MattR

"We don't see things the way they are, we see things the way we are."

When I became SM I told my son he didn't have to stick around because I was SM or that he should get Eagle because of me. He enjoyed scouts until 6 months before he graduated and then sort of faded away. He was looking forward. I was fine with that and I kept at it. You feel bad about stepping down and that's understandable. Don't deny it. But don't beat yourself up over it. This job requires passion. That said, you can find an outlet for that passion and I encourage you to look for it. It will take time.

It has taken me a year. It sort of sucked at first. Now I think it is working out better for the troop and therefore me as well. Rather than have just one adult with a lot of passion for the troop there are now two. I did take about 3 months off, mainly because there were a bunch of things going on and I was okay with skipping some things. I was unhappy with one thing the new SM was doing but I did bite my tongue. When I started as SM everyone was telling me what to do and it just didn't help. So I wasn't going to do this to the new SM. Especially since my opinions carry a lot more weight than those of others. But we were both after the same goal so I decided to let it play out. In the process of doing that I found a couple of things to work on that were orthogonal to what the new SM was working on and at the same time complementary (so what really bothers me about his new approach will solve itself). I now have a purpose. We're working together. And I don't have to worry about all the little details anymore. I'm happier. Whereas before the buck did stop with me, so it was all my problem if nobody else was going to step up, I can now say nope, I'm not going to worry about that. I can now focus on the things I wanted to do before but didn't have time for. Of course, the district has sucked me in but that's another story.

Anyway, if you have a passion for this then honoring it is not such a bad thing. You still have to balance it with your family but how often do people get to find something they really enjoy?

Good luck!

Our SPLs pick their ASPLs. Our current SPL is not real happy with his choice. He may be encouraging the ASPL to step aside. I was surprised when he made that choice.

Since the SPL has to make it all work, I think he should get his own choice. If the ASPL is good then when it comes time to voting he's going to get it. If he's not good then he won't get it. It works. I've also seen scouts that, after having been ASPL, decided SPL was not for them.

BTW, we do have the patrols pick the SPL. Those wanting it give a speech. The patrols talk. The PLs vote.

We're back to voting on a schedule but I did like it when the patrol leaders made their own schedule. Getting them out of sync helped the transition. I think a good idea would be 6 months, plus or minus 2. There are different reasons why scouts would like to change the schedule. Basically you have to have an election every so often but if you want to do it earlier then go for it. They can make that decision.

The risk of a wrong decision is preferable to the terror of indecision

    -Maimonides

I can't answer that for you but here's how I'd answer it. How's your program? You are apparently happy with it, but why? What's your definition of a good program? For me it's the scouts are having fun and the scouts are taking on more responsibility as they grow older. How do you measure fun and responsibility? One way to measure fun is how active are the scouts? How many scouts go on weekend events? What are the week long programs and how's the participation. As for scout growth, what are the growth paths? How are the patrols functioning? What percentage of scouts are older, say 15 and above? What do they do? How do they relate to the younger scouts?

You can tell us answers to these questions if you want but it's really just for you to think about. But if you're happy with your program then it works. You might want to dig a bit deeper with the people that say you need more ASMs and find out the why behind that.

To say that national is doing fine and it's all just a local issue is kind of like saying the board of directors are all doing a good job but the employees are all just bad.

To answer your question, it's simple, focus on making the program easier to understand. This will help recruit and keep volunteers. Where does it concisely state what the program is so a new volunteer can get up to speed and productive quickly? This is why there are few volunteers. It's hard enough to volunteer but if you have no idea what the program is and how it works then forget it. Volunteers need to see results or they will drop off and quit. Then there's the parents that get the program wrong. It was a constant struggle with new parents because they thought the program was getting eagle. So, that's where I'd start.

The program is simple. It's fun with a purpose. And the purpose is developing responsibility. So, scouts having fun while taking on more responsibility. That's the program. JTE does not reflect that. The training does not reflect that. The Aims of Scouting do not reflect that.

