Eagledad

1 hour ago, 5thGenTexan said:

Singing, skits, jokes, etc make me want to pack my stuff up and go home.  So... doesnt always build team spirit.  Personally, I simply won't take part in it.  

Hmm, how should a troop deal with the scout who doesn’t take a turn cooking? Or cleaning?  Or tearing down camp? Or……..? Or…….? 
There is a method behind the madness. But, some youth just aren’t ready to be part team program. They eventually will figure it out, or leave. But the program shouldn’t change for the rest of the scouts.

Barry

15 hours ago, 5thGenTexan said:

I completely understand that.  I also know that in my observation its NOT happening.  It appears to me that Scout Law and Scout Oath are a tick box marked off as a requirement for Scout rank and never though about again.  It is not taken seriously by Scouts or adults.  The selfishness and ugly things I hear at district campouts as well as summer camp are disturbing.  

This is a big problem, I agree. I believe a big part of the problem is adult leaders who never had a youth scouting experience. Without the experience of adventure and the social dynamics of camping in the woods, these adults have to rely on measurable experiences, which is advancement. Advancement drives annual schedules and shapes scouting activities. Character development is a function of rank and advancement sing-offs, not scouts’ choices judged within the interpretations off the law. Theses adults are afraid to let any scout not earn the Eagle. 

And you can’t blame these adults, training doesn’t emphasize growth from right or wrong choices. Allowing scouts to make choices and decisions in their activities requires giving them the freedom to define the parameters of right and wrong and adults today simply don’t allow them that freedom, partially because it’s not pushed in training.

1 hour ago, Eagle1993 said:

The merit badge program for Eagle is not designed well.  I think it does little to keep youth in scouting, is redundant, boring and not aligned with the "outing" in scouting.  It is what it is.  National doesn't seem to care.  So, either scouts slog through it or Eagle factories pump out the clinics for youth who want to add Eagle Scout to their resume.  

I’m not sure I agree here. I believe the Eagle should be a personal goal of jumping through hoops beyond the typical troop outdoor program. The troop outdoor program should be complex enough to attract the maturity of older scouts. The Eagle requirements should be more than what the typical troop outdoor program offers, and require more than the typical ambition of the average scout. Where we fail the Eagle program is we adults push the scouts to do more than their maturity wants in their program. Eagles are for above average scouts, and we adults should have the courage to let the scouts choose.

My observation is that most scouts in a program that challenges them at all ages don’t really feel the drive for Eagle until they are at least 15. Most troops think 15 is to late, but most of our Eagles had their ECOH within a few months of their 18th birthday. They were simply having too much fun to focus on the advanced Eagle requirements in their early years. Ironically, the troop that puts more focus on adventure than advancement, will have a more Eagles. A lot more Eagles because it’s really just a natural progression for the maturity of older scouts.

Barry

As a SM, I was called at least once a week by a parent with an opinion of something they saw that bothered them. Sometimes more than 1 a week, rarely less. And you would be amazed of what bothers parents. Every SM has a strong opinion to someone, especially if they firm with how the program is run.

All I can say is if SMs, or strong leaders, don’t learn the art of listening, they will have continued frustration and drama. Add the skills of patience and humility because sometimes the SM, or strong leader, is wrong.

Barry

For troops that want the benefits of scout growth from patrol method, summer camp gives the scouts the most growth of the year because of the intense outdoor program in the number of days forces scouts the habits of servant lifestyles. However, that growth requires older scouts to work along side the younger scouts. Young scouts learn by watching older scout mentors and older scout grow comes from mentoring (NOT Babysitting) the younger scouts. Troops with a program of older scout mentors working with younger scouts in a patrol method environment typically have a good attendance of older scouts to their summer camp. A common comment from parents after summer camp is the troop brought home a more mature son then the one that left for camp.

I say all that because summer camp should be a troop priority for scout growth and patrol unity. HA is also important for growth and opportunities, but should be secondary to the summer camp program.

One last comment; I encourage troops to push high adventure to their whole troop, not just the younger ones. I realigned my thinking when our 11 year old tenderfoot who had been racing bicycles for 3 years wasn't allowed to attend a biking HA trek. He knew more about bicycling than all the rest of the scouts added together and had more miles of riding than some adults have in cars. Of course physical and mental maturity are required for to match the activities, but, there are many activities 11 and 12 year old scouts can do. The idea that only older scouts should do HA is one reason the BSA program as a whole is struggling. Troops should be adventure programs, not First Class advancement programs. The last thing a 14 year old scout wants to do is repeat their first three years of pushing young scouts to advance. Older scouts enjoy teaching and mentoring young scouts in adventure.

