|
  |
|
|
| Author |
Message |
betsy_in_va
Guest
|
 Posted: Fri Aug 11, 2006 7:03 am Post subject: If You Could Change The DCP Program, What Would You Change? |
 |
|
Just playing Devil's Advocate here, but if you could change the DCP
program, what changes would you make?
I often hear the "regulars" complain that they wind up doing most of
the speeches to get DCPs. There's even a big push in the last month to
start yet another CTM just for the sake of DCP credit. Everyone
ackowledges that the speeches aren't great, it's just for credit. This
seems counter productive... so if I could change the DCP, I think I
would not allow people to get count awards towards a DCP after they've
been earned the first time around. Once you have completed that first
DTM then you do manuals strictly for the joy of doing them. You could
get new awards, just not count them towards the DCP. That would make
clubs concentrate more on getting newer members to get their CTM and
ATMs rather than relying on the same old people.
Just a thought...
Betsy |
|
| Back to top |
|
Regina Litman
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 11, 2006 7:34 pm Post subject: Re: If You Could Change The DCP Program, What Would You Chan |
|
|
I don't favor your suggestion for the following reasons:
1. Someone in multiple clubs may want to do various designations more
than once precisely because they want each club to get credit for such a
designation.
2. Someone who feels that they still have a lot to learn may want to
repeat the CTM/CC program, with the expecation that they will benefit
personally from it. I have two CTMs, and that is one of the reasons I
did the CTM again.
3. When a new Communications manual is issued, experienced Toastmasters
may want to complete it. Another reason I did a second CTM is that I
wanted to work from the C&L manual that was issued in the mid- or late
1990s. Now, looking ahead past the DTM I expect to complete in the
2007-2008 program year, I want to complete the latest version of the
manual for a CC as my next goal after the DTM.
4. A Toastmasters member with a CTM who dropped out along the way may
want to do the CC manual because (1) they feel they need it, and (2)
they want to introduce or re-introduce themselves to the club with the
Icebreaker and other projects contained in this manual.
5. In order to keep members who have earned the CTM/CC and higher
designations interested while adhering to a provision that every speech
at a meeting (except in contests) should be a manual speech, getting DCP
points by earning an additional CTM (now in the form of a CC) and other
designations is a major way to keep old members involved.
As for my suggestions:
1. Revise item 1 to be "2 CCs or CLs" and item 2 to be "2 more CCs or
CLs". This allows clubs to benefit equally from whatever path a new
member chooses to pursue.
2. Remove CLs from items 5 and 6.
3. Revise item 10 to be "2 out of 3 - officer list, October dues
submission, April dues submission" instead of the officer list being a
firm requirement to go along with either dues submission. This way, a
club with annual elections that overlooks sending in the officer list
can still "recover".
4. I'd also like to make a change to the officer training requirement so
that if a club misses the summer time period, they can still "recover".
The reason for my desire to revise the last two is that in some places
where there is a communication breakdown, clubs sometimes learn about
the officer list and summer officer training period too late to get that
point.
I also favor some "pro-rating" to allow newly chartered clubs a shot at
being Distinguished in their first year.
betsy_in_va wrote:
| Quote: | Just playing Devil's Advocate here, but if you could change the DCP
program, what changes would you make?
I often hear the "regulars" complain that they wind up doing most of
the speeches to get DCPs. There's even a big push in the last month to
start yet another CTM just for the sake of DCP credit. Everyone
ackowledges that the speeches aren't great, it's just for credit. This
seems counter productive... so if I could change the DCP, I think I
would not allow people to get count awards towards a DCP after they've
been earned the first time around. Once you have completed that first
DTM then you do manuals strictly for the joy of doing them. You could
get new awards, just not count them towards the DCP. That would make
clubs concentrate more on getting newer members to get their CTM and
ATMs rather than relying on the same old people.
Just a thought...
Betsy
|
--
Please note my correct email address:
rslitman [at-sign] infionline [dot] net |
|
| Back to top |
|
betsy_in_va
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 11, 2006 11:34 pm Post subject: Re: If You Could Change The DCP Program, What Would You Chan |
|
|
| Quote: | getting DCP
points by earning an additional CTM (now in the form of a CC) and other
designations is a major way to keep old members involved.
