Questions for Scout Leader Trainers.

[Bob White]

Some interesting thoughts have been brought up in other threads and I would like to look into them a little more.

 

1. The fact that some council and district trainers by either individual choice or committee direction alter the training syllabi contents.

 

I am curious as to what information you add or delete and why.

 

 

2. The frequency or infrequency with which courses are offered and why.

 

3. How does one get to be a trainer in your District.

 

4. How are Pack and Troop Trainers (a committee position within the unit) used to enhance or deliver training in your district.

 

5. The idea of using "devil's advocate" or purposely presenting wrong information in order to spark a discussion, as an effective training tool.

 

 

To get the most usefull information it is important that only Trainers respond. Their knowledge of the various training syllabi and scout traininig techniques are vital to the response.

 

Thank you in advance for participating,

Bob White

 

[evmori]

Bob,

Interesting subject.

 

1. We stick to the syllabus. The only variations are those that enhance the learning experience.

 

2. In my district, training is offered annually. There have been some discussion to hold Scoutmaster Fundamentals twice a year.

 

3. One must complete the course one would like to be a trainer for.

 

4. Staff is chosen from the PAcks & Troops in the district.

 

5. Excellent technique. This works especially well with youth training programs.

 

Ed Mori

Scoutmaster

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[OldGreyEagle]

(pardon the interruption, this thread is being hijacked by OldGreyEagle)

 

With all due respect to Mr. White, I have to ask Ed these questions,

 

Do you think any Council/District ever varies the syllabus to mess up/degrade/lessen or otherwise make the learning experience less than it should be?

 

How do you measure how much your alterations "enhance" the learning experience?

 

Have you ever had adults attend both your training and training done "by the book" and asked them to compare the differnt experiences?

 

What qualifications does your training staff have that allows it to "know" how to improve a training program put together by professionals in training and years in development?

 

(I now return you to your regularly scheduled thread)

[evmori]

"Do you think any Council/District ever varies the syllabus to mess up/degrade/lessen or otherwise make the learning experience less than it should be?"

 

Yes I do.

 

"How do you measure how much your alterations "enhance" the learning experience?"

 

We don't alter. Just embelish.

 

"Have you ever had adults attend both your training and training done "by the book" and asked them to compare the differnt experiences?"

 

This has never come up. Why the question?

 

"What qualifications does your training staff have that allows it to "know" how to improve a training program put together by professionals in training and years in development?"

 

We follow the syllabus.

 

Hope this helps.

 

Ed Mori

Scoutmaster

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[EagleWB]

1. We have altered a few things based on comments from course participation evaluation forms.

2. everything but Sm specific and intro to Outdoor Leader training is offered multiple times. We've tried to offer this more, but cannot get the people there.

3. They must have the course they are going to train and we strongly suggest they take train the trainer.

4. Our trainers come from the Troops and Packs, but I don't think we specifially recruit the postions you mention. We do use the JLT staff to teach the Intro to Outdoor Leader. We feel it gives the boys an opportunity to practice their presentations and shows the adults how the boys can do the teaching in a boy run Troop.

5. I'm not a big fan of this. I would never present the wrong info. What if there is no discussion, they just take it as is. I try to give it as it is and get into a discussion by asking and answering questions.

[fboisseau]

Here are my answers based on serving as the district Webelos leader trainer and a Pack Trainer.

 

1. The fact that some council and district trainers by either individual choice or committee direction alter the training syllabi contents. I am curious as to what information you add or delete and why.

When I do training I teach the syllabi contents. The only thing I add is suggestion of ideas of things to do or methods that I have tried or that others have used that worked. For example I tend to handout a copy of the letter I gave my Webelos leaders along with the schedule I used. I also try to make sure that any myths that I am aware of that come up in the class are pointed out at that time, for example what consitutes a complete uniform.

 

 

2. The frequency or infrequency with which courses are offered and why.

The district that I do training for offers the new leaders and leader specifics training in the spring and fall.

 

3. How does one get to be a trainer in your District.

You typically are asked to volunteer by the District training coordinator. In my case the Cub Master of my Pack who was the Roundtable Coordinator at the time recommended me to the Cub Trainer director, because he liked the way I ran my Webelos den.

