ParkMan

While it might be nice for the DE to do a little more proactive outreach, this sounds about right.  

The DE is a district level player.  If you guys are not involved at the district level and just focus internally - then why would he interact with you?

5 minutes ago, KYScouter said:

I found this interesting (from section I):

"One-on-one contact between adult leaders and youth members is prohibited both

inside and outside of Scouting."

 

A literal reading of this would mean that I can never again babysit my scout nephew, even if it's not a scouting event.  Yikes.  (Of course an even more literal reading of this means my brother can no longer take his scout son to school while mom takes younger brother to daycare.)

I've had Scouters try to jump through hoops before to get around G2SS rules by saying - we'll, if I do it and it's not really Scouting - is that OK.  My guess is that's what they are trying to get around.

10 hours ago, WisconsinMomma said:

It was a rough  night in our WB course, but, it was also interesting to reflect on.  I think I learned things from the exercise.  Of course, it is a struggle to be set up to be in competition, then have the objective changed to be cooperation.  It's a trick.  I was in competitive mode the whole time, and having a big failure is always a learning experience. We had a cracker barrel afterward and some time to chat.  It was very dramatic for us.  Rough but we moved on and it is not the main feature of WB, or my most vivid memory from the course, we had so many other positive moments that are more significant than Win  All You Can. 

I think I missed something when I took the course, because it really didn't impact me or my patrol.  I will always remember that at the cracker barrel after the game, the staff kept asking us if we were OK.  We were baffled why they were so concerned.

But, having gone back as a staffer and then also talking to lots of folks, I do understand it.  I think it's unfortunate how it impacts people.  The core message I'm OK with - check the natural desire to personally win against the much larger benefit the group gains by succeeding together.

A little I'm reminded about the Mike Rowe topic.  I see the Game of Life as kind like Wood Badge throwing an elbow.  It's unpleasant, but it makes a point and leaves a memory. 

1 hour ago, FormerProfessional said:

Ask the professional in private, or electronically what they meant and if you get the run around go see management. I would take “conditional scouter” as a threat that a low level professional can’t back up.

I think the professional is just giving you grief about having a breaking point.  

This period in Scouting history is testing us all - I wouldn't sweat it.

1 hour ago, FormerProfessional said:

Well said. I agree 100%.

It seem to me the implication of the fact that the district volunteers really run the district is that there really shouldn't be much the DE does directly for units.  Yes, the DE needs to be an ambassador of the professional staff.  But, expectations like the DE arranging programming, informing units about activities, etc. are really beyond the role description.

Now, I would expect the DE to have developed relationships with the primary outward facing volunteers in the units - the CC, SM/CM/Advisor, and the COR (if they are active).  A DE probably doesn't need to know the ASMs, den leaders, etc., but it might not hurt.

It certainly would not hurt the BSA to develop a couple of jobs for a DE that endears them to unit level volunteers.  Not quite sure what those would be, but it probably would help the image of the DE role.

57 minutes ago, FormerProfessional said:

I am not a lawyer, and do not claim to be but part of the commissioning the DE is a legal representative of the council and can represent the council to Charter Partners and future CP and other organizations like United Way etc. This is one example where the DE “fills the gaps” and volunteers can’t do per National BSA membership standards.

I've heard this as well - they have a special status that allows them to represent the council to the COs.  That's why they do the CO visits and not a district volunteer.

Yes - let's not get into debate of who cares more - volunteers vs. professionals.  That's will never end.

It's pretty clear from the structure of the BSA that volunteers are designed to run things.  The phrase I've heard time and time again is "volunteer led, professionally guided".  

The challenge of course is that someone has to keep the lights on.  The professional staff, by the nature of being paid staff, is in a unique position to fill in the gaps left by volunteers.  I suspect many professionals find it easier to skip the volunteer role and go straight to just doing it themself.  I think this has been compounded by the fact that the district committees have been neglected for many years.

