Is Wood Badge just about "the beads"?

[John-in-KC]

E92 nails this thread to the wall.

 

We need an Outdoor Skills course that allows the leader to study a host of basic outdoor skills across more than one weekend.

 

Now, with that, some of the things we do are utterly obsolete. Who is going to cut down trees to provide the timbers for a signal tower in the Leave No Trace era? BSA has been, and sometimes rightly so, accused of using outdoor techniques that are damaging to a micro-environment. Who still ditches tents? Who still digs trenches for fire pits? Who cuts branches for browse beds?

 

Like it or not, the techniques espoused by Hillcourt need updating before we redeploy the pre-1965 curriculum. The US Army does not even issue signal flags anymore. The Navy does make blinker signal with Morse and run flag hoists ... when vessels are operating in close proximity. They just as often send digits across a radio-based LAN.

 

Even so, we need to teach that outdoor cookery is not as precise as our kitchens, that comfort in the winter means dry socks and layers, and comfort in summer means rationing your activity, not your water intake.

 

Now, since I am the OP, let me remind folks why this thread was created? It was to allow us to answer a question about why we serve and why we take WB. I think even Kudu would agree that if you're not here to serve the youth, either directly or indirectly, then why did you even take any WB?

[eolesen]

WB wasn't about the beads or joining the Man Scouts -- it was purely about getting trained to the best extent I could...

 

And yes, I think being trained in the program and the BSA's bureaucracy makes a difference when dealing not only with kids, but with their parents...

 

I think I've worn my full regalia once -- and that was at my beading ceremony two years ago. I've worn my beads a half dozen times at meetings since then, and will admit that I did wear them on purpose once to establish some credibility with a new pack my youngest son was joining.

 

Most of the time I'm in the uniform, they're hanging from the rear view mirror of my Jeep. I don't think half the leaders in my son's troop have been to training, so why bother flaunting it? They do a good job supporting the boys, and that's what matters.

 

And I don't wear knots, either. I could, but why bother? Decorations are for Christmas Trees...(This message has been edited by eolesen)

[Basementdweller]

Not man scouts any more....

 

 

The Gals were worse than the Men.....

 

 

Adult Scouts

[acco40]

I've taken, taught and was the course director for Introduction to Outdoor Leader Skills. I've taken WB for the 21st Century (i.e. the "leadership" version of WB). What is more important? Well, it depends on where one's deficiencies lie. I've had SAs that were propane, knot, tent, fire, knife, axe, etc. experts but could not relate to the boys or had absolutely no expertise in working with young teens and pre-teens. They needed WB. I've had SAs who were expert leaders but had no Scout skills - they needed IOLS.

 

This will raise eyebrows - what I would like to see added to WB is a large portion of child development knowledge specifically about 11 to 17 year olds (I'm Boy Scout biased, I admit).

 

Again, old vs. new WB is a dumb argument. Both are equally patrol based however. What do I feel is needed more? Well, to take WB, one needs to be trained in their position and for SMs and SAs that means that they have already had IOLS so I say go for leadership training.

 

Kudu - I'm confused with your White Stag reference. I thought White Stag was a leadership course for Scouts, not Scouters. On a similar vein, I know that troop leadership training (what was called Top Knot in our council) went to NYLT over the years. My son was a NYLT participant, Troop Guide and finally the SPL. NYLT, for better or worse, has become kind of like a WB for the 21st Century for youth. Personally, I think these types of leadership courses do more to meet the aims of Scouting than Scout craft courses but each can be of great value if used properly.

 

I think the big fallacy, and thus some animosity, is that somehow those who have taken Wood Badge (either flavor) have gotten some sort of magic pixie dust sprinkled on them. Yes, I do have some WB ashes but that is more of a memento and does not make me better or worse than any other Scouter.(This message has been edited by acco40)

[Basementdweller]

acco what your saying makes perfect sense. teen development training. It is something that I would be interested in as well.

 

Scouting is a huge time commitment anything to make myself more efficient and effective.

[Kudu]

John-in-KC writes:

 

Who is going to cut down trees to provide the timbers for a signal tower in the Leave No Trace era? BSA has been, and sometimes rightly so, accused of using outdoor techniques that are damaging to a micro-environment. Who still ditches tents? Who still digs trenches for fire pits? Who cuts branches for browse beds?

 

John is more enlightened than most leadership advocates, but the same litany is hauled out whenever Staffers justify why Wood Badge violates both the spirit and the letter of an Act of Congress:

 

Sec. 30902. Purposes

 

The purposes of the corporation are to promote, through organization, and cooperation with other agencies, the ability of boys to do things for themselves and others, to train them in scoutcraft, and to teach them patriotism, courage, self-reliance, and kindred virtues, using the methods that were in common use by boy scouts on June 15, 1916.

 

The 1916 program can be found at:

 

http://inquiry.net/advancement/tf-1st_require_1911.htm

 

I don't see anything there that requires trenching tents or cutting branches for browse beds.

 

I never trenched a tent when I was a Scout before 1965, and most $50 tents now have bathtub bottoms.

 

I don't see anything wrong with digging trenches for fire pits in the absence of established fire rings, as long as we save and replace the sod.