Barry

2 hours ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

Yes!  This is why we tell new folks the best skill to acquire is to know when to say "No."

Yes, but he was a paid professional. I don’t know how much he can no.

Barry

The best DE I ever worked with was a retired engineer. He was also a Silver Beaver with a very good 20 history as a Scoutmaster. He was an idea guy, so we got along well and started a few district activities. What did him in was being assigned the council summer camp coordinator. It was a thankless job that took him away from his wife too much. The problem with any volunteer type organization is talented workers keep getting more responsibilities until they are sucked dry. I’m sure our DE would have stayed another 10 years if he hadn’t taken the summer camp coordinator job.

Barry

The situation isn't just Scouting, but any organization that relies on volunteers to run the program. And, it is a double complex realty because volunteers are generally not trained or have expert skills for their expected tasks. In fact, volunteer work IS on the job training. Which is why units with adults who had a youth scouting experience are usually far ahead of units with no youth scouting experience. 

As for volunteers with a military experience, they typically respect the leadership a bit more than non military experienced volunteers. The most entertaining units to watch are the ones with a main leader who has military experience, but the rest of the adults don't.

Barry

19 hours ago, Calion said:

I do not know what to do here. I feel that this Scout, instead of attempting to address the issues I raised either by remedying them or discussing them with me, went behind my back to get everything signed off by someone else. I haven't even authorized  this Scouter to sign things off, though I never told him I didn't want him to either; it hasn't come up before, and as he's not an ASM, and has been around much longer than I, it didn't really occur to me to tell him what he could and could not do. 

Advice? There wasn't time to give that SM conference when he asked, but next time I'm going to be on the spot. 

I had a similar situation with my first SPL. I wasn't really happy with his performance for my expectations. So, I took him out for pizza before the meeting so we could talk. After discussing family and other light topics, I asked how he though he was doing as SPL. I expected him to hemhal around without much details, and that is where I would discuss his performance. But, he instead broke a huge smile and started telling me (bragging really) about all the things he had done and was improving on. After ten minutes of his enlighting reflection, I had to admit he was doing a really good job and I needed to cut each of us some slack my my high expectations. 

I'm glad he was my first SPL because he taught me a great lesson that helped my Scoutmastering the rest of my career. Every scout is different with different personal expectations. Some scouts are just great leaders and do a great job. Some scouts aren't so good, but work their butts off to be as good as they are. While I had to set up expectations for scouts in all their activities, I also had to judge them under their terms of ability, personality, and character. Then, I had a starting place where I could measure their growth of performance instead of measuring them under my rigged expectations.

Through my career of adult scouting, I have had the opportunity to counsel many leaders who were frustrated with a scouts performance. I asked them, "have they grown?". If yes, then you are doing it right and you should be proud of both of you.

Most of us are not great leaders, so great leaders really stick out. But, we shouldn't let the great leaders set the bar for everyone. We adults need to guide each scout to set an individual bar the requires the scouts to stretch himself in making right decisions. But, not set the bar so high that the scout never sees himself growing and doing well. We adults are doing it right when each scout can say to himself, I like myself when I am scouting.

I personally learned to talk to scouts a lot so that I had an opportunity to say good job, and build a relationship to suggest improvement. I found that some scouts didn't even know when I was officially doing a SM Conference. But, at the same time, the scouts learn a lot about me during these discussions, and just watching me. They get to know what I expect and the priorities of their behavior. It's a long process for us adults to become productive role models, just like it is a long process for scouts to grow in their decision making. 

You also have to set some guidelines for the other adults. Mostly just to maintain consistency, not control.

While I haven't answered many of your questions on this discussion, I hope I've given food for thought that might help you as you progress with your program. 

Have a great Scouting week.

Barry

I figure a Scoutmasters needs at least 3 years to start to understand the general workings of Patrol Method. And a lifetime to really know how those workings push young adults to grow in character. Seems you reached that 3 year mark.