I tihnk this creates the impression that the DEs are in charge, but they really are not supposed to be. 

25 minutes ago, gblotter said:

I disagree that BSA is powerless to influence WOSM on this issue, but Irving won't take a stand because it would draw attention to condoms and sex at Jamboree (doh - too late for that now).

Here's an idea: How about BSA start "acting like a Boy Scout" and just say no to condoms at WSJ and let WOSM deal with it. Such a move might actually attract positive press for a change (something Irving is unequipped to deal with).

Ok, so here's the current issue list:

1) should the BSA attempt to change WOSM rules such that they match BSA rules?

2) should the BSA attend a WOSM event if there are rules more permissive than BSA rules?

3) should BSA leaders be empowered to instruct youth on the differences between BSA rules and WOSM rules.

FWIW - my opinion on the above.

1. Depends, but probably not.  In the case of condom distribution - this is an unsettled social topic with pros and cons on both sides.

2. Yes - the pros of attending a WOSM outweighs the risks taken on by having condoms available.

3. Yes - without doubt.  Leaders should be free to highlight rule differences.

14 minutes ago, gblotter said:

Me - I'd say no. I would prefer my son experience those things in the setting of a National Jamboree where G2SS rules apply.

 

This is one area of complete agreement. Scouting families should have it spelled out to them in clear language the specific differences in behavior standards between BSA G2SS and WOSM - and it is a great idea to make parents sign a document about such. However, my bet is that BSA avoids all mention of this because they don't want to depress attendance at the event (for their own financial motivations).

Feels to me like we're essentially at the same place.  We just disagree on whether the BSA should participate or not.

Not sure there's really an answer here so much as a choice.

7 minutes ago, JoeBob said:

I'm still wondering what landmine we triggered in the other topic.

Does kinda seem like the same thread doesn't it

8 minutes ago, David CO said:

I know what it is. We have Chartered Organizations. They don't.

I think that's part of it.  It's not the CO model itself, but the fact that individual religions represent large proportions of the COs.  When you have any religion that is 10% of the COs, I have to imagine they will influence policy.

I think there are probably others.  One is the headquarters location.  BSA - Irving, TX.  GSUSA - NYC.  I have to imagine some of these things are influenced by the working staff in the headquarters office.  

7 minutes ago, Saltface said:

This looks like the kind of garbage we burn the Girl Scouts in effigy over.

Yeah - not sure what it is about the BSA, but we always seem to be influenced a lot more by our conservative members.  The GSUSA not so much.

29 minutes ago, Gwaihir said:

no. again, not a difficult concept.  I have repeatedly stated that what's being called into question is why we want a game that is opposite our rules in the first place.  I'm not sure why this is such a difficult concept. 

Honestly I think this is a much better question.  Should the BSA participate in or host a WSJ if the rules in conflict with our own G2SS.

Me - I'd say yes.  The experience of a WSJ is significant enough that attending is worth the exception for these cases.  

Further, the BSA should make it crystal clear to a participant from within the BSA that the rules are different.  Make parents sign a document stating that they are aware of this difference.

12 minutes ago, gblotter said:

The problem is that BSA is over a financial barrel because of Summit debts. BSA absolutely needs to host events like WSJ in an effort to pay the bills. Once again, principles are subjugated to expediency.

Not knocking the perspective, but I see it very differently.

This is the World Scout Jamboree.  This is a big deal.  Having it here on our turf will allow so many more Scouts to attend.  If my son hadn't bailed on scouting, I'd have signed him up in a heartbeat.  

I can accept that the BSA made an exception and is following the guidelines of the WOSM.  It's like a host country making an exception for the Olympics.

If the BSA refused to host it because of this, I would be very disappointed.  I can deal with these exceptions so that our scouts get the opportunity to attend the WSJ.

Beyond that, I see this as the BSA showing some humility.  The USA is but one of many national Scouting organizations.  That the USA isn't trying to impose our will on other countries I find very noble.

