Twocubdad

Bob I only know what I have observed within my pack and affilliated troops and that is we have a difficult time getting boys to be den chiefs.

I can tell you that for the system to work, you need both things to happen. And obviously, the most important element is the selection of qualified, motivated Scouts to take the job. I don't want a den chief who is there only because it was the only leadership position open or because his SM is making him do it.

I can tell you from working day camp that age and maturity are huge factors in whether or not a Boy Scout is an asset or liability to a den leader. Our day camp gets a lot of 11 and 12 year old Scouts as camp volunteers because either their younger brother or parents are atttending camp, or because they really enjoyed Cub camp and want to keep going. Most of these kids are a net drain on the camp staff. On the other hand, the 14 and 15 year old boys who help are a real blessing to the camp staff. They are old and mature enough to take responsibility for a job and get it done. Of course, as you know, it is suggested that den chiefs be at least two years out of Webelos for this reason.

Understood. That was the point of my last paragraph. But I'm talking about fairly limited situation where an intervention is warranted. If the CO and unit leadership is adamant that they are "fine" as the unit circles the bowl, there's not much that can be done. For someone to get involved with a unit like this, there needs to be the consent of the CO and the remaining leadership AND a clear exit strategy.

This is getting off topic, but if we're rethinking the role of the commissioner service, maybe we should think outside the current rules and constraints. It may not be "our unit" right now, but if I show up with an adult application and an offer to help, it can be my unit real quick. The boys whose unit is about to fold don't care if my other uniform has silver shoulder tabs.(This message has been edited by Twocubdad)

On the thread about recruitment, ASM514 posted a note about how his troop is trying to upgrade their den chiefd and better use them to recruit Webelos into their troop. Along the lines of Bob White's thread on the Commissioner Service, I'd like to start a sparate thread on Den Chiefs. ASM maybe you can expand you post here, to.

IMHO, a good den chief is the best recruitment tool a troop can have. It is extremely intimidating for an 11-year-old boy to show up for a troop meeting with a room full of 16- and 17-year olds. I can't think of any greater retention tool that for the new Scout to know one of those older guys and trust him.

Unfortunately, in our area at least, the system of assigning den chiefs seems to be broken. I have repeatedly asked for den chiefs for our pack and have never been assigned the first one. In my time with the pack, the only den chief we have ever had are the Scout-aged sons of our den leaders. To my knowledge, none of them have been trained.

Den chief is probably the toughest leadership position in Scouts. It requires attending a second night of meetings every week, and a separate, day-long training session. Not to mention dealing with Cubs can be difficult. On the other end, you're not doing things you enjoy, you're not with your friends, and because your service is away from you troop, you're not immediately recognized for the work you do.

Right now, being a den chief is like joining the army. You have to put your life on hold for a period of time, the pay is lousy and there is always someone yelling at you. The reward are long-term -- a sense of service and duty and the friends you make along the way. That's a tough sell for a 15-year-old. (Okay, that's a bad stereotype of army life, but I'm making a point.)

There has got to be a better system of rewarding and encouraging den chiefs. Frankly, I don't know what the answer is, but that's my view from the Cub side. I'm interested in hearing more about ASM's den chief patrol. Maybe some the other on the Scout side have some thoughts.

Good thread here, and not the interrupt things, but as a point of clarification, my post on the commissioners' thread was regarding Cub Scout recruitment, not Boy Scouts.

That, Acco, is what I think one of the failings of the Commissioner Service. What's wrong with a Commissioner becoming activly involved with a unit? A struggling unit can get advice out the wazoo. What they need are butts in chairs.

So let's say you have a small pack that's been carried along by the Cub Master who is now being transferred out of town. Because it's a small unit and small CO, they are having a hard time coming up with another CM. What's wrong with the Commissioner stepping in and running a few pack meetings and helping to recruit new volunteers?