We also built our patrol around 10 scouts with the idea that at least half would show at campouts. But, we often had 2 man patrols and even 1 man patrols once in a while. We found the scouts like 1 and 2 man patrols because the individualism is adventure and they look forward to the challenges. And, we found the other patrols will look after them. Our 1 man and 2 man patrols tended to get standing ovation at the end of the campouts.

The next part is just information, but not suggestions. We also build and purchased the good patrol equipment and patrol boxes. About three years after starting the troop, I arranged meeting of ideas with the PLC and that is where I learned the scouts hated the patrol boxes. They were big and heavy and tended to always get real messy. They also weren't all that excited with big stoves or lanterns. It was a lot of stuff they had to load, unload, and maintain. Two weeks later we created and experiment where 3 of our 6 patrols were changing to backpacking patrols. No patrol boxes, no lanterns or big Coleman stoves. We purchased two burner backpacking stoves and streamlined the rest of the gear to be backpackable. We did do High Adventure backpacking trips, so we knew our way around the gear. The idea was let these 3 patrols experiment with the minimalist gear for 6 months and then evaluate what to do with the other 3 patrols. Well, as you might guess, the experiment didn't go as expected. The 3 other patrols demanded they become backpacking patrols after two months. And that was how we became a back packing troop.

Our troop also used 4 man tents because they were the most economical when we started the troop. But, because we were a backpacking troop, the scouts started bringing their own backpacking tents that they used on backpacking trips. They just like one or two man tents more. And, the older scouts actually wanted the privacy to sleep.  

We adults got into the program wanting to develop the best troop with the best scouts. Of course. But, I saw that adults dream of scouting is uniformity. Looks. If we adults will allow them, the scouts will show us what true patrol method really is. And, it's not always pretty. But, true Patrol Method becomes an addiction where the scouts are free to develop their dream of an ideal scout.

If the adults could stand to just step back and let the patrol method machine work under it's own inertia, the adults will find that the scouts will grow so fast that the adults struggle to get out of the way. Patrol method should be real life at a boys size. Every time the adults try to guide the scouts toward their vision of ideal scouts, the program will bog down trying to find the next step. Scouts will naturally let adults takeover, so the adults have to purposely "Get Out Of The Way". Once everyone understands their place, the adults will be surprised to see the troop become a lean, mean, scouting machine. And, it will grow.

All the adults really need to do is insure that the scouts are using the 8 methods of scouting. They can measure their program by watching how well the scouts are working the three Aims. OK, I understand the National added the 4th Aim, leadership. Ignore leadership as an Aim and let the scouts deal with it in their methods. Adults want all scouts to be leaders, but all scouts don't want to be leaders. They want to be great scouts. I have lots of stories of great scouts who stepped up and showed great leadership when leadership was required in the moment.

I'm over stepping. Sorry. Sounds like you have a great program. Enjoy.

Barry

19 minutes ago, SiouxRanger said:

National, despite its best efforts, has killed itself.

Kodak.

Don’t you mean in their best efforts.

3 hours ago, qwazse said:

 

How about a committee lead by SPLs to review adults before earning their "trained" patch?

Our ASMs were provided a scout to brief them of the PLC meetings and help train the new ASMs to the troop program on campouts. We created the idea to help the ASMs to work equally with scouts as team members to prevent the common problem of adults treating scouts as youth. We didn’t do a trained patch, but the ASMs were required to get Woods Tools training which was signed off by the scouts.

Barry

I learned from experience that behavior discipline, uniforms, and advancement are the most challenging parts of todays scouting for adults because they are the most controlled parts by the adults. They are challenging because adults look only at the technical aspects of the scout’s actions and misapply, misjudge and misunderstand how to used the actions for developing values of making decisions. 

For example, BORs are by design the only process in a Scout run program to be run only by adults. Does that make sense? Well yes, the SM conference is a adult process. But, skills are part of the program and guarded by the Scoutmaster. They alone are held responsible for program quality, so they should be given responsibility to measure their program.

im not even a fan of Scoutmasters signing off completed MBs. In fact, our Council uses MB white cards that don’t have that signature requirement. What is the point? The card was signed off completed by the counselor. As qwazse points out, any additional signatures are just questioning the scouts and counselors integrity. And, if the SM simply wants to learn the quality of how the counselor worked with the scouts, they can do it through a conference.

