Re: Scoutmaster Training Certification - Long
golden cliff (c60clg1@CORN.CSO.NIU.EDU)
Fri, 5 May 1995 00:32:12 -0500
On Wed, 3 May 1995, Marc Solomon wrote:
> At 05:52 PM 5/2/95 -0500, golden cliff wrote:
> >I believe they should give Scoutmastership
> >Fundamentals a 5 year certification. After 5 years, if the Scoutmaster
> >has not recertified by taking a course or teaching on staff, his
> >certification would expire and he would no longer be considered trained.
> >This would encourage trained leaders to continue updating their leader
> >training. With the many changes that occur in the Scouting program, it
> >is vital to keep our adult leaders current on all the latest changes.
> >It would also keep their units in focus on the primary aims of Scouting
> >by reviewing those aims as a student or instructor.
> >It would also give many Scouters additional incentive for volunteering
> >to instruct on training staff.
> There are other ways in which Scouters can stay current on all the latest
> changes. The best way I know of is to have a well-trained and up to date
> Commissioners Staff, that gets out word to all the Scouters about changes in
> the program, policy, and procedures. Your Commissioners Staff is a vital
> link between Council/District and the individual units. It is their job to
> get the word out. The next way to get the information out is to have the
> Scouter attend the roundtables. All changes to the program should be
> announced there. The last method I can think of is to have a decent council
> and/or district newsletter. Both our council and our district puts out such
> a newsletter and an important section in those newsletters is what changes
> have occurred to Scouting policy ans procedures on both the National and
> Council levels.
I agree that the above methods are excellent ways to keep leaders
informed. In addition to being a Scoutmaster, I am a former Roundtable
Commissioner and currently a District Commissioner <Hopefully I will
retire in June as DC>. I think you miss one point. Recertification is not ONLY
about updating people on changes. I doubt there are many annual changes in CPR,
First Aid, Safe Swim, or
Safety Afloat. We still need annual recertification. We need to review,
resharpen skills, and be reminded of their importance. Are the
fundamentals of the Scouting program less important to us. Are they
worth a few days every five years. <If you took it in 1995, your done for
the century, review wouldn't be required until the year 2,000.> I don't
think that is unreasonable.
> While having Scouters retake the Fundamentals as a student or an instructor
> in order to refocus the aims of their units might be helpful, I feel the
> more experienced Scouters might be bored going through ALL the fundamentals
> again. This boredeom would affect their enthusiasm for the course and the
> lowered enthusiasm would adversely effect the new Scouters who really need
> this course.
I just helped staff a SMF course last month. I've been a Scoutmaster for
18 years, I wasn't bored at all by the course. It was review for me, but
I still picked up a few things. Few of us are so knowledgeable that we
can't learn something from our fellow Scouters. When the basic
fundamentals of Scouting bore me, I'll know it's time for me to quit.
Besides, if a Scouter is bored by Scouting basics, and his boredom
affects the enthusiasm of Scouters, then imangine how he might be
affecting the boys he serves.
I found it very refreshing to be around a group of eager new Scouters.
They were filled with enthusiasm and that enthusiasm was exchanged
between the staff and students throughout the course. I had some adults
from my troop taking the course. They were pumped up about Scouting
afterwards. Effective training is a shot in the arm for newbies as well
as experienced Scouters.
> A better method might be to create a review course for trained Scouters.
> This course could cover much of the material covered in the full SMF course
> but leave out most of what hasn't changed in the last five years. A large
> section of the course should allow for two way conversation about the topics
> those going through the review feel they require the most updating about.
> Chances are that such a course can be covered in one day. That fact alone
> would make the course much more marketable.
> | Marc W. Solomon | Unit Commissioner |
> | firstname.lastname@example.org | Sycamore District |
> | email@example.com | Blackhawk Council, IL |
> I use to be a wise old owl . . . Now I am just old
That means we would have to offer two versions of SMF. Two courses,
Certification & Re-certification, requiring two staffs. That would require
training committees to work even harder. What is the benefit of a "short
cut" course for leaders? This recertification would only be once every 5 years.
National Camping School
requires recertification every 5 years. They don't offer any "short cut"
programs, you do the whole thing, one full week.
I believe Scouters should have the option of retaking the SMF course for
recertification OR helping to staff a course. It's not just what you can
get from the course that counts, it also what you can contribute. Being a
good Scouter should mean willingness to share your knowledge with fellow
Scouters once every 5 years. The better the staff, the better the
course. Our program rests on the quality of our volunteers and the
quality of the program they present to boys. Having well trained leaders
who share their knowledge freely with newer upcoming leaders seems to me
to be a way of helping to ensure the quality of program our boys
deserve. Five years is 1,826 days, surely we can spare a few of those
YIS, Cliff Golden
Terry Howerton Sakima Group, Inc. SCOUTER Magazine Kansas City