Eagledad

One of my marketing phrases I gave to visiting Webelos parents is: "The troop program is the real world scaled down to a boys size. We want our scouts to learn from their many experiences of making decisions so that when they grow up, they can deal with situations like waking up to a sick wife, three hungry kids and a boss calling about a deadline. Barry

This pretty much is normal operation for National. We only need to refer to the coed change discussions to find ourselves reflecting on the same thought. In fact, where is the transparency for any changes pushed on the membership. Is there any method for volunteer members to hold professionals at National accountable. Maybe they come up with some of these ideas at the water cooler or coffee pot. I would like to know that my opinion on their performance counts. Barry

Everyone's comments are on mark. The reason we don't react to other kids bad behavior like react to our own is that we think we can make a difference with by lecturing. But we learn after a few examples like yours that we have very little leverage for motivating change of behavior. That is why the better leaders don't try to change behavior, they find ways for Scouts to see the repercussions of their behavior so that they feel motivated to change. Anyway, we learned to quit working around the parents and include them on the team. We talked a lot to the parents basically bragging about and how they were doing in the program. Then when we needed to talk about bad behavior, they didn't feel like we were dumping on them. We are a team and work problems out as a team. Saying that, sometimes the parents weren't willing to contribute to the team as much is required, so it was no surprise that they quit. Most parents are all in, but once in a while, you will have to let the scout go to save your sanity. My advice from hard learned experiences is the same as others here, get the parents involved with their son's behavior in the program. Don't let their kids be just your problem. This is sound advice even in their late teen age years. Barry

I had a similar situation and my SPL assured me he would make sure the event he would be fine without him because he was working hard with the team that was running the activity. I was concerned because this Scout had a past. But the activity when off very well and I was very proud of him. It seems odd the SM wants him to quit at this point. It sounds more like a temper tantrum than mentoring wisdom. Scouting is all about boys learning about themselves from their choices. Maybe the SM has some investment in the activity and is blinded by the opportunity for your son's growth. Frankly letting your son deligate the troop activity is a risk for the SM. The results are far bigger than your son learning from the experience. Especially if your son fails. A lot of folks don't do well with risk. But Scoutmastering at its best is risky because allowing Scouts to succeed (or fail) for the Scouts growth requires understanding the dynamics of the scout program and values. If it were me, I would tell the SM that I see an opportunity he for my son to learn greatly from the experience. I would desire, if not beg, for his understanding and help in giving my son a once in a lifetime opportunity to be a better man that both of us would be proud of. Of course I would guide and mentor my son of his experience, but wisdom coming from his SM would have much greater impact. I envy your son's opportunity and hopes it is the life lesson it could be. Barry

The loss of membership as a result of burnout is so bad that I am willing to sacrifice the Tiger program for better marketing of the Wolf age entry level scouts. I have been saying that for almost 20 years. Barry

I'm gunna disagree. The problem with preK to first grade (toddlers) is the large gap of maturity with the 2nd to 5th graders. The challenge adds a lot of complexity for planning and running pack level activities. I also disagree with the challenge of sports, at least until 2nd grade. We had a couple packs defy Counsel pressure by starting their entry level at the 2nd grade instead of 1st grade. They maintained the same membership number that they had five years earlier with their Tiger program. I believe there is so much pressure on 1st grade parents confronted with the multitude of entry level programs competing for 1st graders that they are relieved to hold off a year. Actually I know this to be true because they told me. BUT for those adults who are concerned about competing programs, I would propose a program like the Girl Scouts have of a preK to 1st grade program that is separate from the pack. That way both programs can be designed independent of the maturity issue. And possibly help the burnout issue by not taxing the pre-k parents. Barry

Experts say volunteers of any volunteer organization give about 20 months before burning out. Asking a volunteer who is starting to burn out after 2 years to give one more year is not hard. I've done it many times. The problem is asking a burned out volunteer to give another two or three years (Bear Leaders). The heaviest drops in cubs when I was on district during the years around 2000 were from Tigers and 2nd year Webelos. I have heard that drop outs have increased during the bear and 1st Webelos years as well. I'm not sure why those years increased. I could only attribute it to a heavier Tiger program, but I didn't track data that long for all the cub years. Barry

