Resentment about needing to get trained?!

[Nike 94]

As for Girl Scouts, I would almost kill (definitely give you a case of Samoas) to have the BSA's national training syllabus and abilities.

 

We have no national database of any kind that local volunteers can access to see who was trained in anything anywhere. My new-to-me leaders sometimes have a stack of old papers and cards certifying they did this or that class. And every council has called the core traning something different for the past 20 years at least. The Welcome to GSUSA is on line and no certification is ever sent anyhwere but to the taker.

 

Our new leaders have to complete Welcome to GSUSA online, Welcome to your Overseas Committee, and Leadership Excellence (explains Journeys). No deadline, but I have a really great group of leaders here who want to get trained and get to work. If a leader wants to earn the Leadership Development pin, Troop Management and Age level training must also be taken. We encourage everyone to take Outdoor Training for Leaders which is completely different from IOLS. About the only similarity is learning the 3 bucket method for washing dishes. And worst of all: WE HAVE NO SYSTEMATIC YPT!

 

As a highly decentralized organization with an excess of top-downess, we don't use the charter system. The only person who knows which girl is in which troop is the local registrar. We also have no way to block someone from registering as a GS adult for any reason except not to accept thier application at the local or council level. If National has an issue with a volunteer, we won't find out for months.

 

 

[Abel Magwitch 10]

At least in my council, training = $

 

Abel

[John-in-KC 311]

CP,

 

Considering the problems Atlanta Area Council had a few years back, I'd not be surprised if your Exec Board decided to add a YP component to Den Chief training. Please, could you see what info is out on the Council website?

[moosetracker 132]

But do Den Chiefs need to be a registered position in the Pack?.. If not it is hard to track if they are trained or not. I think that may be why the Pack trainer is the only committee position outside of CC that is registered as a different position other then just Committee member. They wanted to enforce different training for them.

 

Without the position being registered, the boy is just a youth member in a boyscout troop. Maybe they now do register them. It is about 5 -7 years ago my son was a den chief.

[JerseyScout 10]

I can see and 110% get behind the idea that every leader should have Youth Protection training.

 

I didn't mind taking the 700 online courses. In fact, I took every one of them, required and unrequired, just to make sure I had the best idea of how the program is supposed to run top to bottom.

 

I am fully First Aid and CPR certified, and get renewed every two years through the American Heart Association for work.

 

I enjoyed my one day Scoutmaster 1,2, and 3 course, I argued endlessly with the other people taking the course how their troops were "adult led" (the instructor found this funny and kept backing me up).

 

I even took the merit badge councilor class (which was downright silly, half the training was how a blue card worked), just to set a good example for the rest of my troop leadership.

 

But the idea of IOLS (or ITOLS as its known around here) makes me insane. Learn tenderfoot to first class skills in a weekend? I'm only ten years removed from Eagle Scout (I was only four years removed when I came back to Scouting), who has never "left" camping or high adventure. Between being a Scout, being a leader, and being a guy who camps in his free time, I have probably has over 1000 nights of camping under my belt. I've been Scoutmaster for a full year and de-facto Scoutmaster for the two years before that, so I've been "in charge" for almost 50 trips. My council does not offer an "opt-out" option. I dedicate all or part of 30+ weekends a year for Scouts (without having a kid in the program), I have not been able to bring myself to waste a weekend to learn how to tie knots, that you are supposed to hike down the left side of the road, and to learn how to properly set up a campsite.

[moosetracker 132]

I can't see how a Council can not allow the test-out, when National is saying this is a way to do the course.. Although I guess others can argue that I shouldn't say "no" to one-on-one approach to it, when that is also stated as a way to run it and I simply wont due to not having the man-power, and fearing the loss of what is left of my trainers if I did offer it.

 

To point, I did not know about the option because my council never offered it. I started figuring out what it was after reading these forums. I could see other Councils not being aware of it.

 

Have you handed them a print out of the Training updates of October, where it states it is an option, and asked them about it? Or simply because it is not offered, assume they know about it, and are not doing it..

http://scouting.org/training/trainingupdates.aspx

[John-in-KC 311]

Moose,

 

Would you care to come to my District and find the volunteers to handle a test out?

 

How many of us are doing 2-3-4-5 Scouting jobs already?

 

Sorry, ma'am, but sometimes prioritizing the resources available is part of the package, and yes, part of the problem too...

[BrentAllen 10]

I'm in the Atlanta Area Council - can't say that I've ever heard about Den Chiefs being required, or even asked, to take YP. Aren't they still youths?

 

Moosetracker,

I haven't heard of any opt-out testing options. However, if this is a reality, or becomes a reality, you might look to your district's UCs. If you could get them trained to offer the supposed opt-out test, they could do this on a campout visit with their units. I think Mr. SM would be much more open to knocking this out on one of his Troop trips, instead of having to give up another weekend or two at a separate event. Just a thought.

[moosetracker 132]

I am planning to use the enthusiasm for this new way to train to get new people to be able to do this test out along with other types of training.. The UC idea is fantastic and may just fall in line with my plans..

 

Guys!! Just think of it this way.. This is the same skills needed in for troops to get their scouts from tenderfoot to First class.. This isn't rocket science.. This isn't your HA training.. So I would hope I can find people in each and every troop who can test people out. What I don't want is for a unit to test themselves out.. Yes I should trust, but this is the reason for it. I just want units to learn from each other.. I want the stronger troops to have opportunities to help the weaker troops grow. You don't get this if you train internally.

 

So I want to train alot of people, and I am hoping to get ALOT of other people on training staff for the other trainings the more people on staff, the more I can offer these trainings on a smaller scale, (may two or three troops comeing together, because I don't want the troop doing self training, as already stated) The easier for me, the easier for them.

