HelpfulTracks

14 minutes ago, TAHAWK said:

1/3 of all Wood Badge staff are primarily selected by BSA decree based on a factor other than competence; namely, total lack of experience staffing Wood Badge.

Course Directors, who should be highly competent, are not allowed to ever hold a significant staff position again, unless that has changed recently.

Just nuts.

We have a nice solution for maintaining that knowledge/history/esprit de corp etc. Our "Committee" is made up of a large number former course directors.  They are not official staff, but they are part of our Wood Badge family and add so much to our courses. They are great as resources for participants, but even more so for the staff. They are our wise sages, advisers, storytellers, song-masters and cheerleaders.

1 hour ago, .40AET said:

After reading for months on this site, I asked for 2 books for Christmas. These are the North Star to which my compass points. My wife gave them a special place on the fireplace mantle. 

Those are very nice, I have them as well. Mine are from different printings but both are 3rd handbooks.

I love the old books and anytime I can find one in good shape I try to add it to my collection. They are full of great knowledge and history of Scouting. It is also interesting to see how things are different and the same. My oldest dates back to 1922.

4 hours ago, TAHAWK said:

Start with this: understanding the Patrol Method is not even a learning objective of Scoutmaster basic training per the current syllabus.  It should be THE objective.  

I agree with some of your post and cannot disagree with some of it.

So I'll just make a few points.

1. I use the syllabus as just that, an outline. The syllabus even states the as a trainer we need to fill the gaps. The syllabus actuall covers very little of the real material, most of what is needed is found elsewhere
2. I am careful about who I chose to be trainers, because I am a radical evangelist for boy-led and patrol method. If you are not living/teaching that, then no thank you
3. When I have new trainers, I am always nearby to step-in and assist/set the record straight
4. When I do teach alone or with one or two others I know well, we often hit the syllabus high-points and make it more conversational, so we can participants can ask questions
5. Everything I have read, even GBB's writings, the troop serves a purpose, but the patrol this the foundation
6. When you boil down the actual training (depending on how Gathering/opening and closing are handled) there is only 3-1/2 to 4 hours of training. Some sections could easily have that much time devoted to them, Patrol Method, Annual planning, Advancement come to mind. Because much of what SM/ASM's walk in the door knowing, needs to be unlearned, which take even longer than teaching.
7. Unfortunately, longer training will not happen, as it is increasingly difficult to get people to take a half day out of their schedule for training now
8. I do use the Meeting plan and Troop Program Features to teach, but I also teach them how to use them based on where a troop is in their boy-led cycle. I used them in my units to get Scouts accustomed to making plans and using PLC for troop decisions, based on the Patrols decisions. I teach using it as a guide and once they have grasped that I tell them use it/alter it/throw it out as they see fit. A meeting, outing, activity needs to be what the Scouts want, not what the book or SM says. If PLC wants 100% of the time as Patrol time, more power to them. If they want none of it because they regularly meet as patrols, outstanding.
9. To be honest, I do better teaching/training and coaching from my Commissioner position, I can actually see units in action, and talk about Patrol method and boy-led and give advice

I am not sure it sounds like it with the post, but I am 100% in tune with you on Patrol Method and Boy-led. Which is why I spend so much time (and money) with old Scouting books and material, I want to make sure I have everything available to make every Scouts experience the best it can be.

Maybe I stray too far away from the BSA company line in some folks eyes, but I prefer to look at the syllabus as a guide on what to cover. I expound on the different areas as time allows, which to me really is the problem, not enough time.

3 hours ago, Col. Flagg said:

I have never found BSA training to be wanting in time consumption. That's one of their biggest problems is the length of time they take. They take 6 hours to teach 2 hours worth of material.

Material is their next problem. It is inadequate and out-dated.

Training the trainer is the next deficiency. Their materials for teaching delivery -- and actual course content -- have few good examples and don't teach trainers how to teach well.

I guess it is a matter of perspective. If you know the material then it may seem like a waste of time. For others, there is not nearly enough time. Then I have those who "know all about it", that are consistently wrong in their approach. During my last SM Specific class I had two brand new Scoutmasters, who, by their own admission, did not know a thing. I could have spent two days with them and not answered all their questions. I have also have those that argue with me because "his boys can't handle that much authority and responsibility."

I am perplexed at the out of date comment, when most would argue we need to be going back to methods from the 20's and 30's.

