Win all U can thread

[OldGreyEagle]

I deleted the win all you can thread started by goofy, he got his answer and more than a few people PM'ed me saying that some of the posts were exposing to much of that element of wood badge and it should be removed, so I did

[Bob White]

To think that the elements of Wood badge cannot be discussed in public is a throw back to the old way and old habits of Wood Badge training prior to the year 2000. This concept change is even discussed in the opening pages of the staff syllabus for Wood Badge for the 21st Century. To think that anything is off limits for open public discussion is not an attitude that is supported by Wood Badge for the 21st Century or by the BSA.

 

In addition, consider the fact that on this very forum we have already openly disussed such Wood Badge course elements as Tickets, SMART Goals, Mission and Vision, Empathetic Listening, EDGE, Group Dynamics, Diversity and Inclusion, Planning, Evaluation, and others.

 

Doesn't it seem inconsistent that after all those elements are discussed that we are unable to discuss a simple game?

 

The Wood Badge course has moved beyond the concerns that it has to we secret to be effective, as scouters and trainers we need to move beyond that kind of attitude as well.

 

 

[BrotherhoodWWW]

Bob White, there is such a thing as the element of surprise! I'll stand up and say that thanks to you and all of the other posters that were discussing the game my Wood Badge experience was lessened! The game, and the lessons that were the reason for its use in the course could have been much better if I had not known what I knew.

 

Bob I see a huge difference between discussing the principles being presented and format in which they are taught. I did not toss my $200 down just to gain knowledge. If you feel so strongly perhaps you could just write a book detailing all the knowlede shared in the course! Think of all the volunteer hours that course staffers could place actually directly serving youth rather than staff a course. Participants could spend at least half the course fee on your book. Heck you'd be a hero.

 

Alas it is not simply the knowledege gained but the experience of gaining and application of that knowledge that makes Wood Badge worthwhile! To publicize the process of the course IMHO does a dis-service to future and current course participants.

[Twocubdad]

It's like the OA: it's not secret, but it is more meaningful if there is some sense of mystique to it. Or like a good joke, it's more fun if you don't know the punchline.

 

[hot_foot_eagle]

I would venture that most people don't like the plot twists and endings of movies spoiled before they have a chance to see them on their own.

 

I think some "secrets" should be kept to preserve the joy of discovery for future participants, not to suggest exclusivity.

 

 

[Bob White]

There is nothing in the lessons of Wood Badge that rely on surprise twists, mystery, or the like.

 

WWW, the most information that wasw shared was that there were no question. A fact that is told to the participants at the very beginning of the game. There is no surprise to be ruined. LOTS of games do not involve asking questions, that should not shock or spoil anyone's experiences.

 

As far as thinking that knowing what is going to happen in advance will spoil the fun, anyone who has ever been on Wood Badge staff knows everyything that is going to happen in advance and we still have fun, and we still learn more each time.

 

None of what is taught in Wood Badge is unique to Wood Badge. The Win All You Can game is a common excercise in innumerable corporate leadership seminars.

 

Those currently holding staff syllabi will find in the opening instruction from the BSA to the WB staff that the attitude of WB being secritive is a thing of the past.

 

To compare it to the ceremonies of the OA is a mistake. The OA ask that such things be kept confidential to heighten their experience. Wood Badge makes no such request. To assume that the BSA wants or needs WB training to be secretive is a gross misconception of the training. Wood Badge is supposed to be shared with others.

 

The fun comes from the people you meet and interact with, the information is just good solid leadership skills that can be found in many different books and training courses.

 

There is nothing secretive or suspenseful about Wood Badge. And there is nothing in the course, or from the BSA, asking or instructing that its elements be a surprise. This is an artifical attitude that is being attched to it by Scouters improperly relating The current Wood Badge to the old WB training methods and to OA neither of which are correct comparisons.

 

[rmeints]

If you want to be surprised by something I find it is far easier to just not read about it than try to ban or delete discussion about it. It sometimes helps if people post a heading with "spoiler" in it sometimes, which is what is often done with book or movie reviews posted on the net. As for the OA, if you look around enough on the web you will find much of their "secret" info as well.

 

As a trainer, I have seen that surprising people only works in a few situations, and can often lead to students feeling unfairly tricked if not carefully done. I just got back from my first weekend of Woodbadge, which included the "Win all YOU can" game. I chose not to read up on it before going. The biggest lesson I learned had to do with experiencing first hand how naturally non-competitive Scout Leaders were when it was a contest that meant people could lose if you wanted to win more.

 

Yours in scouting,

Rick

[SR540Beaver]

I think calling it "secret" is a stretch. Asking participants not to share too much about the lesson the game teaches isn't asking too much. It has far more impact if everyone gets to participate fully instead of knowing what will happen beforehand. In the courses I've been involved with, a request is made that any participants who know the game sit back and let it unfold naturally. Another request is that for those who see it for the first time, they not give it away to future participants. It has nothing to do with secrecy and everything to do with respecting the experience.

[Eamonn]

I think comparing the OA and Wood Badge is not a good thing.

While I'm all for Wood Badge being as open as possible, I have asked participants not to use parts of the course when they get home. Mainly parts of the camp-fire and the presentations near the end.

