Eagledad

Our council has had scouts protest in the EBOR one way or another. I know of only one scout that didn't pass, but that was at his request. He wanted to use failing to highlight his passion for his protest (I don't remember what his protest was). He made it easy for the board and got what he wanted. I always wondered what his parent thought. There was a time, I'm told, that Eagle Scout candidates had to plead their case to a local judge instead of a BOR. I like that because the intent was for the scout to prove himself in understanding the importance of making moral decisions. Barry

Can anything of importance be gained from an extreme nervous scout? Let's not look for reasons for not learning about a scouts understanding and experience of the program. It's better to just have compassion for being nervous. Barry

You don't think so? Hmm, and what if the scout refuses to recite the oath or law during his BOR. Pass, fail? What if the BOR (or EBOR) decide to start the review with the Pledge of Allegiance and the scout refuses? Sound silly! Excepting for the the Pledge of Allegiance, I have seen these examples more than once. I don't ever remember hearing the phrase "adding requirements" while I was a scout. I do remember being asked to demonstrate a knot or two and show how to make a splint using my neckerchief. Hmm, was I abused! No matter what side we are on with Adding Requirements, I believe the adults have taken this horrible action so out of context that they have lost the perspective in the big picture of developing citizens of character and leaders of integrity. I admit seeing the "adding requirements" used so much over the past few years with the intent to force power over someone that hearing the phrase makes me sick anytime I hear now. My example points out that any person using the phrase becomes an instant hypocrite because every adult has some personal expectation of the scouts that isn't directly prohibited in the manuals. If adults can't find a moral wrong for making request of the scouts, then maybe they should evaluate why they are personally offended. If the adult's request is for the purpose to achieve a personal objective (such as requiring Older Scouts to attend all SM Conferences on camp outs to force more older scouts to camp outs), then state why it's wrong without the cover of "adding requirements." Barry

We had a scout the same as your scout, MattR. He droves us crazy mouthing off to adults and teasing other Scouts. Some today would his antics bullying, but they weren’t personal, more of just burning energy. Anyway, when he went through puberty, he became a poster boy for scouting. It really wasn’t anything we did, Mother Nature gets the credit for that one. That was 18 years ago. His dad is my neighbor now, so I get to him and his two daughters often. As for WB, at least from the 60s, it wasn’t a course intended to teach boy run. The course was designed to teach SMs additional mentoring and teaching skills. It was designed for experienced Scoutmasters. So, it was never intended to help adults understand boy run better. I’ve been involved in several courses and classes over the years that put adults in patrol settings during their training. But I’ve concluded that adults with life experiences in patrol settings can’t have the same experiences of growth as young men without those same life experiences. Also the expectations are different; Scouts are in it for fun and adventure. Adults are in it to learn and experience the patrol life. Those are two very different motivations for being in a patrol. I can’t ever recall an adult who stood up and yelled, “eureka! I get it now.” I believe the best way to teach adults boy run Patrol Method from the perspective of the scout is to observe Scouts in Patrols. Whether they observe a JLT course or a patrol in their troop with no personal or emotional attachments, they can observe the struggle of Scouts making tough decisions and growing from those decisions. I have observed several adults see the lightbulb turn on at both our troop and council level JLT courses. They were moms in most cases. That doesn’t mean they turned into good leaders, but they had a sudden respect and trust of the boy run program. Give me that much, and I can teach the rest. Barry

Good post. Our troop also calls it servant leadership. I also used the Army definition in my training material and in our JLT courses. Barry

