The Training Panacea

[Beavah]

The only hope for a dysfunctional committee and troop is if they get training.

 

Yah, I'm all in favor of trainin', eh? I think it gives people the basic outline of the program. Maybe. If they're payin' attention, and if they already have some experience with the terms and how kids' programs are run.

 

I'm even more in favor of self-study, eh? The BSA materials are pretty good. I buy every new book or pamphlet and read it cover to cover when it comes out (part of my job as a commish, eh? just sharin' materials here and there ).

 

But I really do think we have to be a bit more circumspect about the reality and limits of training. The reality is that it's pretty spotty out there. As often as not, trainin' isn't presented all that well, and in some cases it really isn't written all that well.

 

And the utility of training is fairly limited, eh? I've got to say that I've never, ever seen training fix a dysfunctional bunch of adults. Typically all they do is latch on to the sentence or two that supports their way of thinkin' and use it to holler at the other folks (like we haven't seen that at scouter.com, eh? ).

 

I think what's probably true is that trainin' is only effective when yeh have relatively good adults who are gettin' along and who have very limited experience but want to do better. Beyond that, I think sharin' ideas with other scouters in other programs helps good people try to figure out what might help in their circumstance lots better than training does.

 

Perhaps one of da things which is really missing in the BSA materials is "what to do when it ain't working." Our stuff is pretty polyanna sometimes. Nuthin' on misbehaving kids, nuthin' on misbehaving adults, no FAQ on all those hard practical questions that come up here a lot.

 

Trainin' has a point and a purpose, but I reckon it's more like a starting point than a be-all and end-all.

 

What say the group?

 

Beavah

 

[John-in-KC]

Training is only one tool in the toolbox.

 

Good relationships, to me, are the plumber's pipe wrench and the cheater bar. How many times here have we encountered a situation between people, or between organizations, where good relations just aren't there.

 

- Sometimes it's poor group communications.

- Sometimes it's just "it's always been that way (or at least has been beyond memory).

- Sometimes it's a boor or a horse's ### in a key position.

 

The lesson I've learned along the trail thus far is the traditional Chinese denotation of Gung Ho: All pull together Whatever our position is on the adult side of Scouting, we all have to pull together, for the sake of the kids.

 

Lisa said it in another thread, and it should be graven on every Scouter's forehead: Play Nice

[Gunny2862]

Disclaimer: I wasn't a Scout, my brothers were and I had a "70 something handbook I read over and over but I never was a Scout.( maybe I'll tell you over a campfire sometime...)

 

Many, Many years later I became Scout parent and a week later an ASM and not long after that a inexperienced, ignorant Scoutmaster. "Little has changed".

 

 

I still feel up against the wall, far more regularly than I like. The training has helped a lot. I'm only missing Woodbadge at this point. But I am still dealing with legacy Scouters who have never been to training, yes they were Scouts and many times Eagles but that same experience leads them to think that it's the same thing on this side of the fence. And their differences (which vary far more from the program than my own) an insistence on "this is the way Scouts are supposed to do things" drives me crazy.

 

By I do believe in training, I'm leading Cub Scout NLE and SM specific on a upcoming weekends in accordance with the Wishes of our D Traning Ch.. It would be nice if it were a little more practical - or if the volunteers could be led into going at a higher rate - but I also have issues with mandatory training - because then some well-intentioned folks will inadvertently make the bar so high the leader pool will shrink to unsustainable levels.

edit: John's post beat me in - I (as usual) concur.(This message has been edited by Gunny2862)

[mls1]

Thanks for spinning this thread, Beavah. This is very helpful. I agree that training is a starting point, and that BSA stuff can be pollyanna-ish in terms of avoiding the hard questions.

 

This reminds me of my church worship work - the best worship, and in a parallel sense, BSA work - occurs when people check their egos at the door and put the greater good first. But egos are mighty demanding things, and seem to always be hungry!

 

So I would add to the Sayings List, "It's NOT about you!" I'll have to remember to ask our DE if that is emphasized in training in our Council.

[OldGreyEagle]

At the same time, On the other hand I have four fingers and a thumb...

 

OK, maybe the BSA doesnt have training for what to do when the Advancement Chair fires the Chartering Organization Rep, or what to do when the Scoutmaster doesn't let any youth younger that his son advance past his son, or anyone of a myriad of other weird things we have heard. How can the BSA tell us how to handle situations that will be unique to the unit, the community and the personalities involved? The overall panacea would be the watch phrase of Bill S Preston, Esquire and Ted "Theodore" Logan who together were WLYD STYLLYNS admonition to "Be excellent to each other". Other than expecting Scout leaders to act Scoutlike to each other, what can the BSA do?

[BadenP]

Well for one thing they can post a step by step chart and guidelines of who to go to and what to do when the scouter has a problem with, a COR, adult leader, a DE, a parent, a district chair, a youth who has talked about wanting to or committing suicide, to name just a few, as these topics are continously debated and argued over in this forum.

