Eagledad

Yes, I agree on the written communication issue. Most here will agree that I struggle with my application of words. So much so that I've been called a lier and intentionally using bad grammer to make a point between the lines. LOL I can't seem to make a point directly, much less between the lines. Another example is your whole 4th paragraph describes me word for word "I guess I'm a bit more push the envelop type person....", and I question why you don't see that. Oh well, we move on. Something I've come to understand through many rather humbling experiences is that adults set their program style, not the program structure. It is said that SMs determine the size of their troop by their personalities, not by what they ideally desire. Don't you think a successful truly boy run program would be desired by most boys and the program would naturally grow? Then how could one assume a troop of 50 scouts is less boy run? Using a Kuduism: 300 ft is 300 ft no matter the size of the troop. I believe that in most cases a SM will have about the same level of success with any program structure because their vision and personality are the main drivers of a program performance, not the structure. Certainly a SM with a direct coaching style is going to drive a different style program, but not nessessarily better or worse. If the SPL doesn't fit well in the SM's plan, then it behooves the SM to not use one. But we shouldn't assume all SMs use the SPL the same way. In its simplicity, scouts' responsiblities along with all the Methods are only tools for the Scoutmaster to use for the greater vision. Since we each have different visions and personalities, we each use our tools differently. I like this forum because of it's unlimited resources for ideas to help make our job easier. All of us have our opinions as to why some ideas and experiences are better than others. But I'm not so sure any suggestion is bad. I'm going way to long. Sorry folks. Barry

When you start inferring that other BSA program styles are the basic causes of problems, you are going to get resistance, especially when the examples are not typical of the BSA scouting program. Lets use your suggestion from the other thread to assume other posters here don't have enough experience to know different. Instead of suggesting that scouts don' t need training, a better discussion would be how to get scouts prepared enough to have a positive experience without "over training" them. That is actually a pretty difficult task for the new SM of a new troop. I'm confident that you and I have two different styles to achieving that gaol, but I'm also confident our two different styles are equally successful. Actually I think we are probably very much the same, but we let the clutter get in the way. As you said, lets everyone here give an example of their successful experience and go from there. Barry

I agree Personal Growth isn't a written requirement, but neither is weekly meetings. However, Citizen, Character, and Fitness are general aims that should be applied to all scouting activities. And your point about a clueless group is right on as well, that is why I suggest doing some research. The difference between weekly classes and working independently on the MB is the difference of using the Advancement Method as the end goal instead of the 3 Aims. That is the big picture and it is a hard one to grasp all at once.

I understand what you are saying about training, but one adult's training is another adult's coaching. Can you imagine the chaos a new SM with a brand new troop is going to deal with if all he said on their first campout was just "Take Care of Your Boys"? You kind left out the "and then" part. Train them, Trust them, Let them go. Pretty simple really. As for all that other stuff you said to justify your every scout having a job comment: What Troop Are You Talking About? Those are visions of your fears, not tyical real life situations. Quit making stuff up. I know you have been trained, but it wouldn't hurt for even the smartest SM in the room to review PL, SPL or SM Handbook once in a while. Barry

Cnew2, if you are thinking about approaching the troop about this, do a little research and have facts and a plan ready to present. I agree with Brewmeister, it's hard to switch horse in mid stream. LOL You need to sell on the advantages of what Scouter99 calls the "personal growth" part of the process. Identify the advantages of growth form the process. You also can learn how other troops run a successful MB program without it being part of the weekly meeting. Build a couple of simple plans that ween the troop away from weekly meetings and into a program where the scouts have most of the control of how they perform in the process. I will say that from our experience, it only took only three MBs for the scouts to learn the habits of the process. Our troop goes something like this: 1. Get the MB Counselor list, 2. Pick a MB, find a partner to do it with and get a MB Card, 3. Call the Counselor to set up a date to meet and get counselor personal information to fill out the MB Card. 4. Get SM signature on MB card. After that, it's none of the troops business what the scout does until he completes all the requirements. Now of course there are different ways doing this, we had scouts call and ask the counselor to meet 30 minutes before a troop meeting, especially when the scout was alone. Sometimes it is best to work as a group, like the model rockets MB. But once everyone understand the premise of intent of the process, the counselor and scout can work out the process to completing the badge and getting them most growth at the same time. Good luck. Barry

I'm with most everyone here, we ran our prgram like Scouter99 describes. But I had a friend in another troop who ran an experiment over a couple years. He counseled a MB class of 30 scouts (I don't remember the badge) where the class met one hour before each meeting until they finished the badge. Then a year later he introduced the same badge, but didn't hold any classes before the meetings. He encourage the scouts to work on their own and call him. He started with about 30 scouts in that group as well. He signed off almost all 30 scouts in the first group who attended weekly classes and 9 in the second group. I'm am not suggesting one way or the other , I'm just pointing out this MB counselors results. I'm so fanatical about the personal growth part of the MBbadge experience that I was kicked off the District MB College team for insisting we use the same standards our troop uses with the scouts. By the way, Horsemenship is a very cool badge. As for communications, I think you will find it a lot more fun and rewarding for both you and the scout when working with each scout individually. The badge itself is a great personal growth and confidence building badge when done correctly. Barry

