ParkMan

I'm sure an 11-17 year old troop can work.  So too can a 11-14 and a 15-17 troop.  It's not a question of what can work. 

This is a topic about the sustainability of the BSA's program. 

• For years we've seen declining membership numbers. 
• We hear numerous stories about boys becoming less active once high school starts.  We've got another topic now on re-engaging older scouts. 
• This forum has seen countless topics on how troops are mis-applying the program.  You get the sense that the true "boy led" troop is a pretty rare thing
• We see story after story about how Venture crews struggle and often just don't work.

When we talk about older boys, we hear that we need to focus on keeping them engaged.  The how usually seems to be some combination of high adventure & leading the troop.  Troops seem to struggle with how to do this and make it work.

The answer to much of this seems to be to double down on the "boy led" program.  If only we need one more training, one more nugget of knowledge from one of the Scouting founders.  But for so many it seems elusive.

The UK and Canada have gone to a split older scout program.  I've got no idea about other countries.  In the UK at least, membership appears to be growing.

But, here in the US, the 11-17 Boy Scout program seem sacrosanct.  Why?

So, in the context of this topic on the future of the BSA, I wonder if the 11-17 year old troop is that important.  Would the scouts be better served letting troops for 11-14 be a bit more adult led?  Let the 11-14 year olds focus on building good patrols and the leaders on being good patrol leaders.

Would we be better served letting the 15-17 year olds focus more on what they enjoy rather than trying to program to the younger scouts?  Let them organize their own troop and focus on peer leadership than wrangling a bunch of 11 & 12 year olds.

1 hour ago, Eagledad said:

I was speaking from experience, not idealism. Scouts of the troop age will gravitate towards activities and feel comfortable with the like mind members is the members are sincere in welcome to the group. Forget age and think in terms of experience. Never have I seen this more than where our troop went to play Lazertag. I watch a newly formed patrol of scouts from age 11 to 16 come together within a few minutes because the activity required all them to work as a team or fail. You will also see it in troop activities, but at much slower rate. Ignore age, think in terms of experience.

I have spoken here many times that the main cause of older scout failure is giving the older scout responsibility in getting the younger scouts to first class (core camping skills). Of course the older scouts will burn out because they are just repeating their first three years. To challenge scouts at the reach maturity, they have to be given responsibilities that challenge them physically and mentally. That means adult responsibilities. The 15 year shouldn't be responsible for getting scouts to first class, they should be responsible for making the program gets them to first class. If that sounds confusing, it basically means they should be doing the adults job.

 

The problem here is that the adults are still driving what the scouts should be, or not be, doing. If the troop is running correctly, it should be running on autopilot with very minimum adult help because the older scouts are running the program.

Troops that struggle with the older scouts generally are not giving all their scouts enough independence to make their own choices. Leadership is different from mentoring. Leadership is an action insuring direction. Mentoring is guidance of growing in maturity.

Boys between the age of 10 and 13 learn 90 percent of their behavior by observing their role models. The design of the scouting program for the older scouts to be the role models. That is why skills courses aren't good teachers of behavior. 

This is where the UK program fails as far as I'm concerned. We found that the 14 and older scouts step into leadership with a great deal of confidence because they mimic what they observed up to the age 14. It's how we are wired. They will tend to lead as their previous leader led and serve as their previous role models served. Scouts who like to serve will choose to push that direction while the scouts who would rather specialize in other activities like high adventure will migrate that direction. Not all scouts want to be leaders, and that is fine. But they will know leadership skills because they have been watching it for several years.

One of the big problems I worked with in units that separated their older scouts from the younger scouts was the complaint that the older scouts didn't have much inititive to lead their program. WELL YES, OF COURSE. They didn't have good role models to learn from. 

I use to teach that if the troop is functioning perfectly, it would never need leadership development classes. That is mainly because the older scouts are leading and the younger scouts are learning all the leadership skills by observing the older scouts. So, if the troop is struggling in an area of leadership, fix the older scouts, not the younger. 

The quality of a troop program should be measured by the oldest scout, not the youngest. Fix the older scout and the younger scout problems will go away.

