JMHawkins

Thanks, I think I get it now. It's not just more youth involvement, it also makes the, ah, shall we say pagentry of a Boy Scout troop (CoH, uniforms, ranks, ceremonies, etc) totally optional. I think I might even understand the why - the ceremonies and rituals are great for 11-14 year olds, it captures their attention and stirs some part of their developing mind, but the older youth of Venturing are probably less interested in that. In a sense they've already "graduated" and the coming-of-age rituals should be behind them.

That can be as easy as an email.

My first thought when I read this was "what about Summer Camp and Merit Badge Weekends?"

Then I remembered I dislike most MB classes.

And it's not like the cards help that much. Last year we went to a MB weekend and it rained hard overnight. Most of the blue cards scouts were holding on to (in the thigh pockets of their scout pants) got soaked and turned into little piles of blue pulp. We ended up needing to recreate a whole bunch of those.

OTOH, a Scout needed to shepherd his blue card from SM to MBC and back is a lesson in responsiblity.

Yeah, I think Gunny's response is right. It way more important what sort of spirit a scout goes about doing his service with than how many hours he racks up.

I'd much rather it be more like a Scout Spirit requirment. But that would drive the bureacracy minded folks nuts.

Thanks BadenP, that helps. But I'm still a little confused about the Crew is not a Troop part. I guess it's just that of course a Troop isn't a Crew, but they are alike in that both are youth organizations with adults helping. Just like a Troop and a Pack aren't the same but both have youth and adult members. I completely understand the Webelos III description of adults who don't get the difference between Pack and Troop, and I'm pretty sure one reason I understand it is that I was a Boy Scout in an old school sort of Troop.

But I was never a Venturer, so when you say "Every crew in my experience who tried to run their crew like a troop has FAILED!" I really want to know what that means. We don't run our troop like a Webelos III den, but what else if different (beyond the details you listed, Co-ed, uniforms, ranks, specialties)? It sounds like it's not just a matter of degree (give the youth more responsibility), but that there's a fundamental difference of kind.

Maybe if you defined "running it like a Troop" a little, that would help me see the difference.

SP is right about this. Our biggest headaches have been when the training records the Council had were not up to date and caused problems with adult recharters. So, I would first send the CC of the unit a list of training records for adults registered to that unit and work to get them updated. Do whatever you can to make that process easy.

Beyond that, the next step would be to revamp the whole process, but that's outside your scope.

I think the rechartering process is something of a joke in the modern world. But BSA needs to fix it's IT system before it can do much better.

I think the thing that makes the average American most upset is seeing someone bullied, regardless of the political issues involved. If a bunch of Rush Limbaugh listeners had been barricading the enterances to Dixie Chick's concerts, it would have been different, and it wouldn't have worked. But, that's not what happend. The Dixie Chicks weren't bullied by anyone, they just made comments a huge portion of their fan base found obnoxious. OTOH, a couple of mayors threatening Chik-fil-A over comments people who don't generally eat there find obnoxious is seen as bullying.

Sorry, didn't mean to sidetrack things with my "unscrupulous" bit. Not referring to any organization in particular really, and especially not the typical scout service project. But I do think there's a lesson worth teaching as we teach scouts about service: there are those who will take advantage of it, and it's worth knowing how to spot it when it happens. Also helping the scouts figure out how to react.

if they weren't mandatory then many would not do them.

Service projects can be mandatory without having an hour requirement. For example:

Star Rank:

4. While a First Class Scout, take part in one or more service projects that benefit your community in some way and demonstrate the spirit of selfless service. These projects must be approved by your Scoutmaster.

Citizenship in the Community:

7c. With your counselor's and your parent's approval, contact the organization and find out what young people can do to help. While working on this merit badge and with your conselor's approval, volunteer your time to help the organization achieve it's goals in your community. After your volunteer experience is over, discuss what you have learned with your counselor.

The requirement isn't to keep a rake handle warm for X hours, it's to learn about service and why it's necessary.

Then again, I'm enough of a cynic that I'd like to see another requirement along the lines of:

Describe how an unscrupulous organization might exploit volunteers, and how this harms a community. Discuss ways you might recongize this sort of exploitation and how you can avoid it.

In my experience with Venturing for almost 12 years now the problems in getting it off the ground has been a total lack of understanding of what the program is SUPPOSED to be based on their own literature by both National and Council employees. In addition the disjointed and watered down training given on all levels to Venturing advisors and youth officers. IMO how can any revision coming out of National, who doesn't understand the program in the first place, be of any real value to those of us in the field who have been delivering the program.

Y'know, to be blunt, you could replace "Venturing" with "Boy Scouts" and the same thing would be true. The only real difference is that there's a larger number of advisors, er, I mean Scoutmasters, with an understanding of what Boy Scouts is supposed to be. Troops that don't have one or more of those folks are likely to be lost as to what sort of program they're delivering.

BP, what do you see as the key differences between a Troop and a Crew? What would you want an experienced SMASM moving to Venturing to know?

