you all to return to ripping the stuffing out of your teddy bears now.

My concern with this approach is not that it makes it harder for purple trades / non-army types, but that it lowers the standard for some of the other trades.* That's cool that the infantry has its own PLQ, but IMO the entire combat arms needs that little bit "extra." Applying this model, if the CAF runs a PLQ and then each trade runs its own "add-on" piece that is trade specific, that may fit the bill, or at least in groups (aka combat arms, combat support trades, service support trades). But if they are going to run PLQ CAF-wide but only the Inf gets its own PLQ mod... many other trades suffer in the CAFs attempt to cater to such a huge width of skill sets.

*I was the Crse O for a PLQ-L at Leadership Company a little over a year ago. The swing NCO I had was armoured and was excellent, and had been there for 3 years I believe. I made a remark that the depth of experience between candidates (one was a PRes musician who had never been in the field before this course, while some were seasoned combat arms Corporals) was making it impossible to apply one standard fairly. Either a bunch of people that don't need these skills fail, or a bunch of people that need these skills and don't have them pass. He agreed and said "that's why I've seen the standard drop for the combat arms ever since they moved to this system. It's fine for the Infantry, they have their own PLQ to deal with the problem. What about armoured, arty, sappers? They are lumped in with musicians."
Have you ever danced with the devil in the pale moonlight?

Offline daftandbarmy

  • Army.ca Myth
  • *****
  • 315,340
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 16,252
  • The Older I Get, The Better I Was
Re: Primary Leadership Qualification Course (PLQ) Mega thread
« Reply #536 on: March 08, 2016, 09:30:31 »
My concern with this approach is not that it makes it harder for purple trades / non-army types, but that it lowers the standard for some of the other trades.* That's cool that the infantry has its own PLQ, but IMO the entire combat arms needs that little bit "extra." Applying this model, if the CAF runs a PLQ and then each trade runs its own "add-on" piece that is trade specific, that may fit the bill, or at least in groups (aka combat arms, combat support trades, service support trades). But if they are going to run PLQ CAF-wide but only the Inf gets its own PLQ mod... many other trades suffer in the CAFs attempt to cater to such a huge width of skill sets.

*I was the Crse O for a PLQ-L at Leadership Company a little over a year ago. The swing NCO I had was armoured and was excellent, and had been there for 3 years I believe. I made a remark that the depth of experience between candidates (one was a PRes musician who had never been in the field before this course, while some were seasoned combat arms Corporals) was making it impossible to apply one standard fairly. Either a bunch of people that don't need these skills fail, or a bunch of people that need these skills and don't have them pass. He agreed and said "that's why I've seen the standard drop for the combat arms ever since they moved to this system. It's fine for the Infantry, they have their own PLQ to deal with the problem. What about armoured, arty, sappers? They are lumped in with musicians."

.... meanwhile, it takes longer to formally 'train' an infantry junior leader, who is out of commission on courses for more time than is reasonable.

Sigh....
β€œTo stand on the firing parapet and expose yourself to danger; to stand and fight a thousand miles from home when you're all alone and outnumbered and probably beaten; to spit on your hands and lower the pike; to stand fast over the body of Leonidas the King; to be rear guard at Kunu-Ri; to stand and be still to the Birkenhead Drill; these are not rational acts. They are often merely necessary.”
β€” Jerry Pournelle β€”

Offline George Wallace

  • Army.ca Fossil
  • *****
  • 436,675
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 31,552
  • Crewman
Re: Primary Leadership Qualification Course (PLQ) Mega thread
« Reply #537 on: March 08, 2016, 09:46:36 »
What is old is new again.  We have gone full circle once again.
DISCLAIMER: The opinions and arguments of George Wallace posted on this Site are solely those of George Wallace and not the opinion of Army.ca and are posted for information purposes only.
Unless so stated, they are reflective of my opinion -- and my opinion only, a right that I enjoy along with every other Canadian citizen.

Offline Halifax Tar

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 56,293
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,100
  • Ready Aye Ready
Re: Primary Leadership Qualification Course (PLQ) Mega thread
« Reply #538 on: March 08, 2016, 10:10:54 »
Just speaking for the Navy here but are they going to start posting Infanteers into the leadership schools to teach the army side of things ?   

