Scoutmaster or Cubmaster Credibility and Authenticity

[qwazse]

Here's a link to an open-access article on cubmasters and scoutmasters from an education theory perspective:

Yulianti, Yulianti, Dian Widya Putri, and Stephani Raihana Hamdan. "The Comparison of Credibility and Authenticity of Scoutmasters of Indonesian Scouting." 2nd Social and Humaniora Research Symposium (SoRes 2019). Atlantis Press, 2020.

The two constructs of interest are:

• Credibility, indicated by
  • Expertise
  • Experience
  • Rationale
  • Conviction
• Authenticity, indicated by
  • Congruence
  • Full disclosure
  • Responsiveness
  • Personhood

 

Quote

... scoutmaster(s are) perceived by the student(s) ... to have credibility, but should increase their authenticity for ... a greater impact in character education.

 

Heads up: this has not been peer reviewed and there are typos and non-native English grammar (thus the heavily edited quote). Plus, in general, I've found education research to be a little loose with the stats. But, it is interesting as it reports on scouts' evaluation of their leaders.

As we noted in the other thread, it's anybody's guess as to how palatable our "-master" title for direct-contact adults of troops and packs will be to a post-modern nomadic audience. We often think of that audience in terms of trend-setting Americans, but more than that, young American parents are multi-national. Indonesia is an excellent test-bed for sociological constructs in scouting because, being intrinsic to the nation's education system, their SMs have to attend to scouts who might not be participants were they in a US school. So unlike many American youth, every Indonesian has a personal understanding of "scoutmaster".

If you have the patience for this sort of think, I'd encourage you to wade through the article. Regardless, here's the question:

If your scouts were to evaluate you, where would you rate on credibility and authenticity?