Eagledad

Well we didn't end up doing this, but we did a lot of research into separate programs under one troop and the results weren't very good. Three out of the four programs changed back to one single program. First, logistics is a killer. The troops would require either meeting on separate nights or in separate meeting places. Either way the adults are being pulled hard, especially the SM. The committee is pulled in several different directions as well. Imagine the challenge of finding enough adults for one functioning troop committee, now you have to double or triple. In our research, the scouts do ok because they are in patrols anyways, so it's not that big of change. But, troops are adult programs for guiding youth toward men of character. Even in the most boy run programs, success and failure is dependent on the adults. What we found is that the programs become lopsided very quickly because skills of the adults will tend favor one program over the other. Not on purpose, it just worked out that way with the adults of the programs I researched. The SM burns out quickly as well as the adults on his staff and the committee who tend to work the needs of both programs trying to keep their heads above water. While boy run becomes more of a challenge as the troop grows, working it under a single program of skilled adults is easier than dividing the groups up. And, I personally found the scouts come up with some pretty good ideas themselves when you let them go. Also, there is one other consideration, depending how far the unit wants to take it. Many of the families in our troop heard about our research and informed us that they joined the program that we had, not a program that might be split. They would consider taking their son and their adult volunteering time and leave for another troop. Yes, it's complicated. Barry

So you are saying that there is something wrong with the present program that is causing a decline. The fix to the problem is adding girls to the same program with the same problem. Hmm, ok, there is no arguing with that kind of logic. Barry

Trust me, this is much harder to accomplish than you think when your program is the most popular in town. Our goal was to keep the number below 40. We tried all kinds of ideas to slow our growth, but we past 40 in our 3rd year. shesh, thinking back, boy run becomes very complicated when the troop grows that large that fast. Barry

This is exactly right. I believe all the advantages of one gender program are mostly diminished by puberty. I'm not even that concerned about girls in cubs except that I can't see how girls could be turned away after Webelos. So, instead of fighting that battle, I would rather keep the program as is and let girls join at the Venturing age. Barry

I wasn't asking you or those who think like to reconsider, I never thought you would because your reasoning isn't based from experiences or facts. I only wanted you to understand there is a lot at stake here. You say your reasons are clear, but there is nothing clear in the simple statement that girls would add strength to the program. I can state examples why I believe female leaders took away strength from the program. I'm not sure you could give examples otherwise. In fact, history is on my side. The program will take a hit and not recover for some time. History shows that. Is it worth it for the theory of adding strength? That is all I ask. And, I don't think you have a sneeky ulterior motive, I think you are being up front. But your reasoning is not pragmatic, it's more emotionally based. Is that self-serving, oh I don't know. I wasn't thinking that. Experts in human behavior say almost 90 percent prepubescent behavior growth occurs by observing role models. Role models of the same gender have a higher impact on that growth. Adding girls, and female leaders in a youth program ages 14 and under dilutes that impact of growth on boys side of the program. Oh I know troops already have female leaders, but adding girls will increase the balance heavier to female role models. Same with the girls side. Male role models don't have the same influence on behavior growth for young girls as female role models. This isn't even getting into the complications of logistics for patrol method. But I don't think it's a reach, even if the patrols do camp 300 feet apart. Barry

I believe it. I know of parents who didn't care one way or the other about gays scouts, they just didn't want to be involved in an organization with a political spotlight on it. While I believe the BSA program is the best youth organization around for building citizens of character and leaders of integrity, it is not the only game in town. Barry

Because the cost of required plumbing and equipment closed some camps. And because of the previous membership changes, many councils don't have the donations they once had. Wow! Sounds like a pretty politically correct approach to convincing folks like me who believe that changing membership reduces the growth my son would benefit by not changing. This was the same reasoning used for accepting gays. I get the feeling you don't really care about program membership strength, you are just reaching. The only scout program that has as many members after a major membership change is the Boy Scouts in Great Britton. And it took 30 years to get there. Imagine how many scouts they would have now if they had done nothing. I could go on with your other theories, but here is the problem I see, I believe that admitting girls will slowly dissolve the advantages boys would have with an all boy troop. I't s not touchy feely theories, I worked the program long enough that I can't see how girls maintains the same program quality, much less improve it. So I ask, if there is even a slight risk that boys will loose some growth potential as a result of adding female scouts and scouters, is it worth it to you? I don't really care about your answer, it's more of a question for you to ponder to learn your real motivation for wanting girls in the Boy Scout program. Barry

What I'm guessing will happen is the cub scouts will get the fair share of the girls. When those girls crossover, just taking boys will become difficult for many reasons. Barry