I was on the District Membership Committee when National introduce the new and improved Tiger program in 2000. We had heard it was coming and we had hoped it was a scaled back program because we were already struggling with the burnout loses. Instead the new Tiger program required more adult time, not less. In fact the Tiger program alone require about 50% of the total pack adult volunteer time if done as requested. We predicted that troops would see a larger than normal decline of membership in 2005, and they did. I don't have the total cub numbers, but I believe less than 25% of Cubs from the Wolf age make it into the troops. I don't start with Tigers because the loses were huge in our area. A family program might stabilize that number some, but that one-hour-a-week will still be killer even with the whole family involved. Barry

We did this by getting a senior scout involved with the SM instead of the ASM. SPL, JASM, Troop Guide, or just an experienced respected older scout, it doesn't matter. The point was getting the scouts used to trusting the older scout as the trusted assistant of the SM. As a SM, I used the experience to get older scouts more mentoring experience. It starts out a little slow, but as the older scouts age and mature, they get used to the idea of being the trusted role models and mentors. Barry

Yes, making a program more interesting for older scouts is less about better activities and more about getting older scouts involved in the day to day management of the program. That is what you have been doing with your program. Once the older scouts have bought in to being the leaders of the program, they will naturally make the activities more attractive for all the scouts. The program will move from a First Class skills development program to a outdoors adventure program. Barry

The poor program causes the other problem of pulling the boys out. You have heard me say many times that is the parents pullout with their support, their sons will follow. Like all outside activities, scouting requires stamina for those dry times when the scout just isn't in the mood. When the program is so boring that the scouts are always whining, the parents eventually give in. The problem Sentinel is that this is a harder problem to solve than the Cub burnout issue. I could fix the burnout issue overnight simply by shortening the cub program. The troop issue has more to do with not providing a program that is interesting for older scouts. Much harder. Barry

Finally, a voice of reason. "Most" (more than 50%) new Venturing Crews in our area don't last more than five years because the adults of bad troop programs start the Crews. If they can't run a troop, what makes them think they can run a crew. Five years is about all the interest the adults have. Still, the BSA's biggest membership killer is a top heavy Cub program that drives families. Ironically the best way to fix the membership problem would be to bring the girls in at the 10 year age so the families aren't lost as a result of Cub program burnout. Barry

True, but the unit committee will make the choice for them. Unfortunately, that often leads to conflict. Barry

As someone who has a lot of experience working with multiple units in a single sponsor, as well as dealing with the struggle of finding enough volunteers, I can't see two separate programs working side by side. The charter will have to either pick supporting a single gender program or mixed. The forces of economics don't allow it any other way. Barry

It will be interesting. I've said here before that we had several mothers that specifically put their sons in our troop for the exposure to male adult role models. They made it quite clear they that while it was up to the SM, they would rather not have females camping with the boys (we had no restriction). We had several female committee chairman and they were up front that male role models would dominate the program. I also find it interesting that todays parents don't get that. I think the feminist have won in confusing equality with equal abilities. Barry

Demonstrate Scout Spirit and Living the Scout Oath and Law has been a source of contention since the day it was given power to judge a boys behavior. It's nothing new. The struggle is that there isn't a defined set of actions for Demonstrating Scout Sprite, and the result are different adult interpretations of Scout Oath and Law. You would not believe how many times National deals with this conflict on Eagle applications. And 9 times out of 10, the scout wins. Or maybe it is better understood that the troop leadership looses. So what is a parent supposed to do when they feel their child is being wronged by some self-righteous adult whose only authority is some traditional paper hierarchy of a national youth organization. They stand up against the oppression of course. Sadly, the side with the greater pride is the winner because after all, volunteerism isn't worth the heart-ach. And, ironically, Scout Spirit takes a beating because the adult role modes can't play nicely. As our program grew and the Scoutmaster matured along with learning from the experiences of dealing with the high expectations of parents, we got better at explaining what new families should expect from the program. And I know it worked because I got fewer calls in the evening from parents who felt they weren't getting their monies worth. Of course no matter how much we preach our expectations and methods of reaching those expectations, some parents still struggle with their son's less than perfect performance. So, they try to push back. Units the deal with these conflicts the best are the ones that maintain a consistent program. Troops with strong Committee Chairman have the least trouble because they usually work side-by-side with the SM. It doesn't matter how strong or weak the scoutmaster's perform, everybody look's up to them for program direction. So if the CC and SM have a full understanding and agreement of the vision (expectations) and the methods for working toward those expectations, the program is strong; no matter how weak it is. That is why I always encourage CC's take the Scoutmaster Fundamentals training with the SM. They rarely do, but the point is understood. Generally units search first for a SM to build a strong program. But I encourage units to first find a "strong" CC, because they will find the "strong" SM and the two together will build an outstanding program. I kind of went off on a rabbit trail or two, sorry. Barry