Barry

I'd agree with much of what you write here.  But, what if we're asking the wrong question.  What if it's not how to make it work - but whether we should be making it work.

Yes - 11 year olds & 16 year olds will play laser tag together.  But, is that really what your average 16 year old wants?  You can challenge a 15 year old to develop the program to get an 11 year old to first class - but again, is that what your typical 15 year old wants?

Is it that the American program is failing because it is trying to make the Scouting into a leadership lab?

What if the BSA did draw a line at 14 and split the program? 

• The older boys were forced to go to the older boy program. The younger boys were forced to go to the younger boy program. 
• We could still do the whole boy led thing for the 11-14 group. 

The older boys are really just focused on leading themselves and developing their own program.  High adventure, high challenge, lots of autonomy. 

The older boys who really like the leadership work could go and be the senior leaders/troop guides in the 11-14 program.  Like den chiefs, but for the 11-14 program.

54 minutes ago, MattR said:

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.

26 minutes ago, Eagledad said:

MattR pretty much posted my thoughts. Statistically  the success of crew programs is directly dependent on the leadership and agreed direction.  And statistically crews with specific programs like the EMT, Law Inforcement, Scuba, and Ships have greater longevity because the goals are more obvious with sponsors that maintain a program goal. 

Barry

Agreed.  

One of the biggest differences I've noticed between troops and crews in our area is the lack of a vision and shared desire to succeed for Crews.  Scoutmasters, Committee Members, other adults - they understand what a troop is and what needs to happen to sustain it.  Funds, membership, program, etc.  Crews seem to float by, lack direction, vision, etc. 

I'd worry that when you combine three crews into one, all you're doing is delaying things by a few years.  If you really want to have a Crew, I think the CO (and by extension other adults) need to rally around the Crew.  Just as you would for a troop, that Crew Committee needs to push to make sure things are moving.  The Advisor needs to develop some youth leaders who really understand what it takes to lead and grow at Crew.  It's not to say that adults need to lead the Crew - they should not.  But there needs to be a longer term vision for that Crew so that it develops and grows.

Just my .02.

What's we've done to help with this is we've got a focused BOR organizer.  That person explains the concept to new parents and organizes a BOR such the either he/she sits on it, or another experienced person does.

That helps us make sure that it's never just new parents in the room with the scout.  One person who knows the ropes is always there.

It has also helped us dispel the notion that a BOR is about testing.  Sure, we have the Scout talk about accomplishments.  We also have him go over the oath, law, etc.  That latter is done so that we can have a conversation about how a scout presents himself.  A newer scout we can guide to be a better job and improve.  An older scout, who should know, we can talk with about making sure he is prepared.

I don't think we've ever failed someone in a BOR.  We might have told someone to come back if they are out of uniform.  But, our purpose is not testing.

1 hour ago, Eagledad said:

My experience is a little different. First, 11 year olds will hang out with 17 year olds when they are together in the same activities and program. 

Kids are going to generally gravitate towards spending time with those people who they feel at ease and comfortable with.  17 year olds live in a very different world than 11 year olds.  High schoolers live in a different world than middle schoolers.  Sure, they can and do spend time together - but it's different than "hanging out" with friends.

1 hour ago, Eagledad said:

As for the boredom of older scouts, the key to ALL scouts staying satisfied in the program is challenging them mentally and physically everyday. Boys of this age get bored when their experience doesn't provoke some intellectual and physical stimulation. 

And I'm curious why you don't see leadership and mentoring as the challenge for the scouts. I once poled our 14 and older scouts  (45 of them at the time) to find out how many enjoyed the high adventure part of our program.  14 of the 45 said they enjoyed the high adventure. So, something other than the high adventure kept them coming back.

The key for adults keeping the program challenging is to insure that the scouts are continually making decisions that effects them at the moment. Mix things up a little. Change routines. Challenge them for new activities. Make them think and act. Give them a chance to make bad decisions and learn how to recover. 

I think this is the easy to say/hard to do part of Scouting.  Once a 15 year old has been camping 30 times, then what?  Once a 15 year old has been through the core camping skills 3 times, then what?  It seems that in my troop, older Scout activities become a mix of leading the troop, some high adventure trips, and the push to Eagle.  

