Eagledad

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

Well that supports our experience of slower growth in same age patrols. However, we also learned that adding more than two new scouts at once disrupts the dynamics of the whole existing patrol, not just the new scouts. So, if we get more new scouts than two per patrol, we put them in a NSP until after summer camp (5 to 6 months). While the new scouts may still be struggling a bit, they have enough experience and maturity to not upset the dynamics of the existing patrol. All that being said, it's important to remember that accepting new members into a close bonded group is hard no matter how much experience the new guy has. Barry

Role models. Our natural human instinct in the process of learning is to mimic what we see. We develop habits by repeating (practicing) what we mimic. Role modeling takes away the need of class room type of instruction intended to start habits. It's a lot more fun learning skills by watching and mimicing those skills in everyday activities. You have to watch the process a couple years to see the effect of learning by role modeling, but once you see, you understand it's power. Now my observations from same age patrols compared to our mixed age patrols. When a patrol doesn't have experienced role models for younger scouts to learn from, growth has to come from outside the patrol. That tends to be instructional teaching. And, that tends to be adult based, even with the troop has Troop Guides. One of the first areas where I saw same age patrols performing slower was cooking. Same age patrols tend to cook the same food over and over again until somebody steps in to show them something different. I'm not a fond of the advice that boys can live off peanut butter and jelly sandwiches because scouting isn't about getting along, it's about growing. The sandwich is only a starting place. Scouts need resources to continue their growth. Resources come much slower in same age patrols. We also found same age patrols to be more cliquish. That sounds funny in a program where all the patrols camp 100 years apart. To some degree, all patrols should be cliquish. But all the patrols are often together for one reason or another and the same age patrols didn't mix well with the rest of the scouts. They are snobs, they just seemed uncomfortable mixing in. I've heard a lot of Scoutmasters have this same observation. We found that scouts in same age patrols had less independent thought for planning and making decisions. They struggle to be creative. They tended to advance as a patrol, not as individuals. While we want patrols to bond and grow together as brothers, we also want our scouts to grow as individuals by set personal goals at their person ambitions based on their level of skills and maturity. Where I saw this becoming a problem was taking on troop leadership positions. Same age patrols tended see Troop responsibilities as taking turns. They felt that the patrol as a whole should be the troop leadership when it was their turn instead of individual scouts being setting out for a responsibility. I don't know if this is because they don't have the confidence to act individually or they rely too much on each other. But as same age patrols matured, the scouts struggle to act and grow as individuals. It was obvious as older scouts. Growth and maturity are how we measure our program performance and the same age patrols lagged in those areas. Barry

Hmm, that's a little concerning. I've never heard my name and the words "pop-culture" used in the same sentence before. Barry

