DuctTape

While it may be fun to pick on PC, or even be a badge of honor to refer to oneself as "not PC", I think the fundamental concept behind it is sound. If calling someone something is offensive to them, why would we continue to refer to them in such a way as to be hurtful? I thought a scout was supposed to be Kind.

Based on the list of activities, it doesn't sound like the Band, Scouts and Church are all that much. I would sit down with the student and look at his monthly, weekly and especially daily calendar. In my experience, the most time is wasted in the afternoons and evenings during the week and not on the weekend activities. When looking at the calendar, also begin discussing "how much time do you think you should spend on xxx, per day/week/month". A week has 168 hours in it. It is about setting priorities, but is also about organizing. Since he is so negative about school, I would be good money he only does school work with you, and barely enough while in school to not get in trouble. A week has

I dont agree with part of the original premise, that patrols get hurt when only half show up for a campout. I think the majority of hurt is caused bymerging patrols for said campout. I have no objection to a patrol of two boys on a camping trip. The fun they have encourages their patrol mates to really want to attend the next one. I think a better solution is to prmote more patrol events instead of troop events. This allows more flexibility in scheduling at the patrol level. "What weekend is everyone free next month"? Then plan the patrol activity around the patrol members availability. I dont see the issue as overscheduled kids as much as I see it as lack of authority allowed to the patrols. Instead of the patrols dictating their schedule and activities it isdone at the troop level.

No reason why the boys can't plan the entire camporee and included in that planning is finding adults to perform certain tasks.

Sometimes it is not being aware, sometimes it is the events/activities are not desired by the units/boys. In our area, between the district and council there are too many activities/events planned at the levels above the troop. Looking at our calendar, every weekend is filled with some event. A troop which uses the patrol method will have many events and activities being planned at the patrol level and some at the troop level. Every so often they may choose to attend a district camporee or something. It isn't being unaware, it is the units operating as individual patrols and troops and choosing with their feet to not attend the district events. I don't think the goal should be "how do we increase participation in district event xxx?", instead it should be "What event(s) do the individial units desire the most?". Then focus on those.

Sure it would. But I dont see it as incorporating "bushcraft" into scouting, I see it more as focusing on the outdoors aspect of scouting which should have the scoutcraft and woodcraft at the forefront instead of the "one and done prepare a fire" requirement to be checked off. If Scouts used their first class skills all the time, on most every outing then the same thing is accomplished. Instead those skills are a checklist to complete, instead of a set of skills which define a First Class scout and what he does.

I can find hundreds of these zones right here in America' date=' from Ave Maria, FL to the local gated homeowners association.[/quote']

 

 

Really? These zones are exempt from state, federal and local laws and instead operate under some other religious law overseen by the local religious leader? State, local, and federal law enforcement have no legal authority there?

Stosh, hence the adjective invidious to specify a certain specific type of discrimination; which isn't defined as lawful or unlawful.

Invidious discrimination is bigotry if it exists in ones heart regardless of actions.

Invidious does not equate to unlawful. Invidious discrimination may be either lawful or unlawful.

jamist... You need to do do what you must. After your update, it doesn't even sound like Boy Scouts. Sure the Council will accept the $ and the charter, but what you describe sounds more like a couple of adults trying to run a boys camping club which parents view similarly to little league.. It is a shame National, councils, and districts allow this to happen to troops. I support your decision.

Now some advice. Scouting at its core is the Patrol, not the troop. With no support from the troop or other parents, start with your son. Get him a copy of the Patrol Leaders handbook (current and an older one), and together learn how a patrol is supposed to operate. If he isn't a patrol leader encourage him to work with his patrol leader to develop patrol activities and follow the structure of Scouting using the Patrol Method. Start at the core of scouting to help your son, his patrol and maybe the troop.

SMMatthew, I cannot speak for others, but my comments about mbc being too young is in reference to scouts, not 20-somethings. Bsa has turned a blind eye to their own advancement requirements and allow non-adults to function in the capacity as mbc in violation of bsa policy. I agree with you about camp staff and younger (adult) camp staff. However, staff and mbcs need not be the same. As has been pointed out in numerous threads, many mb's "earned" at summer camp are a joke. This is a result of trying to equate camp staff for what you describe (and I generally agree) with mb counselors. This isnt just a camp issue, it has permeated bsa councils and districts with the mb universities, etc... Some might be ok, a rare few might actually be quite goid. But by and large they are advancement mills designed and implemented to rush boys through advancement completely ignoring the real purpose and benefit of MBs.

Yes, our pack and troop meets in the building as well. Schools here allow all community groups the same access.

Those participants didnt want fair, they wanted equal. Equal isnt always fair, and fair isnt always equal. Everyone receiving the same might be equal, but everyone receiving what they need is fair.

Here is a thought experiment.

Scout at EBOR is asked what point of the Scout Law is the most difficult for him to follow. Scout answers, Helpful. When asked to elaborate he responds that A Scout is helpful in the law and in the oath I am on my honor to do my best... to help others at all times. There are some people which I do not like and I do not even try to help them at all, let alone at all times.

Should the Board of Review consider not "passing" the Scout due to non-adherence to this portion of the Law and the Oath? Why/why not?

A similar situation could be created for any of the Laws or promises in the Oath. Do we deny advancement for scout who does not keep himself physically fit and makes no effort to do so, even to the point of being weak and unhealthy?

