MattR

Time is critical for learning from group decisions. The faster a group has to respond to a situation, the faster they make decisions that teach them from the repercussions of that decision. That's why I like tight agendas on our campouts. Time is a great teacher of living by the scout law because we humans learn best under stress.

I've used this as much as possible. But it's not fool proof, in an odd way. I had a training campout and I packed it really tight, just to add a time stress. I told the scouts if they didn't work together they'd fail. They had fun and at the end I asked them what they thought of the training and they said it was great. The thing they liked the most was how much time they had to do things. Say what? Turns out they took my advice to heart and worked so well together that everything went much more smoothly than normal. So, did it work when they got back to their patrols? They certainly are much better than before, but not nearly as good as they were on that training.

Eagledad, you said earlier that cooking took up time from training. We put some challenges in their cooking. We gave them something they hadn't cooked with before (ingredients, methods, equipment). It worked well. Something like the banana split thing. They knew there was a challenge so they got into it. I think that's why the time stress training worked so well.

Charity goes to the poor, whether that be money or ability or some other hardship. Giving charity to those that aren't poor, in whatever definition of poor being used, is just being foolish. There are plenty of other people that do need that help. In your example the old lady presumably is not very mobile and helping her with the newspaper or her groceries is a good deed. You say it's not about money for this lady, which means it's probably more about community and interacting with someone that doesn't get out very often. That's the poverty in this case, a poor social network. So the kid that helps out is doing a good deed. The homeowners, however, are young and able, as a neighborhood, to pick up their own garbage, and just as importantly, they have a strong social network. They are not poor in any way. They don't need our charity.

Curious, but why not just do it again and call it a conservation project?

Maybe you're misreading what I meant to say. We were free labor for a HOA with million dollar homes. They could afford to pay someone to pick up their garbage.

Do modern Troops do "regular duties" anymore?  Does your Troop SEEK OUT things to do for others? 

 

If your family House of Worship holds a Pancake Supper, can your Scout use busing tables as his S/P ?

Must the Scout HAVE   to plan and pursue the S/P himself?   Can he not just "help" as he is directed? 

 

When does the "Good Turn"  turn into a "Project" that earns "Hours"?  

 

How do your Scouts fulfill these requirements?  How to "keep score" ?  

We wouldn't be allowed to do regular duties. We do seek out projects. We do a bunch of annual projects. We give hours for all of these and that's the score.

Assuming the pancake supper (shouldn't that be a breakfast?) is a fundraiser, we never give service hours for fundraisers, mainly because the scouts profit from it.

We once had a really nice HOA convince someone in our troop to organize cleaning up garbage around their ponds. It started off that they were going to make a donation to our troop and then they said it was a really nice service project. We kept our word and did the job but that was the end of that. The next year they asked and we told them $10/hr/scout. They didn't call back.

I remember running around for smoke shifters and sky hooks. I tried to restart it and got a "that's hazing" lecture. Everyone is my troop would like to keep it going, though. We sat down at one point and talked about the rules of when to let the scouts in on the deal.

I had not seen these 3 characteristics together before:

      all Boy and Girl Scouts, any age

      STEM focused

      partnered and located at a University

Do this at Berkeley and the camp fires would blend in with the burning cars.   (Sorry, tasteless, but...)

I could see it being a fun change, once every few years. Cardboard canoes are also a lot of fun.

I personally would rather develop a patrol method course for adults so they can take what they learn back to their units because what the scouts learn really doesn't matter if it isn't supported by the adult leaders.

Yes. Maybe a 3 month long course would do it. And the flip side is if the course doesn't send something home with the scouts then the adults don't know how to emphasize what was taught. So I like the idea of a course just for teaching the adults patrol method.

Wear a full brimmed hat, they will drop out of trees.

Maybe if your trees look like grass, and you rub it like an elk.

