Eagledad

Ah, the Technology. Your continued condescending speak only exposes no confidence to even attempt swaying minds with logic or reason in a civil tone. Not unlike when gay activist suggested technology was on their side as well. They couldn't prove it either. And how could they, the workings of the mind are so complicated that there isn't technological method yet that shows unquestionable proof of ones natural gender. Barry

From a Christian perspective, God gave us ethical and moral guidelines so we as a community would guide (guard) the youth toward a consistent behavior acceptable by God. Now, I'm not professing that you accept a Christian's guide to acceptable behavior, but I am saying that when the community or culture lack some kind of general guideline to keep fleeting youth fed emotions in check, those youth will tend to look for a sanctuary to encourage growth of those emotions. It's one thing to stand back and let the community steer a child into the dark unknown, it is quite another to contribute to that act by accepting their present state of mind as acceptable. Love is not giving into fickle delusions of emotional acceptance, but protecting the weak from self-serving deception. Barry

It didn't take long for a mature dialogue of thoughts to get dragged down into the mud of judgemental condescending diatribe. Barry

At my age, I've learned it's a waste of time attempting a dialogue of ideas against closed minded theories. As with others on this forum, I have had many wonderful scouting experiences as a youth and adult in the BSA. Enough experiences to know the difference between idealism that set boundaries to protect limited vision, from the humility of keeping an open mind for new ideas to expand scouting experiences. When adults move past the pride that tends to create barriers, there is no limit in giving scouts a program where they have the freedom to experience their dreams. Barry

I happen to work in an environment where I get to observe some of these behaviors (lifestyles?) from day to day. From those observations and my experiences with people of all ages over my lfietime, I have concluded that loneliness is a powerful force that can drive us toward dark places cloaked in hope. Barry

I agree. This same thought wasn't received well during our gay scout discussions. I will go even farther in suggesting that accepting a young boy struggling with their sexual identity risk encouraging him to continue toward a path that will further complicate his struggle. The BSA needs to stay out of it so as not to be a contributor of a life of strife made by wrong decisions. Barry

I remember reading somewhere that Badon Powell's vision for scouting was world peace. I can't remember where I read that, but it has always stuck in my mind as the perfect world vision for scouting. Barry

I don't understand this fear of scouts loosing respect from one challenging experience. We are scout leaders. We have the power to change and influence young minds. People screw up, especially adults. It's how we react to the screw ups that influences those around us. That being said, I believe humilty is the most powerful reaction one could observe from others. In fact, I also believe observations of humility are becoming rarer in today's culture. If the youth don't see humility in their role models, they are less likely to express it in their own lives. Barry

Same standard, different approaches. Sometimes adults have a bad day or just act out of ignorance. Sometimes they let their egos too far. We approach them by pointing out what is expected compared to what just happened. As a Scoutmaster, I would say my time was spent 50/50 working with adults to scouts. My goal for scouts is building character. My goal for adults is setting a good example of the law and oath in front of the scouts. I'm not trying to build character in the adults, just set guidelines of their behavior. Sometimes the adults are incapable of living up to my expectations in front of the scouts, so those adults were generally moved away from the scouts. I wouldn't say I have high standards, some adults just have low habits of behavior. In a situation like this, my first priority is working with the scout to see and understand his behavior toward the other people. Then I would have the discussion with the adults to discuss their expectations of procedures. Barry

Credit to him for overcoming it? Hmm, he sets up a BOR to tell them they were wrong and then walks out! That's not overcoming, that's a tantrum. Maybe I'm reading this wrong, but knowing qwazse's scout leading skills, I feel he gets credit for direction the scout is taking. The scout obviously has a good head on his shoulders, but even the best of us need guidance when our emotions try to take control. Barry

I agree with you qwazse, even most adult leaders don't know of that documentation. My response was a reaction to the scout even having the knowledge of the boards responsibilities. Anyway, I have no trouble with the scout being proactive for meeting with the board without first discussing it with the SM, I respect being proactive with personal dealings and practices. My struggle is the scout's attitude to why he approached the board, which led to how he approached the board. Of course there is a level of respect that should be given for at least informing the SM of the boards' improper actions. Barry

