Team Members for Blog

[ASM1]

I have started a Blog about the problems in todays Scouting and how to fix them, or to suggest things to address. First let me say I have no clue what a Blog is, but it seems to be the rage nowadays.

 

Anyway, I would like Team Members from this forum to include for this Blog. I don't want the idle rantings that go on in this forum, but I wish to narrow it down to the specifics.

 

The address of this Blog will in effect identify me to those who know me. But guess what? I could care less because they are the ones who have inspired this Blog. They will think, "WAR", I think it is time to address the problem and make Scouting for the youth once again.

http://www.idso.net/blog

 

ASM1

 

[Twocubdad]

I'm not sure I understand this Blog thing. I read the page and don't understand why you couldn't just post it here, but that's your call.

 

I suppose the primary point of the post was that training should be mandatory. In principle, I agree with that. The other problems you listed sound to me like local problems related to the lack of training, leaders who just don't get it, or who think they should run "their" (and in this case I use the possessive in it's negative connotation) unit as their own fiefdom. If someone chooses to run a unit counter to the stated methods and policies of BSA, training isn't necessarily going to help. It doesn't sound like these guys are ignorant of the program, they're just set on doing things their own way regardless.

 

But back to mandatory training. While I agree that every leader should be trained, I don't think that BSA training is ready to back up a mandatory training policy. Before someone decrees that everyone must be trained, you better dang well be prepared to train them all. We're not ready for that. A couple points under the general heading of the Devil is in the Details:

 

1) The current position-specific breakouts for Cub Scout leaders is a waste of time and resources. For the volunteers, it is a waste of time to take three, virtually identical courses (Tiger, Cub and Webelos leader specific) with the span of three years. There just isn't that much difference in the programs. A Den Leader Basic course could easily cover Tigers and Cubs. The program material for Webelos leaders could be folded into Webelos Leader Outdoor course. That would reduce four courses to two. Committee member and Cubmaster could be combined. Actually committee member specific could be dropped as it contains nothing that isn't covered in any of the other courses.

 

From the training committee's perspective, the five courses means that to teach a Cub Scout leader course you need five instructors, five class rooms and five sets of computers and projectors. (Apparently no one is capable of teaching the courses with flip charts anymore.) We frequently have courses canceled because of a lack of instructors or a lack of students. While 8 or 10 people may register for training, they need to take five different classes. The same is true at the pack trainer level. It's not difficult to teach Youth Protection or New Leaders' Essentials the the pack leadership, but s pack trainer has the same problems delivering the position specific courses causes that the training committee does.

 

Bottom line is this: If a Scoutmaster or ASM can take Scoutmaster Fundamentals and be considered trained to position to handle Boy Scouts from a new Scout patrol of 11 year olds all the way to a Venture Patrol of 17 year olds, why am I required to have two different courses to handle 7 year old Tigers or 8 year old Wolves?

 

2) Mandatory training is a crutch for the training committee. I'm beginning to see that locally already. Sooner or later the attitude will creep in that "you have to take the class, we don't need to make it convenient or interesting." Our training chairman went on and on recently about the vast number of training opportunities the committee had planned for the coming year. How many of them are schedule other than on a weekend, I asked? Zero. What are you doing differently to promote the courses? Nothing. This is the same level of customer service you get at DMV. Anyone tried to get a driver's license lately?

 

3) Administration. From what I see, the poor state of BSA record keeping is a universal problem. You are going to deny membership on the basis of the world's worst database? Until you can accurately tell me the current percentage of trained leaders, you're not ready to mandate 100%.

 

I've tried for two years to get my pack's training records corrected. We've submitted training inventories, we've sent in copies of training certificates, and I've corrected the records at recharter time. All has been ignored. One day I spent 45 minutes with the council registrar going through old notebooks trying to correct my own record and still didn't get it right. At that rate, it will take 20 hours to get all my leaders updated.

 

When national, the council and the training committee solves these problems and gets their house in order, then I'm all over mandatory training.

[ASM1]

Manditory training needs to come from the Charter organization. It has to insist and pay for that training for the leaders of their units. It needs to be a requirement of National for any Charter Organization to gain its Charter.

 

There is just too much garbage being handed out to new Scouts by untrained leaders. It is ruining the program as a whole.

 

Your comments are well founded. but I suggest, if you have not already attended, to take your Councils next Wood Badge course.

 

ASM1

[Laurie]

"I have started a Blog about the problems in todays Scouting and how to fix them, or to suggest things to address. First let me say I have no clue what a Blog is, but it seems to be the rage nowadays."

 

You are asking for team members for a Blog, though you don't know what it is?

 

After reading the link, I have one thing to say: It does not take Wood Badge to obtain leaders committed to keeping Scouting a youth program. Though I've nothing against Wood Badge and hope to one day take part in it, I am one of many leaders who care deeply about carrying the program out as it's intended to be carried out.

 

[ASM1]

Laurie, if you are untrained, you are one of the few. Many, and often too many think they have the best motives in mind, but lack the whole program training to make it work. You seemed offended that I slate untrained leaders, I do. Sorry to say they are often running our programs at the root level, and at the recruitment level. Hence the problem.

