KoreaScouter

Joni; We're in the same council, and I attended WB in Okinawa, so I'm very well acquainted with many of the volunteers and pros in your district. I think you have a number of very dedicated people there, who have the right sight picture -- your unit experience notwithstanding. I have to believe that your district leadership will work to correct the problems you describe and experienced. If it's any consolation, we've all run into the same things...maybe just not all at one time like you did! Adults behaving badly is one of my biggest frustrations, but I get around it by judging the program based on the Scouts' experiences, not mine. It doesn't always do the trick, but it helps...and I'm sure you already use the same technique -- you'd almost have to! Good luck; we both know how much more difficult it can be to give our kids comparable experiences to their peers in the U.S. -- Scouting's no different. Hang in there... KS

The "Old Goats". We function as one on outings, but do not compete with the Scouts or diminish what they're doing. Patrol organization helps with workload sharing, rosters, communication, etc. Just what we tell the Scouts, and modeling it reinforces it for them. It'd be nice if our Venture patrol were the model, but they've got a ways to go on that... KS

Hops_Scout: "Technically"? According to what? There's no language in the G2SS that requires units issue either card to their Scouts or that they carry them; or in the SM Handbook; or in the Scout Handbook. The Totin' Chip itself (don't have a Firem'n on me) has a proclamation on the front, signed by the unit leader, and a list of responsibilities on the back, signed by the Scout. None of the responsibilities includes carrying the card if you're carrying a knife. So, the training's an advancement requirement that has to be completed before a Scout can "tote". But, the card itself is not a requirement, administrative or otherwise; it's an option. Now, the cards are good management tools, especially at district events where you don't know all the Scouts...and our Troop issues them, too. What I don't do is confiscate knives & matches if a lad forgot his, it's in his tent, or he washed the darn things with his pants. I don't issue free replacements, though -- I charge him the 8 cents...a responsibility thing! I've seen leaders from other units confiscate knives if the lad didn't have his card with him...even if he did have his handbook, was signed off on the requirements, and was using the tools properly. Doesn't make sense, and takes the fun out of this, in my opinion. The title of the thread is "...myth debunking...". The cards are available, and most troops use them, but... KS

How about: "You can't carry a knife/matches unless you're carrying your totin' chip/firem'n chit" KS

Thanks, KWC, you hit the nail on the head! I've been off the forum for a couple days -- movers are coming today and lots to do -- didn't see the posts that seemed to indicate the lad was in my troop or something! Of course, I have no idea if this actually happened. But, that's not the point. Look at the Scoutmaster Minutes in the back of Volume III, Troop Program Resources. Many refer to the hypothetical "Scout" in order to personalize the message -- same thing. The purpose of that minute is to get them thinking about something other than the relative merits of X-Box vs. PS2 on the way home. In this case, how much are you willing to help someone? Sorry if anyone took the example too literally...next time I have a human example in one of these, I'll put a movie-style disclaimer at the end!! KS

KWC: The outdoor/camping portion of WB was modified, as I understand it, because the varying degrees of outdoor emphasis are now included in the position-specific training that is supposed to be a prerequisite to attending WB. The "...used to be..." simply refers to the patrol assignments during the course; it's one of the lines from the song. If you're not there anymore, you're no longer a (whatever), but you "used to be" one. Although there isn't as much camping as there used to be, you still follow the patrol method throughout. The ticket is simply a set of promises, or a commitment, to use your personal goals/vision for yourself to better your unit, district, community, whatever, in some meaningful ways. A course staff member will serve as your counselor when you're writing your ticket items to ensure they're suitable, feasible, and executable in the allotted time period. In my WB course, some people had to edit/revise their ticket items for various reasons, some had theirs "blessed" first time in, and one fella even showed up with his already written. This guy was major Type "A", tried to get the full curriculum/staff guide ahead of time, tried to game the whole thing, and ended up very frustrated at the end of the course. Any WB staffer, correct me if I'm wrong here, but as far as I know, ticket items do not, repeat, not, have to be related to your current Scouting position. Bottom line: don't write tickets you can't complete, and you know your situation better than anyone else. Like many on this forum, I too had already been exposed to most if not all of the leadership and management theory presented in WB. Indoors, outdoors, on confidence and obstacle courses, with food and sleep deprivation, with non-stop coffee and donuts, in all the elements, even with bullets flying over my head. That said, I'm telling you that BSA is very clever in how the staff presents the material, makes it relevant, and gives you an opportunity to let the true meaning sink in. I said it before and I'll say it again: for some people, it won't sink in. They're too wrapped up worrying about tickets, and competition, and getting everything right, and trying to psych out the staff, that they just can't relax and surrender themselves to the course. That's a shame, because if they don't, they're wasting their time and money. I can't tell you how entertaining and enlightening it is to watch alleged adults react to all this when they get immersed in it. Should you go to WB? Absolutely!! If I had to do it all over again, I would. It was a great experience, I met some wonderful people (and a few stinkers, too), and have what I think is a better outlook on this whole Scouting thing than I had before. The offline and sidebar discussions and insight-sharing were probably as valuable as the slides, if not more so. KS