 

My 1944 Fieldbook mentions straw, dry grass, and dry leaves under your groundsheet, not evergreen branches. We used air mattresses. I did once sleep under the stars on a bed of balsam that another Troop had harvested the previous weekend. Almost a half-century later I remember that night.

 

BSA Councils cut down trees for money all the time. Pioneering in the 21st century is just a matter of preserving for reuse small trees routinely thinned out.

 

As Steven Covey says "Begin with the end in mind." Wood Badge starts with the premise that to be popular we must violate our Congressional Charter, then it works backwards, citing Leave No Trace, the Guide to Safe Scouting, and race and gender issues. Like speeders who spout cliches to state troopers, this process should be familiar to everyone who watches corporate leadership experts explain golden parachute thinking to Congress.

 

John-in-KC writes:

 

The US Army does not even issue signal flags anymore. The Navy does make blinker signal with Morse and run flag hoists ... when vessels are operating in close proximity. They just as often send digits across a radio-based LAN.

 

This is a different but equally well-worn Wood Badge excuse. If "modern practicality" was the reason for teaching code to Scouts, then why were the requirements later expanded to include (along with deaf sign) Indian sign language?

 

Signalling belongs to the most primary class of Scoutcraft skills gutted from the BSA: Observation and Deduction. Kim's game, tracking, and secret codes have always appealed to boys, as noted by Baden-Powell, Dan Beard, and Seton.

 

Scoutcraft is all about what a Scout can do with this hands. As Richard Louv points out in Last Child in the Woods, the human brain evolved as a result of the design of the human hand. What do Boy Scout Morse code, semaphore, Indian sign language, and deaf sign all have in common? They all use the silent human hand to communicate.

 

acco40 writes:

 

Kudu - I'm confused with your White Stag reference. I thought White Stag was a leadership course for Scouts, not Scouters.

 

Clearly, the BSA's war on our Congressional Charter began with Wood Badge's 1965 move from Scoutcraft to White Stag's Eleven Skills of Leadership. See "1965" at White Stag's own Website:

 

http://www.whitestag.org/history/history.html

 

acco40 writes:

 

I think these types of leadership courses do more to meet the aims of Scouting than Scout craft

 

The so-called "Three Aims of Scouting" are never mentioned in the BSA's true "mission statement," the Congressional Charter. The "Three Purposes" of Scouting are ("using the methods that were in common use by boy scouts on June 15, 1916"):

 

1. The ability of boys to do things for themselves and others,

2. To train them in scoutcraft, and

3. To teach them patriotism, courage, self-reliance, and kindred virtues

 

Unlike the CEO worship of Wood Badge, Scoutcraft is one of the aims of Scouting.

 

CHLees3rd writes:

 

have you written your Congressman and/or Senators about how you feel the BSA is not living up to what is in the Congressional Charter?

 

No. In the words of FDR, when he met with labor leaders in 1934, after four hours of meeting, he said the following: "Youve convinced me that you are right. Now, go out there and FORCE ME TO DO IT.

 

To inspire Congress into action we must first create a popular movement.

 

The potential is there: When I recruit in the public schools and sell BSA Scouting as the kind of adventure that excited these sixth-graders' great-grandfathers in 1916, I register about 28% of the audience IN ADDITION to the boys there who have ALREADY crossed-over from Webelos as a result of all the efforts of the BSA's millionaires and volunteers.

 

As I understand it, BSA District Executives are expected to register 2% TAY (Total Available Youth). So, if the BSA gave up its War on the Congressional Charter, Scouting could be eleven times more popular selling Scoutcraft than it is with office manager role models.

 

My recruiting presentation is easy enough, see:

 

http://kudu.net/adult/recruiting.htm

 

Likewise, my "Traditional Scouting" Website inquiry.net has served almost 30 million page hits, so clearly the potential for a popular movement is out there.

 

Any chance that Congress may revoke the charter or compel the BSA to adhere to the conditions?

 

The political aim of revoking the Congressional Charter is usually linked to punishing the BSA for its membership policies. Nobody is currently interested in forcing the BSA to obey an Act of Congress just because it is the Boy Scout thing to do.

 

Yours at 300 feet,

 

Kudu

 

[theysawyoucomin']

I've been away from this board for a good year it seems, probably to the great joy of many, and this is still being beaten around?

[eolesen]

I had the same reaction... been away from the forums for about 18 months, and found not only the same arguments, but the same 6-12 people carrying on most of the discussion (not saying that is a bad thing). At least they're consistent.

[acco40]

Isn't Scoutcraft simply the crafts we teach Scouts? If so, then are we not arguing a moot point? (This message has been edited by a staff member.)

[Kudu]

acco40 writes:

 

Isn't Scoutcraft simply the crafts we teach Scouts? If so, then are we not arguing a moot point?

 

That is why Wood Badge declared war on our Congressional Charter.

 

That Act of Congress is very specific in its reference to the methods that were in common use by Boy Scouts on June 15, 1916.

 

Therefore, the test of a First Class Scout's mastery of Scoutcraft is for him to make a round trip alone (or with another Scout) to a point at least seven miles away (fourteen miles in all), going on foot or rowing boat, and write a satisfactory account of the trip and things observed.

