Lisabob

For those who are or have been SMs, what sort of preparation do you expect from your scouts prior to holding an SM conference for rank advancement? Our SM has decided that he would like scouts to do a short written assessment (one-page form) that includes some info on what they've done as scouts of ___ rank, how they've fulfilled their responsibilities if they were in a POR, what merit badges they've earned or are working on, what challenges they've faced/likes & dislikes about the troop, and what their goals are moving forward. I haven't seen the exact form he'll use so I am not 100% sure on the specific items, but this is the gist of it. I think he's hoping to use their responses as a guide for discussion and also, especially with the more advanced/older scouts, to encourage a bit more reflection rather than a box-checking mentality. I'm neither pro nor con on this, I'm just curious to know if anybody else does something like this and if so, how it works out for you.

Just had a conversation about this very topic with my son last night. I'm a MBC for the citizenship badges and we have several scouts who have contacted me to start work on one of them. I asked my son (one of these scouts) to work with a different MBC instead of with me. I had to laugh because he actually *wanted* to work with me! (Rare moment these days, he's 13 after all). But we talk a lot about politics, citizenship, and gov't at home as it is and he already knows my views and thoughts. I figure it would be more interesting and probably more challenging for him to work with someone else, whose insights would be fresh to him. Plus, esp. with these Eagle-required "school work" badges, it is just too easy for some people to assume favoritism when a parent counsels their own child. I'd really rather not deal with that. As long as there is another competent adult available, I'd prefer he work with them instead of with me - and I'll counsel their kids too. On the other hand I am the only counselor in our council for the American Cultures badge. If my son wanted to earn that one I guess I would be happy to work with him. So Bob White is 100% correct in what he has stated, but like many parents, I still prefer not to sign off on requirements for my own child.

We've had plenty of threads on whether or not the BSA or Philly - or both - ought to change their tune. But I have to say that the disposition of the council office has very little to do with the ability of scout units on the ground to provide programs to the youth of the city. I see that Zeiger is an Eagle and an ASM. I wonder just how much of his scouting time is or was spent in the council HQ? I wonder how many of today's youth even know (or care) where the council HQ is?

Oh I do, I do, and boy was I ticked. I didn't support the tax rebate to start with (yeah sure we can all use more cash but my thought was it was a cheap popularity stunt and not enough to really do much with anyway), and then to find out it was simply an "advance"... oh, grrr..

Well there packsaddle, if Thompson's only lasting contribution to this campaign is that he drew the gun crowd away from Huckabee in SC, thus causing Huckabee to lose the state and possibly the nomination to McCain, then I would like to shake Thompson's hand and thank him for running. As somebody else said elsewhere, we're electing a president here, not a preacher, and I don't think you can take the preacher out of Huckabee.

I'm really curious to know whether yours are the only ships in your districts or councils? There is talk about getting a ship functioning in our area (and on the great lakes you'd think this would be a natural fit). But there is a considerable learning curve involved, not to mention sunk costs, in getting that first unit up and running, let alone getting several ships going to have an actual district- or council-wide "program" to speak of. Eamonn mentions the lack of support for the program - as opposed to for specific units - is this a common theme elsewhere, and if not, what have you done to over come this, especially if your ship was the first in the area to get going?

What my son's troop does is not strictly by the book. Reality for us is that we have an out of touch CO that neither wishes to be more engaged nor wishes to relinquish their hold on our charter to allow a friendly transfer to a different CO. So the business about the CO making careful selection isn't realistic since they (CO) have very little idea who we are or how the program works. This, despite my efforts to the contrary. Anyway. The troop has a tradition that people serve as CC and SM for a two year period. THis isn't in writing, it is just the way things have been for the last 6-7 years or so, mostly as a reaction to a couple of people who practically "took over" the unit in previous times, and the disruptions that occurred when those two families (husband & wife teams) both left around the same time. So this summer we were in a position to choose a new SM. We were fortunate in that we had two people who really wanted the position, both of whom were long-time ASMs with the troop, well-known and seasoned, and both of whom would have been excellent choices. The two submitted written info about their background and their vision for the troop (which were actually quite similar) to the PLC, ASMs and the committee. All three groups had a chance to ask questions. The committee, plus the SPL, then voted. This has since come under discussion, as some ASMs felt they wanted to have a more formal voice in choosing (I agree). Some committee members also didn't feel the boys should have any voice in the matter (I disagree). And of course it does not bear close resemblance to the official way of doing things. But it is how we've done it, which is what Beavah asked for. It isn't a method that I would recommend in all cases, but (at least this time) it worked pretty well for us. In reality, I think most troops, most of the time, are crossing their fingers that somebody will step forward and volunteer to take on the job of SM. We were incredibly lucky to have two such well-qualified individuals this time around.