I hate the phrase "double dipping." Probably as much as some people hate the phrase "Eagle Mill."

I don't see any particular reason the hours can't count for both. Certainly the goal of "service" in advancement requirements is not to get free labor out of Scouts, but rather to teach them about selfless service. To be blunt, I think counting the hours in the first place is the wrong way to go about this. It makes it more of an economic transaction - you get X payment for doing Y hours of work. Getting hung up about "double dipping" just reinforces that they're doing the service in order to get something.

The Star requirement is there to ensure the scout learns something about selfless service. The Citizenship in the Community requirement seems pretty clearly meant to teach them scout about how the particualr charitable organization functions through volunteer help. Seem like compatible goals to me. Going on about hours and double-dipping seems more like clock-punching than selfless service to me.

As an MBC, I'd want to know what they learned about how the organization uses volunteers and whether the scout thought the organization could continue to provide it's service without volunteers. In fact, I might even ask if the outfit has any paid staff, and what the scout thought about there being paid people and volunteers working for the same organization. Of course he wouldn't need to give any specific answer.

And for the Star requirement, I'd be more interested in his general attitude towards service projects than the total hours he put into it. Sure, the requirements say we have to count hours, so he has to have a specific number, but I'd do everything I could to keep the number from being the most important thing.

We don't do NSPs, but the general idea of a hike to work on scoutcraft works for any program.

Something we did last year was "The Amazing Race" hike. Patrols started out in different directions with their first clue, which led them to a Scouter waiting somewhere in the trail complex. Once they got there, they'd have some sort of scoutcraft tests (tie several knots, identify plants, etc), plus they had to navigate the trials to get there. After finishing the skills at that station, they got their next clue, which took them to another Scouter running a different skill station.

If you have older scouts, you could of course run it with the older Scouts doing the stations/instruction rather than adults. Alternately, you could divide up your NSP among your existing patrols for the hike. At each station, the older scouts in the patrol have to instruct their new scouts on the skill, then the new scouts have to pass the skill test there before moving on. It becomes a patrol competition for how well the patrols can teach skills, as well as giving the older scouts and the new scouts a chance to get to know one another and interact as scouts.

If he is the only member of the troop who goes to a different school (HS vs Jr or middle school), and he's new to the troop, the item I as his parent would try to get on the Committee agenda wouldn't have anything to do with Venture Crews, but rather with perhaps reviewing the schedule to see if there are future school-scouting conflicts that could be adjusted now so you can avoid these problems down the road.

I'm guessing the current schedule was made before your son joined, and so did not take into consideration his school schedule. It's perfectly reasonable - if done in a polite, non-demanding way - to ask if it's possible to try and retrofit the troop schedule to accomdate his school schedule. It may not be, depending, and if so, well, it's back to "you have to make choices."

Is your son in a year-round school program?

huh, my reply above should have had a section quoting Eagle732 that said:

We try to keep it simple.

Adults set the dates. Camping trips are traditionally the last weekend of the month unless a holiday interferes.

Boys choose the activities they want to do and which month to do them.

But it didn't show up.

Well, sounds like things are moving in a good direction though. If people are unsure how to increase youth involvement, maybe my idea of adults scheduling the when but letting the Scouts schedule the what for at least a couple of activities might still work.

Well, maybe what you can do is make a gentle suggestion during the adult planning conference to nudge things in a more boy-led direction.

Eagle732 said:

My son's troop planned a four day campout for this weekend. The troop left on Thurs. and my son was unable to go at that time due to a scheduling conflict....My son has now missed the final campout before school begins; a campout he really wanted to attend.

So which is it? Was there a scheduling conflict or did he really want to attend? If there was a scheduling conflict, then he (or you) clearly valued the other thing on the schedule more than the trip, which is fine. Part of life is making choices and deciding on priorities. You cant do everything, so learn to pick what's most important. Nobody else is obligated to accomodate your schedule if you can't fit into the schedule the Troop has already created. Your troop has several families in it - the Troop schedule is their effort to reconcile all the various conflicts and priorities of the entire Troop. If your family can't fit into that, then it's your family's responsibility to make something else work. Or just wait for the next campout.

Don't try to blame another family because they let you down. If your son had gone on Thursday with the rest of his troop, then none of the Crew (or cooties) issues would have mattered.

Besides, maybe you don't realize it, but it's really obnoxious for the trip leader to have to deal with Scouts coming and going other than with the group. When I'm leading a trip, especially a big Troop-wide one, I've got 20+ kids - other people's kids - that I'm responsible for. I need to keep track and make sure I don't lose, leave, or misplace any of them. Knowing there are 23 Scouts registered for the trip, that 23 were in cars when we left the parking lot, that there are 23 present at any given point during the trip, and that 23 got back into cars when we left for home, that's okay.