 

While it may be true to act scoutlike to each other we all know that is not the reality of the real world, and it would be nice to see some consistency in dealing with these situations from on high. Granted every situation is different, but there are some commonalities and methodologies that would be very helpful to all scouters in most of these cases.

[dewASM]

I had to chuckle as I read this thread. I am battling a SM and his committee member wife to get our troop back to boy led and patrol method. And they are the MOST trained members of our organization. She is active on the council level and is involved in wood badge training. He is both trained and a trainer. We haven't had an election in two years and in that time their SPL son has never planned nor led a meeting. Our boys have not been camping since summer camp in August.

 

I spoke to our DE who told me to work with the boys who have had leader training. You guessed it. The SPL who does nothing.

 

Meetings are not in anyway planned. They consist mostly of announcements and "go do something". There is no patrol leader council it is a small troop (in no small part do to the SM). But I think the 13 boys we do have could be involved in planning, execution and decision making.

 

My point is that training cannot possible fix a problem unless the problem is ignorance. People who chose not to follow the program for whatever reason will never be changed with more training. In fact training only empowers them to laud their status over others.

 

Since we are in a rural area and the closest troop is over 30 miles away, I keep plugging away. But keep in mind that training is not a magic bullet.

 

[shortridge]

I haven't been on here nearly as long as others. But it seems that a lot of the answers come back to "Have a friendly cup of coffee" or "Talk to your unit commissioner." Coming in a close third is "Get Person Y to training."

 

I think Beavah is largely right, and that training at all levels could be enhanced by adding sections or segments on how to work constructively with "problem adults." Perhaps even going through the process of identifying one of these souls might open some eyes to their own attitudes and behaviors.

 

What would such a training segment say? Oh, that's for brighter minds than mine. I'd suggest having a friendly cup of coffee to talk it over.

[John-in-KC]

shortridge,

 

I have to admit, I use "friendly cup of coffee" a LOT. Part of that is that reasonable people can do an awful lot in simple friendship. Thinking things over together in a friendly environment is a lot more helpful in about 95% of all Scouting than is "go confront the stupid sonofagun."

 

Sadly, the outlying 5% are health & safety or YP issues which need immediate and sometimes direct address.

[mls1]

OldGreyEagle - that is one of our FAVORITE movies. There's something awfully funny about Genghis Khan swinging a baseball bat to decapitate a mannequin in a sporting goods store, while Beethoven rocks out on multiple keyboards three stores down.

 

Would that everyone would be excellent to each other...

[shortridge]

I definitely get it - and I hope no one thought I was being critical of the cup-of-coffee approach. Working with friends, or at least acquaintances under truce, is much easier than headbutting enemies day after day.

 

I sometimes wonder if YP has taken on an aura of less importance because it's an online module nowadays, versus a grizzled guy standing in front of a room saying "You. Do. Not. Do. This," striking a flipboard with a ruler at every point.

[John-in-KC]

Sadly, the only way we'll know is if there's an uptick in incidents God help the youth we're here to serve.

[scoutldr]

HAYYYY! Who you callin' grizzled?

 

Here's an alternate perspective. I have been both "trained and a trainer". In fact I did a stint as the District Training Guy (I don't use the term "Chairman", since I had no committee...I was it). I have been trained as a trainer and have taught adults at the college level, so it's not new to me. But the materials left a lot to be desired. "Stick to the syllabus" was the mantra of one who used to post here. Well, that brought you in within time limits, however, the students left just as bewildered as when they came. Only when we put the "schedule" aside and started having directed discussions (Socratic method) did we start having "learning", but then we went way overtime because they really got into it. They came to NLE wanting to know "what the heck do I do next Tuesday night for my first Den meeting"...not "this is how the Council is funded". The training, as designed, is not a course in human relations, management techniques, or in child psychology. That leads us to the BSA recommended leader selection process. We need to be looking for people who ALREADY possess the desirable qualities of a leader and mentor, since the BSA training will not magically transform them. Too often, leader selection consists of "OK, who wants to be the new Scoutmaster", and the first hand in the air gets it. Then we wonder why we have conflict.

[Gunny2862]

Yeah, first hand in the air or the one left after all the good excuses have been made...Or the one who couldn't think of a good excuse...

[emb021]

Yeah, traning is not a panacea.

 

What's the old say of 'if you send a monkey to training, you'll just get a trained monkey'.

 

Some people just go to training with the wrong attitude. They ignoret the information, or just focus on what they want. Somehow the attitude of the participants is never covered in trainer development.

 

Also, having a training syllabus is great. It gives an outline of what needs to be covered. But you need a trainer who is both a good trainer and knowledgable enought about the topic to bring themselves into it. Otherwise, as noted, you just get someone who is reading the script. You have to be careful of not turning the training into a series of 'war stories', but that the trainer is able to engage the participants, bring out their questions and issues, and be able to answer them, either from their knowledge or that of the audience.

 

This is partially why I'm not too keen on self training. Anyone can read a book. But many times true understanding comes from the engagement between the participant and the trainer, and even the participant and other participants. This is lacking in self training. There is nothing there to ensure the trainer is mislearned or misunderstood something.