Change the Concept of Wood Badge--Universal Unit Leader Training

[Stosh]

I don't disagree with anything that you said. But for a moment imagine stosh and I presenting the same course side-by-side, is there any way National could write the syllabus so that the courses are presented identically?

 

Don't presume I am defending National's courses. Because of my position at the time, I was asked to give some comments for the new  soon to be NYLT course when it was being developed. They used ZERO of my suggestions and the course is opposite of what I think a Council Level JLT course should be. 

 

Barry 

 

We may dicker the fine points, but both you and I are still staunchly pro-boy with the organization.  If National tosses out your ideas, then what in the world are they putting in it's place?

[JoeBob]

 It *is* pricey for a week of camping and bad cafeteria food. 

Cafeteria food?  The three we sent this year cooked all their meals, and said that the stress cooking situations was what they learned the most from.

They came back all fired up and 3 months later we can't get them to tuck in their shirt -tails...

[Stosh]

@@JoeBob  This is normal.  Kids (and/or adults) go off for training.  Come back all fired up.  Nobody listens and smiles nicely and lets it go i in one ear and out the other.  The new trainee gets tired of talking about all the neat things they learned and life goes back to normal.  Nothing changes.  Time and money is basically wasted.

 

I have seen this pattern over and over and over again.  

[TAHAWK]

Is it really such a surprise to hear that who teaches has an impact of the quality of teaching?

 

The NYLTs I did from 2010-2014 all, with National consent, had PP slides prepared by the respective staffers.  Our rationales the first time around were that: 1) the staffers would be more familiar with the material if they did their own slides; 2) they would use words, images, and ideas that were more contemporary for the participants, and 3) that the slides that came on the course disk were pretty awful.

 

The 2010 course had female participants, with National consent, a "year early."  (They were very strong participants and became very strong staffers.

 

My impression was that the lady in charge at National in 2010 was open to trying to find better practices.  Bless her.

[gumbymaster]

One of the things I really liked about the youth leader program I attended as a Scout was it was divided into levels.

 

The first year was "Phase 1, Patrol Member Development". Scouts 11-12, were taught how to be good members of a group.  They learned core Camping skills, and were exposed to peer-to-peer teaching, and various leadership and communication skills.  Staff members acted as the Patrol Leader for the group.

 

The second year was "Phase 2, Patrol Leader Development".  Scouts 12-13, were broken into patrols, each member was the patrol leader for a day, and charged with coordinating all the tasks the patrol needed to complete that day.  Staff members were patrol guides (more on that later).

 

The third year was "Phase 3, Troop Leader Development".  Scouts 13-14, were still divided into patrols, each patrol had one or more days as the Leadership Corps for the Troop.  There was a lot of emphasis on Communication Skills, Leadership styles, Peer-Counseling - taught in the context of Scout skills and other hurdles.  Phase 3 was mostly/generally, but not always, taught on the trail, taking a 20+ mile hike over several days with the remainder of the week back at the main camp.  In fact, check-in for phase 3 was usually well before the camp, and they spent the next 3-4 days hiking in.

 

The fourth phase was to come back and act as the Staff for Phase 1.  Explorers, 14-15 returned to act as the patrol leaders (or SPL) for phase 1.  Staff would typically meet one weekend a month for the 9 months prior to camp to warm up their teaching and communication skills, and to decide on the activity plan for the week of camp.

 

The fifth phase was staff for Phase 2.  Explorers were typically 15-16 and would act as the Leadership corps and patrol guides for the Patrol Leader development level.  As with Phase 4, they would meet monthly before the camp to plan their activity schedule and how they planned to teach Scout skills, Leadership styles, and Communication skills.

 

The sixth year was Staff for Phase 3.  Explorers aged 16-17.  Here they acted more like Scoutmasters, guiding the Leadership corps, and teaching Leadership styles and Communication skills.  While Scout skills were used as the mechanism for teaching, the staff did not teach those skills, but had the Phase 3 candidates teach each other using the leadership methods taught.

