fred8033

Eagle92 ... Those mixed results are because the units are run separately. If the troop and pack were more tightly linked, with the same leaders, same planning and same oversight, then it would be easier to help the units. The examples you give where the troop is healthy and the pack is in trouble, or vice versa, is because the units are separate. If it was one integrated unit, there would be an improved chance for the success of both.

Well written? I don't know. I often get confused by Kudu's quotes and descriptions. Sometimes he's referencing BSA scouting; othertimes UK scouting and still othertimes a scouting ideal that I'm not sure ever existed. Sometime's he's refering to Baden Powell, the person, and other times he's talking about the Baden-Powell Scout Association, which from what I can see was not founded by Baden Powell as it was created in 1970, many years after BP died. When I see it written as "B-P's Patrol System", that seems to reference the 1970's created B-P scout association and not Baden Powell, the person. ... I'm still fairly new, but I've seen nothing from the past that talked about patrol leaders scheduling regular testing / retesting for rank requirements "on patrol hikes". I'd love to see that training materials. Not saying it's not there, but I'd love to see the reference materials. ... From what I do see, the BSA never had a "First Class Journey" as in a long hike that was part of some cumulative test of first class skills. The only requirement I found was removed in 1948 and referenced taking a seven mile out and seven mike back hike as part of earning first class. Overnight was optional, not required. Then the scout wrote down what was observed on the hike. No create master journey. http://www.troop97.net/pdfbin/bsa_ranks.pdf ... As for whether it's well said or not, I'm not sure. BSA has and always will be about the outdoors. Maybe the scouts don't have to walk five miles thru deep snow to get to school every day. But, scouting has been and always will be about the outdoors. ... I need to always remember that this web site is not strictly about BSA scouting and that every post is not necessarily talking about BSA scouting. There's many other scouting programs and concepts out there.

DeanRx wrote: "would it mean you MUST have a troop for your pack?" ... Our pack has no parrallel troop. I'd hope we could change our charter to be chartered under the same organization that hosts a troop. They would just host multiple packs. DeanRx wrote: "I wouldn't want to be a CM forced into feeding boys into a failing troop" ... I'd bet that units that create successful troops would also have successful packs. And vice versa. ... PLUS, any scout at any time can change membership to another unit. I'd rather see the emphasis on changing to a unit that matches your needs and less on shopping for a unit when you become a Webelos scout. DeanRx wrote: "I don't see this changing if you throw them all in one unit." ... I'd see it as one unit, but not one program. You'd have a Cub Scout program for the K-3rd grade. You have a Webelos program for the 4th & 5th graders. A Boy Scout program for older scouts. They'd come together a few times a year for a picnic or a B&G banquet. But generally, each sub-group focuses on age / program appropriate materials. ... Basementdweller mentioned the stake in where Webelos cross over into. My question is why do we emphasize Webelos shopping for a troop, but not emphasize Tigers, Wolves, and Bears shopping for a better pack each year. IMHO, I don't see any difference. If your happy, you'll continue in the same unit. If your not happy with your unit, switch or help it improve.(This message has been edited by fred8033)

Yeah, I've read the label. Understand the differences. I'm just saying the green version is only a decorative replacement for the red version. If you want something functionally equivalent, you need to shop elsewhere. I absolutely hated the disco red color of the old jac shirt, but you could depend on it keeping you warm.(This message has been edited by fred8033)

Ya know... I was going to write a post about the new green jac shirts. BUT ... I was not going to be as nice. Green Jack shirt PROS ---- Comfortable and less itch'y. ---- Looks nicer then the old one ---- Scout emblem is embroidered on. CONS ---- Less functional. ---- It lets the wind thru and does not keep you any where near as warm. I swear that I could use the old red jack shirt over my short sleeve scout shirt until it was about 5 degrees. I always had my procedure. Button cuffs. Close one or two buttons. Button to near top. Flip collar up. The colder it got, the more I would button The new one is only good to about 30 degrees if it is NOT windy. I love the new look and feel. But I miss the warmth and wind blocking of the old red jac shirt.(This message has been edited by fred8033)

JAY - You said "Requirements counted towards one Merit Badge may not be counted for another Merit Badge." Why? Is there somewhere it says that? I'd be okay if there is an official source. I'm just curious. I ask because we've had times where scouts work on multiple merit badges that have overlapping requirements, often first aid requirements. Summer camp often has any scout doing an aquadics badge show up at the same time to complete those basic requirements. Not once per badge they are taking. Plus how would two different merit badge counselors avoid being gamed by smart scouts or accidentally missing something from an honest / innocent scout. Just wondering if it's a BSA official rule or a troop / counselor rule.

