things we might change about WB

[Lisabob]

Since there seems to be a desire to talk about this topic, I'm spinning off a thread rather than further contributing to the hijacking of robvio's thread. It seems to me robvio has a legitimate question and it would be un-scoutlike to continue harumphing on about WB over there in the manner that some have.

 

Now, if you want to *change* the current WB in some way, big or small, I do think it requires that you have more than a third-hand familiarity with the WB course outline! So I would ask that only people who have some direct knowledge contribute their CONSTRUCTIVE suggestions here. Want to rant/rave or otherwise carry on about something? Good, then go start your own thread elsewhere to do so.

 

 

Now as for me: One thing I found irritating in WB was the way that "cub scouting" was used as a sort of cutesy introductory phase. This is something Kudu brought up too, and one of very few places where I think he's right about the need for revision in the 21st C WB approach. I recall being a little embarrassed that we went "through" being cub scouts in all of about an hour, with little actual thought or emphasis given to what cubbing is really like. This reinforced the views among some troop leaders that cub scouts exists simply to "feed" their troops and therefore that cub leaders are some lesser sort of scouter. Annoying. And totally un-necessary.

 

I understand that this has been "tweaked" somewhat since I took WB in 2003 and that now there's a longer "cub" period, culminating in a "Blue & Gold" dinner on the first night. But I still get the feeling that this is pretty contrived. The structure of the course is really based on patrols and troop-level leadership (SPL, etc.) and I think it might be better to just stick with that.

 

So that's one thing I would like to see changed, though perhaps those of you who have been through the most recent version of 21st C WB after the "tweaking" might disagree, and if so I'd be interested in hearing why.

 

I used to be a BOBWHITE, a good old bobwhite too!

 

 

[purcelce]

My two cents...

 

Add more Venturing information to the program, or at least have a staff member who works with Venturing give the bits about Venturing to the class.

 

I was the only Venturing Adult leader in my class. The first day they one of the staff members giving a briefing on Venturing and were giving bits of wrong information. Of course the big mouth I am, I chimed in and corrected the situation on the spot. Afterwards I was taken to the side and counceled about interupting.

 

Several of the members of my class didn't know about Venturing and I was swamped the first weekend with questions about the program. Our patrol project was to give the brief outline of the four programs in BSA: Cubs, Boy Scouts, Varsity, and Venturing. The BW patrol did good and my class members and the staff had a general understanding of all the programs.

 

Cary P

Crew 805 Advisor

WB C-39-06

I used to be a BOBWHITE!!!!!!

 

[hot_foot_eagle]

The "outdoor program" weekend was a bit of a letdown. If WB is going to be about leadership and the methods of scouting, fine, if it's going to be an advanced outdoor skills seminar, that's fine too. But the way it's integrated into the grand scheme of things, it doesn't do much more than the cub scout morning.

 

Yet another good ole BOBWHITE!!

 

 

[Eamonn]

I'm really happy I had nothing to do with developing the "New" course.

Trying to save bits from the old course (I'm thinking about the Boy Scout Course) Which used a more hands on practical approach to the new management/ leadership type course, that covers four programs must have been really hard.

Things I'd change?

I'd bring back the pre-course meeting.

I'd take a long hard look at if the Win All You Can Game (The Game Of Life) is really doing what it is supposed to be doing?

I'd move all talk about Tickets to Day 3.

The 360-Degree Self-Assessment, just never seems to work!

I'm not really sold on the value of bringing people away for a leadership course and having them perform a conservation project. - I can't help thinking this was some sort of window dressing!

The course needs to do a better job of trying to get people to really understand more about their personal Vision and Mission.

I'd be happy to leave more what the Outdoor Experience might be to the Course Director.

I can't help but think that the Instructional Camp Fire is way over-scripted (My guide has 20 pages!!) Yes, some of it is outstanding, but come on!! We get the idea!!

I like the movie. But is it really a vital part of the course?

Day one is really hard on the seat!!

Eamonn

 

[BrentAllen]

Most of the suggestions here have already been addressed. There was a pretty significant revision in 2005, I think, and it either addressed these issues, or some councils just aren't incorporating them. I just received the syllabus for the 2008 course. I'll try to see if there are any significant changes over 2007.

 

The first day starts off with everyone as Cubs, and continues through lunch, with a Blue & Gold Banquet, and crossover. This is done for a couple of reasons - to give those leaders who never spent a day in Cubs an idea of the program, and to make the Cub leaders feel more welcome in the course. Since most of the rest of the program is built around Boy Scouts, I don't think this is too much to ask.

 

We had nearly a dozen Venture Scouts come in and set up a "What'wrong with this campsite?" game, and they lead the participants on the hike to their overnighter. Participants had plenty of time to talk with them and ask questions. The staff became Venturers on day 5, I believe.

 

For the summer course, our participants camped in the Summer Camp staff tents for the first weekend, and we ate in the mess hall. For the second weekend, participants camped in their patrol sites in their own tents, and cooked their own meals. They back-packed to another part of camp for the overnighter. The program serves several purposes, just as does Scouting.

