Lisabob

OK I admit some confusion. Every time I think I've about got this BOR thing figured out then you guys throw me a new one and off I go again to think things through. Not that that's bad... this time it has to do with asking for skill demonstration. So let me see if I understand the consensus I seem to find here. It is ok to ask a scout to demonstrate specific skills (like knots) at their BOR but it isn't ok to decline to advance them, if they cannot do the skill in question? Does that mean that we are bound to advance boys who just don't know the skill? Isn't that a rubber stamp if ever there was one? If that's the case then does it even make sense to distinguish, as Beavah did (others too I'm sure), between boys who don't know it because they've forgotten it, and those who don't know it because they never learned/are scamming? When it comes down to the skill, in both cases, the boy just doesn't know the material. As a somewhat more practical matter - while some committee members do camp a lot and have pretty good knowledge of scoutcraft, I notice around here that many do not - they are good at the "business" side of the program but they may not know the difference between a square knot and a granny. So I'm not all that worried about them tossing the kid a rope and asking for a bowline because I don't know that they'd be able to recognize it if it was right or wrong. (Call me cynical but I've seen boys mess up the oath and law and nobody else on the BOR picked it up because THEY didn't know it either.) And I think you get the "fluff" BORs in these cases too because not only do the adults not know the skills but as a result, they also don't know how to ask intelligent questions ABOUT the skills and judge the answers.

I sympathize with your ongoing efforts and am cheering for you from a distance every time I read the latest update in your quest. I wish I had an answer to the recruiting issue - I don't, except to say it sure sounds like you are doing all the right things and it will hopefully come with time. However, even with one patrol, the boys could still develop a yell and flag. If you get to a point where you have enough boys for a really solid second/third/etc. patrol then sure, you can have more flags and yells and patrol competitions, etc.. But for now - if one patrol is what you really have then go with it.

Give some of your older scouts something constructive to do. Ask them to lead skill for example, or plan and run that night's game/activity. Look to your patrol leaders to help you. As a group (maybe at PLC), come up with guidelines you all agree to follow re: meeting behavior. That may be more powerful than you trying to demand a certain kind of behavior without their input. Maybe have some patrol competitions (first patrol formed up for opening ceremony and quiet wins, etc.) with small but fun rewards. Younger guys can be fairly easily motivated this way and older guys hate "losing" to the youngest scouts so that might be a motivator for them for next time. Talk with your SM about suggestions he or she can provide - your SM knows more about the dynamic in your troop than we do here. Hang in there! It's tough to change a group's behavior.

Sue, that's a clever idea. I really wouldn't have minded that sort of lack of information. What I experienced was, in all probability, a remnant of (perhaps misdirected) attitudes from the previous version of the course - lack of basic information about who, what, when, where that would have been (at a minimum) helpful and sometimes even crucial to getting our end of things done as a patrol. In addition, there were frequent occasions where we (participants) would uphold our end, sometimes to our inconvenience, only to find that we were cooling our heels waiting around for our CD to uphold his end of things. Some of this appeared to have been intentional. Really it was a control situation in my view and I've never been good at going along in a docile manner in those sorts of environments. However, one learns all kinds of lessons about leadership and sometimes how *not* to lead is among the most important of those lessons. So I can't say it was entirely useless even when I was most irritated. But it did leave a bit of a sour taste in some respects. As I said in my first response though, what made the course special for me was really the relationships I formed with fellow Woodbadgers, primarily among the other participants.

I agree with all that FB wrote. While in the big picture I thoroughly enjoyed my WB experience and value it highly, among the things that irked me at the time were the "clique-y" nature of the staff - in particular the CD and his SPL (elitist is the word FB used and I have to agree), the "you don't need to know that right now," "patience grasshopper" approach to quite a lot of information for no clear educational reason, and a few of the activities that seemed to be, at the time, make-work in nature (such as the overnight hike/camp - which we got word of at the last minute, none the less scrambled to plan for, only to have canceled at an even more last-minute time. Grr.) Again, as FB said, maybe this is a stylistic preference. Some participants might have liked the fact that they didn't know why they were supposed to do some things until well after the fact and frequently didn't find out important details until the last minute. For me it detracted from the ultimate purpose though because it seemed more like gamesmanship of the worst kind (staff controlled all the info, we were at their mercy) than well-thought-out pedagogy and led to guessing games ("what's the purpose of this exercise do you think?") rather than focusing on the actual task or information. I had supposed that all of the above was just a feature of our CD's style and level of communication skills. Perhaps not though, given the FB seems to have a similar outlook on these things and we did not attend the same course.