I don't think the COR job description is the same as a group leader concept. COR is more representative of the CO and signs off on the leaders. But not really an involved executive role. The Group Leader concept seems more involved in getting the program running in a specific direction. There is overlap but a definit difference.

Beavah - I think we are confusing each other's words. I agree with you on this topic. COs don't have the skills for recruitment or helping packs provide a good program... as a rule of thumb. But then it's a catch 22. COs could structure their units in the one-unit-style if they are strategic about it. But COs aren't skilled in scouting. So they don't. The result is that units work separately within the same CO and not leveraging each other. Even worse, alienating each other. The COR could do this, if they thought strategically. But most CORs don't. They just represent the authority of their CO. ... I also agree. The failure is not in the CO. It's in the BSA and the councils. I think BSA needs to address the scout unit structure to make up for the lack of CO guidance.

Nicely said. I believe that in a one-unit concept ... those parents of Cubs that move up in rank become the elders that can guide, advise and support the new cub parents that come into the program. I really believe that the lack of such support is a key reason for the repeated pattern of packs problems.

Basementdweller ... What you describe is what I was thinking of as the concept. The only difference is there is no "join" situation. Just continue into the Boy Scout ranks, similar to continuing into the Wolf, Bear, Webelos or other ranks. Good concept too on events. The only important role is that the units need to still meet separately as different ages need different things. But, I'd argue Webelos need to meet separate from Cubs because Cub Scouts now starts at Kindergarten and that's too big of a difference between Webelos and K. Cambridgeskip ... "Group Scout Leader" ... I like that concept. Keep the unit leaders, but move the committee up a bit into a group committee. I see the UK also has a concept of a Group Executive Committee that includes the unit leaders and other key persons. That concept seems correct. Right now it just seems broken when a charter org provides a pack, a troop and a crew but then administers them separately. It just seems self-defeating. Of course then can do differently, if they realize it's important.

Weaker troops ... Just looked at my district, we have 39 troops and 40 packs. In my experience, that's not enough packs for troops. I don't know how many are living functioning units. But we are very close to one-on-one now. Hmmm....

I had not thought about the weaker troop issue. You are right in that, RIGHT NOW, it does take multiple packs or so to feed a troop. In our city, we have equal number of troops and packs "officially". Unofficially, some of the packs are pretty small and about to fail. So, a troop in our city needs multiple packs to support itself. BUT ... one healthy pack can keep a troop going. In another words, a perfect troop is between 32 and 50 scouts. So troops need six to eight new scouts each year. A healthy pack can easily graduate six to ten Webelos. Plus troops gain one or two scouts each year thru other channels. The trouble is there are too many unhealthy packs. Though there are multiple reasons, one reason is that it takes awhile for adults to "get" scouting. By the time, adults get it, they are moving into troops. By being more then just partnered, truely integrated as one unit, packs would have more resources, do way better and graduate more scouts into Boy Scouts. .... One solution is to have packs that don't have a troop to be re-chartered under an existing troop's charter org. I'm betting most pack charter orgs wouldn't notice one way or the other. So troop 123 would have packs 123 & 124.(This message has been edited by fred8033)

Beavah - "... that's really what da COR's role is supposed to be, eh? ... Why create somethin' new when da current structure provides exactly what yeh suggest?" I think that's partially what the COR is ... or could be. The issue is that most CORs don't take ownership of the job to think strategically about the success of the units in their charter. They see names on an application. They work with the IH to get the charter signed. I think key is that most (not all, but greater than 75% if not greater than 90%) charter orgs are just not significantly involved. So each unit charters separately and is left to struggle. Troops leaders struggle with recruitment. Pack leaders struggle with how to provide a good program. BUT ... the packs could support the troops in recruitment and the troops could support the packs in putting on a good program. So your right in that Charter Orgs could structure their units as I'm suggesting. I just think that most won't as they are already doing a good deed by providing a room to meet in. I've heard rumors of a one-unit approach. I really hope it's more than just lip service of automatically registering cubs in the same COR's troop. I hope it really is re-engineering scouting to be a one-unit concept. Maybe different meetings and different outings. But, designed to be one unit.

