Boy Scout Training Isn't Strong Enough?

[Eagle1973 10]

Dan, I understand lowest common..., hence my suggestion to validate training.

 

Are you saying that I didn't get it because I don't understand "boy lead"? I very much understand boy lead. I believe I was a successful Naval Officer because of the leadership methods I learned as a Scout.

 

I believe in discision making at the very lowest possible level. This can be achieved by instilling self-confidence in the person that is making the decision. Self-confidence is instilled by ensuring that the person is trained in the "whatever" he is making a decision about and allowing that person to make a decision, even if it's the wrong decision, but as long as nobody gets seriously killed.

 

Being a leader in the US Military is easy. Being a leader as a boy in Scouting is very hard. In the military I could take things away, restrict, throw in jail. In the BSA, I couldn't/can't/don't have those avenues open to me.

 

Leadership is the art of getting someone to do something that they don't want to do. Boy Scout training didn't address leadership, it addresses management.(This message has been edited by Eagle1973)

[dan 10]

Eagle1973

NO, I said you where bored because you already understood boy lead. If the training was kicked up a notch, you would get more out of it. BUT the other trainees would get nothing out of it, it would be over their head.

 

but as long as nobody gets seriously killed.

Is there any other kind of killed beside seriously?

[Eagle1973 10]

Thanks Dan!!

 

I've been using that "seriously killed" line for years. A crusty old Bo'sun used it while mentoring me. I love it!

[Eagledad 2779]

HI All

 

On top of all that Eagle1973, with the professional training that you listed, I don't think you need Wood Badge. Which leads to a different discussion of testing out. What if a person really is qualified?

 

Dan, I look at the roughly 50 more hours of training a ASM has to take just to get a trained patch, and I cringe. There some here who feel syllibuses should be followed almost word by word or it will degrade the training. How much more can one take before voluntering is nolong fun?

 

I always like hereing new ideas. What do you propose?

 

Barry

[Fat Old Guy 11]

"Dan, I look at the roughly 50 more hours of training a ASM has to take just to get a trained patch, and I cringe."

 

I don't think that it's enough. There are too many grey areas and not enough centralized information.

[Eamonn 61]

I don't have a copy of the Scoutmaster Specific Training in front of me however even in my advanced years I seem to remember covering the Methods as one of the later sessions in the course and the syalabuss instructed that they be listed. Help me out here Bob White Please!!

All this talk about validating training has me a little lost. We do validate the training has been taken when we issue the Trained Patch. Or by validate do we mean that have some sort of test or exam that will validate that the participant has an understanding of the material that has been presented? If this is the case I suppose that would mean that some people would pass and others would fail.Something similar to a driving test? Being as the people taking the test don't work for us, we (The District, Council, National.) What would the penalty be for not passing? Yes we could not present the Trained Patch and ask the participant to come back and try again. However if he or she choose not to come back and informed us to stick it in our ear, there wouldn't be much that we could do.I suppose the CO could be given a report about how their leader did at training? But to my mind that seems very juvenile.

At present we have the services of the Commissioner Staff, if a Unit Commissioner sees that the leaders need to attend training he can set the wheels in motion. This doesn't help the unit where the leader has taken all the training's and just opted to ignore the material.

At times I feel sorry for the ASM's that attend the training's and as a presenter I see the joy that they have as the program is unfolded before them. I hear them when they say that this isn't what is happening in the troop that they are in and I feel their pain when they say that the Scoutmaster and the Committee aren't willing to change. I have seen Wood Badge staff members who ought to know how to plan and run events, in camp with their home unit for a weekend troop camporee. Sad to watch the Scouts wandering the camp site like POW's with no planned program.

I suppose we who have been involved and are involved in training are the eternal optimists, we keep on going back course after course in the hope that at least some of the stuff that we present will stick with some of the participants. While we might be prone at times to become disgruntled I for one take solace in the great strength of the program. When it is adhered to it becomes something of sheer brilliance, but even when leaders choose to not play this game by the rules the outcome can still be good and do good and it has stood the test of time.

Eamonn.

[Bob White 20]

You are correct Eamonn. The various methods of each of the scouting programs are first discussed in New Leader Essentials and are then referred to again during each of the leader specific courses. One of the areas of the Scoutmaster Leader Specific Course that does this is the Advancement Chapter where the presenter is instructed to lead the participants through a review of the Boy Scout Methods to point out how they all are related to advancement in some way. The purpose being to show that advancement happens as the scout participates IF the program uses the methods of scouting.

 

While it is important to follow the syllabus and to make sure that the learning goals of the course are achieved, the BSA does not require a word by word adherence. Nor does it require that the same teaching aids be used by each instructor.