Well first let me speak for the large number of new scouts. Our experience was very much like your experience, so here is what we learned. Anytime a troop jumps 40% in size, the program is starting over again. I know that seems kind of extreme, but neither the adults or scouts are used to the dynamics of so many members with zero knowledge or experience in your troop. Over the years, our experienced scouts would say the worst behaving scout in the troop is the new scout. When half the troop is new scouts, behavior can quickly get out of control. So prepare the scouts that new scouts like chatter, wonder around, talk while others are talking and even disappear (going to bathroom without anyone noticing). Double up the Troop Guides. We even had a Troop Guide ASPL who was responsible for making sure the NSPs had enough TGs. Teach the adults to stand back far enough to let the TGs work, but close enough for scouts to ask for help if their situation becomes impossible. The adults will be tempted to step in, and they need too, but in most cases the scouts get it figured out. Adults should never make the first move in any situation. Let the scouts deal with it and ask for help if they need it. Keep the new scouts busy. We found that teaching the new scouts how to use camping equipment for their first campout was a good way (fun) of indoctrinating them into the the Troop program. They get to practice with real troop gear (very cool for them), and the experience allows the troop guides time to build confidence working with these wild monkeys, and building a personal relationship (just learning names takes time). NSPs that struggle the most are the ones where the scouts do the most sitting. After about a month, they will settle down. Consider NOW the logistics of your troop. Is the meeting place big enough? Do you have enough drivers? How about patrol equipment? Our new troop of 15 scout got 25 new scouts the next year. We lost half those scouts in three months because our adults stumbled around reacting to the new size instead of getting a head of it. Scouts run the program, but the adults are in a panic, the scouts will feel it. So react with confidence that a new problem is a good problem. Oh, remember, last years summer camp site will be too small this year. Work hand in hand and as a team with the PLC for working out ideas, situations and problems. The PLC will be grateful for the help, and grow a lot in maturity for the responsibility. The more they do, the more your troop will mature. Next year will be a lot easier for them. That's it for right now, I'm sure I can think of a lot more if you need. Our troop took grew 40 to 60% each year for the first seven years after starting. We are boy run troop, so we weren't looking for that kind of growth. At least not that fast. We learned A LOT. As for considering the health of the other troops, That is a very noble approach. Well done. If I were you, I would invite the SM and CC of the other troops over for refreshments and cookies to discuss your concern. I would practice how you will start the discussion so that you don't come off condescending as the troop receiving such a large new group. Instead speak in the big picture of the health of the troops and how to approach the keeping some balance. Maybe consider a Troop night night where all troops set up a booth and display at at church or school. Or a day where the troops set up a patrol campsite to allow the Webelos to visit and ask questions. But more importantly is for all the troops to maintain a good relationship so these matters can be easily discussed. Be aware that the unit leaders might not feel as noble and instead have more ambitious ideas. I had to deal with a lot of, lets say, overly zealous unit recruiting while I was on district. They don't see themselves as doing anything wrong. Still I admire your troops attitude and think it's worth a try. I hope this helps a little. Barry

Good question. The Aims are the down in the trenches unit goals the adults use to help the scouts toward the BSA Mission. The BSA Mission is preparing young people to make ethical and moral choices over their lifetime by instilling in them the values of the Scout Oath and Law. And sure, the Mission is not specific to a gender, but Mission goals has it's most influence toward growth when the genders are separated. At least at the troop age where using the Eight Methods is specified for the troop program. We talk about "boys becoming men" because this is after all the Boy Scouts. But I expect Girl Scout leaders talk about "girls becoming women". Barry

This is how I use the adult association in our troop when I was Scoutmaster: I personally feel young adult scouts and Scouter age adults should confer with each other as a team of adults instead of a mix of scouts and scouters. I would like that attitude for all troop scout ages, but certainly the Eagle scouts. In the bigger picture, I believe living the Scout Oath and Law requires each scout and scouter to consider the needs, expectations, and abilities of the whole group, so as not to limit themselves. That is why I welcome scouts to include adults as part of their bag of resources for their patrol activities. Young adults need to respect the benefits of older adults, and older adults need to respect young adults as equals with less of life's experiences. Barry

Why do I think this is bad.... Oh yah, I call it equality through mediocrity. But Latin Scot said it much more eloquently. Barry

Our NYLT (actually JLTC at the time) was also scout run when I was the Council JLT chairman. While the scouts learned a lot from the experience, it didn't help the problem of Scoutmasters understanding what the scouts learned. That is why we added the required adult part of the course. Barry

Moderate, or moderator. I've known you on this forum a long time NJ, moderate would lean toward exaggeration. And I think it is also why you can't tolerate letting the discussions get too political. As for the "This movement is about taking down religious, male, conservative institutions." quote; a gay activist organizer said that exact same thing to me in 1993. I thought ridiculous at the time. Barry

Oh I know, but we also found that scouts behave differently when their adults pass by. They enjoy a break from their troop adults. I'm not against the idea and I do think it is good idea that works. I wish all troop adults could have the experience.

