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

Re: [Scouter_T] Re: Valid methods for training delivery

Expand Messages
  • Charles Seltenright
    Training no matter what form,as stated before, is important to complete at the earliest possible time.I have used and been part of all three types in the
    Message 1 of 30 , Mar 4 1:52 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      Training no matter what form,as stated before, is
      important to complete at the earliest possible time.I
      have used and been part of all three types in the
      scouting program.And can say it was invaluable in each
      way it was done.I believe the interaction that comes
      from group training is a key to a very motivated and
      prepared leader.But it also does not always fit into
      everyones schedule or more importantly there learning
      style.Not everyone learns or retains what is taught in
      the same way.Just look at the way our schools are
      changing there methods to reach each and every
      student.
      I took my commissioners training by self study
      through our District Commissioner.If I hadnt been
      allowed to do this at the time I would not have been
      able to for a long time.What I learned enabled me to
      go on and put together a successful Roundtable program
      4 years in a row.I may be one of the exceptions but I
      am able to learn more from self study than in other
      ways.But then again I take scouting very seriously and
      research and study way beyond what is taught in group
      training.In fact I do self study even after group
      trainings because I want to be the best leader I can
      be.
      That being said I must also add there is absolutely
      nothing that compares to a Group course that is well
      put together.Learning from the experience of dozens of
      other veteran leaders has no comparison.I have spent
      many great times camping,learning and teaching
      scouting.And hope to have many more in the future.In
      fact I will be part of our upcomming Commissioners
      College,COT and Woodbadge to promote Venturing.
      One cannot rule out any of the forms of teaching our
      leaders.All scouts deserve a trained leader and no
      matter how a leader gets that training shouldnt
      matter.As long as they learn the material and use it
      effectively is what truly matters.

      Charles Seltenright
      Crew 308 Advisor
      Troop 337 ASM
      Nottowa Trails
      Southwest Michigan Council




      --- Dan Kurtenbach <danielkurtenbach@...> wrote:

      > Just a couple of weeks ago, I was in a four-day
      > "live" training course at work. It was a
      > soul-killing, life-sucking experience. The thing
      > is, the actual _content_ of the course was great.
      > It was the presentation format that was deadly.
      > PowerPoint slide after PowerPoint slide, dense with
      > text. "Presenters" doing little more than reading
      > the slides. We could follow along by reading the
      > slides too, or by reading the copies of the slides
      > they gave in the 3-inch binders. Fortunately, we
      > were being paid to be there.
      >
      > The idea that a live training class is and should be
      > the preferred method of training is simply wrong.
      > In some situations and for some people it may be the
      > best method, but that depends on so many factors
      > that it is impossible to support the generalization.
      > Those factors include the quality of the content,
      > the skill of the trainer, the learning style of the
      > participant, the day of the week, the time of day,
      > the facility and equipment, the other things on the
      > participant's schedule, traffic, the other things on
      > the participant's mind, whether one of the other
      > participants is obnoxious, distance to the course,
      > cost, and numerous other elements that can all
      > affect the success of a live training course.
      >
      > Further, it's not as if Scouters will never see
      > another Scouter outside of training courses. Good
      > heavens, they are all over the place at Scouting
      > events -- and interaction with other Scouters on a
      > regular basis is one of the main purposes of
      > Roundtable.
      >
      > The purpose of a training organization is not to
      > hold training courses -- that is a far too narrow
      > definition. The purpose of a training organization
      > is to help people acquire the knowledge and skill
      > they need to do their jobs. It doesn't matter _how_
      > that knowledge and skill is transmitted to people
      > who need it -- live classes, online courses,
      > one-on-one discussions, self-study of course
      > materials, or independent research. The trainer's
      > job is to facilitate any and every method that will
      > help people quickly acquire the knowledge and skill
      > they need; not limit, restrict, or channel access to
      > needed information.
      >
      > Dan Kurtenbach
      > Fairfax, VA
      >
      >
      >
      > [Non-text portions of this message have been
      > removed]
      >
      >



      ____________________________________________________________________________________
      Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page.
      http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
    • Gerry Moon
      no ascertaining if there is a understanding of the material .... This one caught my eye. Let s be blunt - most of our training is quantitative, NOT
      Message 2 of 30 , Mar 4 6:08 PM
      • 0 Attachment
        "no ascertaining if there is a understanding of the material"....