 

4. How are Pack and Troop Trainers (a committee position within the unit) used to enhance or deliver training in your district.

As a Pack Trainer also I will have to say that I am still feeling this one out. I tried to make sure that the leaders are aware that I am available for any question that they might have and also am willing to arrange training time for leaders at their convenience to give them unofficial leader specific training if they can not make the district training.

 

5. The idea of using "devil's advocate" or purposely presenting wrong information in order to spark a discussion, as an effective training tool.

If used correctly it can get people to think about issues. The main point about using this is to be ready to state the correct information and make sure everybody realizes why what you said first was wrong.

 

 

[Overtrained]

BW

Good topic. I wonder where the idea came from? :-)

 

 

1. The fact that some council and district trainers by either individual choice or committee direction alter the training syllabi contents.

 

I am curious as to what information you add or delete and why.

 

The only one we adapt is the Cub Scout Leader Basic, as discussed in another thread. We only alter where some things are presented, not the content. The only other difference Ive ever done was having a backup flannel board and flipcharts for when tv/vcr werent available or werent working. Of course the power point slides arent always used do to equipment.

 

2. The frequency or infrequency with which courses are offered and why.

 

Our council training committee has gone to a coordinated calendar. Leader Specific training is available every month of the year in at least one district. We all took a slice. We can add more to our district calendar. My district offers Varsity once, Venturing once, SM/SA 3 times and CS specific 4 times. TCC is offered once, but scheduled by request with each unit. OLS is offered by the council only at this time, 6 times a year. All of the above, occasionally, is done by one on one coaching.

 

3. How does one get to be a trainer in your District?

 

Some volunteer, others are recruited. I currently have a prospecting list of 40 names that was derived between the Key-3 and me. I have recruited a Cub, Scout, and Venturing Coordinators, a registrar, and a Marketer. The marketer has time to call folks so we target market unit trainers and untrained leaders for specific trainings. Ive also gotten several trainers and am working the list.

 

4. How are Pack and Troop Trainers (a committee position within the unit) used to enhance or deliver training in your district?

 

This was late to the table in our council and is really just getting going. For the ones we have, some are now trainers. Others are the liaison to the unit and gather all the training information and promote the trainings to their unit.

 

5. The idea of using "devil's advocate" or purposely presenting wrong information in order to spark a discussion, as an effective training tool..

 

I dont have any trainers, that I know of, that do this by design. I have been known to use this method on occasion, as Im sure my trainers have, but only as a means to guide the discussion to its proper conclusion.

 

 

 

[Bob White]

I'll tell you why I asked these questions. Keep in mind this is based only on my experiences in corporate and scouting training, and on a number of trainer courses I have participated in within the education, corporate and scouting arenas.

 

It is my experience that...

 

1. The biggest contributors to the spread of scouting myths are trainers who embellish or vary from the syllabus. Adding local information such as council and district boundaries, local names, and local resources is as embellished as we should go. Every time I hear a trainer say "well when I was a Scout" I brace myself for a barrage of useless information.

 

2. As Districts and Councils get larger, training gets farther away from the trainee. Time is precious to volunteers and they often judge the value of training by travel time. The days of offering courses in a central location twice-a-year are gone. Trainers must take the training to the trainees and we must do it frequently. Solo staffs can do the majority of Cub training, and SM Leader Specific, Intro to Outdoor Skills, BALOO, and Webelos Leader Outdoor need to be done three or four times a year minimum.

 

3. I highly recommend trainers be selected by their ability to communicate and their dedication to stick to the syllabus. Everything else can be taught to them. I would also make completion of the Trainer Development BSA 500 course required.

 

4. We use Unit Trainers to 1. promote training and encourage attendance. 2. To deliver training directly to their unit volunteers, once they have been approved to do so.

 

5. Devil's Advocate may be effective in some circles but scouting isn't one of them. Scouts and leaders alike have very limited face-time in front of instructors. In order to maximize learning it is imoportant for instructors to say and do the right thing. A learner should not picture a method or recall information from a scout training and have to ask themselves "was that one of the times they were telling me the right thing to do, or the wrong thing to do?"

