WB as a means or an end?

[Lisabob 13]

The other part is a take-off on my post above. Committee members who suddenly discover the wonders of Woodbadge after many years in scouting, then arrange or "abbreviated" specially arranged training classes to qualify for Woodbadge ("Damn the torpedoes . . .", let's jump straight to the top-tier leadership stuff). Youth protection? Essentials? Position-specific? Not until "getting the card" became critical for something else. And it's not just our unit. But that's fodder for another thread.

 

Well OK Eagle, let's start this thread then.

 

I'm curious about the above statement. Do you mean to suggest that if a long-time committee member who has steadfastly (ignored/dodged/weasled out of) training suddenly sees the light, goes to training and successfully completes woodbadge, that their WB beads are somehow less worthy than those of the volunteer who gets trained early on for their position and continues steadily on through woodbadge? Can't people in both situations, and the unit they serve, still get an awful lot out of their wb experience?

 

In your view, should there be a mandatory waiting period between basic training and wb, or something like that? I'm not trying to be flip (well ok, not too flip - grin), I'm just not sure what you are getting at with the view you expressed above.

 

Is this any different from the people who grumble that WB should be reserved for longtime leaders because those "newbie" leaders don't know enough about BSA/haven't paid their dues yet and don't "deserve" wb so early on?

 

Of course everyone really should get trained for their position as soon as possible. But then, we all know plenty of scouters who don't. If the desire to take WB is what motivates them to get off their duffs and get the basic training, hey, at least now they're trained. It would be hard to do the wb course, finish the tickets, and not become a more dynamic and effective volunteer in the process. Isn't that the main point?

 

I see wb more as a means than an end. Consequently I can imagine all kinds of reasons for different people from different units to choose WB early or late in their scouter career, after extensive training or just the basics, depending on what they and their units actually need at any given time.

 

 

PS - Cub leaders aren't required to do OLS as a pre-req. either, though some do anyway. Does that make their beads "worth" less than the troop leaders' beads?

 

Lisa'bob

A good old bobwhite too!

 

[John-in-KC 311]

Lisa,

 

Thanks for starting this thread. You've touched one of my buttons; I think how we train to serve the youth of the Scouting program is vital.

 

My bottom lines up front are:

- We need Scouters to be around for the right reasons ... help raise up moral and ethical young folk to adulthood using an outdoors based program.

 

- We have too many Scouters who enter the system with a "less than desirable" outdoor and/or citizenship/ethics skillset.

 

- We need BSA to package an overall training program which provides not just introductions, but depth and breadth in ALL its subject areas. THEN, an adult can select training based on interests and perceived needs.

 

If folks want to read the long version, it begins here:

 

I think there is a two-tiered problem out there.

 

First, sadly, some Scouters forget why we're here: TO RAISE UP ETHICAL YOUNG MEN (and women). When being a Scouter stops being about youth service, and instead becomes being about patches and knots ...

 

Second, I've spent a few years in adult training, both on the platform and behind the scenes. Scouting has done a superb model of an empowering training program that has a life cycle. There is just One Little Problem: Many people in the real world don't bother with the model, they take what they need when they think they need it.

 

To me, WB is a means, a network builder, and a beginning: It's a means because it does provide tools for your personal toolbox. The people you meet in your patrol and troop expand the network of contacts you have for scouting. Finally, it's a beginning: If you're contemplating Scouting being a main focus of your adult service to the community, it seems to be a declarattion that "you're serious" about committing to the program.

 

To me, though, the training system needs two separate tracks, one covering our programs, the other building outdoor skills. We need Scouting to provide the opportunities for "rookie adults" to LEARN, to STANDARD, the basics of the outdoors. That may mean an adult "orienteering for leaders" weekend, where map and compasswork is the focus. It may mean "cookery". Equally, it may mean learning how to carry, as Colin Fletcher once described it "your house on your back."

 

My thoughts here.

 

John

A good old owl!(This message has been edited by John-in-KC)

[Eagle74 10]

I'm curious about the above statement. Do you mean to suggest that if a long-time committee member who has steadfastly (ignored/dodged/weasled out of) training suddenly sees the light, goes to training and successfully completes woodbadge, that their WB beads are somehow less worthy than those of the volunteer who gets trained early on for their position and continues steadily on through woodbadge?

No, I do not mean to suggest that the person that has such a change of heart/attitude or "sees the light" is any less worthy. I do mean to suggest that the person that sees that training as a waste of time and effort or simply "not necessary" (for those many years and still today) until they suddenly needthose cards becausethose beads will give them the status, is.

Can't people in both situations, and the unit they serve, still get an awful lot out of their wb experience?

Yes, as you present the situation.

In your view, should there be a mandatory waiting period between basic training and wb, or something like that? I'm not trying to be flip (well ok, not too flip - grin), I'm just not sure what you are getting at with the view you expressed above.

No, I did not mean to imply that.

Is this any different from the people who grumble that WB should be reserved for longtime leaders because those "newbie" leaders don't know enough about BSA/haven't paid their dues yet and don't "deserve" wb so early on?

No, I did not say that nor mean to imply that.Sometimes, the scouter that's been around for a long time, has not been trained or has not kept up, may in fact be the worst-case scenario. This would be the "when I was a Scout . . .", "I've done it this way for years" type.Dues are paid by learning the program and following it to the best of ability, not byticking offthe years. A bad program of twenty years is no better than a bad program ofone year.

Of course everyone really should get trained for their position as soon as possible. But then, we all know plenty of scouters who don't. If the desire to take WB is what motivates them to get off their duffs and get the basic training, hey, at least now they're trained.

