Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [Scouter_T] Digest Number 713

Expand Messages
  • wahowland@aol.com
    Message 1 of 1 , Nov 17, 2003
      <<<<<< I was not aware of this exception. Does this exception apply
      generally? I mean, can a Scouter take Woodbadge or a Philmont course by self-study
      (as a last resort, of course)?And since this document controls over individual
      course syllabi, why isn't this exception more generally known? I mean, how
      many of your average Scouters (i.e., those who aren't also trainers) even know of
      the existence of this exception? Whereas most of your average Scouters *are*
      aware of the national website, one would think such an important piece of
      info would be more widely publicized.

      Finally, since most self-paced courses involve a self-assessment (e.g., the
      online YPT), what does #34169E suggest a Scouter use as a self-assessment tool
      who decides to take NLE by himself?>>>

      The information that some training MAY (not has to be) accomplished by
      self-study and individual coaching does NOT mean that the learner has total control
      over self-certifying <G>. The next sentence in the book states clearly that
      this is under the control of the training committee head (not the district
      commissioner who wants to boost his QU numbers, the SM, or anyone else), who has
      the responsibility of approving this course of action. I chuckled at your idea
      of self-study for PTC or WB. Ummm, you were kidding, right?

      IMHO, the circumstances for allowing self-study, and even personal coaching,
      are vanishingly rare and should be limited to extreme distances (like in
      remote areas where travel to far-distant training opportunities are the only
      option) or other exceptional circumstances. There is not, and should not be, a
      blanket loophole for any leader to declare himself a self-study and all trained
      just because he thinks it's a nicer idea than actually participating with his
      peers in a course. Just as "he who represents himself has a fool for a lawyer,"
      so (often) does "he who trains himself."

      I could tell you stories of people who have gone to extreme lengths to avoid
      training (one notorious in council even told me, "I have Guard duty that weeken
      d," for two years, repeating it the last time when I hadn't even told him the
      date yet <sigh>), and then heard of this loophole and got someone else to
      declare them trained...without knowing that that someone didn'thave the right to
      do so.... Of course going to training doesn't automatically equate with being
      competent, but it's harder to BS your way thru something when you're in a
      class full of peers, especially if you know those peers are gonna be camping next
      to you at the next district event, and you know that they know what you heard.
      This particular guy was recruited to "teach"

      BTW, the YP online has a testing section that is not self-graded, so although
      it's individual instruction, it's not independent.

      Look, one of the big benefits of NLE is that you are in a room with other new
      leaders. it's designed to teach the integration of the three age-appropriate
      program levels, and get them all to work together. Why would you want to
      encourage circumventing this explicit goal?
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.