Eagledad

I read nothing into your post. You focused on training and then asked me about the slippery slope. You are making this discussion to personal to your more specific interest of applying one of the eight methods. I was speaking more about using a specific method to drive the program. My point, once again, is use adventure to drive the program. Not advancement. Barry

The slippery slope is using advancement to drive the the program instead of outdoor activities for adventure. Advancement tends to limit the troop program to activities themed toward getting requirements signed off for rank. Adventure instead encompasses all the eight method for the purpose of a fun hands on outdoor experience. It's all to easy to let skills requirements drive the theme of the troop activities. I consider instructional teaching a red flag indicating that our program isn't doing enough outdoor activities to pass the skill along by simple observation. Of course there are times when instruction is required to pass along a skill. But, the program should be driven so that desire to learn a skill is motivated for participating in program activities, not for advancement. Funny story. Our troop spent a month getting ready for a weekend of search and rescue activities. The troop meeting activities also included first aid instructional activities to prepare for the victims of the search and rescue. What the scouts didn't know is the older scouts set up a car wreck simulation near the camp. They had a blast spending learning how to apply makeup for simulating blood and broken bones. We hiked the troop about mile into camp so that we would walk on the road of the simulated wreck. I will never forget how slowly those scouts approached the accident scene when they realized that they happened on to a bad wreck. Of course as they got closer, they recognized the older scouts and what they were doing. The older scout did an excellent job the next hour quizing the scouts of the injuries and first aid that should be applied. Everyone enjoyed the experience and learned a lot. Even the adults. Fast forward six months as our Troop Convoy driving to summer camp witness a car overturn on a wet road. Several adults trained in these things attended to the people in the vehicle while the rest of us (about 100 total) stood safely on the side of the road out of harms way. Our concern was another car loosing control into the scouts. I will never forget the first year scout who walked up to me and said in all seriousness, " we get trained for this exact situation and you won't let us help." I don't remember what I said to him, but I took his frustration as a compliment to the program. Barry

I fully agree. Ninety percent of the SPLs who attended our Council Youth Leadership Development Course (NYLT) had no training toward planning and leading PLC meetings, much less the annual planning meeting. Most who attend troop monthly PLC meetings led by a untrained SPL would likely rather watch paint dry. By the time the participants finished our four day course, they had planned at least eight PLC meetings (which include annual planning) and led at least two. The SPL handbook also gives basic direction toward planning a PLC meeting. Our troop is a little different in that our PLC meetings are held 30 minutes before each troop meeting. Our SPL becomes so efficient that most meetings run only 20 minutes. Barry

This, is not the same as this. While your focused on teaching, I was speaking more in context of using the method of advancement as the main program objective. I'm tempted to repeat my thoughts on advancement vs adventure. But I will rely on my previous posts to support my point that a program of advancement will never have the foundation for building character, nor will the program develop a maturity that is attractive for older scouts. Advancement is limited to the finite skills in the program. Listen to this scout leader: Barry

Do it in steps. Have a troop send a couple of Scouts over to teach the Webs totin chip and see where that goes. Let them prove if they are mature enough for sheath knives. Barry

Adults are just as bad with creativity as Scouts. That is why most troops rely on a Scouts skills advancement program. Even when new ideas are presented, many units nixed them because they don't fit in with the advancement theme. Education of understanding that advancement is a byproduct of adventure would be one way to encourage creativity of activities. And if the only way to get adults on board with an adventure program is compromising with some instructive advancement, then add a couple hours of free time before loading the cars for home. Barry