 

Ea,

I can tell you the Game of Life works sometimes, and others, it doesn't. It didn't for the course I attended back in 2004, but it worked beautifully this summer. Too many variables to figure out why. When it works, the message is extremely powerful, so I would vote enthusiastically to leave it in. We have a previous CD who is very talented at running the game, so nearly every CD asks him to come in and run it.

 

The 360 worked very well for me. Can't speak for others.

 

The conservation projects I've been involved with have been huge successes, on several levels. One, we did make an impact on the area. Second, the participants were very proud of the work they did, and were impressed with how much could be accomplished in such a short amount of time. Many are skeptical going in, but leave with a real lesson about what can be accomplished with a little planning and organization.

 

The movie is important - if the debrief is handled correctly. There are so many examples of team development, leadership styles, mission & vision, and coaching vs. mentoring. If the participants are allowed to "discover" these through group discussion in the debrief, it really clicks the light bulb on for many of them.

 

Day One seems to last forever. The next five seem to go by in a flash!

[Gonzo1]

I'd like to see the old course brought back!

 

Then, take elements from this course and re-name it so it has nothing at all to do with WB. Then, have this revised course serve as a pre-requisite to WB. That way, we can have the WB21C with a new name, maybe just one weekend and the old Boy Scout Leader WB where the course director is actually the Scoutmaster.

 

Gonzo

Eagle Patrol

SR-59

 

[Gold Winger]

"We had nearly a dozen Venture Scouts . . ."

 

What's a "Venture Scout"?

[BrentAllen]

GW,

My mistake - that should have been Venturers. That word just doesn't seem right, for some reason.

 

To answer your question, a Venture Scout is a member of a Venture Patrol, which, as you know, is different from Venturing.

[Gold Winger]

Actually, according to the BSA style manual, your example would be "a Boy Scout in a Venture Patrol. We have Cub Scouts, Webelos Scouts, Boy Scouts, Varsity Scouts and Venturers but no critter called a "Venture Scout"

 

At one time we had Explorer Scouts but they became Explorers.

 

FWIW, I like the term Venture Scouts because it lets folks outside the program know who you belong to.

 

Hey, let's lobby national to change the name!

[BrentAllen]

Well, they do have a Venture Patrol Leader, who leads the Venture Patrol. It is much easier to say a boy is a Venture Scout than to say he is a Boy Scout who is in a Venture Patrol. As you said, we have Varsity Scouts, so why not Venture Scouts? None of the Troops in my area use the concept, so I don't have to worry about it. :-)

[Gold Winger]

My son's troop tried having a Venture Patrol a few years back but they never wanted to do anything.

[Lisabob]

Brent,

 

Interesting comments, and thanks for your perspective.

 

I was a cub leader when I took the course and I thought the way the cub program was introduced made a mockery of it. I'm not sure that what you are describing post-2005 sounds a lot better, but that's just my view and I don't have first-hand experience with the updated version.

 

For what it's worth, I really liked the content of the movies but the timing was terrible and I don't recall there being a de-briefing (maybe that has changed, or maybe my CD was playing it fast and loose there, or maybe I've forgotten which suggests it wasn't very influential if it occurred at all, I'm not sure which). My major problem with the timing of the movies was that they were really late at night (like, ended around 1am) and I just wanted to go to bed. Is that a standard thing? Or was this just the way it worked out in my course?

[Gonzo1]

Movies???? You had movies????????

Sheeeeesh!!!

 

Let's just bring back the Wood Badge course from the 20th century and have an Intro to Scouting Programs over one weekend.

 

We didn't have movies, we had outdoors skills, leadership and mangagement training, scoutcraft skills. Granted, some people were more skilled at some things than others, but the course was outdoors. We cooked over wood fires, used a hand pump well, had no instructors other than WB staff (no ventureers setting up model campsites), we had patrol method. we had different leadership exercises, etc. It was a nice course.

 

I know some people here think I have no business commenting on the WB21C course because I haven't attended it. I attended WB in 1994. I see no reason to attend again.

 

Movies and staff cooking meals for the attendees, you've got to be kidding!!!

 

 

[purcelce]

Yes they did the Venturers at my course...some of the kids were from my crew There are other parts of Venturing than just the Outdoors part, some crew are into hobbies, sea scouts, etc...would have been better if they would have spent 30 minutes going over the Venturing program.

 

But the "cross-over" of the TGs to Venturing at WB is not how it is done in the real world. Plus the uniform police would have had a field day when they put green tabs on the tan shirt...

 

 

[Lisabob]

"would have been better if they would have spent 30 minutes going over the Venturing program. "

 

Agreed. It was nice that the young men and women who assisted with our course did so, but as others have also mentioned in various WB threads, Venturing leaders tend to be a distinct minority and there are an awful lot of Scouters - myself among them, sad to say - who did/do not know much about the Venturing program. In our area, the same is true of Varsity Teams, which there are maybe 3 of in my district and probably less than 10 of in our whole council. When we got to the part where we needed to do a display "explaining" or incorporating Venturing and Varsity, it was somewhat a matter of the blind leading the blind, I'm sorry to say. Real opportunities for better understanding were overlooked here, IMO.

 

But, I think this would be a tough thing to mandate nation-wide because in some areas, the Venturing program and certainly the Varsity program are better-known.