There's also a very good article in the October 2002 Scouter Magazine about how all the various levels of training tie together. It contains a 2-paragraph description of the WB curriculum. I can see how it may have been more difficult to bond as a patrol with the 2-weekend arrangement. We went for a week straight (actually longer with flight arrival differences and waiting to get started, then waiting for departure on the back end). I think it helped us get to know each other better/faster... KS

What happens to poll results? A rhetorical question perhaps, but I'm reminded of a quote from, I believe Oscar Wilde, referring to a newspaper critic of some work he did around the turn of the century (20th, that is). It goes something like this: "I am sitting in the smallest room in my house. Your review is in front of me. Soon, it will be behind me." KS

Sctmom; It's not that anything related to WB is a secret...it isn't. I use this analogy to explain any reluctance on the part of participants to share the course content with participants-to-be: If you were in line to see a just-released movie, that you were really excited about, that you had just bought a ticket for, and that all your friends had recommended, how would you feel if someone walked up to you before you got inside and told you "whodunit"? It's the same with WB, in my view. Assuming you get the point of the training (some do and some don't, apparently), you want others to get the same benefit you did. Disclosing the staff methods can ruin it and rob that participant of the lessons. One lesson I've learned as a Scouter is that "there's no such thing as too much training". Go if you have a chance, and you'll then know for sure if it was worth it. Then, go to National Camp School, and Philmont, and Commissioner's College, and all the Roundtables you can make, etc., etc. KS

Many, if not most, experiences are better in the anticipation than the execution. For those who looked forward to WB as a personal epiphany, then discovered that it was not, their comments are understandable. Maybe we're all partially responsible, because of the level of hype. WB is, as far as I'm concerned, like any other activity in that you get out of it what you put into it...and most of what you put into it are the intangibles. Manufacturing "perfect experiences" in Scouting or any other endeavor requires the precise synchronization of a number of simultaneous external variables. Now, complicate that with the fact that most of the people we're relying on for this are volunteers. It's no wonder that something usually goes wrong. Moreover, we don't all speak with one voice on how the aims and methods are supposed to be applied or delivered; ask a 20 Scouters how the patrol method works in their troops for example, and you'll get way more than one answer! Looking for flaws in Scouting events is like fishing in a barrel -- easy. But, beyond a certain point, it reminds me of the guy who told me the difference between a music lover and an audiophile is that a music lover plays a record and hears music, while an audiophile plays a record and hears pops and scratches. Okay, the example only works if you're old enough to remember records, but the point's still valid. BW's right, also, all the tools and info are out there if you take advantage of the opportunities. KS