If the BOR is a check on the Scoutmaster’s program, then what is wrong with retesting. A scout is retested in school, work, sports and skills activities all their life. Scouting should be a place to encourage confidence of retesting. If abuse is the fear, well that is a problem with all aspects of the scouting program. The committee deals with it through a complaint process. And if adult intimidation is the fear, mix experienced scouts into the board. I’ve done and if fixes that problem.

My point is get advancement back into the proper place of ‘decisions making development’ instead of ‘stature ranking’. 

I would much rather have patrol leaders with the skills to survive 40 nights of camping. A camping MB should just be a gimmy for a true first class scout.

Barry

34 minutes ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

As from posts above, the Committee looks at the plan first through the lens of "Can we rally the functions, logistics, and bodies we need to support our Scout's desires?" 

An example might be that the Scouts want to do a Troop cycling/camping trip.  You expect 25 Scouts to attend.  How many adults will this take to provide transportation and supervision?  Two isn't gonna cut it. (Unless you've got a 20+ passenger bus that one leader drives, and the other leader pulls a large trailer that can carry 27 bicycles and Troop gear.  You get the idea.)  So, what's it gonna take, and can we provide it??

This is why it is important for the SPL (with SM, or adult that facilitated planning, attending) to present this to the Committee...  if only for the Personal Growth/Adult Association/Leadership Development aspects of it.

Once the plan is approved at the Committee level, it becomes the demand function for a Troop budget. (Does your Troop have one?  Budgeting is a Committee function, not a Scouts' function.)  What resources will it take to implement the plan, and how are we gonna get those resources (like thru dues and fundraisers)?

Our Troop runs an SPL term of 6 months.  Each SPL has the task to do an Annual Plan during this tenure.  With this scheme, at a minimum the first six months of new SPL's tenure is already programmed, and they can look ahead for planning, instead of trying to come up with a camping trip for next month.  The next six months after that on the existing plan can be tweaked, if the PLC wants to make some changes.  They are not "married " to that part of the existing plan.  (e.g.,  Previous PLC said they wanna do skiing, but we have changed our mind and wanna do snowshoeing instead.)  Then, they get to dream up (create) the plan for another six months after that.  This kind of long range planning makes for a much more stable program for our Troop and families, and gives us time to make adjustments and do adequate budgeting. YMMV.

The adult leadership needs to help set a "battle-rhythm" adequate for your Troop's needs.

If I didn’t know better, I would say this was my troop. We run exactly the same way including each SPL doing an annual plan.

I agree the committee supports the scouts program. But, I also believe they insure the Scoutmasters program is in sync gwith the program vision.  Every scoutmaster has a different way of doing things, so program consistency is the committee’s responsibility.

Barry

12 hours ago, qwazse said:

It’s astounding how quickly a teen will catch on to that stuff. It may even be why the scout was intimidated at this BoR. Youth who are trying to be loyal to every adult in their troop … their response when they perceive a loaded question is to freeze. And if you don’t think “What makes a good leader?” isn’t a loaded question in an environment where scouters have been at odds, it’s time to polish the mirror.

I'm not quite sure what all that means. Who should look at the mirror?

Leadership is a standard BOR question on most BORs all the way to Eagle. Any question from an intimidating adult could be perceived as loaded. So, the issue isn't the question, it is the stressful BOR environment. And, if it is stressful for one scout, it is likely a problem for several. 

So, yes, something has to be fixed. And, it appears to me the SM is dodging the problem taking it on her own. That is not how to Fix the problem. The program has to be safe for all the scouts. Not just the one. I'm not giving a SM a break when their actions could cause more harm. I've seen it happen. 

Barry

As a retired SM of many hundreds of scouts and the trainer, advisor, and mentor of hundreds of Scoutmasters, I put the blame of this situation 100 percent on the Scoutmaster. 

First, I have said many times on this forum that I am not a fan of the current BOR process for two reasons; First, it interrupts the scout run process with a totally adult procedure that scouts could do themselves. Second, I don't like the adult run BOR for this very situation. The Troop brings young naive scouts and helps them build a trust of youth leadership, THEN throws them in room of adult strangers who asked them challenging questions in a testing format. I understand that the only objective of the BOR is to find issues with the program. But, it is the Scoutmasters program they are judging through the eyes of a scared shy naive youth. I have said many times that if the troop really wants to know how the Scoutmaster is doing, talk to the parents.