What's the worse thing that can happen? Six months later we can say we honestly gave it our best shot, but there just isn't the support for a unit at that CO. Then, at least, the Commissioner/Cub Master has a relationship with the boys and their families and can help direct them to other units. Or perhaps the Commissioner decides that Cub Master is his true calling and decides to stay with the unit. We've lost a Commissioner, but gained a pack. Not a bad trade.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not suggesting that districts need to get into the business of providing leaders to failing units. This is a very limited situation where a unit commissioner steps in to work with one of his units with which he has a pre-existing relationship.

Bob, I've not spent as much time thinking about this as you have, but my observations locally match what you are saying. We've got a good DC, several good ADC, but I don't know that I can name a single UC. Three years ago, they recruited one of our den leaders to be our UC. He quit after a year because he thought it was a waste of time. Apparently he's still on the books as our UC, though.

My view of the commissioners is that they tend to drift, looking for something meaningful to do. We have several good ADC who keep coming up with interesting projects, but they seem like B or C priorities, not really focused on core programs or problems.

I'm with you on the mentoring program. I think we do a lousy job supporting new units -- especially the small struggling unit where you've got two leaders and 8 boys clawing and scratching to get the unit to critical mass. The district needs to assign one or more volunteers to these units to help them out. And I don't mean someone to come to meetings and explain what all their square knots are for. Units like this need people to get involved for six months or a year at the program level. Get dirty, go camping, build birdhouses.

Here's a good example. I was our district's Roundup chairman this year. One of my goals was to balance recruitment over the district and direct the boys from the large units to the smaller ones. It didn't happen. The big units have enough leaders to send recruiters to several schools on school night. The small units could hardly muster the volunteers to participate at all. A prime job of the mentors should be to represent these new packs at school night and help direct families to these smaller units.

I know our district has a tremendous turnover in units every year and spends a great deal of effort recruiting new ones. Anything that could be done to get the new units over the hump and stabilized would be a huge advancement.

P.S. Eagledad -- I'm looking forward to your thoughts on Webelos retention(This message has been edited by Twocubdad)

Boy: "May I have a cookie?"

Dad: "You may not."

Parent: "May I smoke?"

Leader: "You may not."

Where is the ambiguity? In which English-speaking country do they interpret the father/leader's response to mean "have one if you want to."

Our district exective has gone from District Executive, to Senior District Executive to District Director, all while keeping the same job. My understanding was that the difference was largely a seniority/pay grade issue.

But, sctmom, the problem there is not that they boys are working on a merit badge, per se, but that the entire troop is being shoe-horned into one activity. That's no different from the thread a week or two ago about a troop where the PLC decided to plan a cold-weather campout and excluded everyone below first class. All the other boys spent weeks with nothing to do. In my old troop, there were always multiple activities to choose from.

Bob wrote "There are two divergent philosophies at work," one emphasizing advancement and the other emphasizing character growth through a balance of all eight program methods.

But if those two philosophies form one end and the middle of a continuum, the other end of that line emphasizes boy-led leadership to the exclusion of other methods. I see that in some of the local troops. In those troops, I don't see the adult coaching and counseling you mentioned. I see younger boys being left behind, ignored or sometimes worse, by the older boy leaders. And I see very little advancement.

I absolutely agree with you that units should use all eight methods of Scouting, including adult association. But what I read on this board is that boy-led equals a great program, and advancement mill equals a broken troop. Like most things in life, I don't think it's that simple.

I appreciate the discussion here. It seems the quality of debate on the board has been bumped up significantly in the past few weeks. I'm not trying to pick a fight or start an argument. This is something I'm sincerely trying to learn and understand.

I'm not sure where Dan was headed with the Scoutmaster Generic message, but I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. A week or so ago, someone on the board made the comment that the "rant" key on the computer had been stuck. Seems to be a pretty common bug around here, so maybe that was Dan's problem.