        This one caught my eye. Let's be blunt - most of our training is
        quantitative, NOT qualitative - it is not an exercise wherein one
        demonstrates competency or even a grasp of the material before one is
        awarded the completion card. It is an endurance test. If you can sit
        all the way thru to the end, you get a trained card. We aren't fooling
        too many. Then again, the majority of us are not trained trainers - we
        are folks that do this in the hopes that we can help others along. We
        are those that can stand and speak before a group. Some of us are
        absolutely FANTASTIC presenters. Some of us are on the other end of
        that curve. Some of us have districts where training is the law of the
        land and the vast majority understand it's something the need to do;
        and there are districts where there is NO training and hasn't been for
        a very long time.

        We aren't testing anyone - or at least it's not part of the plan to do
        so. There is a (my perception) huge swath of leaders that cannot or
        will not come to a training day and sit thru one or two courses to be
        a "trained leader" - under any circumstances, unless it's mandatory -
        and if it comes to that, then they will bow out.

        I detest "e-learning" - I don't learn much from it, but that is just MY
        learning style. I do a lot of it on my job - I work for the 4th largest
        software company on the planet. I'd rather have an ILT (instructor-led
        training) any day - but it's not cost effective to have that as the
        ONLY method available. E-learning, I can do at home or away from the
        office. It's cheap, it's available 24x7 and portable.

        Like it or not, it is a VIABLE way to get leaders trained. Only the
        quality suffers - nature of the beast. Certainly, it's not everyone's
        PREFERRED METHOD, but if it reaches even a sliver of those that
        can't/won't come to a sit-down session, then it is, as I read over and
        over again, "better than nothing" - slightly.

        Resistance is futile, though and it's not going to go away. I hope to
        be able to spend less time being disappointed with the new training and
        more time figuring out how to make it work.

        Sorry to vent. I just had a rough OLS-WL weekend.

        Gerry Moon
        Orlando, FL



        --- In scouter_t@yahoogroups.com, "apatschin75" <tttrack@...> wrote:
        >
        > I personally think that "self-study" is one of the least effective
        > methods of training we have started using in BSA.
        >
        > No feedback, no sharing of ideas, no ascertaining if there is a
        > understanding of the material. Learning in a vaccum!
        >
        > What is even more appaling, to me, is that we don't even attempt, in
        > some cases, ascertaining whether a Scouter has even read the material.
        >
        > Guess we may as well give folks a Wood Badge syllabus and when they
        say
        > they are complete, hold the ceremony and give them their beads,
        woggle
        > and neckerchief.
        >
      • NeilLup@aol.com
        ... Hello, With respect and not meaning to be attacking you, I believe that what you have posted is a strong symptom of problems that I have seen in many
        Message 3 of 30 , Mar 4 6:52 PM
        • 0 Attachment
          In a message dated 3/4/08 10:59:43 AM, tttrack@... writes:


          > I will now bow out. I understand I'm not going to convice folks, and
          > they are not going to convice me that self-study is a good method of
          > training.
          >

          Hello,

          With respect and not meaning to be attacking you, I believe that what you
          have posted is a strong symptom of problems that I have seen in many Scout
          training commitees, training teams etc.

          Training committees and training teams like doing training. That's why
          they got into training. The ideal situation for many trainers is to show up
          well prepared for a good training class, have lots of eager faces waiting for
          them when they arrive, put on the great training and leave to the cheers of
          the assembled multitude.

          What's missing in this picture?

