Re-Train ALL Adult s who had Training Prior to 2000?

[Stosh]

Unfortunately, GW, that solves only half the problem. Like your example shows, anyone can vote with their feet. Your example shows that if one doesn't like the rules, the answer to the situation is to "leave", "avoid", or deal with the situation by removing oneself from the problem area. Unfortunately a lot of units will find themselves in a tenuous position if SM's leave, avoid or remove themselves from the situation. Not everyone has the luxury of an assigner to allow SM's to move around between councils or jump council lines when they have CO that has multiple locations. Instead they'll just vote with their feet and it'll be the boys that end up on the short end of the stick.

 

At this point I really don't see National ever requiring this process of retraining and I don't see any councils getting away with trying to implement anything along these lines either. Every council knows they can blow hard on a lot of issues, but if all their long-term experienced people leave, they know their dwindling numbers will be seen at the top of their food chain.

 

Stosh

[NeilLup]

It would seem that two topics are getting confused here

 

1) REtraining to be considered trained

 

2) Mandatory training

 

I believe that at various times, most of us have felt that mandatory training is a good idea. Personally, I am very hard pressed to be comforable with a leader of youth who is not trained. Noting that training can be completed by group training, or personal coaching, or self-study, a person who studies the material by himself or herself can still achieve the status of fully trained.

 

Retraining can also be a good idea, agsin by group training, or personal coaching or self-study. When a new program comes out, I try to read about it and learn about it so that I can implement it. This is, to me, training through self-study.

 

I didn't read in any of the posts that retraining would be considered mandatory for rechartering..

[Gold Winger]

Stosh, it looks like you missed the point of my story. It wasn't about voting with my feet. Every year we had to attend at least 16 hours of refresher training and take two exams. Despite all of his training and the fact that he had to pass the exams to be working, the official in question still refused to do things the right way.

 

It's that way in Scouting too. How many "trained" Scouters do we all know that think that boy led means that the SM appoints the PLs or is okay with a mom doing the meal planning? How many trained MCs out there are willing to pass a boy on to the next rank even when confronted with evidence that he never did the work just so his feelings won't be hurt?

 

In my shooting instructor's class we were taught that someone is trained when they have effected a change in their knowledge, skills and attitude. Attitude is often the hardest thing to change.

 

Why'd I vote with my feet on that other official? Attitude.

[Crew21_Adv]

Fellow Scouters,

 

Greetings!

 

 

I concur with NielLup and as with my previous statement in this string; it seems some Scouters misinterpret their council's intentions. Then rumors run wild.

 

As it snowballs the minimum basic training somehow gets hooked onto other rumored statements, such as "not allowed to recharter".

 

As a naive parent. I would hope at the least that all my son's leaders have attended some sort of youth protection training, and safe programs training at the waterfront, in the woods and on the interstate. Also I would hope they know how to enter the minimum amount of program/advancement documentation into my son's handbook and forward to council.

 

As a Scout leader. I would hope my fellow Scouters are Faststart, YPT, TCC, NLE, Specifics, BALOO, OWLS, NLE, TLT, VLSC, SSD/SA, Woodbadge, Powderhorn, Commissioner, National Camping School.... etc, etc. All of these to deliver a high quality program.

 

As a Scout Leader, I would have high hopes for my unit leader's training, But I expect them to meet at least the minimum.

 

Similar to NeilLup. I believe some of our fellow Scouters, have taken national's and even their own council's desire for a higher level of current and quality training to be synonymous with the minimum training stated in the centennial award. Some of our fellow Scouters have taken a vague desire from their council, and have quoted it and attributed to be a written mandate from national. I agree, there is a difference between retraining to be considered trained and Mandatory training.

 

I appreciate the desire for a highly trained adult staff. But I am comfortable with adult leadership and troop committee that understand safety.

 

For now. Ill interpret the Centennial Quality Award Program Commitment and Achievement Form as what training is required.

 

Scouting Forever and Venture On!

Crew21 Adv

 

[Sprite]

While I've become a convert to training, I've a number of concerns. 1) Concentrating training via District works well when you have a functioning district but until recently our DE was not a troop builder which left some strong scouters out of the loop. 2) Some of the training for new leaders was repetitive and more geared to "Join Scouting." If they are leaders--drop the sales pitch and focus on the needs of leaders. 3) The rewrite of training and "requirement" for fresh training is IMO for the lawyers and a method to raise money. (cynical I know) which is why I suspect they chose not to do "refresher" courses as JBlake mentioned. Yet despite these concerns I see the benefit of training now that I am able to get some. We had a scouting university recently which was wonderful for me. My favorite was Troop Committee Challenge.

As for people who are already strong scouters--been Wood Badge trained and even taught many of the courses. National should recognize your quality and preserve your time by providing refreshers/updates and encourage you to help facilitate the new courses. I think what really angers is the attitude that your experience in scouts and former training now doesn't count.

[NeilLup]

Hello Sprite,

 

You raise some interesting points but there are a couple of points I would like to address.

 

Probably most important -- I don't believe that National has ever said that previous training is not valuable or is not valid. Much the opposite. If one has ever completed Training, they are considered trained according to National guidelines. It would be a local council which would mandate or strongly advise retraining.

