Open Discussion - Program
Share Scouting Topics here.
Subforums
-
- 816
- posts
-
- 2.8k
- posts
9743 topics in this forum
-
- 0 replies
- 6k views
-
- 23 replies
- 45.8k views
-
- 9 replies
- 8.7k views
-
- 0 replies
- 19 views
-
- 0 replies
- 111 views
-
- 0 replies
- 84 views
-
- 67 replies
- 15k views
-
- 0 replies
- 88 views
-
- 61 replies
- 3.4k views
-
- 0 replies
- 100 views
-
- 33 replies
- 1.1k views
-
- 36 replies
- 1.5k views
-
- 19 replies
- 587 views
-
- 41 replies
- 1.8k views
-
- 3 replies
- 273 views
-
LATEST POSTS
-
This requirement makes some assumptions and forces a Scout to lie or not get the merit badge: 9. Document and discuss with your counselor three or more areas in your life outside of Scouting where you feel you can actively provide stronger leadership in: I have a Scout who goes to school, comes home, and does Scouting. That's it. So are Scouts who don't have other activities unable to earn Eagle? The Scout lives in the country with no neighbors around. He doesn't play sports due to his grades being bad this last semester. The areas of his life are Scouts, family, and school. You'd think this would have been more well thought out, considering the MB is all about consideration of others. -
Often in Scouting the answers were part of the program; the growth opportunities for the scout. Adults (meaningful) over time have diluted the program and these growth opportunities. Cost being discussed is just one example. The concept of cost was (should still be?) a learning/growth opportunity for scouts. "A scout pays his own way". A simpler program without bells and whistles for which a scout can earn enough with odd jobs, chores, allowances to pay for it. Adults intervened and created troop fundraisers, camps exploited the fundraising and built dining halls and other amenities to summer camps (in contradiction to living under canvas). Costs rose, parents ponied up, to only ask about ROI. Fun and adventure was not enough, merit badges earned became the metric. And the downward cycle continues. BP, West, GBB, etc... understood how all parts of the program were in concert fundamentally held together by the concept of not doing for scouts what they can do for themselves. That glue is what ties the program together, even more than 100 years later. The systematic replacing of that glue by adults to make things more efficient, or more modern or more "xyz" is why the program cannot hold itself together. Adults asking about cost/value is a symptom of the systemic failure of adults in Scouting to adhere to the basic tenets of program delivery in an attempt to increase efficiency, or market share or other business terms. The answers are and have always been in the program delivery; Scouts learning to do for themselves and others. -
By BetterWithCheddar · Posted
This thread is really hitting the nail on the head. I wish someone with influence would take note. Many of the other youth programs we've been exposed to either have 1) an affiliation with the school district that allows families to get access to facilities and quality instructors at a greatly subsided rate or 2) a for-profit operator that is highly motivated to provide a quality program. My wife (an IT project manager) is appalled by the way our Pack operates (even though it's probably one of the better units in the area). My response is always the same - "We're just a handful of parents doing our best. No one else will step up." -
It's true the high cost of volunteering in scouting is often unacknowledged, especially when compared to other youth activities. This is part of the value perception equation. It's also not as simple as thinking parents want to dump and run. Potential volunteers who are used to operating in more functional organizations find the systemic dysfunction in scouting incomprehensible. The onboarding experience in most youth activities is efficient and user friendly. Trying to onboard in scouts can be an ordeal. That makes the first point of entry a complete turn off for a lot of competent adults. Not necessarily dumping kids but running backwards away from dysfunction. -
I partly agree but it's kind of a chicken and egg situation. Value perception is lacking because the program is so difficult to deliver that quality is inconsistent and often poor. But even when well administered there are multiple aspects of the program that no longer work well, appeal to, or provide comparative value to an increasingly large demographic.
-
-
Who's Online (See full list)