In reply to captain paranoia:
I was a bit rushed on Friday. Here's a slightly longer reply...
> I'm a DofE assessor and supervisor with the Scouts [...] Sure enough in one of the expeditions that have already used it, they pressed a button for an asthma attack
Poor training. The team should have been instructed in the effects and treatment of asthma, and how to recognise a genuine emergency.
> I'm struggling to see why you think mobile phones are OK but this type of tracker isn't.
Indeed; both are to be treated as unreliable emergency equipment, and procedures should allow for their not working. A mobile phone used to call up help from a group able to locate themselves is little different to a group using a GPS/GPRS tracker to call for help. The only difference is that the position may be more reliable.
> I'm also a D of E assessor and I agree entirely with you on this. The idea of GPS trackers appalls me; what's the point in getting lost if someone knows exactly where you are?
To find yourself again? There's no real difference to knowing that, if you got lost, someone would come looking for you. Nothing has changed, except that the searchers
might know where you are.
> As another leader, I also fully agree with your comments. I know of one such case of a gold group on a practice who had a SPOT tracker, and instead of being able to see the staff, even from a distance, they instead were instructed to press the "ok" button on the spot tracker every hour, with no other means of communication with their supervisors. The group were running dangerously low on water on their third day, and only by their good fortune of meeting the leader of a totally separate group were they able to get the water they needed, and help with their blisters, all while their supervising team sat blissfully unaware in a nice warm bothy.
That's not due to the teams having SPOT, but to poor supervision. Remote supervision still requires supervisors to meet the team. The Guide stresses that you cannot determine the morale or physical state of a team by mobile phone or SPOT reports.
> actually get in touch with their surroundings ratgher than stare at a screen, GPS or otherwise.
A tracker has no screen to look at. The Guide points out strongly that personal electronic devices, and being engrossed in a screen is contrary to the ethos of DofE.
>The possibility of getting lost (in the sense that the supervisor does not know where you are) is essential to the experience of self reliance and responsibility.
With a GPS tracker, that is still entirely possible; there is no guarantee that you can a) get a fix or b) be able to communicate that position, and that concept must be stressed to EVERYONE involved. The sense of unknown is still present.
> I also am a DofE supervisor. I'd not be happy with a tracker that had all sorts of buttons and gadgets to tempt the kids into using it.
I suspect you might change your mind if they had to use it in an emergency. But I agree that the tracker should not be seen as a gadget to be played with.
> Otherwise, why not just have an "expedition" in lowland areas, or for that matter,
Bronze and Silver shouldn't held in 'wild country'; only Gold is. Also, even for Gold, it is 'through wild country, not over it; solitude, not altitude'. Height gain should be less than 500m per day.
> Another ATC/DofE supervisor here. I would love to have the tracker aspect, but with our dumbass lot, a button for them to press would be a very bad idea indeed. It is much better that they radio us, and we can act as a filter and tell them that in fact they are probably not going to die.
Most trackers will SMS the location to one or more numbers. These numbers could be control base and supervisors, and need not be 999. So you can do your filtering, if necessary; you ring the team's phone and find out what's wrong and tell them they're not going to die.
> I'm struggling to imagine what other means of remote supervision might be contained in a risk assessment!
Then I'd suggest you might benefit from a little revision of what 'remote supervision' means...
> I saw a bunch of DoE groups walking the Thames Path last week. That's right - it's a fully waymarked path along a river
The Guide says clearly that routes should not follow National Trails except to use short sections to link other, quieter paths. Failure of route checking by supervisor and assessor. Unless it was a practice walk...
> I find it interesting that the kit list for DoE requires the group to have map and compass but doesn't mention GPS, even as an optional item of "useful additional kit".
That's because the Guide doesn't mandate the use of either GPS receivers or GPS trackers; in fact, it tries to discourage their use on a number of grounds.
> That "some day" when kids and parents expect to be GPS tracked will only happen if GPS tracking becomes widespread and/or implemented openly in policy
That 'some day' is already here; GPS use is practically ubiquitous, and people already rely on it. If there's a problem, people WILL ask "why weren't you using GPS tracking?". That's real life, and you'd better get used to it.
> as a supervisor I'm sitting warm and dry in a big comfy chair with a whisky in my hand in the control centre in front a screen and I see the little red dot go a bit off route.
The Guide is quite clear that, as a Supervisor, you should not be sitting on your arse, but out in the field, supervising. You may choose to use an exercise controller at a base, relaying information.
> However, the GPS tracker may be used in the event of a problem/incident to help with (re)location of the group by the staff. The group has no way of getting data off it, so essentially it is of immediate irrelevance from their point of view whether they have it or not.
Exactly. Our groups accused us of using the trackers to spy on them. We explained that, actually, we'd just been following their chatting, laughing and singing, and hadn't used the trackers at all. To contribute my anecdotal evidence, none of our groups used or abused their trackers. Some weren't even turned on...
> The incident that lead to their introduction was a lost group, unable to relocate, then subsequently having a medical incident requiring staff assistance.
And here we have more anecdotal evidence supporting the use of trackers.
> and they still follow a safety procedure that assumes they are not GPS tracked, whilst the staff are able to use the PS trackers either in anger to double check incident location GRs
This is exactly as mandated in the Guide.
> Specifically in the Bronze groups where the kids are of the age of usually 13-16
Participants must be 14, even for practice expeditions.
> ensure safety
I phrased that badly, rushing to post before being thrown out of work. We cannot ensure safety; we can only manage risk. GPS trackers and mobile phones are one of many measures we can employ to manage risk.
> One of the things this thread highlights is that the degree of supervision varies immensely
I think it highlights that knowledge of, and adherence to, DofE guidance is worringly variable...