I experimented with adding an Older Eagle Scout to the board for the Tenderfoot, 2nd Class, and First Class BORs so the scout would have a friend in the room. And it worked very well. We couldn't do that all the time, but most scouts get comfortable with the BOR process by their 1st class BOR anyway.

I'm curious:

1. How did this scout get to Star in these BORs?

2. How is he going to get through an EBOR of total stranger asking difficult questions.

What bothers me about this situation is the Scoutmaster missed and opportunity to help the scout grow so he can deal with people that make him feel uncomfortable for the rest of his life. And, the mis-actions have divided the adult team's trust. The SM is not the leader of the adult team, that is the CC. And it is up to the committee to determine what to do with scoutmasters who don't live up to the expectation of the troop. In most cases, committees let the SM drive the Vision of the program and the process for working the program. But, in reality, the Vision and the program process should be created and guarded by the committee to have continuity over the years.

Part of the problem is that many Scoutmasters use compassion as their motivation without really even considering the scout's future. True, this SM save the day by totally ignoring the troop committee and presses further by choosing future committee members for the scout. Without, sitting down and discussing the situation with the committee to seek out what is really best for the Scout. The whole committee can't be heartless.

I also struggle with these scoutmasters because their Ego's many times tend to drive them to ignore normal policies and other ideas. We had such a SM on this forum who stated good ideals for the good of scouts, but tended to modify the BSA policies to fit his own unproven theories. After he was asked to  leave his 3rd troop in five years, he dropped off the forum. His compassion and theories where dangerous.

If the SM of this situation doesn't work with the committee, then they can look forward to other issues in the future. I watched a stubborn compassionate SM drive their troop to litigation. It was the wisdom of the CC who manage to find compromise with parents and save the troop a lot of money.

The CC needs to have a meeting with the SM and explain the loss of trust they have with decisions. The Committee and the SM corp need to go back to training together and if possible, team development training. Each adult member needs to learn the expectations of their position and trust each other to support the program.

I could go on and on, but I have watched many BOR issues drive a wedge in troop programs because one of more adults decided they were right and took things in their own hands.  Unfortunately most of volunteers are not trained for many of the situations that occur in a volunteer organization and they let their emotions drive their actions around policies and procedures. And then someone like me gets a call from district to go and see they can get the program back on the rails.

Barry

4 hours ago, Eagle1993 said:

I used to be a fan of the Lions program as it provided an early scouting experience and aligned with GSUSA Daisies (plus the timing when many kids start sports).  However, I am seeing local evidence that both volunteers and youth burn out on scouting at a higher rate if they start as Lions.  I'm not sure if that trends across my council or nationally.

Most folks here know that I am a anti Tiger person because I found through a lot of research that Tigers strangles the ALL the other ages because it burns out the adults. Lions will only push that issue faster. If National feels peronoid about membership at the toddler age, then they need to look at a seperate program like the GSUSA Daisies that takes the burdon of toddler maturity away from the pack, and provides a divide where adults can say, No!, I need a break.

4 hours ago, Eagle1993 said:

We kept Lions to a one meeting OR outing per month. Very limited attendance at Pack meetings.  We charged no pack fee and didnt have them sell popcorn. 

We changed our Tiger program to one meeting a month led by parents with the assistance of a pack adult mentor. We made a few other changes with the intention of taking as much burden off the adults as possible. Our Tiger to Wolf retention went from 20 percent to 90 percent.

Do, what it takes to save your program. I know of several packs that skipped Tigers and maintained their Wolf numbers the next year. A packs long range goals should be to get their scouts to crossover. That is a huge goal. On average, only 50% of Webelos even crossover to troops. That doesn't include the membership drop outs at the younger ages.

2 hours ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

Will not see the first Lions become Scouts until next year. Lions started in 2018.

Normally, observing Troop membership is a good indicator to how program changes are performing, but covid has everything messed up. A guess is that 2022 is really the first year baseline leaving 2028 as the indicator for Troop membership. BUT, We already noted a measurable drop in Troop membership in 2006 after national made huge program changes to the Tiger program in 2000. I can't imagine Lions doing any better.