 

When setting the example always set a good example..and scouters and trainers should always be setting the example.

 

Bob White

[jbroganjr]

BW

I am replying to the devil's advocate, as I know it is addressed at mysefl in particular, as it is my post and use of those words that prompted this thread.

First off, RT, which is my primary job. Part of RT's job is provide additional training and modeling of behavior.

 

Actually, I think that done right, Devil's advocate works well at a RT discussion. It is a method to stand wrongness or myths on their head.

An example in use.

When presenting recruitment ideas. My flip chart contains some funny or abnormal thoughts, like the first one - "Recruitment....we're against it"

Another approach is dispelling myths.

Or FOS is solely to provide more income to the Scout Executive. Both of these are followed up by statements that come directly from BSA, in order to dispell the "myths" and misconceptions.

Devil's Advocate, is not promoting wrong behavior, but shining a light on the wrongheadness of a position or theory. It is naming the elephant in the room.

To do this right, the follow up discussion has to be forthright, cite BSA reference materials. Printed or emailed resources is integral in getting the right message out.

Why do I do it this way? First, don't assume this is a weekly or monthly thing, Two, having gotten to know my district, I found that just broaching the topic in the "regular" manner produced two reactions. One, the audience would just argue til the cows came home, or Two, the rest of the group shut down mentally.

By presenting things as "I am on your side at first, but I have acouple of questions about your conclusion... then following up with the cited resources makes for a more lasting impression. I'd rather have a scouter, who was convinced he was right (i.e. a SM playing oldest SPL in the world, or a cub scouter spouting all sorts of rules and regs. that are made up, acting like a BSA gestapo) leave my presentation either realizing they where wrong or at the least, that I have planted a seed of doubt in their minds.

To do this correctly takes a lot of time. Finding and citing the BSA policy, at times, is time consuming, brainstorming with my staff on potential answers, reactions etc takes most of the time, plus the positive follow ups, and resource material. We normally plan out two months to present this type of presentation.

Now, I would agree that this approach would not work in NLE. In specifics, I would rather see a "Deputy Discussion" that is used tween modules. [we're in jersey, put on a couple of cowboy hats and stand on a milk crate really gets the trainees involved.]

Scouting is about making ethical decisions, to help develop a moral compass. If follow the aims and means of scouting, the mission statement, the oath and law (whether cub, boyscout, venture, etc) is the guiding principle of the trainer, and the methods employed spark fun, interest, empower, etc. then I have done my job.

 

 

[Bob White]

Jbroganjr, although something you wrote spurred my post you are by no means the topic of the post.

 

Heres what it means according to my dictionary to be a Devils Advocate

 

A person who advocates an opposing or unpopular view, often for the sake of argument.

 

By your explanation of how you introduce a topic, it does not fit the definition. If you were to argue a defense for not recruiting scouts, or against FOS that would qualify as being a devils advocate. I dont see by what you have written that this is the method you use.

 

Although Roundtable is an element of supplemental training, the purpose of RT is to provide unit leaders the Will To Do and the Skill To Do a quality scouting program in the unit they serve.

 

I do not see how creating an argument in support of policies or methods that oppose those of the current scouting program would help in either of these two areas. There are far more positive and effective teaching methods at our disposal that I would recommend never using the devils advocate position as a way to meet the mission of roundtable or Scouting.

 

Bob White

 

[Twocubdad]

Bob, if ability to communicate clearly and adherance to the syllabus are the two key traits of a trainer, why doesn't National present most training via video tape? Videos could use professional presenters and tightly control content. The few local items you mentioned could be easily covered in handouts, the way local reporting information is handled during Youth Protection.

 

What is the purpose of having live presenters?

[Bob White]

Twocubdad

Welcome to the 21st century. That's exactly what they changed to over a year ago. Fast Start, New Leader Essentials, all the Leader Specific Training except for the Troop committee Challenge are now primarily on Video tape and PowerPoint. The reason for doing this was to help standardize the information. However for that to work we still need the trainer to stick to the plan.

 

Why have live presenters? I guess the easy answer is "somebody has to push the play button."