But beyond that, Dan's last post, and the one three posts ago (actually I took a break for dinner, so I may be behind now) about striking a balance between advancement and other elements of the program sounded very reasonable to me. I don't understand why some seem to consider merit badge work at troop meetings to be the hallmark of a dysfunctional troop.

Admittedly, I since I work with cubs, I haven't had Boy Scout level training and my personal experience in Scouts is 30 years old. Back in the day, there wasn't the emphasis on boy-led troops. There was no such thing as a patrol leader council and there was no doubt that our scoutmaster was in charge. Leadership was an important lesson, but so was teamwork, service to others and all the other traits we expect from a good scout. In retrospect, I'd say that teamwork was probably the most sought-after trait, simply because our troop was comprised of a large number of Scouts roughly the same age. As a PL you were a peer among equals rather than being look up to as a leader. A subtle difference, but an important skill all the same.

Advancement was a big part our troop's program. Our SM's motto was "Work the Program," by which he meant, you have an advancement trail laid out before you, follow it. Troop meeting time was spent in patrols planning campouts or practicing skills for competitive camporees, and older scouts were expected to help younger ones learn basic skill. But there was always the opportunity to work on a rank requirement or merit badge you needed.

I know, I know. Things have changed in 30 years. The program has evolved and for the better. I'm not saying the way we did it was superior. I'm only saying, as I believe Dan is, that there is a balance between leadership development by way of boy-led units and everything else.

We all like to think we can make lemonade out of every lemon. That if we just give this guy a job, that he will see how much work being a volunteer really is and lighten up on everyone else. My experience is that people like this are rarely willing to put their money where their mouth is. Even if he takes responsibility for a job and does it well, chances are he's still going to be a hypercritical pain-in-the-you-know-where.

Leader, you didn't say what your position is, but I'll assume it's den leader. Personally, I don't think my den leaders should have to deal with these kinds of problems. I, as Committee Chairman, and the Cub Master (and possibly the Chartered Organization Rep) should handle it. (That's why we get the big bonus checks at the end of the year.)

At best, this guy is making your job difficult and undermining your position. At worse, he's running off a good den leader. Along with my Cub Master, I would take the dad aside and tell him that you are a good, well-trained leader and that you run a good den program. That it is our responsibility to supervise you and we are please with how you run your den. His criticism and negative attitudes are creating a problem. Unless it is a matter life or limb, we would appreciate that he keep his criticisms to himself. If he's not comfortable with that, he should possibly look for another situation.

At this point, who can or cannot attend committee meetings is moot. There is no committee other than the den leaders. Let's not get side tracked from the real problem.

Marty, I think you have a classic opportunity to show some leadership and turn this unit around. Don't look at the problems and lack of leadership, look at the opportunity you have. Whether or not you succeed, will depend on your attitude. You need to have a lot of enthusiasm for the program and the improvements and changes which need to be made.

First of all, you need to set goals for yourself and the pack. The number one goal should be to achieve Quality Unit status. That gives you a whole set of sub-goals for leader training, programs, etc. Another goal could be that 50% of the boys advance one rank during the year (I think that's low, but that's the goal for the training awards). Another goal may be to upgrade pack meetings to make them more fun for the boys and to emphasize advancements.

Present these goals at a pack planning conference. Set aside a Sunday afternoon and invite not only the den leaders (and your newly-recruited committee members) but as many parents as you can get. (Don't tell the parents this is really for "leaders" -- make them think they are supposed to be there too.) For each goal, break down all the parts and a talk about how you plan to meet the goal. Regarding the advancement goal, for example, discuss with the den leaders how they should be using the advancement requirements for ideas for den meetings. I see a lot of dens which do fun things, but the den leaders never make the translation into an achievement. Buy every den leader a advancement wall chart so they can track their boys advancement. Give them all instant recognition kits and make sure they know how to use them. You've been to the training -- you can come up with even more ideas than this.