False narrative? I'm confident that most parents with kids in sports have at least one horror story of over the top coaches. I have some scary stories of coaches physically fighting and a couple of stories of police getting involved. TheYMCA here requires ALL parents take a morning course of controlling their behavior and then signing a contract before their kids can participate in any sport. I imagine the coaches have more extensive training. I have one funny story of a very concerned scout parent. I was one of several parents who reported him for his behavior when several of us pulled our 6 years old son's from his team. He was asked to take the assistant coach role but he instead withdrew from the team because most of the parents attended his (our) church. Short story is he was very uncomfortable how I would treat his son as his SM. Of course that's not my style and both his son's earned their Eagle and aged out in the troop. But little of that really contributes to how sports compares to scouting in developing character. During my years as a scout leader, I also coached for 12 years. Since I was obsessed with character development in scouting, I also tried to carry that goal to my coaching and found it very challenging. I Used to tell our scouting parents that the troop is the real world experience scaled down to a boys size. That is because the Scouts makes hundreds of decisions that have direct consequences on the will of the group. I found that while we can apply specific experiences of sports to real world, on the whole the outcome of character growth is very controlled and fragile. Of coarse we could argue that team members also make choices for the good of the team. But the difference, at least for me is that errors are not welcome in a sporting event because it can cause a bad outcome for the whole team. The scout program, if done correctly, is a safe place for wrong decisions because they are opportunities for growth. Same result happens in sports, errors can encourage changes in habits. But errors can have have such a dramatic result to the team that they are not welcome and many times brutal to the player. I personally believe that sports give our youth positive experience of character growth that prepares them better in their adult life. But I don't believe any parent or player joins a team to develop character. And result of that is that very few, if any, adults become coaches in little league to develop their players character. Barry

Focusing on teaching scout skills is truly a slippery slope. i think the word that concerns me here is "teaching". Boys of the scout age learn far more by observing the skills being used in action than by instructor directing. Of course Scouts need some instruction to learn specific skills, but a troop that builds on learning skills as the highest priority typically misses the point of scouting. The main purpose of the program is developing moral and ethical decision makers. The practice of making decisions occurs best in the woods, not the classroom. A troop that focuses on adventure where Scouts see scout skills used is far more successful than a troop that focuses on first class in the first year. Instead of making all the boys scout skills experts, make the program adventurous enough that if drives the boys to want more skills. Barry

Yah, it's difficult problem. Back Pack is right that Patrol Method IS the scouting program. Or at least the troop program. But the problem is "what is Patrol Method"? Adults by human instinct are ambitious and seek gratification of personal performance. With that in mind, the actions in the "advancement" process are strait forward and produces fast results. Did the scout learn a knot? Yes! Bang. Done. Sign and move to the Next Requirement. The process of Patrol Method, on the other hand, is vague compared to a first class signoff list. Even worse, the patrol method process of changing habits by responding to previous bad decisions is slow and cumbersome. It requires a great deal of patience AND trust. And in reality, performance of a scouts growth in character may not be seen for several years. Is it no wonder adults steer toward advancement activities? But let's understand, adults are not being purposely malicious in how the direct their scouting program. They honestly believe they are nobly doing exactly the program that builds character. As Back Pack points out, the BSA should do a better job training patrol method. But after 25 years of teaching different training courses, I'm not sure quality patrol method can be taught in the limited time today's adults are willing to give. Patrol method has to be experienced or observed over time to understand it's advantages. I've said many times that a new adult leader with a youth scouting experience is three years a head of most new adults without without a youth scout experience. I don't blame the adults. I blame the process that drives inexperienced adults to intuitively steer the program to be advancement driven. Because I have the youth scouting experience, I know that fishing is a lot more fun than tying knots. Barry

One of the problems the BSA caused with the first year first class program is that it unintentionally steered inexperienced adult leaders to focus on advancement. I can't count how many Wood Badge Scouters I had to counsel who wrote a Wood Badge Ticket Item intending to get 100% of their new scouts to first class in one year. And the continued domino effect of FCFY led to several other problems, one of them being the adventure part of troop programs. Troops over the last 25 years have developed an expectation that high adventure doesn't start until age 14. So, they have let the adventure of the troop program degrade to just camping out once a month. The majority of troops today don't know how to add adventure to a typical campout. Water sports, biking, canoeing, back packing and so on are activities waiting for older scouts. The result of this has also led to the loss of older scouts. When adults limit troop programs to basically first class advancement, older scouts are bored and move on. Without older scout role models, the adults have to step in. Younger scout age boys by nature don't relate to adult role models the same as brotherly older scout role models, so the growth benefits of patrol method are stunted. Troops need to get back to the simple idea of adventure in their campouts. It doesn't have to be mountain top experiences, just outdoor activities that provide growth through independent learning of new skills and practicing their association with the buddies. Our pack had a tradition of taking new Tigers and their parents fishing on their first meeting. We provided everything including breakfast. I can't describe the dozens of faces from these scouts and their parents after catching their first fish. That event alone would be a great commercial to the outdoor program of scouting. Barry