Or maybe I'm just wrong and I should find something else to do. Please tell me if that's the case because it would make things easier for me. Seriously. I get really tired of telling people "But what scout will think that's fun?"

@ParkMan, I'm not trying to pick on you. I'm just getting frustrated. There are fewer and fewer people helping out. The fallback is always advancement. I visit other troops and I can't see patrols in any of them.

@KevinPMajka, while I agree that there are different ways to donate, the words "being a turd" is not one of them.

3 hours ago, Cyclone said:

They camp about 7 or 8 times a month and have about 10-14 scouts

They camp a lot! I'd go with them. Man, talk about taking outdoors to the extreme.

Oh wait, maybe you mean 7 or 8 times a year? Never mind.

But welcome to the forum. Just to reiterate:

A:  Too small. There's a minimum number of scouts to keep a critical mass going and that's too few

B: Don't know. The fact they don't meet could be really good or really bad. It might be that they have a lot of scouts and the patrols are meeting weekly. This could be a diamond in the rough. I'd check into them more.

C: Camping 7 or 8 times a year is not bad. 10-14 scouts is at the low end but possible.

D: Mmmm, no. I've had scouts drive a long way to get to my troop and they eventually drop out. Think about getting your son to the parking lot the day they go camping. That's a lot of driving.

So, between B and C I'd visit. Ask if you can go camping with them and see what the response is. If they take you, put your son in a patrol, and feed you well. Done deal. As I said, B could be really good or really bad. C might be really good and would welcome your help. Or they could just do it their own way.

I'm not sure if it was this thread or another, but we talked about how to describe the program succinctly so everyone can understand it.

On 4/5/2018 at 9:24 PM, HashTagScouts said:

Focus on making the program for the kids you have as awesome and fun as it can be, and that is what is going to be the decision point of whether more kids get involved.

Hillcourt called this ""Fun with a purpose." I'd say for a cub the purpose is to develop friendships to get ready for boy scouts. For boy scouts the purpose is responsibility, to God and country, to others, and to self. But it has to be via having fun. That seems to be the part that gets dropped. The documentation that come out of national seems to lead the way in dropping fun. More requirements that aren't any more fun. Rather than dilute the fun they should consider diluting the boring requirements and expanding the fun ones. Don't talk about the food plate, learn to cook an omelette. If the scouts are truly having fun then they will learn the boring requirements anyway.

We got a new DE and he had no scouting experience. Zero. DEs become SEs become national. Most of the DEs in my council had no scouting experience as kids. So after decades of this how many people at national truly understand fun with a purpose? How many have run a troop or pack? How can they help if they've never done it before?

Scouting is certainly sustainable. I'm just not sure about the way the BSA is currently run.

6 hours ago, Eagledad said:

Some of us here think it is in the training. I also believe adults who haven't seen it work as a youth struggle to trust the program will work to the level we say it can. Adults just don't believe a 16 year old can manage a troop, so they only give them a short leash to try.

I don't think it's that simple. It's amazing what ranges of parents I've seen. On one end are the snow plows and on the other are the "suck it up" parents. That phrase came from a parent meeting for children going on a year long, overseas exchange program my daughter went on. While a bit crass, the phrase suck it up really means their children will have to figure it out on their own. There are a number of parents that like this approach and it's independent of scouts or outdoor experience (or exchange programs for that matter). Those parents don't really need much scouting experience to understand what it's about.

Unfortunately there are fewer of those parents around then there used to be.

As far as your comments about fun vs advancement is concerned, yeah, but maybe that's a different axis. Some just see eagle and some see fun.

I agree, @Packman, the meetings are repetitive. I think that's caused by DLs learning as they go. Yet the program is the bread and butter of the organization. Think of it this way - 6 or 7 years in cubs with 30 den meetings a year means roughly 200 meetings. I'd think national could come up with 200 really fun ideas. Or a wiki. Or something to help these poor den leaders.