But when I have to start remembering there are 25 registered, but only 22 are driving up with the Troop, 2 others are coming up with another leader later, and 1 is arriving the second day, 2 are being picked up and going home early... yeah, I count Scouts and have to start thinking, is that how many I'm supposed to have? Where's Danny? Not to mention, it's even harder for the PLs, who are just learning to do the organizing, to deal with it. We've had grubmasters who weren't planning on coming until the second night, but the Scouts didn't realize it. Good lesson for them, but really.

Just fit into the schedule or wait until the next trip.

Really, it's whatever works for your unit, but a useful concept is a division of labor with the CM responsible for everything that has to do with the youth and the CC responsible for everything that has to do with the world of adults. Neither really works for the other, they just support each other. For a military analogy, I'd say it's more like the CM is the General who commands the troops hitting the beach and the CC is the Admiral who commands the ships getting them there and keeping them supplied. Maybe providing some fire support too.

A good Admiral knows the goal of the amphibious operation isn't to sail a bunch of ships around (e.g have committee meetings), but to secure a beachhead (deliver a good program for the youth). And a good General knows it's a long swim if the Navy isn't there, and the supplies you need probably aren't going to wash up on the beach all by themselves.

It was Groucho.

But he had another quote about clubs that might be even more appropriate to the recent discussion.

I've a mind to join a club and beat you over the head with it.

Congrats, sounds like the right direction. It takes work, but glad to see other folks bought into important changes.

Good luck.

I'm with Twocub and ScoutNut on this. Drop this crusade until you can approach it with a little more rationality. You are not being reasonable in your actions or expectations. You may have a legitmate grievance with the troop leader and how your council handled this, but you are blowing this out of proportion and will do nobody - yourself, your wife and your daughter any good by continuing on your current course.

Dean, I think the converstaion you need to have with the SM is one that says (in whatever words you think will be most effective) "Buddy, you're darn lucky it was me out there and not some other new parent who doesn't know you that saw this. They would have flipped out..."

Lisabob and Barry both make really good points. This troop needs to put more effort into training the adult leaders and into getting the younger scouts goings. If you're going to have a NSP, you can't just leave 'em essentially unsupervised. Shouldn't there be an ASM assigned to help the NSP and the PL for it? Forcing the parent of one of the new scouts into that role impromptu is not how it's supposed to be done, and long term isn't a recipe for success. You said the PL joined the Troop last year? I'm assuming he spent that year as a member of the NSP then, so he's probably never seen a real Patrol Leader functioning. No wonder he doesn't know what his job is. Doesn't seem like he's preparing his patrol for a campout, looking after it on the campout, or helping his scouts with advancement. He needs a mentor.

So, trying to synthesize Lisabob and Barry's points, Dean I think your actions on the campout sound reasonable under the circumstances, but you should seek to avoid repeating them. That probably requires more confidence on your part that the same problems aren't continuing, which requires some more effort from the SM directed towards the new scouts and the adults in proximity to them.

Chronic poor maintenance and repair. An obvious safety hazard.

Wrenches, pliers and grease guns are probably banned somewhere too.

I think the 15 year prediction is about right, because by then the Boomer generation will have exited most leadership positions in society. Having public debates about morality is a very Boomer thing to do. The younger generations aren't as interested.

I also expect by then Society will have significantly bigger problems to worry about. I suspect the overriding moral imperative will be to get along with your neighbor and not be a perpetual PITA. We won't be celebrating "diversity", we'll be celebrating teamwork. I think we will return to a much stronger division between private and public life. There will be higher standards for public behavior, but they'll come with an expectation that a person's explicitly public behavior is what they'll be judged on.

What that means for gays or the BSA? Nothing that will matter anywhere near as much as how either reacts to other more important problems between now and then. I suspect banning little red wagons will cost BSA more members than any decision the outfit might make on gays will.

I realize it may sound dumb that my wife wants back in, but we do have a lot of friends in that Troop and it would be a lot of work to organize a new Troop. She really just enjoys working with the girls and wants to focus on that rather than all the other stuff this obviously involves. Plus our Troop being so large has a lot of options and resources that we wouldn't have available if we started from scratch.

Indeed, the best thing for you and our wife might be to stage a coup and take over the troop.

But would that really be the best thing for the other 100 girls in it?

This isn't about you, your wife, or "justice." It's about 100 girls. You should be very reluctant to take any actions that jeapordize their program. Those resources are not yours. Those resources aren't meant to give you options. They're meant to give 100 girls opitons.

Start your own troop - if there are over 100 youth in the current one, and several families are willing to move with you, then that seems like the right choice. Let the current troop go it's own way and use it's own resources. Don't look at what's there and think it belongs to your family. It doesn't.

Every society has to have some method of selecting a figurehead. "Eldest child of the previous figurehead" or "guy who pulled a sword out of a rock" or "tarts in lakes handing out swords" don't seem like the best methods, but I'm not sure "Ivy League Grad Making the slickest promises" has worked very good the last few times on this side of the pond either.

I honestly think its more about time management with this age group than anything.