John-in-KC

Anarchist wrote in part: Get a life, your "job" is to learn the material no matter how poor the "teacher" is. Are you an intelligent adult or do you want to be thought of as a bottle-fed infant with a soiled diaper? Sure its more work and effort to dig out the info when you think the teacher is a twit, but Life is not always what we would like it to be...if you have been given broken eggs - make an omelet! HORSEHOCKEY! We''re VOLUNTEERS, not someone with a job. We choose to serve Scouting out of hopefully passion, possibly necessity (we really need you to lead...) and occasionally out of duress (we will not charter Den 6 without a DL...who''s going to step up?). VOLUNTEERS need to be treated with care and respect for their time, and new unit-serving volunteers more so than us old farts who have WB, who go to supplemental training, who have to choose between backing up a single Campmaster and going to skills/safety training at the Scout Reservation. If we don''t treat the new arrival parents well, we won''t have their KIDS and them around for the journey. So NO... THERE IS NO EXCUSE FOR BAD VOLUNTEER TRAINING IN SCOUTING!! IT''S A DIS-SERVICE TO THE MOVEMENT!!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :) :) !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! WELL DONE!!!!!!!!!!!!! WAY COOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Did your TG share with you that that''s only your First ticket??? Congratulations to a bunch of California Bruins! (This message has been edited by John-in-KC)

1) Have son call PL "I cannot be at meeting tonight, and neither can Dad." No explanation given. Go see one of the other Troops. 2) Do this on alternate weeks. Attend meeting on other weeks. 3) When SM catches on, say "Son may be developing other interests, we''re looking at what youth serving activity supports him best." 4) If SM gets a call from another SM, and he confronts you, simply say "I''m seeing an Adult Run Troop here, and no willingness to change. That''s not the Scouting experience I want for my son." This isn''t the NFL, the team isn''t paying your son big bucks to participate. In fact, you''re paying to participate. Your son deserves the best Scouting experience he can reasonably find, and you can reasonably support.

Ga Hill Billy, Long story short: If your current unit is not delivering the promise and will not change its use of the Methods, then it''s time to consider a new Troop. Your son should look for: - Smiles on boys faces. - An activity schedule that shows them out doing things - Training in troop meetings which supports operations on coming campouts. You should look for: - SM who gives much authority and responsibility (and perhaps some deference) to the SPL and the PLC. - CC who works with the SM and who takes program info from the SPL (as the voice of the PLC). - Committee which supports the SM and steps into the meeting only as specifically needed. - Skills taught mostly by youth, but adults stepping in on request of youth when advanced topics come up. Make sense?(This message has been edited by John-in-KC)

No, Pete, NPR is reporting that methane gas in Asian rice fields is 20 times more potent than CO2 in contributing to global warming: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=15100994 Synopsis: Thai Scientists Look for a Greener Rice Crop by Jon Hamilton All Things Considered, October 8, 2007 Rice fields are a major source of methane one of the so-called greenhouse gases linked to global warming. But switching to other crops is unthinkable in Asia, where rice is the primary source of calories for many people. So scientists in Thailand are trying to find rice cultivation techniques that produce less methane. Further, there is the dreaded Staff Cow at Scout Camp: I am cow, hear me moo I weigh twice as much as you And I look good on the barbecue Yogurt, curd, cream cheese and butters Made from liquid from my udders I am cow, I am cow, hear me moo (moo) I am cow, eating grass Methane gas comes out my MOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!! And out my muzzle when I belch Oh, the ozone layer is thinner From the outcome of my dinner I am cow, I am cow, Ive got gas

To amplify on what ScoutNut said, also have the UC visit with the COR in advance of the meeting. The COR can come in and say "Thus it shall be," and end the discussion. The Chartered Partner owns the license from Scouting, not the members of the Committee or the CM.

