Eagledad

Well yes, by the adults looking at the problem at the Aims perspective and working from there, the scouts make changes at the Methods level. We had a situation where the scouts were bringing too much soda to the camp outs. It was leading to unhealthy diets and trashy campsites. So, I approach the SPL and told him that we adults were observing unhealthy changes to the Fitness Aim. So, the SPL and I came up with a compromising solution of only one 2 liter bottle of soda per campout. He presented it to the PLC and got it approved. Not only did that solve the observed problems, the patrols pretty much stopped bringing pop all together because 2 liter bottles are a hassle for back packing style patrols. Which is were we really wanted the scouts to go in the first place. I just wanted it to be their decision. We stayed out of their responsiblities of running the program and they respected our expectations of character, fitness and citizenship. Barry

Hmm, that is a complex question because their are so many dynamics of setting goals and developing skills, toward, or as a result of those goals. It might be easier to define the differences as a result of scout choices. And many of these things come by accident. For example we had to take a scout to the emergency room during summer camp because the he subbed his toes while running through camp. The adults camp at a separate campsite across the road from the scouts, so I have to walk over to talk the SPL. And in short, the SPL saw the whole thing happen. He knew the rules of shoes being required and no running in camp and even confessed that he didn't try to stop the scout. In fact, at least 20 scouts witness the scout running through camp without shoes and didn't try to stop him. Being a little frustrated, I had a SM Conference with all the scouts at once and pointed out that they were all as much at fault with the accident as the scout himself. When comparing their choices to the law, they all failed and someone got hurt. That was a red flag to emphasis that taking care of each other often means telling your brother scout that they are doing it wrong. I coached the PLC to watch and help each other. I started having conferences with all the scout involved with a scout's bad decisions. If a PL is having trouble with one scout, don't wait for the call of help, wander over and offer your help. Don't yell across the room as a distraction, just quietly wander over. What I didn't know at the time of summer camp but came to learn was the scouts needed permission to call their friends on some of their bad decisions. They didn't want to be a bad guy acting like police on their friends bad decisions. I gave them reason and an excuse to be that bad guy. I turned the bad guy image into being a good guy. It was like letting air out of a balloon, all of a sudden calling each other on their bad decision was a good character action. The result at the troop level was that incidences of bad decisions brought to the SM dropped to almost zero in 6 months. If an incidence did get to the SM, it was usually a new scout that wasn't respecting the youth leadership. The scouts starting being proactive in dealing with the discipline of bad decisions. Simply telling your tent mate to put on shoes nips something worse down the road. That has nothing to do with the Methods, but very much to do with Character and fitness at the Aims level. And probably citizenship if we discussed the subject in details. That is one example of many. I just have to think of them. Barry

Apologies? You have a very fine troop, no apologies required. I don't mean any disrespect, I just personally feel that giving the scouts the responsibilities of their activities and just taking responsibilities for their decisions is the next step in adult leadership maturity. But, I admit, that is my big picture of developing Citizens of Character and Leaders of Integrity. Vision keeps us going strait, which isn't always easy. I commend anyone that stays in the lane away from the gutters. Barry

The program is changing enough that ethical decision making will fad into a myth because the method of challenging a scout to make ethical decisions requires a moral reference. The YMCA was created for moral and ethical development of boys. Does our culture today respect the Young Men's Christian Association as an organization built on the foundation of morality? Or even ethical development? Oh, some will say the oath and Law doesn't require religious reference to be valid, but once a consistent moral reference (god) is taken from the ethical decision making process, character is left to be defined by the strongest adult in the group and the mood they are in at the moment. The reference of ethics will just depend. One only needs to look our schools to see how that will go with kids who make a moral decision only to find the adult doesn't agree. Like the YMCA, Scouting will only be a family weekend program. The Eagle will only mean that they stuck it out for more than year. I'm waiting for the day that the ty-die t-shirt and purple neckerchief are the official uniform. Then, the alumni of the traditional program can define the difference between the Boy Scouts that died in 20??, and the Scout Family Weekend Fun Program. Barry