I've never heard an entomologist say that ticks jump out of trees. Ticks do not jump or fly. Most of their pray is about 18" off the ground so they stay around there. Ticks are in grass and once they get on you they walk upwards till they find a good place to bite. Lots of ticks like scalps.

That sounds like a hoot. Please let us know if it's a good read when you're done.

But you have to work with the world you have, and not the world you want.

"You can't always get what you want

But if you try sometimes you just might find

You get what you need." Keith Richards & Mick Jagger

I agree that ironically kids are less social with all the social software tools out there. While they might like teamwork less than before, companies are desperate for people that can work in groups. Even software, the quintessential nerd activity, requires a lot of teamwork these days. I guess all this applies to families as well. So the need is there.

But your point is well taken, scouts have fewer chances to learn how to interact with other people than before and consequently struggle with it. I see a lot of scouts struggle with leadership because they don't have a clue how to deal with disagreements. So they don't and problems fester. People problems seem to be the biggest challenge they have and so there's a lot of walking them through the process. What is really rewarding is when they do start figuring it out.

Also, introverts can do quite well in teams. They just need a job that can be done by one person. That's another challenge I see. Patrols are like soccer teams. When they're young it's swarm ball. Everyone is trying to do the same thing. As they get better they realize different players have different jobs.

So I'd say yes, it's a bigger issue, but it's even more important than before to make patrols work.

I scouted with a very successful troop  for twenty-five years up to 2007.  Never fewer that 40 Scouts and as many as 75.  It was competitive as respects other troops.  There were seasons,  Every year there was a major event that program culminated towards - the Klondike Derby, after which everything started over.  Every second year there was also the troop's own independent Day 1 - Day 10 Summer Camp, usually at another council's camp that no longer had summer program after Cub Week was over.

 

The patrols changed only when natural life-cycle made them so small the Scouts saw the need to consolidate and decided how that would be done..

I'd really like to see the type of challenge you describe for klondike and camporees as well. Get everyone excited about it. The district has tried a few times and the response is not so great. Some scouts are all in for competition but some just don't like it. Part of that is that some kids are good at some things and not good at others. I'd like to see ideas for patrol competitions that require all sorts of abilities. Does anyone know of resources for that?

I remember when band was a fall thing.

I remember when band was about music.

This brings up an important point. Most extracurricular activities are based on a competitive model. Scouting is not competitive. It's challenging and it's about community. It takes time to develop. There are no seasons. There is no major event that everything is culminating towards - after which point everything starts over. Scouts doesn't start over. We don't want patrols reformed every year. It takes time to create that identity or that bond that brings scouts together, where they want to be together. It's not like a sport where x number of players are needed, each is given a job by the coach and he does it.

Scouts can't get jammed into this model. Using the sports terminology, If the coach is picking players then there's a huge problem. We want the scouts to come up with their own schedule, have a never ending season, develop their own game plan, design their own plays, solve their own problems, and define what the rules of their game is. And every player needs to do this. This takes time and finesse.

If a unit struggles with scout participation (at any age), the program likely needs some changes.

I certainly agree with this but there are external pressures making this harder ....

One of the things I think we're missing in our analysis is the sheer size of the marketplace we're now competing in.

There is a certain minimum participation level required for a patrol to be cohesive. If that level is not met then friendships fall apart, there's even less reason to participate, and it becomes a vicious cycle. Mandatory participation from a wide range of extracurricular activities is making this much harder on patrols.

This is why I set participation requirements that were against the GTA. I want scouts to do other things outside of scouting so I made them fairly lax. But at the same time I want scouts to decide that if they want to be involved then they need to commit some time to this. I don't care what a scout's goals are. Motivation may come from rank, high adventure, working with youth, service. It doesn't matter. But the program doesn't really work if there's not a minimum participation.

Won't help. War or college come calling on 18 year olds. If they haven't learned pass on high school activities, they won't be able to as adults.