Boy Scouts is a bit more challenging but your idea of increasing challenge in the basic program is good. MBs are low hanging fruit. Wikis of good ideas that national would facilitate would be great. Again, the volunteers could use more ideas. And then there's the issue of teaching the scouts to own it. Again, the training lacks.

I think it's all easily fixable. It just needs some leadership that understands that, in your car analogy, that people want quality.

Cargo Skorts

Hi Buggie. Welcome to the forum.

What you're describing is really the patrol method done right. The patrol leader should be talking to his patrol about what they need and then should make that happen. Should. Reality is often a bit different if the scouts don't know how to talk about what's bugging them, what they need, when's the last time they advanced, etc. So, they likely need some help learning how to do this if they've never done it before.

@Cambridgeskip and @ianwilkins, It sounds like you're seeing the same things we see. Scouts are busy for a bunch of reasons and drop off. Ian, your description of explorers is nearly identical to our venturing, scouts form patrols as needed, anyone can lead. The numbers are dropping. Adults have no idea why. It looks like it should be fun but the kids just don't respond.

I've noticed that for older scouts motivation has to be internal or they'll just go along because there's nothing else to do (and if there is something else to do then they'll do that). A bigger adventure is self motivating for only a small percentage of kids. One thing that most older scouts want is purpose. They will rise to the occasion if they are a critical part. I've seen scouts that, while in a leadership position, will do great things. But as soon as they step down they drift off because they have no purpose anymore. So while many people think getting a group of older scouts into their own group might help I think it's more complicated than that. A group of older scouts that are all self motivated means all of them have a purpose in helping the group go. That's not so easy to create. Everyone needs a critical job. How many jobs in a venturing crew are critical? If the model is a loose knit group of kids that are really busy and kind of come and go when able, then my guess is there's little chance of this working. For a better example of everyone having a job to do look at a sports team or theater or concert band. Everyone has a critical job that's very well laid out. Self motivation is easy to create in those situations.

The model with a mixed age has less problems because most of the older scouts have an important job to do, namely to lead the younger scouts. That's why I think it works. But I don't think it's the only way.

I've said before that figuring out how to fix venturing would make the scout side so much better. Some things that I think would help:

• For younger scouts the idea of teamwork is more important than leadership. Without teamwork leadership is much harder.
• All scouts always have a responsibility. This is not a vague request that can be ignored. If you're part of the patrol or crew then you have a job to do and everyone knows what it is. The idea that younger scouts have no responsibility, that older scouts only need a few months of responsibility, or that venturing scouts don't have any responsibility is hurting the program. It doesn't always have to be intense but loyalty is a two way street.
• For older scouts it's more challenging to find the right responsibility for them. Some will enjoy working with younger scouts. A few will be happier organizing high adventure. That can help everyone. Some will be happy organizing campfire programs. The older scouts need a wider range of responsibilities to choose from.

An important question not being asked about the UK scout/explorer division is how many older scouts are there compared to younger scouts. If the program was fantastic you'd expect roughly a 1/1 ratio. You can find those numbers ( http://scouts.org.uk/media/879334/Annual-Report-2016-17_WEB.pdf) and the beaver, cub, and scout divisions all have about the same numbers. The explorer numbers are just above 1/3 the number of scouts so there's a big drop from scouts to explorers. My guess is that's similar to the BSA numbers. I'm not picking on UK Scouts (they do some things much better than we do) I'm just saying splitting scouts in two is not a magic solution. If it were then venturing in the BSA would be much stronger than it is. Venturing is almost exactly what UK explorers are. Coed, 14-21 instead of 14-18. Do what the scouts want. It's collapsing. What scouts want might not be what they need.

My troop's ratio is closer to 2/3 older to younger scouts but I'm sure my troop has more older scouts than most in my district. From what I've seen of other troops we do a better job of working scouts into critical positions. Granted, I'll be the first to admit their leadership has a ways to go but they have fun together. Some of them just want to do high adventure but more of them truly enjoy working with younger scouts.  I'd certainly believe there are troops with as many older scouts as younger scouts and those are the ones with better scout ownership of the troop.