What made it special? Getting to know so many other scouters who were all excited about and dedicated to scouting. I've served in a pack and now a troop for a few years and done some district stuff too and while we also have some great people in all of those groups, only at WB did I find that "spirit of scouting" was practically universal among participants. Such a nice change from having to continually "sell" people on the value of the program back in the home unit (esp the pack). It really refreshed and energized me in terms of my scouting outlook. Also of course, the great friendships and mentorships that I was lucky enough to become part of.

Trev, you are a hearty soul. If it were me, one thing I'd want to do is be sure of the circumstances during which I'd be giving the spiel. One time I saw an FOS presentation at a B&G while the families were serving themselves at the buffet line. Awful - everyone talking, kids running around like, well, kids, and nobody paid attention. I felt terrible for the presenter but worse, I don't think anybody donated that night. So work out with your host units what the situation will be. Keep it short/to the point. Nothing worse than a rambling FOS presentation! Whatever amount you're asking for, make sure people know that smaller donations are also very much appreciated. Find out if the unit(s) you are visiting have recently participated in any council or district events like day or resident camp, fall/winter event, whatever else you have. Then you can talk about how much fun they had at that event as a tie-in to why they should contribute. Know what the unit(s) donated last year. Be able to talk about where some of last year's donations were used in ways they may have noticed since last year (maybe not unit-specific donations, but in general terms - what did last year's money pay for?)

We have a scout who fits your description almost to a "T". He's a nice kid in general but he seems to view scouting almost as a chore. He has had a hard time getting elected to a POR because he's not a good follower and so the other boys don't want him as a leader. As an APL, has been more trouble than help to his PL. He's made it clear to adults and other scouts that he wants a POR solely for advancement purposes. Poor attitude. The other boys in his patrol are well aware of this. This same boy's parents have been talking about how he (and his little brother) will make Eagle since this boy joined as a Tiger in 1st grade. Dad was the youngest Eagle in his troop "back when" and has commented many times about how he'd like his sons to follow the same path (which, none the less, isn't happening). Lots of family pressure there. I feel for these boys because they don't seem like they're really enjoying themselves. Here's the thing. You aren't obligated to hand a boy advancement if they haven't done their part. You can't "make" him enjoy scouting if he is determined not to. But if you're the SM and he is in your troop then I think you are somewhat obligated to continue to provide this young man with the *opportunity* to learn, grow, and enjoy his time with you. Hopefully he'll make the most of it but maybe he'll stall for a bit longer where he is and perhaps he'll choose to leave on his own. Maybe he's getting a lot of pressure from his parents to "get" Eagle, in which case if you can approach the parents about re-orienting their viewpoint, that might help. Of course some parents just won't listen and that might even be counter-productive; you'll have to use your own judgment there. Maybe this is simply a maturity issue. A lot of 12-13 year olds (typical 1st Cl age) just lack the maturity to understand that it is the experiences they have, not their rank, that matters in the end. The rank is just a symbol of what they've achieved and learned, nothing more. You can offer guidance here, but results may be slow in coming. Maybe if he sticks it out and you stick it out with him, eventually he'll come to that realization. I don't think there's a reason to push him out the door though, based on what you've said. Be clear (in a kind manner) with him about what the expectations are if he really wants to advance, and that you'd really like him to enjoy his scouting experience. But let him know he's always welcome in the troop whether he chooses to work more toward advancement at the present time or not.

