Eagledad

Yes, and I understand that generalities often make a lot of sense and sound good. But they don't tell the whole story. What also needs to be added is that creating and maintaining a troop program that challenges all scouts at all ages is a lot of work. Adults have to be on their toes making sure they learn more than the scouts so that they don't find themselves getting in the scouts way. I made a lot more bad decisions than good on my road to learning how to be a good scout leader. Humility is a requirement for adults building a quality program. It's a lot of work, but the results make it worth the effort. Barry

For me personally, one thing more annoying than a distracted person distracting the event is the guy up front stopping the flow of the event to enforce rules he's just making up in the moment. The behavior is rude to many of us, but not others. A lot young people find this behavior acceptable. Some general guidelines should have been given at the beginning of the ceremony. I taught the scouts to either handle these things personally and quietly without distracting the rest of the group, or endure it and learn a lesson for the next time. Now that's just my personal pet peeve. I understand it's not everyone's style. Barry

The troop program is long enough that normal males go through several mental and physical changes during that duration. As a scout gets older, he gets wiser and more mature. His interest change as well as his dreams and goals. And scouts of the troop age enjoy the experience the most when they are challenged, both physically and mentally. The average age of Scouts leaving the troop indicates where the activities stop challenging the scouts. I used to teach leaders that bored scouts are a red flag that the program has reached its maximum potential for scout growth and they needed to change. I have said many times the measure of a troop program is the older scout program, not the younger scout program. Webelos leaders visiting future troops should watch and learn about the older scout program. If scouts are Eagling and leaving at age 14, I would move on. You pointed out that you didn't enjoy teaching skills. I assuming you meant standing in front a group basically lecturing the lesson. Most boys don't enjoy that style of teaching either. A lot of folks are surprised to find out that the program is designed for scouts to learn by actions and observations through activities. Not sitting thru classes. A class may be required now and then, but the rule should be for the scouts to learn from participating in patrol and troop activities. As long as the program keeps the body and mind busy, the scouts will stay because scouting makes them feel good about themselves. Barry

Hmm, I'm not smart enough to make up theories, I'm only speaking from experience. I can justify my suggestions with real experience antidotes. May I suggest you do the same before considering programs from other countries. Barry

Too long for whom? If the scouts are running the troop, adult burnout doesn't have much effect on the program. If the scouts are wanting to leave by age 14, then they aren't running the troop. Barry

I wasn't focusing so much on applications of the program in this discussion. Someone else started a thread on fun pack meetings, so I won't go there. My main disappointment with the Cub program is the weight of responsibility National has pushed on the adults for five years. Experts say the average volunteer for any volunteer organization will give about two years of their service before loosing interest. This of course doesn't include the rare volunteer with the passion to give a lot more, which is most of us on the forum. Anyway, the Cub program is FIVE YEARS LONG. See the problem? Most volunteers are burned out after two years, so their motivation and enthusiasm has dropped. They are ready to stand back and watch for a while. The best solution for keeping the program fun is to replace the burned out volunteer with a fresh volunteer. But there aren't enough parent resources to recruit fresh volunteers. Parents willing to be volunteers likely already did it. The result in about 50% (or more) cases is a boring program for the boys. And what the boys experience now is what they expect for the future. Which is why the crossover rate of Webelos joining Troops is around 50%. SO! What does National do! Add another year (lions) to the program of course. Another hole in the hull. Ah, but there is a fix to this hole. Tap into a new resource (girls), that fixes the problem. Barry

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