          1) Who GOT those people to the training session? Many trainers really do
          not like recruiting, etc. in some cases, they don't like the physical
          arrangements. In some cases, they don't like writing their own training,
          but prefer a detailed script or course outline they can follow. But it does
          ask the question "How does it happen that all those eager faces are there?
          Who got them there?"

          2) How 'bout the people that, for a variety of reasons, won't or can't go
          to the training class. What happens for them?

          This is a topic of real frustration for me, as you can see. I know of a
          trainer who runs an outstanding Boy Scout basic training course using the course
          guide from the 1990s. He refuses to change to the newer course guide.
          He requires 6 weekdays and a weekend. In terms of quality and of information
          given, the course is superb. He does make the effort to recruit, but
          it is strictly recruiting to his course and his course plan requiring
          attendance at all sessions.

          He runs the course once per year and gets 10-15 people. There are probably
          100-200 new leaders per year in his service area who need training. If you
          ask him about them, he will say "We held the training and it is available
          for them."

          This is the dilemma and debate. Do we, as trainers, run training courses
          or do we get people trained?

          I grant you that this trainer may be a bit extreme. But isn't the
          difference between him and the leader that says that self-study is not a good method
          of training a difference of degree rather than a difference of kind. I would
          suggest that self-study IS a good method of training, when done right.
          Arguably group training is a better method and attempting to encourage leaders to
          go to group training is probably doing them the greatest service. However,
          it is our job to get people trained and saying "You didn't go to group
          training, group training is the only good way, so tough nuggets, you're
          out of luck, there's nothing for you" is, I believe, not doing our job.

          With proper mentoring, one can learn a great deal through self-study and
          through personal coaching. For some leaders, it may be the only
          alternatives. As Ida has said, on-line training is a type of self-study and it can
          be powerful.

          I try to remember BP's wise saying about baiting the hook with the kind of
          food that the fish likes. We like group training. But what kind of food do
          the fish like?

          Best wishes,

          Neil Lupton


          **************
          It's Tax Time! Get tips, forms, and advice on AOL
          Money & Finance.
          (http://money.aol.com/tax?NCID=aolprf00030000000001)


          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • Glen Hoshizaki
          This is actually a huge topic, with many facets. I ve been involved with e-learning for considerably over a decade, many times as a student, sometimes as
          Message 4 of 30 , Mar 4 9:51 PM
          • 0 Attachment
            This is actually a huge topic, with many facets.

            I've been involved with e-learning for considerably over a decade,
            many times as a student, sometimes as faculty, and a few years ago I
            was one of the founding members of a healthcare system's regional
            e-learning committee. Thus, I've seen really good e-learning programs
            and really bad ones. Where I've been on the student end, the most
            enjoyable e-learning programs have been the instructor-led ones (yes,
            e-learning can be instructor-led).

            Glen

            --- In scouter_t@yahoogroups.com, "Gerry Moon" <gerrymoon32817@...> wrote:
            >
            > I detest "e-learning" - I don't learn much from it, but that is just MY
            > learning style. I do a lot of it on my job - I work for the 4th largest
            > software company on the planet. I'd rather have an ILT (instructor-led
            > training) any day - but it's not cost effective to have that as the
            > ONLY method available. E-learning, I can do at home or away from the
            > office. It's cheap, it's available 24x7 and portable.
            >
            > Like it or not, it is a VIABLE way to get leaders trained. Only the
            > quality suffers - nature of the beast. Certainly, it's not everyone's
            > PREFERRED METHOD, but if it reaches even a sliver of those that
            > can't/won't come to a sit-down session, then it is, as I read over and
            > over again, "better than nothing" - slightly.
          • Alpvalsys@aol.com
            In a message dated 3/4/2008 10:52:44 A.M. EST, Corinna wrote:
            Message 5 of 30 , Mar 5 5:36 AM
            • 0 Attachment
              In a message dated 3/4/2008 10:52:44 A.M. EST, Corinna wrote:

              < For a new leader the classroom training is usually best. Besides skipping
              over information (self-study) or being distracted (online training), it's
              great to have Q&A and discussions. >

              At last night's District Committee meeting I mentioned that I've registered
              to take Youth Protection and SA/SSD training at our upcoming Institute of
              Scouting. Somebody asked why I'd signed up for them when on-line training is
              available. It's simple; I know I'll get more out of it in a classroom
              situation than I'll ever get sitting in front of the tube (which is when the
              District Commissioner made his comment about all the e-mails I forward to him
              <VBG>). Classroom training is a good refresher for us old timers, too.