Agreed. My reference was to those who aresubverting the system.

It would be hard to do the wb course, finish the tickets, and not become a more dynamic and effective volunteer in the process. Isn't that the main point?

Yes, that is the point. The value of the course depends on what you put into it, what you want to get out of it, and how you apply the experience. From my perspective the process of education, training, and knowledge seeking never ends.

I see wb more as a means than an end.

That one simple sentence says it all. Are you doing it for the beads or for theexperience and what you will be able to offer after the experience. This is similar to some of the Eagle Scout discussions on the forum.

PS - Cub leaders aren't required to do OLS as a pre-req. either, though some do anyway. Does that make their beads "worth" less than the troop leaders' beads?

No, it does not. My reference was to committee members who were committee members on paper only and then used that to take advantage (subvert) the program.

Myissue is those that see the beads solely as a status symboland get them by any shortcut possible. And who don't really understand the program any more when done than when they started.

[Eagle74 10]

Allow me to put this another way. I ask scouts working toward Eagle "Are you doing this for the badge, or for what the badge represents?" The same can be applied to Woodbadge. "Are you doing it for the beads or what the beads represent?"

 

I would also offer that there's a reason it's called a "commencement" and not a "conclusion".

 

 

[baden 10]

Back in the day there was a two year waiting period to attend WB. You had to be registered for two years, but I think you could take Scoutmaster Fund. the week before you went to WB. I didn;t see the point then and like the new system.

 

Getting to the point though, WB is both a means and an end. For the better Leaders, it is most definitely a means. I think the time spent in WB on Aims & Methods really expands on what is taught in the Basic courses. Sometimes you see a lightbulb turn on in the room and it is fun.

 

For the less stellar Leader WB starts out as an end. It is emphasized that it is not a recognition program but some view it that way. Even then, some people that I have perceived as being there to complete their resume sometimes seem to have an epiphany {sp?} and seem to get it. It is worth putting in the time as a Staffer to see this happen

[orennoah 11]

Interesting discussion.

 

I think that you will see a difference between the "means" and the "ends" approaches when it comes to the writing of tickets.

 

Not to brag, but I really wanted my ticket items to be something that I would always be proud of. I chose difficult, challenging and - at times - scary items. When I was lucky enough to be asked to staff a course, I upped the level of difficulty for my Quartermastering. I'm very proud of all three of those beads.

 

However, I have also seen some ticket items that I consider rather "lame." E.g., reading the Scout Handbook. Heck, every Boy Scout leader should do that. However, those beads look the same as mine.

 

Likewise, I've seen Eagle Scouts that I am in awe of, their achievements being so impressive. Others, not so much. They both wear the same rank badge.

 

Bottom line. Your Wood Badge beads are worth what you paid for them. If you go the cheap way, they're just some pieces of wood on a thong. If you value the experience and challenge yourself, they're a source of pride and confidence.

[eagle-pete 11]

I completely agree, Orennoah

 

It's the old adage, "You get out of it what you put into it."

 

This is how Wood Badge was designed and how it works best. And although it may be irritating, infuriating, and sad to see individuals pay for the course, go through the week of training, put together a ticket which they breeze through, and then they are handed beads for which they didn't earn, nor do they even understand what the whole process was for, this is their choice and their beads will only be worth whatever effort they put into earning them.

 

The same thing can apply to a boy earning his Eagle, getting a college degree, and any number of accomplishments.

 

One of the most important things I got out of working my ticket was I realized that it only meant something to me. If I cheated, I only cheated myself out of a great experience. So whatever effort I put into my ticket was only measured by myself, and therefore I placed whatever value on my ticket myself. No one ever said, "Pete, this ticket and these beads are worth...[fill in the blank]". They are worth what I put into them.

 

Those who are in it solely for prestige will never realize this.

 

Eagle Pete

 

[emb021 16]

" should there be a mandatory waiting period between basic training and wb, or something like that? I'm not trying to be flip (well ok, not too flip - grin), I'm just not sure what you are getting at with the view you expressed above.

 

Is this any different from the people who grumble that WB should be reserved for longtime leaders because those "newbie" leaders don't know enough about BSA/haven't paid their dues yet and don't "deserve" wb so early on? "

 

Personally, I do feel that some new leaders are rushing in too quickly to take Wood Badge. I don't think that WB should be 'reserved for longtime leaders', whatever that means, but someone who only recently joined probably should be in WB.

 

BSA training, like a lot of other orgs, has a very logical sequence. Part of that sequence is the concept of: take some trianing, put it in practice, take some more training, put it in practice, repeat. We short circuit this with some people by trying to crame all the training in at once, including WB.

 

Ideally, a new leader should:

 

Join.

Take fast start (within a week or so)

be involved

take NLE, and possibly leader specific

be involved

go to roundtable

be involved

go to roundtable some more

etc

if council has a University of scouting, take it

be involved

take Wood Badge.

 

I think someone who has joined in the Fall should wait until atleast the Spring to take Wood Badge. The next Fall at the max. If someone has been involved in scouting for a couple of years and hasn't taken WB, I would have to wonder (is there a problem with the time committement? cost?)

 

Part of my feeling is that I'm bother by the lack of knowledge of some of the participants who go thru WB. Many seem to lack a basic level of knowledge that I would expect of the 'average' scout leader who has been reasonably involved. I feel that if one is in WB, that they atleast have heard of (heard of, mind you) OA, Venturing, Jamboree, Philmont etc.