When we talk about Boy Scouting, particularly for older Scouts, it often becomes a discussion of leadership.  It's as if Boy Scouts becomes a civics laboratory.  I'm sure that there are many boys who thrive on that,  but I expect many do not.  I was looking at the UK Scouts website.  In their program descriptions they have:

Explorer Scouts (14–18)

Explorers are encouraged to lead themselves in deciding the programme and direction of the Unit, with support and guidance from leaders. The section also includes the Young Leaders’ Scheme, where young people are able to take on a leadership role in one of the younger sections.

There is wider scope for activities like offshore sailing, campaigning, performing, parascending, mountaineering and expeditions.

This feels about right to me.  If an older scout wants to be a leader of younger scouts - that's great.   But we should be careful not to assume that's the path for all scouts.  So, I'd disagree with your statement: "And I'm curious why you don't see leadership and mentoring as the challenge for the scouts."  But, reword slightly and I'd agree with "And I'm curious why you don't see leadership and mentoring as the challenge for some scouts."

It feels a lot to me like we know how to run a 10.5-13 year old Scout program.  Camping, cooking, outdoor skills, etc.  When the boys get older - some like it so much they stay.  Others like to lead such things and so they stick around.  But, I think lots of troops struggle with what to do for the 14-17 year olds.

• We try leadership - but it doesn't apply to all.
• We try high adventure - but then folks say - don't forget the younger guys

This feels like one of those core things we struggle with.

I think the key thing is having a differentiated program at each age range.  In theory, a group of kids could start together as Lions and progress together.

It's not so much that 6 years of Cub Scouting is bad, it's that 6 years of the same Cub Scouting with minor differences each year has a high potential to get boring.  Separating them by ages lets each group take on a different feel and helps inject some newness, but it's not a guarantee.  A good pack could make it feel new as well through a thought out progression, den leader change, etc.

At the Boy Scout level, it's a tad different - but the same principles apply.  Since Boy Scouts is boy led, keeping them together from 11-18 provides a way for boys to grow their leadership skills.  It does though increase the liklihood of boredom in the older boys.  It also sets up some interesting age challenges - 11 years old generally don't hang out with 17 year olds.  So that becomes the challenge we all discuss so often.  How do you provide the leadership and mentoring structure within the troop, but yet also have a program that is challenging and appeals to 15-18 year olds.
 

Maybe this is the point where packs differentiate more sharply between Cubs and Webelos. 

We do this in a BOR.  At the end of the board, we tell the scout that we are done asking him questions and would like his feedback on how Scouting is going.  We explain that it is quality control.

In the boards I sat it on, we seemed to get pretty good feedback.

While the Scoutmaster can gather similar info - it's good for the MCs to hear.  It provides for some objective adults hearing it too - brings more people into the discussion.

3 hours ago, blw2 said:

My requirement be that it "uses" the skills..... then my natural progression.... guys that know will practice, guys that don't know will ask, and guys that know will, like a good older brother, help those that don't.....

I like this.  Older scouts don't want to hear - "tonight we're going to have a lesson on ..."  Build the challenge into what you do.

On the GSUSA side - all adults have to be registered.  The BSA is actually pretty lax on this one.

We tried to help everyone earn their rank award every year - regardless of when they joined.  I always found that earning their rank was pretty important to most Cub Scouts.  Sure they had fun participating, but they had more fun participating and earning the badge. 

If someone asked me to work to get these girls to their rank in a few months it would have been a no brainer.  I'd have wanted that for my son.

I'd make sure you know the BSA YPT rules here.  But as you're den leader for a den of just your daughter, maybe those rules are a bit different.

Me - I'd focus on figuring out how to build a den around your daughter.  I'm worried your den of one will turn into a troop of one in a year.  If you need to jump packs, rally more help on recruiting, or something else - I think you need to be asking those questions.  My goal would be a patrol of 10 girls your daughters age in a year.

It's not a topic for a troop meeting, but us male Scouters probably ought to get used to hearing about it.  It's just a normal part of life.  I do imagine the girls would be more comfortable talking with a female, but we should be careful to not make them feel awkward about it.

