Eagledad

Cubs and Troops are two completely different programs, so the discussion has gone divergent from my points. The Cubs who resented the program because their parents would not let them quit typically didn't crossover into the troop program. Most of the parents, like Hawken, wanted their sons to learn the lesson of committing even when they lost interest. But the percentage of Boy Scouts who resented the program as a result of their parents were far fewer than the Webelos who quit at crossover. And, as was said, resentment of a program is typically the result of a boring program, not the unrelenting parents. The parents get blame, but the program is the cause. Barry

Interesting comments. One of my traits of reasoning is I tend to look at the bigger pictures. What I see is that scouting did it to itself from a lot of bad decisions. I often wonder how today's parents would view the BSA if National had not made any major program changes since 1957? Over the years, since the 1960s anyways, sudden membership declines can be tracked following national level program changes. Not all membership declines were sudden. I believe some declines were the result of changes (Tigers/NSPs) that took a little longer to show a performance degradation of the overall program. When I look at the program differences between my youth experiences of the 60s and 70s compared to starting back as a scout leader in 1990, I can't think of a single change to the program over those years that was an improvement for my sons. When I watched and experienced the changes from 1990 through about 2010, I felt National was purposely trying to drive adult leaders to quit. The changes over those years increased the work load on the cub leaders and gradually turned troop leaders into baby sitters. I remember after seeing the changes to the Tiger program in 2000, several of us in the District Membership Committee predicted that troop membership would drop measurably in 2005. And it did. We weren't clairvoyant, we just reasoned that the membership drop we saw from Tiger program in 2000 would catch up to the troop membership five years later. Tigers feeds packs. Packs feed Troops. Troop membership is directly related to Cub membership. Can someone think of a Cub program change that resulted in long term growth? If National had done nothing to the program since 1957, how would we view the program today? The three leaders who started our troop ran it as close to the program we experienced in the 1960s and 70s as we possibly could within the limitations of program changes. Our troop of 17 scouts (11 crossovers, 5 older scouts) grew to a troop of over 100 scouts in six years. Forty Five percent of the scouts were 14 and older. We were not even close to the biggest troops in the council, but we had more older scouts than any unit (Crews Included) in the Council. That is nearly half the state of Oklahoma. Council noticed and tried very hard to convince us into creating a Venturing Crew. But we resisted by pointing out that our troop program model (1960s Patrol Method model) was the reason we were so successful. A Venturing Crew didn't fit in that model. My point of all this is to say that in my opinion, the declines aren't how National attempted to fix the hole, but are instead a result of National creating a lot of new holes from a series of bad decisions. Some here have said that people change. Population attitudes change. Still, I wonder if a 1957 BSA could be successful today? Barry

The Disney steamboat is a fake? I hate growing up.

Human instinct drives youth going through puberty to show their best toward the opposite sex. I have observed many times over the years that scouts between 13 and 15 struggled the most with the uniform because they were questioning if it showed them at their best. Youth before puberty are instinctively followers blending in the herd, so they don't question individuality. Older scouts 15 older have become comfortable with who they are, so the uniform is just part of scouting program like a uniform for a sport, so they are fine with it. Leaders who understand this predictable behavior can stand back with more patience and mentor them with empathy of what they are going through at the different stages. I'm reminded of our 14 year old scout who nearly collapsed after our first 5 mile full pack hike getting ready for Philmont. Among the items in his 50lb pack was a large jar of hair gel. We didn't tell him that he couldn't bring it, we only said that the 5 lb jar needless weight was also bear bait. To the surprise of the whole crew, he still brought the hair gel to Philmont. We were not going to let him take it, but in our wisdom of past experiences, we let the Philmont Trail Guide be the bad guy. I imagine the OPs daughter is in this challenging stage. I sure hope so. She will wear the jacket when either the weather conditions and/or her confidence in her appearance out weigh shivering from the cold. Barry

My observation is that inspections aren’t respected without some expectation of benefit. Nothing teaches the value of something until it is missed. Some here will be amazed to learn that patrols in our troop have survived the whole weekend after forgetting their tents, stoves, rain gear, and even food. Im not saying don’t do inspections, inspections are great for leadership development. But don’t be surprised when the Scouts show up unprepared because experience is still the greatest teacher. Im ashamed to admit I don’t have much empathy for the OP, but I’m crediting that to observing so many youth learning from their stupid choices. Barry