My favorite is when the troop recharters and sets the COR to a specific person. Then the pack recharters and sets it to a different person. The next year, it happens all over again. The charter org executive just signs the recharter paperwork and never notices a difference. Troop never learns until the next year. And then the troop criticizes the council for not getting the charter names correct.(This message has been edited by fred8033)

SeattlePioneer - I partially agree in that you can "adopt" a neighboring district. I disagree in that the other district can not adopt you. You can adopt another district's training, campouts, activities and roundtables. Most districts would be glad to have you. But the other district can't adopt you for .... ---- Support from your DE and district staff ---- Where your hang files are put for roundtable ---- Coordination - Popcorn sales ---- Coordination - FOS ---- Coordination - Recruitment ---- Advancement - Approving eagle projects ---- Advancement - Eagle boards of review ---- Advancement - Disputed situations ---- Advancement - Leader recognition ---- Advancement - Any special awards, heroism, hornaday, etc. ---- Order Of The Arrow - Elections ---- Order Of The Arrow - Chapter meetings ---- Membership - Signing rechartering paperwork ---- Membership - Signing new member applications ---- Communications from district / council Some not impossible but difficult ones would include... ---- Anything resembling a "district level award / trophy" ---- DISTRICT PINEWOOD DERBY ******* I know I'd be upset if a Cub Scout from another district came to compete in our district pinewood derby, received an award and then consumed spot going to the next competition level. If that is allowed, I should shop around for multiple pinewood derbies until I find one where my son's car could win and he could advance to the next level. Or if we lose, we could fix the car and then find another district's derby. Probably similar for other events. Is it fair for anything competitive to have other district scouts win things in another district? Probably not an issue for casual competitions such as camporee competitions. Very much an issue with pinewood derbies and such. Very much for things such as "top seller" or etc. Also, it would be difficult for the other district to recognize your eag ................ I'm just saying, if you don't like your district, your options are ... ---- Officially switch districts ---- Pretend to go it alone. No FOS. No recruitment materials. No popcorn. No support. But depend on district for advancement, rechartering and signing your paperwork. ---- Be a quiet member of your district (FOS, recruitment, popcorn, support, pinewood derby, ...) but participate with other district's activities (camp outs, training, etc) ---- Try to improve your district from the outside ---- Try to improve your district from the inside (help the district) The option I don't see as realistic is trying to "unofficially" be part of another district and then ignore your own district. That's just asking for headaches. ................ To be honest, I view "go it alone" as argumentative. You don't have to do FOS, popcorn, camporees, roundtable, etc. But units still depend on their district. Make it an official switch or work with your district.

If the issue is your district is bad, I personally don't find that a good reason to switch. Focus on making your unit the best it can be. As for the distrit, call the SE. Let people know the issues. Get things to change. I have had to do that a few times and things can change. It's not easy, but it helps everyone in the long run. You can also volunteer. Then when your helping, you can influence things. (This message has been edited by fred8033)

I know some have recommended just doing it yourself "unofficially" but there are reasons to either make it official or not do it at all. You can always attend training and learning from other districts. BUT ... - Hang files will be at your "official" district roundtable. The hang files will get your ... ----- Your rechartering packet ----- Your FOS packet ----- Your event fliers - Communication will be done through your "official" DE, district & roundtable staff. ----- I'd be surprised if another DE would "unofficially" communicate with you "long term" for risk of upsetting another DE or earning a bad name for himself. ----- DEs also change every two years or so. So any "casual" arrangement is not really dependable - Recruiting ----- The original poster himself mentioned that the annual recruitment is coordinated thru the district. ----- Your "official" DE coordinates and approves flyers, annoucnements and other unit postings. - District events ----- If your district has "events", you want to do them with your official district. Otherwise you will miss communications, announcements and will continually be the "outside" troop. (This message has been edited by fred8033)

I am greatful for the advise. I am already to secede writing better to. The yolk I bear is Mis-Capitolization and it effects anything I write. Other authors may flout their own fancy words. Sadly, I have no angle on my shoulder to take me through the gamut. But my decent into grammatical confucianism is drove by commuter auto-correct. By and by, this is only my prospective, of coarse.