 

 

That could be true. I was just thinking of the scouts that can get Eagle by 18, they could be good leaders. And not adult leaders. Look at the UK model and it seems that they go to 21 and it's those older scouts that do a lot with the younger scouts. Yes, college and life does make scouts move but that could be a nice way to mix up some experience. The adults would have to get used to it but that's okay.

I think Venturing is in a lull due to the lack of the right kind of adult advisors.  Outdoorsmen/women.  Physically fit.  Energetic.  Visionaries.  Motivators.   There are some advisors that fit the bill, but many are just not ready for the challenges.   They may be okay for pack and troop level scouting, but I think Venturing requires an adult that has leadership skills above/beyond.

 

Edited to add:  Venturing is one program that I think National got right.   A lot of thought and effort went into it, and I give kudos to the folks that got it rolling.  However, implementation has been hit/miss, in the field.

This is just my opinion, but Venturing seems to be suffering from the same problems that Boy Scouts has, only it's worse. Namely, scout leadership is even more important in venturing, because there's no advancement carrot such as Eagle, and yet the venturing scouts I've seen have no more leadership skills than the boy scouts. It takes a certain amount of self motivation to make things happen. Without it scouts just sit and wait for someone else to do do it. The parents aren't around in venturing to run things. That's why I think fixing venturing will fix boy scouts. This has little to do with coed.

Jobs can be an issue but rarely. The fumes thing is a farce. The points above about how other activities have strict attendance is very true in my area. It's why we've made attendance requirements for ranks above and beyond.

But more likely it's the impact of puberty, and I don't mean girls. There seems to be a gap between childhood and adulthood, roughly 14- to 16++, where boys' brains are just mush. My theory is they're starting to see the size of the world and trying to figure out how they fit in. Consequently they struggle making decisions and commitments. If I can get them to stay until they are close to 17 then suddenly everything gels and they are incredibly fun, capable, and they really get it. They can more easily self motivate. Then they graduate and move away and I start over. That's why I like the idea of raising the age to 21 for boy scouts.

Just for arguments sake, let's assume TAHAWK's better product is created. Strong focus on the boy led, patrol method, outdoor skills, where adults are just trying to work themselves out of a job by developing great youth. In this scenario what would the impact be of adding girls to the boy program? The boys own this. Some would like having girls around and some wouldn't. And just the same, some girls would like having boys around and some wouldn't. Sounds like a good problem not to be wasted on adults.

Most of my concerns with girls in the program are mitigated by having a strong youth led program. Unfortunately, the evidence suggests this would be micromanaged from above.

Can't say, but here's the scoutstuff.org phone number: 1-800-323-0736

@@John the Xcar, your complaint that there's too much focus on advancement, that advancement has become the aim of scouting, annoys a lot of people not in LDS units as well.

Of all the boys I served that I come in contact with I have never had one ever reminisce about their eagle award or eagle project... But they have all talked at length about the hikes, climbs, raft trips, canoe wars, ...

Very well said.

I don't know if this is possible but if the LDS church drops boy scouts is there anything preventing you from starting a regular troop?

Good points, Skip. But I'd gauge where the scouts are before talking about it. A lot of kids are not affected by the 24hr news cycle because they're more interested in playing video games. At the same time, if a kid is in shock about it then telling them to ignore it is not going to help. You have to accept where they're at. So maybe "go enjoy a rare day of sunshine, but if you're really upset by this then let's talk."

Every problem is an opportunity so who knows, maybe a discussion about the scout law might also help.

When 9/11 happened I was a den leader and what we mostly did was just watch the kids for unusual behavior. I think all the parents in my den just turned off the TV when their kids were around so the kids didn't see much. Kids talking doesn't have nearly the impact of seeing it on TV so we never even brought it up at den meetings.

... you have a blue card signed it was proof enough.

Yes. The MB counselor decides when it's done. And that means nobody else needs to see a worksheet, or that one is required.

Just a hunch, but does this troop not use blue cards and uses a worksheet instead? The blue cards are the correct way to do it but ... if there's room for a counselor's signature on the worksheet then maybe your troop twists the rules just a bit for their own convenience. Sounds silly to me but there are much worse things.

