Eagledad

9 hours ago, yknot said:

With 70 million Catholics in the US today even in membership decline, it's a number significantly higher than scouting. No one can know specifics. But when you are comparing numbers that are many orders of magnitude above the other, you can make some general inferences.  

 

I don’t think so. I’ve had to balance many of your posts over the years because you present micro analogies. You basically take local data, which is a sliver of the overall picture and present a confident analogy as the overall big picture. It’s not. General references can only be interpreted as reflections of personal biases at best. That’s ok if the author starts their opinion with “In humble opinion” ………… . But, when the analysis is intended to sway general opinion, we’ll, you know.

Barry

21 minutes ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

Haven't seen any...anecdotally, ~80% cross over (primarily because their membership is already paid for the year, and there is a good deal of build up to the ceremony, so many go with the flow...)

After a year, I see about 75% stay.  That's an overall 60% staying from AOL until after first year.

Would love to see some stats with more granularity.

This must be local or recent. When I was tracking crossovers 20 years ago, an average of 50% of Webelos crossed over to troops in our council. National average at the time was slightly less than 50%. We did not track AOL because that wasn’t important for us. I can’t remember the average for 1st year scouts dropping out, BUT, 1st year dropouts has been the highest dropout rate of all BSA ages since National has been tracking that data. At least since the 60s.

Barry

17 hours ago, Eagle1993 said:

The 18 - 30 year old age group is prime to help if approached.  One of my biggest complaints of the BSA is that they seem to ignore that demographic.  When I was in my 20s, I didn't have kids, had a TON of free time (compared to now) and was volunteering for various organizations.  BSA never reached out (and I never even thought of it).  I volunteered for sports clubs & FIRST robotics.  If BSA reached out, I could have been a district volunteer or even unit.  I'm convinced that there is huge potential in that group.

I think it’s a cultural thing. I worked a lot with the 14 to 22 year olds and gained so much respect from them, as well as pleasure with the experience. They are the noble product of patrol method and have so much to give back. But, our culture expects them to go out into the world and get educated and find their place in the community. Like some here, many at National and others outside looking in see scouting as nothing more than an after school babysitting program. Move on from youthful play time and get busy with serious adult life. I agree the BSA doesn’t give the older scouts any vision of scouting beyond 17 and that cripples the adult’s vision as well. We can do more at the local level. I did do more. But, the effort is an uphill challenge that wears one down. Can you imagine working with dozens of Eagle94s? The experience is a reward from God and makes all the hard work at the younger ages worth it.

Barry

5 hours ago, Eagle1993 said:

My thought was primarily Cub Scouts.  They have Squirrels (4 - 6), Beavers (6-8) and Cubs (8 - 10.5).  I wonder if by keeping these groups in smaller age groups, they may see less drop off when they go on to Scouts (10 - 14.5).  I do wonder how the patrol method works by moving 14.5 year olds to Explorers.  Most, if not all, of my PLs are >14.  My SPL is 16 and my JASM is 17 (Eagle).  

 

I do agree with your Cub thoughts. Especially the squirrel age. Squirrel?
 

Barry

53 minutes ago, Eagle1993 said:

I have forever been a fan of UK scouts.  Their transparency, their smaller board, their media, etc.  I also like how they separate their age groups.  Their result ... 3% of available youth in scouts.   BSA is at 1%.  

I’m now sure how any of that enhances the program towards growth, I’m willing to to listen. But, I don’t like how they separate the ages after the cub ages. Character growth is very dependent on older scouts mentorship and they don’t do a good job there. The UK scouts believe in Patrol Method, but without the older mentors, their program relies heavily on adult mentorship. And that is not the same. 
 

Barry

Just now, johnsch322 said:

Yes, some posters are calling for the end to scouting, but not many. How many ruined lives are acceptable to add good moral decision makers to the world? You should answer this question as it is a question of morality and I am sure you consider yourself a morale person.

How many lives are saved from the program. I’m a personal witness to many.

I wouldn’t be standing up for it if it weren’t true.

2 minutes ago, MYCVAStory said:

Okay, so please provide the context that will help some people come around to supporting the BSA's continuance.  I'm not calling for its termination, or encouraging its continuance.  Being a Survivor for decades whle your abuser walks free means getting pretty good at accepting to some extent things you have no control over.  But, I'm interested in understanding better the context that will help those who don't agree with you come around to the thinking that "in context" the abuse was what, not so bad?  Acceptable?  Better than other organizations?

Some here are supporting killing the program. I believe scouting is a noble program that adds good moral decision makers to the world.