              Ralph V. Balfoort, UC
              I used to be a beaver (NE III-135)
              In the Beaver Patrol as a Scout
              And still Ktemaque (Beaver) Chapter,
              Kittan Lodge #364, OA






              **************It's Tax Time! Get tips, forms, and advice on AOL Money &
              Finance. (http://money.aol.com/tax?NCID=aolprf00030000000001)


              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            • Dan Kurtenbach
              [Neil Lupton wrote:] I know of a trainer who runs an outstanding Boy Scout basic training course using the course guide from the 1990s. He refuses to change
              Message 6 of 30 , Mar 5 6:31 AM
              • 0 Attachment
                [Neil Lupton wrote:]
                I know of a trainer who runs an outstanding Boy Scout basic training course using the course guide from the 1990s. He refuses to change to the newer course guide. He requires 6 weekdays and a weekend. In terms of quality and of information given, the course is superb . . . He runs the course once per year and gets 10-15 people. There are probably 100-200 new leaders per year in his service area who need training.
                [/Neil]

                This reminds me of an episode of the television show "M*A*S*H." When Dr. Winchester first arrives, he is something of a perfectionist in the operating room. While the wounded are stacking up outside, he is making sure his stitches are neat.

                [Neil continued:]
                This is the dilemma and debate. Do we, as trainers, run training courses or do we get people trained?
                [/Neil]

                Scouts and parents aren't going to care _how_ Scoutmaster Tom learned his stuff; all that matters to them is that he learned it. It doesn't matter a bit to them if he is wearing a "Trained" strip -- that only matters to the folks who compile statistics. Which bottom line should we really be looking at?

                Dan Kurtenbach
                Fairfax, VA
              • gottshalld@aol.com
                Neil brings up several important questions and comments on a training course that I have helped staff for the past 10 years. First, Neil asks Who GOT those
                Message 7 of 30 , Mar 5 11:57 AM
                • 0 Attachment
                  Neil brings up several important questions and comments on a training
                  course that I have helped staff for the past 10 years.


                  First, Neil asks "Who GOT those people to the training session?"

                  The answer is that the trainee did. In our life of ever competing
                  priorities, the trainee felt that the training was worth his time,
                  money and effort. There is a difference between recruiting and
                  promoting. Training committees promote their courses through council
                  web site, district mailings, round table presentations, and providing
                  an excellent training experience. Commissioners identify and recruit
                  trainees through the rechartering process and unit visitation.

                  As a trained unit leader, I encourage new leaders in my unit to make
                  the time to take training for their position. I state unequivocally
                  that the best possible BSA program can only be delivered by trained BSA
                  leaders. Do you want to provide the best possible program for your
                  son? If so, go get trained.


                  Second, Neil asks "How 'bout the people that, for a variety of reasons,
                  won't or can't go to the training class. What happens for them?"

                  The answer is if they won't go, they have made a the decision, right or
                  wrong, that class-based training was not worth their time. As has been
                  discussed over the past several days, there are other modes of training
                  that are more flexible from a logistical standpoint. These are
                  mentoring and self-study. Is there a down side to these modes?
                  Absolutely. You lose the group interaction and first-hand experiences
                  of other leaders, both trainees and trainers. To a certain extent, you
                  lose out on networking opportunities.

                  The answer is if they can't go "to a particular course," other class
                  opportunities should be made available. This can be done
                  inter-district or inter-council. If they can't make those dates,
                  mentoring and self-study are viable options.


