mk9750

1st, Welcome! 2nd, great question! I'd suggest letting the boys in the Scorpion and Dragon Patrols decide. Guide them to three options: Graduate into one of the existing Patrols (other than Ranger - They are your Venture Patrol) once they make 1st Class, allow them to stay as is (my bet for what they will decide), or to reorganize into three Patrols. 11 guys in a Patrol is more than the prefeered number, mostly because each Scout is likely to not have a significant enough role in the running of the Patrol to feel important. This is just one more reason why a good Troop Guide and good ASM are vital for each Patrol. It can work with large numbers, but it takes real guidance by the Troop Guide to make sure the Patrol Leader shares responsiblity for making the Patrol go. Especially if you are right about the attrition you expect, it may work out well for you. But let the guys decide. They'll own the decision, and as long as the guidance is in place, they'll do fine. One suggestion I might offer is not to be so quick assuming that you'll be down to 16 boys. We've done that before, based on how boys react to camp, etc., and have been way off base. Plan for what you have, adjust if it's necesary later. You may find that if your guys see things like this (then deciding how they will run themselves), you might not lose any! Thank you for taking on such an important position. It sounds like you understand that it is important not because YOU will be important, but rather because you realize that the Scouts are the focus of the program. Please keep us posted on how things evolve. Mark P.S. Coincidence is a funny animal - When my oldest joined, 22 guys formed two New Scout Patrols: The Scorpions and the Dragons. mk

Sctmom, I have had this conversation with others, and no one has ever satisfied my couriosity. On what part of the Consitution are the laws gauranteeing ANY education by the government, let alone the best education? The right to which you allude is always spoken about as if it comes directly from the Constitution, but I have never been able to find that connection. As a society, we have decided that it is in our best interest to educate youth. And anything worth doing is worth doing well. It is from this perspective that I agreed with the point Laura made that we ought to be provide the best education to every child we can. But I can't find anything to support that this is DUE anyone, and as such, I cringe when people press schools and governments to do so on the basis that there is a "right" to education. When special accomodations become beyond the means of a community, they should cease to be required. I mean no offense, and I know this is an easy position for me to take because any problems my kids have in school are of their own making. But the hair on the back of my neck rises every time someone alludes to an "entitlement". We each have the right to pursue things like education on our own, but I have never seen a connection between this right and our current belief that we are entitled to an education. Mark

Eagledad: "Parents have to learn that they cant push the program around to make if fit just their son. If every parent does that, it would be pure chaos and nobody gets anything from this great program." Thanks for a great quote. I have offended far too many parents trying to say this. Wish I had these words before. I suspect one or two boys (minimum) might still be in Scouting if I had said what I wanted to say THIS way instead of MY way. Mark

Salt, I've noticed the same thing. As a matter of fact, he has been absent from all of the threads for a few days. Any chance the other "Bob White" thread has something to do with his absence? Hopefully he's at summer camp or something. But if you remember, he talked about not posting publicly the last time things got ugly between him and another poster. I hope he didn't leave this time. Mark(This message has been edited by mk9750)

Laura, Nice post. You hit on a couple of great points. I have questioned for a number of years the trend away from traditional teaching methods. As much as they sound warm and fuzzy, I think the evidence suggests something completely different. As you suggest, basic and advanced math, grammar, and science and geography skills have suffered tremendously, as well as something you left out, writing skills. This decline, in my view, has come at least parallel to, if not because of, these new teaching methods. I do agree that some of these methods do a better job of providing the skills to think problems through, and for that reason, should not be abandoned completely. And I will certainly accept that some people learn best in environments different from others. You mention that some schools have changed to more modern techiques without regard for all of the students, and I a agree. I think that somehow, we need to provide each student with the methods that give them individually the best chance to suceed (at life, not "at school"). But I also wish schools would find a way to emphasize basic carriculum again. Because without the basics in English, Math and Science, the ability to think problems through is built on a house of cards. Mark