You're probably right, but it makes me sad to think people wouldn't get |
another CTM just for the joy of doing the projects.
I like your suggestions, especially the first one. In fact, I'll bet
that change happens within the next year--it seems very logical to me. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Colin William
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 11, 2006 11:44 pm Post subject: Re: If You Could Change The DCP Program, What Would You Chan |
|
|
"betsy_in_va" <b7760@keogan.com> wrote in message
news:1155254613.825685.161330@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
| Quote: | Just playing Devil's Advocate here, but if you could change the DCP
program, what changes would you make?
I often hear the "regulars" complain that they wind up doing most of
the speeches to get DCPs. There's even a big push in the last month to
start yet another CTM just for the sake of DCP credit. Everyone
ackowledges that the speeches aren't great, it's just for credit. This
seems counter productive... so if I could change the DCP, I think I
would not allow people to get count awards towards a DCP after they've
been earned the first time around. Once you have completed that first
DTM then you do manuals strictly for the joy of doing them. You could
get new awards, just not count them towards the DCP. That would make
clubs concentrate more on getting newer members to get their CTM and
ATMs rather than relying on the same old people.
|
I thought that there was some rule that a member couldn't directly
contribute to more than one DCP point in a year? That is, they couldn't
contribute both a CTM and a CL, or something like that? Maybe I'm mixed up.
Colin |
|
| Back to top |
|
betsy_in_va
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 11, 2006 11:50 pm Post subject: Re: If You Could Change The DCP Program, What Would You Chan |
|
|
I think you can't contribute more than one CTM or CL per club, maybe
that's what you're thinking of. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Colin William
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 11, 2006 11:58 pm Post subject: Re: If You Could Change The DCP Program, What Would You Chan |
|
|
"betsy_in_va" <b7760@keogan.com> wrote
| Quote: | I think you can't contribute more than one CTM or CL per club, maybe
that's what you're thinking of.
|
Ah, perhaps that's it. So maybe what you need is something more restrictive
on how much one member can contribute? Spread some off the responsibility
around?
Colin |
|
| Back to top |
|
betsy_in_va
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 12, 2006 12:30 am Post subject: Re: If You Could Change The DCP Program, What Would You Chan |
|
|
Hmm, that could work! There would have to be an exception for the DTM,
though, so you could get credit for it and also an AL or ACG.
Colin William wrote:
| Quote: | "betsy_in_va" <b7760@keogan.com> wrote
I think you can't contribute more than one CTM or CL per club, maybe
that's what you're thinking of.
Ah, perhaps that's it. So maybe what you need is something more restrictive
on how much one member can contribute? Spread some off the responsibility
around?
Colin |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Regina Litman
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 12, 2006 6:01 am Post subject: Re: If You Could Change The DCP Program, What Would You Chan |
|
|
Colin William wrote:
| Quote: |
I thought that there was some rule that a member couldn't directly
contribute to more than one DCP point in a year? That is, they couldn't
contribute both a CTM and a CL, or something like that? Maybe I'm mixed up.
Colin
|
If there is such a rule, it's not being enforced. Someone else already
pointed out the obvious example of someone getting a DTM and also
getting credit for the (using the old names here) ATM-G and AL. I've
also seen people getting their (again, using the old names) ATM-B and
CL, as a result of going in two directions at once after getting the
(one more use of the old name) CTM.
Under the new tracks, a new member may work on a CL and a CC at the same
time, and I'm sure that, if it's permitted, this person will apply for
the CL and CC with hopes of getting DCP credit.
--
Please note my correct email address:
rslitman [at-sign] infionline [dot] net |
|
| Back to top |
|
Tom
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 12, 2006 7:25 am Post subject: Re: If You Could Change The DCP Program, What Would You Chan |
|
|
Regina Litman wrote:
....
| Quote: | I also favor some "pro-rating" to allow newly chartered clubs a shot at
being Distinguished in their first year.
|
We chartered in May 1, 2005. Year ending June 2006 we had President's.
I guess it depends on the charter date but a full year should do it as
long as you have one or two points from your club mentor. I can see
the advantage to your suggestion, but how could it be done? Maybe
eliminate the "x more ---" from the list?