I have never met a scouter who knowingly put scouts at risk of harm. They have a plan B C and D for bad decisions. I kept several extra, sleeping bags, socks, gloves, stocking hats, and so on for those bad decisions. My pack always weighed 15 more just in case. A boy will not understand the cost of independence if he is given the opportunity of independence. Barry

Human nature drives us to learn by the consequences of our decisions. The time for concern is when we don't. Barry

We had several doctors in our troop with a lot of stories for the campfire. But I quit listening to the emergency room doctor's stories because they kept me up all night. Barry

My experience in our troop is that the adults many times get more excited with a Philmont trek than the scouts. Not that the scouts aren't excited, but the adults drive it like it's a bucket list item. So, they tend to pull the crew to the trek. These adults were problematic because they struggle to stand back and let the scouts lead. Our troop likes to plan our own treks so we can customize them more toward our crew needs. I enjoy wilderness treks a lot, but I usually have my fill by six days. Several BSA camps offer trek guides for custom treks as well. The Scout camp in New Mexico used to offer great backpacking treks in the Pecos Wilderness. I don't know if they do anymore. Unit planned treks don't have the Philmont programs, but they don't have the high cost either. And if a less experienced unit is a little nervous about marching into the wilderness, Venturing Crews in your area are usually excited to help. A member might even volunteer as a guide. Barry

Well there's my problem. I'm using and electric saw and wait for my back to tell me when to stop. Which makes the next day miserable. I've been needing an excuse to get a new one. I will look for the one with the smallest gas tank. I cut my right pointer finger off with a radial arm saw when I was 30. It was reattached, but not 100 percent since I took an 1/8 inch out of the knuckle. What I find most frustrating about that experience is allowing my kids to use power saws. I didn't want to restrict them because they would eventually use them in their adulthood, so we practiced safety, ALOT. I sold my radial arm saw several years ago, but I still cringe when I hear one start-up at Lowes and Home Depot. Barry

20 years ago. I guess I really am old. Barry

I can't answer to that because I just don't know. The other council was 1000 miles away. These parents were the opposite of helicopter, they believed in teaching their sons independence and responsibility. The parents took it upon themselves to inquire about possible issues in the situation and were teaching their son how to be responsible to find out the information. The only reason I heard about it at all was because mom was upset and not sure how to proceed. She called the CC who called me. The family had asked us when they joined if this son could finish the project with their previous troop and we certainly had no problem. I think their concern was how the EBOR would judge an Eagle project that wasn't approved in our district. In this case, if the family would have approached us instead of the board, we would have (or given them the numbers to) contact the District Commissioner or DE to answer the question for them. We averaged three transfers a year and questions like this often come up. Advancement policies can be a challenge because they also vary a lot between troop to troop. Going to the approval board is a very logical way to get the information they were seeking, but volunteers aren't always logical. Our district is very welcoming of families in these situations. The district project approval was the only part that I struggled with because they required a very very thorough plan using lots of picture and computer drawings. Barry

The approval process can vary from council to council. In fact, the process can vary a lot from district to district, which can be challenging for troops. We had a transfer scout who assumed his previous units project approval in another state was satisfactory for starting his project, which was going to done in the other state with his previous troop's help. But to make sure everything was in order, the scout's mother drove her son to our District approval board to make sure everything was ok. The board meets once a month where all applicants are in the room together. Well, the board leader expressed his frustration of the scout's proposal that was written in hand (I had previous discussions with the board on this very subject of adding requirements). The scout's mom stood up to defend her son by explaining that the Eagle project process in this district was different from the process they experienced in the troop they transferred from. The troop committees' approve all the Eagle projects in their previous council. The scout was still going to do the project in the city of the previous location with the help of scouts from their previous troop. They only wanted to know if they needed approval by this District. I can't remember what the board leader said, but the mother left in tears. The troop sent a letter to the district chairman explaining the reason the scout went to the board was only to get some clarification for proceeding with the project because the situation was confusing and complex. There was no reason for the lecture by the board member followed with scolding of both the scout and the mother in front of all the other applicants. It wasn't as if the family was trying to take short cuts, this scout is the 3rd son of four. Mom was the committee chairman in their other troop and dad is an Eagle, as well as the two older brothers. So they were very familiar with how the process works. And the scout still didn't get a clarification of how to proceed. The board leader stepped down the next day. Barry