My youngest son is in a crew at Tinnerman this week. I have never gone, but after now seen both my sons prepare for this trip, here are a couple things I can say: 1) The advice about sunscreen should be mentioned 50 - 100 times. The sun is exponentially more intense on water, and aluminum canoes multiply this further. The most oft - missed body part is the back of the legs. Unfortuately, this is problably the area on the body that will hurt the most if sunburned. 2) Map carefully. If there are multiple choices to take on a river, making the wrong turn is not a good idea. 3) For a two day trip, most home made water tight solutions, like garbage bags, will work. Take a few extra per boy to cover rips. And I think someone mentioned it, but it wasn't clear to me. But the way to use a garbage bag to protect a sleeping bag is to line the inside of a normal stuff sack with a garbage bag, and THEN put the sleeping back in the combined sack. It isn't very likely you'll get a garbager bag full of sleeping bag into a stuff sack, and if you do, it's likely to have ripped. Goose neck all garbage bags used. The same techique is good for packs - Line the inside with a garbage bag. And of course, contents in the pack should also be packed in ziplock bags. for longer trips, dry bags are a worthwhile investment. 4) It is likely that for a two day trip, you can probably cook normal meals with little change in your weekend campout preparations. Any longer than that, though, and dehydrated foods become vital. I would discourage boys from taking the easy, expensive way out by buying store bought dehydrated foodstuffs. Dehydrating at home (easier in a dehydrator, but doable even in a conventional oven), is les expensive, more nutritious, and a valuable skill to have. Have boys team up in pairs for breakfasts (granola bars, oatmeal are possible selections), and lunch (trail baloney, peanut butter on pita bread or kaiser rolls?). Have one crew member (or a pair if the math works out) responsible for cooking a diner for the entire crew each night. He would find the recipe, purchase and dehydrate the food, and cook it. And of course, suplementing this with fish they catch is always good. Our Troop's experience with this and on the Appalachian Trail is that despite what common sense tells you, a little food seems to go a long way on the trip. On the other hand, don't get in their way if you stop at McDonalds on the way home! If you go to Tinnerman, they will provide your food. However, it is not always well received by the Scouts. Also, they pack food packaged for each day, and sometimes they do some odd things. You might find a "treat" in the bag for Friday of corn on the cob, but it will be spoiled because it spent all week in a bag in the heat. Check over the food they give you and re-arrange as needed. I think it's terrific that you guys can provide your Scouts the oppurtunity to do this. Good luck! Mark

For those of you who remember, I was investigating the UU / BSA disagreement. I suspect what I found during that investigation is applicable here. To apply the UU situation to the Episcopal Church, if the Church changed the Religious Emblem to include something with which the BSA has a problem, THEN the issue between the two organizations may come to a head. Or, if the Church started preasuring BSA to accept members who do not meet membership standards. Until then, I suspect that the BSA will feel as though they have no reason to take a position about an issue over which they have no control. The interesting thing to watch would be if the religious heads started trying to push the BSA toward accepting members currently excluded. From what I've learned, these are the people who control the policy. Since it is decidely skewed toward a more conservative position now (which is good), it would be interesting to see the results. Mark

It's not so amazing that something good can end something ugly, is it? Thanks OGE. I wish our Troop sang. I envy you. Mark

In the example of the cliff (I am assuming this is a climbing / rapelling activity), using the directing style of leadership happened far later than the real leading activity should have. The PLC, when they decided on such an activity, should have identified resources needed. One of these resources is proper training. During this training, all participants would have been taught (probably by a coaching method, but not necesarily) to stay away from the edge of the cliff. If, in that scenerio, a directive style of leadership needed to be used, the proper leadership was not employed when it should have been. Mark

Neither of my sons are ADD or ADHD. Both struggle to do well in school, but both are motivational issues. My opinion on this subject has evolved over the last few years. Back in '93, I was asked to serve on a community steering council to determine how assessment would be done in our school district. This was a big joke, as it turned out the board had determined they were moving toward outcome based education, where grades would be based on how well you tried, not how well you actually did. (I know this is a bit of over simplification, but the basic idea is correct). They just wanted a citizen group to make it acceptable to the community. During the meetings, however, the conversation turned to "at risk" students, most commonly ADD and ADHD. It was obvious to me that from the standpoint of the administrators on the steering council, the district was far better of identifying children as being ADD, as there was more state and federal money available to the district if more kids were labeled "at risk". It was from this perspective that I formulated my initial opinion on the topic, that being that most ADD and ADHD children are nothing more than children who couldn't prove they weren't "at risk". And, my thinking went, even if they did have a litlle problem, they better find ways to deal with it, because the coddling they were going to get at school and at home wasn't going to continue when they get to the real world. Although I still believe that the real world WILL treat them differently, I have come to believe that the affliction is real, and that taking medication for it, WHEN NOTHING ELSE APPARENTLY WILL WORK, is equivelent to a diabetic taking insulin to control their diabetes. Here is one observation I can give as this relates to Scouting: As Advancement Chair, I get a copy of all the new Scout applications to enter new boys into TroopMaster. I see all of the medical info on the Scout application. I am going from memory, and although I could be slightly wrong, I know I am close: 90% of the boys in our Troop identified on the application as ADD or ADHD have parents who coddle them agressively. Knowing that there are so many parents of ADD and ADHD children in this forum, I fear offending many of you. This truly isn't my intent. But ADD on the application has almost always equalled mom packing for campouts, dad driving two hours to take Johny his pillow, and mom and dad making excuses for mistakes that all young Scouts make at one time or another. My hope (and belief) is that because the members of this forum have a more "global" view of the values of Scouting, that they have recognized this and have not allowed themselves to fall victim of this too. We have a boy with Downs Syndrom in our Troop, and he can take care of himself 95% of the time. My belief is that ADD and ADHD boys can do at least this well. Maybe that takes medication, maybe not. But they can do it, if mom and dad stay out of the way. Mark