I've stayed out of this fray until now. But let me suggest one other reason for following "the rules" in all but the most extraordinary of circumstances: other people have entrusted us with the safety and well-being of their children. In most cases they have done so with, at least, an implicit belief that as BSA leaders we will be following BSA policy. With a unit where the leaders took a "don't worry/trust me" approach to safety issues and set aside the G2SS to implement their own standards instead, as a parent I might be concerned. This speaks to the level of personal trust we have in each other, yes, and it may be a sad commentary on our society. But how do I as Joe-average or Jane-average parent know that said leader's personal judgment is superior to the BSA guidelines and bold-letter policy? Honestly, I probably don't. In most cases we're not talking about close-knit small town life where everyone has known everyone for decades. We're talking about a society where people are ex-urban, detached, highly mobile, bedroom-community-dwellers. Leaders come and go. Boys come and go. Parents aren't all terribly active in the troop, let alone in the community. Even if parents are active in the troop, it takes time to develop that sense of personal trust and I don't know about you, but 99% of the people I've gotten to know through scouting, I did not know in any other context prior to my son becoming a scout. Some of the activities we're talking about are fairly technical and/or are not things that the typical parent these days has much expertise with, thereby making it still harder to judge whether another adult really "knows better" than the BSA policies. There just isn't always much basis on which to substitute personal knowledge of the leaders' abilities and judgment for the knowledge that these same leaders know, understand, and have agreed to follow BSA policy. In other contexts, EagleDad has commented that adults' fear is a driving force behind what we will, and won't, allow our children to do as far as activities are concerned, and as far as how a troop functions (boy-led or adult-dominated). This is an insightful comment on his part (at least, IMO). And I really think it helps reduce these fears, thereby allowing for a better program and more opportunities for the boys to grow, if parents believe that the people who are responsible for their child's safety will follow the rules and guidelines of the BSA. As for extraordinary circumstances, it is hard to quibble with some of Beavah's examples where adhering 100% to the rules may not make a lot of sense, but for the most part these are not common place occurrences. (ie, evacuating someone who is seriously injured from a hard-to-reach location using available transportation rather than waiting hours and risking much greater injury in the process to get some other kind of transportation) Consequently, in my view, the starting point for everybody ought to be BSA policy, particularly when it comes to safety issues, because this is what most parents expect of us when they entrust us with their children.

WHy would you need anything more high tech than some people at the end of the track "eyeballing" the winners? How about this...because once upon a time I was involved in a pack where some leaders/parents including the CM literally came to blows - in front of the scouts - over exactly such a decision rule, in a very close race. Many families left the pack as a direct result and the pack was thrown into crisis. Those of us remaining (who had nothing to do with the above disgraceful adult behavior) were left to try and pick up the pieces of a pack that had exploded. Not fun. Not fun. Not fun. One of the best decisions the pack committee made following that debacle was to buy an electronic timing device. Saved us from ever having to go down that particular road again. Plus the kids thought it was cool to see their actual times and just how close most of them really were. So "thumbs up" from me for this particular e-gadget.

We also collected the full fee in August/September rather than trying to collect twice. This, however, results in charging "new" scouts a higher fee (to cover the period Sept-Feb) than "returning" scouts, so it still needs to be explained in a clear manner. As for your leaders, how about telling them that the paperwork will all be completed at the Sept. or Oct. committee meeting each year, and they need to come prepared to fill it out/hand it in at that time. As an aside - wow! 115 cub scouts! I think that would give me a headache. But I'm curious to know what happened that the pack lost almost half of them since August. Maybe you split into two packs?

Thanks Beaver, that is what I was thinking about. I admit in part that I was curious to see whether or not Brian would get past the open discussion forum and venture over to the WB area. But really, I just can't see how or why it would make sense to do something as public as a website on how to "save" scouting and then assert that one doesn't want to share it with other scouters in one's area who might be offended by it. If we suppose that this desire to "save" scouting is genuine then shouldn't that apply to those units in one's own area too? Venturing beyond that particular example, I just couldn't think of legitimate reasons to hide your ticket from other scouters. Eamonn, your examples make the most sense to me of why certain people in sensitive positions might prefer not to broadcast their ticket. I hadn't thought of it in that light. Eagle-Pete and Gonzo, I understand what you're saying too.

Not to change the thread but practically everyone here has agreed that many 10-12 year olds lack the upper body strength to do pull ups, due to the nature of their physical development at that age. I agree - I've watched my own son and practically all of his scouting buddies have this same problem. So can someone tell me then, why is this pull up requirement in the tenderfoot rank?! Seems to me the folks who brought us "ages and stages" might also profit from revisiting this requirement and perhaps changing it to flex arm hang or something a little more developmentally appropriate for the typical scout-rising-tenderfoot.