Tom Mahoney, CTM
President - Franklin & Marshall College Toastmasters |
|
| Back to top |
|
Regina Litman
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 12, 2006 9:41 am Post subject: Re: If You Could Change The DCP Program, What Would You Chan |
|
|
betsy_in_va wrote:
| Quote: | Just playing Devil's Advocate here, but if you could change the DCP
program, what changes would you make?
|
I searched on Google Groups and found some ideas I posted back in
February 2002. Although I posted four ideas then, I have deleted a new
category I came up with that dealt with contest participation above the
club level. At the time, I was a frustrated Area Governor who was not
seeing much participation in Area Contests. I now realize that contest
participation should not be a DCP category in itself. I think that some
of the new CL projects may be fulfilled by taking on contest roles, so
this may contribute indirectly to a DCP point.
These are posted verbatim from what I said before, including the
references to the old designations.
1. A club that does not get four officers trained in the first time
period (June through August) but does get at least four officers trained
in the second one (December through February) would get one half (1/2)
point. However, the reverse would not be true (in other words, a club
that gets the four trained in the northern hemisphere summer would not
get the half point if they missed out on getting the four in the second
training period). The purpose of this would be to give clubs that missed
out the first time around an incentive to get the four or more officers
trained the second time.
2. A club that gets exactly three CTMs in the year would get the full
point for the first two CTMs plus one half (1/2) point for that third
CTM. However, a club that only gets one CTM would not get the half point
in the column called "Two CTMs"; the half point could only be applied to
the column called "Two additional CTMs".
3. A club that gets exactly six or seven new members in the year would
get the full point for the first four members plus one half (1/2) point
for those two or three additional members. However, a club that gets
just one to three new members would not get the half point in the column
called "Four new members"; the half point could only be applied to the
column called "Four additional new members". Also, no fractional points
would be awarded for having exactly five new members in the year, and to
keep from having to deal with quarter points, getting exactly seven new
members would give the same total points as getting exactly six new
ones. Still need an incentive to jump to that eighth new member!
--
Please note my correct email address:
rslitman [at-sign] infionline [dot] net |
|
| Back to top |
|
Regina Litman
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 12, 2006 9:45 am Post subject: Re: If You Could Change The DCP Program, What Would You Chan |
|
|
betsy_in_va wrote:
| Quote: | Just playing Devil's Advocate here, but if you could change the DCP
program, what changes would you make?
|
I just posted something I had posted here in February 2002. One day
short of exactly a year later, in February 2003, I posted another
thought regarding my personal pet peeve of requiring a club with annual
elections to send at least four officers to training twice a year
(incidentally, District 38 has chartered a few clubs that meet weekly
and hold semi-annual elections since then):
For clubs that elect officers annually (and that is nearly 100% of the
clubs in District 38, where virtually no clubs meet weekly), the officer
training requirement of four officers trained per training season only
has to be met once but ONLY IF the officer list and BOTH semi-annual
reports are submitted on time.
Alternatively, include the Immediate Past President position as one that
can be counted among the officers trained.
I am finding a strong resistance on the part of officers going TWICE a
year for training. With only seven officers in a club, except when there
has been a mid-term replacement, at least one officer has to be trained
both times.
--
Please note my correct email address:
rslitman [at-sign] infionline [dot] net |
|
| Back to top |
|
Regina Litman
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 12, 2006 9:55 am Post subject: Re: If You Could Change The DCP Program, What Would You Chan |
|
|
Tom wrote:
| Quote: | Regina Litman wrote:
...
I also favor some "pro-rating" to allow newly chartered clubs a shot at
being Distinguished in their first year.
We chartered in May 1, 2005. Year ending June 2006 we had President's.
I guess it depends on the charter date but a full year should do it as
long as you have one or two points from your club mentor. I can see
the advantage to your suggestion, but how could it be done? Maybe
eliminate the "x more ---" from the list?
Tom Mahoney, CTM
President - Franklin & Marshall College Toastmasters
|
Here's what I posted back in February 2004 regarding this "pro-rating".
Ironically, when I went into Google Groups to look for this specific
topic, I found two other messages I posted with my ideas, so I posted
them here in other messages tonight.
