Scouts-L Mail Archive for February of 1999: Re: CSLBT (4 hours?) formerly, What's new at National?
Re: CSLBT (4 hours?) formerly, What's new at National?
Tue, 23 Feb 1999 02:50:47 EST
In a message dated 99-02-23 01:27:24 EST, Chris Jacobi writes:
<< The problem is that no new cub leader wants to sit and be trained
for much more then 4 hours. It just doesn't make any sense to take
new people who don't know anything and then train them the
whole day. It is much better to give a few hours introductory
training and then later, (after they know what we are talking about)
give another part of the training. >>
But the problem as I see it is that it seems to be like pulling teeth to get
some of the new CS leaders to show up at Basic at all, especially those that
seem to resent the intrusion and probably need it the most. So how do we
expect them to come back for quarterly, or so, updates/refresshers? That
would seem to be even more of a intrusion into peoples lives and less likely
to get the response to a come back invitation.
I've heard of a neighboring council where the professional staff insist on
staying with the 4-hour limit and the trainers end up doing auxillary training
at home or wherever. They do this because they are frustrated at not being
able to give all the information necessary for new leaders to operate with in
4 hours. But the people they are probably reaching are the ones who would
seek out the additional info on their own, the ones who wold go to R/T and
But what about the ones who are there grudgingly because of their over full
schedule, after they receive a "TRAINED" strip they have the recognition that
they have all the BASIC knowledge they will need and most will most likely not
come back for more, IMO.
Our Council still uses the 6-hour schedule and you feel like there are so many
subjects that were only lightly glossed over that you wonder if people are
getting any of it. I guess it seems better to me if you are going to get
probably only one shot at introducing people to the many relevant subjects
that it is better to hit as many as possible in your one sure shot. The
argument can be made, and probably will be, that the many small sessions will
lead to a higher quality training overall, and I tend to agree, IF, you can
get most of them to come back, but that is the problem.
Much like the argument to lower the price of a product to entice more people
to buy it, thus boosting total sales and total profit. However, if the demand
is not constrained by price then you only succeed in lowering your profit
margin. In the case of training new leaders we are mostly constrained with
the new leaders enthusiasm, and their available time.
P.S. Chris and I are from the same council and have served on training teams