Wow, stosh and I don't agree much on styles of pushing a boy run program, but this post is pretty good. My experience is different with stosh's last his last point, the boys don't typically know what they want and that is why adults struggle with older scout programs. Typically boys today aren't given enough independence to know what they are missing. Like stosh said, they are searching for an identity which motivates them to push boundaries. But I found their search tends to be varied because they don't really know where they want to go. It's true, the younger a boy is given independence to explore his interests, the sooner he finds himself and finds a direction. But our culture doesn't like young people venturing out very far because it is dangerous. Truth is most young adults today don't get much world experience to find themselves until they graduate high school. That's too late for troop programs. As I said, earlier in the discussion, I found in our troop that only 25% of our older scouts wanted more adventure. Why do we adults keep thinking adventure? I guess it is automatic that when scouters talk about adventure, they usually mean backwoods type adventure. But believe it or not, scouts have done a lot of adventure by age 14 just in camping. More adventure seem like more camping to most older scouts. They aren't looking for adventure, they are looking ways to prove their physical and mental maturity. They are looking for the adult in themselves. That is something very different. Also, I found young adult scouts want is to be respected as adults by adults. It's hard to define adults respecting young adults, what does that really mean? Let's try this; imagine how each of us greet and talk to adult leaders as they enter a troop meeting. Do we greet and talk to the scouts the same? Trust me, it's a lot harder than it sounds. If the adult didn't wear the uniform to a meeting, do you say something? What about the scout? How are the responses to adults late to the meeting compared to the scouts? We scouting adults are just parents that over the years have been programmed to see youths as empty minds needing experienced instructions to survive. Without even consideration, our brains automatically think of youths as mindless kids who can't get through the day without some kind of adult guidance. As a result, we speak down in a condescending tone to their ignorance of life's experience. Now don't feel bad, just about all adults do it. The more we experience life, the more our maturity builds up our stature as supreme vessels of life's knowledge. Hey, raising kids builds a lot of stature. And that stature demands some respect, you know what I mean. Our parent egos are so pumped in a room of kids, we probably glow in the dark. But we adults aren't bad for holding scouts down as snotty nose kids, we just haven't learned how to equalize ourselves to these young adults. Giving scouts the respect as an adult takes forethought and practice. Lots of practice. We have to practice not giving suggestions as older scouts struggle through their dilemmas. Kind of funny, at first we are proud of ourselves for not saying anything while this scouts are rattling through their issues. But a funny thing happened, they actually came up with a really good idea through all that rattling nonsense. I mean really, their idea was better than I could come up with. I remember that first experience very well. And that wouldn't have happened with the old parent me, but the adult to adult me let nature take it's course and we both grew a little that day. But, confidence is fragile. Our troop developed a Troop JLT that became so popular that other troops were sending their scouts. Our older scouts were so excited that they were coming up with new ideas. One of those idea was some kind of badge or uniform display they could give scouts who graduated the course. They got the idea from the beads of Wood Badge, but they wanted something different. I was standing back enjoying the ideas being passed around when another adult nearby jumped in and took over the discussion. I saw the color of their excitement drain from the scouts in matter seconds. And nothing ever came of the idea. Confidence needs to repeated actions to be reinforced. All the adults need to get on board or it will be a struggle for the program as a whole to step up to the next level of maturity. I guess my point in all this is that older scouts aren't necessarily looking to tell adults what they really want because most of the time they don't have enough experience to know. We haven't given them enough independence to figure it out.The adults have to push scouts to find themselves in the scout program by letting them experience the program as adults. The younger, the better. I found that scouts learning to initiate pushing their imagination in the scout program is just as hard as it is for the adults to initiate respecting the scouts as adults. But once both the scouts and the adults learn and practice their roles, watch out because the program will take off. The scouts will push the program out of the adults comfort zone, and that is when we adults found out just how serious we were about developing men of character. Barry

The assumption was the gay issue was driving membership away. Folks always think the world rotates around them. It's Human nature. I presented facts many times to show that it wasn't the gay issue hurting membership, it was, and still is, the program. Great things? Maybe! But all the U.K. can say is that they recovered back to 30 year old numbers (i think that's right). It is very possible they might have been twice the size had they left things alone. We've had many discussions. Most of us who have a grasp of reality know the program is the problem. Of coarse the gay issue took a huge hit. Even if the BSA accepts girls to slow down the loses, it still has the program issues that are still causing the present loses. If you want to start a sobering discussion, ask how many boy loses are acceptable for "doing the right thing"? Barry

History also favored the Patriots before the game started. Barry

This was said many many times just on this forum about the gays and that didn't happen. I can only suggest a look at the history of youth scouting organizations in North America that made significant membership policy changes. None have recovered to the numbers they had before the changes. Last I heard a couple years ago, the Canadian scouts was still around 60% after 20 years. If folks are going to argue for adding girls, they might be better off arguing the addition of girls would improve the quality of the program. At least then no hard data could be found to prove the theory wrong. Barry