The PLQ already has little if anything to do with what a sailor will do at the primary leadership level so this only exacerbates the issue and makes it harder on anyone who isn't army and doesn't have any army experience.

I see the need for commonality in training,  but expecting a stoker or a WENG Tech to be able to set up a defensive or run a section attack is just silly.  While he may get the basics in the short time he needs to know it, read knowing it well enough to pass, it will be quickly info dumped as soon as they are back in the MCR. 

It's wasted training value on those who don't need it.  It boggles my mind that the RCN hasn't created its own Navy-centric PLQ it expects its "hard sea" folks to complete that would actually be of value and have some take away points.

Why not bring the whole necessity of a PLQ into question ?  I mean if ones trade has deemed them well enough to lead at a junior level why is that not good enough ?   
« Last Edit: March 08, 2016, 10:25:53 by Halifax Tar »
Lead me, follow me or get the hell out of my way

Offline Jarnhamar

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 366,261
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 12,488
Re: Primary Leadership Qualification Course (PLQ) Mega thread
« Reply #539 on: March 08, 2016, 12:05:57 »

It's fine for the Infantry, they have their own PLQ to deal with the problem. What about armoured, arty, sappers? They are lumped in with musicians."

I would give the combat arms their own PLQ.  Emphasis on section attacks, recce, urban ops, defensive, calling for artillery fire and something vehicle related like vehicle recce or convoy ops.

This way all 4 trades have their thing and no one will feel left out. All those activities would be something all four trades may be exposed to.
« Last Edit: March 08, 2016, 12:38:36 by Jarnhamar »
There are no wolves on Fenris

Offline BinRat55

    ???

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 19,940
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,125
  • Lead by example.
Re: Primary Leadership Qualification Course (PLQ) Mega thread
« Reply #540 on: March 08, 2016, 12:14:09 »
Just speaking for the Navy here but are they going to start posting Infanteers into the leadership schools to teach the army side of things ?   

The PLQ already has little if anything to do with what a sailor will do at the primary leadership level so this only exacerbates the issue and makes it harder on anyone who isn't army and doesn't have any army experience.

I see the need for commonality in training,  but expecting a stoker or a WENG Tech to be able to set up a defensive or run a section attack is just silly.  While he may get the basics in the short time he needs to know it, read knowing it well enough to pass, it will be quickly info dumped as soon as they are back in the MCR. 

It's wasted training value on those who don't need it.  It boggles my mind that the RCN hasn't created its own Navy-centric PLQ it expects its "hard sea" folks to complete that would actually be of value and have some take away points.

Why not bring the whole necessity of a PLQ into question ?  I mean if ones trade has deemed them well enough to lead at a junior level why is that not good enough ?

And for me, therein lies the issue - Halifax touched on it. The "hard" trades. You have one RCR, one Stoker, one AVS Tech... right. Arrowhead to figs 123456. Reconstitute on 4.

I am a purple trade. That means I can end up as combat service support (I just came from 4 ESR) where I taught orders and battle procedure to my younger staff (who BTW were Land, Air AND Sea DEU) Where do we fit in? I did a JLC / JNCO (JNCO being the old CLC) and after the JLC portion, we watched one Musician and one Dental Tech go bye-bye. The Supply Techs / Maintainers were the only non-combat arms on the CLC. I personally know one of the Dental Techs and she is an amazing person - as well as a highly qualified and respected CWO!

I like to think I was better off having done it!
Never interrupt your enemy while he is making a mistake - Napoleon Bonaparte

Offline dangerboy

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 340,674
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,083
Re: Primary Leadership Qualification Course (PLQ) Mega thread
« Reply #541 on: March 08, 2016, 16:04:38 »
Just speaking for the Navy here but are they going to start posting Infanteers into the leadership schools to teach the army side of things ?   