I have heard that Weight Watchers are/were using the Leaving A Legacy presentation not long after it came out. I don't know maybe they were using first?

I'm not a great fan of the Win All You Can. The Game of Life. I just don't like it!!

I was told it was first used by the OA.

 

When I hear all the misinformation about Tickets, I at times wonder how after all this time and how after so many people have been through the course; this can be?

Eamonn.

[Bob White]

Unlike a book or movie where the whole point of the experience is to build up to the cilmatic ending, the same is not true of BSA training. The purpose of training is for the volunteer to ba able to learn and apply the information. So there is no need to encase it in mystery.

 

The BSA no longer has "mystery" as a part of the Wood Badge experience. They want the know,edge used and shared. Someone who does not want to share a ceremony as an example is not required, but neither is anyone required to not share it.

 

Someone who says they are not going to attend Wood Badge because they know the rules to Win All You Can were likely not going to go anyway. The Wood Badge "experience" takes place in the atmoshere of Scouting fellowship that forms between the participants, not in the content of the lessons.

 

 

[Eamonn]

Bob White,

Of course the person looking for an excuse is going to find one.

I see asking people not to use the stuff from some parts of the course not as a way of adding any mystery, but more along the lines of "Hey that was good! I never seen it before."

I have sat through a lot of Eagle Scout COH's and will admit that at times I have thought to myself, "Oh no! Not that again!!"

I kinda think the point of asking people not to recycle parts of the course is a way to avoid this and keep the course fresh.

I kinda think we will have to agree to disagree on this one!

Ea.

[Twocubdad]

Perhaps I misunderstood, but I thought we were discussing the game, not the course in general.

 

If we are discussing the course in general, you are absolutely correct, Bob. But if we are discussing the game specifically, it clearly works better if there is some element of surprise to it.

 

That the overall philosophy of the course is one of openness and transparency but that there are elements which are more effective the details aren't known in advance are not contradictory concepts. You can -- and should -- have it both ways.

 

Another example: almost everyone shows up for the course asking about The Ticket. As you point out, the ticket is not a secret and a good staffer will answer a participant's questions to the best of his/her ability. But that doesn't mean they should explain the entire ticket process straight away. I was trained to answer questions about ticket by saying, "relax about your Ticket. Over the next three days you're going to hear everything you need to know. And if you still have questions, it's my job to make sure you get them all answered. Relax and enjoy the course."

 

That's not being secretive and in no way compromises the openness of the course. It's a simple acknowledgement that, 1) there's more to this that can be explained in three minutes, and 2) the experience of Wood Badge is more that the sum of book knowledge contained in the course syllabus.

 

The "reveal" of the game is part of the experience. That experience is enhanced if the participants don't know the ending.

[OldGreyEagle]

". The Wood Badge "experience" takes place in the atmoshere of Scouting fellowship that forms between the participants, not in the content of the lessons."

 

I am sorry, but I have to question this, if the content of the lessons was not important, then the BSA wouldn't have paid what they did to follow copyright laws and would not have gotten use of the management guru's of our time materials. If the content didn't matter then Course Directors wouldn't have to sign statements that they will follow the course curriculae. I think the course content is very important training and allows Wood Badger's and NYLT'ers to speak the same language.

 

I can appreciate that the networking and fellowship of Wood Badge is a great asset of the course, its great to be in a room of people as jazzed up about scouting as you are, and relationships form that may be lifetime long. but to say the content of the lessons is not part of the experience, is just bogus

 

[Bob White]

I never said the content did not matter. I said that the content does not rely on mystery, or surprise, or confidentiality from others.

 

The content is available from a lot of other places. The BSA wants people to understand these skills whether or not they attend Wood Badge. Attending Wood Badge just makes it easier to learn and to teach then doing it in little pieces at a time. Learning these skills in a scouting atmosphere is what makes it fun.

 

There was a time when "what happened at Wood Badge, stayed at Wood Badge". It was that attitude that did the course so much harm and build a great resentment among many scouters toward the course.

 

For that very reason the crafters of Wood Badge for the 21st Centrury removed that "cloak" of mystery.

 

Again, we have already discussed far more elements of Wood Badge on this forum in far greater detail than we did with the Win All You Can Game, and no one closed those threads. It seems unreasonable to start now and especially to start with this topic.

 

Two cub dad wrote "But if we are discussing the game specifically, it clearly works better if there is some element of surprise to it."

 

All I can say to that is ...prove it. What data, evidence, or instructions for the game can you reference to prove that? I do not think that you can substantiate that belief. I appreciate that you feel that way, but I hope you will understand that is is just a feeling and it has no actual validation.

 

 

 

(This message has been edited by Bob White)

[BrentAllen]

I've been on a course where at the end of the game, one of the participants said "you should have explained how this all worked, so we could have played the game better." One of the other participants replied, "But then we wouldn't have learned the real lesson." Most of the other participants agreed.

 

There is a world of difference between shrouding the course in secrecy, and explaining every detail. I haven't seen the Scout Shop stocking the syllabus or the participant notebook on the shelves. Some lessons are much more powerful when experienced through discovery. The lesson of this game is one of them.

 

I hate moderating or editing on message boards, but I would be happy to see this thread disappear as well.