Good for you. I relish the glass half full. Reading data and applying it is what I do for a living. And I'm pretty good at it. Still, once in a while incomprehensive optimism balances historical evidence. Barry

After working this general area of scouting for so many years, I learned that experience (good or bad) has the most impact for how adults run a unit. It's nice that National supports Patrol Method, but as simple as the method appears in print, in reality requires a great deal of discipline to direct. Those who have the experience jump into patrol method without much thought. Those who don't have the experience require proof to even trust it. And they typically don't have the patience to wait for the proof. I have watched this over and over through the years, even on the forums. Today is as good as patrol method boy run scouting will ever get. Barry

Correct, but it more than doubled the number of scouters without experience which almost overnight dramatically affected the dynamics of the troop program. So much so that new adult training courses replaced the old courses in 2000. I admit, I found it ironic that one of the main pro patrol method forum members here also used the women leaders introduction as an example that not much of the program was affected. Truth is that adding women (non-experienced adults leaders) had a huge negative affect on patrol method. And as you pointed out (as I have for several years), it will never get better. I guess we could look at admitting any and all youth as acceptable because the program will never get back to what it was, but I'm an idealist. I will hold out to the end. It does seem we are getting close. But adding girls will be the last straw for me. Barry

We are supposed to question God. God creates all of us to glorify Him. God creates us with strengths and weaknesses to guide us as we grow toward Him. Our weaknesses challenge us to grow in Gods light, and clear our vision toward our strengths. Now that we got that out of the way, I personally don't feel that scripture is the higher issue here except that some are motivated by ideals instead of consideration of the youth. I feel the intellectual challenges are pragmatic in the applications and results of both the scout and volunteers. My concerns in the order of priority: 1. Health of the scout. Mental stability of children and young teens varies a lot from their environment and capacity. Many youth have taken a path of sexuality because they didn't feel that had a choice at the time. As I said earlier, the BSA has chosen to put volunteers in a situation where they may be encouraging the scout toward more instability, not less. 2. The BSA Mission and Vision. I have been doing this scouting stuff long enough to know that changes such as these rarely help the volunteers ability to develop a program that helps boys grow toward being better ethical and moral decision makers. Someone even mentioned the addition of adding women leaders. The history of changes in the troop program and adult training pretty clearly show how adding women leaders has made reaching the Mission and Vision more challenging. And for those who like to turn words around to distract discussions, it has little to do with the gender, but more to do with the lack of experience. 3. Adding procedures that require additional volunteers and special accommodations usually restricts patrol method. I have worked with a lot of different types of mental challenges and they do take away from the overall advantages of a patrol method program. For me, the troop program is about guiding boys to develop habits of making decisions based from the virtues of the Oath and Law. Any changes that take away from that goal should not be considered. Barry

Yep, this exactly the problem. Barry

This equates morality to nothing. It's anti God and is more destructive to the culture than any other attack because society looses all baseline of moral integrity. When man starts basing good and evil from the fickle policies of popularity of the moment, the culture can't servive because the demographic with the least voice loose faith in its leaders. This really hit home for me as I read about the organizers of the women's march. The organizers drew a line that feminism is based (yes based) on the liberation that mothers can kill their preborn sons and daughters without fear of government retribution. Imagine a political party hinging its success of power of mothers killing their children as being on the "right" side. The Democratic Party accepted the feminist leaders throwing out the pro-life feminist and that was than. No debate, no "let's think this out", the party accepted the switch from pro choice to pro abortion. Our culture has come to embrace the acceptable idea of moms against their children. I guess to some the trans gender thing is obvious when scaling it down to a personal issue of what is best for that one youth. But to discount all other opinions on an egotistical idea that I'm right and your wrong places man against man without any consideration of an agreement. Ego against ego only forces a following of the guy with the biggest stick. As we have watched our leaders over the past 10 years, picking the stick that will beat our neighbor down in submission isn't working. Barry

No, some readers just might not have thought in that direction. Barry