This is pretty good, you are way ahead of most troops. May I ask if your committee discusses how the troop is doing in the 3 Aims, Character, fitness and citizenship (I'm old school, so I don't include the new aim of leadership)? In my philosophy of a boy run program, the scouts are responsible for the Methods, and the adults are responsible for the Aims. If the scouts aren't doing the Methods correctly, the adults will likely see the problem in the Aims. Then the SM can identify a change or changes to influence more progress. Judging troop performance from Methods to Aims is a difficult shift of accountability. But ideally the separation of responsibilities pushes the program more towards the objective of preparing young people to make ethical and moral choices. The adults shift their focus from Methods (or scouts actions) in making decisions, and more to the bigger picture results of decisions based from the character actions of the Scout Law. Everything in the Aims is based from the integrity of scouts decisions in their activities. As I said, shifting from asking the question of, if the troop is spending enough time (or to much) on advancement, to letting the scouts control their advancement and asking the question of, do the adults see a measurable change of better character, is a challenge for adults. But, the adults will see a remarkable rise in the maturity of the troop culture if they work toward that focus. Just a thought. Barry

Well, I said Stand Back, and my point was the problem of adults not letting scouts run the show. I think you find that the adults of successful patrol method troops somehow someway set the example of successful leadership while giving them room to make decisions. I remember asking a new ASM what he thought about our troop. This was after 3 campouts, he said “I’m surprised that the scouts side of camp mimics the adults side.”. He was surprised because the adults camp was typically out of sight 100 yards away. Just what kind of example should adults set 100 yards away, and out of sight? I’m not sure, but if the adults are truly giving the scouts authority to run the program, and still holding them accountable for their decisions, something in that process must work. I always told everyone that the adults weren’t scouts and not to expect them to be a patrol. Not in the troop sense anyway. We always stood behind scouts during assembly, and never where we would be a distraction to the youth leaders. Adults never put up the scouts sign first, but instead modeled a reaction to the youth leaders putting their signs up. Maybe that in a way was a model of leadership, I don’t know. Maybe adults, in their maturity, already set the example of helping each other. But as I said, I have found that when a group needs to help each other to be successful, someone is going to step up and help. And that will likely be a more mature scout who has been around long enough to learn from his mentors. Barry

Good question. My initial response is yes, because all the other scouting programs a declining as well. But then I started thinking about the GSUSA. Are they declining? Ironically, at least for me, the GSUSA is the one scouting organization left that hasn't been in the spotlight of changing it's program to the will of a progressive agenda. Now I agree, the GSUSA sold out to the progressives a long time ago, but they seem to have stayed out of the spotlight of radical change in the last few years. Will they eventually be the flag ship of scouting? Barry

I believe the romance of Scoutings idealism was beaten out of the population with political correctness. I remember listening to a young couple, during the gay scouting debates, when asked about their opinion of putting their kids into scouts, they didn't want to add more political drama in their life. Scouting used to be a refuge from real life. It then became one of the headlines. It was then I heard the big donor supporters, I mean the really big ones, where stepping back. Up until then, scouting had an idealistic image of developing the perfect citizen. So, maybe, the BSA is about to go through a change where the grassroots of tradition will drive more of the local program. Who knows, the Canadian Scouts went the opposite direction of turning into a progressive example of a global youth social association. Barry