SilverShark; I think the whole construct includes the presumption that people are doing what they're suppposed to be doing. That is, the Scouts (new, experienced, or Venture-aged) are following their leaders enthusiastically; the youth leaders, elected or appointed, are motivated, trained, and have their heads screwed on right; the adult leaders are similarly motivated, trained, and have their heads screwed on right, too. If any of these ingredients are not present in any quantity, it's incumbent on the adults to first recognize it, then get the gaps filled in. For example, the NSP PL of the month has no idea what to do? The SM should spend the hour or so it takes to go over that portion of the TJL Training Kit. It won't make him the reincarnation of Omar Bradley, but he'll have a clue. The Troop Guide's agenda doesn't match the NSP's? Appoint a new Troop Guide who's with the program. I guess my bottom line is, if someone in the Troop I serve is foundering aimlessly, that's not their fault, it's mine. One of my non-scientific observations is that adults tend to bring workplace baggage with them to Scouting. That is, everything must be perfect the first time, flawless in execution, and brutally efficient 24/7 -- because that's what our jobs demand. In a true boy-led Troop, everything will not be perfect, flawless, and efficient, and it's nothing to wring our hands over. We can measure the quality of our program by how closely a NSP PL models Alexander the Great during his month in the position, or we can measure our program by how that NSP PL turns out when he's an adult (what's the BSA mission again?). Two extremes on the continuum, I suppose, but I think my point is that if we take a longer view, remember this is a marathon versus a sprint, and orient ourselves in that fashion, we're operating closely to what BSA has in mind. I'm no expert with a hotline to Irving, but I keep the mission, aims, and methods on the back of my business card, and use them to guide my activities. I've had both good and bad experiences with an NSP. There's merit to having those Scouts in a group, and the program in its design assumes a troop has an NSP. It takes a good supporting cast, though. Here's a radical thought: if a given Troop doesn't have a solid Guide and NSP ASM, recommend the Scouts join a different troop, one that does??? KS

Please don't say "both"; where does your heart lie? This may be a "boxers vs. briefs" equivalent... As I mentioned in another thread, we just got back from Spring Camporee. Advertised as a "light weight camp", we weren't allowed to bring patrol boxes, propane tanks, coolers, or the other flotsam and jetsam that fills every nook and cranny of our supply hut. We're proud of that stuff and how well-turned-out our patrols are. We get away from it all -- and take it all with us, too! We eat like kings, with up to 5 Dutch Ovens going at the same time, 20-lb propane tanks with each patrol, gigantic umbrella-like freestanding gazebos as rain flys (flies?), etc., etc., etc. Now, we had to leave it all behind, get backpacking stoves, change the way we plan menus, and actually rough it...comparatively speaking. Now, we've done a little of this, but if you had to categorize us, we are definitely "car campers"! Well, we didn't own backpacking stoves, so our committee reimbursed our Scouts for half the cost if they went out and bought one. They bought all the gas canisters for the Scouts, too, and we planned mainly retort packaged foods that we provided, with every Scout planning his own meals (maybe with a patrol buddy) and getting himself whatever he needed beyond the retorts we provided. I thought our lads would raise cain over not having the Dutch ovens, coolers, fried chicken, lasagna, biscuits, cinnamon rolls, and all the other stuff they normally eat, and I was smug in assuming that they couldn't wait for the next campout to go back to the way we normally did it. I took an informal poll, and they not only liked using the backpacking stoves, but many prefer it to the patrols boxes and ten tons of gear we usually take. I found this surprising, but maybe I shouldn't have. On reflection, from their perspective, the food procurement was easier, the cleanup at camp was easier, less manual labor setting up/tearing down camp, they cook/eat when they're ready rather than when they're told to, and they get to operate this cool gadget (that novelty may wear off). Okay, what's your experience? Are you primarily car campers or backpackers? What do you see as the pluses and minuses of each? What do your Scouts prefer, and why? And, this doesn't have to be either/or, I realize. Your thoughts, please...one of my fundamental beliefs has been shaken to the core. KS

Been in the military in some shape or form for 26 years now. Also, taught college classes, driven a potato chip truck, been a busboy, worked in executive protection for a Fortune 100 company, ran a mail room, and repossessed cars for a bank. We just got back from our District Spring Camporee this afternoon. On the other side of the camp resort we were at was a group of about 100 people having a picnic. They were all professional colleagues with each other, but all their contact until that day had been primarily over their computers. They had a blast meeting each other live for the first time, and I couldn't help thinking how much fun it would be if we could do the same thing...probably impossible, but neat to think about. KS

