Scout Led/run Vs: Scouters Teaching

[blw2]

I'm not sure, but wasn't woodbadge started to be such a thing as I described in my earlier post?

[Gone]

I'll give my thoughts on WB21C. I'm going this fall.  I've been in Scouting 15 years now, after being a member on this forum, I doubt there's much I'll be taught there that I don't already know. We'll see. 

 

 

Here's the WB21C outline. I don't see anything there to learn that a scouter who has spent 15 years in scouting, who follows the patrol method, boy-led aspects of scouting, has taken all the mandatory and optional training, and has taken the time to read the BSA pubs (and other pubs) doesn't already know.

 

My friends with similar credentials have been and, apart form being at Philmont, thought it was a complete waste of time and money. 

 

I'm not sure, but wasn't woodbadge started to be such a thing as I described in my earlier post?

 

I believe very early on it was like that. It wasn't until the late 90s that the changes were being discussed and then implemented in 200-02.

Edited May 11, 2015 by Bad Wolf

[Gone]

IOLS, IMHO, is for teaching new leaders how to tie the basic knots, use a compass, and heat (not cook) food in dutch ovens, using matchlite in a chimney starter. 

 

I think that is what @@blw2 was getting at...and perhaps a bit more. At VERY least IOLS should teach everything first year scouts must learn AND everything scouters must know to help the first year scouts stay on track with those core skills. It should also teach patrol method. Boy-led and how to stay out of the boys' way should be taught in leader-specific training.

[blw2]

that WB21 outline was interesting.  thanks for posting that badwolf!

 

based solely on that it seems that it could be a worthwhile exercise, although exhausting!  I've been to many full day training weeks like that, with very little break..... and they will drain an introverted person like almost nothing else.

 

If it were hands on woodcraft and scout craft, I'd be eager.....

sitting and listening.... not so much.

[TAHAWK]

Hey, that gives me an idea....

they should make a training opportunity

adults go out in the woods, under the tutelage of a true expert woodsman, and camp for maybe a weekend or two without the boys around, learning and truly practicing woodscraft skills, knots, shelter building, etc....

all with no saddle of leadership theory, classroom work, or any political non-sense.... all hands on, just becoming more proficient in the skills....

 

.... they could call it wood-beads maybe...???

 

I would sign up for such a course!

I repeat for emphasis, the first version of Wood Badge (We're on 3.3 now)  was First-Class level skills.  So the advanced course, which I would love to see, would need to be called something else.  "Outdoor Wood Badge"?

[Eagle94-A1]

I admit, I've never done WB, but I've done Brownsea 22 and staffed JLT. I was told both courses are 'Woodbadge Lite" since the material is nearly identical, and Scouts don't do tickets. In fact one of the JLT staffers, who turned 18 after the course and went to WB told me when I asked him about the course, "I wouldn't waste my time going right now since everything taught at WB we taugh at JLT. I'd wait until you got out of Scouts for a while, and come back in and need a refresher."

 

Back then, the courses took what Scouts should know as First Class or higher Scouts, and applied it in a no-nonsense setting where we not only mastered the skills, but could teach those skills effortlessly since we lived it for a week.

 

Someday I do plan on going through WB, but it's more of a check off for me. Jambo has WB as a requirement for being a contingent leader now, and there are some folks I've met who, if you don't have beads, you don't know squat. What's funny is, when I tell those who know me that I haven't done WB yet, they freak out.

 

Then again, we have one "old fogey" who is still "untrained" after 60+ years in Scouting. He still hasn't taken IOLS. He's been to busy camping, doing OA, working at Philmont, and travelling in his retirement to attend IOLS.

[Gone]

 

Someday I do plan on going through WB, but it's more of a check off for me. Jambo has WB as a requirement for being a contingent leader now, and there are some folks I've met who, if you don't have beads, you don't know squat. What's funny is, when I tell those who know me that I haven't done WB yet, they freak out.

 

Why do something to check a box?

 

If more solid scouters stood up to say, "I don't need WB to be a good scouter" maybe BSA would wake up and realize their training is less and less pertinent.

 

The best training I have taken in the last 5 years has been outside of BSA. WFRA and LNT are done by outside groups and are top notch programs. My climbing, survival and watercraft training have also all been outside of BSA.

 

Checking the box makes you one of the good old boys. Why do that if you get nothing out of it other than a woggle and a lighter check book?

