Eagledad

>>I'm happy with my methods, and those favoring highly competetive events are certainly welcome to their methods too.

>>And again -- this kind of competition is aimed primarily at Tiger Cubs, Wolves and Bears.

>>I have only won a couple big competitions in my life --1st -courting my wife

>>No matter how one sugar-coats the process, competition means someone's going to win and everyone else is going to lose.

I spent a lot time building confidence in scouts. I've always said confidence is the flashlight of going into the dark cave of life. That being said, I don't think confidence replaces competition. Competition is the natural instinctive drive to dominate. It gives us the edge to survive. We may not understand it today in a society where we don't have to compete for our very survival, but it is a carryover from the times man had to fight against nature and enemy to survive. Boys have the same natural desire to practice their instinctive survival desires as young animals like lions, tigers, and bears. For humans, it is even more important for boys to practice competitive games so they learn how to control their resultant emotions. Uncontrolled reactions are the natural instinctive animal responses to actions and events that challenge the brains view of a safe or perfect environment. Training ourselve to react against our instincts and to act appropriately within the acceptance of our culture is developing character. The whole idea of the BSA program is putting boys in a safe environment where they experience the natural urges so that they develop the character to resist those urges. I think a discussion of how to provide a safe environment for boys to practice competition is important. But I think suggesting competition is bad for a boy is distructive for raising a boy into a healthy man. I'll bet every one of us can think of a situation where an adult behaved badly in competition. Win or loose, that is an instance of a person not learning how to deal with their emotions as a youth. The lessons that teach us character usually come at a much higher cost when we are adults. Barry

>>Somewhere, there needs to be an actual physical learning/ training time. Time for them to actually do what they are expected to do in Boy Scouts.

>>That's not quite an example of a Scout being abused at camp, but it's pretty close

>>I wonder of the 50 or so coaches in my baseball league, how many are predators?

>>That being said, if you were just grouping age ranges for any kind of program in general, the UK model is probably about right.

My experience from the membership Chairman point of view is Three out of four Venturing Crews failed inside four years. Actually I think that number is higher, but its hard to track. Just about all Crews created by Troops eventually failed. The ones that succeeded have very heavy adult involvement to keep it going. I found the two main reasons for starting a new Crew and Venture Patrol was needing a program to save the older scouts from leaving or a way for adults bored with the Troop to stay busy. This developed the saying in our District of if you couldnt make it work in the troop, what makes you think you can do it better in Venturing?. And they didn't. The Venturing programs that are successful provide a theme that is difficult for a Troop program to providelike: Aviation, Law Enforcement, medical emergency, sailing, scuba diving and cinematography. In fact, many of these programs have been around for many many years. The Scuba Explorer Post I joined when I was 16 is still around today as a Venturing Crew. My observations are that the vast majority of failed Venture Crews were started by bored adults. I worked really hard with Troops that were considering the Crews or even Venture patrols to reconsider it because they were going into it with the wrong motivation. As soon as the passionate adult who invested the energy to hold the program together left, the program failed within the year. It is much better to improve the troop program to hold the older scouts than split the troop program. Im not sure how Venturing fits in National long range vision anymore. When I was an Explorer, the program was used as vocational training. Now I know Scuba Diving isnt really a practical vocation in the big picture, but law enforcement, aviation and medical emergency certainly fit that vision. Barry

This is a great question Beav. If I remember right, the Canadian Scouts had the same kind of structure as the UK Scouts accept for the 14 year old limit on the Troop Scouts. I had a lot of respect for that structure before they changed in the 90s. It had more outdoor program for the cub ages while adding more mature program for the older scouts. Anyway to your question, I think adding the Beaver Scouts to the BSA would reverse the trend of loosing cub scouts that we are seeing today. The 5 year Cub program is burning out the adults and strangling the Webelos program. The Beaver Scouts suggestion separates boys with a toddler age maturity from boys with a grade school maturity and would simplify both programs immensely allowing the adults to put more focus on the smaller easier to manage groups. As for the rest, I agree it would help in a lot of the issues you brought up. But for me, I do not like the Scouts being limited to age 14 for two reasons: First, the success of Troop age scouts comes from the younger scouts learning from the actions of the older more mature scouts. My experience is there isnt enough difference in the maturity between 11 year olds and 14 year olds to have a real difference on the younger scouts growth. We need the 15 thru 17 year olds for the role modeling to make a real impact. Second, generally mature troops have a program where the oldest scouts run the program with the younger scouts developing the maturity and skills at their own pace to move into the leadership positions when they reach the appropriate age and maturity. Four years isnt near enough time for the program to develop an older generation of leadership. The difference between young troops that dont have the older scouts and the mature troops program with older scouts is that scouts in the younger troops feel that they are obligated to take their turn in leadership position when they reach an expected agen. The troop either gets bland from unenthusiastic leadership or the adults have to get more involved to inject more ideas and variety. The mature troop programs tend to separate scouts who want leadership from scouts who are satisfied with lesser responsibilities. It makes a big difference in the developing the maturity of each individual scout and leads to a more exciting program for all the Scouts. Other than that, I like your proposal and think it would simplify the program a lot. Barry