In my way of thinking this is the whole story. The scout came in BOR hostel, angry and seeking revenge. Worse, he planned it out and ambushed the board. No where in the Oath and Law does it say that a scout is only friendly, courteous and kind when he chooses or when he is in a good mood. Character defines itself in difficult situations, not the best. How much more significant would the scout's approach had been if he had taken and shown the BSA documents that support him to the board. The scout failed because he lost his dignity and integrity with the board members. Even if they are wrong, the scout could have approached them as an adult and carried a mature discussion. My bride of 36 years is a CPA and I am astonished to how she deals with very difficult clients each day. She disarms them with kindness and respect. She listens quietly while they have their say, then she talks with them with a smile. She speaks in a tone that makes them feel safe to just relax. These are the skills we need to teach our youth so that they can make a positive difference in other peoples life simply by have a civil discussion. The scout isn't ready for the Eagle because he lacks maturity to act scout like when his pride is challenged. It's just me and I'm not proposing anything to qwazse because he is one of the finest leaders on this forum, but I personally would ask the scout to reconsider how to reapproach the members of board to discuss his unlike scout attitude in trying to make his point. It seems that getting in someones face to make a point is the acceptable means of presenting one's opinion today. We don't teach courtesy and manners as the standard method of dialogue. Teaching scouts the values of the Oath and Law aren't easy, but they are noble. Barry

Putting on my human behavior hat here; Blw2 and NJ are exactly right, teenagers learn what the want to learn. The way the human brain works, at least the male human brain, is that it absorbs everything it observes until puberty. In fact my child psychologist Professor friend (also a SM) says that we males learn almost 90% of our behavior by age 13 simply by who we watched. And that is why Scouting is a wonderful teaching program when the unit bases growth from watching role models in action. To this discussion, when the brain passes through puberty, the natural learning from just observing dramatically decreases and the brain starts to act proactively from what it learned. In other words, learning by observing is no longer the primary means of growth. The primary means of growth after puberty comes from active rational analyzing of situations. Basically that means we learn by our experiences or by proactively planning a change to the environment for our ambitions. In other words, the post pubescent brain only learns what it wants to learn, as apposed to the pubescent brain learns simply by watching. A post pubescent brain in nature grows when it wants to change the present status. The reason so many troops struggle with older scouts is the adults set the vision of how older scouts should behave. Part of the problem is adults think of themselves a the main teachers and providers of the scouts; babysitters. So they project that on to the older scouts. Which is fine if the adults handed the responsibility of growth over to the older scouts. But growth of behavior and learning scouts skills is not the same thing. The adults push the older scout to just teach the First Class skills basics without consideration of how scouts actually grow in the troop program. So the older scouts are just repeating their first two or three years of boring skills lectures, which doesn't require any stimulation by creative rational analyzing of the situation. It doesn't stimulate growth. And the young scouts sit in a boring class watching boring instructor that less desire to be there than the young scouts. Because their older scouts are bored and leaving the program, many troops try to build the program so the scouts is basically finished by age 14 with the Eagle. But in the human psychology world, that is about the age when the scout has become a man and is ready to take on real responsibility. His brain wants that responsibility because it desires more stimulus of growth. Most here who still read my posts have heard me say that the quality of a unit is best measured by the quality of the older scouts. That is because the younger scouts (prepubescent) by nature learn their behavior in the troop by watching the older scouts (post pubescent). Considering that older scouts learn only by their experiences or drive to change the current situation, Scouts at all ages in the troop are measurably more mature when the troop gives older scouts the freedom to be proactively creative with the managing the troop. So to blw2 and NJ's point, the more independence we adults give the older scouts to be creative and make decisions on managing the troop program, the more all the scouts will grow from the experience. And the more they will enjoy the troop experience. Barry

Wow, great discussion. It's the balance of managing the "Game with a Purpose". Barry

Yes, this is in my mind the basis for growth in the troop program. I think I spent a great deal of my SM time guiding the adults that scouts struggling in their responsibilities is ok because they are learning and hopefully growing from the experience. Adults by nature are impatient with slow performance because they measure performance at an adult perspective. But scouting is the real world scaled down to a scouts size. We are in no hurry, so we give the scouts the spce to grow. Someone of the forum said the other day that the troop program is a safe place because it is where failing is considered a good experience for learning. I always gave the same basic pep talk before elections which said that each individual should seek out a responsibility to grow, not to be perfect. Making a good effort toward their responsibilities is all that we ask because we know that whatever the results, they will have learned from the experience. Sometimes they learn that they aren't very good in those particular responsibilities. Barry

Yep, we were the same way. We eventually started asking the committee members to have their own sub meetings and then just brief the main committee of their conclusions.. The CC would monitor the committee members to make sure they were on track with the program and know what they were going to say before the meeting. That way the CC could control the meeting by minimizing the chit-chat to stay on focus of the main points. By the way, the adults learned this from the PLC, which meets once a week 30 minutes before the troop meeting. The PLC had to learn how to keep on point so they wouldn't be late for the troop meeting. That wasn't intentional, it just worked out that way. The key to short meetings is a CC (or SPL) who communicates with all the members before the meeting and knows how the meeting will go before it even starts. Barry

