Lisabob

Hi AntelopeDud and heartofbrightstar, Thanks for the info. Unfortunately I've been stymied. It turns out the nearby council doesn't offer the training in a convenient way (rather than do it all at once, they stretch it out over several weekends, a couple hours at a time, which doesn't work for our scouter's schedule). And our own council won't offer the training because as a council we don't own climbing equipment - so, given limited resources, they don't want to use them on this. Nor have I had any luck getting info on upcoming NCS programs in my region (Central). We apparently have no functional web site for the region and one of our FD's told me that of all the regions, Central is the worst at disseminating information. (Even if I do find these, I'm not sure it's an option - NCS is expensive and our council wasn't interested in helping pay the cost for this. Since they don't plan to run any council climbing events, they saw no wider benefit to subsidizing this scouter's training.) I'm in Michigan, not far from Ohio border. If anybody is aware of a climbing instructor training coming up in MI or Northwest OH, I'd be very grateful if you'd let me know so I can pass it on to our scouter who wants to do this training.

Yeah I dunno about that comment regarding 11 year olds' perspectives. Our troop went to a camp last year that was weak on program. The boys knew it. Even the younger ones. One of them (now age 12) said to me, not long ago, that he felt he'd been cheated. He'd "earned" his fishing MB at the camp but he knew they fudged some of the requirements. Now, when he has a problem related to fishing, he's embarrassed to ask for help from some more knowledgeable folks in the troop because he recognizes that he SHOULD HAVE learned the skills at camp while working on the badge. Only he didn't because the MBC didn't teach them, and they signed off anyway. The really sad thing, this kid told me this when I asked him why he hadn't been fishing at all yet this summer. Last summer it seemed like that was all he wanted to do! By the way - we went to a different OOC camp this summer and they had an AWESOME program. Even though it was ridiculously hot and very buggy, even though the boys returned with sand in their - well, everything (ahem), they had a blast at this camp. So I'm with John on this - have a great program, and the boys will have fun. Lousy program, or outdated program, and you can forget it.

Jambo, although I agree about the advertising issue, I respectfully disagree that scouting is going to die out soon, or that people see it as "just a silly youth organization." Call me optimistic. But tonight I went to a local library to sit on an Eagle Board for a very strong candidate. There were 7 people (5 BOR members, 1 scout, and the SM) in uniform hanging out at the library tonight and let me tell you, not one person in the very full library gave us "the look" or made any negative comments. Several had positive things to say to us. The scout in question is a teen aged boy - exactly the demographic we hope to appeal to, and exactly the group we are sometimes accused of not connecting with very well. When asked about what he enjoyed in scouting, he had quite a list of exciting adventures to recall. He's looking forward to more adventures in the future. This scout got letters of rec from his church leaders, his teachers, his neighbors - all of whom discussed specific ways that this boy had lived up to the ideals in the scout oath and law in his daily life, and how he had grown to understand the role he has to play in his community, as a result of his participation in scouting. How much more could we want than that? Like anyone who has sat on BORs for the more advanced ranks (esp Life and Eagle) I've heard quite a few teen aged boys who are on their way to becoming the next generation of leaders in this country tell me that being an Eagle Scout matters a great deal to them, not for their resumes, but rather because of what it says about character, loyalty, trustworthiness, honesty, and perseverance. I've heard them recall how scouting has shaped them and their world views. I've heard a couple of them tell me how scouting has helped them turn away from making dangerously bad choices that others in their peer group or family had already made. And then when I got home tonight, I got a very excited call from my son, who is out of state visiting relatives. His cause for excitement? Well someone there heard that my son had worked on his rifle shooting MB at camp this summer, and they invited him to come over and shoot targets together. This isn't a person who normally shoots with anybody (let alone with kids) and he's very serious about guns and gun safety. It turns out, this "someone" is also an Eagle scout who used to run the range at his scout camp in his younger days. To be invited to share this connection through scouting - it made my son feel about 10 feet tall. I could feel his joy and pride radiating down the phone line. So no, I don't think that people who have any connection at all to scouting see it as "just a silly youth organization." The boys, their families, their neighbors and community members, other former scouts and scouters, (and together, that's a LOT of us), all "get it" that scouting can be much more than that.

