Eagledad

I'm not sure what that means. You imply that I said boys need to be separated from moms and sisters because of their differences. Read my post again:"As for our children turning into fathers, husbands, mothers, and wives; scouting is not the end all of our maturity growth. They still are players in the arena of real life with their own parents modeling the behaviors of mature adults. Scouting can't and doesn't dominate all their growth, thank goodness." Many studies have concluded that both genders tend to do better at this age when they are segregated because they are distracted by the opposite sex. Interestingly, you followed the adversity breeds strength and character with "We manage our developmental differences in our troop by keeping the patrols separater." You post is a bit conflicting, if not confusing.. Confusion aside, I'm intrigued with your program hieudo. I try to bring a pragmatic balance to these discussions because the general reasoning for bringing girls into the program is basicaly for adult convenience. The arguments are generally: "he rest of the world does it", or " Girls are no different than boys", or "It's inevitable, so lets get it over with'. This is a great program where boys can truly grow into men of character when the program is managed correctly. It is one of the few youth programs in the U.S. where the structure is designed for the boys to learn by taking responsibility for their decisions. From my experience, I disagree that outside adversity is always a character builder. The Patrol in the Patrol Method is actually a somewhat fragile structure that can be disrupted by the smallest of interruptions. In fact I would says at least 50% of the discussions on this forum deal with the very problem. Outside distractions from the adults alone disrupt the ideals of boys making independent choices. Adults struggle to give boys independence, you think that gets easier mixing the hormonal sexes? All in all the advantages of patrol method are shut out or shutdown. It's not a theory, I've observed it over and over in non scouting youth programs where the boys and girls are mixed together. I'm intrigued with your program because you did something that nobody else has really suggested, or at least done to level of success. You attacked the problem from the girls side without really changing the patrol method of the boys side. What makes the patrol method the ideal environment for scout growth is the patrol itself. Most other adults would mixed the genders within the patrols and as I keep saying, that does change the dynamics completely. Either we are in this for the boys growth, or we are not as far as I'm concerned. Same goes for programs with our daughters. If I wanted my kids to go to a YMCA after school program, I would send them there. The Mission of the BSA program is more pointed in building ethical and moral men who make decisions. I have been doing this scouting stuff of a long time and it works as marketed when it is managed as marketed. But, by keeping the boys in boys patrols and girls in the girls patrols in your program along with keeping the BSA program on the boys side and the GSUSA on the girls side in your program, the two sides stay autonomous while still using the advantages adults seem to need with mixed gender scouting. In fact, the most popular reason adults want to bring girls into the BSA is because the quality of the GSUSA is not up to par with the BSA. I can see your structure attacking that problem successfully without taking away from the patrol method program. I would be interested in visiting your program and watching it in action. While I'm not sure there is a nation wide need for a program like yours, I can see it working for a lot of smaller communities. In fact, a program like yours might become a standard vehicle for improving the quality of the GSUSA programs. One final thought: folks keep participating in these discussions as if mixing girls into the BSA Troop program is inevitable. They don't understand the strength and will of the GSUSA. The BSA does however. If the BSA ever considers the idea of bringing in girls, they will have the wrath of the GSUSA on them and National won't know what hit them. So, with that in mind, the discussions should steer away from the BSA side and point more toward to giving girls a quality program their brothers are getting. I think your program is a model that could start that discussion. Barry

Pretty interesting article. I was looking at the four leadership traits described in the article (Supporting others, Seeking different perspectives, Operating with a strong results orientation, and Solving problems effectively) in how our troop encourages and evaluates leadership performance in our program. The four traits are almost more advanced in application than the traits we encouraged in our patrol method. Certainly Supporting others is a key part of servant leadership, but Solving Problems Effectively is a step more advanced than just understanding the problem and changing the approach for better results. Solving problems effectively is leading more actively to finding solutions that work more efficiently. It's not a hit and miss sort of thing, it is pushing the team to find the BEST solution. I think that is where a six month election cycle hurts leadership; by the time a leader gets up to speed for leading and for understanding the goal, he has run out of time to consistently push for a best solution. Even worse, I'm not sure 6 months allows a scout enough time to take ownership for wanting the best solution. I think back on one of our SPLs who after a six month break to refresh from his first time as SPL, ran again for the position with specific goals and plans in mind. He was exhibiting an intent to practice solving problems effectively even thought we weren't encouraging that trait. On a different direction, I compared these four traits against all the bosses in my lifetime and found that the two best bosses (and my two favorite) I worked under are very strong in those four traits. I found that to be very interesting and enlightening. If I were ever a Scoutmaster again............ Barry

