Your biggest instructional or training problem

[AltadenaCraig]

Very interesting topic.  Thank you @shortridge .  My $.02:

Biggest problem with youth skills instruction.  For me, it's First Class Nature; specifically 5a):

• 5a.  Identify or show evidence of at least 10 kinds of native plants found in your local area or campsite location

I interpret "kinds" as "species" within the plant kingdom.  I'm terrible at it.  I find guidebooks difficult.  What I need/want to do is get a local botanist to really train a few of us adults in the field so that we can in turn train our senior scouts.  After that it's purely monitoring/mentoring as the scouts can take it from there.  I'm comfortable monitoring/mentoring all other First Class skills (Navigation, Knots, First Aid, etc.), but First Class Nature 5a is really tough for me.

Biggest problem with adult leader training.  For me - and I personally believe on this issue Scouting's membership will either turn around or continue to slide - it is:

• Supporting the Patrol Method

I'm exasperated at adults who couldn't care less about promoting the outdoor small-group dynamics and who think we're failing if we're not focused on reincarnating individual "Daniel Boones".  Similarly for other adults the only metric on which they're concerned is counting each scout's merit badges and rank advancements.  Even after exhaustive guidance, these adults remain completely oblivious to Baden-Powell's admonition: "The patrol system is not one method in which Scouting for boys can be carried on. It is the only method."

I'm enjoying reading the other scouters' thoughts on this thread.

[Terasec]

2 hours ago, AltadenaCraig said:

Very interesting topic.  Thank you @shortridge .  My $.02:

Biggest problem with youth skills instruction.  For me, it's First Class Nature; specifically 5a):

• 5a.  Identify or show evidence of at least 10 kinds of native plants found in your local area or campsite location

I interpret "kinds" as "species" within the plant kingdom.  I'm terrible at it.  I find guidebooks difficult.  What I need/want to do is get a local botanist to really train a few of us adults in the field so that we can in turn train our senior scouts.  After that it's purely monitoring/mentoring as the scouts can take it from there.  I'm comfortable monitoring/mentoring all other First Class skills (Navigation, Knots, First Aid, etc.), but First Class Nature 5a is really tough for me.

 

 

You may be over thinking “kinds” of plants

i equate “kinds” with types

more general than species

evergreens conifors btoadleaf flowering moss algae fern etc

even veteran outdoor folks generally dont learn 10 species at a time 1-3 new species per year would be more like it

[DuctTape]

I always referred to "kinds" as species, or in the least the genus. 10 different genus in the local area is not that hard, especially for first class. Just "coniferous" is way to broad IMO, as that refers to the phylum which on the taxonomic key is just below kingdom. Barely any different than identifying it as a plant.

[Terasec]

16 minutes ago, DuctTape said:

I always referred to "kinds" as species, or in the least the genus. 10 different genus in the local area is not that hard, especially for first class. Just "coniferous" is way to broad IMO, as that refers to the phylum which on the taxonomic key is just below kingdom. Barely any different than identifying it as a plant.

If you look up kinds of plants most botanical reference sites equate kinds with types which is just general category

open to interpretation

scout requirements are usually quite general 

 

 

 

[HashTagScouts]

Go to the more general.  If you have a large wooded area- state or national forest- nearby.  Look at the tree species first.  A Red oak or shrub oak is definitely different than a white pine, lodgepole pine, etc.; and then a fir tree (any type) is distinctly different than a white pine.  You should be able to find 3-4 tree species fairly easily in most parts of the US, and those are the easiest to point out and scouts to remember.  Then you can start in on some of the more obvious things like a fern, or even a dandelion.  If you are trying to point out the differences in various arborvitae, you're overthinking it.  Also don't be afraid to tap on those park rangers- they are usually pretty cool about spending time with scout units explaining the park they work in every day. 

[willray]

On 3/10/2019 at 9:08 PM, shortridge said:

...

- With youth, what is your biggest problem in skills instruction?

The fact that everyone, youth and adults alike, seem to have devolved into thinking that the rank-patch/merit-badge/etc. is the reward, rather than it being a symbol that they've mastered the material.   "I want to earn 2nd-class, because then my father will let me ..., but I don't want to have to learn all these stupid ...", rather than understanding that the learning itself is the reward.

Couple this with the scouts who have advanced through this system of "first class first year!", and "Eagle by 14!" patch-bling-based "advancement" now being the senior scouts doing the mentoring, and you've got a perfect storm of scouts who have never been given a reason to appreciate actually having skills, being mentored by scouts who don't think that learning the skills is actually important for their mentees.

I had the exquisite displeasure of having a recently aged-out "Eagle" scout in my GreenBar patrol, who could not set up his own tent, and (as close to verbatim as I can get) said "Why should I know how to tie the rope to this tent?  Knots are all the same, and they're all stupid".   He's the problem with skills instruction.  He may have the patch, but he's never going to actually be an Eagle, and everyone he "mentors" is going to be tainted by his horribly attitude.

On 3/10/2019 at 9:08 PM, shortridge said:

- With adults, what is your biggest problem in leader training?

