blw2

I remember faces a long time out but I'm horrible with names. I've tried all the tricks, just have a hard time with it.

Wow, this has really morphed into an interesting discussion of new scout retention. I originally had in mind just a random discussion about various studies that have been made either scientifically or intuitively, not only around retention but with other aspects too.... I suppose it mostly boils down to retention in a way though. No matter, this retention stuff is very on topic for me and my son's den. Just based on my intuition, I think the points of an active troop (or maybe better an active patrol), engaged parents, and 1st year summer camp all really make sense. I really saw the role active parents play in cubs. A high percentage of drops seemed to be those scouts whose parents didn't pay attention. If the parents didn't take their son to the camps or other trips and activities, the scout was much less interested. It's one reason I hope to find an ASM position with the troop.... but I certainly don't want to make it more adult heavy either. I certainly am not a helicopter parent and fully want to give my son complete separation, but I also realize that if I'm involved generally, if I'm going to summer camp anyway, he'll be very much more likely to go too. it sure seems like his friends play a similar role. I can fully imagine that my son will be much less interested if he's assigned to a patrol that doesn't have his best friend and den mate in it as well. the comments about the New Scout Patrol with assigned ASM really do scream Cub Scouts (as someone wrote earlier) or 3rd year WEBELOS.... but I can also see the logic behind it. It does seem like a real tight rope walk though, balancing between enough and not enough... and the need to slowly retreat from it.... I still wonder though, for example the summer camp attendance vs retention idea. Is it the scout or is it the act of actually attending camp? for example, an interesting twist to look at might be looking at scouts that really aren't into scouting but that are forced to go to summer camp, vs scouts that are into scouting but for some reason aren't able to go that 1st year.... or another "study" comes to mind in the idea of an active troop is what grabs them.... are patrol level troops more successful in this compared with troop level troops? (where troop level troops have patrols but they get shuffled and reassigned often, ad hoc patrols are formed for every activity because one patrol or another is down to a small number, etc..) or put another way, do you have troop meetings VS Patrol meetings

interesting Stosh. i think yours is the first response pro paperback "perfect bound" I can imagine that the spiral offers the advantage of lay-flat and stay open, so easier to use hands free, but otherwise your logic makes more sense to me. Regardless, I asked my son which he wanted.... "I don't care". I ordered the spiral based mostly on the majority of responses here. I hope the cover they sell for the old edition fits this new one.

Interesting post Barry. lots of stuff there to digest. I'll have to followup later to read the responses after.... I'm in a bit of a hurry My initial comment is this, regarding the 1st class in the first year thing.... Could it be that the scouts most likely to stay with the program just happened to be the ones most likely to work on and earn 1st class quickly? kinda the chicken or the egg question.... The BSA study suggests that it's getting the rank is what held onto the boys.... just seems like it's at least just as likely the other way around.

a follow-up question to that @@Krampus would you say that you are a troop level unit or a patrol level unit? ....meaning does more stuff happen on a patrol level or on the troop level? .... do your scouts form ad hoc patrols for campouts, or do they always stick with the patrols they are in? .... or put another way, who is the most "important" leader in the troop.... the SPL or the PL? I don't mean these question judgmentally, I'm honestly curious. I'm unsure, but I suspect that these may play a role in the patrol structure you outlined above.

As I'm sure most or all of you know.... as a catholic chartered unit, we go through a fingerprinting and background check as well as a separate training course. I have no idea what they are using, but all indications are taht the background check is more extensive than what the bsa does. One thing for sure is that the training is more intensive. On top of that, I have some licenses and access permits that require their own background checks. All of this duplication of effort strikes me as very inefficient. Oh well, I guess it keeps those background checkers employed.....

This parallels what my gut has been telling me whenever these discussions roll around to shuffling patrols, forced mixes to have age spread (or whatever), etc... It just makes sense.... boys just want to hang with their circle of friends. Some boys are social and can mingle out more and have a bigger circle, while others aren't and have a small core group of friends. @@qwazse, you're right. That is interesting. To me, it just makes sense, so I can believe that it's generally true

I found a couple comments in another thread very interesting. I thought it could make for an interesting discussion.... I'll bet there could be lots of different ideas and twists. These are regarding retention of new scouts, which happen to be maybe the most interesting thing for me right now as our den is "crossing over" in about 2-1/2 weeks. Any more empirical observations out there? statistics can be made up, or I'll be there have been quite a few more scientific analyses done that some of you might reference....