Master and Commander is one of my favorite movies. What I mean by biology is that the human mind isn't really ready for independent responsibility until puberty. We are wired to run in groups because it is safer and leading makes us vulnerable because we are seperated from the group. That is why you can see such a dramatic change in leadership behavior after puberty. As for the sqeakers, privledge has it's advantages. Those boys were given the expectation of leading from the day they were born. Barry

Back when our troop was young, we kind of hit a plateue with the patrols. We were trying some ideas to help them in their responsibilties and it wasn't until we adults performed a skit of the ideal Patrol Corners that I saw a light bulb turn on with a scout and a big "OHH!, I SEE NOW!. The problem with Stoshe's suggestion and with ours at the time is that we weren't in cluding enough training in the "Train Them, Trust Them, Let Them Go" process. We learned that there is a huge difference between shoving a scout into a dark cave without any tools and giving them a big enough flashlight (confidence) to move deeper into the unknown. Now, I really don't believe Stosh send his guys out in the woods without any training, but I think he doesn't recognize what he does give then so that they have the confidence to move forward. We found that training gets both scouts and adults past stalling performance. But it is difficult to know how much training is too much or too little. I teach to give enough training to give the confidence to do the job, but not so much that they are only mimicking what they learned. Mimicking can be a problem. One of the reasons National created a new Wood Badge course in 2000 was because adults in the old course went back to their units and mimicked what they experienced in their course. Well that doesn't work so when boys are added in the mix and it was causing a lot of problems. The first lesson I give a new SPL is writting a simple meeting agenda. Thats all really. You would be surprised how much better a PLC meeting goes with just a simple four or five item agenda. It gives just enough confidence to help the scout get through the meeting without any help from an impatient adult. I'm also a little surprised at Stoshes discovery of everyone having a job, that has been encourage from the begining of scouting. Barry

That you even start off with "white" takes away any credibility that you might have had for the rest of your post. Your anger as well as your prejudice precede you. Give it break, your passion of hate can''t be good for the health of you or those around you. Barry

Of course, but a broad brush painting all 17 year old Eagles as so called deathbed Eagles isn't accurate at all. Quite frankly we brag about the age of our older Eagles because it shows that we have an active program where boys like to hange out. A trend of deathbed Eagles is red flag of problems in the program. Barry

That's rediculous, our troop averages one Eagle every 2.5 months at the average age 16. That means we have a lot of late 17 year old Eagles. These guys are just busy running a troop, that's all. You want to guess how long the average 13 year old Eagle hangs around? Barry

I'm with Brewmeister on this one, we don't have enough information to know why the Scout is motivated to earn the Eagle so fast. I was reading the other day of an 11 year old who is going to an Ivy league college to become a doctor of something or other . The article didn't say if his parents are behind the boys motivation, I just assumed he isn't a run of the mill kid. Our job is to provide a program where every scout has the same opportunities to the activities as all the other scouts. If we do that correctly, the scouts follow their own vision, not ours. If the program is developed correctly, advancement and leadership are just two of the eight methods. The other six should keep the scouts busy and balance their experience in the troop. Since I have this T-shirt, I can say that a boy who is capable of earning Eagle by 13 typically has a lot of other special talents that a well meaning SM can tap from the scout. Still, my experience is the best a SM can expect is a one year delay. Also we can talk about leadership all we want, but biologically, 13 year olds aren't mature enough to understand the value of leadership. Maturity is really what is at stake here. Maturity of physical and mental health, maturity of character and maturity of citizenship. I'm guessing this 13 year old is not practicing enough of one or more of those areas of the program, or the program is failing all the scouts. Better check their camping program. Barry

OA isn't about honor camping anymore, its about another patch on the shirt, that's all. Only 10 percent of OA members last a year anyway. It's a great program for that 10% who hang around, but it still doesn have the prestige it carried back when I was a scout. Why do you think OA change the qualifications of the candidates? Barry

I disagree, almost 1/2 of the SMs never had a scouting experience, they don't know what honor camping is. And, OA pushes really hard for troops to send as many scouts as they can, at least around here. Barry

Yes, my first ordel as an adult in 1995 was quite a shock. Compared to the Ordeals of the 60s and 70s, I am now ashamed of the OA. For those who don't understand, some of the requirements differences are that OA candidates in the 70s had to be at least 14 years old and only two scouts could be elected by their peers from each troop. Eleven year olds can go now and a troop can send all their scouts if they want. As a result, most scouts going to Ordeal have less than a year experience. Hardly enough time to earn the honor of honor camper. I don't know when OA changed the requirments, but I'm sure the pressure to change was a reflection of our culture. Barry