Not to get too far off track but I'd venture to say that T. Roosevelt might be spinning in his grave at some of the "environmental" policies of current-day Republicans. Anyway, I agree with Beavah that this provision will never survive the light of day and so I think I'll stick with Lisa'bob for now. If that annoys you all, well tough. Or I suppose I could go change my legal name to match...hmmm...

The pack we were part of is chartered by a PTO. Most years there was surprisingly little coordination, even though several PTO members had boys in the pack. Perhaps this reflects the fact that PTO membership in elem. schools changes considerably from one year to the next. However, in our most successful recruiting years, we did seek out the PTO to team up with them. For example, we made sure that blurbs about Spring Tiger recruiting, fall round up, and other special events made it into the PTO news letter each month. We helped staff the PTO's spring and fall welcoming/celebrate the end of the school year events (like serving ice cream at their ice cream social). We did this in uniform (boys especially), with one-page flyers about the pack for parents. We participated in other PTO events like donating books to the under-funded school library, presenting the PTO president and school principal with new state flag when the old one looked ratty, helping with PTO-sponsored school clean-up projects, etc.. Another good option - one year all the parents who volunteered in the school as teachers' aides, lunch ladies, etc., were asked to the PTO meetings early in the year. We came too, got to know them, and found them to be the best recruiters for us because they knew the boys, the parents, and the teachers all really well. And, being in the classrooms on a regular basis, many of them were happy to help us get cub flyers and promos distributed without having to bug the teachers or school administrators for access. Note that all of this was spread across about 4 years and it didn't all happen every year. In fact, we found we had to rebuild our relationship from the ground up almost every year and sometimes the PTO folks just weren't interested in us. But with cubs and especially tiger/wolf ages, it is at least as much about getting the parents on board as about the kids - so anything you can do to develop visibility and good relations with parents (incl. PTO) will help your recruiting efforts.

Just went to one a couple weeks ago that was along the lines of Beavah's description of a youth-planned, informal event. No long-winded adult speeches, a couple of short funny stories shared by people who knew him well (including his peers), some ceremony and a couple teary-eyed moments, and then on to eating cake and checking out the displays of photos and cool stuff the boy had done, youth and adults talking and laughing together about scouting and the troop and this fine young man's achievements, and that's it. I have to say that I really enjoyed it myself, and knowing this young man, it would have been a poor fit to have a super serious, formal ceremony. There's a lot to be said for a youth who has the self-confidence to be comfortable just being himself, even at ceremonial pomp & circumstance type events.

I'm not opposed to laser tag. But my understanding of the "rules" as they were fit pretty closely with what SSScout wrote. And to say that because it isn't explicitly banned means it is ok leads us back to sod surfing too, right Ed? I just think if the intent was to clearly make laser tag acceptable, then the good folks in Irving could have done a better job of making their meaning plain. I'll ask our professional staff as Oak suggests. Anyway whether it is "ok" or not, I'm not fond of it as a district recruiting event. I say this even though it would likely be popular, and I'm trying to organize a district recruiting event for boy scouts, myself. But it bears no resemblance to what we actually DO as scouts and doesn't really fit with what we promote as "scouting" activities like camping, fishing, hiking, canoeing, etc.. Boys do not join scouts, and their parents do not sign them up for scouts, to play laser tag. They do that on their own time already and don't need us to help them learn to do it. I'd feel the same way about a video game lock in as a recruiting/joining event. Fun, sure, maybe even a cool one-night activity for a troop, but not a good recruiting tool since it isn't what we actually do 99.9% of the time.

OK now you can all tell me to take the proverbial leap if I'm being too concrete sequential here. But are we sure that just because something was posted as the "definitive" interpretation on a scout discussion list online, that it is true? I'd be happier to see some more direct explanation of this on an official scouting website, or coming through our professional staff, or on letterhead, or something along those lines. I mean, I could post here all sorts of things but that wouldn't make them all true, right?

huh??? What are you talking about?

Thanks for the feedback folks. You've reinforced my initial thoughts on this matter.