For what it may matter- My son's Eagle project proposal estimated that he would need over 800 hour man hours. As Advancement Chair, I still guided him to alter his project because there was not enough evidence of leadership. In the end, his project required a little over 500 hours, but he demonstrated a significant amount of leadership thoughout almost the entire project. And he was questioned quite critically about this by his BOR (upon my suggestion to the District Advancement Chair). Time means practically nothing. Mark

OGE, Although I've heard of PERT, I can't recall in what context. I think it was in relationship to Critical Path Planning, but I might be wrong. The process of working backwards from a required completion date I have always called a Gannt Chart. Scouts who make 1st Class get a lesson from me in this technique with the hope that they apply it to working on Eagle. Most don't bother, but a couple have, and have been very pleasantly suprised by the results planning like this has made. As to GMTA, I'm not so sure in this case. I still have a long way to go to prove I belong in any catagory titled "great minds". But thanks for the nice word. Mark

SaltHeart, Aaahhh, the old trying to recapture lost oppurtunities screen name ploy, eh? Understood. If I went that way, mine would be "couldabeenaminorleagueballplayer". Or Maybe "shouldagottenmycollegedegree". Or best for this forum, "wishiwereaneaglescout". Thanks for being here. Mark

Rudd, As to the signatures on the blue card, two Troop signatures are required. One is on the first third of the card that is the application itself. The Scoutmaster or other designated adult signs this to verify the Scout is eligible to begin working on the badge. The second signature is on the second third of the card, which I am almost certain is the Scout's record. The signature is there to verify that the unit has knowledge that the Scout has completed the badge. We use this signature as evidence that it has been entered into TroopMaster. If a Scout can show me a blue card with this second signature on it, he gets his badge even if I don't have a record of it. If I signed it, but it doesn't show up in TroopMaster, I goofed, not the Scout. But in no way do we use this as an approval. I have always assumed I was not allowed to "approve" anything, unless I was the MB Counselor. My signatures "verify" that the Scout is eligible to begin work, and verifies that he has reported completion to me. I agree with OGE about the college example. You are right, but colleges do not have the same processes or standards as the BSA, and the BSA does not have the same processes or standards as colleges. You are right that Scouting is an excellent prepatory effort for success in college, but that is not one of our goals. It happens, I agree. But it's a by product , not the reason, we Deliver the Promise. I am beginning to sound frighteningly like Bob. Oh well, it could be worse. Lot's worse. Mark

Rudd, In re - reading my post, it is obvious to me that I didn't emphasis my main point. Let me try again. I feel it is our (Troop adult leadership and committee) to GUIDE an Eagle candidate to making his own determination of what is an acceptable display of leadership. I feel it is NOT our responsiblity, nor do we even have the right, to "approve" a project. We simply acknowledge with our signatures that we have done our duty to guide the Scout. Approving the project is the duty of the District Advancement Chair, and reviewing it after completion to determine if it adequately met the requirments (all of them, not just the leadership provision) is the duty of the Board of Review. As to your specific example, I would certainly not let a Scout who was seeking my guidance think that this is an acceptable Eagle project, with the facts you state, regardless of whether the Troop spent 10 hours, 100 hours, or a million hours. Lastly, your post seems to indicate that you believe an Eagle project must be completed by the Troop. Although I will agree that the Troop is often the group with the most time involved in a project, they are not the only people who can be involved. Quite to the contrary, I advise Scouts when they develop their plan to try to include as much help outside the Troop as possible. Although this has a couple of benefits, the one I think that is most important is the experience that comes with leading friends and relatives. Let's face it: It's pretty simple to "lead" a bunch of guys who feel that they have to be there, that the only way they are going to get reciprical help on their project is to be at someone else's, and to lead guys who an Eagle candidate has likely led before. It demonstrates a whole different level of leadership when some of the group to be led are school friends and ands and uncles. Please understand that I don't ever make this a requirement. But I do point out both the long term and short term benefits of doing so. How a Scout utilizes my guidance is up to him. Mark