That is equating the program pinnacle of ethical and moral behavior growth with simple knowledge of practical hand skills. You keep saying you understand, but your words don't fit the definition. I'm going to bore with what I'm about to say because you know the mechanics of the BSA structure. But you don't seem to understand the idealism within the scouting structure. How else to explain you the fallacy of your posts. The skills of the Eight Methods are only actions for working toward developing moral and ethical behaviors. In other words, the patch at best only represents a stage the scout is at in practicing behavioral decisions. The patch only represents a beginning of a scouts phase decisions process, not an end. No two scouts are equal in their knowledge of skills or their maturity of making decisions. But it does define a knowledge base the scout is working from. How often have scouters expressed frustration of 14 year old Eagles. In your explanation, all Eagles are equal regardless of age. So why are some adults frustrated with 14 year old Eagles? Aren't they just over achievers in the practice of the eight methods? Or does the community expect more from the reputation of an Eagle than just setting up a tent and tying knots? Do well expect a scout to mature by knowledge of common hand skills, or is can we expect more from the practice of making decisions? Experience of practice in making choices and decisions based on balances of the Law and Oath are priceless compared to the skills practiced in the Eight Methods to earn a patch. Shouldn't that alone have value? How can a 14 year old Eagle Scout with experience as a Patrol Leader, Troop Quartermaster, ASPL, SPL, Troop Guide and JASM even be compared with a new 14 year old scout with no record of making ethical choices and decisions? Of course you could just allow the new 14 year old Scout to test out and slap that patch on the uniform. But isn't that like an engineer testing out for a surgeon without considering the experiences of the surgeon? Doesn't experience have some value in making ethical and moral choices? That is the pinnacle of the Troop program. If proving that girls are just as smart ,and just as skilled, or just as whatever you need to feel better is your goal for Venture Scouts, then make up some award that compares apples to apples. But don't mess up a tested process so you can feel better. Barry

Well said, I enjoy big picture perspectives, especially in the possibilities of scout growth. I would enjoy working with you in the program. Still, the risk (I believe certainty) of introducing girls into the program at this age does not opening the possibilities of growth, but instead narrows the possibilities of growth. I imagine the growth for our sons in big picture of the troop program as an open umbrella. Adding girls to the program is essentially closing that umbrella. As for our children turning into fathers, husbands, mothers, and wives; scouting is not the end all of our maturity growth. They still are players in the arena of real life with their own parents modeling the behaviors of mature adults. Scouting can't and doesn't dominate all their growth, thank goodness. What it does is take the real world and reduce it to a boy size so that he can grow using specific confines of behavior at a maximum rate for his maturity. The growth risk based from the demographic changes of adding more female leaders (moms) has been explained pretty well. So let’s move on and consider the risk of a scout growth in the maturity of boys and girls in the troop age group. The actions of youth in their ages and stages are very powerful in prepubescent boys and girls who are going through hormonal changes and imbalances. It's not theory, anyone who has worked with youth of this age can reflect on the test of their patience. Working with one gender is challenging; the distraction of mixing the genders is much greater to say the least. Just as importantly, youth of this age learn most of their behavior (90% give or take) by who they observe in their everyday activities. Compound that with the importance of this maturity oberving role models of the same gender because they "will" display what they observe as young adults. It is as import for girls as it is for boys. That is the main reason I personally don't approve of opposite genders as the dominant unit leader. Boys need to observe dominant males, and girls need to observe dominant females. And yes, this discussion is just as much for the health and growth of our daughters as it is for our sons. If our daughters' don't have as much opportunity for growth, then pressure should be applied to the girls program so as not to reduce the quality of our sons' program. Finally, the maturity of our youth change with puberty. Their brains are rewired so that the impact of observing others doesn’t have near the impact as it did before puberty. This is why mixing the genders in the BSA program around age 14 doesn't have the negative effect on their growth as it does before puberty. I enjoyed your explanation of the possibilities of growth for both my sons and my daughters, but you are missing the important phases of these young peoples' maturity and instinctive drives. Nature (God) has built instincts into our youth for maximum growth for their behavior in both as children and as adults. If managed properly, the Boy Scout program, as it is now, maximizes that growth within the design of the scouts’ instincts. Mixing the genders will only distract them from their instinctive design and reduce the possibilities of their growth. I have observed and experienced it in the different youth programs of which I participated. The Troop program right now is one of the best programs for behavior growth in our culture. Changing it without consideration of the effects of that growth will only hurt our sons. Barry

