Case Studies: Is Training Really Working?

[Gone]

It's the additional training I'd like to see because the basic training doesn't cover this. Certainly not IOLS. Not sure about trek safely.

 

Part of this is basic adventure training: know your limits. That requires experience. No classes can teach that.

 

But again, these guys got out alive with no serious injury. Only one group split up so that's good. And people knew to eat their pride and know when they were beat.

These case studies ALL broke basic rules of being Scout leaders, most if not all,of which IS covered in basic training and documentation. Heck, nearly all of these could have been solved by basic trek planning and following the ten essentials.

 

Parents expect us to know these things. These leaders screwed up by not following basic training using established BSA guidelines for leaders. They screwed up, full stop. The parents of those units expected the leaders to avoid situations like this, and rightfully so.

Edited June 16, 2015 by Bad Wolf

[andysmom]

There definitely needs to be some evaluation of the trainers.  Sure, they follow a syllabus but some really suck.

There needs to be some re certification training every few years.

Training needs to be accessible and given often. 

I think that non direct contact leaders need to be re certified as well.

I think it would be beneficial to have different "tiers" of training.  (Basic first aide a requirement before wilderness first aide. etc)

Only very basic courses should be available online.

 

There are troops that I have heard of that have no trained leaders (except YP), either the leaders don't think it is important enough to do or they don't know it is available.  There are many leaders who honestly think this is a 1 hour a week job and that is all they are willing to put in.  We need to recruit better leaders who are willing to take the time to do what is best for the scouts.

[Stosh]

Let's assume for the moment that the SM's, et. al., in the program are all reasonably cautious people.  They are young parents of boys that are just starting Boy Scouts.  That would put them about early to mid-30's.  If by that point they aren't really the outdoorsy type, they aren't going to become one anytime soon unless they are really into a lifestyle change.

 

But BSA is bound and determined to give them training, which is a good thing.  YPT - well we haven't gotten to the woods yet, but we're just starting.

 

If I remember correctly it was the Webelos overnight and SM fundamentals that taught a bit about cooking using stoves.  Well, we've cooked on stoves before at home, no problem they might be able to figure it out.  A propane stove one has for the troop works just like the propane stove in the RV motorhome/trailer.  At least plop camping is basically covered.

 

After teaching/observing T-FC, one has a pretty good idea of how to take care of oneself in the woods.  At least if they paid attention.

 

For the most part the really good scouters should be able to get the boys to summer camp where the staff and mess hall take over, the camporees, a bit more challenging, but pretty much plop camping, and a high adventure to a state park to plop by oneself.

 

If a SM wishes to go beyond that, i.e. Dutch oven/campfire cooking, canoeing, backpacking, hiking, etc. the scouter has to learn that on his/her own or rely on such resources as Northern Tier, Philmont and Sea Base.  Other outfitters can cover some of the other outings along the way, but the further one gets from KOA plop camping, the more one has to train on their own.

 

I believe one of the major reasons we are less adventurous today than years past is because the adults are no longer comfortable with either the outdoors, taking youth into the outdoors and cutting the apron strings of civilization. Why?  Go back and read the first line of this post.

 

The people who make the news are those that don't fit that description, yet want to provide the next step for their boys and there's the rub.  Where does BSA provide any training in anything beyond KOA with a Boy Scout Theme?

 

I haven't seen the most recent curriculum for current training, but I can assure you, NONE of it was of any value to me.  I had been cooking on open campfires long before I even joined Scouting as a boy.  My canoeing, hiking, Dutch oven, etc. are all things I learned along the way, either by watching others or by experimenting on my own.  Before I go on an extended hike with the boys, I jerk my own meat and dehydrate the rest of the food.  Very little from the grocery store is in my backpack and what is has been repackaged to protect it.

 

So my new ASM's, parents, et. al. are given a lot of slack for not wanting to get involved.  If they are at all intelligent people they will be wary of what their limits are and the only criteria I use for selecting ASM's is their willingness to learn.  My current ASM is also the district commissioner who specifically asked to be my ASM so she could learn about the Boy-Led, Patrol-Method style of troop organization I use.  She also happens to be my age and works extensively in the American Heritage Girls program as well.  She wants to learn.  That's all I need to know.

