Mandatory Training???

[GoldFox]

Rumor, strictly rumor, has it that at the National Meeting in May BSA is doing to make leader training Mandatory. It is supposed to be phased in somehow. Apparently they will not allow a unit to recharter if their leaders (I guess based on the phase in) are not trained. Anyone have any scoop on this?

 

Also, does your district/council do this already? If so, how is it working for you?

[nolesrule]

The previous cubmaster of the pack I serve as a unit commissioner was trained, completed Wood Badge, served as Cub Scout Roundtable Commissioner and was on the distrcit training team (just mentioning this to point out that he wasn't some obscure scouter). The offical Scoutnet records never reflected that he was a trained leader. We tried to get this fixed all the way up until the time he stepped down as cubmaster, but it never happened.

[John-in-KC]

Individual Councils are implementing training mandates as conditions of folks rechartering. I can look you in the eye and tell you my Council will not accept new principals for the 2010 charter cycle who are not fully trained for their position (CM, SM, Coach, Advisor).

 

Check with your UC, DC, or DE to find out what your Council is doing.

[gcnphkr]

Heard something like this today to the Trainer's EDGE Training. Starting with unit leaders in 2010 and youth contacts in 2011. Getting Scoutnet to get this right seems to be a stretch.

[GoldFox]

I know what my council is doing as I am on the Council's training committee. We are looking at this mandate as well, but there is the age old issue of Scoutnet records. We were also wondering what other councils were doing.

[evmori]

Training should be mandatory!

[Eagle92]

If the mandate comes to fruition, I hope the SCOUTNET records are current. THAT is the major problem with my council, and alot of others.

[nolesrule]

"Training should be mandatory! "

 

Of course it should. It's the best way to provide the proper program. As a UC, I get questions all the time from my units where the answer is in the training.

 

But the bigger problem of requiring a trained leader in order to recharter is the record keeping. How does that get resolved once and for all when a very trained cubmaster can't get his ScoutNet record to reflect he is trained after 5 years.

[HICO_Eagle]

""Training should be mandatory! "

 

Of course it should. It's the best way to provide the proper program."

 

I'm sorry, I don't believe that. Adults and Scouts should be encouraged to get training where they are deficient but I would rather have an involved adult who lacks formal training than have adults (or Scouts) pull back and not get involved because they "don't have the training" and don't have the right timing to get that training. One of the biggest problems I see right now is this management philosophy that places such a huge value on documented training instead of looking at the program itself and seeing if it's healthy. In fact, I'll argue whether the training itself even leads to a proper program given the most recent changes in how patrol method is taught or the new editions of handbooks that have lots of great graphics at the expense of the material they used to contain.

 

"As a UC, I get questions all the time from my units where the answer is in the training."

 

Which is a great example of when to encourage use of the formal training system. There are lots of adults who have no background in Scouting and can benefit from some of the training -- and lots of adults for whom the current training programs are redundant and superfluous. I think we'd get far better response to the training programs overall by looking at how a unit is functioning and then pointing out to the committee and SM/ASM how certain courses would help them. If the course isn't needed except to check some block then don't waste their time with it.

 

"But the bigger problem of requiring a trained leader in order to recharter is the record keeping. How does that get resolved once and for all when a very trained cubmaster can't get his ScoutNet record to reflect he is trained after 5 years."

 

Perfect example of the current philosophy that is more concerned about recordkeeping than actually doing the program. I wish I could read through some transcripts of the discussions that have led to some of the changes in the past 5-10 years because I'd really like to understand what they were thinking. I am not at all convinced that many of the changes instituted in the last 5-10 years have been productive or helpful for the program.

[nolesrule]

I'm not sure what the "perfect example of the current philosophy that is more concerned about recordkeeping than actually doing the program."

 

My comment wasn't about being obsessed with record keeping, but rather how do you enforce a policy of manditory training when the data you rely on to make the policy determinations is in error?

 

As for your other comments, yes having motivated adults is very important. Not scaring them off is important. But even the most motivated people will have issues that could have been answered by the basic training for their positions when they don't get trained. We're not talking about getting all leaders Wood Badge trained, we're talking about the unit leaders (CC, CM, SM) being trained in their position specific training.

 

 

[evmori]

If adults can't find the time then maybe they aren't the adults we need in the program.

[OldGreyEagle]

HICO, how do you propose that one deliver the promise when one hasn't bothered to learn what the promise is?

[Eagle92]

Another thing about mandatory training, beside making sure SCOUTNET has the correct info in it, is to offer more than just face to face training. Do offer self-study courses with online tests. Do offer more online courses. Heck do online courses and then have the person contact their trainer to sign of the skills like AHA does with CPR. Allow challenges fo those with the skills and knowledge already

 

Some districts have no problem with trainers. other are begging for a training chair. Do not penalize the units for a district/council problem.

[HICO_Eagle]

I'm not sure what the "perfect example of the current philosophy that is more concerned about recordkeeping than actually doing the program."

 

I was referencing how your response seemed to prioritize the recordkeeping as the "bigger problem" whereas I viewed the bigger problem being the mandates themselves. If the training is encouraged rather than mandated, the recordkeeping becomes nice to have rather than the huge problem it is.

 

If adults can't find the time then maybe they aren't the adults we need in the program.

 

Perhaps my perspective is skewed since I have dealt primarily with smaller units that desperately needed ANY adult involvement they could get but in my opinion, these training mandates will eventually lead to the spiraling deaths of smaller units. That might be okay if all the Scouts migrated to the larger units but I don't believe they will and we will miss the chance to mold young lives that would have benefited from exposure to Scouting -- even incomplete exposure.

 

From my own experience, if these rules had been implemented 30 years ago, I can think of a dozen Scouts who probably wouldn't have made Eagle -- including myself. My troop had a GREAT ASM who molded and shaped the rest of us but the SM was frequently whatever parent could be drafted into giving up the time (or more importantly, signing the paperwork).

 

In my experience, the official training is less important than the personal enthusiasm and desire to help out -- and if mandated training dampens that enthusiasm or desire, it becomes counterproductive.

 

HICO, how do you propose that one deliver the promise when one hasn't bothered to learn what the promise is?

 

But that's just my point -- we have adults who are delivering the promise. Mandated training frequently doesn't help them learn or deliver it (I taught more than learned when I took Scoutmaster Fundamentals and have yet to see a need to take Woodbadge other than documentation). I'm not saying delete the training -- I highly encourage some of it for the adults or Scouts who need it but I'd rather keep them involved in the program than turn them off with time wasted on box-checking.

 

I was able to assist with an Eagle service project two weeks ago only because the training I signed up for that same day got postponed. I will continue to take training that helps my knowledge base or is mandated to perform my role but what Scouts won't I be able to help because of the schedule conflicts and what about the adults who WOULD have helped if it weren't for the mandates?

[CMPA]

I believe that my council already has mandated traing. If I remember right all direct contact leaders need new leader essentials(this is scouting now), leader specific, and youth protection training within 1 year of registering. I have not heard of any problems with this yet.