I had a few scouts transfer out after my head to head meeting with the parents. I listened patiently and then quietly replied to how and why my actions with their son were appropriate, and supported by the troop committee. I would remain consistent with my scoutmaster style. I tried to not lead the meeting a do or die type of conclusion, but I did leave them an out that there are other programs in the area they might find more acceptable for their family. Sadly, in most cases the scout didn't want to leave. I did track many of those scouts through my sons and about half them aged out of their other troop program because their parents stayed involved. Barry

Same thing; you don't actually know the true motivation or true future anymore than the rest of us. Ok, we do know something, BSA is loosing the present membership and the plan is add new membership instead of fixing the cause of the present decline. Now that sounds like a solid plan for developing a healthy program. Barry

When a poster states a theory and then finishes with a comment of not understanding the point of other posters stating theories, it's time to walk away from the computer. Barry

That's very interesting Eagle, thanks. My wife was a leader in the GSUSA while I was a Scoutmaster, so it was easy to compare. She didn't last long because the program just had no point. When she tried to run her troop like a BSA troop, she was stopped by the higher leadership. If the BSA wanted to partner with a Girls program, Campfire would be the way to go because the program closely resembled the BSA. They have been struggling with membership ever since they opened up to gays. Campfire was at the time a very values and traditional program. It didn't hold well to liberal progressivism. I don't know how they are doing today, but we haven't seen Campfire candy sells for a long time. Barry

When I took my kids to the local Scoutorama, the first place they ran to was the Pioneering area with the 3 story tower and 2 story rope bridge. Boys can build that! Pioneering was a lot easier in the days without self supporting tents, tarps and elaborate camp cook boxes. Even tripods struggle with wash basins near latrines and stoves replacing campfires. Technology has replace the need for knowing the proper knots for more comfortable camping. Pioneering towers and bridges help romanticize the skills that boys in general find boring. A clever SM then uses imagination to push the scouts a little further with visions of gadgets and camp aids. Barry

I admire CCs who value the program because they are more responsible for program quality than most realize. Basically the CC is responsible for bringing in the right volunteers to support the vision. Mot CCs just fill in vacancies, but the good ones recruit specific talent for specific responsibilities. That being said, volunteer sources are limited. Most units do the best they can with the resources they have. When I was at my prime as a "boy run" "Patrol Method" leader of a very successful program, I in my arrogance and immaturity believe every troop should be like ours and that any troop that wasn't like ours was a failure. Then I was recruited to volunteer for district where I was responsible for membership and unit quality. I learned over the years that if the families are satisfied with the program and believe they are getting their monies worth, the unit was as high quality as mine. It just had a different style that match the style of the fine adults leading it. I don't know your resources or the quality of your program, but I think you as the CC are asking the right questions to understand your situation better. Good job and I hope you find a way to work your concerns. Lots of us are here to help, but your the one on the ground and your unit is better for you. Barry

The BSA was loosing membership even before the recent membership policy changes as a result of a program structure that makes managing a unit challenging for volunteers. I have said many times that the sensible way to work the problem is fix the internal issues first. OK, that doesn't seem to be the path National is taking. So, in my mind, bringing girls (family) into the program is like the Titanic taking on more passengers with baling buckets. Even in the best case scenario, the girls membership will eventually level out leaving the program with the same internal problems that is causing the present membership to leave. In other words, bringing in girls to save the program is only a temporary solution. Barry

You know, I wished I had thought of that. There is training for rappelling, swimming and boating. Why not Pioneering! I like it. Barry

Anyone that watched the GSUSA over the last 40 or 50 years noticed that the organization has a lot of support from the womens rights groups. Way to much in some peoples' opinion. However, the GSUSA was noticeably silent during the BSA gay drama when they have the weight to apply pressure. Nothing official, but the rumors were that so long as the BSA stayed away from the GSUSA membership, the ladies would play nice. I wonder if we are about to see weight of their influence. So, on a different note; I don't know how these things work at the National level, but is there anything that shows the public who works for National and describes their responsibilities? Can't the volunteers apply any pressure for accountability? WHO ARE THESE PEOPLE? Barry