>>But you don't have to look to far in these forums to see experienced and respected scouters advocating that Scouting would be better off without cub scouts

Hmm, does the lazer level come under lazer gun or power tool? Barry

The power tools restriction is a myth. I believe scouts should use power tools so that they can learn the safey behind using power tools. I've young adults tell me that my meeting on lawn mowers and lawn mower safety was one of their favorite Webelos meetings. A lot of dads even showed up for that meeting. Our Webelos used a lot of power tools for many of their projects. Many of our Eagle projects rented some fun and interesting power tools. Kind of funny, the tool that causes the most reported injuries in scouting is the bow saw. Barry

>>So please enlighten me how having money and being involved in scouting in the burbs makes you a better citizen than us poor black and Hispanic folks in da hood.

>>Ya know Barry, the scouts know who is rich or not. It is very apparent at summer camp. The troops zipping along in Gators or the rest of us eating their dust. The troops that show up in a bus, not school, and tandem axle trailer painted to match

>>Units in comfortable suburbs tend to forget this fact,

>>but we also don't want a bunch of 17 year and 364-day old Eagles either, right?

I don't have one nearby to verify it, but I believe there is some mention of a promise of FCFY in the begining of the Scout Handbook. SR540Beaver and I come from the same council, but times are changing because getting all the first year scouts to FC in one year was a common Wood Badge ticket item back in the 90's and early 2000's. Barry

I think the results of the FCFY program are more complicated than saying National is encouraging more priority of advancement. National added the FCFY in, I think, 1989 because they found from polling data that scouts who earned 1st class in the first year tended to stay in the program for at least three years. Sounds logical I guess, but Im convinced they misread the data. What they should have read from the data is that scouts in a quality program want to be involved for several years because it appeals to scouts of all troop ages. In other words, the program is so much fun that scouts stay involved for several years. If one could find the data, they would find that the BSA has struggled with first year losses long time, maybe since beginning of the program. It is in fact the largest loss of scouts of all the other ages. It took our own troop about six years to shape our program so that we didnt loose first year scouts. But as we constantly developed the first year program, we also constantly reviewed and change the rest of the program as well. After about five years, we had a pretty solid program where 40% of the scouts were 14 and older. We had a program that scouts enjoyed for several years. But we didnt start out that way. We lost over 50% of our new scouts for the first three years. A lower quality program where scouts dont hang around long dont stay long enough for scouts to get their FC in two years much less one. By simple math, a lower quality program could never show a high number of FCFY scouts because only the scouts who like what ever program existed (Leaders kids?) stayed long enough to earn the FCFY. The other part that I personally think complicated the FCFY issue is over 50% of scout leaders today never had a youth experience in scouting. Adults with no experience have to rely on training to guide the program. Women were allowed into the program in 1989, so when the FCFY program started, it still had some balance of leaders who had some scouting experience as a youth to guide the way they shaped the goals of their troop program. Adults who dont have that experience have to rely more on what National tells them the goals should be and how they should get to those goals. It is obvious to Eagle92 and I what the goals are and how to get to those goals because we have been there and done that. But what about folks like Lisabob and adult males who werent in scouts. Now I know that Lisabob has a very good sense of what a quality program looks like, but from my experience, that is not typical for inexperience adults (male or female). WE should ask ourselves, if an adult doesnt have a clue, how should we explain the advancmement method. Actually I think Lisabob did a pretty good job of that in the other thread. And its not a good or bad adult thing, adults by their very nature look for ways to know that they are performing well in what ever we do. So its natural for us who want to do a really good job and have no other frame of reference to see that FCFY gives us a good achievement number to prove that we are performing our duties well. I have found that these same adults tend to change their goals if they hang around for a few years because they start to see what works and doesnt work. National uses the FCFY program to give adults a short term goal. But, my problem with it is not just the advancement issue, FCFY also encoruages aged based patrols, which in my experience does not work well in developing a quality boy run program. I don't think National really cares because I've heard more than once that an aged base program is Nationals long range plan. Sorry this is long. Barry

