Re: Re2: "Double-dipping"
Settummanque, the blackeagle - Mike L. Walton (blkeagle@MNINTER.NET)
Sun, 27 Dec 1998 20:45:33 -0600
Tom Petrik wrote in part:
>However Central Region has already dumped a new ball in their laps
>based on the sentence that they would have national and regional
>cabinets of venturers and we're wondering how far down the
>election of oficers will go - Area?
The last bit of information I've received, Tom, before everyone
went off to Chile (World Jamboree time, gang...not a vacation!)
was that there *was* going to be a plan to put together a National
Venturing Cabinet but was unsure right now about the Regional
Cabinets. There's a bit of unsettled history behind this cautious
attitude: what happened during the years Exploring had Regional
Exploring Cabinets, which included Area Exploring Chairs.
Area Explorer Chairs were one-third of a powerful group: the other
two individuals were the Exploring volunteer Chair and the
professional Area Director, who oversaw operations within several
local Councils in a geographic part of a Region (equate the Area
Director and Regional Director to a District Executive and a
Council Scout Executive for comparison of "power").
The BSA saw themselves being "bit" by some Area Exploring Chairs
and their adult Area Exploring Chairs whom wanted more from
Exploring than some local Councils were willing to provide. They
more or less pressured Council Scout Executives on threats to
"inform the Regional Director" of their lack of composing an
Explorer Officers/Presidents' Association within their Councils.
Some Councils did NOT want such an organization, because they felt
that either they would not be able to control the individuals
selected as youth chairs nor would they be able to financially
provide the variety of activities which would be attractive to
youth at that age group while maintaining it as a "boy scouting"
activity to insure overall funding. They balked, and soon found
themselves on the receiving ends of Regional Directors whom told
them "either get with the program or get out" and many Scout
Executives saw this *power* from teenagers something they just
couldn't handle! They complained, individually and collectively to
the Chief Scout Executive (at that time, our friend Chief Love),
whom decided that enough was enough and recommended suspending the
Area Exploring program to the National Executive Board.
It was a fight almost to the finish, and while it DID finish off
Exploring representation at the Area and Regional level in four of
the BSA's then six Regions, it also re-affirmed what one National
Explorer President told the BSA's National Executive Board when
they more or less "voted the national youth leadership program out"
in reforumlating the Exploring program on a national level: "You
will see the program die from this point onward, because we don't
want to be puppets on strings but rather participants and leaders
in our programming. That's what made Exploring great and that's
what's going to make Exploring weak."
The rest, as they say, is history.
So, that's why the Program Group, Tom, is moving very slowly and
carefully with regard to Venturing National and more importantly,
Regional Cabinets.
>Since that is a YOUTH problem that needs definition we're waiting
>for that to be taken care of before we move on to additional
>Advisor problems.
The Venturing folk are trying to use the old Exploring "books" in
forumlating the Venturing cabinets, programming and support. I
haven't heard anything about Commissioner support to Venturing: are
we going to call them "Venturing Commissioners" or "Venturing
Service Team members" and Chairs? I'm really hoping that they will
take the advise of several Scouters, including myself, and
incorporate Commissioners (as an title!) within the Venturing
program. It will go a long way in resolving some lingering issues
with some Councils as far as "creating something special just for
them (Venturing)."
>And since we are trying to separate BS rank advancement from
>Venturing AWArD advancement, I use that for my suspicion that I
>can guarantee that they will not be allowed to double-dip.
I would tend to agree with you, Tom, that youth shouldn't be able
to "double dip", but it's going to happen in some Councils,
particularly smaller ones where the support system is small and
they are just willing to go with a NEW program!
What has to be developed in *my opinion* is a plan that doesn't
penalize a Council for failure to develop a Venturing program
overnight or within this first year. There's a lot of pressure out
there among professionals, particualarly Scout Execs, to "create a
Venturing program" even in Councils whereby they have had a rather
successful Exploring program. There may not be enough resources to
do this overnight or within this program year, but things like the
creation of "youth cabinets" may force Councils to do things they
aren't really set up yet to do.
Perhaps a phase-in whereby two Regions would organize Venturing
programs within their Councils, while the other two watch and see
what has happened and what works and what doesn't. Then the next
year, the other two Regions would take the great ideas and
suggestions from the field from the other two Regions in organizing
the Venturing program within their Regions. This gives the first
two Regions time to "reforumlate and reorganize" as well as time to
learn from the successes of the two "starting out" Regions.
Settummanque!
(c) 1998 Mike Walton ("no such thing as strong coffee,...") blkeagle@mninter.net
http://mninter.net/~blkeagle Burnsville, MN 55306-7130 (612) 435-3085
privately at kyblkeagle@aol.com or waltonm@server.kaiserslautern.army.mil
---- FORWARD in service to youth ----