You might find that, just because you WANT a den chief, doesn't mean you are going to GET a den chief from a particular troop. Being a den chief can be a lot of fun, but it does mean another meeting to go to every week for the boy (and his parents, assuming they're driving him). And teenage boys have pretty busy schedules already. So I think it makes sense to ask both troops, because I'd be surprised if you found 3 or 4 boys (one for each den?) who are able and willing, all in one troop. And then - depending on the adult leaders in your pack, consider whether you truly want a DC for each den this year. If you have leaders who are gung ho and excited about it, great - go for it. If they're lukewarm or if you're excited about setting this up *for* them and they're not interested, it could be more problem than help. You might also want to see if your council offers a University of Scouting anytime soon (ours are usually in the fall), and if they do, whether there are any classes for adult leaders like "how to use a den chief." That's a popular one around here. Our council frequently offers den chief training (for the youth) at U of S too.

Kittle, I have to say I'm aching for your son - I can't imagine that BSA meant to keep a boy from advancing to even the first and most basic rank for a couple of years now (right? I'm thinking it has been that long for your son) based solely on the difference between 1/2 a pull up and 1 pull up. That's crazy and a sure way to lose scouts. Common sense needs to prevail here. Also, I don't see how this is the committee's job to determine (nor council's - sorry, but I don't think it will help you to drag them in to this and they'll probably tell you to just talk to your troop leaders anyway). I would think that the SM would be the person in a position to determine this. We don't allow the Committee to set the standard for other advancements. Could you imagine if they were allowed to? "Yes, he tied the knot but he didn't do it fast enough." Or "No, we don't think he had sufficient scout spirit, even though the SM thinks so." This is not the committee's role. (I say this as a committee member, myself.) And before anyone says it, yes the BOR comes from the committee, but generally speaking, the purpose of a BOR is *not* to question whether or not the SM ought to have signed off on a particular skill. So it should not come up there, either. Maybe the best thing would be for you to touch base with the SM. If s/he has told your son that 1/2 is ok, then that should stick. Remind the SM of this and ask for his or her help explaining to the committee why this is the SM's call. Oh, and definitely join the committee if you have the time!

When I say that I don't think any scouter, of any sexual orientation ought to be initiating conversations with the boys about this topic, I have in mind the sort of thing that Brent mentions in his post. I can't think of very many merit badges where this would come up in context of the material, but I suppose that, if there were some, and the boy specifically brought up the topic of sexual orientation in proper context, then I might be ok with a leader following through on that conversation. I would also hope that the leader would be intellectually honest enough to point out that his or her views were only that - his or hers - and that others disagree. I would hope too, that a leader in that situation would encourage the scout to talk with his family to understand their views on the matter. I'm not advocating muting people, especially in response to a legitimate question asked in an appropriate context. On the other hand, the examples that Brent has given seem to be of a different variety. If my kid comes back from the archery range and tells me that the MBC held a lecture on why it is ok to be gay (or straight) before he let them enter the range, well I'd find that to be out of line. Same with a leader who takes it upon him- or herself to proactively start and teach cub scouts about sexual orientation along with the square knot - this is NOT their job and parents and COs would be justified in being annoyed. I think that the problem we are having here is that not all gay people are going to act like this Tim Curran fellow Brent is describing. In fact I believe that he is probably in the minority. And just because he's gay doesn't make him either a poster boy for all gays, or a fit prospect for boy scout leadership. Anybody who wants to join specifically so that they can openly proselytize other people's kids with regard to sexual orientation is highly suspect in my book. Some people just shouldn't be leaders and for me, this is not a matter of being gay or not.

Brent, I would hope that if a scout leader was in the habit of starting conversations about his or her sexuality that boys and parents would complain to the CO about this. I would then expect that the CO would either make it clear to the scouter in question that this is utterly inappropriate and better not happen twice, or that the CO would remove the scouter in question from the troop's leadership. This holds true regardless of the sexual orientation of the scouter.

John wrote: "What I think we are scratching at is developing an ethic of learning, to gain competency and then expertise, to then share with our younger." I think John puts his finger on an important part of the problem here. We're becoming a nation of "instant experts" but the problem is, our knowledge base tends to be a mile wide and an inch (if that) deep. I see this in the academic and business worlds all the time - don't know something? Hey, just look it up on wikipedia and you're good to go, no need to truly master, or even fully comprehend, the material. So many people see education as something you go out and "get," as opposed to a process that actually requires some sweat equity in order to be of any value. So it doesn't surprise me that this carries over into scouting too. And we reap what we sow, when boys (and parents) feel they're "owed" a merit badge because they went to class for 3 or 4 days at summer camp, or they're "owed" a rank advancement because they showed up. The same holds true, in far worse ways, when we read about some tragic accident that might have been prevented if the people in charge really knew a lot about the activity they were engaging in. I wish I could say that I believe the BSA could fix this. But I don't think we can seriously be expected to buck the broader cultural trend toward de-valuing knowledge and expertise. And in fact, I'd have to say that many of the BSA trainings I've attended simply reflect that trend, rather than even beginning to push back against it.