Gunny, As I think I''ve told you offlist, WB is the same leadership development you received in the Corps, the same as I received in the Army. A good friend, a Navy Commander, and her good friend, a retired Marine Master Gunnery Sergeant, recently took the course: She could teach many of the modules better than any of the staff ... I ABSOLUTELY RECOMMEND WB!!! The friendships, the fun, and the connections will serve you all your days in Scouting. David, No, I''m shooting a target: As a Council Commissioner and a Course Director, you have input we who are further down the volunteer chain do not get: You can give them Feedback (and tell them it''s a gift!). You can report your active listening of the field to folks who make decisions about the program. That''s something I do not have the connections and relationships to do! One other comment: You wrote: I promised to deliver the program to the youth the way it''s presented." WB is about supporting volunteers. It is only to the extent that WB is a tool for unit serving, 2d line, and 3d line Scouters to deliver the program that this promise comes into play, imo. Please, tell the folks you inter-relate with further up the Scouting food chain that the policy of setting aside Neckers and beads is bovine excrement, and it stinks. Some day we will have a curriculum change. Why should we who are 21C graduates someday be made to feel the way Mr Shupe did about his course??? It''ll be flat-dab wrong then, as it is flat-dab wrong now. To conclude: I believe in lifelong learning, and in cementing skills, hard and soft, by sharing them. Setting a lifelong learner up for success is vital. If a course or an instructor makes the learner feel his prior skills are for naught, then it''s possible to alienate the student (he''s there only in body), or lose the student altogether. Scouting competes for volunteers with other youth serving and community activities. Scouting has enough problems already dealing with a host of issues from homosexualty and YP to the DRP. It simply cannot afford to alienate volunteers because their prior training is to be discounted in function, or in form. I hope you can tell I''m passionate about this.

Everything Lisa said, except taking Bachelor of UC coursework. That''s about 18 months out. Additionally, DO NOT be incapable of listening in on the adult information back-channel: If the pack/troop/crew you serve communicates by email and list-serv, YOU bloody well participate in the list. I had a UC who was clueless; he refused to give us an email address, then he complained he didn''t know where we were on meeting nights, when we were offsite.

David, National can place their Administrative Guide where the sun does not shine. If ever I take WB as a student again, I may be willing, during the classwork, for uniformity, to take my beads off... but from the moment I enter Gilwell Field for the final ceremony before going back into the Scouting field, well... that''s between me and My God, and no one else. They can pry my beads out of my cold, dead hands. I trust that is clear to you. Want to know something? While I''d expect a pre-21C who wants to staff to do the same, when he''s done with the learning phase, I''d not begrudge him one iota of putting his Gilwell necker and beads back on either.

flowerchild, Do you happen to be from the Atlanta Area Council? If so, after the membership scandals there a couple of years back, there may be some intense validation and audit tests before the Council locks in Charters and prints cards. Even so, ask your Chartered Organization Representative (the guy/gal who supervises the use of the Scouting program for your Chartered Partner) to call the Scout Executive and ask for a "no bull" explanation. Civic organization license (charter) the Scouting program from the BSA local council, and the Council has fiduciary obligations (mainly involving the general liability insurance coverage) to the Chartered Partner!(This message has been edited by John-in-KC)

Pete, Yep, you said it. They will have to pry my beads from my cold dead hands. NO ONE can make me give up my beads, if ever BSA migrates to a new curriculum from 21C. As for a new ticket, my TG, at our completion visit, told me pretty plainly... from this point out, you''ll always be finding new ticket items to take care of.(This message has been edited by John-in-KC)

MOST COOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Congratulations. May you find many enjoyable years of working your lifelong tickets! John I used to be an Owl C-40-05

Lisa said, in part: I can''''t see this working where we are. Part of the problem is the lack of quality in some of the trainings (see GaHillBilly''s recent post). If the training team doesn''t have a reputation for providing a good, useful product, people will find ways not to go. And I don''t know if I believe that a DE will follow through on this threat not to recharter units where the adults don''t meet the requirements. I have to agree with Lisa here. I assume the DE is scored on # of units and number of youth program members. If you drop a unit, you''ve lost those kids... forever. I don''t see it. Now, with online training, there really isn''t an excuse for either YP or Fast Start. Beyond that, training has to be: - Executed well. - Executed on time. - Not waste the volunteers time (don''t read the slides). - Don''t be buffaloing the volunteers (mandatory training or you lose your charter). Threats not made good do not help credibility. As far as Commissioners go, sorry. There, yes, training needs to be early and non-negotiable. Commish are a whole other category from unit serving Scouters, they''ve decided they want to serve Scouting as volunteers. No slack should be cut for commish. LH, I really want to get some feedback and followup from you as your recharter season hits: Do they really drop units? If not, the council is in the same boat as the Troop Committee which sets other than the BSA standard for Active Scouts for Eagle: They''ll find out who loses credibility, the hard way.