Sorry Trev, I should have linked my question to the thread that got me wondering about it. In another thread (in the open discussion section) Brianbuf indicates that he has not shared his website or ideas about "saving" scouting with people in his area, although developing this website was apparently a major portion of his WB ticket. The gist of why seemed to be that it might upset people or ruffle feathers. Got me thinking, is there ever a legitimate reason for not making your work toward your WB ticket known to others?

OK I get it. Sort of like doing a road race? I guess a pack could put one together themselves (to ensure that there's a "there" there, at the end of the treasure map, complete with do-dads or whatever). I know of a troop who does a road race version of this as a fundraiser and although personally I'm not excited by that idea, or willing to spend money on gas to drive all over creation either, I hear it has been a successful event for them. Unfortunately it is also an event that scouts themselves have very limited participation in, since they can't drive. So - if I were to do something like that with cubs I'd make sure all of the map could be done on foot.

Congratulations to you and your scouts on a job well done. Best wishes to you for the holidays and here's hoping that the next year will bring more scouting success stories for you and your troop.

Thought I'd try posting this in the WB forum rather than the open discussion forum...we'll see who answers! How do you all feel about making the end product of your WB ticket public? By that I mean, does the unit or district or council or who-ever it is you serve, know about your ticket? Do you share with them how you have completed your tasks? Are they part of the process of working your ticket? Are there instances where you feel it would be justified to go ahead and do something but then hide it from those whom you serve in a scouting function (or at least, not promote it)? I can't think of too many occasions where that would seem appropriate. "Hurt feelings" doesn't seem like a good reason to me. If what you're saying or doing is truthful and important then maybe it needs saying or doing, although of course sensitivity is desirable. If what you're saying or doing isn't truthful, or isn't done well, or isn't meaningful, then hiding it to avoid hurting others' feelings seems like an excuse for just spouting off without any serious effort or thought to start with, and in that case perhaps motives need to be re-examined. But maybe I'm not thinking creatively enough.

Aw Brian, We've been over this ground 15 times. Give it a rest, would you please? In the meantime, I'm curious to know why the only topics you ever engage on in this board have to do with declining numbers. If you serve a pack, troop, crew, or team in some capacity, don't you ever have anything to say about that experience? I'm also curious to note (from your other thread on WB beads) that you don't want fellow Scouters in your home council to know about your website. Gosh, if you're that embarrassed by either the form or substance of what you have to say on your website then perhaps you ought to reconsider how you are saying it. And I do think that ties into the above question - are you truly this one-dimensional in your scouting experiences? Sorry but I just don't see the substance here and I have really tried.

Never heard of this one. A map to what? What would the value of this map be? Is this something they'd hang on the fridge (look what some cute little cub made...) or is this part of a geocaching kind of game (where the person is essentially buying an experience) or what? In other words, what does the purchaser receive for their money?

In my son's troop patrol advisors are ASMs who are available to help specific patrols. They tend to be more available to the younger patrols and more hands off as the boys gain experience. This was something the troop started to do about 15 months ago. My son crossed over, along with almost 20 other webelos, about 2 years ago. The troop had had very few cross overs who stayed for more than 6 months in the previous two-three years so it was an older troop without recent experience with young scouts. After losing a LOT of our new crossovers in the chaos that ensued, the troop began trying the "patrol advisor" idea. Personally I am glad they did. My son's patrol advisor is the adult he is closest to in the troop. This man, not the SM, is the one my son turns to when he has thorny questions or needs a quiet chat or a little encouragement. He's a major reason my son is still sticking out his role as PL now, and also why my son didn't quit scouting last year. It is a big troop (around 40, bigger right after cross over) and the SM is a very hands-off guy who my son is not close to. So I see this patrol advisor role as providing another opportunity for boys to avail themselves of the adult associations method. It might not be appropriate for all troops; it has been a big help in ours.