Adding to the discussion, but not answering the question directly, the number one problem I find with units trying to deal with discipline is they don't teach the scouts to work as a team. Generally scouts misbehave in groups, not just one on one. Why then does the group not take control of the situation? Boys of this age are so use to adults taking control that they don' t have the experience (or permission) of reacting when they see bad behavior. They also don't have experiences of dealing directly with their peers (best friend) either and are shy of telling a buddy to "stop". They wait until someone of authority deals with the problem, which sometimes never happens and translates to the offending scout that his behavior is OK. Our scouts learned quickly that not only will the offending scout be held accountible for his behavior, but everyone who saw and didn't do something to stop the behavior would be held accountible as well. Bullies don't do well against groups. But another more typical example is we had a scout cut his foot badly running barefoot through camp. The accident occurred right in front of the SPL and several older scouts, but he had run almost the whole troop before he got hurt. The troop has a no running and no barefoot policies, so when I asked who attemped to stop the scout, the PLC found themselves developing program for the next couple of weeks teaching "The Whole Troop" accountibility of behavior. As Nike said, scouts don't like bad behavior either, they just need to be taught how to deal with it. Barry

Like the government, once you start making policies, you can't stop because new policies will be created with each new issue. For some scouts, policies are goals, not consequences. Three strikes rules are bad because they don't deal directly with the behavior. Should a scout only have a SM confrence when he pulls a knife on another scout? Nike gave a great reply, teach the scouts to deal with their discipline, when the problem behavior is beyound the maturity and experience of the scouts, then let the SM deal with it. Replace the three strikes with Oath and Law. Teach the scouts to be accountible for scouts bad behavior. The more severe the behavior, the higher up the ladder it goes for accountibility. The troop is supposed to be the real world scaled down to boys size so that they have real life experience when they go on their own. There are no three strikes in real life. Barry

Hey, hey, hey, don't let the ramblings of hypocritical discontents taint reality. Anyone can become a hater if they get obsessed with their anger. Despite the many false accusations that have been said on this forum the past few years about scouters, the program and especially it's members are very welcoming all over the country. I have never seen anything close in reality to anger and hate I've seen here. Barry

Culturally and ethnically diverse youth had a lot more opportunities today with the BSA than in the 1950s. Followers of activism were warned and have historical evidence that forcing moral diversity on values baised programs would be liken to throwing out the baby with the bath water. But Activist have their own scortched earth agenda and the followers are sheep who are led by emotion. Trail Life is a logical conclusion for creating a program where none other exist. I don't know much about the program, but the few folks I know considering it will except all culturally and ethnically diverse boys. But they will still be choosy about the adult roll models who lead these young men. Barry

I was pretty sure you were quoting the article, but without quotation marks, it was safer to quote your post. Thanks for the clarification. Barry

Well, ok, I'm enjoying the context of the discussion very much. It's rare to get in deep philosophical and intelectual discussions on this forum because emotions tend to take over. Brewmeister's post is profound to me because it says the issue isn't about tradition and trying to get back to the old ways, it's about understanding why some of the old ways worked. At the root, boys of today are the same of boys of yesterday and we need to understand what makes them tick to understand why the program is more prissy (sissy) or not. I do appreciate Kudus part of the discussion, but sometimes quotes without reasoning just aren't enough. Because of the challenges of WWII, my dad was not only an Eagle, but also a teenage Scoutmaster of his troop back in the early 40's. Through him I can learn what actual scouting was like at least that far back. When I ask him about hiking 14 miles for 1st class, well he laughed. Mind you my dad's troop rarely used vehicles to go camping because of the cost of fuel, they met at the church and hike out of town to their camp site. So it's not like they didn't hike. They were literly a back packing troop. I have a lot of respect for Kudu's vision of scouting and mean no disrepect, but how far back do we have to go to not be prissy or sissy? How far do our sons have to hike alone in the woods over night to prove themselves? As Brewmeister says "We go camping because it is the most useful way of achieving the aims of Scouting". Everything else is just clutter that slows down or even stops that process. I really think that is what Kudu is also trying to say. I would love to ask more questions, but my pragmatic nature sometimes pushes discussions off the edge. So I will just watch and enjoy. Barry

Then we agree, but let's not discuss it here and highjack the thread.

Well guys whatever the program calls itself, if these folks can do a better job for the boys at achieving the same goals, you have to agree it's the right program for them. As for the laser tag restriction, I think that should be discussed in the "is scouting too sissy" discussion.

Your answer Moose may be that it's less about religion and more about freedom and independence to run youth camping scout program. I've talk to a few leaders, who I respect a lot for their boy run program, that are looking at this program with curiosity because they are tired of the burdemsome paperwork and silly restrictions like lazer tag and wagons that take away from building citizens of character and leaders of integrity. Some folks just want to do good scouting and feel that National is gradually pulling them away from it. Barry

LOL, are your familiar with Martin Luther? I believe for a person to grow holy with God, they have to believe ALL of the Bible applies to them. Once we start picking only those things we like, not only do we stray away from God, we encourage others to stray away from God.