I've been around several handicap scouts, some in our troop and some in the council. This situation reminds me of a Eagle Scout who was born with severe birth defects. I don't remember what those defects are, but imagine Steven Hawkin. This scout's father became the ASM of a troop so that he could work officially with his son through the process of advancement. I met with this dad a few times and learned that he took as much training as possible so that he work side-by-side with Council and District to create a modified plan for his son. This dad knew the advancement process better than most of the DEs. When I read about the scout of this thread, my first thought was dad, for whatever reason, didn't register his son as a Scout. Minor detail to dad, but a huge misstep in the whole scouting process. In general, National tries to give benefit of doubt and judgment to the scouts. So, I'm curious of this situation. Barry

Yes, my wife is always telling me to focus. And it makes typing sentences challenging as well. Barry

Agreed, and even more. For me scouting (all scouting) is about growth in behavior. Parents are shocked to learn that I don't care much about their little Johnny getting Eagle. My passion is for their son to learn habits that give him the tools to get his Eagle on his own initiative. Rank is fine I guess while he is a scout in his youth, but I want to teach life Habits of setting goals and building a plan to achieve those goals. Part of that process for us was to guide the new scout in how to initiate working a MB. We teach him to ask for the SM counselor list, call the counselor to learn more about the badge, get counselors information and set a plan for their meetings. Then the scout fills out the MB card with all the information including the counselor information and present it to the SM for approval. We found that scouts pretty much do this on their own without any help after two MBs. The challenge for them is usually calling or communicating the counselor. 11 year olds just haven't called total strangers much in their life, much less to talk about specifics and asking for pertinent information. So we sit down with them and practice what they will talk about. The secret of maturity growth in scouting is giving them just enough confidence to venture into the dark. 1. "HI" (I am amazed at how few of youth know how to start a conversation with a simply "Hi!". 2. MY NAME IS __________ 3. I am a Scout with Troop _________ 4. I am calling you because _________ We help them practice a little bit, and many times ask their parents to practice with them (I found that the parents really like doing this because they enjoy watching their sons learn the skills). Communication with a stranger is a challenge. But, as I said, they typically have it mastered by third MB. And, more importantly, they have learned a leadership/management skills that they will use a lot in their future with the troop. And life. So, even though I don't get personal with a scouts rank, I place a high value on the MB process for learning growth. Barry

Prohibited! Like breaking a law or something? My post was specific to the MB college discussion. The organizers of the MBC provided a list of classes, but not counselors. The scouts were guided to call the organizers and get the counselor information. A lot of the times the organizers hadn't found a counselor yet, so the scout couldn't find out about the counselor until they went to the MBC, where the SM stood by to sign the cards once the scouts got the information. A bit of a hassle, but as I said, MBC wasn't that big of deal for our troop. As for the rules; in my opinion National guideline is more about the troop's obligation to provide a source of safe counselors for the scouts, not restrict the scouts from using someone that is not on the list. What about parents, friends and acquaintances? I believe the rule is mainly telling the unit to verify the scout's counselor. It used to be that MB counselors were the source of most abuse complaints from scouts. National is just trying to get the unit leaders to be more responsible in checking out these volunteers. Barry

Who is teaching the younger scouts? Who is teaching the older scouts? My Child psychologist professor friend (also a SM) taught me that the human instinct is to learn our behaviors by observing others until puberty. After reaching puberty, instinct is to serve the pack. In other words use what they learned to serve. Any scouter who has worked with scouts after a new SM takes over will acknowledge that the older scouts don't change. They are who they are and many times Scoutmasters have to split the program to get the older scouts out of the way. I found that while younger scouts will led if put in that position, they don't learn much from it. They don't really like it. They might learn a few basic managing skills taught to them, but not really much in the way of behavior. On the same line, older scouts are resistant to learning if they have now desire because it's not in their instinct. You seem to be resistant to the idea that a troop of scouts from 11 to 17 can't work. It has been working for over 100 years. Why would it not work now? As I said before, if the older scouts are given the responsibilities of adults, they will enjoy the challenges. Part of those adult responsibilities is taking reponsibility of the younger scouts. But, it's not sudden. It has to be developed into the program. Barry

