Eagledad

Well that is not typical of national, or wasn’t. I haven’t been involved for the last 10 years. Is that District or Council wide a far as you know? I would enjoy coming down to abserve the program in your area. Maybe you guys are doing something right that would benefit the rest of us. Barry

CMs and ACMs are generally more passionate about the program and aren’t as affected by burn out. But, those leaders (Wisconsinmomma) only make up about 5% of total leadership. Troops suffer from burnout as well, but it’s not as much of a problem because the Scouts take on a lot more responsibility. However, I have seen that Troop Venturing Crews were generally started by burned out troop leaders looking for more adventure to keep them interested. Likely why they rarely last more than 3 years. I found the best Webelos leaders are Troop leaders that go back to take on a Den. They know how to have fun and ignore the boring stuff. Barry

Could be right, but 80% of Bear leaders are moms in either the 2nd or 3rd year of Cub leading. We can agree to disagree, I invested a lot of time to find this conclusion. Dont ever blame other programs, if a boy enjoys scouts enough, he will find a way. Barry

No wonder the world is in such a mess. Folks are so focused on their own personal agendas, they are color blinded to reality. You always misread between the lines of my posts. The only blame is National that burdens the cub adults so much that they are burned out by third year of a five year program. I personally interviewed dozens of Webelos leaders over the years, so if you don’t agree, you are free to invest your own time to prove me wrong. Let me give you a hint, start talking to the Bear leaders. I also interviewed many male Webelos leaders who had no desire to lead the Den, but were swayed (heels dragging) one way or another into holding Den meetings. Their Scouts couldn’t wait to jump ship. I believe it’s fair to say 40% of Webelos leaders have no enthusiasm for being a den leader and are counting days to cross over. Its a huge problem, but as long as folks are stuck on their own personal agendas, the real problems get ignored. Shesh. I started a program in our District to help burned out Webelos leaders, which had some success. But a few scouters who read about the program on the forum created the program in their own district with great success of about 90% crossovers. Unimaginable in my area. Barry

And one other big factor is the average Webelos leader is the burned out mom who has no outdoor camping experience. Is anybody surprised by the 49% crossover number? Barry

I agree and disagree on this. The statistic Nationally is less than 50% of “Webelos IIs” join Boy Scouts. So if we added the dropouts from all the age groups, including the Tigers, the number of cubs who don’t join Boy Scouts is substantial, maybe 75%.The main cause of cub drop outs is adult leader burnout. Burned out Leaders don’t put the effort into the program to make it interesting for the boys, so they get bored and move on. I believe the overburdened Cub program is the main cause for dropping membership the 30 years. Barry

Aren’t you the adult who doesn’t allow OA in your troop? Barry

So very true. I was a very good recruiter as well. It requires someone of humility because others will get the recognition for the tasks you recruited for. I learned that recruiting is an art and a rarer skill than most realize. You can move mountains simply by putting the right people in the right positions. I know this, we now have a few mountains in Oklahoma. Barry

I was recruited for that very thing. BUT, how much can we do in one hour a week. We turned a dying troop of 7 into a successful patrol method program of 100. That takes a bit more than one hour a week. There are many discussions on this forum of learning how to say "No". And please don't think bad of us. I had many choices for applying my one hour a week after I step back from Scoutmastering. I decided to go a route where I could accomplish the most growth with my limited time. It was a purposeful strategic choice of teaching adults and senior scouts at the council level. My dream was a council of patrol method troops. I just didn't see accomplishing the same goal with OA. I admit I believe OA is hopeless. Barry

I think what OA represented is dead. OA used to recognize the above average scouts. They were experts with woods tools and felt very comfortable alone in the woods. They were givers of their time an represent Friendly, Courteous, and Kind to a fine art. Todays adults prefer mediocrity so that nobody feels bad being the below average scout. Advancement is more desired in groups and leadership is given so that each scout gets a turn. OA was a program that gave the above average scouts a bigger arena to expand dreams. Now it's just another boring program that is challenged to fit in a troop agenda. Barry

You think National would have change their mind if they researched the Canadian Scouts and the Campfire Kids programs after their membership policy change? Personally, after watching how they handled this whole thing, I think this was a knew-jerk action without much consideration of failure. They wanted it, so they did it. Barry

I agree. I believe I was clear, but the point of the text was showing how much the program can change as a result of a membership policy change. Barry

It's difficult because the data can change depending on the time of year it is taken. National has not found a consistent method for acquiring data that has enough precision to see a trend. And they also are their own worst enemy. National pushes families of Webelos IIs to join a troop. But they won't know for at least a year if the scout was active. A lot of Webelos are pushed to join a troop only to never show up. So, National can't really track how many Webelos actually continue into scouting. I had to personally call the families to find that kind of data. I know that I have a better feel for program problems than National. The Tiger program is a membership killer for many reasons, but National has only shown their reliance of the program. I have the data, I'm not sure what they have. Barry

You keep asking that question and we answering it. The program changed a lot with the admittance of women leaders. There didn't appear to be a lot of changes from the outside, but it was obvious from the inside. As I've said several times (I believe to you, but I could be wrong), the massive training course changes in 2000 were largely a result of bringing women into the troop. Not because they were women, but because they had no Boy Scouting experienced. The BSA was so overwhelmed with un-experienced adult leaders that they had to rethink how to train them. And I think most of us who were leading Troop programs back then would say that Patrol Method has suffered greatly. Adults today don't get patrol method because training doesn't teach it well and there aren't enough experienced leaders to encourage it at Council or district level. Bringing in girls will increase the number of un-experienced unit adult leaders. If there was any hope that the program 10 years from now resembled today's program, calling it a family program killed it. Calling it a family program will add more confusion between leadership and parents. It will eventually sort itself out if scouting survives, but it won't be the same program. Barry