 

I know that currently Wood Badge staff service requires that one have taken or previously staffed 21st Century Wood Badge. However, this is after 6 years of availability of 21st century Wood Badge so most potential staffers have had exposure to the current course. Also, on an individual leader basis, exceptions can be made.

 

I'm not sure why you think that requiring training or updating training is for financial reasons. I don't know about your council, but my council loses money on training and expects to. The reason that update courses are often not done is that they are hard to write and do. If a new training method or new operational method is being taught, the training course is normally pretty condensed to start with . It is hard to condense further and still maintain the full "flow" and content of the course.

 

Finally, as far as "National" not valuing and crediting previously trained leaders, where do you think that trainers at the local level come from? We don't breed trainers or drag them in from the street. They are the people who have been trained in previous methods and learn the new methods and new courses so they can use them.

 

It certainly is possible that a particular local council may discount the value of experienced previously trained leaders. But that isn't National. It is that local council and, more specifically, the leadership of that local council.

 

 

[Joni4TA]

Ok, nothing to get in writing. Though it may be just a rumor... I heard this from somewhat credible sources IMHO.

 

I heard our District Training Chair say it to my dear husband, (My husband is the former District Training Chair but is now the District Camping Chair). Then it came up at the District Committee Meeting, and the District Chairman was a little upset that the Council would even consider making HER retrain, as she is a Scouter veteran from the days of yore and all..........

 

No one furnished anything in writing or any kind of confirmation... it was just a matter of discussion. But I brought it here to the forums since our District Committee found it worthy to talk about, I wondered what ya'll thought about it.

 

I am curious what our Council or any other District, Council, etc. would be thinking by insisting folks who were trained eons ago - RE-DO it all. It seemed a little ridiculous and extreme to me! And upsetting if someone at Council level is actually considering this seriously!

 

As far as the mandatory training issue goes, that's a whole other subject. Though our Council has already implemented something called an "Amnesty program" where they've explained there was crappy record-keeping on the part of the national registration system. They say System problems lead to that information becoming unavailable or unreliable. They also say National has repaired the system but they needed us at Unit level to re-create all the records and turn them into our Council so they could be updated into the newly repaired National system.

 

I have no idea if that ever completely went through. I know I turned in the form to our District Training Chair but that's about it.(This message has been edited by Joni4TA)

[Scouter&mom]

As a member of the district training committee, I have seen how bad the "official" records the council has. Last fall, I was told there was not a registered leader in our district that showed as trained. Now we are not a large council or district, but I know many of the Scouters have been Scouters for over ten years and have not just completed Woodbadge, but staffed it. So yes that is a nightmare. The committee chairman has written each unit leader asking for training info, and so far he has only heard from 4 units. SAD..

 

Our council, who has not offered BALOO or OWL, in my memory, is now saying Cubs must have a BALOO or OWL trained leader to take them camping. The OWL course scheduled for last weekend was cancelled. 4 years ago when I took IOLS, about half the class were Cub leaders, so Cub requirements and rules were discussed too. Now it is being passed from SE, or somewhere, that no one can take the Webelos camping if they have not had OWL. Now as a volunteer, asking me to take a weekend out of my busy schedule, pay to attend the class, and go to a class, that I have basically taken before is a waste of my time, money and effort. I have been to BS and Cub training (even going out of council to get more training that was not offered locally.) I can read G2SS as well as anybody (I read govt manuals and teach/analyze govt programs). I just cannot see not being able to take the Webelos to a council event or along with the troop for a joint campout, especially since I can take the Boy Scouts camping in much more rustic and dangerous places and do more dangerous activities. Go figure!

 

 

[FScouter]

BALOO and OWL trainings are not about taking Scouts to dangerous places. Introduction to Outdoor Leader Skills is for Boy Scout leaders, not Cub leaders. It may cover 10% of the BALOO material, the other 90% you get from the BALOO training.

[fgoodwin]

As others have explained, the purpose of BALOO is to introduce Cub Scouters to pack family camping -- it was never intended to cover Webelos Den Camping. National does not require that a WDL have BALOO in order to take his or her den camping.

 

Of course, councils can add more restrictive requirements, but frankly, I think its stupid to require a WDL to have BALOO in order to go den camping. I know that's not a Scout-like attitude, but its stupid nonetheless. The audience for BALOO is not WDLs, and BALOO does not talk about the outdoor Webelos activity pins.

 

There's no other way to put it: that's a stupid decision. The answer is for your council training team to get off their rears and organize an Outdoor Leader Skills for WDL class.

 

I say this as a former district training chair who has organized two IOLS sessions and assisted with an OLS-WDL session, as well as staffed many BALOO courses.

[Eagle92]

Having served as the district training chairmen, I can also tell you how messed up the training records were. I asked for and received a copy of the records. According to the records, I was never trained, my district commissioner who taught at PTC was never trained, and only three leaders in the entire district were trained. And those three were the new ones who just completed everything for scout leaders. It was a mess.

 

One of the things I did was pass out a 2 page training survey with every recognized training from the District Training Pamphlet and also 3 or 4 additional courses from our council registrar. I collected them, copied them, and sent the originals to the council office. I did that 2 years ago and there are still a few problems. I suggest getting a copy of your personal record and reviewing it. I did that recently and my record still has a few errors in it.

 

And when I did that form, national had codes for older courses like Scoutmaster Fundamentals, Bronwsea 22, JLT, etc.(This message has been edited by Eagle92)