 

The key will be getting the Adult Leaders of the units in my district to see this and jump on board with this idea.

 

 

I guess I don't see the opt-out of IOLS as being more work, but as being less work.. Much easier to run 30 through test-out option, then to teach 6 -12 in the two+ day training.. This will assure that the people I get for the longer training are people who "NEED" the training, and hopefully they will appreciate me slowing down the course so that they can "LEARN".. Because our district has taken this 1 night & 2 day course down to a 1 day course, the brought it back to 1 1/2 days.. But I want to go back to running it the way it should be run, which means having those in the course that "WANT" the training and appreciate that we do not fly through it to fast for them to grasp.

 

AGAIN.. we will see, the whole key will be having the Adult leaders jump on to this idea and volunteer to be on the a training staff that they will allow them to self-organize the training locally with 2 - 3 troops in there area, and pool out of those units and a cross-population of people who can be on their staff..

 

[moosetracker 132]

PS. The opt-out will not take a weekend or 2 (who does 2 weekends?? or do you do a Saturday one weekend then a Saturday another & call that 2)..

 

I have not timed it but rough guesstimate will be 3 - 4 hours.. They don't have to camp overnight just pitch the tent after doing a site selection.

[JMHawkins 15]

Mandatory YPT training isn't an onerous requirement. The training isn't dependent on districts or councils offering up the training - it can be taken online, anytime, day or night...

 

It's the other training requirements that are going to lead to interesting situations.

I agree about YPT, it's not onerous, and I actually thought it was valuable "training" (though I don't personally consider watching a video real training). The other requirements, the ones that require in-person instruction, are definitely the problems. So far, the in-person classes I've taken have been good, nothing has been a waste of time (note for Kudu, I have not taken Wood Badge), but they aren't offered anywhere near often enough. There's also a lot of material that could be done on-line.

... there will be units lost for lack of adults willing to volunteer, with a resulting drop in youth membership numbers - and at some point, if that happens more often than not, National may do a rethink...I suspect that eventually, many units will take advantage of the loopholes and have trained leaders in name only that aren't actually doing the job, but are on the charter as doing the job....

I may just go full circle. It started out with individual units responsible for vetting their own leaders. Now National is trying to enforce training, but doesn't seem to have the organizational capacity to deliver adequate training opportunities, so I expect they will create programs where units self-train (what moosetracker is trying to avoid) as the only way to meet the training mandates without losing units. So we'll end up with individual units responsible for vetting their own leaders, just with the added step of recording some official certificate as part of the process.

 

I'm not sure what the best solution is, because there are structural problems with a "professional" staff trying to set mandates for volunteers who deliver 99% of the program. Even the training in done mostly by volunteers. Mabye they could fire the corporate lawyers who advise a new CYA course for every contingency and use their salary instead to hire extra Training staff to reorganize the existing training into three tiers -

 

-unit internal training (basically the position-specific training - units are expected to self-train on this, keeping replacements adequately training. For new units, or struggling units, a UC could do this - isn't this functionally a big part of what a UC does anyway, help unit leaders understand their roles? Roundtables could devote breakout sessions to this as well, but condense it dramatically)

 

-Required on-line traiing (delivered on line or though a video library, covers YPT and paperwork topics like tour permits)

 

-Required hands-on training (WFA, the non-classroom portions of IOLS, etc. Stuff you have to get out and do).

 

 

 

 

[John-in-KC 311]

ScoutNut:

 

As a followup, I got an email Saturday from my District Commissioner. He in turn got it from the Council Commissioner:

 

At the Heart of America Council board meeting on 11/15, the board approved a one-year extension for the position specific training requirement for Assistant Scoutmasters WHO ARE 18-20 years old.(boldface added)

 

This is effective immediately, so those persons under 21 who are serving in ASM positions need not have the position required training. The Youth Protection Training would still be needed [and of course it can be done on-line.]

 

Please pass the word.

 

NN NN, Council Commissioner

 

This does not change the training requirement for any of the other direct contact leaders in Scouting in my Council, which I linked to earlier...

[clemlaw 55]

>>>Would you care to come to my District and find the volunteers to handle a test out?

[Eagle92 110]

Don't forget your Venturers for test out staff, esp. those workign on Outdoor Bronze and Ranger.

[HICO_Eagle 93]

I can well believe leaders are against the new training requirement. I'm one of them -- it's hard enough getting some of the adults involved without adding more mandatory time wasters. Yes, time wasters. It's not that it's too hard -- it's that it's a waste of time that would be spent better with the boys or even reading a good book. The OP seems offended that district training numbers haven't gone up in the past two years, that adults should take these courses because the council or district has asked, pleaded and begged. Perhaps the adults didn't take the courses because they didn't see value in them?

 

In the last 20+ years, I've seen plenty of Scouts stick around regardless of whether their parents or other volunteers got "official training". They stay (or go) because of the program you offer them, the fun they will have. I'd rather have an adult help out with the occasional activity despite lack of "training" than have them stay home because they're "unapproved".

 

I bow to the regular YPT because of today's litigious society -- not because it helps me in any way. I took the Trainer Development Course because it was required for yet another course that I needed to take in order to continue counseling a merit badge I qualified to instruct 20 years ago. I learned very little from SMF 15 years ago and expect I would learn even less from SMST or IOLS if I wasn't grandfathered due to my past SMF course. I have had plenty of useless time-wasting training in the military but at least it was made an official part of my duties when I took it instead of sucking up yet another precious weekend.

 

Having said all that, I have one reason to encourage the other leaders to take this training: National's iron fist regarding unit charters and advancement. (Of course, the fact they are resorting to that iron fist is yet another indicator of how little value the new training requirement provides.)

 

By the way, I would encourage adults who I felt needed the training to take it -- what I object to is the mandatory nature.