Barry

9 minutes ago, MYCVAStory said:

Ahhhh....great idea....let's keep "giving context" to the abuse so it will make it seem much less devastating than it was to those of us abused.  Just so we're all clear, please remind us what percentage is the over/under line for when the abuse rate doesn't seem so bad.   Sarcasm mode off now.  The abuse, whether you believe the number of claimants or not, is more than a total number.  It was a number over time and the BSA knew it had a problem.  For those of us abused while files were kept, and refused payoffs to drop our suits and go away, "context" is irrelevant.  At some point a Trust may be validating claims.  Then there will be a better understanding of the abuse but there is no reason to believe it will not be significant and historic in its scope.  Then, the BSA will be able to better make its case every year that compared to the past it has improved.  Not yet though.

When folks want to kill a program as a result of personal harm, context and truth is very important.

Barry

14 hours ago, ThenNow said:

If 82,500 people are killed at one type of traffic light in a particular type of location or context, that type of light either doesn't work flat out or is utterly ineffective and/or dysfunctional in that context. On that basis I don't think the analogy is apt either, but don't really care so much if it is or isn't.

My concern is with the second sentence. There can be a tendency by some to switch tenses in mid argument. When a post is addressing the past, a sleight of hand switcheroo rebuttal inserts present and future. Two different arguments entirely. That swap out is unfair, invalid as a rebuttal and, most importantly irrelevant. I'm not poking, just using this example to illustrate what I see as a fault line in one side of the debate. That's all. Carry on...

One type of light! I’m travel in Europe at moment and they use the same Red Yellow Green traffic signals as the rest of the world. And, we are warned to watch out for drivers who run red lights. The whole world knows the rules and they know when the rules are broken. 

if you want to keep using the 82,000 scouts sexually abused number (which I don’t believe), can you include the total number of BSA members during the same time? I don’t know what that is, but you seem to have insight in these details. 

Barry

14 hours ago, johnsch322 said:

No that is a terrible comparison.  It does not even come close to the same thing. 

I disagree.

Barry

17 hours ago, johnsch322 said:

And here is another fact if or when this settlement is done it will be the largest CSA settlement in history.  Yet there are still people saying that the BSA did a better job at YPT than other organization's, Hmmm?

Isn’t that like saying traffic lights don’t work because someone got hurt by a drunk driver running a red light.

Scouting is very safe. Not perfect, but very safe.

Barry

19 hours ago, RememberSchiff said:

My daughter-in-law speaks highly of the results of the Patrol Method. 

Of course. We would expect nothing less from his dad.

Barry

5 hours ago, johnsch322 said:

So you are saying the ends justifies the means and you would not sacrifice your experience for mine?

My experience for yours! Should everyone in the nation sacrifice their education for the one abused student? We could go on and on, should we sacrifice aviation for one crash victim? Should we sacrifice cars? Your question doesn’t have a pragmatic relevance. Your trying use moralism to raise your anger above the nobility of scouting’s mission. But your question isn’t in context with the overall good of scouting’s mission anymore than the abuse student in public school. Bad things happen to good people, but the world doesn’t come to an end.

Barry

Just now, johnsch322 said:

Let me rephrase. Would anyone forego their wonderful experience in the BSA if it meant one less victim of abuse?

The experience is making moral and ethical decision makers of millions of young people for future generations and cultures.

Barry

1 minute ago, johnsch322 said:

 ask you this, if you could change history and not have BSA come into existence would you for the sake of all of the victims?

I was just thinking about this question with all the abuse in the public school system. In fact, you could ask the question of any organization, associated, or public institute. One victim of harm is a crime against humanity. Should the National public school system be shutdown over one victim. Maybe five. Dare not that we even consider 10 victims against  all the good that has come from the public school system over the last 100 years.

The question has no relevance forward balance and never will with the hurt with any victim of unfair harm in any system intended to advance positive growth of its members because it doesn’t take in the positive accompaniments of the goals.

if 99 percent of the community doesn’t relate to a victims pain, it’s because the 99 percent didn’t feel that experience That doesn’t mean they don’t feel compassionate. They do. 

Barry

8 hours ago, yknot said:

But it's only in scouts where you are banned or muzzled or labeled fun police for simply reading, knowing, and following the policies and procedures manual, which in BSA's case is G2SS. In any other youth organization it's not a battle to get people to follow it. If you don't follow it, you generally get tossed.

Examples please!

Barry

5 hours ago, RememberSchiff said:

IMHO, the Patrol Method is not that everyone has a specific job rather everyone helps get the whole job done.

My $0.02,

This is part of it, but patrol method is also developing habits that enable immature decision makers an environment to practice choices based from the scout law. That in of itself is chaotic enough. Some regimented procedures provide scouts a safe place to make decisions based on the law instead of emotion. Structure is kindness. And when an individual builds the habit of making decisions based from trustworthy, helpful, friendly, …….., then they have the maturity to try it differently to improve the results, just like my kids are doing as parents. 