1 hour ago, FormerProfessional said:

A DE is responsible for Membership Money Manpower and dont read to much into this but the face of scouting within the district. The DE is the council representative to the public. Charter Partner visits, Charter Partner Agreements (Goldenrod), United Way, civic clubs, new unit sales calls and building relationships with the public.

Any current or former DEs please add to this post on what you do that I may have overlooked.

As for a problem solver, it’s always best for another volunteer to resolve volunteer problems if possible. It could be a vol from another unit, UC, DIstrict Commissioner or Council Commissoner if necessary.  You need to be aware the DE, or council management will counsel whoever goes to help. Managent May tell the DE who in turn tells the vol what to say/do.

 

What do you see as the relationship between the district volunteers and the DE? 

For example - what is the DE supposed to do compared to the district finance chair? The DE compared to the membership chair?  The DE compared to the District Chair?

I appreciate that to the othet professionals, the DE has accountability that stuff gets done.  But - if things are functioning correctly and the district committee is doing it's job - what's the thinking?

I probably should have been clearer when I said problem solver.  Generally I turn to the Unit Commissioner for volunteer issues.  My questions for the DE are generally more about dealing with the council staff.  I figure the DE has better insight into council operations than my unit commissioner.

11 minutes ago, Gwaihir said:

nonsense.  our very foundation as a nation held certain truths self evident.  There is no compromise for self-evident truths and inalienable rights.  Should we compromise on murder?  On pedophilia?  where else should we compromise?  This is a silly statement that is not grounded in reality. 

I think the quote is:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.

I really appreciate your insight into the DE role.  I appreciate working with my DE as he's been outstanding.

5 minutes ago, FormerProfessional said:

The question you should ask yourself...Ask not what your DE can do for you, what can you do for your DE.

I expect you'll see some pushback on this comment.  I get what you're saying.  I find the majority of Scouters view the DE like other district & council level scouters.  Those higher level Scouters are ultimately there to help units succeed.   So while yes, we all want to help each other - most volunteers are not looking at how they can help a DE out.

One thing that I think would help here is the development of a "purpose statement" for the DE role.  What is the primary goal of the DE?  For example - the DE is not there to do all the work of the district or to even lead the district.  That's the purpose of the District Committee.  The DE is there to advise the District Committee, but not replace it.

In my mind, the role of the DE can be summed up as:
- professional advisor to the district staff
- second level problem solver for units in the district
- champion for growing Scouting in the district
- district level representative for the professional staff of the BSA

Not sure if that's really how it works, but that's always been my understanding.  I went looking for a better definition, but couldn't find one.

8 minutes ago, TMSM said:

This is unfortunate timing. I am getting quite a bit of flack from parents in my troop. Its not just condoms but alcohol also being allowed (although limited).

 

I'd just be upfront with my families about it.  Something like:

This is a World Organization of the Scouting Movement (WOSM) event and these are their rules.  The BSA under the terms of the agreement to serve as host is bound to implement the WOSM rules.  The BSA is working to implement those rules in a way that is consistent with the BSA's values - but ultimately the BSA will comply with tho WOSM rules.  The however, does not indicate a change in the rules of the BSA itself.  This is a unique situation due to the nature of this specific event.

We as parents and leaders may have preferred for the BSA to withdraw from the event, but ultimately the BSA did not.

If you (as parents) are uncomfortable with this decision, you should not send their Scout to the World Jamboree.

1 minute ago, Eagledad said:

What about scouting for you makes the program bigger than the changes being implemented on it.?

Barry

To me - I've always felt that Scouting was about developing self confidence and leadership skills.  Over their time in the program they go through all kinds of life challenges that they overcome - camping, earning awards, etc.  In the process, they develop the skills and tools that stay with them for life.

I've always used the example.  Because I was a scout, someone could plop me down anywhere - in a city, in the desert, in the middle of the forest, and I felt confident that I could find my way home.