 

How many people do we have as scouters who don't make that qualification?  Especially those troops with untrained SM?  Besides the basic training given to all adult leaders today, including WB and U of S. there should be extensive training going on weekly, if not monthly.  Our councils are filled with experienced scouters that could share their knowledge and reduce the learning curve of our new scouters.

 

More experienced scouters could be available to share a knowledge library where maybe there be a process set up to have kind of a MB program for SM's   I want to do a HA for my troop so I seek out the HA Organization AMB (Adult Merit Badge) counselor for further training.  I want to do a white-water canoe trip, so I seek out the White-water AMB counselor, etc.

 

Maybe there ought to be CampMasters, retired SM's that are available to be the second in 2-deep that when the boys are doing their thing, the CampMasters could be doing further training with the SM's.  I spend the whole week at camp reading books, playing with lashing projects, cooking really well for myself, etc when all that time I could be training other SM's on hundreds of different topics.  I'm sure there are others just like me in every council.  The last time I was asked to do a seminar they wanted me to come in and do a presentation for WB.  They wanted the fire-starting, wood tools portion covered.  They were going to give me one hour.  I said no unless they gave me two hours.  I covered the tools, the different types of woods, fire-starting with various mediums, etc. and before everyone left they all knew a lot more about fire-starting/tools and a few hit the nail on the head when they further commented that they were NOW MORE CONFIDENT about the subject than they had been before.

 

We teach skills, but do we teach confidence in those skills?  If not, the training is a waste of time.

[perdidochas]

Are We Training Our Adult Leaders Enough?

 

You seem to read more and more in the news of cases where adults and scouts -- in some cases Eagle scouts -- make some really poor choices and get in to trouble. The latest cases are here, here, here, here and here. These are prime examples of ill-prepared individual and groups heading out on activities for which they are not fully prepared. BSA has plenty of resources (Sweet 16, online training, advanced training, 10 Essentials, and much more) which they make available to leaders and adults, but none of it is required as a condition of holding your leadership position. Weather safety and many of the online courses only require one adult on the trek to have taken and passed the training; same with first aid, CPR/AED, etc. It would seem it is time to make these online training modules mandatory.

 

Question: What are the minimum required training courses YOU would suggested Boy Scout (Venturing) leaders have as a condition of keeping their leadership position?

 

For my money the basic required training would be:

• IOLS
• Leader Specific
• Basic (Red Cross) First Aid/CPR/AED
• Weather Safety, Trek Safely, Safety Afloat, Safe Swim, Climb Safely
• Wilderness First Aid

I would add that the following courses be developed and made required:

• Water Trek Planning/Safety (develop this course)
• Back-country Trek Planning/Safety (develop this course)

   

What say you? Do YOU have any courses that leaders should take OR that should be developed?

Discussing case studies, do we know the training level of the SMs or group leaders, in order to make a conclusion about Scout leader training?

In the first case, they didn't have the correct equipment--namely navigational. 

In the second case, I don't see the big deal.  They were OK, where they were supposed to be, they would have gotten across the river in another day.

Not sure what to say about the third one, except I don't understand why they went back up the mountain.

Wonder about maps/gps with the fourth one.

 

Not sure why they kept going after the distress call on the last one.

 

I don't think we have enough information about the leader training on those.  I do note, that they all occurred west of the Mississippi. 

[JoeBob]

There definitely needs to be some evaluation of the trainers.  Sure, they follow a syllabus but some really suck.

Generic PowerPoints make the lawyers happy. "You were told so-and-so..."

They also make any idiot a 'trainer'.  BSA training is so damn dry that many repeat trainees just plan to nap and get signed off.

At least training that is outsourced usually gets a real expert who can answer questions and keep you mentally engaged,

 

There needs to be some re certification training every few years.

As long as you have a test-out option.  Repeat CYA training that just takes up time drives away good people.  How many of the YPT slides can you draw from memory?

 

I think that non direct contact leaders need to be re certified as well.

Why?

 

I think it would be beneficial to have different "tiers" of training.  (Basic first aide a requirement before wilderness first aide. etc)

As long as there's more to it than lengthier PowerPoints.