Yes, but you seem to be going around in circles to me. Scouting is about character. Adventure and leadership are how the scouting program shapes character. But go read the article again. Is it not talking about character? As a grandfather and youth leader, I think parents today are very much concerned about raising their children into mature adults of character. But the culture (pop culture) has very much defined everything that can harm their kids. AND, a parent could even get arrested from the fears of your community. Our house painter had a long night recently when the neighbor called the police because he spanked one of his kids. Another friend was visited by the policed because his kid didn't wear a bicycle helmet. Schools are terrified of food allergies. I can go on and on, but no wonder parents feel more at calm with their kids in their bedroom playing on the computer on a beautiful sunny day. Parents are looking for a safe outlet where their kids can experience life without fear of harm. Scouting is that outlet. But, if we scouters don't understand the program, how can the parents? Anyone who monitors this forum would come away feeling that patrol method is very complex because we all have opinions of how to use it differently. In reality, developing character is simply learning by the results of choices. My course participants laugh when I tell them that I want my scouts to make wrong choices because that is where they learn to change. The more wrong choices they make, the more they learn and grow. Eventually they will make fewer and fewer wrong choices. BUT, that kind of leadership goes against the natural adult instinct of protecting our youth, so the result is fewer and fewer adults who willingly allow their scouts to make wrong choices. And in this day and age of neighbors calling the police on their neighbors because their kid rode of on his bicycle without s a helmet, we start to understand the challenge of building character in an outdoor program. The challenge for the BSA today is resist going away from a character developing program and morphing into an afterschool daycare program for young adults. Personally, I don't think they are doing a very good job. Barry

What about a strait Scout tenting with a gay scout. When this question was brought up during the gay drama a couple of years ago, it was received as a form of prejudice or hate. Is that situation really any different than a male scout tenting with a female? Barry

I'm not disagreeing and I'm sure you are right, but since we pay for our training, how do you imagine the marketing dollars helping? For your pleasure, one of my favorites: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rpMFkcSn5IM Barry

Different? LOL! We are on the same track. But marketing is about selling a vision, not the intricacies of the process. If you ask the average parent what patrol method is, they won't have an answer. If you ask them the benefits of making independent decisions while spending a weekend in the woods, they will ponder for a moment their child standing near a tent fishing in the trickling stream. Barry

It's time to show parents how the outdoors builds their kids into better adults. At the very least, activities in even the most adult run units can get their kids "safely" away from the computers. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2017/09/19/teens-grow-up-slower-study/105758486/ ""The lure of the internet – which might keep kids glued to screens instead of out driving and dating – probably has had some recent impact, Twenge said. And more attentive parenting, sometimes derided as “helicopter parenting,†certainly has played a role,"" Barry

Our schools have a day where the parents come to pick up the room assignments and equipment list. We set up a table with pictures, pinewood derby cars and uniforms to attract the kids and parents to the table. We ask them to sign a visit list with their phone number. Than I start calling that night to recruit them. The same people show up to the recruitment night as well, but we have them in an assigned den by that time. I would guess 95% of the families we recruit from the visit day list came to the recruitment night. Barry