In another thread, FScouter quoted a BSA wesite, thusly: There is a more to "active" than being registered. BSA does say a boy must be registered, but goes on to specify more. See http://www.scouting.org/boyscouts/resources/mbc/rank.html Here''''s an answer provided in a Q&A about advancement: Question: For the Star, Life, and Eagle Scout ranks, how is "Be active in your troop and patrol" defined? Answer: A Scout is considered to be active in his unit if: 1. He is registered in his unit (registration fees are current). 2. He has not been dismissed from his unit for disciplinary reasons. 3. He is engaged by his unit leadership on a regular basis (Scoutmaster conference, informs the Scout of upcoming unit activities, through personal contact, and so on). The unit leaders are responsible for maintaining contact with the Scout on a regular basis. The Scout is not required to attend any certain percentage of activities or outings. However, unit leaders must ensure that he is fulfilling the obligations of his assigned leadership position. If he is not, then they should remove the Scout from that position. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ You haven''t seen this young man since he was just over 14. In fact, you dropped him from the Charter the year he would be 16, because a call to home said "I''m done with Scouts." He was a Life Scout when he dropped, and while he hadn''t signed off Spirit or SM conference, the SM at the time had signed off his POR. He shows up at a Troop meeting, about a month past his 17th birthday. He''s not a true "deathbed Eagle candidate" (that would be the boy who shows up 10 days before he ages out of Personal Fitness/Management and Family Life), but he''s not been steady on the trail either. Now, he wants to rejoin and earn his Eagle. What do you tell this young man? Why? Do you consider, as Beavah has suggested, not accepting his application? If so, why? Remember: His obligation is to pay dues and not be a disciplinary problem. Our obligation as Scouters is to engage him. This is a true open-ended question, and it is not tied to any boy in my own unit. I have one deathbedder who has stayed on the books, but whenever I ask him about when he''ll start his "Big 3" MBs, he tells me he''s not ready to start his logs. It''ll be a moot point in 45 days, when he breaches the 90 day line from his 18th birthday.

OUCH!!! Your critiques have merit! 1) There is never an excuse for asking a volunteer to do something on a "hey, you" basis that is not direct support of the youth program members! Two weeks of heads up time should be the bare minimum. It''s completely reasonable to say "Sorry" at 13 days or less, imo. 2) There is no excuse for not giving accurate info, especially on starting times. 3) As you noticed, reading the !@#$%^&*()_(&^%$ slides is WASTING THE VOLUNTEERS TIME. I can read, dagnabit... add value to the slides, say something that isn''t on them. 4) Since few of us are professional trainers in our day jobs, I can understand a training event going long ... but 2 hours and 15 minutes long is indeed discourteous to the training audience. Thank you for volunteering to serve Scouting in a unit-serving position. Please remember not only the course content, but also the lessons you learned in how (not to) train others... you may someday be leading unit level junior leader training whilst you ramp up kids to do it for themselves!

My course, weather rock was still there. (2005). Right or wrong, I dunno. It was there! As Lisa said, for many of us, WB21C is what we know. It is what it is. We had a great time, we got a great chance to work our tickets. My Owl patrol corresponds by email, we''ll be going (well, they''ll be going) to breakfast reunion later this month... I have a HS obligation with EagleSon and the band. As far as patrol method, it''s still there. For our second weekend, I was grubmaster, another was quartermaster, and we shared cook and KP. We had a blast! I''m sorry, allangr, you got talked to that way by someone current. Too many of us 21C folk have had the reverse experience from older course folk. We''re here to learn, to make friendships, to better prepare us to serve the youth program members. Your Gilwell necker and beads are no different than mine. As far as the expense, I''ve deducted WB fees and mileage as skill development training. My CPA gave me a green light. It''s not that much, but every penny counts. John I used to be an Owl C-40-05

Aquila wrote, in part... Not laziness here. We award rank at quarterly Courts of Honor. It has nothing to do with laziness, and EVERYTHING to do with ceremony and recognition. But we''re talking about CUB SCOUT PACKS here, not Boy Scout Troops. As short an attention span as an 11-15 year old can have, an 8 year old has an order of magnitude less. The Den meets weekly, the Pack monthly, there just isn''t any excuse for a Cub Pack not to give rank and awards monthly.

Ed, I think the true issue here involves, as Beavah said, what the National Council thinks the program should look like. Lord knows we need the volunteers who serve the various National committees to be thinking very hard about what right looks like. Away from the definitions, I don''t like the rubric "registered=active." I''m also waaay too far down in the trenches (as are most of us here) to have a say in this. We need to push two comments up through our Advancement folks, to the National Council: - Get away from registered=active. - Set a reasonable standard for the word active.