 

Only very basic courses should be available online.

With interactive training so advanced, why not offer the test for re-cert first?  If you meet a set percentage up front, you get signed off and don't have to sit 20 extra minutes.

 

There are troops that I have heard of that have no trained leaders (except YP), either the leaders don't think it is important enough to do or they don't know it is available. 

Hopefully those leaders are legitimate outdoors-men who can teach BSA what is wrong with their camping methods.  The more competent a person is, the higher value they place on their time.

 

We need to recruit better leaders who are willing to take the time to do what is best for the scouts.

You could make a good start by not wasting volunteer's time with useless 'training' and CYA re-training.

Edited June 16, 2015 by JoeBob

[Stosh]

Or... one could offer extended training in areas of interests to the scouters, i.e. Adult Merit Badges where the subject could be picked by the person wanting the training.  That way one would at least have interested participants in the audience.

[Gone]

To catch those folks up who have not read the whole thread, here's another update to the running list offered by everyone:

• Teach planning and execution of program activities.
• Keep the costs low and reasonable.
• Make initial training (i.e., first aid) rigorous but the "re-cert" training less so.
  • Establish a means to get updated changes to techniques, curriculum and content to those who have passed the training (e.g., changes in first aid application, safety rules, etc.).
  • Validate exactly when re-certification is necessary (e.g., Why every two years? Did content change or is the reason legal/regulatory?) 
  • All leaders should re-cert on important training, not just direct contact leaders.
  • Eliminate "useless" training (Need examples here)
• Use an evaluation criteria to test the people taking the training to see if they pass a minimum threshold.
  • Have a test out option for those who can demonstrate the minimum proficiency.
• Develop ways to ensure that training attendees are participating, learning and able to apply what is being taught.
• Hands-on training, no PPTs. Use EDGE.
• Follow-up mechanism to make sure training is being implemented within the unit.
• Standardizing the curricula for the various training courses so that they can be implemented consistently. 
• Make sure courses are well-developed and of professional quality.
  • Have a course similar to TFC for all adult leaders. Just like TFC, must demonstrate you can pass this course to lead.
    • Cover basic core skills of camping, cooking, first aid, pioneering, etc.
    • Planning, execution, BSA policies, etc.
  • Evaluation of the trainers, course and content. Cannot be boring, must be hands-on.
  • Training should be accessible and given often.
  • Tiered training: Basic, Intermediate, Advanced. Make certain levels mandatory for certain activities (e.g., high adventure requires advanced training).
  • Basic courses only should be online, the rest should be face to face.
  • Articulate the need for training to leaders. Make training curriculum widely available and communicate it WELL in advance. Make sure it does not conflict with historical busy times for scouters. 
• More practice and drills (competitions/demos/meets) should be available for applying learned skills. For example, an RT drill: bring some NWS forecasts and evaluate go/no-go decisions for the next day, next two days. Or circulate maps with hike plans A, B, and C for boys of different levels. Afterwards you are scored on your decision.
• Make something like Powder Horn available more frequently.
• Evaluate the leaders being trained. Learn their skill level in various areas (pre-course survey to better target content for those attending). For example, do they know basic cooking, equipment, map reading, etc?
• Extended (advanced) training (e.g., adult merit badge concept of in-depth training). This sort of training would net an interested audience rather than a captive one.
• Detailed training on the Patrol Method and how to build, manage and nurture the boy-led program.

[andysmom]

Leaders need to be trained in the program, not just how to cook in the woods.

[Gone]

Leaders need to be trained in the program, not just how to cook in the woods.

 

I don't think you'd get any argument. I see cooking as part of "the program". It would be one of the core skills both scouts and adults learn, otherwise how can one lead a simple camp out or trail hike?

[Stosh]

Leaders need to be trained in the program, not just how to cook in the woods.