I don't know, between this post and your reasoning for discouraging OA, I almost get the feeling your are anti-male. Equalizing the sexes seems to be how you rationalize your hostility. Yes, I know, psycho babble. But I haven't seen much in your post that show otherwise. Watered down? Your program is already watered down simply by discouraging OA. Adult fears and ignorance are the biggest obstacles to allowing growth that comes from making decisions. I get the feeling your weren't a boy scout as a youth. A lot of folks say the studies are mixed. The studies have been around for a long time as well as single sex education. No one disagreed or argued with the facts until recently when mixed genders became fashionable. Watered down has a lot of implications here, but in large the program will loose the foundation of character growth from the practice of moral and ethical decisions. I have watched the program change in the last 20 dramatically away from scouts independently driving their activities to more adult driven activities. I believe part of it is due to a more fearing helicopter parenting mentality. But the other part is that fewer adult leaders have the youth experience to carry over the scouting spirit of the program. The reason we are seeing so much more advancement driven program is because the advancement process for adults is easy to understand and measure. Building character from freedom of choice doesn't have the instant measurement of unit performance like advancement. Stature is also measureable, and since leadership is a requirement of advancement, scouts are getting less freedom to choose how and when they will lead, leaving the adults to drive a program that places the boys into leadership slots so that their advancement will continue. Adults that don't have the experience of character growth by learning from independent choices typically don't trust the notion of the process. So, that is why adults without a youth experience naturally gravitate toward the measureable part of the program. We are watching the progression of the troop program changing to Webelos III. Barry

Character is not different, but the techniques and environment for developing character can have a huge impact for developing character. I guess we can rehash this again, but it's been mentioned several times in these discussions that non coed education has a positive effect in development. I guess the question is really more of how much watering down of a program is worth going coed? I don't know the answer, I'm sure it also depends on the SMs. But is it worth the risk? Barry

We developed a general set of benchmarks for all the positions in our troop. However, the expectations (benchmarks) are purposely set a bit generic because we ask each scout to define his own set of benchmarks that his will use to measure his performance. He writes his benchmarks in his book so that he and the SM can refer and discuss them later. We do that because benchmarks change as the unit grow and mature, and to tailor the benchmarks to each scout. BUT remember, growth is developed in the journey, not the destination. Sometimes scouts find they aren't very good with the particular responsibility. I have had many scouts grow considerably in character while failing to meet some of their benchmarks. I guess what I'm trying to say is for me, expectations (benchmarks) should be more of a guide for the SMs than a check list. Barry

I didn't have trouble at the Cub age because I knew to just keep the cubs moving. If they weren't exhausted by the end of the meeting, I added more jumping, yelling, clapping, and cheering somewhere in the program. Personally I feel Cubs are unfairly expected to behave like adults at Pack Meetings. IF I saw scouts talking to each other during my meetings, I took it personally that I was doing something wrong, not them. My goodness they have sit all day in school and then sit for another hour at meeting that is supposed to be fun. The scouts had so much fun at our meeting that their siblings came to join in as well. As for the Webelos, they are called the Cub Master assistants. They helped with all awards and led the flag ceremonies. They also were expected to perform at least two skits and three run on skits. They loved it. Scoutmasters told me that they never had a scout from our pack that was afraid of getting in front of the crowd. I believe that by the time our cubs left the pack, they had enough experience and confidence to lead any troop campfire. We taught our den leaders to have at least 20 minutes of free time where the scouts are running. Most of them had a basketball goal that was used heavily. I suggested sacrificing arts and crafts for physical activities is always a preference when boys are acting up. If they can't focus, just send outside with the basketball and they will go home thinking it was a good meeting. I only had two Webelos meetings a month, but they were 90 minutes long with 45 minutes of game time. I never heard a single complaint and had 100 percent participation. Boys just love to run. But to Fred's post; how he describes discipline is exactly how we taught the patrol leaders and senior scouts. If a scout is acting up, warn him once. If he continues, send him out of the room or activity. Don't yell, don't argue, don't debate, just quietly ask him to leave and deal with him later when you have the time. The youth leaders liked that method because it took conflict out of controlling behavior. If the scout was still a problem, then the SPL , JASM or SM might be brought into the picture, which was very rare. At the adult level, we learned over time to get the parents involved sooner than later. AND, LOL, we made the scout call their parents to come in early and talk with the SPL or SM. I think that scared them more than anything. As Fred implies, just nip it in the bud. It's better for everyone including the misbehaving scout. Barry