OK, Ed, Be my guest. Deny one of the young men in your Troop an Eagle SM Conference or EBOR for lack of your term of "active" ... and we''ll see what your Council Advancement Committee says. Is it right, what the Boy Scout Division is doing? No, from every perspective except perhaps legal defense. There are rumors floating of litigation against Councils and BSA over denied advancement. From their perspective, setting the bar at "registered=active" makes economic sense. It saves money on legal fees, money which if sent to lawyers cannot be used for other Scouting purposes. It is still policy? That''s for your local Advancement folks to tell you. Do you, as a SM, or you as a CC, or even you as a COR, want to be overturned by Council or National? Will that help your personal and corporate credibility with the youth in your charge? I submit not. It''s not right; it is how we seem to be expected to do business now.

Beavah is absolutely smack on ... if you haven''t accepted the young man''s application and dollars yet If you have accepted his application and dollars, then you''re in the loop my posts describe. For others who may find this thread through whatever search, read well Beavah''s post above. If you take the boys'' app, if you recharter him from year to year, then National defines a standard. If OTOH, he gets to 14 and drops out a bit beyond Life, you do not have to automatically recharter him. Year to year, at recharter time, look at each youth member and adult on your books.

I think we touched one of Lisa''s buttons! I have to agree though. While I can respect individual politicians, I find them, as a class, a bunch of buffoons. Maybe we ought to hire the entire Ringling Brothers, Barnum and Bailey Circus clown department to be Congress. EagleSon and I both love 1776, the musical. EagleSon has memorized John Adam''s opening speech: "I have been told that one useless man is called a DISGRACE, that two are called a LAW FIRM, and three or more become a CONGRESS!..." Mark Twain and Will Rogers would both have field days over our current legislatures.

Well, 40 years ago, my Cubmaster gave us our ranks and arrow points at monthly Pack meetings. You should have seen the smile on my face. 10 years ago EagleSon''s Cubmaster gave him his ranks and arrow points at monthly Pack meetings. You should have seen the smile on his face. 7 years ago I was ACM and helped give Cubs their ranks and arrow points at monthly Pack meetings. You should have seen the smiles on their faces. Any old codger stick-in-the-mud sourpuss who doesn''t want to see smiles on Cubs'' faces, and give them their ranks and arrow points (and belt loops and all manner of other doo-dads) at monthly Pack meetings needs be told: Sir (or Madam), you are full of bovine excremental matter, and you stink to high heaven. My two cents. YIS

We''ve been here too. Go read this thread: http://www.scouter.com/forums/viewThread.asp?threadID=158762 Read the 5th (Beavah''s) and the 7th (ScoutNut''s) posts in this thread. Whether we as volunteers like it or not, National has set a standard: If you accept the app and the bucks, he''s active. A distinguished Scouter with excellent home office contacts gave me the backstory offlist. I would not be surprised to see the quote ScoutNut gave to be in Advancement Committee Policies and Procedures at the next printing. Whether you like National''s policies or not is immaterial. If you deny him a SM Conference or an EBOR, you must explain to him the appeal procedures. He''s on your rolls, he''s active. That''s the long and short version. If he appeals, your Troop will most likely lose. How important is the credibility of your Scouters? Do you want to be shown up by your Distict Advancement Chair, Council, or National? Cut your losses. Accept he''s active, and press on with the tasks at hand.

Flowerchild, That is where you have your Chartered Organization Representative call the Council President (a volunteer) and the SE (a Professional) and say "What in the devil are you guys doing? Get my youth and leaders their cards." JeffD, On page 2 of the Recharter Report from Scout.net, there is a field for the Boy''s Life subscription period. In the case of my Crew, the charter year was Jan 1 to Dec 31, but the BL subscription year was March 07 to Feb 08. Your CM, SM, Advisor, COR or IH puts his hands on the recharter report, so one of them should be able to tell you! HTH both of you.

If the Scout has completed his POR, and the Scoutmaster signed off on it as being acceptable service, then he''s done. Period. If the Scoutmaster didn''t sign off, then you have to make a decision. I would certainly consult your District Advancement Chairman before making the decision. If the Scout says, I was OATR, On My Honor... well, a Scout is Trustworthy. I suspect the DAC will say "it''s done", if he/she''s anything like my DAC. Here''s the rub: If the Scout or his parent complains to the DE, a Commissioner, the COR, or the DAC, then the issue may not be what he did... it may be "what is Mr Troutmaster''s credibility? Is he following the program?" As I have said elsewhere, I have seen at least one DAC withdraw a Scouts advancement from the unit. Right or wrong, it has happened. Talk to your District Advancement Chair. Buy him or her a cup of coffee, and figure out how to make this a win/win.