Eagle94-A1

That is what we had and didn't work

Growing up, we had established patrols, so when you joined the troop and placed in a patrol, you may not have a choice in the matter. Twice a year we were able to switch patrols, start a new one if needed, elect PLs etc. Usually we stuck with the troop's original names. When the patrol ceased to exist, the flag was "retired" and brought back when needed. That's what happened when I became PL, one fo the original patrols was brought back and we were given their flag, patches, etc. HOWEVER we didn't like the name, and wanted to change. Only "restriction" was from the SPL: had to be a bird "Birds of a Feather flock together." Also he stated when we changed the name, it would be a brand new patrol, with no history, flag, etc. We were cool with it, and changed.

I don't know, but I was told the following: 1) It is too long, 2) it is too repetitive 3) "I'd rather shoot myself with a shotgun than go through that again" or words tyo that affect from my DE who had to do all the online training to go to DE school.

Sad thing is this has been going on for 4 years now. Multiple people have talked to the SM about this: 3 CMs, a WDL, a UC, old SM, training chair ( former ASM with the troop) and myself. I even spent a night with the troop so that they would have a second adult present, and we discussed this and other things around the fire for several hours. In one head out the other. I am very slowly coming to grips with the situation. Hate to see the troop die, especially since I helped get it started by training the original adult leaders, and working with the original Scouts on occasion. But I made my choice, and son made his. I gotta stop looking back.

You name it, they will create a patch for it. Originally the patrols were named after birds and animals. But nowadays, if you can't find it, they will create a patch design. There is even a T.A.R.D.I.S. Patrol patch.

Well, it happened again. for the second year in a row, no Cubs from my pack are going to the CO's troop. Out of the 4 Cubs crossing over this weekend, 3 are going to one troop, 1 is coming over to mine. And no one confirmed about the 1 coming to us until today! Interesting thing is this, their WDL was adamant about keeping the den together and joining the CO's pack up until June, when I stepped back from the pack some. The DL was upset when one Cub crossed over "early" in June ( Scout had a late birthday and met age requirements to become a Boy Scout) and joined my troop. I don't know what happened between June and last month, but something happened and his den are going elsewhere. The only thing I can think of was the lack of involvement with the Cubs by the troop. They didn't go to council camporee (which encourages Webelos to go and has a Cub World), they invited the Webelos to only one camp out, the district camporee (and that was a fiasco since all the troop did was stay in camp all day and did not do any of the events except the gateway and a game), they do not provide den chiefs, they didn't do Scouting for Food, and only had one Scout attend the Scout Sunday service we coordinated with them. As for this weekend's Webeloree, the SM said they will be there camping with the pack, but the troop still has not told the Webeloree Chief they are going, or which event they will be working. And they way it sounded from the parents' Facebook posts last night, they may not have any leaders going! Yet they complain when other troops invite the pack's Webelos to camp. They complain when other troops provide den chiefs. They complain when Scouts from another troop help the pack with Scouting for Food. They complain when Cubs go to another CO's Scout Sunday services. And they complain when other troops invite the Webelos Den to camp with them at Webeloree. Folks, if you don't do anything with your CO's Cub Scout pack, then do not be surprised when no one joins your troop. Thanks in advance for letting me vent.

I agree.

I admit not much. Compression rate is 100-120/ minute now, and using a cell phone and leaving it on speaker are the two I remember from my instructor update/recert a few months back. I know the BLS for Healthcare providers training has been updated with 2 types of training videos, prehosptial and hospital. I personally like the prehosptial because it covers what will be seen in the real world, and has a greater emphasis on that aspect. Whereas the hospital one goes over real work scenarios briefly. First aid I haven't seen yet; new books and materials come out latter in the year. And I don't have a copy of the dull updates in front of me at the moment. But trust me, and you've probably seen it too teaching, those who don't practice on a regular basis will have some issues. Heck I screwed up on the update. I was doing 2 man child CPR, and forgot that the dummy was suppose to be a child. I kept doing one man until my partner reminded me it's a child.