                  In our council, we provide both council-wide and district training
                  opportunities. Training committees schedule, staff, promote, and
                  prepare for these opportunities. They can be provided as stand-alone
                  events both as local unit and as district-wide opportunities. They are
                  provided at district round tables, and integrated into other district
                  and council programs. I am sure that this is similar to most training
                  programs. From this, we can see that training opportunities are not
                  the problem.

                  Neil is correct. Within my district, which serves 12 towns and a local
                  Air Force base, we probably have 25 troops, which register about 400
                  adults with a turnover of about 100 leaders each year. We are well
                  below the National recommended number of unit commissioners for the
                  number of units registered. Several of our district committees are
                  "Committees of One or None." The district Boy Scout Training Committee
                  has a standing committee of less than five, most holding significant
                  unit leadership roles in addition to supporting the district.

                  Some of those troops have close to 100% trained adults, many Wood Badge
                  trained. Some have none. I have found that units come in two
                  categories:

                  - Unit thinks that training is critical to running a quality program.
                  - Unit thinks that if training was that important, it would be required.

                  Some of the latter units also have a culture of not participating in
                  district or council program at all. They "do it on their own". The
                  "Vanilla" Scoutmaster-Specific Training is offered twice a year within
                  the council. The "Vanilla" Outdoor Leader Skills is offered once a
                  year within the council. Over the past several years, these courses
                  were canceled due to lack of interest or logistical issues. This makes
                  it very difficult to fill upcoming Wood Badge courses.

                  The course Neil spoke of entitled Scoutmaster Fundamentals Plus. It is
                  provided as a district training course and is open to all adult leaders
                  within the council. The course runs six evenings, a weekend, and a
                  closing banquet. While the course is based upon a more historical
                  format, the course content covers the current training continuum for
                  the following training modules:

                  Boy Scout Fast Start
                  New Leader Essentials
                  Boy Scout Specific Training
                  Troop Committee Challenge
                  Outdoor Leader Skills

                  It relies heavily on the patrol method, with each participant having
                  the opportunity to be a patrol leader and assistant patrol leader,
                  participating in a PLC, and leading a patrol meeting. It provides
                  background in small group dynamics (utilizing White Stag leadership
                  competencies), develops "friendly" inter-patrol competition, and
                  emphasizes the importance of a boy-led troop. It provides role-playing
                  scenarios in areas of both adult and youth conflict resolution and the
                  use of reflection as a tool.

                  Hands-on scout skills development is provided in the following areas:

                  Knots and Lashings
                  Map and Compass
                  First Aid
                  Games

                  Presentation skills are also reviewed and each participant selects,
                  develops, and presents "real-life" skill instruction, with their own
                  developed aids, to their patrol with each member providing feedback and
                  evaluation.

                  We are currently in Week Three of the course and have 19 participants
                  and a staff of 10.

                  A couple things to note:

                  - Troops who attend the course have a tendency to keep coming back.
                  Course evaluations note the "added value" of the course content.

                  - Troops who attend the course encourage Cub Leaders from associated
                  packs to attend. Course evaluations note the "big picture" perspective
                  of the course.

                  - Participants want to come back and staff the course because they had
                  fun and see the staff having fun. On average, 20 % of the staff are
                  new.

                  - Staff provide "lifetime support" to participants. If participants
                  have a question or a need, they can call their troop guides. We
                  develop relationships over a two month period. This provides a level
                  of trust and understanding not developed in a one-off course.

                  The trainer that Neil calls out has served his unit, district, and
                  council since long before its inception in 1993. He was a Scoutmaster
                  for over 20 years. He successfully directed Council JLT for over a
                  decade. He is 4-bead Wood Badger and two time Philmont Crew adviser.
                  He has served a District Boy Scout Round Table Commissioner, Council
                  Training Chair, District Training Chair, and developed and presented
                  "Supplemental Training" before that was what it was called, including
                  Low-Impact Camping. If commitment to excellence is "extreme", I guess
                  both he and I are extreme ... extremely committed to making sure that
                  unit leaders have the best possible chance to provide the best possible
                  program.