Any more word yet on when we might actually see these new shirts? I'd love to be able to share this info with webelos leaders and parents of new scouts in need of uniforms as cross-over season hits us.

Ohio Scouter, our troop doesn't have a "feeder" pack. Instead, we recruit from all 10 packs in our town, typically drawing between 8-15 boys from a variety of packs. This year, we are getting a few new scouts from a pack that traditionally has not sent us scouts, and they decided last summer (before they were thinking of cross-overs, I'm sure) to hold their B&G early in the month. Nothing we can do about that, other than to welcome them a little sooner than we had expected. As a matter of fact, this year it looks like we'll get boys from four or five different packs in town. I'm feeling pretty good about it because rather than having a den leader decide for their whole den that they'll all join Troop xxx, it seems we've convinced many families to look carefully at each troop and decide what is the best fit for their individual child. It also suggests to me that we're doing a better job than in the past (when we got boys mainly from just 2 packs based on ties to families already in the troop) of reaching back to the cub packs and providing them with program support all year round. All four troops in town run good programs and have reasonably good relationships with each other so it works out fine this way for all concerned.

Where I live, it is common for scouts to cross over into troops sometime during late February/early March. Feb. is usually the nastiest month of the year in terms of weather and it isn't uncommon to be talking about tent camping in single digits or negative digits, lots of snow, ice, etc.. Of course we train our scouts to prepare well for these conditions and typically things work out fine. We also hold a shake down camp in late March to orient our new guys to the troop, equipment, basic outdoor skill, etc.. Now March can be bad too, but at least these new guys have several weeks of meetings under their belts before they go on their first colder-weather camp out and we can be pretty sure they have the right gear and know what to do with it at that point. It also gives us time to get the parents on track regarding what sort of equipment their kids really need, and for them to either buy or borrow what they need to have. This year, we've just learned that we'll have a small group of new scouts joining us the very first weekend in February. Our Feb. camp out, a week later, was organized long before we knew this and is centered on "winter survival" skills. It really wasn't designed with brand new scouts in mind because we expected them to join us later in the month. (We have a larger contingent of new scouts joining us at the end of Feb. also.) Our current scouts have been preparing for this camp out for a good bit but the new scouts almost certainly would not be prepared for this. What to do? A couple of options: tell these new scouts they have to wait until the March camp out; invite these new scouts to join the troop on Saturday for the day time only (we camp Friday night to Sunday late morning and this camp out is local); take them with us for the whole weekend and hope for the best. I'm leaning toward the middle option. It gives the boys a chance to participate but doesn't require nearly as much preparation, skill, or knowledge on their part about how to stay warm in the elements. And if they are really cold and miserable, well it is only for the day and they can look forward to a warm bed that night. I admit I'm biased though because when my son joined the troop three years ago he went camping just a few days later, poorly prepared for the weather, and he nearly quit on the spot at the end of that weekend. Some boys he crossed over with did quit, and several others had to be talked out of quitting just like my son. He laughs about it now but it wasn't funny at the time. If I'd known then what I know now, I would not have allowed him to attend that camp out. What's your view? For you Southerners like BrentAllen, keep in mind we're talking really cold weather, not a balmy 20-40 degrees (that's spring, thank you very much) .

While it may or may not be what others do in their PLCs, our troop's PLC takes a large hand in planning monthly troop activities. What I was thinking about when I wrote that I didn't know what role the PLC would have in the first class plan that our new-ish SM is going to roll out, what I was thinking was that if the plan calls for new scouts to be presented with skill X that month, then it would be helpful if the PLC was aware of that so they could plan some time for new scouts to work on that skill (if they desire to do so) at that month's camp out. This is the way our troop works. It might not be how others do, but in the capacity that I've described, yes I do think the PLC does, or should, have a role to play in implementing a FCFY program.

pack, perhaps this will cheer you up a bit. In tracking down the correct answer, one thing I found out was that our district advancement chair personally checks the names of the MBCs on every blue card submitted in our district against our list of registered MBCs. She will not allow credit for merit badges where the "MBC" isn't registered. I can only imagine some of the delightful conversations this must lead to between her and some SMs, on occasion. Of course this doesn't guarantee quality of counseling, but at least it is a start. I was happy to hear someone, somewhere, was paying attention.