Interesting take on the skorts though - never thought about that.  I'm 100% behind uniform updates that are thought out and practical.  With that in mind skorts with pockets now make sense to me.

I'm curious to see what the 11-18 year old uniform updates will bring.

6 hours ago, Treflienne said:

Really? No pockets in the skort?!  Didn't they realize that girls would want pockets, just like the boys?  I hope they don't feminize other aspects of the program to "accommodate" the girls.

Just last week I heard a group of 6th-8th girls complaining that it was no good that girls' pants (unlike boys' pants) don't have pockets.

And really, at the cub age, the girls can wear exactly the same clothes as the boys, anyway.

 

I'm all for tailoring the uniforms so they for better - but things like skorts, no pockets, and capri pants just seem odd.

23 minutes ago, Eagledad said:

The first camp out for our new class of crossovers was on a very dark and very rainy March evening. After we reached camp, the new SPL was just repeating the routine that he had observed and assisted over the years of him and the Patrol Leaders taking a hike to locate all the patrol camp sites. Each patrol tries to get as far from each other as they can, so it can take a few minutes. Mean while all the patrol QMs start to instruct the rest of the scouts in unloading the gear from the cars and trailer.

It's raining pretty hard as I watched the troop in action. The new scouts are disoriented, it's dark, it's raining and they have never done anything like this before in their life. The SPL walks back with the patrol leaders and feels very temped to help the new scouts just standing there watching, but steps back as the TGs gets their attention leads the new scouts to their new camp site. They look lost, but they are smiling as they walk into thru the rain into the dark. Thank goodness they brought rain gear.

I always like to watch new SPLs on their first camp out. First thing I teach the SPL after election is delegation. It is such a hard skill to practice because up to this point, their previous responsibilities have been more of doing in their climb to the SPL position. This SPL, like those before him, finds a place where can stand and watch. This is what the SM does, waiting to serve is the goal of the SPL. But he is temped to help the scout who is searching for the missing tent poles. He throws out a suggestion and the scout waves a thanks.

The new scouts are following the TGs around like baby ducks following their mother as they set up tents. The SPL walks over to show one newby how to drive a tent stake. However at the same time, a PL approaches with a problem. I don't hear the problem, but the SPL starts to follow and is just as quickly stopped by another PL with a question. The SPL looks up at the dark sky and says, "is the rain coming down harder". Not really a question, but more of a pause in the beginnings of the chaos.

I take a few steps out of the trees and quietly throw out "delegate". The SPL looks at me, then the area around him. I watch his gears turn, he turns and walks over to the ASPL helping the TGs and ask him to assist the PL with the problem. Then he listens to the second PL and gives a satisfying answer. I smile a well done to the SPL, turn and go to the car to get my gear. It is never planned this way, but SPL and SM are always last to find their tent spot.

The SPL approached me with a big smile the next morning as I'm drinking my coffee to say that he has never been more challenged, more scared, and more exhilarated in his scouting experience. He can't wait for the day to start. I asked him how the new scouts are doing, he laughed and said he could hear them giggling in their tents all night long. It's always that way and I'm thankful that the adult camp is so far away. I asked him if anybody got soaked. Nope, all is well in the beginings of a beautiful sunning morning.

We try to make each scout's scouting experience more challenging than the day before so that he not only continues to grow, but continues to be excited. This SPL is only 15. How can he be challenged more. Well, the SM has to step back some more from some of his responsibilities. The SM has to grow as well so that the SPL and the troop to grow. 

If your 15 year olds aren't getting these kinds of experiences, then I think you are doing it wrong. The measure of a quality for a troop should be the experiences of the oldest scout. Not the youngest.

Barry

Thank you.  I think someone ought to capture more stories that for SM training.  Our troop is a fair bit off from that.  But - that's a topic for another day.

What you describe here is a very good example of how Scouting develops the character and leadership qualities of youth. My son could have benefited from that.  Goodness - I could have benefited as a Scout.  

Though he would have grown from that, I doubt that leading other scouts would have kept his interest.  My son never showed any interest in leading within the troop.  He liked the camping & camaraderie.  The rest all seemed like work to him.