I question the sanity of any BSA adult leader who believes a person grows into a moral and ethical decision maker without practice. Barry

My troops more memorable camporees are night camporees. They were under the themes of Star Wars and Star Trek, but the theme really isn't important. The change of scouting activities from day to night was the real fun. We started with a program kick off of the Saturday night campfire. After the Completion of the campfire, patrols were given their agenda and sent along their way to the activities. The activities took about three to four hours to complete. At one camporee, the adults of al lthe troops worked together to cook breakfast for all the scouts. The same was done at the other camporee except it was the dinner before before the campfire on Saturday. Other than the shift from day to night, there really wasn't a difference in camporees. But the scouts talked about it for years. As for a favorite competition, starting fires using a bow and string. Barry

Actually history already proves him right. Most of the changes the BSA made to the adult side of the program after 1990 were reactions to program quality after the induction of women in the troops. Ignoring for a moment the obvious differences in gender, the induction of women massively reduced the number of adults with a youth boy scouting experience. That led to a cascade of changes from the BSA to attack the sudden reduction of troop program quality. Anyone who has worked guiding troop leaders can explain the difference in quality of unit programs (especially new units) is dramatically affected by the youth experience of it's adults. My observation is that an adult without a youth scouting experience is set back at least three years compared to adults with the youth experience. The average troop level adults last about two years. Different, but the same, women by in large don't have the same experience of camping or outdoor experiences as compared to men. But more importantly is women don't really have the heart for it either. Again, outdoors experience and the desire for it can dramatically effect a Troop program. I experienced this myself when I was advising female scoutmasters. While I know there are some female scoutmasters who believe and use the outdoors part of the program as the primary arena for scout growth, my experience was just the opposite. In fact, I remember one scoutmaster questioning why more arts and crafts meetings wasn't appropriate for her troop. If you wonder how far the BSA had to go to react to the induction of women, I was told all the new adult training syllabuses introduced around 2000 were the result of rethinking how to get unexperienced adults up to speed the quickest. This isn't even getting into the logistical challenges of adding girls. Adding girls to the program will only increase the adult situation more. Using the argument that other countries do it isn't a sound argument because it by passes rational reasoning for making a massive change to a successful program. The argument doesn't speak of how program quality would change in the BSA. Who knows what kind of effect gender based scout programs would have in those countries. And it also ignores the elephant the room; GSUSA. The only rational reason I could accept for bringing girls into the troops program is that it will enhance the mission of developing ethical and more decision makers by using an outdoor program. If mixing boys and girls into scouting at this age is such a great thing, as I said in the other post, it is time to put our energies into changing the Girl Scout program that seems to be a major catalyst for this discussion. If adding women lowers the quality of a scouting program, logic suggest adding men would increase the quality of a Scouting program. Barry

First Class in not just a recognition of skills, it also represents a scout's trials, actions and efforts that work toward a mission of developing moral and ethical decision makers. Having the skills without the effort is not Boy Scouting. Barry

What kind of statement is that! If you could find 10,000 adults who want to earn Eagle while they are troop leaders (like the old days), the requirements could also be changed instantly. Eagle requirements come from a Troop program and continued in the Venture. NOW WE WANT TO CHANGE THE WHOLE TROOP ADVANCEMENT PROGRAM JUST FOR THE CONVENIENCE OF GIVING GIRLS AN EAGLE? Folks on this forum whine a lot about the Eagle loosing it's prestige with watered down Eagle requirements. I can't think of a better way of pretty much killing the honor of the Eagle than changing the requirements for what will only have the appearance of political correctness. Let me ask, does anyone know what the equivalent honor is in the Canadian Scouts or the Campfire Kids program? Does anyone care? Only the BSA carries that prestige and that is only because of the reputation of it's tradition. This is Boy Scouts of America. There is a program called Girl Scouts of the United States of America. Why does the Boys have to sacrifice the quality of their program to accommodate the so called progressives. It's time we see the energy spent on changing the Boys program redirected at the Girls program. It's not the boys program that is failing their gender, it is the girls program. Changing the boys program will only make it more adult run and less effective in building citizens of character and leaders of integrity. It's time we put our sons a head of our adult self serving desires. I agree with Hedgehog, 14 is a good age to bring in girls because the boys have the maturity grow without being distracted. And leave the Eagle for the boys. Create a different award for Venture. Barry