The adults have a different agenda, or they are supposed to have a different agenda. I taught that adults are responsible for Character, Fitness, and Citizenship. Scouts are responsible for Patrols, camping, advancement, relationship with adults, growth in making decisions, decisions base from Oath and Law, leadership and uniform. Scouts don't have much of a problem with their responsibilities, it's the adults that can't seem to stay in their lane. So, to your point of the SPL driving a fun program; scouts know what fun is, so the scout should be driving the fun. You are right to question how we teach leadership. But I'm not sure about teaching the psychology or attitude of leadership is the starting place, even for adults. After experiencing life of working with youth, good leadership is best learned by watching good leaders. Of course the question is what are the qualities of a leader? I've come to realize that each SM has their own ideals of leadership, and most try to teach that those qualities to their scouts verbally. Ironically, what the scouts take away from their leadership mentors are the actions of their mentors, not the words. Scouts need less teaching, and more actions of application. The only adult course I believe that taught leadership specifically was the old Woodbadge, which ended in 1999. And that course was designed to teach advanced teaching skills, not leadership skills. BSA doesn't have a real leadership course today. And maybe that is a good thing. I used to believe that all people have some leadership abilities, but I've come to realize that only a small percentage of the population have good leadership abilities. The rest just have a few learned skills that they can apply in specific situations that they happen upon. So, maybe courses should focus on how to let the scouts work the program where leadership decisions are forced so the scouts can reach high goals and maintain an orderly culture by making decisions based on the oath and law. Where the adults fail today, as compared to my troop as a youth, is that they don't allow the scouts to work toward high goals that forces them to organize for success. I've use the example of Laser Tag a lot; I watched a group of boys who didn't know each other come together as a team in just a few minutes because they were highly motivated to be successful. The goals of success and motivation for success was so clear to each person in the group, that some members were willingly submissive to the stronger leaders, just so they could succeed. That is amazing to me. Imagine a goal so strong that each member of the group wants so bad that they go against their pride and humbly find their spot on the team just to so they could share in the team success. That is the instinctive description of a wolf pack. And how does each member learn the skills of leadership, by simply watching the leaders of their group. I've seen it, when the time forces it, even the submissive person will step up to lead because they have the knowledge. If the adults could get the scouts to that point, then the scouts would be ready for the next step of polishing their leadership, which then would be learning the psychology and attitude of leadership. That is where styles of leadership would come into play, and where the SM could show the advantages of servant leadership. But, in the real world most adults are a long ways from that point of leadership development. Pragmatically, I would happy to just see most SMs stand back and let the SPLs and PLs run the program. Barry

Great great post. I couldn’t say it better. We turned into a backpacking troop just for the example DuctTape gave. When we discuss the idea of giving up the patrol camp boxes, we thought the patrols might resist. But the opposite was true, the scouts loved it because they hated those boxes. To add, our PLs are responsible for finding transportation to their activities. The camping ASM assisted them at first because they are responsible for signing up drivers, but the PLs eventually learned how to call the usual drivers. And, the patrols didn’t have to drive together, they could set their own schedule, although I never saw them do it. Ducttape is right on with adult resistance. But that is just human nature, I deal with the same thing at work. The best way to get by-in quicker is give them ownership and seek suggestions idea for making it a success. Barry

The main responsibility of the CC is protect the vision of the program. Everyone likes to give the SM credit for being the gatekeeper, but the responsibility initially falls on the CC who insures the SM runs the program to the vision. If the SM is running the program appropriately, then the CC supports and protects the SM. Part of that support is delegating responsibilities in the weaknesses of the program. Learning the weaknesses answers your second question. Barry

Ah, this old timer has a lot to learn. Thanks Barry

Desperate? Sure sounds like you disapprove. There isn't any art to disagreeing agreeably, just requires a little humility. Barry

As the troop trailer was being loaded, one patrol realized they forgot to buy food. What was interesting about that was all the parents pulled in tight around ME to see what I would say. I said figure it out. Let's go. Strangely, the parents where happy with that response. The scouts manage to get enough food on the drive to the campout. One patrol brought food, but left their Patrol Box. That forced them to learn how to cook on a fire. They enjoyed that experience so much, they cooked most of their meals on a fire from that time on. That was my older son's patrol and he told me after his first family camping trip that his wife was impressed with his fireside cooking. She grew up on a working cattle ranch and said they never eat that well on cattle drives. When my son was a troop guide, all the scouts under him learned their cooking skills on the fire. He always cooked a turkey on the new scouts first camp out to show them how good camp cooking tasted. Picture attached. My sons told me that patrols made mistakes forgetting food all the time, but since they knew the adults wouldn't help, the patrols just got good at helping each other out. I think that is a good habit to learn for life, but it did hurt to hear that they thought we adults were callus of these things. Truth is that we brought extra food just for such of emergencies. They only needed to ask. Barry