Ealge92 and Lisabob 92, you and I come from basically the same experience and same mold. Lets just say that when I read your post, brilliant minds think a like. By the way, I think Eamonn created that mold for us. Anyway, I was the scoutmaster of many Eagles, and that says a lot for a true boy run program that was NOT advancement driven. We were leadership driven and personal skills driven, which I think led to so many eagles in our troop. But we had one Eagle who gave a speech at his Eagle court of Honor that still touches me today. It went something like this: And I want to thank my parents for without them, I would not be standing here today. Yes, I admit that I did not like them hounding me about earning the Eagle. But I did recognize their sacrifices so that I could earn it. My dad put in thousands of hours as a Scout Leader and my mom gave as much time on the committee. They never begged or pleaded, they just reminded me of my schedule and my goals. They were that little push I needed until I grew up enough to understand how to push myself. I share this honor with them, not because they wanted it more than me, but because they love me enough to guide me as parents should. Now that was a speech from the heart and it was the speech of a real Eagle. I heard the speech early enough in my scouting career that I allowed it to balance my principles of guiding scouts how set his path and his goals and how I guided scouts to be more self sufficient in achieving their goals. If we were to have Eagles in our Troop, I wanted all of them to be as mature as that young man. But even more, I wanted all our scouts to have that same maturity the day the left scouting, no matter their rank. To add, my 28 year old son is an Eagle, but my 25 year old left Scouting at age 18 as a Life Scout, just like his dad. So I can Totally relate to both of your positions. And in fact I think both you and Lisabob are identical in your thinking on the subject. Both of you have always been pretty consistent on this subject through the years, which makes this forum pretty valuable for those adults seeking wisdom. I thank you Eagle92 and Lisabob for that. Lisabob, I fully understand how you feel with your son. My favorite oldest son earned his Eagle within two weeks of being 18, so there is hope. My favorite youngest son just couldnt see it, and to this day has no regrets, so it will be OK. Of course parents want the best and the most for their kids. And I understand that at the core for many of us parents, it isnt about resumes or job applications, its just about reaching that bar that was set just a little higher. We dont want them to have regrets later down the road and it maybe we would like just a hint of ambition they will use in their future. I understand that its not about the Eagle, it something deeper and more important. Its about proving they will be OK in their future as an adult. It just one more little bit of evidence that they will be OK. I can only say that what helped me as a SM wanting all my scouts to set their highest goals and feel satisfied with their accomplishments was that as a Life Scout, I still have no regrets what-so-ever because the values that I gained from my experience in scouting as a youth are so ingrained in my character that I felt compelled to pass them on to the youth I encountered in my life. Not just as a SM, but as a father, coach, church youth leader and a member of the community. I didnt get the badge, but I must have got the heart because I have passed on my scouting soul to hundreds of boys and girls after me. Which is probably the reason I love this scouting stuff so much. Barry

There are as many approaches to the advancement method as there are raisins in a box of Raisin Bran. There have also been merit badge mills long before I was a scout wayyy backkkk in the 60s. Alladults have different motivations toward their vision for scouts. But the difference today that I believe has caused some of the problems we see with the advancement method is the introduction of the First Class in the First Year program. The FCFY program basically directs all adults to put advancement a head of most of the other methods. Its nolonger up to the scout to set a goal and a pace, the adults do that now. Use to, badges were in most cases recognition for a level skills a scout had learned to survive on his own in the woods. Rank had respect because it displayed scouts who you could trust to came back from a weekend in the woods. Now badges are used as markers for adults to track so they know how well they are meeting BSA set standards. Its not that adults are lazy, but how does a new scout leader measure patrol method or leadership. FCFY sets and easy measurement for adults to meet. I dont think we need to take the advancement method out of the program, we just need to remove FCFY and instead encourage a quality program where any scout could advance on his own as fast as he wanted. Barry

Eng61, what percent of the scout abuse cases occurred on Scout campouts or outtings? Barry

I don't understand the point of the discussion. If the scouter didn't ask you to leave Basement, would you still have started this thread? I have personally witnessed scouts behaving badly and we did report it to their council. Don't know if the council did anything. I remember the Canadian authority our crews had to visit on the Boundary Waters to get permission to enter Canada and use their campsites. Once all our paperwork checked out and we paid all the fees, she pulled us all together and proceeded to lecture our crews that Boys Scouts were her worst enemy because they are so destructive to the Canadian campsites. She then handed us a photo album with dozens of pictures of campsite destruction. I personally don't believe many of the pictures were the results of scouts because there was some evidence of hunting and fishing gear. But she was bigger and meaner than any of us and we weren't going to go up that stream. But she still must have had some bad experiences with Scouts to have the feelings she expressed toward us. I should have asked her if she felt this was a BSA problem or a Canadian Scouts problem, but we were ready to move on to our first portage. The problem scouting faces is the number of scout campers compared to the number of non scout campers. Our troop typically hikes trails where we don't run into too many other folks. But when do, its a 50/50 chance that they are another scouting group. With that many scouts out there in the back county, odds are nonscouting folks are going to run into some unscout like behavior. And once a person has one experience, the rest of us are painted the same color. Even Basementdweller appears to think less of scouts after his experience. Not sure what we can do about it. I really believe using the Scout Law fixes most problems, even big group situations. Our Troop breaks up our bigger groups to keep them small just so we don't sound like a herd of bears running from a fire. But it is a learning experience. I still struggle to get scouts to hold a low tone on the Boundary Water lakes. Barry

>>Each of your troops have potentially dozens of parents who are relegated to the sidelines for every outing