Leader education

Having recently taken a Venturer WBI course, I can attest that little of the content relates to the running and programming of the section. This is not the fault of the trainers, if anything I have seen the trainers become much more professional over the past several years, but the content they are required by national to cover.

As both a Venturer Advisor and a trainer on a Company Pt 1, there is a challenge in making this an exciting course. The main reason is that the youth run the program with the adult there as an advisor. What the Pt 1 should do is help you to be an effective Advisor, i.e. know when to provide guidance and, in some cases, leadership. It should give you the tools you need to guide the youth as they plan and implement their own program.

Again, this depends on the trainer and what the trainer understands his/her role to be.

No amount of training will help those who are not open to the experience. If you are willing to listen then you will get something from it. All leaders should make the effort to take training. Even if by Internet, if thats the only way it can happen due to distance, time or other factors.

Content as required by National is perhaps an area that can be reviewed/improved or made more relevant. However the course would have to be longer to cover the additional material. I know the courses have been diluted in the past few years so they can fit into a single day for WB1 as an example. WB2 is far more interesting and exposed me to a much more info than I could find on my own. It would be a much different experience if done via the Internet. There is a tremendous energy that comes from a group of cold wet leaders on a night hike. Fun eh!


On the courses I have taken, the trainers have been are dedicated and want to be there. They encourage and want to promote a wide exposure to all the material as put forth by SC. They may infact do more and if time allowed I know they would throw more our way. WB1 is the basic and WB2 has more outdoors and indepth material. Some are fortunate to live within easy access to courses and others have a longer trip. I found the experiences energizing and well worth the time.

BTW I have never seen the WOSM video.
Jim

Recently, I took WB1 in troop. Now having taken 2 WB1's in less than a year, I can tell you not all courses are the same. The first one I took was essentially a snoozefest but the second one was amazing! I was astonished about all the things I learned. Even the "dry" content was made interesting. When I got home, I realized something- the instructors essentially treated us as a colony, pack or troop. We played games, used small groups and large groups plus many other things that are essential to a good meeting. Even our nightly campfires were instruction based - one was formal, one was informal. So even boring content can be made fun and helpful if given the right twist.

Engaging training is the key to WB I success, IMHO. You put it very well. Thanks.

The various WB Course Training Standards are simply an outline of the material that should be covered. How that material is presented is completely up to the course/section leads.

I would prefer to see nationally standardized courses that are the same across the country so that every leader receives the same material with some local options. As a trainer I've seen far to many courses where the material is simply the trainers favourite items or points or beefs. I really like the BSA material where nearly every course is developed from beginning to end. I don't think we need completely scripted material but we do need much better than we have now.

The WOSM videos are, in my opinion, a great way to encourage spirit for those who get it. They're not part of the curriculum but are used if the section leaders want to, the same as any other material. Airy Fairy? I guess some might see it that way. I've used both of them a lot during Module 1 and received many rave reviews. Of course not using them out would save a whopping 8 minutes or so.

Garth

This might fit here when considering excuses to not take training:
I was recently slapped in the face with a huge barrier to training.

Language.

The area I serve is quite culturally diverse, and many people remember Scouting from their youth in a different country. They contribute in a valuable way, yet are hesitant to participate in training because they don't want to be embarrassed by their English skills. I am struggling with this one. These people deserve our resources and knowledge to hone their skills. Any ideas here?

What languages? Would having a translator present help? Contact your local LDS unit for assistance with that. The church's quantity of foreign language speakers is huge.

Garth

Wayne,

An easy answer, but challenging to implement, is to eventually train those who's first language isn't English to become trainers themselves.

In the meantime, what about connecting with WOSM to see if they have any resources.

I hate E TRAINING! That being said, I think for us, its great! (well, at least "good"!) ...