You can also encourage advancement via the pack meetings. Make a big deal out of advancement with elaborate ceremonies heaping great praise and attention on the boys receiving the badges. Advancement becomes infectious. Once the boys see their buddies getting the recognition, they are going to work harder. A little friendly competition to be the first or to earn the most arrow points can be a good thing.

As far as pack meetings are concerned, as Cub Master, pack meetings are totally within you perview to run as you see fit. All the suggestions made here, and in the resources listed, are great. Go for it. You don't need to wait for anyone.

You asked about recruiting Webelos parents into leadership positions. All things being equal, I rather have a Tiger parent with little brothers that a Webelos parent getting ready to age out. But take what you can get. I've put Webelos II parents into jobs, but with the understanding that they won't bail out on me in Feb. at crossover. I do ask that they continue through the end of the school year, even with their son out of the pack.

You may or may not be able to change the thinking of all the current den leaders. They are volunteers -- you can push a string uphill only so far. But as new leaders come on board, set the expectation that they will get trained. I've found that most new den leaders greatest fear is not knowing what to do and are therefore very motivated to take training, if given the opportunity. It's the veterans who have "done it all and know it all" who resist training. Make sure all your leaders know when leader training is being offered. Send them copies of all the training fliers and e-mails from the council, include them in the newsletter and pack meeting announcements.

You may also talk to your district training chairman about conducting some of the training at a pack comittee meeting. They should be able to at least offer Fast Start and New Leader Essentials during a committee meeting.

One more thing -- instead of trying to get a COR, focus on a strong committee chairman. Since the PTA co-presidents are involved with the pack, they can serve as you laison with the PTA. Since they are your institutional heads, a COR would answer to them anyway. What you need is a strong partner to work with you as committee chairman. Right now, you are wearing all the hats. Your priority needs be getting someone to take half those hats from you.

Good luck.

(This message has been edited by Twocubdad)

"... don't be surprised if a chorus of liberals respond ..."

Rooster -- I got a laugh out of your reply. I have exactly the same fear, except that I worry about what conservatives will do to the freedoms of expression, privacy, religion, etc. Viva la difference.

Maybe the most important part of the constitution is Article V?

According to the Insignia Guide, that is correct, it goes on the right pocket as a temporary patch.

But before I looked it up, I would have bet good money that it went above the right pocket, in the same location as Jamboree patches. I know I didn't make that up, but can't find any of my old insignia stuff right now. Does anyone know if that's a recent change.

Thanks for that info, Bob. It's good to know that the accident insurance is idiot proof. In training we're always told that you must follow all procedures to maintain coverage. The distinction between the two types of insurance isn't noted, however.

This may be a little off topic (so what else is new?) but one question I've never had adequately answered is what is BSA's attitude in deciding which leaders to defend and which they leave hanging? Do they look for reasons to defend you or do they look for reasons to stay out of court?

That's interesting, Bob. Last summer when we went to a council-sponsored Webelos camp, we were required to produce a tour permit at check-in.

OneHour -- are you in my Pack? We did the identical thing this weekend. Same track, same times, everything.

We've got a new Besttrack, too. Very fast -- even kinda scary the first time cars shoot down it. We run our races by rank, with each heat consisting of four runs with the cars rotating across all four lanes for fairness and to give each car more track time. Even if you are eliminated in the first round, your car gets to run four times. The top two cars advance and the bottom two retire. In years past, we tried to run a true double-elimination bracket, but it's very difficult to manage with the number of cars we have.

Even with the aluminum track, there is still lot of variation between lanes. After one four-run heat, two cars were tied. Since our timer records the time of the first-place car, we ran the two cars down the same lane for a timed, solo run. The winner won by one-hundredth of a second. To paraphrase Richard Prior, you can't see one-hundredth of a second. I don't know how you can run a race without an electronic finish line.