Just based on my one experience, I might argue that it's not good to keep a burned out scouter's foot in the door. The negative attitudes and such can be a problem.... I'd say it might be better to let them get some good distance from scouts for a while before trying to bring them back. None, Mr Smarty Pants..... I can imagine though that it would be tough on several levels..... the necessary hoop jumping, while really not a big deal, is certainly one of them. I'd bet that the bigger issue is the unknown about what is expected of them.... how much time is it going to take? How well behaved are these kids I'll be working with? What level of effort is this going to require?, What personal or professional risk am I taking in doing this?, etc... ....But the OP wasn't talking about recruiting "from the outside".... they were talking about experienced scouters.

So it seems the majority recommends spiral so far.... My son bought one of those book covers at the scout shop for his cub book early on....(well he wanted it and I bought it) He's continued to use it. For cubs, protection didn't matter as much since they get a new book every year, but it made his book easy to spot since he was the only one with the cover. Also liked it because he could store a pen or pencil in it (even though it didn't have a loop or pen pocket???? what are you thinking BSA?)

This excuse of too much paperwork reminds me of a few folks in my unit.... the folks I came to call the "old guard". they were leaders that went through the pack with their older sons, now leaders in a troop, and still somewhat involved in the pack as their younger sons come through. Burnt out and wanting to get away from the pack.... but for whatever reason can't seem to let it go and stay just enough involved to cause problems. Anyway, they sound just like your folks at least in that they have no patience for playing by the rules. Almost anything to do with procedure, requirements, district, or council is met with a scoff and is blown off and short cutted around. I think it sets a really bad example for the scouts, even though most of it isn't front and center to the boys, the attitude shows through and these guys hear things. Oh how the pack could have been so much better.... Regardless, it really seems like a very shallow excuse to me. None of what is required to be a MBC is difficult or even all that much time consuming. An honest answer! thank you!! I think a lot of scouters are afraid to admit this..... and there is nothing at all wrong with it! Working with my son is the trigger for me to volunteer, but in working with others I'm setting all sorts of good examples for my son AND the other scouts, It helps the other boys, and is fulfilling in many ways

Perfect Bound OR Spiral Bound? and why? Guess I'll be taking my son soon to get his new handbook (or I might just order it and save a two hour road trip across town) I know this has been discussed here before, and I found a couple threads in searching but they were old and so I thought I'd bring it up here at the campfire.... now that the new book is due out. I plan on letting him choose, but I'd like some opinions so that I can offer up some decent advice. Personally, the perfect bound seems better to me, as a book to keep. It sits on the shelf & I can see keeping it as a keepsake long after scouting. while the spiral bound seems like a disposable workbook to me. I honestly wish they'd offer a durable hardbound book on quality water resistant paper and a good sturdy cover, but that's just me.... and that's off track. It seems like the spiral would be perhaps better for opening to lay flat on a table or on the ground while he's working on a skill or task BUT I have little confidence that it will hold up AND The perfect bound I have no doubt is neither perfect or bound sufficiently. I'll bet on pages falling out soon after the spine is broken while trying to keep it open..... BUT at least it would make a better place to keep signatures organized sitting on the shelf... Incidentally, my scout shop tells me that they are due in around Jan 22

Did you try troopwebhost? I'm guessing not It seems that all of my neighborhood troops are using that one. I can't say I'm a fan of it, but I wondered how you thought it compared to those others you did try.

If I had it to do over again, knowing what I know now, I would do my best to run the pack a lot more like boy led patrols... and not just WEBELOS. No reason in my opinion to wait until WEBELOS. That may be when you kick it into a higher gear (but I'm thinking no matter you wouldn't want to go into overdrive gear for WEBELOS either...Just like we could do the boys a better service by translating the methods of scouting down to the pack level, I think the boys would be best served by not getting the WEBELOS scouts up to totally qualified for scout or tenderfoot rank.... I think that would tend to make it too boring when they first join a troop.) Anyway, i think the boys would enjoy it more if they were better put into control of their activities and meetings, and if their dens were a bit more like patrols... and the side benefit is not getting the parents derailed with misconceptions of what scouting is (and not burning out the leaders quite so much too)