I don't understand the discussion; the BSA can't be successful without girls? Really? As I have said before, admitting girls should be based on if the membership change will help "boys" grow more than the program is doing now. And I don't see how it can. If the patrol method is as powerful as many of us claim it to be in building character, putting girls in that mix adds a complication that makes it more challenging, not less. Barry

Imagine doing a remodel of your house. You aren't a craftsman of installing new floors, new cabinets, appliances, plumbing or electrical, but you can design the plan, schedule the contractors, arrange payment for materials and labor. Eagle scouts should be able to handle themselves as adults, so acquiring help from adults is reasonable. Barry

Well I'm not stating a theory, I have been watching the change for the last 50 years. As for the first scouters, they had a single vision to which the built the program around. Folks today aren't working toward a single vision. Not even the National. Barry

Yes, I was going to throw that in, but decided to not complicate the picture. My 34 and 30 year old son are likely the rare adults now who experienced a patrol method program. Barry Whoops, sorry about the key typo

I like this idea a lot and did suggest it to the council when I retired from Council JLT Chairman. However, having the adults does have an effect on the scouts. Getting adults up to speed on boy run, patrol method, or what ever you want to call it is an interesting dilemma. We can train the boys but the adult's screw it up? LOL There is no easy solution. As was spoken in one of the discussions last week, with over 75% (probably close to 85%) of adults joining the BSA without a youth scouting experience, the odds are against building a traditional patrol method program. And training adults to understand patrol method is not as simple as putting them in patrols and letting them play boy scout for a week or two. The old Wood Badge course did that and the adults nearly destroyed the patrol method standard because they forced their scouts to duplicate have their experience of the course. Truth is you can't take the helicopter parent out of the scout leader until the scout leader experiences or witnesses the internal motivation to change from making a previous decision. Scouts given the freedom and safety to make independent decisions for themselves and their group is what patrol method allows. Forcing scouts to duplicate the Wood Badge experience is not giving scouts independence. As a result, the old course was scrapped. The problem we have with preaching "take care of your scouts" to inexperienced adults is that real growth comes from the motivation to still take care of your scouts after you did it wrong the first time. That is a very difficult concept to teach, which is why the BSA fails at it. I'm honestly not sure it can be taught in a training course. Patrol Method wasn't a huge issue when 60 to 70 percent of the adults joining the BSA had some patrol method experience as a youth. Barry

The delimna of any training is that the syllabus presents only one approach or set of guidelines to a program with diverse approaches. Just take a look at the different "my way or high way" responses in this thread. Did these seasoned (legends in their own mind) leaders go to the same training? The way we attempted to work the problem of newly NYLT trained Scouts was to require the SM attend a 2 hours talk on the last day of the NYLT course. The talk was heavy on Aims, Methods, boy run, and what the scouts were taught in the course. Then the scout participants were asked to sit with their SM for an hour to review the Scouts list of ideas they wanted to bring to their troop program. The scout and SM developed a plan together of how the SM will support the scout in his list of ideas. The Scouts created the list as they attended their classes. The idea was based on on the Wood Badge Ticket Items for the adults. We called the Scouts and SMs 6 months later to see how the Scouts were doing. It was the SMs who praised NYLT for bringing new ideas to their program. I think the Scouts just assumed that they would make a difference. The SMs knew better from previous NYLT courses. Even us experts on this forum have different interpretations of how to approach the program. The best way to minimize interpretations is to direct one set of guidelines at the groups as a whole. District and Council trainings is the best way of doing that in scouting. But the trainers must be of one mind on the subject content they are teaching, otherwise even the training courses will have multiple interpretations. Barry

This is where most, if not all, the scouting organizations in North America who made major membership changes have ended up. The Canadian Scouts are nearer to 50% of what they were when they started making their membership changes. What really makes that even more significant is that the Canadian Scouts Program was considered the premiere Scouting model in the world. But to be fair, I believe their membership changes were forced on the organization by the government. Barry

This is why some scouters have no integrity with me. In all my years of scouting as a youth and scouter, I have never seen this kind of consistent behavior. Units that I know with consistent behavior issues eventually changed the adult leadership to survive. A program running on the theme of "taking care of your scouts" doesn't have consistent bullying issues. Why would older scouts suddenly quit wanting to take care of their scouts and switch to bullying? Does that even make sense? How could the BSA have survived 80 years of traditional mixed age patrols if the older scouts were all bullies? I believe troops follow programs that fit their adults best. Age base (traditional) patrols work best for some of us, same-age patrols work best for the rest of us. And then there are those between. But I have enough experience and have been around long enough that I can tell when someone is demonizing rather than relaying experiences. Shesh. Barry

Wow! Canadian Scouts all over again. Scouts will survive, it just won't be scouting anymore. So long patrol method. Barry

To maintain the scout independence, our new scouts are instructed that the current patrols can recruit from the new scout patrol anytime they want, or wait until the NSP disbands after summer camp and work it out then. It is up to them. And, the new scouts can ask to join a patrol at any time as well. So it's pretty open. But during my time as a leader, I never saw a patrol recruit any new scout until after summer camp, nor have I witnessed a new scout request moving to a patrol until after summer camp. And as far as the last picked scouts go, that sort of implies the current patrols somewhat care what new scouts they get. I don't know why, but that is very rare as well. Current patrols instead work it out with the SPL the week the new scouts are disbanded. The SPL does ask the new scouts if they have a preference patrol, but I found the patrol leaders were more or less content with any scout. I can't say it's bad or good, I don't know. But I got the fewest calls from the parents of new scouts and the fewest complaints from scouts with this new scout process. Barry