fred johnson

Young scouts with homesickness is always an issue. Their having phones is just another version. They key is on-boarding the scouts into the troop. To be honest, it's also one reason I have not bought my youngest a phone yet. He will get one soon, but he's 14.

Please accept that I trust what you say that the PLC decided it. When I hear adults say "the PLC decided", I raise my eyebrows. It's like business that hang safety posters on their walls. You only say it if it's not true. I've seen PLCs decide things that just don't seem normal for a group to decide and it's often based on lots of adults providing their side comments and nudges. Yeah, the PLC decided, but they were pretty beat up from the side discussions and interjections. In my book, it's right up there with arguing about "boy led".

We're in the same camp. It's a tool to be used responsibly. For many, the cell phone is the same as a newspaper, book or card game. It's just the modern version with more twists. But that's not our main reasoning for letting scouts have phones. Our main reason is that we want to build trust with the scouts. We want the scouts to reason for themselves and make their own decisions. If I'm in the mode of laying down rules and threatening to confiscate stuff, then I'm putting up a wall with the other scouts. I'm also setting an example of big-boss dictating to the serfs. Our troop is more focused on scouts socializing and participating. And we'd be the same with books, card games or pretty much any other distraction. And even then, we'd do it as a friendly conversation and suggestions. I feel strongly because I remember being with a troop that had a no-electronics policy. Their SPL and senior scouts became "enforcers". They confiscated stuff. Then, they disappeared into their own tents and played games and used the electronics of the other scouts. It created a hypocritical environment with scouts continually trying to get away with things. I think it's more important to promote trust.

At every court of honor, the SPL asks almost every scout what he got or learned from taking the badge. The scout is supposed to say something. Way too often we've heard something similar to "absolutely nothing". Effectively what the scout got was the badge. As long as the scout is polite and respectful, we let blunt comments stand. We do that as we want to get scouts to speak their mind and share their thoughts. On the flip side, since the scouts are free to speak, it's really refreshing when they take a great badge such as sailing or a good cooking badge.

BSA Advancement Team published the May / June 2017 Advancement News. It had a section on Reference Letters. FYI. http://files.constantcontact.com/137c2ed6201/2bf9ecdc-eb7a-431a-9ce1-453aa8ec62a4.pdf

The original statement was that an EBOR would not be scheduled without a SM reference letter. You can request and call directly a second time. But if does not come in, it's wrong to not schedule the EBOR. It's even wrong to delay an EBOR waiting for the reference letter. That's BSA GTA documented..

The scout law says friendly; not pompous. I'm just amazed what people dream up. A BOR to approve the project separate from the rank EBOR. I've heard rumors of units doing this. But I already thought it was ridiculous enough for troops to expect the scout to create an Eagle project presentation, schedule time before the troop committee and then defend their project in front of a sizable number of adults. BSA publishes guidance saying project approval should be simple with the focus on making sure the project will be a positive experience for the scout and successful. Page 8 of the below BSA advancement news has always provided good guidance for project proposal approval. http://www.scouting.org/filestore/advancement_news/2013_Aug_Sept.pdf

I'm betting that's a district practice, not a council one. I've seen quite a few backwards districts, but usually when it gets to a council level things are more per BSA GTA direction. But then again, I'm in a very large council. Some councils are the size of some of our districts. As for the practice, it's just wrong and a waster of time. The SM has signed the eagle project and the eagle application. If the SM won't sign those, there is a well written process to pursue rank under disputed circumstances. Requiring a SM reference letter is just a weak, ill-defined, dead-end, non-BSA process. Did I mention wrong? I'm always surprised when I hear things like this. People value Eagle so highly that they add their own twist / signature to the process that flies directly in the face of the organization that is providing the credential. It's a contradiction to highly value an organization's credential but not the infrastructure behind that credential. I just don't get it. BSA's methods and processes are just not that hard to understand.

For me, they could combine Golfing with Hiking Family Life with Signs, Signals and Codes

I so fully agree. It would be funny if it wasn't so sad. Sort of like laughing at the oxymoron: military intelligence. BSA is a faith based program who's main quality control tool is the Darwin principle. Essentially, let the weak, bad or mis-directed units die. The trouble is that the bad or mis-directed units are not always the weak units. And if they are all the weak units, the unit can continue damaging youth and setting a bad name for scouting until the unit dies. I don't know the answer, but this is a huge issue.

I've sat on many Eagle BORs now. I must admit that I'd be very tempted at the EBOR to tell the scout he needs to find another project. He'd have to explain strongly how he setup the project such that his dad could lead it. Otherwise, I'd assume it's a dad driving the whole project.

I've done that exact thing. When friends visit, kids are required to stay outside until wife is home. I've even kept the garage door open and moved cars out so kids could play outside in the garage during a heavy rain.