I have lived and worked in other countries so I am all for inter-cultural exchanges and experiences because I believe they can be true learning and growth opportunities. I do not, however, see an automatic connection to scouting and for most of us who serve in a unit or even a district level position I fail to see the immediate relevance to our positions. I can think of many, many, better ways to work the "diversity" aspect of one's ticket that would have more obvious benefits to units and districts. Just as an Eagle patch is just a piece of cloth, the beads are just pieces of wood, and can be either earned or purchased. In the end your beads are worth whatever you personally believe you put into, and get out of, earning them, no more, no less. So yours cost you $5000 and a trip abroad and that is apparently a large part of how you measure their worth. I suspect you might have purchases a set at Gilwell park in Britain for less. I do not measure the value of my beads in monetary terms but they are dear to me none the less for all that they represent. Each time I put them on they also remind me of the responsibility I took on when I earned them. And yes, I do think it is disrespectful to just have the beads mailed in most cases. Consider how we might feel about a boy who "earns" Eagle and requests we just drop the patch in the mail. I can't think of (m)any true Eagles who would take that approach. But then there are cases where perhaps the recipient would be embarrassed to receive the award in front of their peers.

backwoods, I am truly sorry to hear that things are that bad in your troop. All troops have their strengths and weaknesses, ups and downs, but it does sound like you are in with a disfunctional crowd. You wrote: "As for starting a new troop. Why would you want your son to be a part of a troop that only has a percentage making Eagle when the one next door has 100%? " My answer: because as a parent who understands at least a thing or two about the purpose of the program, I don't want my son in an Eagle mill - I want him in a troop that follows the BSA program at least a little bit better than the one you describe. Starting a troop is an enormous undertaking and there are many good reasons not to do it. I'm not saying you are necessarily the right person to do it, or that this is necessarily the right time for you to do it either. These are things that can't be determined on a message board. But if you were to take this option, you might be surprised at how many other people would reach the same conclusion as I would - choice between two troops - one is 100% Eagle but has a lot of problems and doesn't deliver on the promise of the program - the other is smaller, newer, maybe needs more help, might only have a small % of Eagles or might not have any Eagles at all yet, but provides the boys with genuine opportunities in keeping with the program - hmm, I choose the 2nd every time. Especially if the troop has a fun program that draws the boys in and helps "hook" them on scouting with lots of age-appropriate adventures. As for voting in committee not to authorize turning in paperwork, etc., I'm again sorry to say but that isn't going to get you the desired results. Packing the committee is easy, as you've discovered. More important, no matter how much we might like it to be otherwise, troops are not required to be democracies. If you are not in a powerful position (CC or SM or COR) and you don't have the ear or respect of those who are, you're not going to effect change against the will of the CC and SM no matter how you vote.

In addition to the PL's understanding and ability to carry out his duties I'd say the lack of a patrol yell/flag/name indicates a failure on the part of the SM to teach the PLs about their positions, say at the troop's youth leader training sessions. We might also fault the SM for signing off on tenderfoot requirements that haven't been fulfilled (boy, and this sets a terrible tone for the way young scouts view advancement - on their very first rank they're "sliding" through on basic, simple, fun requirements. How will they respond later then, when they face more difficult requirements? Doesn't this lead to the attitude that advancement is all about checking off boxes and doing the bare minimum necessary to get signatures?), and the BOR members for agreeing to advance boys to tenderfoot if they have not done these things. But it does seem somehow a bit wrong to lay all the blame at the scouts' feet for lacking scout spirit if they have been let down in these ways by the adults to start with.

backwoods, if that's the way things are then you have three choices: 1. Leave the troop and either find another one that runs a better program (preferred) or start one. 2. Get yourself onto some of these BORs and vote NO if the boy truly has not met the requirements - but this is going to be a contentious plan of action and may not be worth it. 3. Sit back and wait for this SM to step down, or perhaps actively seek someone to replace him. Sometimes the latter option makes sense, for example if you know he will be stepping down in the foreseeable future anyway. On the other hand if he's been SM for twenty years and this is 'his' troop or something like that, then this option is probably just an exercise in frustration on your part because the only way he'll leave it to be pushed, hard. Sorry to hear about your situation.

I really don't think that the success of the popcorn sale figures into this $130 estimate. If it did, the amount that is requested would differ widely from unit to unit and year to year. The fact that this number (or something very close to it) is quoted across so many different units lends credence to the notion that this is a national estimate with no regard to unit-level variables such as popcorn sales. None the less I understand your point that people feel they have already contributed by supporting the popcorn sales.