 

What is important to remember is that this is BASIC training, not final training, or all encompassing training. It is also necessary in most cases to teach the course at the most basic level for two reasons. First is that scout volunteers come from every imaginable walk of life and we deal with a variety of skill and educational levels within each group we train. It is impossible to teach to all levels at once. Secondly, even if the course includes Eagle scouts, their understanding of scouting is from a totally different vantage point than that of an adult leader. Another thing to remember is that experience does not equal knowledge. There are many scouters as we all have met or come in contact with through this forum with years of experience who haven't a clue how to deliver a scouting program. As trainers we are there to present the BSA program and its resources as clear and as informative as possible. Often times those who say they got nothing from the training came with the intention of taking nothing from it. They are happy in their kingdom and have no enthusiasm or openness to learn the BSA program.

 

By the way if I could be allowed I would like to address some huge misconceptions.

 

1). The instructors read from scripts, read from flip charts, played video clips.

Sometimes the wrong people are selected to train just as the wrong people are sometimes selected to lead. The tapes are used to insure that all key info gets to all participants who take the course.

 

2). The information presented was straight from publications that we could read for ourselves. And if everyone read the books you make the trainers very happy indeed. But most do not.

 

3). The instructors were volunteers teaching fellow volunteers on how to make the lives of paid Scouters easier. See answer one. There is no training section that implies or even touches on that topic in any of the BSA training courses...EVER.

 

4). Not one paid Scouter showed up during my 4 sessions of the two courses I attended. let me make this point perfectly clear...SO WHAT! they can't be at everything and they have enough to do than to be at every training course. You have no inkling of the number of different course put on by the training committee. If the District Training team is doing its job even the training chair could never be at every training course. I can think of 3 training course in the last year that a DE has been at and we have done over 70 courses in that time.

 

5). The information presented on how to work with/teach Scouts was all common sense, especially if you were a Scout, and if you have held leadership/instructor positions in the past. Again we as volunteers come from all walks of life and if you don't know it by now "the trouble with common sense is it ain't common". AND again we teach classes of mixed experience and must teach to the least experienced.

 

6). When a question of canoing policy came up and the instructor gave an incomplete answer, I attempted to give the fellow ASM more info and I was told by the instructor that it would be covered in outdoor skills. But his troop was going canoing in two months, and the next skills course was still unscheduled. The instructor should have offered to address the question during a break or after the course had concluded. We are trying to be mindful of our time commitment to the participants and the paramount goal is to share the course related information first. A canoing question was not appropriate to the basic training purpose, but an opportunity to address the scouter's need could have been negotiated quickly and then return the conversation to the training at hand.

 

I apologize for the length of the post and thank those who hung in with me until the end.

 

BW

[Fat Old Guy 11]

"I suppose the CO could be given a report about how their leader did at training? But to my mind that seems very juvenile."

 

I wouldn't be juvenile if the goal was to not just have leaders who sit and snooze but leaders who have a grasp of the material.

[Eamonn 61]

Like it or not, it is a fact of life that some people are better at presenting the BSA training's then others.

During my term as Council Training Chair. When looking for Trainers I was hoping to find people who had KSA.

Knowledge, Skills and Attitude. The hope was that they would pass on the knowledge, skills and attitude that would help the leaders taking the training acquire and develop the knowledge, skills and attitude to make their contribution to Scouting worthwhile.

When we looked at the fundamental requirements for training leaders we looked at:

1/ Desire.

Leaders must want to learn how to operate a unit effectively.

Adults resist learning something simply because somebody says they must.

Adults learn best when they have a strong motivation to acquire a particular skill or increase a particular knowledge.

When they have the understand the importance of the job to be accomplished.

2/Need.

Leaders learn only what they feel a need to learn

The materials presented in a training course should provide immediate help to unit operation.

Training tried to use the idea "This is what you do. This is why you do it. This is hoe you do it.

3/Practice.

Leaders learn by doing.

We try to provide immediate and repeated opportunities to practice the skill that was being taught.

Where possible we try to provide "On the job training with a skilled trainer.

4/Realistic.

The situations presented in training courses must be realistic. Using actual unit situations as a basis for the discussions.

5/Experience.

Previous experiences affect a leader's ability to learn.

If new knowledge doesn't fit in with what leaders already know or think they know they may well tend to reject it.

We try at training to convince leaders of the best methods.

6/ Environment.

Leaders learn best in a relaxed, informal, comfortable environment. We encourage fun and fellowship. We encourage discussion and questions.

7/ Methods.

We use a variety of training methods and technologies to improve learning.

8/ Guidance.

Leaders want guidance and help not grades.

Some of these things were within our control others we tried to "Push" in a friendly way. Still at the end of the day if the leader has no desire to take the training or is only there because it is mandatory we are fighting an up hill battle.

If a leader feels that he already knows it all, again it becomes an up hill battle.