Clubs chartered between 7/1 and 8/31 - same as existing clubs.
(Presumably a club chartered in late August has had some contact with
District officials who can train them while they're still in the
chartering process. I don't know if a training date before a club's
charter date can appear on the training report, but I wouldn't have a
problem in a situation in which a budding club's officers were trained
at a District sesion in mid-July, the club got chartered August 31, and
for these officers, the training report showed August 31 as the training
date. When I was an Area Governor, I held a Phase II officer training
session on February 6, and a person from a club that didn't charter
until the following March 23 attended. I put his name down on my report
without a club number.)
Clubs chartered between 9/1 and 2/28 (or 2/29 in leap years) - must have
at least four officers trained once, by the last day in February, but
the period of time in which this training can be conducted begins on the
charter date or 12/1, whichever is earlier.
Clubs chartered between 3/1 and 6/30 - must have at least four officers
trained during the period between charter date and 6/30.
My suggested changes regarding the officer list submission requirement:
Annual clubs chartered any time during the year and semi-annual clubs
chartered between 1/1 and 6/30 - I've never been involved in submitting
a chartering package, so I don't know if an officer list is required to
be enclosed. If it is required, then presumably the club is not even
permitted to charter if it's not enclosed. Therefore, just submitting a
chartering package fulfills this requirement. If it's not required, and
can optionally be submitted later, then the new club would get the
credit for submitting it on time only if it is enclosed in the
chartering package. [August 2006 note - I know now that the chartering
package must include the officer list, so submitting a complete
chartering package would fulfill this requirement under my proposal.]
Semi-annual clubs chartered between 7/1 and 12/31 - They have that
"second chance" opportunity to get one in by 12/31, so no change suggested.
Regarding one semi-annual dues submission on time requirement:
Clubs chartered between 7/1 and 3/31 - No change.
Clubs chartered between 4/1 and 6/30 - The initial dues paid by this
club would fulfill this requirement.
--
Please note my correct email address:
rslitman [at-sign] infionline [dot] net |
|
| Back to top |
|
John Sleigh
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 12, 2006 1:39 pm Post subject: Re: If You Could Change The DCP Program, What Would You Chan |
|
|
Some interesting comments in this thread and the related one on TLI.
One question I have never heard asked (and never considered until this
discussion is should all executive opsitions be required to attend training,
and should they all qualify for DCP and leadership track credit.
I support the tone of Susan's post that that if you are going to do the job
you need to be qualified. A visitor to any of the 10,000 clubs walks away
with a lasting impression of Toastmasters - positive or negative. They call
up that impression when they see Toastmasters on a resume in a subway ad, or
a newspaper publicity piece.
TI (and that includes all of us, too) has a vested ineterest in protecting
the brand.
I suspect that Rich wants to be recognized as the best speaker in the world
this year by a credible organization.
I don't highlight my Toastmasters membership as much as I used to in my
profesional publicity materials simply because of two very negative
reactions from potential clients when I did. I don't deny it either and it
does get a mention a few times on my web site, but it doesn't get as much
attention as I would like to give it, and in my case it deserves.
Toastamsters was a great influence and help in my career as a manager and
more recently as a trainer and pro speaker. Yet there are people out there
with a very bitter taste in their mouth because of their Toastmasters
experience. And the time for me to change their attitude is not when I am
trying to sell my services to them. The time is when I am conducting my
training or being introduced as a speaker. I promote it then, under the
guise of a garage where you can practice - a story I have told several times
on this NG.
How to protect the brand?
At least one person in any club offering its services as a member of the
world wide Toastmasters organiazation must have attended and participated in
the most recent version of club officer training and only that person can
induct a new member. They sign the member application form, which includes
the name of the assigned mentor and perhaps some other quality control
measures.
From the volume of discussion on this NG it is clear that there are quality
problems, and this would be my solution.
It strikes me as odd that Toastmasters can claim in its mission statement to
be
"the leading movement devoted to making effective oral communication a
worldwide reality"
when it cannot inspire the front line officers to buy in to training in the
content of the program.
