I have (I was involved in the consultation on its redesign, because I'm sad).I don’t understand the hatred for JSP101.
Out of curiosity, who has read the very latest version on the defence intranet?
Indeed. And unsurprisingly he's wrong about staff college. 50% of the score comes from blind marking of standardised assesments*. The remainder is quite tightly controlled assessment of more general exercises.He probably left the Army before you were born.
Don't sweat it.
What's that you say? Stonker jumping on his favourite hobby horse, without so much as a shred of evidence?Indeed. And unsurprisingly he's wrong about staff college. 50% of the score comes from blind marking of standardised assesments*. The remainder is quite tightly controlled assessment of more general exercises.
Recent ICSCs have seen a PQO and an ETS officer come top of the course.
*There's some discussion to be had about how relevant these exams are to actually being a good staff officer, but that's a different point.
A few years ago I'd have agreed, now, we're on our arrse, you've got no chance of binning someone for being weak and ineffective. Throw in a few major sanctions and a gross misconduct and you might be on to something.It’s a matter of will - and following the correct process.
It really isn’t that difficult.
I do usually enjoy your posts. But this is thoroughly disingenuous: things have changed and quite dramatically, and the utter collapse of manning is only one of them.So, that's what's meant by 'things have moved on a little in the last 30 years'
I guess going downhill could be presented as progress of a sort