There is of course the leader who attends training and may seem to not be getting it, but then goes to bed reading all the stuff that the BSA has ever put out. The leader who as time passes develops his skills and acquires the knowledge along with a good attitude. Imagine the harm we would do if we sent a report to the CO informing them that he or she just isn't getting it.

Eamonn

 

[dan 10]

Some suggestions I have to improve training. These comments are based on the SM fundamentals course I took 4 years ago and Wood Badge 2 years ago AND comments I read on this board. I have not seen the training syllabus to know if it was followed when I took training.

 

When adults are playing as a patrol or troop during training, the trainers needs to stop and explain what is happening. During the PLC meeting, the trainer should stop and point out how the SM is at the PLC meeting, has not said anything, just sat and observed. The SM job should be before the meeting and after, guiding the SPL on what needs to be done, and after on how to improve the meeting. I believe that many adults see the trainer as an adult and not an adult playing as a scout, and they believe that as SM they need to act like the acting SPL did at training and not allow the SPL in the troop to actually run the meetings.

This kind of coaching should be done whenever adults are playacting during training. Better yet if possible would be, have a JASM be the troop guides and SPL at training. That would shake a few people up that I know! This would be good thing!

I do not believe that this play acting thing is a good way to train. Why is the BSA trying to train the adults leaders to be boy leaders? I train on computers, that is like me training someone to create a text document in DOS instead of using a word processor, they both will get the job done, one just must better than the other one. The training should be teaching us on how to be mentors not equals.

 

Patrols

Explanation on the chain of command. Explain that a patrol member should be going to his patrol leader with issues and questions and not the SPL. Need more discussion on how this teaches the PL leadership skills and tools. Explain how every patrol member should have a patrol job. Explain how patrols members should be selected by the patrols not adults.

 

Explain why and how the patrol method is used at troop meeting and campouts. I see very few troops use the patrol methods; they seem to camp as one big patrol. The trainees need to be informed that if the troop is not using the patrol method they are doing the program a BIG disservice. No matter the size of the troop.

 

New Scout Patrols

This needs to be communicated in depth at SM fundamentals. Explain how they work, why, and how to select a good ASM to help guide the troop guide assigned to the patrol.

 

Elections

I see so many variations on how SPLs and other POR are elected or appointed. At SM fundamentals, it should be explained on how a SPL is to be elected and how he choices his team.

 

EXPLAIN what Scout SPIRIT is!

 

UNIFORMS

I should not go here, but I cannot help myself.

Why are Uniforms mandatory for Wood Badge training, but no other training sessions?

 

What should be done at a troop meeting.

 

Give me more information in a simple, clear and easy to understand format, tell the trainees who it should be.

 

The trainer should be pointing out where the information is (books).

 

This is just a few suggestion bottom line is the training is too generic. The trainee just seems to hint at everything, I say give it to me straight and do not sugar coat it!

You can say some people do not just get it if you want, but I would give them the benefit of doubt, that most people want to get it, but the training needs to be improved.

 

Validations of training, yes, it needs to be validations of the trainee. The reports should go back to the Training Chair, so they can see who is not training well, to help the trainer improve.

 

[Bob White 20]

Dan, The courses you based your suggestions on have not existed for over two years.

 

With the exception of covering why uniforms are mandatory at at Wood Badge everything you mention is a part of the Scoutmaster/Assistant Scoutmaster Leader Specific Training syllabus, and in the Scoutmaster handbook, as well as at other leader development courses and youth handbooks.

 

Why are full uniforms required for Wood Badge? Why are tuxedos required at black tie formal dinners? Because they are. That is what the hosts have determined to be the proper attire for the activity.

 

 

 

 

 

[Fat Old Guy 11]

How can uniforms be mandatory for Wood Badge when they aren't mandatory for participation in Scouting?

 

 

[dan 10]

 

The courses you based your suggestions on have not existed for over two years.

It was stated in this thread that SM Fundalments have not changed much in 30 years.

 

everything you mention is a part of the Scoutmaster/Assistant Scoutmaster Leader Specific Training syllabus

Is it as in depth as I suggested?

If a council can make uniforms mandtory for Wood Badge why not for all other training?

 

[Bob White 20]

Because uniforming as well as suporting the other methods of unit scouting is the responsibility of the Chartered Organization.

 

If units fulfill their responsibility and select quality leaders they should be willing to follow the program and wear the uniform. Why should the district/council have to tell them to get dressed? They are adults not youth. I guess they are just expected to be able to dress themselves properly.

 

Wood Badge serves volunteers in other areas of scouting then direct unit service. Rather than have some in uniform, some out and some in none, the Council which hosts the activity sets the dress code... the official uniform of your program.

 

If the CO wants to require a full uniform they can. Many do, many do not.

[dan 10]

Opps I was to subtle again!

The uniform was a question was just a little barb for FOG, I do understand why uniforms are required for advanced training.

 

How about the other questions I asked?