AltadenaCraig

27 minutes ago, qwazse said:

 

• Scoutchieftan
• Scouter Superior
• Scout Commandant
• Scoutherd

 

You would do well to familiarize yourself with the article referenced in the OP.  References such as those smack exactly of the kind of "tyrants and tin gods, renegades and recalcitrants, bullies and belligerents, dictators, martinets, and “world’s oldest Patrol Leaders” masquerading as Scoutmasters" we need to eschew.  And no, I'm not so mean-spirited as to downvote your post.

4 hours ago, skeptic said:

Nonsense.  Push the hype and try to panic weak minded Chicken Littles.  That is not what we teach the youth, or it should not be.

One man's hype to panic weak minded Chicken Littles is another man's Being Prepared, which we do teach the youth.

I'm keeping my powder dry as I lean toward Nonsense, but I'm also contemplating alternatives just in case.  #1 on my list: "Scoutguider".

When a Texas realty group abandons the term "Master Bedroom", how long before references to "Scoutmaster" meet the same fate?  https://www.star-telegram.com/news/state/texas/article243816787.html

Truth be told, Clarke Green and 'Ask Andy' have long observed that the B-P coined "Scoutmaster" as it related to "Schoolmaster", emphasizing the "teacher" aspect rather than "master" in the day.  An important distinction if you're adhering to Scout-led-troop principles:  the true 'master' is the SPL, with SM's & ASM's as "teachers".  https://scoutmastercg.com/just-what-does-scoutmaster-mean/.

To be sure, I find myself occasionally using the redundant "Adult Scouter" simply to avoid using "Adult Leader", a term which frosts me because I want the leaders in my troops to be the scouts, not the adults.  Nevertheless, I'd prefer any changes in titles to be on OUR terms and not because we're kowtowing to unreasonable demands of PC run amok.

I like the idea of Rovers and I like the idea of proficiency for Rovers.  I even like the idea of a Scout proficiency award (perhaps mandatory for the "Instructor" position), requiring some form of re-testing to maintain currency.

Yet I'm hesitant to require currency of all scouts.  The reason is Baden-Powell's attitude toward proficiency as described in his "Aids to Scoutmastership":

Quote

[Badges are] merely intended as an encouragement to a boy to take up a hobby or occupation and to make some sort of progress in it; they are a sign to an outsider that he has done so; they are not intended to signify that he is a master in the craft he is tested in. If once we make Scouting into a formal scheme of serious instruction in efficiency, we miss the whole point and value of Scout training, and we trench on the work of the schools without the trained experts for carrying it out. We want to get all our boys along through cheery self-development from within and not through the imposition of formal instruction from without.

… The object of the Badge System in Scouting is also to give the Scoutmaster an instrument by which he can stimulate keenness on the part of every and any boy to take up hobbies that can be helpful in forming his character or developing his skill. It is an instrument which — if applied with understanding and sympathy — is designed to give hope and ambition even to the dullest and most backward, who would otherwise be quickly outdistanced and so rendered hopeless in the race of life. It is for this reason that the standard of proficiency is purposely left undefined. Our standard for Badge earning is not the attainment of a certain level of quality of knowledge or skill, but the amount of effort the boy has put into acquiting such knowledge or skill. This brings the most hopeless case on to a footing of equal possibility with his more brilliant or better-off brother.

That's from The Boss, himself.

On 5/26/2020 at 3:15 PM, desertrat77 said:

2.  Dignified burial with honors:

- OA (45 years an Arrowman too, ouch)

Don't fetch your mourning armband just yet, @desertrat77, at least not for OA.

Every other youth program I've been associated with - Little League & AYSO - each had an All Star component.  Some All Star program will naturally accompany Scouting, in whatever form survives, to meet the needs of those who just can't get enough as well as serve as a beacon for others.  We need an All Star program, and for better or worse OA is ours.

I do believe there are Sacred Cows within the OA.  Any traditions that smack of "Cultural Appropriation" (dancing, regalia, etc.) even now are being hustled out the back door so fast they won't even get the dignified burial.  That doesn't mean all of OA has to be sacrificed, however.  The honor a scout finds in performing cheerful service to others is worth preserving.

If not direct Native American heritage, what else could serve as an alternative OA touchstone?  Returning to the All Star concept, combining its mission of Camping promotion with "minimalist" theme of leave-no-trace and what do you have?  Highly mobile backpackers devoted to Ultralight principles.  There's enough skills and equipment adjustments in Ultrilight to more than make up for the loss of beadwork, leggings, & chokers.  And its traditions still harken indirectly to Native American roots.

Retain cheerful service, break out the Ultralight handbook, and cancel the wake for the OA.

The story broke yesterday:  https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/n-j-judge-spared-teen-rape-suspect-because-he-came-n1026111

NBC doesn't mention "Eagle Scout" until the end of the article.  Other news outlets aren't being so charitable (with headlines screaming "Eagle Scout Rape Suspect!")

Bad situation all around.

2 hours ago, Eagledad said:

Both post are well said. I went into scoutmastering with the objective of AltadenaCraig's quote, "A leader is most effective when people barely know he exists". But, I found MattR's thoughts, "The best Scoutmaster is the one that does a great job motivating our kid". So, I believe both traits are equally important for a good Scoutmaster. 