                  Scouting is about commitment. Commitment from the Chartered
                  Organization to ensure quality adult leadership. Commitment from the
                  Troop Committee Chairman to get trained and require training for his
                  Scoutmaster. Commitment from the Scoutmaster to get trained and
                  require training for his Assistants. Commitment from the Council and
                  District to ensure quality adult leadership. Commitment from training
                  committees to provide excellent training experiences.


                  The frustration comes when some are willing pencil-whip 100 adults a
                  year through "training" and consider it a success and that providing a
                  tool box of resources for the ultimate Scout Adventure to 20 is
                  considered a failure.


                  As Harold says "Every boy deserves a trained leader." He is training
                  20 now. Who will step up a train the next 20? We have open seats for
                  as many as want to be trained in February 2009.

                  Just my 2 cents ...

                  Dave Gottshall
                  Member - Flintlock District Training Committee
                  Boston Minuteman Council
                  Current Member of 2009 SMF+ Staff - "Laura's Leopards"
                  Past Proud Scoutmaster of "Gottshall's Goats"
                • apatschin75
                  Said I was gonna bow out, but am intrigued!!! You are running the old format with the new information? Tom Travis
                  Message 8 of 30 , Mar 5 1:02 PM
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Said I was gonna bow out, but am intrigued!!!

                    You are running the old format with the new information?

                    Tom Travis
                  • NeilLup@aol.com
                    My colleague Dave Gottshall and I often don t see things the same. This is not in any way bad. He has presented the opposite side of the post which I made.
                    Message 9 of 30 , Mar 5 4:47 PM
                    • 0 Attachment
                      My colleague Dave Gottshall and I often don't see things the same. This is
                      not in any way bad.

                      He has presented the opposite side of the post which I made. I hope that
                      the listmembers here will read both posts and combine the information presented
                      to improve training in their area.

                      Best wishes,

                      Neil Lupton


                      **************
                      It's Tax Time! Get tips, forms, and advice on AOL
                      Money & Finance.
                      (http://money.aol.com/tax?NCID=aolprf00030000000001)


                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    • Dan Kurtenbach
                      [Dave Gottshall wrote:] The frustration comes when some are willing pencil-whip 100 adults a year through training and consider it a success and that
                      Message 10 of 30 , Mar 5 5:11 PM
                      • 0 Attachment
                        [Dave Gottshall wrote:]
                        The frustration comes when some are willing pencil-whip 100 adults a
                        year through "training" and consider it a success and that providing a
                        tool box of resources for the ultimate Scout Adventure to 20 is
                        considered a failure.
                        [/Dave]

                        But again, missing the point. You're talking about which kind of training has more good stuff in it. Doesn't matter. Irrelevant. The elite, comprehensive course and the standard butt-in-chair course are equally ineffective for the leader who isn't there.

                        As trainers in the Boy Scouts of America, our constituents are the Scouts whose adult leaders don't have the skills and information they need to do their jobs. Our mission is to reach and teach those leaders.

                        Now, running a training course for leaders who are highly committed to learning is not exactly challenging, and, frankly, not particularly important. Those leaders will find out what they need to know, and pick up the skills they need to have, regardless of how good or how poor one particular training course is. Their Scouts are in good hands regardless.

                        The challenge is reaching and teaching the leaders who can't or won't show up at a central location at an appointed hour, or who show up but don't really pay attention, or who don't do well with lecture-type training. Even if those leaders are too busy or work weekends or are lazy or learn better visually or think they don't need any stinking training, their Scouts -- our constituents -- still deserve good programs.

                        Our standard of performance isn't how good our training courses are; it is whether we are serving those Scouts by reaching and teaching the leaders who need it.