All of you raise good points, and I agree, at least in part, with all of you. Allow me to reflect on a couple things I've seen in the threat so far... "...a 2-year District slave...". I hope these sentiments aren't serious. I've never been in a district/council where expectations on unit-level volunteers could be compared to slavery. Currently, we as unit leaders (and units, by extension) are expected to take turns "sponsoring" events, that is, doing most of the work arranging and pulling them off. If a Scouter, as part of his WB ticket, completes a project or event for the DE, helps all the units in the District, and gets exposure to the movement on a larger scale, is that a bad thing? BW said ticket items are supposed to meaningful to the Scouter...agreed. I'd submit that something needed by the district or council will (or at least should) be meaningful to me. I'm sure the BSA elders have designed WB the way it is for a reason, to include the focus of the ticket items. I guess I just see some disconnect between the needs at various levels of the movement and energetic WB students who have tickets to complete... Just my opinion, I could be wrong. KS

I think that in the end, we all want the same thing, for the Scouting movement to thrive. There are lots of ways to get there. I personally believe that a lot of our inefficiencies result from well-meaning people who have too small a picture and can't relate what they're doing to the world as a whole. Forcing them out of their comfort zone as part of WB can only help... KS

The Department of Defense supports a number of youth groups and organizations in overseas areas. Not just BSA/GSA, but Boys/Girls Clubs, too. Subsidizes home school curriculum costs, many other things, too. The whole idea is to give the kids a childhood that's as close as possible to what they'd experience if they lived back home. That said, our troop meetings are regularly paused by the deafening roar of four-ship formations of F-16s taking off on full afterburner. Whoever's talking at the time pauses; the lads sit quietly and wait for the last bird to get out of the pattern, then we resume. Not exactly a normal experience, but we don't have to tell our Scouts to stand up for the Pledge of Allegiance, either... KS

Eisley; Yup, we use UTM grid maps. In fact, they're what we train our Scouts with, too. We have to make sure we're using maps with the most current datum (World Geodetic System, 1984 revision, or WGS-84), clearly marked on each map. Using older-datum UTM grid maps will result in slight nav errors -- an inconvenience for Scouts, but very unpleasant when directing aerial fire support. And, we have to teach the dec angles, too. But, they pick it up pretty quickly. And, I can get the maps in any quantity I need, free of charge. KS

I'm pretty familiar with the current ticket philosophy/intent -- had my beading ceremony at District earlier this month. What I'm suggesting is something...a little different. Depending on how you look at it, we all "work for the council" at least to some extent. Many of the things I suggested in my initial post are focused on the unit level, and I think there should be a balance between unit, district, and council service. I disagree that the SM should be in charge of fund-raisers. I see that as a Troop Committee function, to determine the need for them, find the opportunities, secure the applications/approvals, coordinate the timing with the SM to deconflict from program activities, and then the SM, through the PLC, promotes the fund-raiser to the Troop and gets the Scouts out there. I also don't think that a ticket item has to be unit-focused in order to allow the Scouter to internalize the lessons. For example, if I personally believe that volunteers in my district are under-trained, and my vision is to enhance the overall level of volunteer expertise, I can instruct NLE and/or other courses throughout the district as a ticket item. It's personal, tied in with my vision, helps my unit because those volunteers are helping to run district events that my Scouts are attending, and helps the district for obvious reasons. I guess my point is that we seem to define the ticket process as some sort of personal epiphany, like Peter being smitten on the road to Damascus. Meanwhile, our units, districts, and councils have specific needs that WB'ers could fill -- as ticket items. Consider it a "sing for your supper" approach...sort of like National Camp School grads required to serve as camp directors. C'mon, is such a notion that outlandish? KS

Okay, I wanted to split this from the curriculum question in my other topic. Most training I've had involves some practicum, internship, application period, or performance evaluation that's linked to the curriculum. The WB ticket requirement gives BSA councils and districts an opportunity to do that, too. But, we don't, really. Although the staff scrutinizes WB students' ticket items, redirecting their focus if necessary, they're still largely (if not exclusively) the product of the students' minds, and reflects what they think is important and/or needed. What if the ticket items had to be in certain categories that would compel the student to do things his unit, district, or council needed? Categories like, for example: -Financial: -- Serve as a unit Popcorn Kernel -- Head a unit or District FOS campaign -- Lead a District fund raising event -Training: -- Serve as a District-level trainer for NLE or a position fundamentals course -- Serve on staff for a JLTC -- Offer MB counselor training -Administration: -- Serve as a unit commissioner -- Serve in another District-level position -Advancement: -- Serve on X boards of review -- Recruit X MB counselors, or increase # of MB counselors by X percent. -Program: -- Take the lead role in organizing X District-level events. I'm running out of time for this one, but I'm sure you get the idea. Basically, what do our units, districts, and councils need the most? Make those things the WB ticket "buffet"; every WB student selects one item from each area -- appetizer, main course, vegetable, bread, dessert, based on local needs. Also gets the student out of his "comfort zone" and into areas he wouldn't have without prodding. This isn't a "white paper", I'm just thinking out loud... Your thoughts? KS