I remember watching an interview with Charleston Heston talking about the his experience making the Planet of the Apes movie. He found it interesting that while the actors who played the parts of the chimpanzees, orangutans, and gorillas came from different backgrounds and races, they all hung around in the character groups. There was no reason for them to do that other than some kind of bonding attraction for the character. Just his observation. Barry

I stand corrected. Barry

My personal opinion is the program will change dramatically, not so much by admitting girls, but from the adults that will join as a result of all the membership changes. Most of the adults will have very little understanding or experience with Patrol Method, so while it will be set up in the spirit of the handbooks, the adults won't let it process toward the design intention of the method. The adults that do know will be few and far between. If they don't know what they are looking for, they won't know how to drive toward it. Barry

The UK didn't see the rise for over 30 years. And the Canadian case is a great example of the BSA is basically following the same model. Barry

Several of us have been saying the same thing for several years, especially in the last year. But my opinion is that BSA is only focused on the new program. They are basically scrapping the idea of the traditional "Boy" Scouts and going full speed ahead of a Family Scouts program. It's a work as they go along type of development, but there is no doubt in my mind that they are driving toward that program. Someone said it earlier in this thread, but I have been saying it for a long time, the BSA only needs to look at the Canadian Scouts to see their future. Barry

Troops and Crews have been trying some form of your idea for 50 years. However, the most successful crews are typically not tied to a troop program. The most successful Troops typically understand the value and importance of older scout role modeling for younger scout development. A few Troop/Crews are successful, but the general idea doesn't work because the combined program format is too complicated for continuing through future generations of leaders. Success requires a visionary who understands how to develop young scouts from the actions of older scouts setting the example. And the two programs clash somewhat between the "Patrol Method" Method hierarchy of leadership and the Crew Method hierarchy of leadership. The adult who understands how to make both programs successful is rare. The name "Venturing" itself seems to lure many adults away from the First Class Skills part of the program for a more adventure part of the program. Those programs tend to fail within five years, by the way. Without the right adult (qwazse or MattR) to understand the complexity of the two programs, the quality of both suffer and typically the Venturing Crew folds. I've seen the scenario repeat itself many times. Why not MattR's idea, it worked for us. Our troop had the largest group of 14 to 17 older scouts in the Council. We were also considered the most Boy Run Patrol Method program in the council as well. Barry

I don’t how you can say that. You said it yourself, he invented American Boy Scouting. His vision of how Patrol Method changed boys is the big picture. The rest of your post is very good, but I respectfully disagree on this. Barry

Im not sure, you are certainly not slow, but what are the odds of 2 brilliant Scouters on the forum. Over the years Matt, you have represented yourself as a big picture person and a problem solver. Now that you’re not in the midst of the chaos, the picture is probably more clear. I have mentioned our temporary patrol program several times over the years, but one contributer here consistently responded that we were adult run because in his mind, patrols are to be aged based and “alway only” do activities together. I’m sure the interference from the discussion turned readers away. I wish more Scouters were problem solvers like you, then there would more drive to understand the goal of program. It’s hard to fix problems if one doesn’t know how it supposed to work. Natural Patrols? Why? Boy run is hard for adults because a lot of times the boys don’t know and keep wallowing. How far and how long are the adults supposed to let scouts fail before bringing in some kind of infusion? I use to tell our adults that we are doing it wrong if the Scouts don’t want to play the game anymore. It’s hard for many here to understand that the adults are in charge of the “game with a purpose”. Boy growth requires balancing and risk. Risk for letting Scouts push the boundaries too far to find their limits. And balance of just enough of adult interjection to keep the boy run patrol method program working towards the vision. Natural Patrols? Why? Barry

This describes our troop when I was with the troop. I imagine they are still using the program because the Scouts really liked it. Any scout any age can start and/or lead the activity, event, and trek. They have to provide a plan to get accepted. It has no effect on the existing patrols. We averaged 6 temporary patrols a year. Barry

Limiting the troop program to 14 will drive the program to a Webelos III formate. 14 to 15 is the average age and maturity boys are ready to take on real responsibility. It is also the best age for role modeling to young scouts. Without the older scouts, it’s an adult run program not much different from Webelos. And it doesn’t do the scout any good to get pushed to the bottom of another program when he is ready to lead. Venturing is most successful when used as an adventure program, not the “next step” of the scouting program order. Barry

We had a similar situation. Long long story short, we asked the church to look into the matter instead of just blaming our scouts for all the damages they where finding. The committee was upset because the ceiling tiles were being pushed out of place in their 40 foot tall meeting center. I understood their problem, it was a difficult task to find a ladder tall enough to replace the tiles. Turns out the teen Sunday School class boys would compete in slamming balls on the floor hard enough to see if they could bounce them to the ceiling. The other problem was the mystery of ceiling tiles and lights getting torn up in another room. Mystery solved, the Girls Scouts where scrapping the ceiling with their flag poles during opening and closing ceremonies. The church committee was quite embarrassed and never bothered us again, even when our scouts might have been responsible for damage. Barry