I was one of those Leaders who didn't take a training course for several years after signing up. (Four years, if memory serves me correctly..) I didn't take training because there were no courses offered that fit my work schedule. With shift work, a young family and two jobs, finding a free weekend that had a course offered was more than a bit hard! We even looked far afield to try and find one being offered by a different District or Region (thats how long ago it was!). When we finally got a course that fit the calandar, I was disappointed! WBI was too "basic" for me by then! I wish I could say I didn't learn a thing, but I did learn some new things, just not as much as I wanted to! (or thought I would!) Trainers explained to me that it was because I waited too long and that really much of the program is geared for new Leaders..

Now, jump ahead to this time era! If Etraining had of been available, I could have taken it! Would it have been as good, probably not, but it would have got me started! So, should it be offered? I think that is a positive YES! Lots of our members will still take WBI in the real world but lets offer something for those who cant!

I've tried the ETraining and found it to be a bit dry but no more than sitting through some dry WBI sessions either. Etraining also appeals to some folks more! Not everyone loves or wants the "real" course. I found it covered the material and I never had to leave my house. Lets focus on getting everyone trained first, then worry about how we do it later! Part I by Christmas is good, now lets make it possible in as many formats as we can!

We are not the only owners of disparity in training. I know Alberta Ministry of education publishes statistics on each school, and there is generally great regional disparity in quality and effectiveness of education. The schools have a provincially set curriculum, and still this happens.

What if we were to have a small group of national trainers that can analyze this disparity and coach local training leaders and governors on their team's shortcomings, study their local successes, publish results. Can ALL course evaluations be collected from attendees like the survey done for the E-learning modules we have. We would have a good regional measure of our success this way.

I know training in our council would grow by leaps and bounds if we were measured and helped along. I am not saying we suck here. Most of us fall into a routine of what we consider successful presentation and tend to lose our eye for improvement without some outside influence. Our local training leaders are concerned with too many things to give justice to this, and recruiting trainer mentors for each course (which I think is ideal) is often difficult.

There are some inherent flaws in our training methods like the lack of grading of students. Allowing people to fail courses would improve standards of leadership as long as we don't outright dismiss the people that don't measure up. They should become the job of local Service Scouters who can complete accreditation or weed out the complete duds.

Scout Method.

Are youth involved in training?
Do students have an opportunity for practical exercise in courses? Can a new leader observe and analyze children in structured and unstructured play, can they interact with youth to design and execute a program for them that can be evaluated and debriefed? Can trainers be coaches for students while they are doing this? What if each training team had one or more accredited coach?

I have tried this at courses with great success and miserable failures. The largest barrier to this is that we train as teams. If all the trainers are not comfortable or inspired with this approach, it fails or doesn't happen. There is only so much pain I am willing to go through to make an idea work. If this idea were the standard, and how trainers were taught, we would kick butt! Every time. The willing youth were easy to find. Funny how youth and their leaders are willing to come out to camp or for a day to be an experiment. Especially if they didn't have to pay.

Perhaps if councils spent their trainer development budgets on fewer trainers and supported those few through professional accreditation in various techniques, we would have greater dedication and trainers would return beneficial professional development with loyalty. We would really have to be more careful that we are picking the right people. What about that Rover or Venturer that is considering a carer in adult education? We already have scholarship programs that could be used in addition to local funds. At the same time we could seek out those with professional credentials in lecturing, or coaching, or mentoring etc.

Having just completed WB II (Pack) - Pacific Coast Council, I'm quite surprised by many of these comments. My courses have been more than helpful.

It's interesting that some mentioned WB I is oriented to an Assistant Leader, and WB II is for the Section Leader. In my case, WB I focuses on running great meeting nights and WB II was around running amazing weekend camps. And both courses had general information such as Risk Management, History of Scouting, Involving Youth, Communication Skills, Leadership, etc. thrown in too.

Our trainers did a good job, make the material interesting (jeopardy, skits, scavenger hunts, challenge stations) and everyone knew it was possible to fail (especially for WB II). At the end, each leader sat down with the Course Lead and Section Trainers to review their performance, discuss what could have been done better, and what each candidates' next steps were over the coming months.