I can't see that happening anytime soon, we don't have the Infantry positions at the 3 Div TCs and the Infantry school fully manned.  As much as some infantry soldiers might like to get posted to Halifax or Esquimalt, I don't think that the Corps can afford to lose the PYs.
All right, they're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us... they can't get away this time.
- Lt Gen Lewis B. Puller, USMC

Offline Eye In The Sky

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 241,805
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,351
    • VP INTERNATIONAL
Re: Primary Leadership Qualification Course (PLQ) Mega thread
« Reply #542 on: March 08, 2016, 18:00:41 »
My concern with this approach is not that it makes it harder for purple trades / non-army types, but that it lowers the standard for some of the other trades.* That's cool that the infantry has its own PLQ, but IMO the entire combat arms needs that little bit "extra." Applying this model, if the CAF runs a PLQ and then each trade runs its own "add-on" piece that is trade specific, that may fit the bill, or at least in groups (aka combat arms, combat support trades, service support trades). But if they are going to run PLQ CAF-wide but only the Inf gets its own PLQ mod... many other trades suffer in the CAFs attempt to cater to such a huge width of skill sets.

*I was the Crse O for a PLQ-L at Leadership Company a little over a year ago. The swing NCO I had was armoured and was excellent, and had been there for 3 years I believe. I made a remark that the depth of experience between candidates (one was a PRes musician who had never been in the field before this course, while some were seasoned combat arms Corporals) was making it impossible to apply one standard fairly. Either a bunch of people that don't need these skills fail, or a bunch of people that need these skills and don't have them pass. He agreed and said "that's why I've seen the standard drop for the combat arms ever since they moved to this system. It's fine for the Infantry, they have their own PLQ to deal with the problem. What about armoured, arty, sappers? They are lumped in with musicians."

I know I've said this before, but I think the way to go is a CF PLQ (like the former JLC) for anyone not cbt arms, a PLQ-Land (like the former CLC) for all Armd, Arty, Engr types and a PLQ-Inf (like the former ISCC).

Like Nerf Herder, I did my CLC in the early 90s when there was 'everyone not Infantry' loaded on CLC; my fire team partner was a young female Fin Clerk who didn't know what an ORV was let alone ever occupied one before.

This whole 'name changing BS' for CLC has been going on since 1996 at least; 20 years ago this coming spring/summer I was instructing on the 'new' JNCO-OAS pilot courses.  They were running JNCO-OAS (Jnr NCO - Other Arms and Services aka CLC) with everyone except Inf on it, and a course then called JNCO-Army which was the old ISCC.  Here we sit 20 years later of ******* around, looking like we are going back to the 'way it was' in 1993 when Inf did ISCC and everyone else did CLC.

I also think that people forget the formal and informal training and mentoring that happens in each trade before AND after PLQ trg.  A young Armd Cpl isn't going to become a fantastic crew commander because of PLQ, nor will an AVN tech become a better shift M-slash because of PLQ on it's own. 

The PLQ already has little if anything to do with what a sailor will do at the primary leadership level so this only exacerbates the issue and makes it harder on anyone who isn't army and doesn't have any army experience.

I see the need for commonality in training,  but expecting a stoker or a WENG Tech to be able to set up a defensive or run a section attack is just silly.  While he may get the basics in the short time he needs to know it, read knowing it well enough to pass, it will be quickly info dumped as soon as they are back in the MCR. 

It's wasted training value on those who don't need it.  It boggles my mind that the RCN hasn't created its own Navy-centric PLQ it expects its "hard sea" folks to complete that would actually be of value and have some take away points.

Why not bring the whole necessity of a PLQ into question ?  I mean if ones trade has deemed them well enough to lead at a junior level why is that not good enough ?

This.

The Air Force taught CF PLQ for its own folks at the Air Command Academy in Borden.  Why?  Because the average hard air trade Cpl doesn't care or need to know about section attacks and recce patrols. 

The main reason a common CF PLQ doesn't work is not everyone Jnr NCO in the Army does the same job, let alone in the entire CAF.  Have a common PLQ QS, let the Navy run one for RCN folks, let the RCAF run one like it has been and let the C Army run their own.  Each environment is aware of what its folks NEED to get out of their leadership training for Jnr NCOs.

Last point...STOP promoting people before they have their PLQ.  Same goes for ILQ.  Fix the system and then stop goddamn breaking it.
« Last Edit: March 08, 2016, 18:14:59 by Eye In The Sky »

Offline George Wallace

  • Army.ca Fossil
  • *****
  • 436,675
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 31,552
  • Crewman
Re: Primary Leadership Qualification Course (PLQ) Mega thread
« Reply #543 on: March 08, 2016, 18:39:50 »

Last point...STOP promoting people before they have their PLQ.  Same goes for ILQ.