Glad to hear you were able to find a shirt. This forum is a great place to ask questions, post ideas, and get advice. (And you'll learn a great deal, too.) I hope you'll visit again as you and your family get into scouting.

Yeah Eamonn, I hear you. I guess it bothers me because I'm his parent. Because I really dislike seeing things left half-finished, especially when there's only a little bit left to do and it isn't even the "hard" stuff. Because I don't like to see people fall into the "under-achiever" routine, which tends to be a bad road to follow in life. And because, while I'm not asking the troop to "parent" him for me, I'm also thinking he is getting to an age where he's likely to pay more attention to what people other than his parents have to say. Yet I don't know if it is reasonable to ask that the troop keep an eye out for boys, like him, who seem content to just not finish things. Do other troops track partials? Do other SMs keep tabs on how many blue cards (and for what) they've handed out to a kid? If your troop plays a somewhat more active role here, what do you say (that works) to a kid who seems to need a bit of guidance here? He does the same thing with rank advancement, by the way. After 2 1/2 years he only recently earned his 2nd Class. It isn't like he hasn't been active - he attends and participates in practically everything. He just neglects to get his book signed for the things he does, unless someone frog marches him over to an ASM or qualified scout of higher rank with book and pen in hand. I don't think I've ever "pushed" him to do advancement but in the last year I've backed way, way off here. I'm not advocating a hyper-active focus on advancement either, but I'd like to see him find a better balance I guess. I admit, I don't understand WHY he does this and I think that's part of what is making me a little nuts about it.

Help me out here. I've got a boy who is enjoying his troop (for the most part) and who seems to like to start merit badges, but not to finish them. He went to camp this summer, had a pretty good time, and came back with NO merit badges finished - not even the ones that were half-done before he left for camp. Same thing two years ago at camp. Same thing when he went to the district "merit badge day" last year and this year. Lots and lots of partials (at least 15 right now), no end in sight. So far the troop approach has been very hands off - he is always allowed to start yet another MB any time he asks the SM. They don't track partials, or blue cards handed out. The SM probably has no idea that he has 15 or more half-finished MBs already. You can probably guess that this is driving me a little bonkers. I know, I KNOW that advancement is just a method and not an aim. I believe that, really. But isn't there a point where all these partials is a bit ridiculous too? I feel he's learning that it is just fine not to finish what you've started - a bad habit I'd rather not see reinforced. What can I do to encourage him to get at least some of these darn things done? Is there a way to strike a reasonable balance here?

boy, that's a tough one. Others can speak to the formal criteria better than I could. However, depending on how it was approached, I can see many opportunities for a boy to show leadership while developing the school website. Among other things, he may have needed to get the relevant school officials (principal, teachers, superintendent, maybe school board members, student body representatives, etc.) and perhaps also community members (parents, PTO members, etc.) together and bring them to agreement that there should be a website (done by a kid!) at all. Then there's discussion as to content, design, accessibility, and any number of other features. If the boy played an important role in starting and facilitating that discussion, then this is all leadership in action, in my view. On the other hand, if he did the project solo, seeking little or no input from the various interested parties, then I can also see where this might have been a tech project plain and simple, and NOT a leadership project of appropriate nature for an Eagle project.

uz2bnowl, you wrote: "[expletive deleted]" I don't know, perhaps I have misinterpreted this. I have seen this used elsewhere and it has generally been taken to have a rather cruder meaning than what you are now attributing to it. I have never seen it used to mean "[deleted]" Nor would many people feel a need to encode "[deleted]" in such a manner. So, if I misunderstood your original meaning, or have wrongly attributed to you things you didn't intend, then I apologize. I sincerely hope that's the case in fact, particularly given that this is a scouting forum. But if I didn't misunderstand you then...yikes, I'd have to suggest anger management to you or something. (This message has been edited by a staff member.)