There's some dissent on the forum over whether or not WB is worth the time, money, effort, extra socks (okay, that one's mine alone), etc. In other words, are the benefits worth the costs? Obviously, an individual assessment. I think important lessons were taught there...if you could see the forest for the trees and picked up what the staff was putting down. In my WB course, some did, but sadly, some didn't. I don't know what the stats are, but I'm sure that 100% of those who finish the coursework do not go on to finish their tickets and receive their beads. What does that tell us, that the curriculum's flawed, the students lost interest, their expectations were off the mark, or something else? Some possible things that should/could be outlined in WB or some training venue, in my opinion: -Patience is a virtue -You can only recognize the "unusual" if you know what's "usual" -The premiere importance of planning and goal setting, and how to do it at the strategic (program planning conference), operational (monthly PLC), and tactical (stand-up) levels -How to leverage limited resources to get the program delivered -Whoever's name is on the tour permit should be wherever the most dangerous activity is taking place -How to cope with other adults who can drive you nuts -What every adult leader is supposed to be doing (unit level, MB counselors, unit commish, committee members, District vols/pro staff) There's more, of course, but that's a start. You can pick these things up through self-study and experience, but is that the best way? KS

You guys are right, there isn't and shouldn't be a 100% recall requirement to retain MBs (put 'em on the sash with Velcro backings?). My boy has earned MBs he wasn't personally smitten with, but his buddy was doing it, and didn't want to do it alone, so he did them with his buds. Does he remember every arcane requirement in Surveying? Heck, no. He can recognize a transom 9 times out of ten, and knows with certainty he does NOT want to be a surveyor when he grows up...who can ask for anything more? That said, I do have an expectation that a Scout who's earned...Pioneering, for example, should be able to instruct our NSP on lashings, and with a review of the pamphlet, could get a tower built in reasonable time. Ditto for my Orienteering lads...I lean on them to lay out the one-mile courses for our FCFY critters. If they need to get the pamphlet out 'cuz it's been a while, that's fine, too. You can surely come up with other examples, too. Not a retest or exam, just using the expertise in your troop to get the program delivered. KS

There's another web site, http://www.gislab.lanl.gov.faq.html It has a map of the world, with declination degree lines on it as an overlay. The best thing, though, is to make sure your map has complete margin info...can you get a refund? BTW, a dec angle of 0 degrees obviously makes land navigation, and the teaching of it, much easier. Rumor has it that's why the Army located the Infantry Center at Ft. Benning, GA (yes, dec angle of 0 degrees)... KS

We haven't used liquid fire starter for charcoal in as long as I can remember. We normally use a few matchlight briquettes with regular kingsford on top...gotta haul two kinds of charcoal around, but that's the way it goes. There have been many incidents with that stuff, especially when sprayed to re-ignite coals. That 16-ounce can packs a huge explosive force. The hand sanitizer method is an emergency procedure, not a default program standard, as I see it. When we studied emergency prep MB, one of the caveats was that some of the LNT principles go out the window when you're trying to get found. Is a gel a liquid? I dunno, probably calls for a determination of the specific gravity/viscosity of the gel, and some are more gel-ly than others. Any takers? KS

They aren't WB socks, just BSA socks...I only had one pair and needed more. A coin? I never got a coin! Or a notebook, for that matter. They may have been council-level enhancements or something. I do have all the BSA socks I'll ever need, though, and great memories, and a bigger SM tool kit... KS

Mine was $200 for the course, plus the extra socks, activity shirts, and other gear. Then, add on the cost of airfare (had to fly to Japan for it), and other incidentals, and I was pushing $1,000 total. No cost sharing from the troop committee, either...they didn't offer and I didn't ask. KS