Go to any research conference and sit in on a presentation session. Everyone has a laptop. If the presenter is good then everyone is taking notes. If the presenter is bad then everyone is working. Yes, it really sucks.

With respect to your sons, walking out because they don't like it can lead to some short attention spans. Good books can sometimes be a slog for the first half. I'd say they should give it an honest try for the first half. If it's still bad then go ahead and leave. They should also consider doing their homework ahead of time, as in, what's the background of the counselor? If the person has no experience then consider a wasted half as likely.

Any organization requires critical mass, which it sounds like nobody really has. So from that standpoint I'd say combine.

Every organization also needs a leader with an idea of where to go. Do you have that? More importantly, do the 3 crews agree with that leader's view of how a crew should run? If not, combining might be a bad idea. When I say leader there are really two that are important, the youth president and the adult advisor. I'm assuming you can find an adult, but are there any youth that are doing a good job of leadership?

Until there's a view of where this thing is going my guess is recruitment is just wishful thinking.

3 hours ago, Eagledad said:

Role modeling from the older scouts is the foundation of the highest performing patrol method programs. To take that away pretty much kills the boy run aspect of the program because the adults become the role models by default. And that is not the same.

I agree. I just don't call it modeling, I call it magic. It doesn't happen all the time but when it does it is the best that scouts has to offer. Learning duty to others before duty to self can't be any more clear than older scouts helping younger scouts and having fun while doing it. Sure, the older scouts also want their own fun but if that's all they do then it's no different than adults that don't volunteer, that don't learn how to have fun while volunteering, that are only interested in their own fun.

I really respect what UK Scouts has done, their numbers are going up. But I think keeping the 11-18 range together provides a great set of problems/opportunities that have a huge benefit. I can see splitting the cub ages, or pulling out the webelos years and doing something different. @qwazse's idea of overlapping ages is also worth thinking about given the range of maturity levels. But all the 18 year old scouts I talked to about their first impressions of scouting was that they looked up to the older scouts. They had never seen older kids that were kind and respectful to them. They rarely talked about the adults.

Have the older scouts help you come up with fun games that require the skills you want the scouts to know. So, no more teaching skills. The only requirement for each game is that it be fun and that it teach some bit of skill. Fun has a higher priority.

They may need some help but coming up with fun games is a start. If this works and the older scouts start having more fun then see who'd like to work on coming up with some fun for the older scouts.

18 hours ago, MattR said:

I'm waiting for Eagledad to chime in here

Told ya so.

4 hours ago, ParkMan said:

This is my wonder for the BSA's program.  I don't doubt that Scouting will continue.  But, as the BSA works to compete in an ever more competitive youth activity space - how does it distinguish itself?

I think this is a really good point to delve into. @Eagledad talked about his son stepping up on the canoe trip. I hear stories like this over and over again. Even I had a similar experience. My son told me, after he was in college and went camping with some friends, "how clueless they were." He's a bit shy as well but when he went to Nicaragua to help build a bridge he was the guy that stepped up. He was also the only one that spoke Spanish and could drive a manual transmission. The point is that scouting teaches kids to be responsible and make things happen. The scouts really do learn a lot. The problem is they don't even recognize it until after they leave the program. So one issue is getting the scouts to see it. It would certainly help to have a better road map for the scouts to see as to where they can grow. Whether it be merit badges with different levels, different levels of leadership, or different levels of adventure, some way for a scout to see that progress would help. It doesn't even have to be related to Eagle. Just let them see the challenge.