                        Dan Kurtenbach
                        Fairfax, VA
                      • gottshalld@aol.com
                        Dan brings up two points that I would like to comment on: Dan says The challenge is reaching and teaching the leaders who can t or won t show up at a central
                        Message 11 of 30 , Mar 6 1:27 PM
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Dan brings up two points that I would like to comment on:

                          Dan says "The challenge is reaching and teaching the leaders who can't
                          or won't show up at a central location at an appointed hour, or who
                          show up but don't really pay attention, or who don't do well with
                          lecture-type training. Even if those leaders are too busy or work
                          weekends or are lazy or learn better visually or think they don't need
                          any stinking training, their Scouts -- our constituents -- still
                          deserve good programs."

                          As Neil, I, and others have noted previously, there are at least three
                          different training modes available: class training, mentoring, and
                          self-study. As part of district or council training committees, we can
                          and should promote all modes of training.

                          As a district trainer, for the vast majority of my responsibilities, my
                          constituents are adult unit leaders, not youth members. What we fail to
                          impart to those adult unit leaders is that their constituents, the
                          unit's youth, are being cheated of the best possible program through
                          their recalcitrance to participate in training; ANY mode of training.

                          IMHO, it is not the district trainers responsibility to chase down
                          those who choose not to be trained. It is our responsibility to provide
                          the best available training experience possible and to promote all
                          modes of training. It is the responsibility of unit commissioners to
                          remind units of the importance of training and to provide information
                          regarding training opportunities. It is the responsibility of the IH,
                          COR, and CC to "make" training a part of the unit leaders required
                          tasks to ensure that the best possible program is being provided to the
                          unit's youth.

                          Dan also says "Our standard of performance isn't how good our training
                          courses are; it is whether we are serving those Scouts by reaching and
                          teaching the leaders who need it."

                          To the first part of this statement, I strongly disagree. As a district
                          trainer, we provide opportunities for training. That training needs to
                          be the BEST it can be. It needs to be engaging, informative, and
                          entertaining. At the end of each course, participants should leave with
                          the realization that BSA training is worth the time, money, and effort.
                          They need to go back to their unit talking about what they learned and
                          how it will help them make THEIR unit better. If course training is not
                          an option, then another mode can be utilized.

                          We know all adult leaders need training, whether they know it or not.
                          We know every unit will benefit from having trained adult leaders. We
                          also know that we can not make adult leaders take training. They must
                          to want to be trained.

                          As far as standards go, metric measure what you design them to measure.
                          For BSA training, attendance is almost meaningless. As Dan noted, adult
                          leaders that are coerced into attending training get a card and little
                          more. The bottom line is successful boy-led units, more time than not,
                          have WELL trained leaders. Those leaders know the value of quality
                          training.

                          Just my two cents ... your mileage may vary

                          Dave Gottshall
                          Flintlock District Training Committee
                          Boston Minuteman Council
                        • Dan Kurtenbach
                          In a thoughtful post, Dave Gottshall outlines one philosophical view of our role as trainers: IMHO, it is not the district trainers responsibility to chase
                          Message 12 of 30 , Mar 6 5:58 PM
                          • 0 Attachment
                            In a thoughtful post, Dave Gottshall outlines one philosophical view of our role as trainers:

                            "IMHO, it is not the district trainers responsibility to chase down
                            those who choose not to be trained. It is our responsibility to provide
                            the best available training experience possible and to promote all
                            modes of training. It is the responsibility of unit commissioners to
                            remind units of the importance of training and to provide information
                            regarding training opportunities. It is the responsibility of the IH,
                            COR, and CC to "make" training a part of the unit leaders required
                            tasks to ensure that the best possible program is being provided to the
                            unit's youth."

                            At the same time, Dave notes a big caveat:

                            "For BSA training, attendance is almost meaningless. As Dan noted, adult
                            leaders that are coerced into attending training get a card and little
                            more."

                            In essence, _this_ philosophy of the trainer's role is: We can only help the ones who affirmatively come to training with a genuine desire to learn. We can promote training, we can try to convince leaders to come out for training, we can urge them to get everything out of it that they can, but in the end, it is up to them.

                            That sounds reasonable.