26 minutes ago, David CO said:

I'm sure that liberals would love to be able to aggressively promote their agendas without getting any opposition from conservatives. It isn't going to happen.

 

Feels to me like we've got an impass on some of these topics.  Both sides believe their positions.  Both see national decisions as significant enough to leave the movement.

Given that you have to make a choice on these topics - girls in Scouting, gays in Scouting, religion in Scouting, we appear trapped as a movement.  Choices either make the traditionalists/conservatives happy or make the progressives/liberals happy.  My preference would be for local choice - don't impose your morals on me and I won't impose mine on you.  But, even that is controversial.

In my mind, Scouting is so much bigger than these choices - as important as they are.  I would have my kids in Scouting regardless of whether they allow girls, participants who are  gay, or require a belief in God.  My community generally matches my views and the people I Scout with generally do as well.  That's good enough for me.

It just feels like we're pulling ourselves apart as a movement.  I grant that our society is in a time where these issues are not settled nationally.  I just wish Scouting could stay outside that fray, let us do our own thing, and let me just focus on having a good program for my kids.

5 hours ago, Eagle1993 said:

Agreed on the cost.  We, the pack, hand down neckerchiefs den by den.  The pack buys extras when needed but for the most part we already have enough inventory.  We don’t use hats or worry about specific belt buckles.  We use jeans for pants as the Cubscout pants are made for giants.   

When our dens advance we perform a neckerchief ceremony... which is pretty simple.  Our Tigers take off their necker and place it on the Lions... and that continues.  So far we are sticking with the yellow wolf neckerchiefs but we will probably change this fall when Lions have yellow neckerchiefs.

Nah - you don't need to spend that money every year.

The pack should buy new neckerchiefs for every scout.  Make it part of the program.  Add in $10 to the dues at the beginning of the year.  Don't require the hat.  Each den should make their own neckerchief slides.

The scouts buy one belt buckle when they start cubs, one when they get the tan uniform.

I think there's a bunch of steps that can happen here before you start calling district and council folks.  

As has already been shared - talk with the Scoutmaster.  There's about a 95% chance that's all it will take.  The conversation is simply one of "my son's going to have a hard time advancing if he has to write out these worksheets."  Just about every Scoutmaster I know would say "well, then let's find another way".

If the Scoutmaster doesn't work out, then you call the Committee Chair.  The Scoutmaster serves as the discretion of the Committee.  The chair of the Committee has a lot of sway as a result.

If that doesn't work, then you call the Chartered Organization Rep.  You explain how their Scout program is making it hard on your special needs son to advance.

At that point, if I couldn't find a way to make it work, I'd do one of two things.
1) act as transcriber and write out the forms.
2) call the troop down the street and ask when their meeting is.  If after all that, you couldn't get it sorted out, then I wonder what kind of troop this really is.

My understanding is that the WOSM is like the United Nations.  National Scouting organizations can be members and work collectively together, but they don't grant the license for a Scouting association.  

1 hour ago, Jameson76 said:

  And the challenge is that sooo many Scouters take WB and assume they are now the end all be all when what needs to be conveyed is likely how to actually run a program, make sure they have a fun program, and know how to run a unit

While leadership and management team development is important, not sure it is what the focus of the "premiere" BSA training course should be.  Really needs to be focused on what the heck to do outdoors, how to have a successful unit program, how to implement Boy Led units.

The BSA training is absolutely lacking in the how to run unit department.  The primary training for unit leaders is:
- SM basic training
- Intro to Outdoor skills
- Leadership training

There is absolutely a series of classes needed around how to actually run a troop.  I can spout off the stages of team development in my sleep.  But, how to make patrols function in a meaningful way - nope.

Ohh - that never even crossed my mind.

Thanks!

Moderators,

Got to admit.  I'm not sure why you locked and then hid the thread.  

Was it because of the "adult nature" of the content?  Was it because of the debate over values?

The comment and you'll lock future threads just has me wondering what to stay away from.

Not complaining or questioning, just looking for clarity.