As for Training the Trainer, I'll go back to my original comment about not enough time. I have taken the T3 course and I think the subject was short shifted due to trying to cram too much into a short period of time, it only allowed for highlights and superficial teaching. I was (still am) a trainer long before I got into Scouting, so while I agree that those courses are lacking, I look back to my professional training and there is not comparison in terms of the time spent compared to BSA. I guess that reflects the idea that people are willing ot take the time if their livelihoods are at stake but they are not as interested if it is volunteer work.

12 hours ago, TAHAWK said:

 I assure you that I know what went into the syllabus in 2014, and how much more then then head of training wanted to put in before he was promoted out of that job.  It is weak tea, indeed, and a great improvement in that for fourteen years nothing was taught about the Patrol Method.

 

In summary:

1. The patrol, not the troop,  is the primary setting in which a boy experiences Boy Scouting.

 2. A "patrol" is  a small, largely self-selected  team of friends who, under the leadership of a Scout they elect,  experience a Scouting program they collectively plan.

 3. A "troop" is the youth-led “league” in which the patrol teams, who help plan "league" program through representative democracy,  play the “game” of Boy Scouting beyond the patrol level.

 4. Beyond considerations of safety, adults in Scouting are:  a) teachers of leadership; b) coaches,  mentors, and resources; and c) examples of Scouting values.

 

I am not sure what materials you are referencing, but I have taught SM/ASM Specific using the last 2 Syllabi, dating back to 2010, and the Patrol method is very much a part of that training. In fact, we break the group of trainee's into patrols as well. Then we use the patrol method during IOLS and Wood Badge.

The training far too short for the amount if information we are trying to teach, but it is there. And if trainers are following the program, they are teaching it.

I keep reading that we do not teach patrol method anymore, but it is just not true, at least not in my Council. And I hear we do not teach it the "old" way, but I have dozens of old hard bound books dating back to the 1920's and many more on PDF. I constantly reference them for teaching a wide range of classes. For the most part, what we are teaching reflects Patrol Method as it was then and now. Troops putting those lessons in action may be an entirely different story, but Patrol method is certainly being taught.

12 hours ago, TAHAWK said:

As safety has been eliminated as a topic for I.O.L.S. effective last year, I was a'wondering where new Scouters are going to learn about that topic.

Safety has not been a specific topic for IOLS since at least 2010, I cannot say before that. First Aid was removed a couple of years ago however.

Safety, is a part of IOLS throughout the scheduled training though, just not a specific topic. I do occasionally see classes on G2SS at University of Scouting and other events.

I will say that it is difficult to get volunteers to training, so there is a constant effort to reduce the in person training in order to make it more appealing. In doing so, volunteers are offered less and less.

But it is a vicious cycle. I cannot not tell you how many SM's have told me they have been a Scout and Scouter for XX years, and they don't need training, as I watch them go off and "command" their unit and lead/teach things incorrectly.

1 hour ago, GoingTheDistance said:

Thank you for the invite. My son loves the idea of being a boy scout, and I want him to have a great experience... there's just several incidents to have occured that's left me baffled and unsure if this is the right program for him. 

I have a few observations:

1. Do not judge the program by a single pack. Units vary wildly.
2. I have not seen you state that you have had a discussion with the Cubmaster. If not, you should. If you have, what was the response?
3. A Boy Scout does not equal Den Chief. Den Chiefs must be selected by SPL with guidance of the SM, and approved by the Cubmaster and Pack Committee to be recommended as Den Chief to the Den Leader. The Den Chief must be a n older Scout (not well defined, but I am not sure 12 would be considered older). Many Troops will not allow a youth to become Den Chief until they reach First Class ( I was told this is not required by BSA from a parent that complained about the SM's rule, but he rule makes sense to me).
4. Den Chief does not equal baby sitter. The Den Leader is still responsible. Shirking that duty is not acceptable. If I were a Cubmaster, I do not think I would be keen on the idea of a Den Chief serving in the den run by their parent, but that is a personal choice, not BSA policy. 
5. If this unit does not work for you, look for a different unit. Packs are the most abundant unit in BSA, there is likely one, or several, nearby.
6. Please do not take offense to this, but reevaluate your perspective. As a Commissioner I have routinely seen/heard accounts of situations that one or both sides of an issue see though colored lens. Often, once we start talking through the situation, one or both sides see how they may have misinterpreted what was going on. Not saying that is the case here, but it is a good place to start in many cases.