So, for those kids who are like my son - didn't want to be the SPL, Quartermaster, whatever, what keeps them challenged and engaged after they turn14?  Our troop is good, but far from perfect - so I may just be missing it.

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've got two daughters - a Brownie and a Cadette.  Each started as Daisy.  My son was in the BSA from Tigers until age 14.

I really liked the GSUSA camps.  I've been very impressed with them.

It always seem to me that the BSA camps are generally bigger.  I liked the GSUSA camps because they felt smaller.  Camp conditions in my neck of the woods are comparable.  It depends more on the age of the camp than on whether it's a BSA or a GSUSA camp.

I had the same reaction to the tents.  Much better at the GSUSA camps.  Bigger, newer, had screens.  

My understanding is that in the GSUSA, they do not have a shooting program.  So the girls cannot do BB's, rifle, & shotgun.  They can of course do archery.

Paddle boating must be a thing in the Girl Scouts.  All the Girl Scout camps I've been to have paddle boats.  The waterfronts did seem a bit smaller than in the BSA camps, but I gathered it was because they were smaller camps.  They felt similar to me.  That said - our BSA camp doesn't have a very tricked out waterfront either.

I'm not aware of any GS troops that do a summer camp like the BSA troops do.  Even for my older daughter, summer camp attendance is an individual thing.

Thank you for all you have done for the Scouts and for Scouting.

For the little it's worth - I don't think National was trying to disrespect us.  I think they just handled it poorly.

1 hour ago, MattR said:

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.

I see your point.

The difficulty I see though is the challenge in Scouting is elusive.  If I think through some areas:
- camping & the outdoors - What we tend to do in Boy Scouts & Venturing peaks at around 1st class. After that the challenge turns into refining one's skills. 
- high adventure - There are the occasional high adventure trips, but they are not that frequent
- advancement/scouting skills - Again, you learn most things by first class.

 Yes - I think there is ongoing challenge on the leadership side - but I'm wondering - is that really enough to keep kids interested?

Thanks - that makes sense. 

I didn't think about the rank advancement.  I'm sure it's important to them!

From the BSA  aquatics staff guide:

To qualify as a merit badge counselor, a volunteer must:

• Register annually with the Boy Scouts of America.

• Be at least 18 years old. • Be of good character.

• Be proficient in the merit badge subject by vocation, avocation, or special training.

• Be able to work with Scout-age youth.

I think that's about it.

I expect the answer is probably:

- be a registered MBC

- be able to teach the material

Have you found a document that states you need more?

Out of curiosity - why are you shutting down registration?  I thought as an early adopter pack you could keep registering girls & boys passed the March 15 date.  If the council is pushing this, it seems like an odd restriction.

2 hours ago, codger said:

I posted these same comments in another thread, but they apply here as well:

It is plain to me and many others that there is no need to speculate on whether certain changes will come to pass - that in the immediate or very near future:

Packs and then Troops will become FULLY COED, forced into this by a confluence of pressure from: activists: "separate but equal is not equal" , lawyers/lawsuits, and Nationals' desire to minimize bad publicity. This is a given, and to believe otherwise flies in the face of the past 20 years of history of our organization and others.

And the PROGRAM WILL MORPH INTO A PALE SHADOW OF ITS PREVIOUS SELF as the presence of girls will inevitably change the nature of the events, merit badges, requirements, styles and more. No ecosystem can remain unchanged once a foreign species is introduced into it.

Huh?

Adding girls is not going to force the program into a pale shadow of its former self.

2 hours ago, fred johnson said:

It's probably why baseball and other programs may be able to successfully recruit younger.  Same with Violin programs.  The program does not change year to year.  It just gets more challenging.  Bigger bats and violins.  The five year old program very much resembles what the 17 year old program will be, just at a much lower level.  

The scouting program changes drastically from Lions & Tigers until Eagle scout.  Parent involvement changes.  Whole types of challenge changes.  Types of activities change.  It's just a much much different program.  Lions & Tigers is a baby sitting program.   Go see things.  No real skills development or focus at all.  Higher cub scout levels add knives and fire.  Boy scouts adds independence and separation.  Higher years adds high adventure.  

 

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. 

Not sure I follow what you mean.