Rarely have I disagreed with Latin Scot, I'm not sure I ever have. But, nothing to be gained by showing pride for your kids kind of goes too far. Most here know that I take the uniform very seriously and setting the proper example is ver important. But, there are limits to what the adults are trying model. To be fair, the only parents I saw wearing parent pins on the uniform were mothers. It didn't seemed like a dad thing to do. But, I always felt the pins looked appropriate. I have nothing against knots, even though I'm a less-is-more kind of person and only wore the adult religious knot, I didn't mind other adults standing on their rows and rows of knots. In most cases, they earned them. That being said, I wouldn't mind a parent giving up a row or two to parent pins. Barry

Grubmaster is a developing skills job. Budget, quality, taste, and so on. The position shouldn't be shoved from one scout to the next. A couple of helpers makes the responsibility more fun. If the GM gets the money up front, then mom doesn't need to worry about it and can relax in the car while the scouts purchase their food. If the local supermarket is close, she doesn't even need to drive. There is a typical cost per scout that usually works out most of the time. It was $10 fifteen years ago, probably closer to $13 or $14 now. Scouts get good at it. If the adults start dreading parts of the program, they will translate that dread down to the scouts. If the scouts dread a part of the program, then they need to change it to make it more fun. The troop is the real world experience scaled down to a boys size, so the adults need to grab every opportunity to give their scouts that real world experience. Shopping under a fixed budget is good skill to learn. Barry

The two biggest shocks when I became a scout leader were MB Colleges and female bathrooms at the camp I attended when I was a scout. Summer camps, even when I was a scout, made earning MBs easier than at home. How could they not. But, troops back when I was a kid took responsibility for advancement and didn't leave summer to do most of the advancement program. That is the problem I see today. And it is getting worse because the majority of adults joining today don't have a youth experience to base their approach to leading a troop. As more scouts experience bad programs, they will also lead those same programs when they become adults. Patrol Method as was intended by the pioneers of scouting will only be a shell of the traditional patrol method. Name only. Barry

Skeptic, I remember when you were just a youngster. I joined in Nov 2002. Barry

Shesh, it didn't seem this hard with the scouts. Barry

There is no requirement to observe a "debate" and I feel safe assuming that a video of a public meeting wasn't what the MB developers were thinking. I would have been disappointed as well. In my opinion, observing a City Council meeting is one of the few highlights of the Citizenship in the Community requirements. The summer camp guide should advise that scouts would have to complete that requirement on their own time. Barry

It's our personal nature I guess. I'm by nature a minimalist; in place of a wallet, my cell phone case has slots where I carry my drivers license and one credit card. If I loose anyone one of those three items, I loose all three. My son pulled out his wallet the other day and it was as thick as a baseball. I have no idea what he carries in it, but I'm sure he is more prepared than me. Barry

Our troop loves this stuff. The older scouts set the example, but most of our scouts grow to learn. Even the shy scouts want to get involved. The Troop once got a standing ovation at summer camp for their skit. Our color guards strive to never do a simple flag ceremony. As I said, fun should be the first objective. Then, ................ Barry

I admit I was trying to understand what the Communication MB has to do with planning and leading any group gathering like COH and Campfires. Of course we like to help scouts working on those requirements by giving them some priority, if they ask. But advancement requirements is not the point for planning and leading group assemblies. And, while developing scout growth and confidence is the higher priority, I would say "fun" is the motivation and objective. I've watch to many troops drop campfires from their schedules because the scouts learned to dread them. If it's not fun, the scouts will kill it. Advancement is not always a good motivator for quality. I'm reminded of one of the causes that nearly killed our District Camporees was district giving scouters looking to complete a Woodbadge Ticket Item the priority to plan and run the event, even though they never proved they could plan and run their family lunch, much less a weekend of competitions for 20 troops. Barry

So, to answer rickmay's question, yes there is some guidance, but not much in the way of who can plan and run it. We still don't know why the SM chose to do it all, but if the scouts really want to plan and run it, they need to talk with him about it. Show the SM their plan to give him the confidence that they can run it. Barry

Did I miss something? Of course letting the scout run the COH is the obvious solution, so, why didn't he do that in the first place? I believe the SM Handbook talks about how to run the COH, but I haven't seen one in a while. I don't remember the COH being in the SPL Handbook. Barry