Now I can't comment on WFA since I do not teach it. But I can comment on CPR since I do. And I bet the stats are similar hence the 2 years cycles for WFA. There are studies that show that folks who do not practice CPR on a regular basis do lose the skill. While I work with folks who could probably teach the class better than me since they use the skills regularly, i.e. my emergency room and ICU coworkers, there are some folks who I am glad take it every two years to refresh their skills. Those are the support staff, i.e. maintenance, environmental services, IT, etc. Standard First Aid is the same way, but I bet if it was more hands one people would remember it better. Sitting and watching a video is not real conducive to learning IMHO. And it seems as if everything is going to 2 year cycles. I teach multiple courses, and every 2 years I have to go through some sort of recert process. Except CPR. I got recertified last year, and had to get recertified with the new science this year. My other certs are the same.

No, he created the Brownsea 22 ( BA22) syllabus and crest. JLTC has elements from BA22. Some folks made their own patches using the BA22 crest for JLTC, but it had it's own design. Eagle94-A1 COCKY CURLEY! BA22 Staff JLTC

Ok this was with adults, but I used elements of BA22 training to supplement the IOLS training, and make it fun. One thing we did extra with ILST, which is VERY dry, is added a lot of initiative games to it to kick it up a notch.

A few years back, between when I left as a DE and I came back as the district training chair, the training chair did just that: IOLS done at the unit level. Long story short, it was a disaster. No consistency in training as each unit did their own thing, and some units pencil whipped the training. Someone put a stop to it, but the results lingered. I staffed a BALOO course in conjunction with an IOLS weekend, the IOLS SM cut the training really short, and they spent most of the time around the campfire telling stories. When I asked him about the training, I was told that was how they did it when he was trained with the troop. Another time after I stepped down as training chair, one of the folks who was trained during this time was asked to staff the course. He was shocked to see what was supposed to have been covered when he took the course. He too said a lot was not covered by his troop's trainer.

Tahawk, You should have seen the original version of that statement! Seriously, the national training committee posted on FB how they would not accept older basic training for JTE and the "trained strip," and that folks would need to redo basic training every time the course changed. It caused a storm of protest. Thankfully after a week or so, they came back with the statement you quoted.

I know of a few cases where Scouters WITH youth Scouting experience, including an Eagle, needed the IOLS course because they were not campers. Yep, they grew up under the ISP of the 70s.

We got a guy in our district who has been involved in Scouting since the early 1950s (actually he jokes he was born into Scouting since his dad was a DE at the time), is an Eagle, went to Philmont approx. 3-5 times as a camper, worked summer camp staff for a large number of years, worked at Philmont over 20 summers, etc etc, is a Vigil, Founder's Award recipeint, and is a Hornaday Badge recipient. Is considered "untrained" because he hasn't done IOLS. Had to drag him to SM specific.

I've been fortunate in that none of the BORs I've sat on had any actionable feedback. SMs usually caught it before the BOR. Now my Eagle BOR was interesting. The district advancement chair was going to deny me my Eagle because he did not approve the project, one of his predecessors approved it 4 or 5 years previous. Thankfully when he answered my question as to why I am not being approved for Eagle, I was able to politely, and firmly told him he was wrong for denying it and how do I go about appealing the decision because his predecessor who DID approve my project, was sitting on my EBOR, and that it did not make any sense that he as the current DAC needed to approve it. I was sent back out of the room while the EBOR discussed the matter. I was approved.

That was a topic of discussion at both the district committee meeting and CSRT last nite. New DE had to go through it in order to go to DE school, and said he would " rather take a shotgun to my head than go through the new training ever again." We are going to be doing a live version for everyone in the Fall.

Now that you mention it, I think you may be right. The decline in outdoor emphasis, as well as the rule making prohibiting traditional Scoutcraft activities like pioneering towers and bridges, does indeed correspond to changes in the BSA's policy regarding female leaders.