My complaint about OA today is that it allows members who are too immature to understand the distinction and priviledge of the organization. Friendly? Is that like the friendly the atmosphere of taking a test in school, CPA or Law Degree. Practicing the discipline of self control may not have a lot of jokes or laughs, but I certainly wouldn't describe ordeals as unfriendly. In it's day the honor required the maturity for understand the nobility of service and taking on the role with full enthusiasm. In the day, every scout that participated in the ordeal not only wanted to be there, they felt very honored. I beleive that comes under friendly. To bad hazing has lost it's general definition. It wasn't very long ago that Council was suggesting that scout units not recognize scout's birthdays because the act of standing in front of a group while singing happy birthday could be interpreted as hazing to some scouts. And of course there was the silly holding a cub scout up-side-down to award the Bob Cat. The boys begged for the ceremony. Sigh, sign of the times. Barry

My struggles with adult leaders in the last few years are that they are guided by ignorance more than the facts and this is just one example. OA is an honor organization that at it's heart is about serving and service. How scary can such an honor be? Arrowmen when I was a scout were super scouts. The best of the best, and they were the epitome of servant leaders. Who knows where Snow Owl imagined the misinformation about, but the scouts suffer the most because not only does Snow Owl not approve of OA, they are restricted from even considering the organization. I am not surprised that fear of pulling the scouts away from unit activities is Snow Owl's major concern. I have seen a lot of events lately that have convinced me that we live in an age of helicopter parenting. I had a discussion the other day with a scout leader who believe that the majority of scouters today are more of the helicoptering type of adult leaders. So it's not just scouting that is changing from this generation of parents, it's helicopter scout leading, helicopter coaching, and helicopter teaching. Scouting is an outward activities program that forces scouts to make independent decisions and that kind of program is being pushed out of the culture. Kids today live in a bubble created by adult fears and that bubble is getting smaller. I recently read and article that was explaining how the combination of technology (personal cell phone media) and our over the top fears for our children have led to the anti-free speech movement that some of the college campuses are experiencing. Kids today find restricting free speech easier than dealing with the challenges of free thought that comes from free speech. What are these kids calling themselves, "snowflakes"? Sounds about right. This reminds me of a local a group of boys who created a sand lot baseball team that have been in the news lately. You may have even seen them on Good Morning America. Can you believe it, a bunch of boys in the neighborhood get together weekly to play baseball, and it becomes national news. Well these boys have become popular enough that adults are coming to watch. But they are held by the rules of no cheering, no coaching and pretty much stay out of the way of the boys (I don't remember adults at any of my sand lot sports). You would not believe the uproar from some of the local adults that these boys are playing without any adult supervision. Helicopter baseball fans? Sad. You think that is over the top? Go read Snow Owls post again. Snow Owl is not alone. Snow Owls imaginative fears may even be typical. It's been trending this way for a few years now, but discussions like this throw cold water in my face that snowflakes are the future adult leaders of the BSA. Some folks think it's unfair that I view the future of BSA as an after school program. But after school programs were created to keep kids safe and out of trouble until the parents got home. Everything I see is that an afterschool scout program to keep their kids out of trouble is exactly what todays parents want.Well, that is what Badon Powell was trying to do as well. Still, Badon Powell was no Snowflake. Thank goodness that my family of men, from my dad thru his grandsons, were scouts when scouting was about developing boys into men. Barry

