Jump to content

Central Region

Sign in to follow this  

Sections, Lodges and local discussions

14 topics in this forum

    • 2 replies
    • 170 views
    • 11 replies
    • 328 views
  1. Section C-3A

    • 2 replies
    • 1127 views
    • 47 replies
    • 4226 views
  2. OA let my son down

    • 31 replies
    • 3584 views
    • 4 replies
    • 944 views
    • 1 reply
    • 946 views
    • 0 replies
    • 855 views
    • 10 replies
    • 1072 views
    • 5 replies
    • 1000 views
  3. Central Region NLS

    • 2 replies
    • 946 views
    • 1 reply
    • 958 views
  4. When to wear an OA sash

    • 4 replies
    • 1231 views
  5. test

    • 1 reply
    • 951 views
Sign in to follow this  
  • LATEST POSTS

    • Once upon a time you, WB was two separate courses, one for Cub Scout Trainers, the other for Boy Scouters. And very briefly there was a 3rd course for Explorer Advisers. I do not know the requirements for the Cub Scout Trainer WB course, but the Boy Scout version required completion of all basic training, a minimum of 2 years tenure in a Boy Scout volunteer position (I am told it could be waived only if you aged out as a youth at 18, so an 18 or 19 year old could do it) and be invited. The folks taking the course were experienced Scouters, and the course was to improve themselves and learn and expand their knowledge to bring back and help train their youth to run things. I admit, I am not a WBer. But I went through BA22, and staffed JLTC, and both are based on WB. In fact one of my JLTC staffers took WB 3 months after staffing JLTC. I was unable to take that course and told him I planned on taking the next one. He told me, "Don't waste your time. Everything we taught at JLT is taught and WB. Only difference between the two courses is the ticket." When WB21C came out, they combined to the courses and tried to make it "one size fits all." A lot of important program specific material has been left out that is really needed. And I have seen many folks take WB as Cub Scout leaders, and think they know it all when they move up to Boy Scouts.   Powderhorn was originally designed for Venturing as a way for Venturign advisers to learn hor to help their crews plan and execute HA activities. I do not believe it covers a lot of advanced skills . except whatever  type of mini HA activity is planned.
    • Doesn’t powderhorn function as a more advanced outdoor skills course?
    • I am not aware of one. At least not officially. 
    • There have been a couple references in this thread to A-IOLS. Is there an advanced version of that training currently?
    • I dont think those who have issues with wB believe the scouters who have taken the course are not dedicated, or do not have the desire to be better scouters. I percieve the issue to stem from the idea that wB training is the pinnacle of all scouter training. For me, this is where the disconnect arises. wB is good training, but it in no way meets the standard that it aspires to be. This is not necessarily the wB program, but the inexperienced folks taking the course. Most just don't have the pre-requisite experience and training to fully benefit from a top level training. Hence my suggestion for training levels. If the concept of levels was too much like "rank" then ditch it. The main point is that too many scouters are basically starting and ending with wB. There needs to be significant training and experience for a scouter leading up to what is claimed to be the pinnacle of training. If not, we are putting the whipped cream and cherry on top of nothing.
  • Who's Online (See full list)

×