Re: Quality Unit (opinions are nice,
golden cliff (c60clg1@CORN.CSO.NIU.EDU)
Tue, 3 Dec 1996 17:16:38 -0600
Given all the statistics provided by Geary on his post, even the strongest
units he discussed could still not be quality units. At least under the
new guidelines. They could all have a very strong program with a large
membership of boys and leaders, but if they slip one boy, they're not
"quality" as defined by national.
Most of the arguments I've read on this issue aren't against growth or
encouraging growth in units. The issue is that a large successful unit
doing everything correctly can still lose a number and be be considered
"quality".
Directing our efforts toward membership rather than true quality is not an
intelligent flow. Improving quality will usually improve membership,
the reverse is not always true.
If our leaders concentrate their efforts toward providing the highest
quality program for each boy within their respective units, those units
will grow. More importantly, the boys will grow through a quality
Scouting experience. Build it and they will come.
Just saying let's push the rest aside and start beating bushes for boys
doesn't necessarily do the trick. Quality does not follow quantity. You
need quality first, quantity will come.
It's a matter of priorities and common sense. National is taking the
emphasis off quality in the QU and placing it on quantity.
I have over 50 boys in my troop and still might not meet the membership
requirement as written in this year's QU award. It will be close. Trust
me, I'm not myopic about membership growth, I'm just realistic.
YIS, Cliff Golden
Scoutmaster Troop 33; DeKalb, Illinois
Three Fires Council BSA
Terry Howerton Sakima Group, Inc. SCOUTER Magazine Kansas City | 