Pretty primitive still. I wanted to update the unit calendar without sending a notice. Couldn't find out how to do that. Could not add my cell phone. Only shows the "home" phone. Hmmm.... Found it interesting that of the three roster export formats, none of them export the email address. I wanted to compare the list against my roster list. Going into each account one by one is too much work. I won't do it that way. Instead, will wait for rechartering. The site is a nice beginning, but too basic to be of any use.

I'm amazed how many new web solutions exist for scouting and how quick those tools are evolving. - troopwebhost looks promising, but sort of klunky on the interface. It feels like a web version of TroopMaster. - ScoutManager looks promising, but in it's early stages. Not necessarily fully featured. - Our troop uses SOAR (www.soarol.com) and Troopmaster. We don't renew the licence every year as it's not required. - Our pack uses SOAR and ScoutTracks. ScoutTracks has a klunky interface, but is very good at tracking details. But of course, I'm not sure unit leaders need much more then Excel for tracking cub advancement.

I'm not a lawyer, but a key difference here is that teachers and school administrators have been subject to mandatory reporting laws for a long time. I don't think scout leaders were subject to mandatory reporting laws until the 1990s, 2000s or even 2010s. I'm assuming teacher reporting laws extended to universities in addition to elementary, middle and high schools. I'm sure it varied state by state.

I fully agree that unit leaders need further training but I don't think it is formal structured training. New unit leaders need to be mentored. Existing leaders need on-going fresh set of ideas and examples. IMHO, the unit commissioner program is supposed to address this. BUT, again IMHO, the unit commissioner program is fundamentally structurally flawed. Maybe some districts have a functioning commissioner program. But I've yet to see it. Heck, we have not had a unit commissioner visit in the last twelve years in any of my three units. Again IMHO, the solution is to put a program in place where unit leaders visit another unit(s) once or twice a year to learn, to mentor and to get fresh ideas. The units should be rotating so that the same people don't visit the same unit each year. Not only is it a learning opportunity, it's also a great way to build a scouting community. Perhaps that's something that each district committee member should do also. Visit a unit at their meeting place at least once a year.

SSScout, emb21: Thanks. I think I had read it briefly a long time ago, but had never absorbed the concept of equipment patches and trunk patches. We never really used them other then as temporary patches. Your answer is consistent with what I found on BSA's site. http://www.scouting.org/scoutsource/Media/InsigniaGuide/06F.aspx But still ... I'd be okay if someone put them on the back of their sash. I know my son puts temporary patches on the back of his sash. If he wants to put other patches there (not rank), fine. The issue I have with rank patches is it's a been there done that thing. You've got the new better patch on your shirt. Nothing is communicated by showing the old ones on the back of the sash.

Eagle732 - Nope. Nothing automatic. I'm just saying it's one of the first things to get done. Right up there with completing scout badge requirements, teaching them how to setup a tent, choose a camp site and use the troop stoves. Heck, I'm always happy when scouts cook over the fire instead of using a stove. So we want them to have their Firem'n Chit. For the last eight years, in our troop, scouts earn their Totin' Chip and Firem'n Chit on their first camp out. Usually, they receive the cards on same day. Heck, the requirements are pretty simple and it's more of a commitment to act responsibly. I sort of see it as a quick wake up about responsibility and maturity. I see zero reason to delay or associate it with achieving a rank. The scouts need the right to use knives and fire. They are scouts, right? What is any more fundamental to being a scout then using a pocket knife and having a camp fire.(This message has been edited by fred8033)

perdidochas wrote: "To make those boys wait to get second class to carry a pocket knife again is counterproductive. " I had not connected those dots. You are so so so on target. Waiting for 2nd class??? Some kids will roll with the system. But you will lose credibility with your natural leaders. Many of them have strong personalities and can see thru the B.S. Treat them straight and they give you straight answers. Game them and they will start gaming you. Give them contradictions and they will resolve it. The contradiction I see is giving them a Scout Law that starts with "Trustworthy" and telling them that the scouts run the program and that as scouts they are responsible for so much, but then telling them they can't use a knife they have been using in Cub Scouts since the summer before 3rd grade. More simply stated, tell a kid who has a strong personality that they can't use a knife after using it for two years and you won't see them using a knife. They will use the knife. You just won't know about it. I can't really blame them either.