Saltheart, I too missed the start of this current bout of acrimony. Might be better if we stayed ignorant though, heh? Just curious: What's behinf your screen name? It seems like it could have an interesting story. Mark

In what way would adding a tenure requirement to early ranks advance the Aims of Scoutiing better than the currect methods? I am not being contridictary. I think there is room for healthy debate on this, and, if great minds like ours (well, maybe great minds like everyone else's LOL) can agree that there is value, maybe we should try to appoach National? Certainly, I hope we all agree that until National added this requirment, we would be in no position to do it ourselves, right? Mark

I noticed my last post conflicts with one earlier in this thread. Now I'm not sure I remember whether it was Personal Management or Family Life. I think more likely it was Personal Management. Sorry for the confusion, if any. Mark

Advisor FB, Thanks for saving me the typing! "DITTO THAT!" Mark

Eamonn, I too had a similiar circumstance. A boy who transfered to our Troop from another state did nothing toward Eagle for about two years. A number of us tried to coax him to do the last 4 MBs he had left to do (he already had a project completed when he got to us). He just made no effort. He was a grade ahead of his age, so he was already away at college when he was turning 18. He came home from school the weekend before his birthday, and called me asking to do Personal Management MB. This requires a three month budget, which he had yet to start. I explained to him that it was not possible to complete a requirment that takes three months in eight days. Although he has yet to acknowledge me when we have seen each other around town, he was polite and understood that he was responsible for causing the situation. His mother, however, was livid. She called me and berated me over why I let her son do all the work for the other MBs he needed (apparently he completed 3 MBs on a Saturday, inlcuding Citizen of the Nation and World), but then wouldn't work with her son on Personal Managment. I "cheated her son out of the chance to be an Eagle Scout". I have since found out her anger was mostly over a $3,000.00 scholarship her son could have received form his college had he made Eagle. I love Dave's explaination of a Pallidin. I think the truly righteous person would follow these same guidelines. As I have mentioned in at least one other thread, I view one of my responsiblities as Advancement Chair as protecting the honor of being an Eagle Scout. I will do whatever I can to help a Scout get there. But I make this promise to all of you who are Eagle Scouts: No one who does not meet your standards will join your club if I can avoid it. I made one mistake in this regard once. It won't happen again. Mark

Rudd, I applaud the spirit in which your old Troop set this minimum. However, I too have a problem with it, and let me try to give an example that explains why. You want to hold Scouts to a high standard. Great. I agree. You feel the high standard is 200 hours. If I wanted to hold the Scouts in our Troop to our interpretation of a high standard, we could impose a 500 hour minimum for projects. that's two and a half time your standard. And if OGE wanted to really be an SOB, his Troop could impose a 5,000 hour minimum. That would really be a high standard, right? At some point along this continuum, setting a minimum number of hours became rediculous, wouldn't you say? Is it 200, or 500, or 5,000? Who knows? What I do know is that what demopnstrates sufficient leadership for one boy is NOT the same as for another. This "high standard" has to be developed by the boy, with input from his Scoutmaster, Advancement Chair, and adult committee. I don't see our signatures on the Eagle Project Booklet being approvals as much as I see them a evidence that we helped the boy determine for himself what level satisfies the requirement. The District Advancement Chairman (the way we do it in our Council), and the Board of Review, are the ones that determine the adequacy of the plan, and then of the leadership demonstrated. I am all for high standards, Rudd. I wish National would review were we are and ratchet them up a bit. But it isn't our place, nor do I think it ever will be our place, to implement artificial baselines. Mark