I've felt that Lions should be, what is now the first year Webelos with a program that starts the scouting into independent decision making, but with the family. The 2nd year Webelos would be more advanced toward a troop program (basically more independence without the family), but still a den program. But, National never seems to to consider my brilliant ideas. LOL.

Barry

Wow, great discussion. I call the scouting world in this discussion real life at a boy's (youth's) size. Scouting is assumed safe because the program is presented so that scouts are physically safe. But, I taught in the adult classes that scouting is safe because a scout is safe to make wrong decisions without judgement forcing correction. Watching a scout learn from their decisions without the reaction of judging and correcting is the most challenging part of the adult leaders responsibilities. I admit that I did it wrong more often than I did it right.

Barry

21 hours ago, fred8033 said:

Nice. 

I come from a different school of thought.  I'd prefer to not have that class and to not help the scout too much.  Don't be an obstacle, but let's not create an overly structured scout experience.  Rather, filling out blue cards is a great chance to have conversations with the scout and to give him things to look at and work on.  It's a chance for the scout to improve and solve things.  ... Another way to work it.  If the scout brings you a blue card that is not cleanly filled at the start, give them a new blue card and walk them thru filling it out neatly. 

The one time a close is appropriate is when the culture process is going the wrong direction. When culture affects 100 scouts, then the class is the quick fix for correction.

You are right that the MB card is an opportunity for a discussion and teaching, mostly with brand new scouts. But, we found that the lesson learned from MB processing didn't translate to signing off other scouts' handbooks. The issue there is that the signing off advancement incorrectly isn't discovered until the other scouts have a conference. And, usually several scouts are victims of the incorrect signoff processing. I didn't feel a correction here required an individual discussion when the correction was simply a better explanation of correctly signing off other scouts advancement.

And, I took it as more of adults doing a better job explaining the process. When it comes to these things, boys, (adults included) often take the path of least resistance. 

Barry

42 minutes ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

@curious_scouter, the Application for Merit Badge (aka blue card) is the Scouts responsibility. 

Hold them accountable for their responsibilities.

 

And SSScout makes a good point with the hen scratching. We ended up creating a 10 minute class to teach scouts how to fill out handbooks, merit badge cards, and other documents so that their print was legible with correct dates. I am a full believer in NOT making these task easier for the scouts. District Merit Badge Colleges set bad examples to their units, who in-turn follow with bad habits in their MB process. 

Barry

2 hours ago, ShootingSports said:

I was truly taken aback that our National organization does not have this data readily available.

National, historically, has a reputation for using data to justify self serving objectives when the opposite trends were closer to reality. Don’t visualize the fine folks at National as professionals working to serve the noble reputation of the Scouting vision. In fact don’t think of them as professional. 

National likely has some of the data, but aren’t making it easily available because it isn’t to their advantage, both in general operation and public observation. Add that they have been very focused on saving the organization from bankruptcy the last couple of years.

I don’t believe the .9 number is a national trend. But, I could be under estimating Covid. I don’t believe the abuse issue is doing that much harm to the general community, because I’m not hearing it from the community, and cultural scandals haven’t pulled down the membership over the years like the naysayers pontificated.

National is clumsy with program at the national level, so real program organization will come from the local council. Or not, if you understand what I mean.

It’s not hopeless, you do have strength and leverage locally. focus on the pack numbers because they feed the rest of the organization. Raise the pack numbers and the rest of your local program will respond.

Barry

44 minutes ago, yknot said:

Frankly, I wouldn't waste too much time on what else kids are doing. I'm wondering more why an outdoors oriented organization like scouting isn't doing a better job of attracting kids interested in outdoor activity. They clearly want it and are doing it, but they are just not doing it with BSA.  

Your past post over the years say you do think you know why.

Do your research ShootingSports, I did a lot of membership research in the past that often enlightsens and corrects the forum list. Good data is worth its weight in gold because it gives you direction for your program.

Barry

12 hours ago, qwazse said:

To be fair, scouts want some scouters to favor a position against their conscience. And they want to have an outsized voice by promoting an individualism that can’t be expressed through standard uniforming.

Interesting, but I have a hard time swallowing scouts who are passionate enough of the scouting program to make a statement about their opinion of the uniform acting in such a disrespectful manner. It’s me, but I’ve never seen scouts behave like this for a cause. Most scouts want to approach difficult subjects in a mature scout-like manner.