Generally, we were very pleased with the Besttrack. One dad complained about the severe curve at the bottom of the hill, but I don't know that it matters. We did have a lot of problems putting it together. Four of us spent all day Saturday assembling the track for the first time. The alignment pins seemed WAY to tight. Next year we will probably try to loosen the slots that receive the pins.

I forget the brand name of the electronic finish line, but it worked great. A couple of the dads thought it would be nice if it timed all four cars, not just the fastest. They want to use total time from the first heat to advance and seed the cars for the second round. That would eliminate the possibility of a fast car being eliminated early due to the luck of random pairings. But that's a little more technical that I think we need to get. More of a dad thing than a boy thing.

Oh by the way. Both my son's cars were eliminated in the first round of racing. However, both cars brought home trophies in the design competition, as voted on by the other Cubs. Generally, our whole family is more built for looks than speed.

Ditto. You think there are issues between 11- and 17-year-old Boy Scouts? Consider some of the issues for a Pack outing including a 5-year-old kindergardener and an 10-year-old Webelos II.

In the past few months, somewhere on the web I saw a site where someone had knock-off knots on Venture green and Sea Scout white backgrounds. I have no clue where I found them, but if you search you can probably find them.

I know, I know, they're not official, but if you found original BSA knots on eBay, you could wear them. I doubt anyone could tell the difference.

Right on the money, Scoutldr. While I'm sure Bob White is right (he usually is) about the contents of the R&R; in the general scheme of things, it's not unreasonable for a member of any organization to have the bylaws given to him or her when they join. That imascouter went through all the grief that he did only adds to the perception that, at worse, BSA has something to hide, or, at best, that they are incompetent.

Imascouter is apparently having a problem with the ownership of unit property and needs something in writing to clear that up. His DE ought to be jumping over his desk to help him get the info he needs.

BSA is bad about asking people to agree with policies and procedures "as outlined in publication #123whatever." While some people will say "sure, whatever," others (myself included) want to read the referenced publication. When that publication isn't readily available, my ears perk up.

How difficult would it be for every service center to have a reference library in the lobby with a current copy of every BSA publication? Clip them into binders like they use in auto parts stores, so they won't walk off.If nothing else, that would be a resource for people to make sure they have the latest revision of frequently changed documents, like G2SS.

I stand corrected.

So your point is that the right hand would need to know what the left hand is doing? Well now that you put it that way, I see where National may have a problem......

While I've not done a point-by-point comparison of the new and old S&A requirement, I believe they added some new subjects, but that the requirements for the existing subjects remained the same.

You know, when the sports beltloop and pin are required as part of the Webelos activity pin, you wouldn't think it would kill them to include those requirements in the Webelos book, too.

I use the regular advancment report spread sheet to keep a running total of what the boys earn. I do this on the computer, but you could do the same thing on paper. Coloring the boxes with a marker, instead of just checking them off, makes it easier to see at a glance where the most unworked territory is.

For the whiners in the Pack, I'd tell them they can either sit quietly in a corner while everyone else participates in the activities, or they can jump in, have a good time with the other boys and not worry about earning the belt loop. Remind them, however, that the Webelos are required to earn some belt loops AS WEBELOS as requirements for some of the activity pins. So repeating the requirements is not necessarily a bad thing.

I believe I'm correct that the requirements for all S&A pins all begin, "Earn the beltloop then....." so yes, earning the beltloop is part of the requirements for earning th pin. That said, if you've earned the pin, the beltloop should be a short putt.

I really didn't follow all the objections raised by the advancement chairman in your original post. But if she is saying that you have to have previously received the beltloop, then the S&A pin, before earning the WAP, I don't think that is correct. I don't know that I've seen this specific squence addressed, but in other parts of Cub Scouting it is fairly well established that you can work on and earn badges concurrently -- Wolf/Bear badges and arrow points, for example. Your can't an arrow point prior to the rank, but you may do the work and receive the aroow points concurrently. Many of our boys will receive an arrow point or two at the same time the receive their rank badge.