That has always been a sour point for me.  It is, and was, complete "FULL RETARD".

  Fix the system and then stop goddamn breaking it.

But then no one in that lofty position would get a check in the box for promoting change.   >:D
DISCLAIMER: The opinions and arguments of George Wallace posted on this Site are solely those of George Wallace and not the opinion of Army.ca and are posted for information purposes only.
Unless so stated, they are reflective of my opinion -- and my opinion only, a right that I enjoy along with every other Canadian citizen.

Offline kratz

    Well into the COVID-19 routine.

  • Float, Move, Fight
  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 268,128
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,371
Re: Primary Leadership Qualification Course (PLQ) Mega thread
« Reply #544 on: March 08, 2016, 18:57:58 »
I know I've said this before, but I think the way to go is a CF PLQ (like the former JLC) for anyone not cbt arms, a PLQ-Land (like the former CLC) for all Armd, Arty, Engr types and a PLQ-Inf (like the former ISCC).

Quote
I also think that people forget the formal and informal training and mentoring that happens in each trade before AND after PLQ trg.   A young Armd Cpl isn't going to become a fantastic crew commander because of PLQ, nor will an AVN tech become a better shift M-slash because of PLQ on it's own. 

It was JLC when I joined, and the clerks who attended are doing well now.

I can count my mentors in trade. If the entire RCN / CAF was based on their skill, knowledge and dedication, we'd be OK as a force.
I'm just a ******* clerk (retired)



Quote from: Pipe *General Call*
"Tanning Stations on the flight deck"


Remember, this site is unofficial and privately owned. The site benefits from the presence of current members willing to answer questions.

Offline meni0n

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 22,105
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 922
  • Soldier of leisure
Re: Primary Leadership Qualification Course (PLQ) Mega thread
« Reply #545 on: March 08, 2016, 20:35:00 »
Army calendar is out. Training days remain the same and no new CANFORGEN so this looks like just another rumor.

Offline BinRat55

    ???

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 19,940
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,125
  • Lead by example.
Re: Primary Leadership Qualification Course (PLQ) Mega thread
« Reply #546 on: March 09, 2016, 08:39:54 »
Last point...STOP promoting people before they have their PLQ.  Same goes for ILQ.  Fix the system and then stop goddamn breaking it.

Yes. An amazing point. I honestly don't understand why this hasn't been fixed already. Since January alone, I personally (not second hand - personally) know of 5 people who were promoted a few years ago and now have to relinquish their leaf. What a waste - not their fault, but time and resources.
Never interrupt your enemy while he is making a mistake - Napoleon Bonaparte

Offline MissMercury

  • Guest
  • *
  • 460
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 18
Re: Primary Leadership Qualification Course (PLQ) Mega thread
« Reply #547 on: April 02, 2016, 21:24:46 »
I am currently on PLQ, just finished Mod 2. Anyone have some handy acronyms for remembering the 16 steps of Battle Procedure and other MOD 3 stuff?

Thanks!
"Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man's character, give him power."
- Abraham Lincoln

Offline MissMercury

  • Guest
  • *
  • 460
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 18
Re: Primary Leadership Qualification Course (PLQ) Mega thread
« Reply #548 on: April 02, 2016, 22:20:51 »
I did see that post, however it was originally posted in 2002. Seemed very outdated and I wasn't really willing to sift through 17+ pages of comments in one post.
« Last Edit: April 02, 2016, 22:24:19 by MissMercury »
"Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man's character, give him power."
- Abraham Lincoln

Offline Jarnhamar

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 366,261
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 12,488
Re: Primary Leadership Qualification Course (PLQ) Mega thread
« Reply #549 on: April 03, 2016, 08:20:30 »
I am currently on PLQ, just finished Mod 2. Anyone have some handy acronyms for remembering the 16 steps of Battle Procedure and other MOD 3 stuff?

Thanks!

Not what you're asking for but I'll post anyways  ;D
I think you're highlighting a failing of the PLQ course. We force students to memorize various laundry lists without taking the time to explain the significance of how they really apply to junior leaders. You (we) spend more time and effort memorizing those lists than understanding them, and promptly forget them once we pass the PO check.  Principles of leadership is one of the major ones. Students memorize it but then draw a blank when you tell them to apply it to running PT.




There are no wolves on Fenris