                            But what about the rest? What about all those other leaders out there? Sad -- but not our problem, right? We wring our hands, and ask "How can we get these people to training?" all the while knowing that we can't, or that for many of them, it wouldn't matter anyway.

                            This is why I think this view is fundamentally flawed. We should not just write off a large percentage of our leadership corps. For the sake of their Scouts, we should not write them off. If our job is just to teach the easy ones, the ones who would get out and learn what they need to know anyway, then we aren't making much of a contribution to Scouting.

                            I don't think the question should be "How can we get these people to training?" I think it should be "How can we get training to these people?" That's not a job for UCs or CORs or IHs. We're the trainers. It's our job.

                            Dan Kurtenbach
                            Fairfax, VA
                          • Dan Kurtenbach
                            I would just like to expand a little bit on my last comments on this issue. I concluded that post with: I don t think the question should be How can we get
                            Message 13 of 30 , Mar 7 11:20 AM
                            • 0 Attachment
                              I would just like to expand a little bit on my last comments on this issue. I concluded that post with: "I don't think the question should be 'How can we get these people to training?' I think it should be 'How can we get training to these people?' That's not a job for UCs or CORs or IHs. We're the trainers. It's our job."

                              The design of our current training system fails, what, 25%, 40%, even 60% [?] of our Scout leaders either completely or to a significant degree because it makes no provision for those who do not seek out training or those who don't have a willingness to learn. And yes, I understand the counter-argument that it is really those leaders who are failing -- both themselves and their Scouts -- by not taking advantage of training. Granted. But that doesn't change the fact that those "training failures" are out there in large numbers leading Scouts, having poor programs, causing some boys to leave Scouting and other boys to not join. Our object has to be to reduce those numbers.

                              Our current system is built on the notion that "Training" offers leaders something that they can't get anywhere else.

                              However, all the knowledge and skill that a Scouter needs (and far more than he could get in any training course) is all around him or her already. It is in publications he already has on hand or that are easily accessible: The Boy Scout Handbook, the Scoutmaster Handbook, the Fieldbook, the Troop Committee Guide, the Wilderness Training Manual, etc., etc. It is out on the Internet in more forms than can possibly be counted. And all of that "real world" experience, and the contacts with other Scouters that are touted as the main advantages of "live" training courses? Well, those same people are already all around, too. They are at Roundtable and Camporees and Merit Badge clinics, and maybe in a Scouter's own unit. It is all there; and a lot of it is available "on demand" for those folks who like their information delivered "just in time."

                              What Training attempts to do is synthesize, summarize, prioritize, and analyze selected pieces of that information, put it in context, and provide the Scouter with an (at least rudimentary) understanding of how it is all supposed to work, what is important, and what he or she is supposed to do. A good training course can do that, and do it very, very well, for a Scouter who is open to the experience. We also know that we have a lot of mediocre and marginal training courses out there that don't provide much help even to the willing Scouter, and we have a lot of Scouters who attend training courses but aren't really engaged regardless of how good the course is.

                              Thus it isn't the training course that people need; the training course is just a vehicle. Rather, it is the right skill, the right knowledge, the right experience, and the right understanding that people need. How leaders get the right skill, the right knowledge, the right experience, and the right understanding is pretty much irrelevant. What matters is that they get it. A good training course can do it for a willing Scouter. I see our challenge as finding ways to do it for everyone else.
                              I think the place to start, for each leadership position, is to ask: What does this leader need to know, and when does he/she need to know it? I think that with that information, we can then begin to understand the learning needs of every leader from the very beginning of the leadership lifecycle. From there, we can begin to figure out how to get the needed skill, knowledge, experience, and understanding to that leader at or before the time he/she needs it.

                              And you know, that doesn't require any changes at all to how we currently do training. So, the folks who think our mission is simply to put on good training courses can continue right on doing what they are doing, the folks who think we have other obligations can do what they need to do, and neither group will get in the other's way.

                              Dan Kurtenbach
                              Fairfax, VA
                            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.