I would say they are just misguided. I understand and even share the desire to do Father and Son stuff. There are lots of good reasons to want to do this, and for some Cub Scouts was a good opportunity to do it. (I'm starting to think that this is a departure from what is best for the Cub Scouts, but that's another thread) The thing is, this goal of father/son stuff doesn't fit in at all with the aims and methods of Boy Scouts. Seems to me that almost any parent can pretty easily understand and appreciate the aims and methods of scouting if the concept is properly presented to them and they keep just a bit of open mind. I don't think we have a system in place to properly present this.... and I would even guess that a lot, maybe a majority, of scouters don't even fully know themselves. I'd go on to guess that this desire for father-son activity (or mother-son) is a major reason for the adult heavy imbalance that the BSA is suffering under. I'm even hesitant to judge the selfishness of wanting to do it only with their son's. I'd guess that a lot, maybe a majority, of us scouters are volunteering because we have sons in the program. We wouldn't be doing this if our sons weren't in the program now or in the past. In this way I'd say that many of us are really doing it "for our sons", BUT we are able to realize something that the parents you're referencing don't... and that is that helping the other boys, helping the unit, etc... is really helping our sons to have a better program than they could have if they were just solo scouts.

well said tahawk! I especially like the little league coach/pitcher analogy.... and your last sentence nails something I came around to realize lately.... I got it from something I read in BPs book... I figured out that almost no troop is going to be perfect, BUT as long as the scouter "does no harm", any boy will get something good out of scouting....at least its something.... might not be all that it could potentially be, but something good.

This brings my mind to an interesting point... The statement you referenced mentions the scoutmaster.... 1 person but your statement changes that to multiple people. And something I'm noticing is just how many problems this increase in adults into the program is really causing. The book "So Far So Good" I think points to how it was and arguably should be. & its interesting that you point out that the BSA and authorities have made it that way. The BSA for sure, and authorities too, but based on my 2nd grade daughter's experiences so far with GSUSA I would say that they are doing just a wee little bit more right. Perhaps it's not so much by the 'authorities'.(?) Their 1st year Brownies have far fewer adults involved than our troop does!

if it's like our Pacific NorthWest then, at least you can get out in it. A fond memory I have was exploring the streets of Vancouver BC during a saturday layover break on a business trip. It was raining a bit, but what I would call a light rain, almost a drizzle by florida standards, during the hardest showers but mostly it was just a heavy drizzle at best. Folks were out doing their thing. Some were sitting right out in it sipping coffee at sidewalk cafe's with nothing more than the hood of their rain jackets, folks were jogging in the park, rollerblading, and just generally out and about enjoying the day. It was very enjoyable. Here in Florida, we might be know as the sunshine state, but when it rains it rains hard. You can't even run to the car without being soaked to the bone. Not at all enjoyable.

What you wrote about the LDS speculation makes sense given the little I know about that program. At the cub level at least they seem to be very much age segregated. well, this has been an interesting thread for me. This i think is the first I've heard of Leadership Corps so I'm not familiar with that. Just guessing based on the name, Some of that might fit into my thought process relating to an older patrol taht helps the younger ones. Regardless, I'm finding more and more value in looking at the structure and concepts from the early days of scouting. Of course much of it is left to intuitive assumption, but from what I can tell a lot of it did fit very well into a very simple and logical model of what typical boys like, and what they need. Like almost anything, it gets more and more complex over time all in the name of "making it better", all the while what really happens is that the principle of entropy is doing it's thing.....

Eagledad, and everyone, I was thinking about something you wrote. You said something about same age patrols and the troop guide position being created at the same time as a fix of some sort. I'm curious, when did these come about, and for what reason?

Hey, I found a spelling error in one of my posts but since the last crash I no longer see any way at all that i can edit it. Also noticed that the mention button is gone. What's up with that?