We've done some things like that as well and TT is right. We once had a competition where the winning patrol got to shave the SMs head. The scouts lost interest and it never happened. Nothing brings a patrol together more than the stress of working as a team. The more intense, the better. I was told once that a group needs to be together at least 30 to 35 hours to start bonding as a team. A weekend camp out just barely gets that in. I know it was a small thing, but that is one of the reasons we didn't break camp until after lunch. And many of us have heard the four phases of team building; Forming, storming, norming and performing. Well it's rare to find a close team that didn't go through those phases. The most intense and fastest I've watched scout teams bond (norming and performing), are the high adventure crew trips. Nothing like climbing 4000 feet at high altitude in one day to weaken the our patience. The scouts on crew trips have a few days to break down and build back up. Except for summer camp, patrols don't have the kind of time. So troops have to get creative. Bonding patrols is always a topic among troops. I don't personally have a lot of hope for the pie in the face, but I am impressed with your son initiating the idea and looking for something. I'm confident he will make it happen. Just understanding the need is 90% of the problem.

I agree. One of the lessons in humility that helped shaped our program was a scout who was frustrated from being harassed for leaving the troop meeting 45 minutes early for his job. Truth is his dad was the ASM giving him the hard time. When I sat down with him to discuss his frustration, he said "None of the adults say anything to other adults who shows up late from their work, why am I any different?". That statement was profound and we made an adjustment to our program. The SPL found a job for that scout to coach Cheer Masters and Grub Masters 30 minutes before the meeting. The adults have to be willing to learn more and faster than the scouts from the program experiences. Barry

With 90 scouts or more, over 45 percent of them were 14 and older when I was the SM. And most of them went to summer camp until they aged out. Most of our Eagles didn't have a EBOR until they we 16 or 17. My best SPL was also very active in the school band. If the program is worth it, scouts will make it work. This is why I disagree with theories about older scouts being too busy, don't want to baby sit, or need more adventure. Older scouts want to be challenge physically and mentally for their level of maturity. It's that simple and that complicated at the same time. It's a challenge for most adults to know how much is enough for developing scout growth. All of us are challenged to understand the needs of young adults. So let's not call ourselves the enemy. We adults are simply students learning how to be better scouters. If we adults fail anywhere, it's that we are too lazy or too prideful in wanting to make the effort to grow ourselves. I have never met a good scout leader right out of the box. But I have met a few who were willing to learn. Our culture holds parents from treating young adults as adults. To do so is working against the trend. But for those bold enough, the rewards are great. Barry

From my experience, one needs to have some experience with older scouts before theorizing how adults should work with them. It's usually adults of weak units that theorize that older scouts babysit younger scouts. That says a lot more about the adults than the scouts. in most cases it means the troop program hasn't matured beyond a First Class advancment program. It's usually adults that assume older scouts need more adventure to enjoy scouting. But let's think about this for a moment, if the troop is providing adventure for all the scouts, certainly the older scouts are getting their fair share of fun as well. So does pushing the older scout toward more adventure make sense? When adults don't understand why older scouts are not excited with the troop program, they seem to automatically theorize the older scouts aren't getting enough adventure. In reality, successful troops with a successful older scout program simply respects their older scouts as adults. They don't send them away to more adventure, they encourage the older scouts to be creative in running their program. Barry

Troops allowing a Tenderfoot sign off an Eagle's leadership requirement is about as likely as stosh listening to a Tiger Den Leader lecture him on patrol method. *I'm thinking the biggest argument for all these frivolous rules is because the adults want to retain control, especially in the later ranks* No, not at all. It's not about control, it's about trusting boys to make mature decisions. If an adult hasn't experienced boys making mature decisions, they struggle to envision it and accept the idea until they experience it personally. It's a parents instinct to protect the child from suffering. So, inexperienced adults (parents) raise barriers of their fears. The barriers can be eased or removed by the adults simply by the action of teaching the scouts how to work around the cause of their fears. The adults feel better for guiding the scouts toward more maturity. But in reality, the adults just basically fooled themselves into giving the scouts the freedom by simply by giving them a safe process. Most adults admit later that they were over reacting to their fear, but it takes the time for them to experience scouts making decisions to ease their fear enough to give the scouts more room to make choices. That is what I meant by compromise Eagle94. You could create a class that teaches the basics of singing off requirements. Scouts who attend the class are signed off (LOL) to sign off other scouts advancement. You appear to be giving the scouts more maturity. In reality, you are creating some time for the adults to expeirience scouts making mature choices. Once you open that door, I promise time will open it up more. Barry

