Jump to content

Open Discussion - Program

Share Scouting Topics here.

Subforums

  1. Scouts with Disabilities

    Where parents and scouters go to discuss unique aspects to working with kids with special challenges.

    659
    posts
  2. Going to the next Jamboree?

    A place to chat about Scouting's biggest gathering

    2648
    posts

8686 topics in this forum

    • 0 replies
    • 95 views
    • 4 replies
    • 399 views
    • 2 replies
    • 255 views
    • 1 reply
    • 229 views
    • 147 replies
    • 9153 views
    • 19 replies
    • 1780 views
    • 32 replies
    • 8527 views
    • 5 replies
    • 360 views
  1. Linked or not linked?

    • 11 replies
    • 175 views
    • 9 replies
    • 140 views
    • 18 replies
    • 404 views
    • 7 replies
    • 106 views
  2. Stepping Down

    • 9 replies
    • 335 views
    • 1 reply
    • 57 views
    • 4 replies
    • 85 views
  • LATEST POSTS

    • Yep, I sort of agree. But you missed what I think is the National's biggest failure on the program, the over burdened Cub leader. The number one cause of Cubs not crossing over to troops is adult leader burnout. The effects of Cub leader burnout ripples through the whole program. The Tiger program alone requires a 3rd of the cub program resources. What does National do, ADD Lions.  Barry
    • Yep.  I find myself bemused that Irving is blaming their Chapter 11 considerations on the one thing that is NOT their direct responsibility.   Diminish nature and the outdoors in the core program - No harm - No foul. Gay Members - No harm - No foul. Gay Leaders - No harm - No foul. Diminish God - No harm - No foul.  (Did we really need Mormons?  Guess not...) Bechtel (Did we really need Bechtel?) - No harm - No foul. Undercut the value of Eagle - No harm - No foul. Add girls and eliminate boys' safe space - No harm - No foul. Sexual abuse lawsuits...  Oh the cost!  (We didn't do it! We've put YPT on steroids!  We're blameless!) The foul cost!  Money pouring down the drain! Dastardly foul lawyers!  Punitive damages most foul. And fowl droppings.  
    • Have you ever seen this done?  Barry
    • Disrupting the system in place now would obviously be a very difficult challenge, and one that would probably leave many units in a scramble.  The reality that a COR really has no training requirements about what the program even is leaves an obvious void on that person taking control over quality and what is actually going on in the unit.  Current unit for my son is chartered by American Legion- the "COR" changes every year, as it is the newly elected Post Commander that holds that title.  Fortunately, the current Post Commander has served in that role in the past, his son was a Scout (and he served as a troop committee member in those days), so he has understanding of the program and its actual workings.  What do you do with the COR who won't even take the very basic My.Scouting.org training module?
    • No miracles required.  Local control.  The experienced local volunteers who serve as commissioners and committee members are able to assess the quality of a unit program and the competence of a Scout leader.  All that would be required to shut down a unit with a long history of poor program is that the unit not recharter.  And you get to that with a series of conversations with the unit leadership, the Chartered Organization Representative, the Scouts, the families, and the head of the chartered organization.  Of course, that is going to be after a couple of years' worth of prior conversations with unit leadership, the Chartered Organization Representative, and maybe the head of the chartered organization about the unit program.
  • Who's Online (See full list)

×