 

Phases seven through nine were the adult leadership for Phases 1-3/4-6 respectively.  Their role varied greatly in how much they had to teach to the staff (phases 4-6) vs. allowing the staff to teach each other.  By the time of the actual camp, In Phase 1-2/4-5/7-8 they were the Scoutmasters, by Level 3/6/9, you hardly knew they were around.

 

Depending on the attendant's age, it was not unusual for someone to go 1 .. 2 .. 4 .. 3 .. 5 .. 6 instead.

 

Several councils accepted attendance at this program (Phase 2 or 3) in lieu of JLT or TLT as those programs were called in my time (NYLT now).

 

Although the staff changed every year, because of the youth to youth teaching, access to historical training materials, the ready availability to contact the prior staff, and how experience of teaching passed down from year to year, the way materials were taught would vary greatly, but the quality of the teaching was remarkably consistent.

 

The national JLT/NYLT programs drew heavily on this program in developing some of their original materials.  The case can also be made that Phases 7-9 substitute for, and are more intense, than Woodbadge.  In fact, Wood badge 2 derived a lot of their materials from this program (and yes, I realize there is a lot of animosity about that for those in the know - for fairness I reference: http://scouter.com/index.php/topic/9495-if-edge-is-badwrongpoor-how-do-you-teach-youth-to-teac/page-3?do=findComment&comment=305744;However, my personal experience is that while I agree that the competencies of leadership were academic, the method of teaching was very practical and scoutcraft oriented, and I have been able to very practically apply those competencies both in Scouts and in my real-world life; and most Troops I know/knew that send youth to this program are very boy led).

 

I'm on the other coast now, so I have not been to the program in several years, they are still serving many youth.  If you have an unit anywhere near California and Nevada, I strongly recommend looking into it.  http://www.whitestag.org/

Edited October 17, 2015 by gumbymaster

[Stosh]

One of the things I really liked about the youth leader program I attended as a Scout was it was divided into levels.

 

The first year was "Phase 1, Patrol Member Development". Scouts 11-12, were taught how to be good members of a group.  They learned core Camping skills, and were exposed to peer-to-peer teaching, and various leadership and communication skills.  Staff members acted as the Patrol Leader for the group.

 

The second year was "Phase 2, Patrol Leader Development".  Scouts 12-13, were broken into patrols, each member was the patrol leader for a day, and charged with coordinating all the tasks the patrol needed to complete that day.  Staff members were patrol guides (more on that later).

 

The third year was "Phase 3, Troop Leader Development".  Scouts 13-14, were still divided into patrols, each patrol had one or more days as the Leadership Corps for the Troop.  There was a lot of emphasis on Communication Skills, Leadership styles, Peer-Counseling - taught in the context of Scout skills and other hurdles.  Phase 3 was mostly/generally, but not always, taught on the trail, taking a 20+ mile hike over several days with the remainder of the week back at the main camp.  In fact, check-in for phase 3 was usually well before the camp, and they spent the next 3-4 days hiking in.

 

The fourth phase was to come back and act as the Staff for Phase 1.  Explorers, 14-15 returned to act as the patrol leaders (or SPL) for phase 1.  Staff would typically meet one weekend a month for the 9 months prior to camp to warm up their teaching and communication skills, and to decide on the activity plan for the week of camp.

 

The fifth phase was staff for Phase 2.  Explorers were typically 15-16 and would act as the Leadership corps and patrol guides for the Patrol Leader development level.  As with Phase 4, they would meet monthly before the camp to plan their activity schedule and how they planned to teach Scout skills, Leadership styles, and Communication skills.

 

The sixth year was Staff for Phase 3.  Explorers aged 16-17.  Here they acted more like Scoutmasters, guiding the Leadership corps, and teaching Leadership styles and Communication skills.  While Scout skills were used as the mechanism for teaching, the staff did not teach those skills, but had the Phase 3 candidates teach each other using the leadership methods taught.