As for individualism, the present uniform does that quite well. Take a fully uniformed First Class rank patrol leader and stand him next to a fully uniformed Eagle rank SPL from a different state, and the observer would know a lot about the individualism of each scout. In fact, the Scout uniform provides each scout, rich or poor, on equal ground. Individualism without the uniform would do the exact opposite.

2 hours ago, DuctTape said:

If it were me and they were my scouts I would start by engaging in a conversation in a non-judgemental manner. (With a smile)... "Hey Jimmy I saw you wearing tights and a tutu, I don't think I have seen that before. How did you come up with that?"

Good post DuctTape, but I sort of disagree with you here.

The issue in this discussion seems to be adults should respect the scouts for their decision no matter how offensive they were to the group. What the scouts wore t-shirts with 4 letter words giving their opinion of those who disagree? Just how offensive does any scout have to be before they are asked why they feel they can behave Not friendly, courteous, or kind?

The problem I see in this discussion is the list is looking at these scouts as youths, not adults, thus trying not to offend them. And, as a result, the list is struggling how to coach or sway the scouts to see the error of their decision. But, that is the wrong perspective of working with young adults.

For any person to make a change in behavior, they alone have to see the benefits of making an effort to change. First, they have to be approached and respected as an equal adult. Second, they have to feel safe in the discussion that, while they are being judged “Hey Billy, I don’t think your choice of how you customized the uniform came off well in the group. When you had some time to think about it, I would like to hear your thoughts.” And, in general the scouts will do a pretty good job of reflecting on their choices and how to reconcile with the results of those actions.

We adults are mentors and we look look for opportunities to get young adults to reflect back at their actions with the expectation that they themselves will seek and explain the rights and wrongs of the motivations, as well as how to go forward with reconciliation, or moral justification.

As a mentor, I’m only a guide in showing the real picture of their choices,  not the administrator reconciliatory actions. For a person to change, they must believe change is required to be a better (more mature adult) person. Rarely have I ever seen a scout not reflect on the choices of their actions and propose a different approach to making better choices. Few people want to be offensive, they just don’t it through. A mentor gives them the time to think about it and plan going forward.

Barry

27 minutes ago, Oldscout448 said:

A protest?  I don't see any mention or even an implication of such in the OP.    

I can’t agree with knot that that wearing a tutu and tights is a highly appropriate way to bring attention to their opinion of the uniform. Highly?
It certainly isn’t an intellectual approach to the conversation.

Barry

22 minutes ago, qwazse said:

There were a number of adequate replies from several fruitful angles here …

 

Hold on. Not everyone agreed on “inappropriate and just plain disrespectful”.
@Eagledad the OP is in the context of a regional event. (One reply on the original thread claimed to have witnessed it, and it wasfor only one day of the event.)

There are quirky actions and bad actions. Putting on a uniform more suitable for ballet is quirky. I want my SM to spend capital on averting bad decisions like

• Carelessness with knives, fire, rope, water, wildlife, projectiles …
• Using and dealing drugs,
• Speech that engenders rage or sorrow,
• Falling in with bullies or predators,
• Turning a blind eye or being downright cruel to those in need,
• Mocking someone’s faith based on what they’ve concluded from biased excerpts,
• Repeating their parent’s inappropriate behavior,
• Being inappropriate to their parents …

The list goes on, each demands a lot of personal capital and the coordination of people with high integrity for assistance. I would be very concerned if an SM set aside any one of these to scruple over one scout’s quirk in uniforming.

The real problem here is that the event organizers did not have the stones to tell @Mrjeff that they felt that they didn’t see it tarnishing the event or scouting in general. They passed the buck with “hands are tied” language. They made a rule with the expectation that someone other than themselves would enforce it.

And folks, this is the general truth: BSA uniform standards are made-up rules that BSA will never enforce (unless you’re infringing on the their copyright).

Well hold on there, are saying their action wasn’t self serving? Giving permission on one bad action, no matter how small or big, leads to more bad actions. Uniform interpretations are lame excuses. The handbook gives the scouts their guidelines.

Barry

Spending Capital for the purpose of correcting a scout’s motivation behind bad decisions is the main responsibility of the SM. As everyone agrees, their dress was inappropriate and just plain disrespectful to the group. What level of inappropriate and disrespectful actions are we to consider a starting place?

Barry