 

Just kidding. First, this is still a hands on program. There are exercises and training elements that require an on hand trainer. Also, though many of the training courses have been designed to be able to administer as a self-taught course or as an on-line training, group dynamics make learning more effective and yields higher retention of information. Plus of course a live presenter can be more responsive to the needs of the trainees.

 

In our District almost all the trainers are Roundtable staffers. We want to establish comraderie with the leaders and build trust and continuity from the basic training through RT and beyond as resources they know and can be comfortable talking with.

 

Hope this helps ,

Bob White(This message has been edited by Bob White)

[KoreaScouter]

Bob;

 

I'm a NLE instructor; no particular training from BSA to do it, although I've been a college instructor and commanded a military training school (with the accompanying instructional systems design work to go along with it).

 

I don't embellish the NLE class; I've found that the 3 hours BSA says it takes is woefully short if you engage the students in discussion, fight for feedback, actually do all the exercises, and so on.

 

I have significantly modified our Troop JLT, basically rebuilding it based on the content of the SPL and PL Handbooks. I found (and I wasn't alone) that all but one or two of our Scouts had been through the BSA Troop JLT program at least once, and we'd lose them if we offered the same program for the fourth time.

 

We used the BSA Powerpoint template, roughly followed the chapters in the SPL/PL Handbooks as lesson topics, and included end-of-lesson activities to get them off their feet, developing teamwork, and problem solving. Bonus: Using the Handbooks as follow-alongs in the course got the green bars into the books, got the rosters filled out, and gave them the confidence of knowing that issues they ran into in their troop/patrol were in the book, they remembered it, and sent them scurrying to find it and refresh their memories.

 

KS

[Bob White]

Actually KS the NLE course is scheduled for 90 minutes and I have found that it actually requires 2 hours. Not sure what you are putting in that extra hour.

Bob

[dsteele]

Hello, folks.

 

I've been monitoring this thread with interest and remained have remained silent. However, my wife is off visiting her cousin overnight and I'm bored. So what the heck? I'll kick in some thoughts on why you need live trainers.

 

The discussions that occupy most of this thread have lots of good opinions on all sides. I'll leave the debates to the good folks who do the NLE and other training.

 

I recently covered a roundtable for a sick district executive. The topic was youth protection training. I'll probably be reprimanded by some on these forums for not diving in and saving what I thought was the worst example of youth protection training I'd ever seen. Let me defend myself by explaining that I was there, but I was nearly as sick as the DE was. I literally sat slumped in a chair in the back of the room half-dozing through the training. Therefore, I was a small part of the problem. Besides, as a professional, I've literally sat through that tape easily 50 times.

 

The trainers prefaced the tape by saying that this is something we have to do. They pushed play. Then they did nothing for the next 55 minutes.

 

The tape played. People kept up their side discussions. About 1/3 of the room pretty much ignored it. There are discussion items built into the tape. They are timed, with a countdown on the screen. This is mostly where I've seen YPT screwed up.

 

The trainers simply let the tape run. No one (myself included, I was bad) led a discussion. The trainer shouted "break" and more people left the room.

 

At the end of the tape, they hit stop and that was that. That part, they got correct.

 

I've also seen the opposite happen. There are folks out there who schedule 2 hours for youth protection and shut the VCR off for the discussions. They then start war stories and attempt to embellish what is pretty clear in the tape. I don't believe in that, either.

 

The tape is designed to be run. The training should be 55 minutes and not stopped once it has begun. The trainer should not engage in war stories, nor entertain them. If there are questions that don't fit in during the designated discussion time, refer them to their Scout Executive. Or refer them to the online Youth Protection Training.

 

Okay, so there are my thoughts on Youth Protection Training.

 

As to the other thoughts in this thread, I think it's great and healthy to see good trainers debating the finer points of scout leader training. However, you're all far more familiar with the most recent syllabi than I am and I will leave that discussion to you. As long as I don't see any gross violation of rules, I'll continue to make mental notes of excellent suggestions and "don't go there's."

 

This response, before anyone gets jumpy, only came about because (no one suggested it) I'm just afraid that the day may come when someone will hand a YPT video to someone and say, "Tell me when you've watched this and I'll sign your card." That's very different from taking the training online and passing a test.

 

I know you guys would never do that, but someone reading this thread might.

 

DS