ParkMan

Thanks for all the responses here. I was off on a business trip and away for a few days. Back to Scouting! Perhaps a few follow-up thoughts, questions, or points of confusion on my part. I may have mis-used the phrase "manage". I work in a business world, so that's a phrase that comes to mind. But, I do guess the better term might be lead. I'm assuming someone needs to provide leadership and direction to those folks. I suppose with clear roles and responsibilities - then perhaps the SM doesn't need to provide much leadership and direction. But, that's not us. What I see in my t

Hi all, I'm the CC of a troop of about 70 boys. I've been struggling to wrap my head around a problem we've got. Our Scoutmaster has been in his role about 25 years. He's a friendly guy and always willing to go camping. He's generally not terribly interested in developing his ASMs. If a really active ASM shows up and starts filling a role, the SM seems content to let him/her have at it. But, for the majority of ASMs who signed up, but are waiting for something to do - he doesn't seem terribly interested in cultivating that. Most show up for a while, but then stop bothering to c

Agreed. I disagree with coed scouting, but if it comes to pass, I will give it a try. As much as I like Scouting as it issue, it's far from perfect. I've stuck with it so far because of the bigger picture benefits. I don't see those going away because the boys would have to interact with girls.

I'm not suggesting that they'll rush it. I'm suggesting that they'll look at it as a strategic decision based around perceived future health of the movement. As the BSA isn't a for profit organization they're not really looking at profit. They're looking at cash flow. i.e, does the organization bring in enough money every year to enable it to stay solvant, pay the staff, accomplish the tasks it wants to do, . In that, the amount of cash flow becomes important - but only to an extent. I expect that at it's most senior levels, they're looking at 3-5 projections on membership. I am cert

Sort of. It was said in jest - but there is some truth there. Admitting girls to the BSA and making the program coed would be a huge deal. For the BSA to delay a decision of that magnitude because they didn't have the right bathroom facilities would be surprising. If they do this, I expect that the national organization will announce a timeline. i.e. - The BSA will become co-ed on Sept. 1, 2018 - Councils will be expected to have sufficient temporary facilities to support this that that time - Councils will be expected to update their permanent facilities by Jan 1, 2021. Some

Ultimately, if the BSA decides to embrace a full co-ed program, I presume that bathroom facilities at camps will not stop them. That's easily solved with a little money. After all - so many girls will want to join that the new revenue will easily outpace any expenditures for new bath facilities.

That's the big question. In the larger society, is this a discussion about girls having the same opportunities as boys, about really having co-ed scouting, or about ending a boys only activity. This article seems to suggest the first option - this is about providing girls the same opportunities as boys. if so - then it's easily solved. I'd support that myself. For those folks who are really interested in co-ed scouting. Well, I think that's a reasonably conversation. However, at the end of the day I just don't think the benefits outweigh the costs. For those folks who are inte

Any luck in sharing this? You've got me curious

This really doesn't seem that hard if you charter only single sex units (i.e. all boy or all girl packs & troops). Summer camp - in the short term, reserve one or more weeks over the summer for all girl weeks. Longer term, if there is interest expand camps or build new facilities. Camporees - Hold separate camporees - one for boys, one for girls. Doing what's best for boys - this doesn't impact that. Its still parents of boys running boy scout troops. How does this impact that? Separate but equal - During the civil rights movement, accommodations were not equal becau

I imagine they'd rather compete with all girl packs & troops than co-ed scouting.

Hi Jason, I'd recommend that you volunteer to lead a summer camp contingent to the other camp. Then, get the word out and get a good list of scouts to attend. Once you've got that, you'll find another adult to attend with you - I'm pretty certain of that. Good luck! EDIT: Sorry folks - I saw the last append was a few days ago and didn't realize this was an old thread.

I still think that the BSA could easily get ahead of this by just offering to charter girls only packs & troops. If girls want into the program, let them into the program. This is easy to solve. All the BSA is really doing is providing the framework for the program - it's up to local units to implement it.