 

Obviously the program emphasis will falter a bit if the participants don't have food, water, clothing and shelter.    While that might sound a bit sarcastic, it is not meant to be.   One needs to cover the basics of an environment that is NOT part of the normal life-style of most Americans today.  I have a hobby farm, but I don't live in the woods or in a cave.  But I have camped in the woods and in a cave on occasion.    Unless we can assure a basic understanding of food, water, clothing and shelter for people who we are responsible for, the "program" isn't of much use.  Today I see a real emphasis on the program and the basics are secondary which to me leaves the door wide open for Cheshire lawyers lining up.

[andysmom]

Not disagreeing.

I am just seeing alot of skills training and no thought as to "why" we are going on hikes and campouts for example.

Scouting is not supposed to teach scouts how to live in the woods, the outdoor program is one method of achieving the main objectives.

[CNYScouter]

I have to say in my experiance most ASM's can't do the T-FC skills.

A couple years ago I was on our council training committee. They were talking about doing multiple Scouting Universities in a year.

I suggested that one be held at the council camp only doing outdoor classes.

I was thinking that at IOLS we show partisipants how to tie knots and lash things together but there is just not enough time to teach someone from scratch in this and run training with longer classes that there is actually time to teach a skill.

the BSA is an outdoor program but we (as in the BSA) have very little in the way of real outdoor training

I wanted to do maybe 8 classes at most - 2 hours each - maybe a beginners class and an advanced class (knots/lashing for beginners - pioneering for the advanced for an example)

 

This idea went over like a lead balloon and they chose to the "classroom stuff" for the second Scouting University- hardly anyone showed up.

[Gone]

Not disagreeing.

I am just seeing alot of skills training and no thought as to "why" we are going on hikes and campouts for example.

Scouting is not supposed to teach scouts how to live in the woods, the outdoor program is one method of achieving the main objectives.

 

If we look at this from the top down, the mission and vision of the BSA is a bit broader than than just the outdoor program. I suspect, BSA's intent -- indeed B-P's intent -- was to accomplish the mission and vision using the outdoor program. 

 

As we've discussed in other threads, BSA is getting away from the outdoor program (think STEM) and attempting to broaden out their reach in an effort to stem the decrease in membership and, I am guessing, to evolve a bit with the times.

 

For purposes of this thread, I'd like to keep the discussion focused on how we would re-build all aspects of adult training. My assumption going in is that most training should be around the core skills needed to implement the outdoor program. If others feel we need to broaden that scope let's discuss.

 

To get us back on track here is the most recent syllabus for IOLS for adults.

Edited June 16, 2015 by Bad Wolf

[DuctTape]

Not disagreeing.

I am just seeing alot of skills training and no thought as to "why" we are going on hikes and campouts for example.

Scouting is not supposed to teach scouts how to live in the woods, the outdoor program is one method of achieving the main objectives.

I would recommend Chapter 1, Specifically the Aim of the Scout Movement.

http://www.gutenberg.org/files/29558/29558-h/29558-h.htm

[qwazse]

Let's take a step back from all of the "adventure preparedness" stuff and think about the last district roundtable when before the breakout sessions:

• A bunch of sticks and twine was dumped at each table of scouters and everyone was given 20 minutes to lash together a 1/4 scale pioneering project.
• Scouts got to demonstrate 1st aid, by selecting a scouter, decking him out in stage makeup, and presenting a scenario.
• Someone actually acted out being a scout with Asbergers who asked to get in a car with an older (yet under driving age) scout who was at the wheel.
• A compass and flashight was at each table and with headings for a 15 minute night navigation course (inside or outside of the building).
• Each table list of plants and animals and 20 minutes for a scavenger hunt (making sure one person at each table had a mobile phone).
• Scouters saw where they were a little rusty, but experienced DURING THE MEETING just what fun scouting could be.
• Some clever scouter threw in a scoutmaster minute after any of the above?

So, now, think about how the average scouter at your average round-table feels about training if he/she never has any of this as a teezer!

Here, I'm not talking about "drilling" like I mentioned earlier. But just about having good, clean, fun. Enough so that people get to recognize who in the room might be worth sending their boys to for a MB or maybe contacting when time does come to build an adventure.

 

@@andysmom is not far off with the "why" of outdoor training. Sure we have the textbook responses. But the more visceral reason is that you feel so much better about yourself when these resourcefulness excersizes help you to reflect on your place in the wide world.