 

See:

 

http://inquiry.net/advancement/tf-1st_require_1911.htm

 

Yours at 300 feet,

 

Rick Seymour

 

[TNScoutTroop]

Sorry to resurrect an old thread, but the observation that "egos" would make a Scout-craft focused Wood Badge unworkable was puzzling to us. It seemed that there was general agreement that this was true. But we don't see why "egos" would be more of a threat to a Scout-craft focused Wood Badge, than it is to the current management methods Wood Badge. However, none of us are beaded.

 

Anyhow, since we're embarking on a roll-our-own IOLS training that's getting close to Wood Badge in length (2 full Saturdays + 2 Fri PM - Sun PM weekends) and that is focused on learning, and then teaching Scout craft skills, we'd like to know what specific problems you envision.

[Kudu]

TNScoutTroop writes:

 

we're embarking on a roll-our-own IOLS training that's getting close to Wood Badge in length (2 full Saturdays + 2 Fri PM - Sun PM weekends) and that is focused on learning, and then teaching Scout craft skills, we'd like to know what specific problems you envision.

 

The fundamental flaw of IOLS is that it is based on the Wood Badge assumption that Scoutcraft skills can be separated from leadership skills.

 

In other words, IOLS is designed to teach adults how to check things off a requirements list.

 

So the specific problem that nobody in the United States will be able to point out to you is:

 

The purpose of a Patrol is to go out on patrol.

 

In other words, Wood Badge took the patrolling out of the Patrol Method.

 

Scoutcraft skills and Patrols are interrelated. The purpose of Scoutcraft is twofold:

 

1) To give Scouts the basic skills they need to take a single Patrol out on patrol: packing a pack (and walking perhaps a quarter-mile to where your course takes place), setting up tents, building fires, setting up backpacking stoves, cooking, backwoods navigation; and

 

2) To give the Patrol something to do while it is out on patrol (pioneering for instance--which is not really necessary for camping).

 

Everything about Scouting (including your project) becomes self-correcting if you always space the Patrols out as far as the boys' discipline will allow.

 

Many people make fun of me for insisting that Baden-Powell's minimum 300 feet between Patrols on a Troop campout is some kind of magic cure-all, but (as long as you maintain strict discipline and work up to that distance in small steps), I think you will be amazed at the effect that physical distance has on both Patrol leadership and making Scoutcraft look like it actually has a real-world use.

 

TNScoutTroop, is this for adults only, or adults and Scouts?

 

Either way, Green Bar Bill's Patrol Leader version of Wood Badge can be found at the following URL. You might find it helpful in designing your Troop's "roll-your-own" Scoutcraft course:

 

http://inquiry.net/patrol/green_bar/index.htm

 

Yours at 300 feet,

 

Kudu

(This message has been edited by kudu)

[ScoutBox]

Guys, great thread. I just got back from WB, and am working on my Tickets. I didn't go there for the beads, not the scarf. I went there to learn more to help my boys, and my troop. It was a great experience that I would love to do again. In fact we had one Staff member who had taken the WB Course twice. He did the old course, and then the new course, had two Critters, and came out twice for the" Back to Gilwell" "Owl" & "Fox". Song.. Anyway, I think there are always those uniform junkies out there wanting to run around looking like Generals.. In fact I see them mostly at the council level, not so much at the Troop level. Not to say that earning all of those awards aren't worth wild, or great for Scouting. But it can be a bit strange for those of us who are from Districts that don't award adults all of the time. In fact I've been an ASM for 3 years and don't have any knots yet?? Anyway, I love what I had the chance to learn at Wood Badge, the people I met, and the great time I had. I can't wait to have a chance to Staff WB one day. Get to do it all over again. In fact I've already been told it will happen. But first, I have top finish my Tickets. Which are all about making my Troop better.. and helping my boys grow and learn.. which is what I join the Scout for in the first place..

[sherminator505]

"The fundamental flaw of IOLS is that it is based on the Wood Badge assumption that Scoutcraft skills can be separated from leadership skills."

 

I don't quite see it that way. I think that both IOLS and WB21 are fatally flawed in that both are built on the "one size fits all" assumption that a generalized course that seeks to please all and ends up pleasing no one is somehow acceptable.

 

Boy Scout leaders need basic AND advanced training that are specific to their program. Cub Scout leaders and Venturing leaders have similar needs, but those needs cannot be filled with the same courses! By offering watered-down, non-specific courses, we do our leaders a great disservice because we tell them that they have received proper training when in fact they have not.

[TNScoutTroop]

Guys, as interesting as it is, our question wasn't about the relationship between Patrols and skills, or even about management vs. Scoutcraft per se.

 

Basementdweller wrote "I wonder out loud whether a Course of pure Woodcraft would be successful. I don't think it would because of egos."

 

DesertRat77 agreed, and nobody seemed really to disagree.

 

Our question is, why would Scout leader egos be MORE of an obstacle in a skill based WB or roll-your-own OLS+, than it is in the standard all White Stagged and EDGED-up version of those course? That's the part we're not getting.