I've seen a few unrestricted races happening. I've not seen it done as a fundraiser. Mostly just something tacked on to the normal derby & just for fun.

That's what I've found too. You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make them drink. Wood Badge is great - but even in the best courses the staff are not miracle workers. I know plenty of "my way or the highway" scouters for whom Wood Badge is a waste of time. I'd like to think you could get them excited about the materials, but it's just not their thing. I'm also a realist enough to know that the Wood Badge content isn't perfect.

hHi ladybug_scout, I wanted to add. In your situation where you've got: Cubmaster, Committee Chair, Treasurer, & Den Leaders Myself, I'd look at splitting up the tasks somewhere along the lines of: Cubmaster - plans pack level activities - pack meetings, campouts, and other pack level activities Den leaders - plan den meetings and other den level activities. Provide manpower for pack activities Treasurer - manage finances and registration of the scouts Committee Chair - recharter, membership, and volunteer recruitment. I'd find yourself an advancement chair ASAP.

Welcome to the forum ladybug_scout! If you have not, I'd suggest looking over the Cubmaster & Committe Chair position descriptions on the BSA website. Google "Pack Committee" and "Cubmaster". As I see it, the CC is the leader of the team of adults who together run the pack. The individual adults who volunteer in the pack are part of the CC's team. The Cubmaster is part of that team. Ultimately the Committee Chair is responsible for making sure that all the functions of the pack are covered, getting done, and getting done well. It's not the job of the CC to do all the tasks

A while back, I heard a course director say about Wood Badge: "is it for everyone, no. But, if you approach it with an open mind and a desire to get something from the course, many find it to be a great experience."

The problem isn't boy led though - it's getting a consistent definition of what it is and how to implement it. I often run into people who think boy led means - give the scouts something to do, a little guidance, and then let them have at it. If it works out - great, if not at least they learned something. It's like EDGE is really "E" and then hope for the best. To me boy led without the "demonstrate, guide, and enable" is what causes folks like the TC to want to give up on it.

Much of that I agree with - troops don't know how to implement the program. Is not that adults want to do it all. It's that troops donto know how to do boy led. There's a skill to running a troop that is not taught anywhere.

I read this as "if the BSA wants to make Scouting co-ed, it could." I think that's the reality anyways. Perhaps a lawyer or two might have to get involved, but if the BSA decided to go co-ed, it clearly could make it happen.

I look at this a bit differently. I think Boy Scout leaders are way too overworked today. We keep adding more things for them to do, piling on even more training isn't going to make things better. Trying to get some ASM to prove he knows camping skills isn't going to create scouts more in the classic model. If you want troops to create more "classic scouts", you need to really organize troops in that model. We think "train a Scoutmaster and get him going" is the answer - it isn't. I know so many long time Scoutmasters who ignore large portions of the program because "they know be

Thanks so much for the very detailed answer! I've been involved in the troop for about four years now, but was not aware of much of what you wrote. I've been on a three year saga to encourage the troop to leverage patrols. Our troop has been pretending to use patrols, but really has not. This helps me to understand that we're probably more typical than I realized.

There's STEM scouts and there's having a STEM program in the troop. I knowould of our economy STEM Scouts group in the district. A,few packs and troops have some kind of STEM program. In our troop on 70, we have hlaf a dozen scouts pursuing the STEM awards.

How do you think the BSA has been neglecting youth leadership? I'm curious

I agree to letting the scout manage this as much as possible. Learning to follow up on things like this is a good life skill. That said - I'm a believer that sometimes we all need a little helping hand. So, what we do: - our advancement coordinator records the partials in Troopmaster. It's really not that much work. He gets an email listing the partials and then takes 10 minutes to update them. If he stays current, it's not a big deal. - the scouts are provided paper copies of their advancement records - including partials - once a year or so. - a couple of times a year we sche