 

Phases seven through nine were the adult leadership for Phases 1-3/4-6 respectively.  Their role varied greatly in how much they had to teach to the staff (phases 4-6) vs. allowing the staff to teach each other.  By the time of the actual camp, In Phase 1-2/4-5/7-8 they were the Scoutmasters, by Level 3/6/9, you hardly knew they were around.

 

Depending on the attendant's age, it was not unusual for someone to go 1 .. 2 .. 4 .. 3 .. 5 .. 6 instead.

 

Several councils accepted attendance at this program (Phase 2 or 3) in lieu of JLT or TLT as those programs were called in my time (NYLT now).

 

Although the staff changed every year, because of the youth to youth teaching, access to historical training materials, the ready availability to contact the prior staff, and how experience of teaching passed down from year to year, the way materials were taught would vary greatly, but the quality of the teaching was remarkably consistent.

 

The national JLT/NYLT programs drew heavily on this program in developing some of their original materials.  The case can also be made that Phases 7-9 substitute for, and are more intense, than Woodbadge.  In fact, Wood badge 2 derived a lot of their materials from this program (and yes, I realize there is a lot of animosity about that for those in the know - for fairness I reference: http://scouter.com/index.php/topic/9495-if-edge-is-badwrongpoor-how-do-you-teach-youth-to-teac/page-3?do=findComment&comment=305744;However, my personal experience is that while I agree that the competencies of leadership were academic, the method of teaching was very practical and scoutcraft oriented, and I have been able to very practically apply those competencies both in Scouts and in my real-world life; and most Troops I know/knew that send youth to this program are very boy led).

 

I'm on the other coast now, so I have not been to the program in several years, they are still serving many youth.  If you have an unit anywhere near California and Nevada, I strongly recommend looking into it.  http://www.whitestag.org/

 

How long were the phases?  with that many phases it would seem that the boys would be missing summer camp and high adventure with whole week dedicated to this training.  How was the cost of the course figured in.  Can we get a bit more detail of the logistics of the process?

[gumbymaster]

The (non-staff) Phases were a week long summer camp.  Almost everyone who did the program (typically 120-180 youth across all three phases), did this in addition to their Troop's summer camp.  The program was co-ed, so I don't know about the girl scouts and camp fire participants.

 

It was usually run near the end of the summer - late August.  The program rented a Council camp that had been closed for the season, and set up their own operation.  All three phases occurred at the same time - so essentially it was like three full troops operating at a summer camp.  They ran independent programs.  There was some additional support staff (usually Adults/Staff Parents) that ran the Kitchen (distributing food to the patrols for in-camp cooking), the Quartermaster, First Aid, and The Waterfront/Pool (each troop/phase usually had about 1hr per day at the water).

 

Other than closing ceremonies, the Troops/Phases almost never interacted.  In fact, phase 3 usually spent most their time hiking in to the main camp.

 

The staff was fully volunteer, so the costs only covered that of the foods, equipment wear and tear, and camp rental - it was typically about 1/2 to 2/3 the cost of regular summer camp.

Edited October 17, 2015 by gumbymaster

[Eagle69]

Once upon a time, there was a backpacking WB; one of my good friends took it and loved it. It was at Philmont.  I believe there was also a canoeing done at N Tier or Land Between the Lakes, when it was a national HA base.

I did a Walking Wood Badge council sponsored course way back in the late 70's.   We were constantly on the move with sessions being interspersed as we went along.  From the first night we were pitching ou tents and cooking our own meals.  It was a bit different from the static course at the time, but even that was done outdoors with patrols doing their own cooking.  I never understood why BSA created the current couse that is done inside with Power Point Presentations, catered meals, sleeping idoors and combinng Cubs and Boy Scouts.

[CalicoPenn]

 

They may be drinking the coolaid,

 

 

Since Pack is in "run silent, run deep" mode, I'll step in and just remind us all:  It's Flavoraid.