I’d have to go back to my notes, so I can’t comment on my memory (really lack there of) specifically. Seems I recall that “boy run” was only mentioned once in the SM Handbook. I’ve created courses specifically to teach boy run. I start with the Scouting Mission and Vision, then Aims and Methods. Methods are the adults primary objectives using the tools of the Methods, which are totally the Scouts responsibility. Then I work into the Method of Patrol Method and Boy Run. I found that most adults don’t understand what actions by Scouts are boy run. And even more difficult is the idea of mistakes being a positive learning opportunity. Our nature as parents is preventing mistakes, so scouters don’t even realize they are preventing boy run. One example I use is how adults react to how a scout is dressed. Do they feel a scout out of uniform is wrong? Why? The adults responsibility is Character, Fitness, and Citizenship. Is the scout failing in any of those areas? Good performance of the 3 Aims leads to go performance of the BSA Mission and Vision. The challenge is turning adults from their expectations of the 8 Methods and focus on always improving performance of the 3 Aims. Of course the SM might need to give some help with performing the 8 Methods at the beginning, but it’s more to get the Scouts started torward the 3 Aims. The Scouts have plenty of guidance from the handbooks for the 8 Methods, so adults really don’t need to get involved. Instead, they should focus on measuring the Scouts decisions against the 3 Aims. When the adults give the Scouts the independence to do the 8 Methods without adult input or interference, the troop is boy run. Of course giving the scout total autonomy with the decisions in the 8 Methods is almost impossible. We adults are who we are and can’t help ourselves stepping in (intruding) now and then. We have to develop fhose skills just like the Scouts developing their decision making skills. But understanding the roles and responsibilities of a boy run program is 90% of the battle. The SM Handbook does (or did) a terrible job getting adults to that understanding. Ironically, the SPL Handbook and PL Handbook combined do a better in helping both the Scouts and adults understand their roles in a boy run program. That is why I would request participants in my classes bring those Handbooks. The SM Handbook makes for a great sleeping pill, but the SPL and PL Handbooks are easy to read in an hours time. And, the Scouts and SM can use them together. Barry

We had a scout with similar concerns. I’m not sure if he was autistic, but he was certainly quirky. Once he learned he could skip the ECOH, he took off. But he kept it very quiet. None of the scouts and only a couple of adults knew he earned it. The SM was invited to a small family only reception at their home. Barry

I’m not sure who you are speaking about, but expressing an opinion is not dismissing or talking down. The WB course started by Badon Powell has no resemblance to the present day WB course in its design intent or syllabus. It’s has a whole different purpose that includes the Cub program. It so different that I’m surprised they kept WB as the course name. And National hasn’t given the support for Bill Hillcourts patrol method for at least 30 years. The SM Handbook implies patrol method should be used and provides a basic structure, but National hasn’t shown support with documentation content or training for patrol method as the primary method torward character development for a long time. Advance gets a lot more attention for direction than scouts learning from the decisions. Which is why it’s the 2nd most discussed method behind advancement. And, we have earned the right to speak about our experiences in the program. If it’s true National has decided to make membership changes to save the BSA instead of fixing what is broke, it’s not like either of our opinions matter. Barry

Every troop believes they empower youth to lead. Where National has failed in the past courses (1990 thru 2008) is identifying the differences between units. Or even worse, expections of the program. Im not sure they know or care of the differences. So long as units work with in the G2SS and YP, they are satisfied. But, there isn’t much guidance or definition for those of us in the weeds working to get the most of boy run or Patrol Method. That’s why we see extreme programs at each end of the boy run patrol Method spectrum. Barry

So, boy run is an example application for the subject of generations working together. That sounds about right, boy run wasn’t given much more than honorable mention in the SM Handbook. Even the old WB course struggled with it, which was a direct troop simulation. Barry

I would enjoy that discussion, infact I was the presenter of the boy run session at WB 15 years ago. My question is really more how this WB course uses “adult led and youth led” and “working together across generations“ in the same discussion. Barry

I’m curious to learn how “adult led and youth led” tie in with “working together across generations“? Barry

Yep, you don’t here it much in that context anymore, but that is definition of “scouting is a safe place”. Barry

Bad example. Pinewood Derbies were, as I understand it, created as father/son activity. That is how my pack as a youth presented it, and that is how our pack presented it. Those are some good memories with my dad. Now, maybe dad went a little crazy, but it was still father son times. Of course as hour culture progressed, mothers, grandparents, aunts and uncles had to take up some slack. But the derbies, like most of the cub program, was designed around family. The rest of the argument is valid, but I read somewhere that the creation of lawnmower parenting is a lot simpler and complicated. Humans instinctively are driven to build their environment security for the tribe, or family. Even when the environment doesn't present a risk to human security, the instinct is still their and it drives the adults to busy themselves working toward building a better environment. And, human youths instinctively learn most of the behavior by watching role models until puberty. Instructional teaching is not the instinctive route for educating a youth. Left to instinct and time on their hands, human adults busy themselves working the problem and improving it. It's that simple, or complicated, depending on how you see it. We live in safe simple times, so our instinct to build a secure environment has been reduced to protecting our kids from the pain of loosing a pinewood derby. After several generations of living in a safe non-hostel environment, adults are just busy bodies looking to validate their instincts. Barry

From the parents or girls?