It's pretty common. Some troops elect the ASPL every six month, but keep the SPL for a year. In most cases, those SPLs are 16 and older. Seems to work well also. Barry

Good post, very informative. Barry

Well your experience as a Cub leader is very much like mine. While I was involved with the pack, our Webelos crossover rate went from something like 20% to over 90%. The problem with you and me is that we were experienced scouts when we joined as adults, so we had a bit of a clue of what the families needed to see. When I worked at the District and Council level, I saw and felt the problem of units without any adults who had a scouting youth experience. I created some programs in our district that resemble a lot of your camporee programs and they worked very well. But, the integrity was only there as long as the district person responsible understood the value and purpose of the programs. Some district leaders just find warm bodies to replace previous administrators and the result is failure. The best way to maintain integrity of a program is for it to come from National in a written format that anyone can follow. Of course we get into the problem of National then, but that is a different story. Barry

Part of the concern of research data is the reaction to that data. New Scout Patrols and First Class in the First Year are a reaction to data that showed new scouts who earned first class in their first year were more likely stay with the program until at least 14 years of age. Nationals reaction was to encourage troops to push new scouts to first class in the first year. That unintentionally led an interpretation of driving the program to be more advancement based. It is likely that the data should have been interpreted to mean that troops that provide a quality advancement program where scouts aren't held back from their personal goals are the kinds of programs where boys like to experience scouting. I can give several examples of National's reaction to data that hasn't met with good performance. I just don't have a lot of faith in National's ability to respond correctly to their data. As others have suggested in this thread, I'm very much in favor of National first focusing on other problem areas like the huge bureaucracy of running the pack program. I think the number of cubs leaving the program before crossover is near or even above 75%. That is an adult problem that needs attention. Barry

We do the same thing after each SPL election cycle. Barry

Our CCs understood our program very well, which is why they were selected. And typically committees were about 50/50 male female. The thing I learned about moms in general is that you can sell them all you want on boy run and patrol method, but they aren't convinced until they see it in action. Once they see it, they are not only believers, they are the troops biggest cheer leaders. I have a lot of stories about moms all of a sudden seeing the light. I don't understand it, but I saw it happen with several moms. I can't recall a single dad making the same dramatic conversion. Barry

The only suggestion I give to units as far as committee sizes is that it should be no bigger than what the CC can manage. Interestingly, my experience is that females can manage larger committees than men. Barry

I have said many times on this forum that Cub Scouts is all about the adults, not the boys. I know that sound wrong, but in reality if the adults are happy, they will bring their sons and their sons will stay in the program well into their teens. I've done it over and over. So, with that in mind, I also feel that if the Cub program is supposed to build a boys maturity for moving up into the Troop outdoors lifestyle, its' just as important (if not more important) for the adults to grow and mature into that lifestyle. As a Scoutmaster, I have taken many young boys without any outdoors experience and developed their confidence to enjoy the outdoor experience. At the same time, I lost a whole Webelos den because they were so bored that they quit before summer camp. Their Den Leader took them camping every month for two years before joining the troop and taught them all the first class skills. There was nothing they hadn't done that most of our 2nd years scouts still hadn't even experienced yet. Getting back to the adults; our culture today is at place where 3/4 of the new adult leaders joining the program have little or no outdoors experience. Is it really so hard to imagine parents concerns for sending their son out into the wilderness with just a couple of adults? In my opinion, the BSA has to step up educating the parents during their son's cub years of the wilderness experience to help them feel more comfortable about joining the Troop. I'm not sure how they should do that, but we are dealing with a whole new demographic of parents today. Barry

I kind of sounds like your concern originated with your son. Do you feel like he is stuck or his ambitions are being held back? I'm not saying I agree with one way or another because I don't have both sides of the story. But I will say that I have had many many conversations with parents who felt their son wasn't getting what he deserved. My vision for their son was different from their vision for their son and I just had to get better at explaining my vision. I will also say I can think of two families I know of who quit our troop because they (parents) didn't agree with my vision. I am not assuming you are that parent, but only showing you often Scoutmasters have these discussions. I also admit that it is difficult to understand a process that isn't explained well. I assume you have already talked to your son about it; have you talked to the manager of the process? I am assuming that's either the SPL or the SM. But be careful in how you ask the question because your question might come off as being more personal and less inquisitive of the process as a whole. And stosh is right about that a process that isn't working well is as much a teacher, if not more, than a process that functions efficiently. Barry