But the USA is at a different point along that road than other countries. Compared to the UK the USA is far more politically conservative.

 

I wonder what "politically conservative" means. Is it pressure to conform? If that's the case then Japan and Sweden are much more conservative than the US. Is it religious participation? If so, look at Africa or India or most of South America, they are much more devout. Or maybe conservative is that people stay in their social band. When was it that the UK finally got rid of the hereditary members in the House of Lords? How about acceptance of immigrants? I saw some political ads in Berlin last year that were rather blunt in their condemnation of Turks. This is what, 2 or 3 generations after they were first invited to Germany? In the news today I read that 2 men were caned in Indonesia for having gay sex. What about a country like Russia, where state propaganda has made a free press a joke? Is Russia considered conservative?

And yet, all these countries have coed scouts. Maybe it's something else.

The US certainly has its issues but I've seen enough of the world to know that most people, all over the world, want the same things. They might be used to different cultures so their approach to getting those things might differ, but they all want the same things.

I could go on but I think I've made my point, and it ended up being a book anyway.  

Here's a shorter, slightly different version: decide what the maximum amount of describe, discuss, and explain should be for any rank or MB, and then stick to it. Hint #1, it should be a lot less than what it is now. Hint #2: kids like to do.

It seems that each of T21 class have had an added page of requirements, not to mention Scout rank, without any increase in hands on skills. MBs are worse. It's a giant buzz kill. And, to get back to the OP, it makes summer camp boring.

It looks to me like there are two issues. One is some of the scouts are very competitive while others are not. The other is that some scouts, in this case the competitive ones, are very aggressive and assertive.

First, the competitive and non competitive scouts. I would not try to make the competitive scouts less so, or the non competitive scouts more so. That's who they are. Some people would rather challenge themselves than compete with other people. There are different ways that people motivate themselves. By the time they're 16 you'll likely be happy with any way at all to motivate them Anyway, I'd treat them individually and see what works. If they want to split then let them. The challenge is to keep ahead of them and provide enough opportunities to each style.

The second issue is something I'd put my foot down on. I don't care how a scout motivates himself, he can not do so at the expense of disrespecting the Scout Oath and Law. There's an idea in scouting called reflection that might help here. After every event each group of scouts, in this case a den, talks about what went right, what went wrong, and what they'd like to change in the future. While the scouts want to talk about things it's really good to get them to talk about the Scout Law, or how the scouts interacted with each other. The challenge for the den leader is to keep the discussion from getting personal. Telling a scout he's a loser because he doesn't want to compete is not acceptable because you can't tell some kid he's a loser, it has nothing to do with competition. Some scouts want to compete and some don't and that's fine. If you want to compete then politely ask around to find someone you want to compete with.

As for aggressive behavior towards adults, that's also not acceptable. Make clear boundaries and consequences. And treat all the scouts the same.

The meat of unit programs is implementing the program during the year, not summer camps. I need pros around our everyday program to see how their changes challenge Us.

 

Barry

How about having each executive spend time with a randomly selected unit?

I'm not sure it would help for the same reason you mention that going to summer camp wouldn't work. I'm not sure how many of these executives understand how the program works. I looked at the BSA "Game Plan for 2016." http://slideplayer.com/slide/10781510/The emphasis is: Membership, people that work at national, IT infrastructure, finances, and high adventure bases. There is nothing about helping units, or improving the program. The closest they have is membership numbers and high adventure bases. They don't see a problem.

If you're stuck in the woods on a snowmobile: Pull the spark plug, still connected to cable, and crank the engine. You'll get a spark. Even if the tank ran dry there's enough gas left that you can pull some out and start a fire. I've known a few people to use this.

I make my scouts start all their fires with a hot spark, just to appreciate a match. It also forces them to set the wood up right. The best I've had luck with is drier lint and vaseline, but the vaseline needs to soak into the lint.