I was speaking from experience, not idealism. Scouts of the troop age will gravitate towards activities and feel comfortable with the like mind members is the members are sincere in welcome to the group. Forget age and think in terms of experience. Never have I seen this more than where our troop went to play Lazertag. I watch a newly formed patrol of scouts from age 11 to 16 come together within a few minutes because the activity required all them to work as a team or fail. You will also see it in troop activities, but at much slower rate. Ignore age, think in terms of experience. I have spoken here many times that the main cause of older scout failure is giving the older scout responsibility in getting the younger scouts to first class (core camping skills). Of course the older scouts will burn out because they are just repeating their first three years. To challenge scouts at the reach maturity, they have to be given responsibilities that challenge them physically and mentally. That means adult responsibilities. The 15 year shouldn't be responsible for getting scouts to first class, they should be responsible for making the program gets them to first class. If that sounds confusing, it basically means they should be doing the adults job. The problem here is that the adults are still driving what the scouts should be, or not be, doing. If the troop is running correctly, it should be running on autopilot with very minimum adult help because the older scouts are running the program. Troops that struggle with the older scouts generally are not giving all their scouts enough independence to make their own choices. Leadership is different from mentoring. Leadership is an action insuring direction. Mentoring is guidance of growing in maturity. Boys between the age of 10 and 13 learn 90 percent of their behavior by observing their role models. The design of the scouting program for the older scouts to be the role models. That is why skills courses aren't good teachers of behavior. This is where the UK program fails as far as I'm concerned. We found that the 14 and older scouts step into leadership with a great deal of confidence because they mimic what they observed up to the age 14. It's how we are wired. They will tend to lead as their previous leader led and serve as their previous role models served. Scouts who like to serve will choose to push that direction while the scouts who would rather specialize in other activities like high adventure will migrate that direction. Not all scouts want to be leaders, and that is fine. But they will know leadership skills because they have been watching it for several years. One of the big problems I worked with in units that separated their older scouts from the younger scouts was the complaint that the older scouts didn't have much inititive to lead their program. WELL YES, OF COURSE. They didn't have good role models to learn from. I use to teach that if the troop is functioning perfectly, it would never need leadership development classes. That is mainly because the older scouts are leading and the younger scouts are learning all the leadership skills by observing the older scouts. So, if the troop is struggling in an area of leadership, fix the older scouts, not the younger. The quality of a troop program should be measured by the oldest scout, not the youngest. Fix the older scout and the younger scout problems will go away. Barry

MattR pretty much posted my thoughts. Statistically the success of crew programs is directly dependent on the leadership and agreed direction. And statistically crews with specific programs like the EMT, Law Inforcement, Scuba, and Ships have greater longevity because the goals are more obvious with sponsors that maintain a program goal. Barry

My experience is a little different. First, 11 year olds will hang out with 17 year olds when they are together in the same activities and program. As for the boredom of older scouts, the key to ALL scouts staying satisfied in the program is challenging them mentally and physically everyday. Boys of this age get bored when their experience doesn't provoke some intellectual and physical stimulation. And I'm curious why you don't see leadership and mentoring as the challenge for the scouts. I once poled our 14 and older scouts (45 of them at the time) to find out how many enjoyed the high adventure part of our program. 14 of the 45 said they enjoyed the high adventure. So, something other than the high adventure kept them coming back. The key for adults keeping the program challenging is to insure that the scouts are continually making decisions that effects them at the moment. Mix things up a little. Change routines. Challenge them for new activities. Make them think and act. Give them a chance to make bad decisions and learn how to recover. I know we talk about younger scouts and older scouts, but I really believe thinking of the program in those terms sets the wrong ideas in the adults. Instead think of the program as challenges for EACH scout. Not all scouts are leaders, but they all should be practicing moral and ethical decision making. Truth is the Patrol Method isn't about servant leadership, it's about a servant lifestyle. Leadership is just one aspect of that lifestyle. We had a scout go to the emergency room because he broke his toe while running through camp. I asked the scouts why he was breaking the rules of no shoes and running if they told him to stop. Well, none of the dozen or so scouts near him said anything. I held those scouts accountable for their bad decisions for not serving that scout by stopping him. Everyone is responsible for each other in a servant lifestyle. Every scouts should be expected to make decisions and held accountable for those decisions no matter how small the consequence. The example I use when I taught that principle at SM Specific is the uniform. The Scout Handbook clearly, or did then, states what the scout should wear to a troop meeting. If the scout isn't wearing the correct uniform, then why? Whatever the reason, the scout made a wrong choice. If the scout shows up to the meeting a few minutes late without good reason, he made a wrong choice. If the scout isn't helping the patrol when he is needed, he is making a wrong choice. These are little things, but can start to become habits is not challenged. The hard part for the adults in the troop is that it is also a safe place to learn from bad decisions. Instead of forcing a scout to change (hide) his behavior by making him feel bad about himself, the challenge is helping the scout see the advantage of making right choices. Adults can't force a boy to change, only the boy can do that. Adults can shape a program to where the scout, during his scouting experiences, can see himself as he is at the moment and can be in the future. I use the uniform as an example of making right and wrong choices. Many would assume by that statement that our troop would look like a perfectly uniformed troop. Quite the opposite. When scouts are given the freedom to make bad choices, there are many scouts who go through periods of struggle in their choices. Strangely I found that the uniform to be one of the most challenging methods for both adults and scouts when making ehtical decisions. Ironically the challenge for adults is opposite of the scouts. I have found that the best patrol method troops are typically not the most uniform looking troops even though the uniform is expected. I'm rambling, sorry. Barry