He is not interested in being a UC. While not approached directly about it, you need to hear him complain about rechartering Unfortunately, the unit that most needs a good UC would not listen to him, or any UC for that matter. But I am not going there tonite.,

@@hicountry , It's not just the Boy Scout level training and IOLS. I had to sit through BALOO in order to get that checked off so I could help take the pack camping. And I taught IOLS. And I too was one of those "untrained" ASMs back in the day who had a whole boatload of outdoor and Scouting experience. I had to sit through SM Fundamentals, which included a model meeting and model camp out. This was after spending 7 years as a Scout, going through Brownsea 22, and going through Eagle. At least with the SMF course I learned about the paperwork side of Scouting. One reason why I try and find folks who have the knowledge, skills, and abilities to teach the classes, whether they are "trained" or not. I hated sitting through courses I could teach, and I don't want folks to do that. Which is another reason I complained heavily when National tried to make folks go through training every time the course name changed.

HOPEFULLY NEVER!!!!!!! Seriously, not everyone can afford all the electronics that are available these days. And imagine needing your handbook on a trip for an emergency, only to find out the battery ran out? On another, professional FYI, Did you know that NASA has a huge warehouse of reel to reel data storage units that they are unable to read because they no longer have the hardware to read it? And did you know that it is easier to read declassified WWII and Korean War documents than it is Gulf War documents, because DOD doesn't have the software and/or hardware to read those documents any longer? Technology, aint it wonderful?

DDDDDUUUUUUHHHHHH! Yep, I need to think outside the box. Now I gotta practice doing that.

One of the reasons why national has not made training mandatory yet is that the SCOUTNET training records are a mess. For whatever reason,some councils like mine were not recording training in their records, just storing the paperwork. When national started tracking training, then they started keeping records. BUT all the old timers who have "been there, taught that, have the beads" were listed as "Untrained" For example, my district commissioner, who not only taught commissioner training on the local level, but was PTC staff on the topic was "untrained." (Remind me never to approach him ever again with computer errors ) My son's SM, who was the training chair when I was a DE and I helped staff some of his courses was "untrained" You get the picture? To make matters even more interesting, whomever at national that was creating the training codes at the time, only created codes for the current courses. For example, my SM Fundamentals course from '94 was not listed. And don't even mention some of the 1960s and 70s training courses that some of our leaders had taken. So I created a "training inventory" form that I gave to every leader that had all the current training with codes, older training I knew about, and left spaces for some of the additional training through the years. Once that was done I created a spreadsheet with the names, IDs, and training codes with dates. Here is where it got interesting, and it is coming back to bite us again. I was told by my DE after he consulted with the powers that be, to use the current training codes, but the original dates of the training. So my SMF became Intro to Scouting, SM Specific, and IOLS with a 1994 date. At the time, SCOUTNET accepted that, and people were "trained" once again. But now the issue has been fixed, and the original solution is causing issues. My Intro to Scouting, SM Specific, and IOLS with a 1994 date is no longer valid, hence I am "untrained" once again. SOOOOO the process is being repeated with an updated inventory with codes. However some older trainings are still not listed. However we have adapted and overcame. One thing my DE recommended, and I have done ever since ESPECIALLY since some at national want folks to redo training every time the course name changes, is whenever I teach a course, I put my name as a student as well as instructor. That way if national ever decides to make people redo training every time the course name changes, I will be showing up as current. Thankfully at the moment national is allowing council and/or district training chairs to decide whether to accept the older training or not.

I've sat on BORs of Scouts I've worked with via the OA when I was OA chapter advisor. Long story short, we had some troops with weak committees. SM of the troops asked, and the district advancement chair said OK for BORs for these 4 troops. We had a "tough" panel: DE, DAC, me, and 2 SMs from another troop. Most were going for the T-2-1 requirements, but 2 were going for Star. Why we did it? The troop committees were "weak," in that they were pretty much in name only. We were not going to penalize the Scouts, especially SCOUTREACH Scouts,

One "trick" I've used to get people to training is have them teach part of the class. For example, the Eagle Scout who served multiple years on camp staff, served in the Army, and is a 3 beader, I got him to teach cooking skills in IOLs so he could be "trained." Another Eagle, who worked multiple years on camp staff, did 3 treks at Philmont, I had teach orienteering at IOLS. A third Eagle, who also worked summer camp, was a combat medic in Iraq and Afghanistan, is currently an EMT and has been to Philmont once, yep taught First Aid at IOLS. Adapt, improvise, and overcome.