Welcome aboard!

5 hours ago, MattR said:

Asking for 10 full weekends a year plus a week in summer is hard on many scouts. Why this is is another thread, it just is.The result is mixing and matching patrols the meeting before a campout or, as in the case of my troop, small patrols on campouts. This tends to hurt the patrol method in our case or just chuck it completely where troops mix and match scouts.

My first question is what solution did the Scouts come up with?

The family program at Philmont has been around for a while. And from what I hear it’s been pretty successful and well received.

Scouters get to go get some good training and the spouses and children get to have an adventure. 

<sarcasm> Sounds horrible and just plain wrong </sarcasm>

@Tampa Turtle I’m just sorry I can only upvote once

4 hours ago, Col. Flagg said:

But you can't change anything at the district or council level. Why? Old Men's and Women's Club. The WB'ers run everything and if you're not a WB'er then your ideas stink. Or you volunteer, spend hours getting your good ideas put together and supported by the unit only to have some district or council leader poo-poo the idea and literally force you to do it their way. I could go on and on and on.

So that's why many of us, myself included, have stopped doing anything for the district. They are like parasites. They will latch on to you and drain you of your energy without any benefit to you or your unit. So I choose to focus on my unit and make it as good as it can be.

I am sure there are good councils and districts out there. I am not fortunate enough to live in one of those areas. Having tried repeatedly to help "fix" things, I realize it is a futile effort and not worth my time and effort.

I cannot say you are completely wrong, though maybe over generalizing. Every district/council has their problem children (errmmm adults). But I am willing to wager that every district/council also has people willing to figure out how to get around the problem folks and make things work for the youth.

I hold positions in two districts (my home district and inner city), the council and lodge as well. There are absolutely people that are problems, but I generally try to avoid those folks and work around them for what I need. I can tell you, everything I and those working with me do, is meant to improve the experience for the youth. Not all of it is directly aimed at the youth, but it sure is aimed at improving their experience. I also manage to stay active with my unit as well. BTW, I am an evil Wood Badger too!

The point is that I know there are people who will make doing things tough, I try to ignore them and move forward. There are times I bite my tongue till it bleeds, and times I don't (but probably should have).

I think of it like a river, when it starts to dry up, there is a lot of garbage around the banks. And like water, sometimes we have to look for the paths of least resistance. Once you find people of like minds who want to see what is best for the youth,  join up with them (interestingly, it is often the youth themselves). When people realize what is happening is good for the youth they come along. All of a sudden the water is cutting the path with the youth out front, and not looking for the path of least resistance. When the water gets flowing, the momentum of the water just pushed all the garbage away.

1 minute ago, Back Pack said:

I wonder if the IT department is ahead of the policy people. 

I think it is the other way around. Policy folks seem clear (or at least the ones I talked to), but the all of the online places that show your trained status are not up to date.

18 hours ago, Col. Flagg said:

While this is a very cool experience, there are still dangers at base camp. I've seen rattlers and bear in camp, and bear protocol in base camp is required as a result. I think it was 2016 they had to put down 3-4 bear that year, one of which was a repeat offender (I think it was the old 3-legged bear) that kept coming in to base camp looking for freebies.

I would hope that the families get the same training (and adhere to the rules) that the visiting crews do. Otherwise I think I just heard BSA's insurance rates going up.

(and adhere to the rules) <<<<<<< This part.

I would be surprised if Phimont is not teaching them, but for those who have never spent time in the back country it is questionable if it will take root. Not to mention, what they forget about and leave in their vehicles.

Happy Birthday BSA!

On 2/7/2018 at 8:35 AM, HelpfulTracks said:

There was no Venturing YPT option, and the current YPT does not include much of the material tat was in the Venturing version, so I am not sure if the new is supposed to cover both, (I doubt it) or if the new one is not up.

Oddly, this year I still have access to all my apps, but under Training Center:Requirements. IT shows I have no registered positions, not unit, district or council.

Looks like National is still working out the kinks.

16 hours ago, Col. Flagg said:

I had a similar issue. My YPT is good through 2018 so I am not going to waste time taking something that BSA hasn't figured out which one for us to take yet. When they get serious, so will I. In the meantime I have my old, valid YPT.