The same problem I have with committee members on graduate-student dissertation committees:  They're not willing to let the scouts "fail", and instead insist on "passing" them, despite the fact that "passing" someone who hasn't mastered the material, is a bigger failure than sending them back to actually learn and do it right.  This resistance to letting the scouts "fail" extends everywhere from places where the adults are actively evaluating the scouts in some fashion (for example merit-badge counselors), to where they're refusing to stand back and let a patrol struggle with their dining-fly, or cooking their breakfast, and instead the adults opt to jump in and "fix" things for them.

[HelpfulTracks]

On 3/15/2019 at 12:32 PM, qwazse said:

But I'm not putting mastery on the level of sensei. My criteria: barring disabilities, can a scouter do everything that we've ask of a first class scout? If he or she can't or hasn't even tried, then he or she needs to "walk that mile" with his or her scouts. The scouts see the leader trying, and it inspires trust and admiration. That process builds leadership.

That is why I like the term proficiency. Somewhat more than being able to do something one time to get sign-off and something less than mastery. 

Knots for example. A First Class scout (rank of concept) should be able to tie a taut-line hitch without having to think much about it or struggle. If the Scout has to look at a diagram or do it two or three times to tie it correctly, they are not proficient. 

 

[willray]

On 3/15/2019 at 12:58 PM, AltadenaCraig said:

Very interesting topic.  Thank you @shortridge .  My $.02:

Biggest problem with youth skills instruction.  For me, it's First Class Nature; specifically 5a):

• 5a.  Identify or show evidence of at least 10 kinds of native plants found in your local area or campsite location

I interpret "kinds" as "species" within the plant kingdom.  I'm terrible at it.  I find guidebooks difficult.  What I need/want to do is get a local botanist to really train a few of us adults in the field so that we can in turn train our senior scouts.  After that it's purely monitoring/mentoring as the scouts can take it from there.  I'm comfortable monitoring/mentoring all other First Class skills (Navigation, Knots, First Aid, etc.), but First Class Nature 5a is really tough for me.

I guess I'll carp about a couple other things as well:

One is that the lack of specificity of things like "show evidence" leads to people being willing to sign off on requirements like that, without the scout actually doing what the requirement intends.  I can "show evidence" of 10 different kinds of native plants with a handful of soil and leaf-litter from the forest floor.  I can actually do what the requirement intends, and explain something about why the evidence supports there being at least 10 different kinds of native plants represented too, but the typical scout or adult signing off, isn't going to ask me to demonstrate that I actually have some knowledge of the topic, they're just going to say "yup, that's evidence" and sign my book.  We can't "require more than the requirements", but we can darned well require that they actually can convince us that they've met the requirements.

Second, neither you, nor your senior scouts need to be able to do the requirements, for your scouts to satisfactorily complete the requirement.  Part of the meta-requirement inherent in the requirement, is that they learn the material necessary to complete it.  That doesn't mean that you need to teach it to them.  In fact, it's almost certainly better if you don't.  It's also almost certainly better if your senior scouts don't.  What your senior scouts should be teaching them, is "this is how you go learn the material", not the material itself.   If you, or your senior scouts teach them the material, you deprive your scouts of the opportunity to learn how to learn.   Teach them how to learn, and then let them come back and convince you that they learned.  You'll know it when they've learned enough to complete the requirement, whether you can do it yourself or not.

[HashTagScouts]

5 hours ago, willray said:

The fact that everyone, youth and adults alike, seem to have devolved into thinking that the rank-patch/merit-badge/etc. is the reward, rather than it being a symbol that they've mastered the material.   "I want to earn 2nd-class, because then my father will let me ..., but I don't want to have to learn all these stupid ...", rather than understanding that the learning itself is the reward.

Couple this with the scouts who have advanced through this system of "first class first year!", and "Eagle by 14!" patch-bling-based "advancement" now being the senior scouts doing the mentoring, and you've got a perfect storm of scouts who have never been given a reason to appreciate actually having skills, being mentored by scouts who don't think that learning the skills is actually important for their mentees.

I had the exquisite displeasure of having a recently aged-out "Eagle" scout in my GreenBar patrol, who could not set up his own tent, and (as close to verbatim as I can get) said "Why should I know how to tie the rope to this tent?  Knots are all the same, and they're all stupid".   He's the problem with skills instruction.  He may have the patch, but he's never going to actually be an Eagle, and everyone he "mentors" is going to be tainted by his horribly attitude.

The same problem I have with committee members on graduate-student dissertation committees:  They're not willing to let the scouts "fail", and instead insist on "passing" them, despite the fact that "passing" someone who hasn't mastered the material, is a bigger failure than sending them back to actually learn and do it right.  This resistance to letting the scouts "fail" extends everywhere from places where the adults are actively evaluating the scouts in some fashion (for example merit-badge counselors), to where they're refusing to stand back and let a patrol struggle with their dining-fly, or cooking their breakfast, and instead the adults opt to jump in and "fix" things for them.

To your first points about youth skills instructions, I would add units becoming too dependent on summer camps to teach their scouts basic scoutcraft, as well as never actually making that a part of their regular programming- thus not actually requiring their scouts to gain proficiency.  

I'm encouraged by the number of folks here on this forum that Scouting actually does still exist.  In my neck of the woods, far too many units are the car-camping--and-only-when-it-is-dry-and-warm clubs, that happen to wear uniforms (and usually nothing more than the uniform shirt - "$7 for a pair of socks?! How ridiculous! Here, can you hold onto my sons iPhone 10 for him?").