It appears to me Eagle94 that you are constantly fighting brush fires while ignoring the source of the ambers. I'm a big picture person, so bare with me. Scouts in most troops are responsible for signing off advancement because that action is part of giving scouts practice in making choices with consequences or outcomes that effects the lives of others. The mission of the BSA is to develop boys into men who make moral and ethical decisions. The Scout Oath commands the scout to do his best in the duty of helping other people at all times. The Troop boy run program is purposely designed to encourage scouts to make choices and decisions that usually have consequences with other people. Making those choices gives them practice to measure how their choice are affected by the Scout Law. It's right there in both the Vision and Mission Statements. In this case, the scout is accepting responsibility for another scout's level of skill. It appears to be a small thing, but it can have big negative consequences if the troop overall starts to decline in scouts skills. The skills of the troop as a whole is a reflection of choices made by scouts. If adults continue to make these decisions for the scouts, they will never have opportunities to learn from their decisions and fail in the mission of developing ethical and moral decision makers. As you know, signing off advancement is a small action of a boy run program, but it is indicative of the adults willingness to encourage the scouts to grow toward the BSA Mission. As I said before, the skills that boys develop in the scouting program are only limited by the fears of adults. The adults, not the scouts have to learn how to not let their fears get in the way. I teach that a lot. You may very well have to discuss each individual argument to find a compromise, but if you don't start off with the BSA Ideals for the Scouts, the adults are just going to stand on their own ideals. The Ideals of the BSA Mission and Vision trump each of their ideals. Their pride may very well argue against you, but you stand on the principles of the BSA. They are being selfish, you are representing the program as it was intended 110 years ago. I hope that makes sense. You will of course have to think of this in your own words. All I'm saying is start with the big picture. Barry

Scouts can only grow within the boundaries of the adults limitations. Who knows what the scouts can do until the boundaries are removed. Remove the boundaries by taking the adults out of the process. Barry

Sound like a fun idea. Barry

You provoked a few thoughts: *I was given the go-ahead by Council to develop "my" vision of a boy run NYLT (JLTC at the time). I had full support by the council, but I remember one SM who gave me his full support and cooperation, changed his mind when he saw that the participants were given their own campsite without staff or adults to monitor their behavior. As much as we talked about the goal of giving scouts the freedom to create their own patrols and course agenda, he just couldn't find the trust to let scouts camp by themselves in a course environment at the local Scout camp. The youngest participant was 14, and he still couldn't see them as adults. *More than 75% of today's troop volunteers never had a Boy Scouting experience. And most of them have never camped. * I used to poll scout leaders at leadership training courses and I found that less than 10% of trained ASMs had read more than 10% of the Scoutmaster Handbook. Less than 25% of trained Scoutmasters had read 25% of the Scoutmaster Handbook, and less than 10% of SMs had read the whole handbook. It's one thing to talk about developing character, knowing how is something different. The BSA has some challenges for getting parents up to speed as developers of patrol method programs. Barry

We had a scout who is best described as a nerd. He hated scouting and the outdoors so much that he ran away from a camp out one night. About that same time, troop internet sites were becoming coming popular. It was a shot in the dark, but nothing else interested the scout in the troop, so we asked if he would like to give the Troop Web Site developer a chance. He was Eagle 3 years later. You just never know. Barry