The other is getting the adults to see it. I'm sorry Eagledad, but it's not enough  to say trust the program. Nobody knows what the program is or how it applies to the day to day issues. Sure there are lots of descriptions of the aims and methods but it doesn't help. The BSA can't elucidate what the purpose, or aims of the program are without it sounding like 15 committees had a hand in writing it. The adults read that and their eyes cloud over. The program is having fun while learning to be responsible. That's it. Parents know what responsibility is. So when I had to physically pull an ASM out of our trailer on the last campout so the QM could do his job I told him the only way this scout is going to learn to be responsible is for us to let him be responsible. That resonated with him. On the other hand, the BSA describes the program on their website like this:

HELPING YOUTH IS A KEY TO BUILDING A MORE CONSCIENTIOUS, RESPONSIBLE, AND PRODUCTIVE SOCIETY

The Boy Scouts of America is one of the nation’s largest and most prominent values-based youth development organizations, providing programs for young people that build character, trains them in the responsibilities of participating citizenship, and develops personal fitness.

Blah blah blah. I'm sorry but nothing here really applies to why the ASM should get out of the trailer. This is what the adults need. Just get to the point. Don't muddy it up with conscientious participating citizenship for a productive society. it's buzz word hell. We develop responsibility. Period. Keep it simple so the adults know what to focus on. To illustrate this single idea it would be great to have all the stories. But keep the focus tight.

4 hours ago, ParkMan said:

I see the same thing, but draw a different conclusion.

My daughter is a ballet dancer.  Every year gets more and more challenging.  She loves it and thrives off it.  She dances four afternoons a week now.

Scouting morphs over the years, but I don't see the challenge grow.  I suppose if you really like running meetings it does.  But, for most boy scouts - it doesn't change a whole lot over time. 

So, your daughter dances every year, how can that be more challenging? Dancing is dancing.

Before you rip my throat please hear me out. I'm just using the same assumption you've made about scouting in the context of ballet. Scouting can get more challenging if it's done right, just like ballet. I'm waiting for Eagledad to chime in here but as long as there is opportunity to do more then there's challenge. If the scouts are treated like 12 year olds when they're 16 then sure, there's no more challenge. I have a 14 year old troop guide that has plenty of challenge right now trying to figure out how to teach some new scouts about teamwork. He has to be prepared in ways he's never thought of before. Scouting is more than advancement. Other than the eagle project the advancement method tends to plateau (and I think it would be nice to have harder levels within each merit badge)  but scouting is a lot more than the advancement method.

To be clear, if most of the scouts went on most of the campouts then this is a useless idea. However, that ended a decade ago as other extra curricular activities have ratcheted up participation requirements and scouting has not. Also I never meant to suggest that the event based patrols are the only patrols. Have regular, permanent patrols. The PLs, for each event, decide well enough ahead of time to modify those patrols to suit who is going, make sure nobody gets dropped, there's plenty of time to prepare. It certainly isn't ideal but adapts to a certain reality.

The one stumbling block to all of this is scouts would have to decide roughly a month out whether or not they're going. Sounds easy but for some reason making a decision, and sticking with it, is hard.

My idea was form the patrols for the event a month before the event. As soon as one camput ends the scouts should know their schedule well enough to decide if they can go on the next. This gives enough time to coalesce around the tasks that need to be done. I really dislike when the patrols start deciding the meeting before the campout. There's no way the new members will have had time to prepare for anything other than doing the usual meals, not to mention whatever the main event is at the campout. Then everyone wonders why there's no teamwork.

5 hours ago, Tampa Turtle said:

The teeny ones are called 'forgotten scout socks from summer camp'. A good month for fermentation in a plastic bag and they are a bona fide WMD. 

Forgotten socks? How about forgotten feet? That was the worst scout smell in my car, ever. I told that scout to put the socks and shoes back on or he was walking home. It was a combination of rotting carcass, latrine, and teenager, after 45 miles.

And the irony of the day: One of the hardest tasks in programming is defining the requirements.

I'm not a fan of worksheets. It's kind of like the eagle project book. It's training wheels for organizing ones thoughts. let the scouts start struggling with this so they learn. I realize it's hard for teenagers to do this, but it's a skill that is very important.