Whatever your opinion may be, uz2bnowl, I do not understand your repeated need on this board to use foul language and crude suggestion to get your point across, particularly aimed toward women. I find it offensive. Unfortunately it also detracts from what may be some very valid points you are trying to make. Please consider as well that this sort of language and hostility is neither friendly, nor courteous, nor kind, nor clean.

If you don't need a uniform right this minute, keep an eye on Ebay and the like. While it is true that women's uniforms are more scarce than boys' or men's, you can still find them. I have bought several shirts that way over the years, some for under $10. You have to not be in a hurry for this though. Also, if you still aren't sure, let me add my voice to the chorus of people advising against the yellow cub leader blouse for women. Go with the tan blouse. You'll be able to wear it longer (if you decide to become a boy scout leader, for example) and it is also easier to find. Are there any other packs or troops in your area? If so, you might contact them to see if they have a uniform exchange that you can participate in. Or, if you go to your district roundtable meetings, you could ask people there if they know of any good local sources. Around here, for example, there's a church that frequently has extra uniforms for scouts, but Salvation Army in our area almost never has anything. I know this from talking to other leaders (and that's why I recommend roundtable).

Well I guess we do variation on a theme. Generally the SM will pick out 3-5 camps that he is willing to go to, and that he thinks offer a good array of programs for the boys in the troop at that point in time. He then shares the info with the boys and they vote. Some years, we have boys who probably could make a good decision about where to go completely on their own, or who could have had (or wanted) more input into the initial selection of the 3-5 camps. Other years, we've had so many really young or immature scouts and they really needed that guided, structured type of atmosphere. For HA, I would think you'd be dealing with boys who would be more competent in choosing for themselves. But then too, I think there could be times when some adult limits (time, distance, cost) might be important even there. If the boys in the troop are really unhappy about the HA opportunities available to them, encourage them to have a quiet conversation with their SPL, who in turn should have a conversation with the SM about allowing more options to come under consideration. That assumes, of course, that the troop leadership is open to that sort of input (they ought to be, but we all know troops where that wouldn't be the case).

Ma I hate to say this but I think I have to agree with your husband. I've worked on rebuilding packs from the inside so I have some experience with this. And my experience tells me that one person, or even a small handful of people, are not generally successful unless there are a lot of other people in the pack who are just waiting for someone to lead them in a better direction. Under those circumstances, that one person/couple of people can be a real catalyst for change. But that is not what I hear you describing. If, as I'm getting from your posts, most people are happy enough with how things are, or just don't want to challenge the CC and the status quo (even if they don't like it), then you are facing an endless battle with little prospect of a quick turn around. And your son is already a Webelos scout! If, after three years, you still don't see much change in attitude from others in this pack, I think you've done all you could reasonably be expected to do. Rather than continuing to chip away at that mountain, I submit that it is time to satisfy your own child's needs and find your family another pack in the area where things are a little more exciting/fun.

I am increasingly thankful that our council does not run a boy scout summer camp - we do not have this problem and are free to go where we please. However, I have heard other council camp directors berate their troops for not showing "loyalty" to their council camps and I find it to be a counter-productive strategy, employed by people who lack interpersonal skills and don't want to admit the weaknesses in their own programs. You don't build loyalty by bullying and berating people. In fact such tactics may well drive people further away from your camp (who needs that behavior!). Sometimes you have to "speak truth to power" and I think this is one of those times. Lay it on the table. Let them know why you aren't returning to their camp. Challenge them to take a positive approach to improving their weaknesses, rather than simply threatening you. Point out that their threats are a turn-off, not to mention empty. You'll probably offend some people by doing this, it is true, but you'll probably get even more pats on the back from others who agree with you. And maybe (if you're lucky) someone will see the sense in your words and start to make some changes for the better in how the camp is run.

Pete, I'm not sure if I understand what you are asking. As far as I know, once a boy has earned a rank, you can't take it back from him. So if a boy has earned Eagle and then he does something wrong, you'd need to find some way other than through rank advancement (or regression!) to respond. This assumes that he is still active with the troop; otherwise, it may not be a matter for your consideration at all.

My son went to a (non-BSA) camp where they did this. On the one hand, it was kind of fun to see what he'd been doing that day. Plus there was less need (on his part) to remember to take photos - the camp was already doing that. On the other hand, I fear it promotes that sort of helicopter parenting behavior that we all seem to agree is counter productive. Even when kids are away at camp, parents are "checking up" on them. I know some people who use this more as a form of surveillance, than as a nice way to get a photo. Are SMs and camp directors going to start getting phone calls from worried parents if Johnny is wearing the same T shirt two days in a row, or if he's not grinning from ear to ear in every photo? It is a cool use of technology though.