I know that e-training is helpful for isolated communities and agreed it should be used - but only by those that can't attend otherwise. The residential courses are held to a high standard (but that's just me), have an actual feeling of Scouting Spirit (I say that from 14 years as a youth member), and provide an opportunity to socialize, bond, share advice, discuss ideas, and become involved in the entire process - rather than reciting, even if understood, a short workshop.

On our course we discussed the issue of residential training and came to the conclusion: those that haven't done it think it's too much time off (1 weekend for WBI, 2.5 for WBII), but everyone that had completed it thought the timeframe was too short and should be extended.

Much of this comes down to the ability and experience of the trainers. No trainer should conduct a course without taking Trainer I (though I can't comment on the quality of that course as I haven't taken it).

I took WB 1 as a beaver leader 6 years ago. the program was billed as all sections, and the 8 students split off with a trainer for about 20 % of the time to focus on their section. I honestly cant recall a thing from it although I am sure I have used a lot. actualy thats not true, I remember being told a pen in the pen pocket of the uniform was wrong.

the folowing year I moved to cubs. the section head at the time told me that training was fine. 1.5 years later we got a new section head. a while later he pointed out that my training was not fine. I forgot about that, and had no time for taking WBI again. had anyone said take it or get out I would have handed them the shirt and left. this summer I took it on line, found it as interesting as the first one and managed to get confirmation that I completed it. I learned more from the online than I did from the in person course.

from what I know of WBII it wouldnt work well on line. I also will probably never have time to take it, which is a shame, but thats how life is.

Courses will inevitably bring standardisation, and, if it is taught in-house, stagnation. Well, at least if it's the only training we have.

The ultiamte education is one which is aqcuired on one's own. We should put more emphasis on "earning one's ticket" and doing things outide of scouting - this will bring a diversity of experience and perspective which will keep scouting interesting and up to date

your right there is no substitute for experience. new leaders need a way to boost that experience, haveing and on line option makes it much easier, and for some better.

your right there is no substitute for experience. new leaders need a way to boost that experience, haveing and on line option makes it much easier, and for some better.

The course you took appears to have been from before WB I was standardized (which is not necessarily the bad thing that jkees suggests it is, the caveat being that regular updating and revision of the course material is vital. What is wrong with having the same basic training right across the country, so that all of our leaders are trained in delivering the basic elements of the Scouts Canada program?). I took my WB I Colony in August of 2010, and it was an awesome course, tailor-made to the new leader. The sections were separated for the full course, except Module 1 (Duty of Care, etc.), and we learned the specifics of the Beaver program over a period of 11 hours, in addition to brainstorming with our trainers and the other leaders in the room. I took it after a year's experience, and my section leader came to it with 4 years' experience, and our program instantly got better, and we both wish we had taken it earlier. Now, with me having WB II, our program has stepped up yet again, especially in the planning and linking areas. I hope that my section leader can do his WB II this year.

I have done all of the available on-line courses, and they pretty much amount to reading the leader handbook. Yes, you get your basic WB I requirement, but it is far from the course that I took from three trainers in August of 2010. I finished Pack in about three hours, and Troop in about the same, i.e. two courses in half the time it took me to do a live Colony course. I suggest taking the e-course, and then doing a live course. Some of the Groups in my Council require the e-course to be done immediately, followed up by the live course within a few months.

WBI and WBII are the basic requirements, and I believe that Scouters should get their section-specific training done as soon as possible, upon which they should build their experience and additional training. This being said, the best Scouters will seek out new training as they can. For me, I'd love to do No Trace training, lightweight camping, and Wilderness First Aid in the near future, as my daughter will be starting in Scouts next fall. As we have no local Company, we will likely start one (if I haven't encouraged someone else to do it by then) as she progresses through Scouts. However, my wife must agree to my throwing her to the wolves (our kids) for these training events.

Without ongoing skills training, we can't meet our Duty of Care and Risk Management requirements at the same time as making our programs more adventurous for the youth. Without the basic WB I training though, a new leader cannot know the basics of the SC program for their section. Start with WB I, First Aid and WB II, and then move on from there.