 

And here is the rub! Why troop method, boy led? Why is it always all or nothing? Why not let the older boys be boy-led, patrol-method and see where it goes? Everyone is in such a hurry to get the PLC/SPL model going when in most troops that process isn't even required or even needed. I would rather have 1 boy-led patrol, then 2, then 3, then 4, then 5 then 6, then when those patrols are all running just fine as boy-led, introduce the PLC concept. Hey, no big deal, they probably have already been doing a lot of it behind the scenes anyway.

 

The article in Scouting Magazine is nothing more than another attempt to instill in top-down management into the troops rather than the servant leadership needed for the patrol method.

 

Sorry, half-full/half-empty glass is irrelevant, what we have here is a half-hearted attempt to promote management at the expense of leadership. I don't buy it and I would think that any troops that attempt it are destined for a lot of hassles that will quickly build to the point where adult-led will need to be brought back to save the troop. The troops need leadership skills, not management skills.

 

My highest ranking scout has not gotten his TF badge yet, but he still arrives with an agenda, game, flag ceremony, and training options for advancement every week. Why? If you ask him, he'll say it's what's necessary to take care of the patrol members. He's a terrible manager, but his leadership skills make up for it in spades.

 

Stosh

You captured better what I was trying to say. Focus on the patrols.

 

There are plenty of Things they can be doing besides teaching Merit Badges...like Running the Shooting Sports, Serving as Life Guards, and plenty more

Interesting how in the other thread about MB counselors at camp, one of the most common "reasons" given for not utilizing Adult Scouters more is all the extra duties of camp staff. Perhaps it is time we separate the two. MB Counselors at camp need not be "staff".

I know for me, the issue of boy-led vs adult is a symptom of a troop-method vs patrol method. In the article the writer discussed the problem with transitioning to a boy led troop. Instead the focus should be on a boy-led patrol. Until the patrols are boy-led using the patrol method, a boy-led-troop is a pipe dream.

Thanks skeptic for pointing out the irony and for making me look in the mirror.`

I think a boy can just as easily grow up feeling entitled in a middle class home. It all depends on work ethic. Charity from private groups or from public is not what leads to entitlement. Entitlement comes from learned character. If the boys' scouting is paid for from an outside group/person and they are providing work/effort where they are able then all is well. If they are receiving with the attitude that they somehow deserve it, then no. As I said, this is also a potential with families who are able to pay (some might argue more likely). I personally see entitlement attitudes in the boys from the most well-off families. Focus on service and character as embodied in the scout oath and law and an entitlement attitude will be mitigated regardless of where the $ comes from.

I didn't notice the pictures. I had similar thoughts as Tahawk when I read it.

Good suggestions mentioned. What also needs to be included is accountability for the troop. All the suggestions and trainings in the world mean nothing if the troop decides to do something other than follow the process correctly. Charters should be suspended and revoked if a troop is not following the BSA design. Will never see this happen.

In my experience there are plenty of us already there. When the scouts go off to their MBs, there isn't all that much for us scouters to do. The specific answer then is to ask, allow and perhaps entice with discounted/complimentary camp fees.

One last thing i would like to add to my post in addition to agreeing with many of the sentiments. I apologize in advance if this offends, it is not the intent. The intent is to raise awareness of how language is descriptive of reality and also (often unconsciously) perpetuates it. The term I want to focus on is teach. We often hear, even in this thread, the counselor "teaching". IMO, their is a stark difference between a counselor who mentors, inspires, and facilitates exploration for an individual vs a teacher with a class of students. I am sure that many will argue a good teacher will also mentor and inspire etc... and a good counselor will also "teach". But our usage of the terms interchangeably without explicitly noting the differences does describe the current use of merit badge classes and "universities" (even though the BSA literature in the past cautioned against scouting being like school). These (d)evolved into merit badge factories. We do not have scouts calling counselors from an approved list (supposedly vetted by the district) who are experts in their field to mentor the scouts and perhaps inspire them to delve deeper into the activity. Instead we send them to a school-like atmosphere to take a class, complete with a workbook and 20 other students to check of lists. I suppose I am just rambling here and reiterating much of what i and others have already said.

Ok, one last real thought in the same theme of language use. Eagle is an Award, not a rank. I am not sure, but I thought Star and Life were also Awards and not ranks. If I am wrong, then perhaps this is what they should be. 1st class again as the highest rank, no merit badges (or maybe just 1st aid) and everything else is an Award. we should make a bigger deal about the 1st class rank and not the other awards.

DuctTape! I was just going to quote you from the advancement thread concerning merit badges and their linkage with rank advancement:

 

"...prohibit scouts from being MB "counselors" at summer camp, to name a few."

 

So I'll ask a secondary question. If summer camp weren't about merit badges what would be the purpose of the staff?

Scouts as staff should serve to help the Camp Quartermaster, help at the waterfront, help at the archery range, etc... They should be helping, but not act in the capacity of merit badge counselors. Sure, many camps say that is all they do, but in reality it is these scouts who are teaching and assessing the merit badge requirements. The adult MB counselor has abdicated his/her responsibility to the scout staff (with perhaps the exception of lifesaving and rifle/shotgun).

Even if MBs did not exist, there are plenty of jobs to be done around camp to keep these operations running. Stocking of supplies, trash pickup, canoe inventory, bicycle repairs, the jobs are endless.

Yeah, it seems the purpose now is be a merit badge factory.

I don't think I would agree to the elimination of them as rank. However, I would support a significant restriction on how and when they can be earned.

Such as limit the merit badges which can be earned prior to 1st class, add pre-requisite MBs to some MB's, eliminate/reduce the double-dipping of requirements, prohibit merit badge "classes" with large groups, prohibit scouts from being MB "counselors" at summer camp, to name a few.