I don't mean to be quoting quazse so much, but he has been having his moments. It's funny you say that, my son and his wife are both 10th grade English teachers at two different high risk schools. My daughter in-law's school is being recognized a lot lately for the high rate of graduates continuing to collage. When I asked him why some schools perform better than others, he said it is "expectation" set by the school staff. My older son liked leadership because he likes to change the status quo toward his vision. My younger, more introverted, son hates the idea of others waiting on him for direction. Yet, he enjoyed responsibility because he likes making things neat and tidy. It wasn't until my older some gained some wisdom that he started looking for workers like my younger son because they always reached his vision. Much like me, my older son found that he is an idea guy that doesn't get much done unless he has a good crew of doers like my younger son. Troop leaders need to understand the difference so that they can help scouts find where they fit in that big picture of life and nurture them to continue to grow. I have found this to be a common characteristic of successful patrol method boy run programs. As our troop matured, our Eagle rate also started to grow with the membership. It was noticeable enough that when the DE visited a meeting watch our program, he asked my opinion. I basically gave him the same quote as qwazse. Our scouts are given small responsibilities when they join the troop (Grub Master and Cheer Master). As small as the expectations are, they are still challenging for the age and maturity of the new scouts. We mentored them to used the whole patrol to reach the goals of their responsibilities. Scouts are encouraged to reach out to their buddies for help in all their PORs. Eventually it's just a habit used in all their activities, not just PORs. And without realizing it, they are all of a sudden Life Scouts needing only a service project to finish Eagle. I'm not bragging about our Eagles, I am not an Eagle driven person. But the right habits of character make the path of life easier. For example, one of the results of using the many-hands is discipline. Over time our scouts developed the habit of when a scout was behaving badly, everyone around the scout was held responsible for his actions. Every scout was held accountable for the behavior (good and bad) of the scouts around them. As the PLC matured, they took pride that leaders didn't need to yell to motivate other scouts (they saw drill sergeant type troops at summer camp), they just simply spoke in a normal tone because they knew they were supported by the other scouts around them. We adults didn't drive that to happen, it was just the result of quazse's point of using many buddies. That is a big deal because the hardest action for a boy is to confront his friends while not hurting their feelings. But when character of the troop expects the best friend to confront the behavior with support from of all the other scouts, bad behavior gets nipped in the bud. Of course scouts of this age still have their moments of mischief, but reports of bad behavior to the adults drop off considerably. I remember standing in the shadows watching the troop play capture the flag. Nobody knew any adults were around. A 14 year old scout who just transferred into our troop said a few four letter words as he was playing. One of the other scouts said just matter-of-factly, "we don't talk like that here". The transfer responded just as matter-of-factly "gotcha". And that was that, nipped in the bud. Sorry to step on your post qwazse, but you have great insight. Barry

I know this is for qwazse, and I look forward to his opinion. The problem with positions like Webmaster, librarian, historian and bugler is that many units have very few expectations for those positions to hold scouts accountable. Without accountability, there is little growth or learning. For a position to have value in the big picture of the whole program, it needs to have value in contributing to the whole program. If scouts don't see themselves contributing to the big picture, then likely the position isn't really required in the program. Our PLC voted to end the bugler position. It was a sad day for the traditional side of me, but the practical side of me agreed. So, for any position to have values (expectations) in the troop, the SM needs to arrange a concept of skills and habits that develops growth in the scouts behavior (character, fitness, and citizenship). Then those expectations can be given to the scout when he gets the new position so that he and the mentor are on the same page. The mentor doesn't have to be the SM, or even and adult. I developed our JASMs to mentor first year scouts in the Grub Master and Cheer Master position. A good PL is also a good mentor as well. We used those positions to start new scouts in the habits of communication with the patrol to develop menus and skits for the monthly campouts. The mentors guided the scouts in how to communication, and researching for new ideas. The BSA doesn't do a good job of teaching adults that PORs are more about developing character than advancing stature. But if the SM can focus on the character part, the stature part naturally follows. By the way, like quazse, I pushed service projects as a great way to get leadership experience. I didn't give them POR credit, but it was a great way to get noticed by the older scouts for future leadership. Barry

I believe, that you believe what you post. I'm just suggesting respect for posters with other opinions. Barry