Our youth live in a challenging culture. Their bodies and minds turn into adults by the age 14, but our society doesn't allow them to behave any differently than 12. Even our laws restrict our young adults from behaving like young to 18 for voting and 21 for drinking. The restrictions are to protect the society from immature adults making important decisions that can have direct effects on other people and communities. But in the same manner, it also builds a belief that 15, 16, 17 year old teens are still children, not adults. the problem feeds on itself because as the community treats young adults as children, they don't mature as adults and take that learning experience into their parenting. The average maturity for tens is forced lower with each generation. I believe this is where our generation of helicopter adults have come from. they were treated like children in their later teen years, they don't understand any differently for their own teens. The scouting is an intimidating program for today's parents because it pushes their comfort out of bounds for the safety of their children. They don't understand how making choices develops maturity, at least for youth of the scouting age. They question the age of a youth making choices that effect the lives of other people. Making those kinds of decision is for adults, not children; that's the way they were taught. Scouting is an in-your-face program that is unbelievable for most parents. Just like the "ages and stages" examples that scouting and my Child Psychologist friend talk about, most parents find it hard to believe. Parent want more proof and would rather not risk their sons getting hurt than to try this idea of scouts learning from their mistakes. Parents believe they are protecting their children from the pain of wrong choices, but I learned they are also protecting themselves of the pain of watching their children struggle. I learned this, and felt it actually, as I saw the strain of parents letting their sons go on their first weekend campout, or their first week long summer camp. Our troop developed ways over the years to prepare the parents for summer camp and we had a lot less homesick scouts. It's the parents that make a scout miss home, not the scout so much. I got my first job when I was 12. Saved enough money to by my first car when I got my license at 16. My kids are still amazed that I payed my way through college. But they live in a different world. Just as I lived in a different world from my parents who were scouts during WWII. I was a driven boy run patrol method idealist as a Scoutmaster, As a result of our boy run program, our popularity grew through the council. Who would have thought that a program that was normal for most scouts in the 70s would be considered extreme in the 90s. But when I retired as the SM and took on responsibilities at the District and Council level, I became humbled that I couldn't change all the other troops into my level of boy run of our troop because the adults (parents) struggled with my vision. So I learned how to teach the vision of changing boys into citizens of character and leaders of integrity. But it is a tough road. Parent of this generation aren't evil or wrong minded, they are just being the best parents they can from the knowledge and experiences given to them from their own parents. They are being responsible, caring, loving parents who only want the best for their children. Who is to say that Eagledad, Beaver, or Eagle94 really know what they are talking about. Scouting to most parents is camping, not character building. So what is the big deal if the Scoutmaster directs scouts in their everyday activities? Is it so hard to understand that parents look at scouting as more of an after school program? Hey, as I said, how many of you really believe in the ages and stages examples. Your skeptical and really you are not sure how to apply ages and stages even if it might be true. Well it's twice as hard for those parents who don't understand anything about the scouting program. Troops that are the most boy run are the ones that "believe" in the heart of the program. They understand how the Oath and Law make a difference in a scouts growth. I found that most Scoutmasters of the hard core boy run patrol method troops have studied Badon Powell, Bill Hillcourt and other founders. They have some understanding of GreenBar Bill Patrol Method and Badon Powell Scouts. They researched the founders to understand better how scouting works in a boys life. Most want to shuck past the husk of new scouts, BORs, rank requirements, and advancement to find the core of developing growth of character and integrity. These adults don't use boy run and patrol method because the book says so, they use it because it is the most efficient means to an end. They get it. They can define how almost every part of the troop program contributes growth in a boys' character, fitness and community activeness. And honestly boy run is a lot harder because it requires guiding each scout individually instead of by group. Boy run scout leaders are rare and as a result they are under constant assault of their the program and must constantly defend the Vision, Aims, and Methods. It wears on them, but they stick with it because they have the passion to seek a better future for their scouts. If you want what a boy run program gives to scouts, then you must be passionate and proactive because the culture has become a heavy force against youth programs that allow their youth participants the freedom to make mistakes from their personal choices. I believe that true boy run leaders today need to study harder and learn how the pieces and parts of the scout program contribute to the growth of making moral decisions based from the Oath and Law because there are fewer scout leaders who even know. I believe a true boy run adult leader today has to be courageous because they have to learn how to get past their own personal fears that block a boy run program from working. They have to believe in the product enough to let failure become positive lesson for wisdom and change. Boy run adults have to get past their egos so that they are willingly humble in front of the scouts because sometimes the scouts are right and the adults are wrong. Real boy run scouting is hard today. Even harder than 20 years ago when I was a SM. It takes a special person to support and develop a boy run program. The rewards are beyond description, but the first step requires a faith that most adults aren't willing to give. For most adults, the question is how much are they willing to compromise to make life easier for them as an adult leader in a troop program? All I can say is there are a few of us that will support every effort you all make toward your program. So of us will be judgemental, some of us will empathize. But we are here and hopefully make your adventure in scouting a little easier. You are heros to me because you are contributing into making my son into more of a man than without you. That is why I love this scouting stuff. Barry