What's a camporee? Oh, you mean a district gathering with some funky theme for demonstrating unusual skills like starting fires without matches (Oh, and model rocket ignition button pushing competitions). AND, they are typically planned by the troop with an adult completing A WB TICKET ITEM. OK, hold me back. Barry

Yes, this was something that started between when I left the troop in the mid 70s and started again in the early 90s. What were they thinking? I remember getting very angry the first time I saw a beading at camporee. I then saw one at the Blue and Gold and a Crossover. I've not seen it, but I've heard of them at ECOHs. Shesh, can adults think of other ways to make scouting boring and drive the scouts out of the program! Now you've done it, you pushed a button. Barry

Hmm, I couldn't. A troop of Boy Scouts in our area camping once a year would be unheard of. It would be embarrassing. Barry

Well, on the plus side, girls get to push the button now. The WB beading is symbolic of the problem with today's adults. I have never understood adults wanting to do this. Barry

I see what you are saying, but at least around here, a very common family model is dad and boys are active in the BSA, while mom and the girls are active in the GSUSA. So, I'm not sure you can separate BSA folks from the GSUSA parents and leaders. And, at least around here, dads aren't near as welcome to assist the GSUSA activities as the moms are in the BSA. Barry

Let's not confuse personal experiences and observations with pettiness. How does the saying go; All Scouting is Local. My boy run mentor was a women who was the equivalent of the Scouting Executive in two different states. She quit GS and joined the BSA for her son because the GSUSA was run so badly in our area. I can assure you that what I pass along is experience, not unscoutlike pettyness. Barry

Camporees when I was a youth were different from the camporees of today. They were a very serious competition that ranked troops in the district. Horizon reminded me that we spent 4 saturdays in a row practicing skills for camporee. We were experts. Not just our patrol or troop, but all the patrols and troops in our area. Talk about patrol pride, carrying the patrol flag was a respected responsibility. Looking back, our finely honed skills were driven by the ambitions of the adults, and maybe older scouts. I imagine that was the case for all the troops. And we resented it to a small degree until we competed against the other patrols of the district. We were quite proud of ourselves as we competed against patrols of other troops. We were good, so where they. The difference between winners and losers were often just a few points or couple of seconds. But reflecting on this subject, I wonder if our adults back then would be considered lawnmowing adults. If so, it was pretty much all the adults in district. Of course there is a vast difference between how the adults then drove their ambitions back then compared to todays adults, I still retain most of the skills that were driven in me at age 11. And we never saw adults during the camporee competitions. It was a scout thing. As much as the adult wanted to watch, they stayed in their campsites. We were on our own. We were always on our own. Barry

While Mrs. Barry was a GS leaders, I talked to a lot of the families. It wasn't so much that girls wanted more camping, they were got tired of the cabin type of camping. At least in our area. I'm not sure tent camping would change the GSUSA all that much because while they saw tent camping as more romantic, it wasn't something they wanted every month. Now of course there are the few that would love it, but I didn't get the feeling that was a majority desire. The other part of the GSUSA that drove a few girls away is the independence the girls were given (I mean weren't given) in their activities. Adult run doesn't even begin to describe how the troops work. Girls are given so little opportunity for independent thought (much less decision making) that my wife was embarrassed to be associated with the organization. She said girls weren't ever allowed to leave their group at summer camp and they had to be led by their adult leaders everywhere. That more than anything drove my wife away. My wife believed if dads were allowed to assist leading the GS troops, the GSUSA would be more popular. Males are just more adapt with outdoor scouting. Her words, not mine. Me, I agree with what ever the politically correct members on this forum feel at the moment. Barry

Yep, and I’ve seen it protested as adding requirements more than once. That’s why I said that even the most passionate “adding requirements” gate keeper will find themselves being accused. Barry

Maybe it's all in how we explain it, but adding requirements wasn't a big discussion when I was a trainer. Discipline and uniforms seem to be the long discussions. Boy run had it's own discussion. It just seems odd to me that adding requirements has become hot. I was curious if the timing had something to do with a fear for the girls and their race to be Eagle. Barry