Thanks @@Eagledad. I appreciate your well thought response...but I think you are still missing part of the gist of what I'm getting at.... in that it seems you are equating my thoughts to support of a new scout patrol. I'm not trying to encourage that at all. You asked "What makes you think that an 11 year old and 17 year old can't be friends." I don't think that at all. I'm just saying that it's not as likely. A good scout, being a boy of Good Character, will almost certainly be friendly with ALL scouts regardless of age or interest. Even down to the Tiger Cubs.... but they aren't going to be best buds with them either. But hey, if a 17 year old life scout is best buds with a 10 year old WEBELOS cross over.... great, they should work to be in the same patrol! Actually, I am coming to form the opinion that any forcing of patrols is not good. I agree with you that forcing a new scout patrol isn't good, just as I am thinking that it's not good to force a mixed age group. I'm also thinking that it's probably not the best idea to force reforming of patrols based on some date on the calendar either. I'm thinking that many times we as scouters might perhaps be encouraged by the fact that when we ask the scouts, they might propose mixed age as a solution to a failing attempt at NSP, for example, as if it's their idea. That very well may be the better option. But it seems also possible that in some of these cases they are limited by what has been modeled for them. If that's the only way they have seen it done, they might not consider other twists. As scouters, our job is to focus on the individual. To draw out each boy as an individual to find the good in him and then to help draw that good while excluding the bad. As you said, "boy growth". What I'll call building character. and taht has nothing to do with how the patrols are formed by my estimation. It seems to me that even if we were to take it all the way to the extreme of patrols by age, that they could all still grow as scouts, with the older scouts helping the younger ones, etc... I can certainly believe that a NSP if left alone, would almost certainly flounder while the older patrols wouldn't benefit from the personal growth gained in mentoring. What I'm getting at is totally a focus on letting the boys lead fully. Trying to keep in mind that they won't continue in scouts if they aren't having fun, one of our first jobs is to ensure that they are allowed to have fun. I'm saying that most boys will have the most fun with their friends, and acknowledging that you are correct that friends are usually made over shared interest before age.... BUT most of the time it does follow age splits to at least some degree. Middle schoolers are much more likely to hang with middle schoolers and high schoolers with other high schoolers. I'm pretty sure that's not a myth. My son as a case in point - he's in 5th grade, his closest friends are three 5th graders, two 6th graders, and one 4th grader... but the 4th grader is exactly the same age with 1 or 2 weeks. He and all of his friends play very well with the younger brothers and sisters that range from toddler to 2nd grade. they play for hours together and have many similar interests but they will never really be close and prefered friends until nearly adulthood when fairly significant age differences tend to blend out of the equation. Hey, and look at that. His little gang works out to fit exactly within the magic 6-8 count of boys! Since everything is happening at the patrol level, and patrols are sticking together at camp, I just can't imagine a scenario where a boy would prefer to camp the entire weekend when his closest friends are way over there 300 yards away in those other patrols camp. You're absolutely right that boys can make new friends very quickly and easily, but that doesn't always happen either. My biggest point though is that I am not suggesting that the boys should, or that they would even want to remove that personal growth opportunity of interacting with others and the boost that older scouts give to younger scouts..... just saying that they don't really need to force themselves out of the patrol groups where they are most likely to have fun. I'm trying to focus on what it takes for them to stick with scouting.

One thing about GSUSA that I personally don't like as a dad, but I have to admit it's a good thing. They, well at least in my daughter's troop, don't involve parents much in meetings and outings. To the point that I don't feel welcomed and parents are specifically excluded from most camps. My daughter was a daisey and now in the 2nd grade is a brownie. They don't camp much and when they do it seems to be more of cabin sleepovers, but what they do breeds independance a bit I guess. I used to think it was because I'm dad and not mom, reverse sexism and all.... but I'm not so sure. For her camp coming up it's specifically stated parents are not welcome.... she's the same age as our WOLF Cubs! Can you imagine us getting away with that? they do have some family events, but most seem to be girls and leaders only, more or less. I was going to sit in on part of a meeting once when i dropped her off at the church. I sort of hung in the back of the room with my younger daughter to observe a few minutes. They were doing some sort of gathering activity craft thing.... the leaders looked like I had three eyes, and they nice told me what time I could pick her up! I see it as good because it helps the girls have independance, although I think it starts a bit too young.. & it's also good because it keeps out the adult drama that is plaguing the BSA! Another good point about their structure, that I didn't quite understand until recently, is they really are using the patrol method better, I think, than many BSA troops. For the girls, it seems that every troop is really a stand-alone patrol. They seem to be small groups that stick together through the program. Downsides include the topic brought up by the OP and lack of consistency between one troop and the next, with what seems like no coherency in the program.

I like the idea in other countries where the badges are worn on the shirt. That way they are always displayed.

Hey, thats for sharing that! Eyebrow raising idea for sure, but a good experience for sure. I like that you could see down into the orchestra pit from those cheap seats. Another angle of interests for any musicians in the group.