OGE, Your suggestion seems so much like what our Troop does, I wonder if you copied from us (or maybe we copied from you?). I only have one thing to add. I'm guessing that you were intend on discribing the planning process, and figured this point is the next step. But it's important to remember, because good planning will turn into bad execution without it. Follow up. Once the plan is made this way, you have a group of people who are committed to making it work because it is their plan. Unfortunately, that commitment doesn't always maintain the same intensity weeks and months later. And this is not a problem just for boys. Adults do the same thing quite often. Once the plan is made, and commitment is made to accept responsiblity for small parts of the plan, it has to be the leader's (SPL's) job to follow up, enough a head of time to effect change if something is amiss, to verify the assigned person is meeting his commitment. Usually, this means the SPL verifies at PLC meetings a few weeks to a month in advance that the PL is confident that his Patrol has things under control. The Patrol Leader should have checked with the Patrol member(s) assigned to a task to make sure they are on schedule. If all verify they are doing well, then the Troop should expect the plan to come off with little or no problems. If somewhere the chain is weak, than following up enough before hand should allow enoughtime for corrective action. Ryon, and any other Scouts who monitor this forum, What OGE described, and what I added, are two of the charecteristics that go into successful business people. Someone who knows how to run a meeting, make a plan, get commitment, follow up, and see the plan through has advantages in the business world you can't possibly imagine. Of course, I know your goal is more short term (get the calender planned). But if you practice this, you will not only do a good job, and not only will that job have been easier, but you will have learned a skill that easily 90% of adults don't have. Good luck Ryon. I have seen a number of your questions, and they are very insightful. I bet you are a fine leader! Mark

I've come to learn in my timne in this forum that almost all of the participants have a niche in which all of the answers on that subject seem to be right on (Don't worry, I figure mine out sometime!). This one is perfect for EagleDad, I think. I've seen him tackle very similiar issues with a great deal of valuable thoughts and ideas. EagleDad? Mark

As the PL, I would use the divide and win over tactic. For the sake of the discussion, I am going to assume the APL is the know - it - all. My first act would be to pull everyone together and begin asking questions that would lead to the group deciding as a unit to put aside the catapualt project in favor of the things that are scheduled. "Mr. Lashing, it's certainly true that pioneering is a very valuable part of the skills Scouts must have. I'm glad you want to share those skills." "Yes Mr. PL, if lashing needs done, I'm your guy!" "Great Lash! I knew I could count on you. What I'd like to hope is that you see that pioneering isn't the ONLY thing we do in Scouts. Wouldn't you agree that Scouting has so much more than knots alone?" "Well... yeah, I guess Mr. PL. It's just..." Oh yeah, I know, they're fun. And I'll bet if you and I put our heads together, we could come up with a program during free time to show all these other guys how fun it is, too. But did you see your agenda for the weekend? What does it say we're supposed to be doing now?" "Well, we're supposed to be at some stupid lecture about styles of leadership. I don't want to go to that, it's a waste of time!" As the rest of the group starts heading for the mess hall, where the presentation will be, Mr. Lashing and I hang back a bit. "Well, Lash, let's think about that. Are you interested in putting together your program to teach lashings? Well, remember that one of your 'students' is shy, one doesn't want to be here, and the other, MR. APL, thinks he knows everything already. Think that's going to be a tough bunch to teach?" "Well, yeah, I guess so." says Mr. Lashing. "What skills might come in handy to make your job teaching them pioneering?" "I don't know, what?" "Well, I think during the program we need to get to, like in 2 minutes, you're going to get some insight on how to handle situations like you're going to be in. Do you think that if they cover this, it might make your job easier?" "Sure! That Mr. APL is going to be a real problem! I can use anything I can to get him under control. He's a real..." "Whoa! Wait a minute! Now come on, haven't you ever heard the saying 'It's takes all kinds to make a world'? Well, we all have our indiosyncracies, don't we? For instance, wouldn't you say I talk too much?" "You betcha!" "Yeah, all my friends on the Scouter forum I go on say my posts are the longest there. But even so, am I that bad a guy?" "No, not really." "Do you think maybe Mr. APL might have some redeeming qualities?" "Well, sure. He's a real go getter. Wants everything done right. I can respect that." "I think you'll find, Lash, that if we go to the presentation, that we now have 1 minute to get to, you'll find a great way to harness Mr. APL and use his strong points. Want to give it a shot? come on, let's roll." As soon as oppurtunities arose to deal with the others in the Patrol, each of them could be handled using this coaching technique. I could go on and continue with the examples, but as Lash says, I talk too much. Thanks for the chance to share my views. I hope in some small way, they are useful. Mark

Being funny must have run in the family genes. In my early adult life (as I remember looking through the fog that has built up over those many years!), I worked at a clothing store where I sold clothes to Bob Hope's nephew, Milton. Everyone in the store just loved when he came in. He had us salespeople, the counter staff, even other customers in stitches (yeah, I know, REALLY BAD PUN!). He had a way of saying the most rude things and making people feel good about hearing them. He picked on my weight all the time. And it was hilarious. We had one girl who was quite well endowed, and was very self conscious about it. He used to joke with her all the time, and it actually made her feel better. Milton was amazing. Bob seemed to be that much and more. Rest in peace, Bob. Mark