You are hoping one of the parents complains. Well YOU are "one of the parents" too! Just because you agreed to put on the den leader hat does not mean you abdicated your parental role in your child's scouting experience. What happens most of the time in these situations is that everyone waits for someone else to act. When no one acts, at the end of the year half of the parents say to themselves well, I've had enough of that, so I just won't re-register my kid in the program next year. You lose a whole bunch of boys because no parent spoke up. I'm not advocating rudeness or clique-ish behavior, but if it is that bad, be the parent who steps up and raises the concern.

Our (still new, at 5 months) SM has recently found and decided to adopt a year-long first class emphasis plan of some sort or other. I don't know the details of how he hopes it is going to work, what role the PLC has in it, or a host of other factors. Once I get the details I'll be happy to share. In the meantime, I think part of Beavah's point is that there's a difference between on-paper, idealistic, pie-in-the-sky "plans" and more "real-world" plans that reflect the adversity of working with real people in real conditions. And hey, I think it is great to share ideas and plans for how FCFY could work.

Please understand, philt, that I am not saying FCFY is bad, or that it does not work (my views on that question are mixed). I am simply saying that the data national has distributed, and the data you have, while interesting, do not answer the question of whether or not FCFY causes improved retention. There are too many other unmeasured factors involved. We don't have to go to the point of "show me your data" on every question here because FScouter is right, that would pretty much kill all discussion of practically anything. But I hate to see people draw conclusions from existing data that may be erroneous or unsubstantiated, that's all.

Thanks guys, you've helped me verify that what I thought was correct. There was a cake riding on the answer so I'm happy to say I won't be baking this week.

Well the phrasing of this parent's response seems a bit unfortunate. There are plenty of potential reasons to give the guy the benefit of the doubt and suppose it just came out wrong. But then some people are just jerks and/or should never have had kids. I feel really badly for their children. To be honest, you and the boy might be better off without him there, if he fits in this category. He won't know what to do with himself and he won't be interested in figuring it out if he does come along. He'll be checking his text messages the whole time, except perhaps when he's berating his kid for something he (rightly or wrongly) supposes the boy is doing wrong. The boy may want him to come out of a yearning for a better father-son relationship like he sees some of the other boys and their dads modeling at scout events, but reality might be that it wouldn't work that way for this boy and father, and he could end up feeling far worse if dad did get guilt-tripped into coming along against his will. If "dad" fits this model, maybe the best thing you can do for the boy is help him learn to be ok about the fact that dad isn't there at the camp outs. Help him maintain respect for his dad even if the man isn't doing an ideal job and is better off left at home (he's still "dad" to this boy after all). And help him develop close mentoring relationships with another special adult or two in the troop as well.

If this man is not, by your own admission, doing a poor job and instead, he's just annoying sometimes, I'd ask you to think long and hard about trying to oust him. Sometimes, people who have been in one position for a long time become entrenched. That can be a bit of a shame and from what you've written so far it sounds like perhaps this SM is in that position. However, people often end up in that position precisely because they are willing to do all the hard work that goes along with the position, when no one else is. Consequently, you have to decide if you have someone waiting in the wings who is both capable and willing to take on the job if you are successful in removing this person against their will. Most of the time, the answer is "no." And you need to consider the big-picture consequences of your action. If you remove him and the troop folds because no other adult is able to be the SM, how has that served the youth in the troop? There is also "blowback" to consider (unintended, negative consequences of your actions). Say you seek to remove him and in the process, alienate many of the other leaders in the troop so they all quit. Now you won your battle but you've sacrificed the good of the troop to do so. Worse, say you try this and fail. Now you're going to have an angry and perhaps bitter SM, you may have caused a serious internal rift among leaders, parents and even boys who felt forced to choose sides in your little battle, and these wounds are likely to fester for some time. That's really bad for everyone. From what you've posted thus far, the SM may not be aware that some of his decisions bring a perception of favoritism or unfair, even arbitrary interpretations with them. It might not be a bad thing for the SM to be more aware of that fact. But these are not reasons I would use to try to oust him; forced removal is a last resort to be held back unless really necessary and it doesn't sound necessary here. So next time boys come to you complaining about the SM's choices, look them in the eye, tell them it is unfortunate they feel as they do, and tell them that if they have a concern about the SM they should really talk to HIM, not you about it. This should direct the concerns to the person who can address them and also put a stop to any unreasonable under-currents of discontent. Sometimes people seek out what they think will be a sympathetic ear, but be sure you aren't providing incentives for boys who just don't like the SM's decisions to undercut him. He, after all, has to deal with them at every meeting and camp out. You don't.