Re: [Scouter_T] Digest Number 1490
- RE: Online Training
I am a big proponent of in-person training as it is more interactive -- not
only instructor to student but also student-student (ie meeting people like
you looking to do the same thing you do).
However, the reality is it is more and more difficult to get people to carve
out time to attend a training session. We often barely have enough people
to break even on training events while the potential "class" is often 10-20-30
times larger than the number that attends.
I would imagine most of us on this list are baby-boomers or beyond. Our
target audience comes from different generations with different expectations
(and obviously comfortable with on-line activity). They are generally not into
long meetings (or meetings at all) but do generally like teamwork. There are
other differences as well which I will not go into -- let's just say they
have a different operating system (somewhat) than my generation does.
I know someone said on-line training is better than no training -- equals a
cop-out. But I also think it is a nod to the reality that if we hold that
training, they will come. It is obvious to me that that thought process is NOT
working. So, perhaps some on-line training is fine.
I personally did Scoutmastership Fundamentals by reading the syllabus, what
was then called self-study because I wanted to go to Boy Scout Leader Wood
Badge and there were no Scoutmastership Fundamentals courses planned before the
deadline to sign up. (I later became training chairman for my district and
then my council and made sure that was not a problem for future assistant
scoutmasters and scoutmasters in my district and council.)
I wish we could get more people to training sessions, but the reality is it
is tough. So, it might be that for many of those who would never carve out
the time, they will be exposed to some of what they really need to know from
Yours in Scouting,
program vice chairman, Executive Board, Istrouma Area Council, Baton Rouge
some other hats too.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]