I just got of the phone with National Member Services. I was told there is only one YPT going forward, and that I am covered. Even though

Even though I have taken the new YPT, online records are not showing me covered for Venturing, just Boy Scouts.

It also concerns me that most of the Venturing info was removed. The old Venturing YPT covered info about sexual misconduct between Venturers, the new one doesn't specifically cover that issue.

16 hours ago, David CO said:

I didn't raise the point before, but since you have yourself broached the subject of being downright nasty, I must say that I am not the one who is using pseudo-swears or scatological references in my posts.

If you are offended by something that TV sensors deemed non offense 4 decades ago, well sorry.

You calling all things District, Council and National bad/evil, is no different than people calling all teachers incompetent or all coaches and priest pedophiles. Painting with such broad stroke gets a lot of people messy that don't deserve it.

There is the dichotomy of the situation. ]

You say McMartin Preschool to people of my generation and all we remember are the accusations and think of them as evil people. The false accusations, for all practical purposes, stuck.

Then you have Larry Nassar's of the world, where the victims were not believed initially.

Accusations need to be listened to and investigated. But accusation do not equal guilty. Unfortunately, there are those, far too many, that believe what they want to believe regardless of any evidence.  Some ignore accusations because they think it is impossible, others will always believe even if accusations are proven false.

54 minutes ago, Tampa Turtle said:

Not very scout-like; are we repressing dissent in BSA now too? I always thought the rights of the workers to gripe about the "man" was  as american as apple pie.  

Calling horse hockey and recommending someone find an organization that fits them better pales in comparison.

Many of the comments on a myriad of subjects are not descent, they are down right nasty

1 hour ago, HelpfulTracks said:

Well as you say, it is not the Scouts unit it is the CO's. So just make the change, right?

Or if the IH prefers Scout then quit being the CoR. Clearly the way BSA operates does not work for you. All things district and council are bad, national are all liars.

4 minutes ago, David CO said:

Exactly right.

I was quoting your sentiments, those certainly are not mine.

1 hour ago, David CO said:

My school's Outdoor Education program works better for me. I prefer it over scouting. But so long as there are boys interested in scouting, my school will probably continue to offer that option.

Well as you say, it is not the Scouts unit it is the CO's. So just make the change, right?

Or if the IH prefers Scout then quit being the CoR. Clearly the way BSA operates does not work for you. All things district and council are bad, national are all liars.

On 2/5/2018 at 6:25 PM, David CO said:

Everything council is bad. They're the bad guys.

Ridiculous horse hockey.

But if you believe that perhaps Trail Life or BPSA would work better for you.

17 hours ago, .40AET said:

So we're going to Checzoslovakia?

I wish we could quote the upvote/reactions, lol.

@ItsBrian You gave the post above a confused vote, @.40AET is referencing an old 1981 movie called Stripes. The vehicle in the photo posted by @Jameson76 is the fictitious "Urban Assault Vehicle" from that movie that John Winger (Bill Murray) commandeered to for a joy ride, and ends up Czechoslovakia to save his platoon mates, as well as Sgt Hulka, aka the Big Toe.

It's a reference us old farts quickly recognize.

I don't have the James E. West Fellowship Award, and wouldn't wear it if i did. I already do not wear every knot I have.

I know a number of West Fellows, the vast majority do not wear them. But I certainly do not begrudge anyone who does wear it.

Many of the knots/awards are not "earned." They are recognition for contribution, including the DESA, MOESA, DSA, Meany, Young, DAM, Silver Beaver, Antelope and Beaver.

Others are "earned" by doing the job you should be doing, like Den Leaders Award, Unit Leaders Award of Merit, Training Award and Scouters Key. The Boyce Award is often given to the person that did the least amount of work starting a new unit.

Knots are awards are given for various reasons. Financial contributions help keep Scouting afloat, they always have. We wouldn't have Philmont, Seabase, Northern Tier and most of our Summer camps if not for donations and grants. To think those who have helped create and maintain Scouting from a financial standpoint are somehow less important to the program than those of us who work the program is counter productive and frankly not very Scout-like IMHO.

There is way too much US and THEM in these conversations. Scouters, professionals and financial contributors all have a significant role in Scouting. I think it is appropriate to thank and recognize them, and frankly a tiny piece of cloth is not a big deal in light of their contribution.