I clearly do fear having the finger pointed at me. I think many people have that opinion too. Strongly so. I think any adult that volunteers in a youth program should have concern. And if they don't have concern, then I'd be concerned about them. I don't think it blocks volunteer. But it clearly changes the experience. And by changing that experience, I think it does affect how many volunteers you get. Perhaps what changed volunteering even more is this ... adult volunteers in the 1970s (especially in cub scouts) would wait until the kids were asleep and then partake in a beer or two. As long as I've been in scouting, events have been dry. I think that has had as much of an impact as anything else. ... A good impact, but still an impact.

Too long of a thread to fully read ... Reminds me of our troop agenda for troop youth leadership training. Lunch is a bag lunch. Nothing is said. It's just lunch. Scouts grab a bag. It's just that one bag has the deserts. One has the meats. One has the bread. One has the sides. One has the condiments. The scouts are to figure out they need to work together and to be fair to each other. I always feel bad for the scout that grabs the deserts and has to surrender that prize.

Outside scouting, I help run a program that needs lots of volunteers. For the last few years, the volunteers need 4+ hours of training plus a formal background check just to volunteer the first shift. When people are on the fence volunteering and just want to try with a short shift of three hours or so, it's a huge obstacle. That's how many volunteers start too. They start with expressing an interest without having commitment. Requiring all the training and background checks first prevents evolving the interest into a commitment. As for myself, all the recent issues have clearly affected my attitudes and actions. You will never see me pick up a child unless it's an serious emergency. Never a hug or arm around a shoulder. The closest to physical contact is a hand shake. In scouting and my other group, we've discussed our behavior. For example, the adults volunteer with me know that we both expect to never be left alone with a child. For example, if a child hangs back for some reason requiring an adult to hang back, then another adult automatically hangs back to make it two adults. Same with if an adult has to go check up on multiple youth. Usually, another adult will automatically say "Hey, I'll walk with ya." ... These are good changes though.

Find merit badges that will promote great experiences. To be honest, it's supposed to be HIS CHOICE and HIM PURSUING. But I'm guilty too of nudging my sons in certain directions. If you do this, I'd be tempted to screen / feel out / try to learn about what the experience will be. Weed out the work book MBs. Weed out the lectures and large classes. Look for experiences that will inspire him and make him want to continue. I've seen too many scouts that give up early on MBs because of just way too lame of experiences.

I tend to agree. But at the same time, the scout could fully setup the project with people in different roles and the project could occur. I'm just noting that there is no requirement that the scout be there on the day that most people work. I made the comment because there is no requirement in workbook or the Guide To Advancement that the scout must be present when the majority of the work occurs.

It's a hard choice. I wish you the best at it. The committee chair is key to the unit. Unfortunately, when the unit has bad habits or needs fixes, it's the committee chair's job to guide the change. Too often in Cub Scouts the committee chair is relatively new. It can be extremely intimidating. It's always a choice. Do you and your son have friends or neighbors in the current pack ? Do you and your son know anyone in the other pack ? How much effort would be involved in trying to fix things ? As much as I hate troop shopping, switch if your current pack is not a good match ? Even though Cub Scouts is now 5+ years, you have a relatively short time for it to be a good experience for your son.

Scout does not need to be present at his own Eagle project. He just needs to proposal a project and then plan and develop the project. There is no requirement for the scout to actually participate in doing the project.

Burn out ... It's more about adult burn-out. Cub Scouts is an adult intensive program. Younger kid interaction ... It's more about the lowering of the program structure to accommodate the younger kids. It's some about the direct interaction though. Fifth graders don't want to do the same activities as a kindergarten scout.

Are you using BSA's online advancement? Did you submit the advancement? My experience is the advancement report is immediately available after submitting the advancement.

BSA needs to clean up that wording. I've seen this discussed repeatedly online and in-person. Commas are lost when the sentence is read. Writing classes today even advise just less punctuation if you don't know how to use properly. It needs to be re-written when a sentence is confusing to the average reader. The joining requirements are confusing to the average reader.

And then Wolf, Bear, Webelos, Arrow of Light year and then crossing into Boy Scouts. Cub Scouts was the answer to the question: What do we do with boys too young for Boy Scouts but can't wait? I'm not trying to lesson Cub Scouts, but it's Boy Scouts where BSA has a special unique value that youth can't get from school or youth sports. It's where they learn huge lessons by branching out on their own, outside of the family shadow, in situations entirely new to them. Burning families out before Boy Scouts does a big disservice to the program and reduce's BSA value. My apologies for sounding negative. You wrote a very nice note. ... I'm just in a fickle mood.

Dropping Tigers ... I fully believe we would have at least the same if not more cubs in our pack if we started it at a higher age. The only fear I have is those families that are long-time scouters would go to any of the other eight packs in our city. It's the old nuclear option. If one has it, they all do. But even then, I think it would be the better choice to not to Lions or Tigers. Start at the age when you can introduce knives, fire, bows and arrows, etc. In my opinion, that's 2nd grade.

I always fear "pilot" programs have a distorted experience as the packs are selected because they would be more likely to succeed, have special cases (dedicated experienced leader that take ownership) and being in a "pilot" to creates ownership such that you don't want to fail. "Pilot" programs are good to know if a program could work. "Pilot" programs are bad in that they don't help you learn if it would work for the majority of units.