Barry

13 hours ago, mrjohns2 said:

The non-white and non-male populations to start with. I would think that hundreds of wood badgers each year might make a small difference. Small improvements, each year, add up to a lot. 

I think you might be confusing inclusion and diversity. They aren't the same thing. Anyone who lives by the Oath and Law will do the right thing. no-matter the differences of the other person.

That being said, how do you know non-white's and non-males to be a problem, I would be interested to see your data because I know the non-males around here make up close to 50% of the membership at the adult level. So your data will be interesting. 

As for Woodbadge making a difference, well, hmm. I don't see it. Maybe I'm looking to much at the big picture. However, because I have seen it locally, I believe the BSA would have a more profound effect on the community with diversity if they spent a little more time preaching and teaching Patrol Method and Scout independent decision making. The best teacher is one's last mistake.

Barry

46 minutes ago, mrjohns2 said:

Great philosophy. The issue is that the BSA has been irrelevant to certain populations in the country the wood badge ticket item is there to help change that. 

It's just a way for the BSA to check the progressive. box. I'm not sure what population you are speaking of, but this requirement isn't going to change it. The BSA has been working to get into other demographics like inner city, but the effort is a challenge that requires a lot of resources. 

Barry

33 minutes ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

I have found that treating people as unique individuals who are created in the image of God to be the most useful take on developing relationships with people, helping them explore their challenges, hopes and dreams, and working with them to reach for their potential.

This is really good, thanks Inquisitivescouter. I used to highlight to scouts and adult leaders in training that the Scout Oath and Law are framed in diversity. The Scout states that they under their honor they will do their best to do their duty of treating all unique individuals under the one Scout Law.

Barry

It seemed our first year first campouts were rainy the first night, forcing them to set up camp in the rain. Their thorns on that campout was the rain. Two years later the rain was their best memory. I never told them that I always prayed for rain on those campouts.

Barry

I come from the camp of not co-Eding the troop program because my experience is that the adventure nature of prepubescent boys don't mix well with the organizational nature prepubescent girls, The result is neither group grows much from the experience. However, I think co-ed is fine after puberty because the maturity of their adult nature does mix well together and is a benefit for growth.. 

This I believe corelates with qwazse's experience of junior high age youth. I have the been their done that shirt.

Barry

1 hour ago, fred8033 said:

I agree.  There has always been a mismatch between perceptions and what works; a mismatch in many directions.   It's important to also remember that scouting has always a very structured program.  

I agree. The struggles come from lack of understanding the purpose of the structure. 

The scout program competes with two divergent basic instincts. The prepubescent instinct is to play. Playing is the practice of survival that theoretically prepares the youth to compete in their adult life. The adult instinct is to compete in status. The higher status in the herd provides better benefits of life.

Just about everyone has these instincts to some degree. The struggle for scouting is the youths drive to play doesn't fit in with the adults drive to compete. If the adult had the youth scouting experience, their fond memories of play balance or humbles their instinct to compete.

You can see why the adult without youth memories is going to use their instinct to compete for driving the program. What are the ways to compete in the troop program? Advancement and Leadership. Unfortunately, advancement and leadership are the easier and most apparent methods of competing in the program, which is why they often take front stage.

When the youth drive for fun is balanced with the adult drive to compete, the adult will blend competition with the fun for the goal of scout growth. The structure of Elections and patrol social order are some of the challenges of making right and wrong decisions. So a healthy program uses the balance of the youth instincts and adult instinct for growth. We just have to understand where to balance.

Barry

29 minutes ago, MattR said:

I'm going to push back on this a bit. I've met plenty of parents and kids that would have really enjoyed the free range part of scouts and yet had no desire to join. It seems to me the perception of scouts is more organized activity than make up your own fun. Advancement can easily be seen as everyone fulfilling nearly identical rrequirements. An expensive uniform that is used for meetings and travel is, well, uniform.

The idea that scouts can choose their own activities is buried way down in what anyone sees from the outside.

If that's the perception then is there any wonder why we struggle with parents that want highly structured activities? Maybe scouts is attracting the wrong kids and parents.

I don't know. The perception is outdoors fun. Just about all of scout marketing is outdoor activities. But I agree that the training has the perception of organized activities with very little balance of scout run. 

The point of my post is that scouters with a youth scouting experience are more likely to let scouts choose their own activities. Or at the very least, not focus program on the advancement list. As a youth, they remember what was fun, and not so fun. So, they jump start to that part of the experiences. 

Barry