The challenge with BORs is having a good group of members to man them. A canned list (as you call it) helps troops bring in parents without a lot of training. We tried to keep to BOR leaders trained so that they could guide the rest of the board members toward learning from the scouts experiences with the questions from the list. But it's a challenge. I'm personally not a fan of BORs because their purpose is difficult to understand for the novice of scouting. There is a lot of confusion understanding the difference of checking to see is the scout is ready to advance and checking the quality of the program. And how to do that without using the big "R" word (retesting). The BOR is encourage to not fail a scout, but what if the program quality is so bad that the scout isn't ready? Shesh! I've said for many years that if the main purpose of the BOR is a check on the program, the parents should be interviewed as well because they will fill in where their son doesn't give a complete picture. Otherwise let the Scouts do the BOR. Barry

Why do you say that? I believe the traditional scouting program is dying, but I didn't see National separating the middle school age with high school age scouts. So I'm curious why you think they will. Role modeling from the older scouts is the foundation of the highest performing patrol method programs. To take that away pretty much kills the boy run aspect of the program because the adults become the role models by default. And that is not the same. Barry

I tried to have a little chat with the scouts as often as possible so they got use to friendly chit-chats about anything. It is a challenge with bigger troops. But I knew I was doing ok when the BOR leader told me that one of the scouts they were reviewing didn't even know when he and I had our SM Conference. I ran into this scout after lunch at summer camp and offered to buy him a popsicle. As far as he was concerned, it was one of our usual chats while enjoying the popsicle. I also tried to have the same kind of chats with the parents as often as I could. Usually when they dropped off or picking up their sons from meetings or camp. The scouts do all the work talking to the drivers and loading/unloading the gear, so that leaves me plenty of time to mingle. A good relationship comes in handy on those rare occasions when I have to talk about a challenging experience with their son. Barry

This is exactly right. I am so passionate about this problem that I stood up in front of the district committee and asked them re-evaluate their MB College policies. They asked me to sit down. As the SM, you can't decline an approved MB card, but you can (and we did) tell the scouts that the troop wouldn't accept a counselor approved card that wasn't first signed by the SM. That forced the scouts to seek out the counselor and speak with them to get their personal information and class times before the classes and find the SM for a signature. That wasn't a perfect situation, but it help keep the troop policy that scoutlder just posted. But it's not like our scouts relied on the these MB Colleges. Our troop encourages the scouts to work MBs all the time. We keep a counselor list around for scouts just asking about badges. We brought in two counselors a month to give a 5 minute troop meeting presentation for any scout interested. The scouts still had to seek out the MBC and set up their meetings. The problem I see, and I was trying to stop, with these MB colleges is that many troops rely on colleges and summer camp for all their scouts' MBs. And those are the two worst places where the policies go around the the BSA stated polices. Without even knowing it, troops get into bad habits and practices. I found that half of the troops in our district didn't even know basic proceedure of the SM signing the MB card before the scout even starts working with the counselor. I fixed that in district basic training. Barry