 

ASM1

[ASM1]

"After reading the link, I have one thing to say: It does not take Wood Badge to obtain leaders committed to keeping Scouting a youth program."

 

Yes it does plain and simple! No Options! No Substitutes! Make the committment, and take the course! Then, and only then will you understand what the program is all about.

 

 

ASM1

[Laurie]

I am not untrained, but I have not attended Wood Badge. I will respectfully disagree with you that Wood Badge is not the only way to deliver the program as it's intended to be delivered. This is turning into an argument, and it was not my intent. If you prefer to consider me untrained because I've not yet attended Wood Badge, then you're welcome to your opinion and I'm bowing out of this discussion on that note.

[OldGreyEagle]

ASM1 and Laurie, may be agree that one can be trained, although not be WoodBadge trained? Whether its New Leader Essentials, Scoutmaster Specific, or COmmitee Challenge, etc. you can be trained but not WoodBasge trained and while I agree that WoodBadge training is the most desirable, the other training is adequate to communicate the program to those who will run it?

[ASM1]

It was never my intention to suggest you are untrained because you have not attended Wood Badge. But if you think you are trained without attending Wood Badge you are very mistaken indeed. And may I ask what your hostility is towards Wood Badge training? Why are you so hostile because you have not yet sought out the Wood Badge? Do your self a service to you and your unit and get the training available to all Scouters. Why do leaders resist training? I guess here is the reason for my Blog posting?

 

ASM1

[Eamonn]

I am a little confused as to where you are going with this and what this "Blog" thing is all about. But no one ever accused me of being too bright.

I am one of those "District Types" who has a son in the program. It could be that we just lucked out, but his being my son has in no way helped or hindered his Scouting "Career.".

OK, so maybe I am guilty of expecting him to be a little more Scout-like, as he is a reflection of me. Yes he does own and wear Scout Uniform pants. Yes, I do push him to attend troop meetings when he would rather stay home. And yes he is in the know about district and council activities and this knowledge might give him the edge to participate in some of these. He also has to put up with a certain amount of good natured leg pulling because a lot of the adults in the program know who I am. At present he is a Life Scout. He has been for a good while. Everything that is required for him to reach the rank of Eagle Scout is done other then the project and the BOR. He has all the support in the world from his Leaders, his troop and his family. But at the end of the day he is the one who has to make it happen. If he doesn't then that is down to him.

Sad to have to admit that even though I have served as a council training chair, presented most of the training's that the BSA has. I don't share your view that training is the be all and end all of our leadership problems. We have a little over 1.2 million adult volunteers. Just like any other large organization we have the good, the bad and the ugly. Some wise person in these forums recently made the point that if you send an idiot to training you end up with a trained idiot.

We have in these forums discussed Mandatory Training. I agree that the goal of having everyone trained is a good one, however I don't think that mandatory training is the way to go about it. I happen to think that we could do a far better job when it comes down to Leader Selection, but that is in the hands of the chartering organization.

I am not sure where you are finding the data for your decline in membership. So I can't agree or disagree with you. I think that we as an organization could do a better job of marketing at the unit level. Sad to say a lot of the traditional activities that Scouts and Scouting is known for is now being offered by lots of other organizations. We might still be better at some of these but they are doing them.

In my opinion we have at least at the council level made advancement become all to important. Our Summer camps are run with Scouts rushing from class to class. Once a Scout has been to summer camp for three or four summer camps, there are no more merit badges for him to run too. So he sees no point in going. Most councils are having a hard enough time raising enough money to meet their budget that the idea of a capital campaign to raise money for a Cub World or improving the Boy Scout summer camp to make it more adventurous, it out of the question.

In fact I wonder how long or how much longer small councils can survive. Last year I visited a beautiful camp and asked what the attendance was for the summer and they informed me that it was just over 600. This has to be a catch 22 situation. Even with the backing of wealthy benefactor's a camp with so few attending will have a hard time attracting the older Scouts.

We know that the high adventure bases that we have appeal to a lot of our Scouts, bad thing is that it is so hard to get in. Maybe we need to be looking at High Adventure bases at the Regional level? I think it would be something if each and every Scout was offered the chance of attending some sort of High Adventure activity during his Scouting career, while at the same time our Cub Scouts were experiencing the time of their lives at a first class resident camp.

Everything we do needs to come back to the program. Training at every level will help improve the program. A good program will not only retain membership it will attract more youth into the program.

What has this to do with "Blog"? I have no idea. But I didn't say that I understood it.

Eamonn

[OldGreyEagle]

ASM1, you accused someome about being hostile to Woodbadge? Did you mean me? I am a little confused, please help me out

[ASM1]

OGE, Absolutely Not!

[ASM1]

C'mon, lets forget the local forum, lets put together a national team that is viewed by the general public and not just by our little Scouting ring. you know that is what it is, a little local Scouting ring. Let's make it public. We need the public to survive, we need their youth to make it work.

 

ASM1

[ASM1]

"Training at every level will help improve the program." You said it all right there.

 

ASM1

We all agree, we just do not know the avenue...

[VentureScoutNY]

 

I need an explanation of what a Blog is, before I can comment on that link...