Hawthorne effect means that people change their behavior when they know they are being studied. It can be a conscious or subconscious change. John - thanks! I agree. If people don't want to take the current WB course - simple solution - don't. But I'll say this. I know several Scouters who are wonderful people, who are in many ways excellent scouters, who would benefit tremendously from taking the current course. Their scout skills are impeccable. But their leadership and communication skills are lousy and frequently get in the way of what they are trying to do. Why won't they take the new course? Because it is different from the old one. Because somewhere along the way, someone (and actually in these cases I know who - a hard core, stubborn, pig-headed person who thinks anything "new" is automatically "bad" and "things aren't like they used to be! Grumble grumble!") has told them it isn't any good. Guess what, they've been done a dis-service and so have the boys and other adults in their units.

rwp, if you are able to get a uniform bank going, that's wonderful. Contact your local troops too - I can't tell you how many "new" boy scouts we get who have a drawer full of their old cub shirts, etc., and their parents don't know what to do with the stuff. Half of them probably still have it floating around their closets and they might be happy to donate it to your uniform bank. I absolutely agree about the uselessness (and cost) of those dumb hats. And most of the time the boys didn't wear them anyway. Our pack did provide the neckerchiefs for each rank as a way of defraying uniform expense. For the most part, the boys seemed to like having the different neckers (though they were less fond of the plaid webelos one, I noticed). And my personal assumption (which could be wrong) is that the main reason BSA supply switched to the decent zip off pants is that they were probably selling fewer and fewer "official" scout pants - esp. at the cub level, where I don't think I knew anyone who bought both the cub pants and cub shorts to begin with.

I think it might help to take a hard look at whether your discomfort with a certain BOR member stems from your own personal dislike, or whether they really aren't qualified. In the first case you have to set this aside ("it's for the boys" right?). In the second, if the BoR is chaired by a qualified person then let them know your concerns. They should be able to enlighten the entire BOR as to their responsibilities. Important though it is to do it right, it isn't rocket science. As for the question about the neighbor - I don't necessarily see something wrong with that. We've had non-Scouting adults on EBORs before (teachers, clergy, community members, etc), often with excellent results. They frequently bring insights to the process that we, who are so wrapped up in Scouting, might miss. They can also add a "real world" atmosphere to the discussion, by which I mean that the scout realizes that Eagle is not something that is recognized only within the scouting world, but has lifelong implications in many other venues. Again, I would hope that the EBOR chair would take a few moments at the beginning of the EBOR (before the candidate arrives) to make sure that this neighbor, or any other non-Scouting adult, knows what the process is, what's reasonable, and what the boundaries are. They should of course be told to keep things confidential. Better yet, the chair could contact these people prior to the day of the BOR to make sure they're clear on expectations, and then the chair could follow up with a brief reminder to all BOR members at the start of the BOR. So it sounds to me like a friendly chat with the chair of this BOR would resolve several of your problems.

Around here the cost is in line with what Eamonn describes. I think it was $220 when I did it a few years back. That included a shirt, cap, notebook/binder, and an assortment of little items (WB soap...did we really need that?). The real cost for most people was measured in time off from work, convincing spouses that this was a legitimate use of time and money, and in uniforming expenses (for me, anyway, as a fairly new cub leader from a pack that was light on uniform expectations at the time).

I went through the new course - didn't have an opportunity to do the "old" one. I'm not saying one is better than the other, though I enjoyed my WB experience. But if I had an opportunity to do it again? I definitely would. Rather than "just another obstacle" think of it as an opportunity to re-do something fun and eye-opening, as a way to re-invigorate yourself, and/or as a way to get to know a whole new group of high-energy scouters in your area. I have yet to meet anyone who went to WB as a participant (and finished the course) who didn't come away with a renewed enthusiasm for scouting. The course I was part of was staffed almost entirely by "old guard" who had only done the previous WB curriculum. And it showed - I fully agree w/ Eamonn on this. If nothing else, I think most people will be better guides and teachers in the "new" course if they have experienced it for themselves. As for cost, maybe talk to your council's WB association or the CD for the upcoming course. I do think it would be reasonable to offer a reduced rate or partial scholarship to people who are already Woodbadgers and who are only taking the new course so they could staff in the future.