blw2, the behavior of older scouts start from what they know. The instinct is there, but knowledge is only what they observed in their past. Desire without knowledge is like running fast in the dark. The behaviors I wrote in my above post were taught to me by a good friend who is a professor in Child Psychology and a Scoutmaster. Over time I observed his teaching many hundreds of times. Older scouts behave exactly as the role models they watched the three or so years before puberty. I've said many times that the quality of a troop should be measured by the older scouts. What is observed in the older scouts is what will be observed from the scouts following them. If that is not desired, change it. We have so much power as troop leaders to build men of character and citizens of integrity if we only use that power correctly. Barry

I've also seen troops the way Stosh describes, but only in adult guided troops. And not that that is a good or bad thing, without older scouts, adults have limited options for developing growth. But adults who ignore ages and stages tend to struggle more with older scouts because they dont understand the power of human instinct. They tend to either push mature responsibilities on inmatures scouts who really aren't are ready for that much of a jump, or do all the responsible roles for the scouts. Natural instinct pushes prepubescent boys to hang in groups where they are safe from outside danger. Standing out is not instinctive unless they feel safe. And a boy run program isn't inherently safe in that context. Which is why the BSA looses more scouts during their first six months in the troop than any other time. Boys of this age instinctively make decisions based on their personal position (survival) in the situation of the moment. Its frustrating for some adults that young boys appear so selfish in their behavior, but it's just nature. Guidance through respected role models encourages real growth much faster than immediate correction motivated from impatience. The natural behavior of post puberty scouts is the opposite. Instincts drives them to step out of the herd or group and make individual decisions for the good of the group or herd. Imagine all those nature shows where the dominant males watch over the herd. The importance of the scout program is for younger scouts to learn the habits of post puberty behavior by watching the behavior of mature role models. Ideally we want young scouts to be immersed in the servant lifestyle based from the scout law and oath. It's amazing to watch, but once a scout reaches the age of maturity, he instinctively acts with a servant heart. And you find yourself in amazement that the program really does work. Barry

Exactly! Even on this forum we experts have different opinions on boy run, patrol method, NSPs, mixed age, same age, leader styles, elections, and on and on. As Hegdgehog said, open end question are best because the answers will describe the program. But even then the listener has to know something about the program. Our PLC meets every week without any adults. Many PLCs meet once a month with adults. Either method is acceptable depending on expectations and how the meeting led. Even more important is why troops use the methods and styles they use. Can the adults explain them any other way than "it's the way scouting has always done it." And quite frankly many families like the kind of programs some of us detest. I found leaving my biases out of the mix very challenging when our district was developing the program for helping Webelos families find the right troop. The internet can also be an excellent source for guidance depending on the sites; I used to refer Webelos leaders to this forum for learning more about troop programs, but not anymore. The "my way or the highway" tone here drives unexperienced newcomers away. It's better to find opportunities to educate them in district activities. Barry

No, it was not that at all. Shesh. Barry

I took the OPs question to be idealistic, so I haven't participated. Is eight a good starting place? Sure, why not. But as Beaverah points out, eight is just a starting place. But our troop has a reputation of being friendly toward sports and other big activities like band, so we typically experience a 25-35 percent reduction of attendance, depending on the season of sports. I confirmed that figure during January and summer when participation is highest because there is relatively no sports pulling scouts away at the time. In that culture, our scouts plan a head for the activities and experience in the troop. A football player plans to run for PL in the January. We had one scout plan his calendar to run for SPL a head 18 months to fit around his swimming team schedule. We see many players show up late friday night or early saturday after the their game. We adults figure that the troop can either fight for time in a boys busy schedule, or join them and welcome them when they can. We typically have 95% of scouts go to summer camp, which is an incredible number when you consider 45 percent of the troop is 14 and older. The patrol sizes bounce between 6 to 12 scouts. Ideal? I don't know, we adults honestly don't get involved unless we see some dramatic loss of growth. I'm sure their is some struggle, but with mixed age patrols, the maturity of the older scouts balances a lot of those struggles. As I said, 8 scouts is idealistic. Real life finds balance through experience. I think the question is where do we adults fit in that circle of life? Barry