[Sentinel947]

They do absolutely need to create some kind of test out procedure for IOL's and Scoutmaster Fundamentals. While I had fun taking both of those courses, I didn't exactly learn anything from them. That was my 1st year as an Adult volunteer, but my 11th year as a member in the BSA. I ended up helping the IOLS instructor teach some of the Scouting skills to the other course participants. 

[TAHAWK]

I have staffed IOLS 17 times.  I never discussed the course with a single staffer who thought the course actually accomplished teaching First-Class outdoor skills.  We all just do the best we can. But a box gets checked on someone's list and someone(s) play(s) Let's Pretend,  

 

WB was originally something of a graduation course for veteran SM's and by invitation only.  Now the goal is for all volunteers to take it ASAP after completing basic.  In fact, completing basic is "required." But when I last staffed a couple of years ago, 4 of 6 Beavers had zero training.  They were coming in at the middle of the conversation.  

 

One topic not needed way back when was motivation.  15-year SM's did not need to be convinced to work in Scouting.  

 

Too bad BSA employees rewrote the professionally-developed syllabus.  Even more bad that they did not understand some of the material they were rewriting.  BSA saved the royalties and scrambled some of the message.  Fortunately, good staffs fix the errors and internal contradictions.  That's why WB is only as good as the staff teaching it.

 

Beads as a symbol of superiority?  Don't blame WB.  If anyone thinks that they are superior becasue they got their beads, they were probably problems long before that point.  

[TAHAWK]

"They do absolutely need to create some kind of test out procedure for IOL's and Scoutmaster Fundamentals. While I had fun taking both of those courses, I didn't exactly learn anything from them. That was my 1st year as an Adult volunteer, but my 11th year as a member in the BSA. I ended up helping the IOLS instructor teach some of the Scouting skills to the other course participants. "

 

Google         Boy Scout IOLS test out      to see the form for testing out.

 

I expect "participants" will add to the learning a,d have literally never been disappointed.  Collective wisdom and experience is pretty impressive.

Edited May 11, 2015 by TAHAWK

[Sentinel947]

 

 

Google         Boy Scout IOLS test out      to see the form for testing out.

 

I expect "participants" will add to the learning a,d have literally never been disappointed.  Collective wisdom and experience is pretty impressive.

 

Ugh. Should have known about that. Oh well, I had a good time. 

Edited May 11, 2015 by Sentinel947

[Stosh]

@@Stosh, I should revise and extend my remarks; comments apply to most WBers who took WB since the format change. Long ago I believe WB was worthwhile. My opinion is, since the change, most of WB is like JTE. Though in my experience most people with knots or beads on their uniform are always quick to point out how right they are. Present company excluded.

@

 

I know what you mean.  For the 30+ years scouting as a scouter, I have always applied the Peter Principle of creative incompetence so as to not get caught up in the good old boys club.  I had a discussion with my ASM who is also the DC and she was very curious why I never staff any of the training programs.  I told her I used to but when things got out of hand with the new WB, and leader specific training, etc. it got to the point where it wasn't much fun.  

 

After the 100th person asked me if I was interested in WB21C, I finally started wearing my beads so they would leave me alone. 

[blw2]

Ugh. Should have known about that. Oh well, I had a good time. 

looks to me that it's not a national level thing, but a council level.... just based on looking at one page of google results....

[perdidochas]

I think that is what @@blw2 was getting at...and perhaps a bit more. At VERY least IOLS should teach everything first year scouts must learn AND everything scouters must know to help the first year scouts stay on track with those core skills. It should also teach patrol method. Boy-led and how to stay out of the boys' way should be taught in leader-specific training.

 

I agree.  I wasn't impressed by my IOLS class.  I took it after I had been a Webelos Den Leader for 2 1/2 years, and had been with the troop as a committee member (in name, but ASM in actions) for about a year.  I was very irritated with what could have been a great class.  Basically, the class was at basic levels of outdoor skills, and I was at least at the intermediate level.  Besides the section on backpacking, I could have taught it.  No mention of patrol method that I can recall. 

[perdidochas]

They do absolutely need to create some kind of test out procedure for IOL's and Scoutmaster Fundamentals. While I had fun taking both of those courses, I didn't exactly learn anything from them. That was my 1st year as an Adult volunteer, but my 11th year as a member in the BSA. I ended up helping the IOLS instructor teach some of the Scouting skills to the other course participants. 

 

I wouldn't say test out, but I think they should have an Advanced IOLS for people who want more advanced outdoor skills.  SM fundamentals was just a boring class.  The only thing I got out of it, was that our troop was doing a pretty good job of delivering the BSA program. (I did mellow out a little in the two years between the courses).