John Sleigh DTM
Sydney, Australia |
|
| Back to top |
|
Joy
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 12, 2006 1:58 pm Post subject: Re: If You Could Change The DCP Program, What Would You Chan |
|
|
"John Sleigh" <john_sleigh@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
news:1JeDg.10801$rP1.6213@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
| Quote: | Some interesting comments in this thread and the related one on TLI.
One question I have never heard asked (and never considered until this
discussion is should all executive opsitions be required to attend
training, and should they all qualify for DCP and leadership track credit.
I support the tone of Susan's post that that if you are going to do the
job you need to be qualified. A visitor to any of the 10,000 clubs walks
away with a lasting impression of Toastmasters - positive or negative.
They call up that impression when they see Toastmasters on a resume in a
subway ad, or a newspaper publicity piece.
TI (and that includes all of us, too) has a vested ineterest in protecting
the brand.
I suspect that Rich wants to be recognized as the best speaker in the
world this year by a credible organization.
I don't highlight my Toastmasters membership as much as I used to in my
profesional publicity materials simply because of two very negative
reactions from potential clients when I did. I don't deny it either and it
does get a mention a few times on my web site, but it doesn't get as much
attention as I would like to give it, and in my case it deserves.
Toastamsters was a great influence and help in my career as a manager and
more recently as a trainer and pro speaker. Yet there are people out there
with a very bitter taste in their mouth because of their Toastmasters
experience. And the time for me to change their attitude is not when I am
trying to sell my services to them. The time is when I am conducting my
training or being introduced as a speaker. I promote it then, under the
guise of a garage where you can practice - a story I have told several
times on this NG.
How to protect the brand?
At least one person in any club offering its services as a member of the
world wide Toastmasters organiazation must have attended and participated
in the most recent version of club officer training and only that person
can induct a new member. They sign the member application form, which
includes the name of the assigned mentor and perhaps some other quality
control measures.
From the volume of discussion on this NG it is clear that there are
quality problems, and this would be my solution.
It strikes me as odd that Toastmasters can claim in its mission statement
to be
"the leading movement devoted to making effective oral communication a
worldwide reality"
when it cannot inspire the front line officers to buy in to training in
the content of the program.
John Sleigh DTM
Sydney, Australia
|
It is true that a person should be qualified for a position. However,
training doesn't always equal qualification, and some people have experience
in the outside world and are capable of learning from the manual, so they
can do a good job without attending training.
I have known more than one District Governor who attended ever training for
years, but who is definitely not qualified for the position. I spoke with
one DG about one of my clubs that was struggling to stay in existence.
There were only a few experienced Toastmasters in the club, one of whom was
me. Two were a couple in their 80's, and one was a woman who was obviously
burned out on Toastmasters. She was my VP Ed (I was President at the
time), and she wasn't doing anything about scheduling participants for
future meetings. Somehow, we always managed to pull a good meeting together
at the last minute, but I felt I was dragging the club along single-handed.
I asked the DG if there were some way Toastmasters could help to get people
interested again. He said, "You should make them do such and such." I
said, "These are adults. I can't make them do anything." His response?
"Then let the club die." It did.
--
Joy Gaylord, ATM-S, CL
Simi Valley Toastmasters (Dist. 33)
Storytelling & Performing Arts Toastmasters (Dist. 52)
Southern California |
|
| Back to top |
|
Mark Perew
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 12, 2006 4:26 pm Post subject: Re: If You Could Change The DCP Program, What Would You Chan |
|
|
Jean <jean_hf@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
| Quote: | But I am an American and, vast though America is,
there should be some creative solution other than 'then let it die...'
|
There are, however, times when clubs should be allowed (nay, even
encouraged) to die. When I was AG, I spent the majority of my time on a
couple of struggling clubs. I struggled to keep them afloat, brought in new
ideas, reinforced the essentials, helped with recruitment, etc. My
successor did likewise. The following year both clubs finally folded.
--
Mark Perew <perew@squeep.com>
To the world you may be just one person,
but to one person you may be the world. (Source Unknown) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
"Toastmasters
International", "Toastmasters" and the Toastmasters
International emblem are trademarks protected in the United
States, Canada and other countries where Toastmasters Clubs
exist. Unauthorized use is strictly prohibited.
|
|
|
