Troop Leadership Training "mandatory" every six months?

[fgoodwin 23]

My son's SM just sent a note to the troop that Troop Leadership Training (TLT) is "mandatory per BSA National policy" every six months, even if you've had it before.

 

That doesn't sound right to me. I know the Scout won't be considered "trained" in his position of responsibility (POR) w/o TLT, but as far as I know, TLT (or training of any kind) isn't a prerequisite for a POR, nor is it a requirement during a POR.

 

This sounds like another case of "adding to the requirements", but I didn't want to make an issue of it, if anyone else can confirm it.

 

Has anyone heard of such a requirement?

 

Fred Goodwin

Alamo Area Council

[gwd-scouter 11]

fgoodwin,

 

A couple of troops in my area that I know of require training for PORs. They say it is mandatory and if the scout does not attend (without a REALLY good reason) then his POR is removed. Of course, these same troops also make attendance percentages mandatory, finish merit badges within a year or start over, and other stuff like that.

 

Pretty severe in my mind. I don't know of any national policy that makes the junior leader training a requirement. Only what is stated that a scout may wear the trained strip if he has been to Troop Junior Leader Training for his POR.

 

 

[OldGreyEagle 5]

An organization that doesnt require its adults leaders to be trained would require that boys be trained? And evrey six months? What would the troop whose SPL has a 12 month term do? Repeat the same training because its required? Would love to see the ciation on this one. Then of course I am going to go look myself, more for comment that was misconstrued to the requirement however

[evmori 11]

Gotta agree. Sounds like someone is adding to the requirements! And that's a no-no.

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[click23 66]

I dont have my TLT handbook in front of me but I believe that the policy is like this:

 

To wear the "Trained" strip, the scout must complete TLT every time he is elected or appointed.

It is not mandatory for the POR just for the "Trained" strip.

 

Sounds like your troop is going for 100% training for the boys, but I believe that this should be a goal not a requirement.

[Scoutmaster Ron 12]

I wonder what that SM would say if National wanted him to be re-trained every 6 months. Ask to see it in writing, sounds like a bit of overkill

[Eagle76 10]

Considering the way the wind seems to be blowing, I'm probably going to regret this, but I'm going to stick my neck out anyway.

 

Coming from a troop that had not done Junior Leader Training for some time, with the predictable result of poor performance by youth leaders, I sympathize with the SM in the original post. I'm not going to even try to address whether or not it's BSA policy, but it IS the SM's job to train the youth leaders. And I'm not talking about training that just goes through the motions so they can wear a "Trained" strip. The SM is responsible for a type of training that is a never-ending process, always with more to learn. And the best way to accomplish that is to get a good start by conducting TLT after new leaders are elected. Old Grey Eagle brings up the question of a 12 month term, and "repeating the same training". If you have 12 month terms for troop leadership positions, and no turnover whatsoever, maybe you could argue another TLT is unnecessary. On the other hand, I suspect it's more likely that you're going to have some turnover. Part of the training involves team building in your PLC, so if you have turnover you have a new team which needs to learn to work together. And in the event you have no turnover, why assume it would be the "same training?" That's just an opportunity to build on the first training, discuss the experiences and problems of the first six months, and use different presentations, games, examples, etc, to help the boys gain greater understanding of the concepts.

[fgoodwin 23]

Eagle76:

 

You got me thinking about it differently, and I think I can understand now why its the Troop's policy to do it this way.

 

I just wish the SM had said it was a troop policy, rather than claiming it was national policy, as if that somehow gives it more authority.

 

Thanx for the post.

 

 

[Venividi 35]

fgoodwin,

 

gotta agree with your last post that it is good troop policy. Otherwise scouts don't want to repeat the training again. Been there, done that. And will have excuses why they are busy that weekend.

Perhaps an approach where anyone that has already taken it twice is asked to lead one of the sections. Or prepare and present a lesson on one of the leadership skills, and these presentations be used to supplement and expand the TLT. SM could even ask for presentations on areas where jr leadership is weak.

 

Now you get into the "can't add to the requirements" arguement. Serve actively as a POR is a requirement for advancement. As Eagle76 observed, jr leadership gets weaker when jr leaders do not get leadership training (whether by lack of SM scheduling a training night, or by choice of scouts that choose not to come.) Is it better to have mandatory training in order to hold a POR, even though that is indirectly adding a requirement for advancement, or let the troop (and the individual POR holder) suffer from having leaders that did not get trained? We will fall on two sides of that question.

[John-in-KC 311]

Fred,

 

The challenge your SM will face is how to keep the training interesting. Repeating the sylabbus every six months may well lead to bored boys!

[eagle_scout98 10]

Keep in mind this is my opinion, but I am also doing some research.

 

I can't imagine that National would require it every six months. I don't know how they could enforce that. It may stated somewhere that since the PORs are usually only held for 6 months that it is a good idea to hold the training for the Scouts taking on PORs that they have never held before.

 

Maybe the SM is misunderstanding the suggested policy.

 

I commend the SM for wanting to have the boys all trained but I can't imagine making a boy sit through Troop Guide training every six months for as longs as the boy is a Troop Guide.

 

Doing some research.

[eagle_scout98 10]

Based on my research of BSA resources here is my answer:

 

There is no reference in any BSA material supporting that training every 6 months is required by the BSA program for a youth to hold a leadership position.

 

Here is what you will find in the scoutmaster handbook and through basic and advanced scoutmaster training... that training youth in leadership skills is the responsisibility of adult leaders, that is what adults are there to do in the Boy Scout program. Training doesn't happen every 6 months. It happens constantly.

 

Training happens in the Scoutmaster junior leader training program certainly, but it happens in the mentoring and coaching of scouts on an ongoing basis (Wood Badge for the 21st Century). A scoutmaster's conference is part of leadership training, the example we set as adults is part of leadership training, the pat on the shoulder and compliment on how a scout helped another scout is part of leadership training.

 

Can you really hope to train a boy if the only training you do is once every 6 months?

 

Leadership training takes many forms in scouting, the Troop Leadership Training program of the BSA is just one small part of how we train youth in leadership skills. It is certainly not meant to be the only training, and no where is it said to be the only way or the required way to hold an office.

 

Short answer is NO it is not mandated by National. Long winded answer you should be training constantly in the form of coaching and mentoring.

[evmori 11]

eagle_scout98,

 

Excellent response and excellent research. Great job! And right on the money!

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[Eagledad 2777]

>>I commend the SM for wanting to have the boys all trained but I can't imagine making a boy sit through Troop Guide training every six months for as longs as the boy is a Troop Guide.

[eagle_scout98 10]

Eagledad - what you are doing sounds awesome. I commend you for teaching those types of leadership skills and making holding a leadership position important and mean something.

 

The issue of adding requirements comes up frequently in our District. Here is what it always seems to boil down to.

 

If the SM or other adult leader is denying rank advancement or merit badge completion because the Scout hasn't completed requirements that they have added then that is wrong.

 

I see no problem with a Troop having the expectation that the boys will go to training because it is the right thing to do. But if the leaders do not sign off on the requirement and deny them their Star rank (or other rank) because they did not attend a non-mandatory training session then that is wrong.