I'll mention I don't think the two traits are mutually exclusive.  To be sure, the Lao Tzu quote isn't a license for Scoutmasters to abdicate their responsibilities to guide & mentor ... for me the quote is a reminder to work with the SPL in the background and not hog her spotlight (I'm now the Scoutmaster of our girls' troop).  If there's an issue with a scout beyond the scope of the PL/SPL I'll try to work with that scout more directly, but even less obtrusively.  Safety issues aside, of course, which require immediate intervention.  YIS -

- Craig

I'm inclined toward Lao Tzu's quote in the Troop Leader Guidebook: 

A leader is most effective when people barely know he exists.  When his work is done, his aim fulfilled, they will say:  "we did it ourselves"

2 hours ago, fred8033 said:

Military analogy ... Most military branches separate dress and activity uniforms.  Dress uniforms are kept sharp. activity uniforms get worn hard.  

Highly astute observation, @fred8033.  As BSA uniforms through the years have mirrored service fatigues, headgear, etc., I'm surprised BSA has allowed the uniform to drift toward "dress" and away from "functional" (shoulder loops?).  All the more surprising what with the availability of technical fabrics.  And the Army's recent field uniforms (BDU/ACU) have been designed toward functional, with liberal use of Velcro.

1 hour ago, Jameson76 said:

Due to the way they are made; the costs, the fabrics, the cut; not sure they are trying to kill it...however....as with many things in the Boys Scouts of America program....whomever is making the decisions (the uniforms in this case) is not really connected to the actual user of the uniforms.

For example, why not a fabric like the Columbia PFG shirt.  Those are literally designed to be breathable, designed to be short and long sleeve, etc etc.  Even on the "Official BSA activity shirts, those are costly.  Our troop gets the A4 dri-fit shirts each summer.  With 2 logos (front chest and full back) they run about $11 each.  That is for a small run of maybe 100.  

Get better gear and people will buy and wear it.

Highly agree @Jameson76.  Here're my suggestions for getting back to functional:

• Cut should be straight (without tail), and insist it NOT be tucked-in (imitating recent Army field uniform - ACU - which isn't tucked).  To be sure, best practice for hiking layers is they should be "worn loosely".
• Long-sleeve only.  Design should allow sleeves either be down or rolled-up & tabbed (a la the ACU).
• Velcro position patches - again, akin to the ACU - Absolutely!
• Fabric: technical “hiking” fabric.  Columbia PFG is a good model.
• Bring back the neckerchiefs.  Make them out of kerchief fabric that would actually promote their wear on a hike.

For particularly messy or rambunctious activity, a troop-specific A-4 worn underneath would provide the best of both worlds.

Oh, and one more thing:  ditch the shoulder loops.

On 9/27/2015 at 6:47 AM, SouthScout said:

How does your troop handle troop and patrol comminuction?

Fellow Scouters:  As it's been ~ 3-1/2 years since the last reply to this excellent question and thread, I thought I'd resurrect it in case some blessed Scouter has found the right recipe for intra-patrol, SPL, & intra-PLC, and intra-troop communications.

INTRA-TROOP:  For me, intra-troop communications is synonymous with "parental" communications, and eMail is satisfactory.  We have five patrols; accordingly I've established five patrol aliases with as many parent & scout eMail accounts as possible.  Proven advantages & disadvantages include:

Advantages:

• Patrol-specific eMails not only reinforce patrol-method, but the smaller distributions mitigate the eMails from being tagged as "spam" risk and thus improve sending & receiving
• "Aliases" prevent my (thankfully few) "sky is falling" parents from spinning up the others with their "reply-all" nonsense.

Disadvantages:

• The aliases are mine alone; I haven't figured a way to share them with my SPL and responsible ASM's
• Attempting to individualize five patrol eMails takes time & effort, both in the body text (I try to draft the eMails in Word to "XYZ Patrol", changing the name before pasting into each eMail) as well as a fresh Subject line (if I want to avoid "RE:" or "FW:").
• eMails appear best suited to Parents ... to me it hasn't proven reliable at the Scout-level

SM-SPL:  Text is winning the day.  I have a text-group established with the SPL and her parents.  Same with the SPL when I was Scoutmaster of the boys-troop.  That worked quite well, even on the occasion when the SPL didn't have a phone.  His parents always did and I was pleased with SPL responsiveness on the occasion I asked his parents to have him call me.

INTRA-PLC & INTRA-PATROL:  This is where things get messy and I remain flummoxed.  After several SPL's (boys & girls) I'm about to insist the first thing I do with a new SPL is sit with her (or her parent if she doesn't yet own a phone) and perform a text-group commo-check with the rest of her/his PLC.  Barring that I'm stumped.  I'm also stumped on how our SPL's should advise their PL's on intra-patrol communications.  The good ol' phone tree just doesn't seem to fit the 21st century.  Other best-practices?

I remember when Tiger Cubs was initiated.  I saw it as a response to Y-Guides (then “Indian Guides”) which began in 1st grade and threatened to capture dads & their boys before they became eligible for cubs.  I see Lions as a similar response to youth soccer, which a few years ago began capturing families at Kindergarten.

My son & I enjoyed Tigers - and I’ve been involved ever since even though my son is now 23 - but I can see Barry’s point that for most parents, this race-to-the-bottom just invites early burnout.

5 hours ago, TAHAWK said:

Leadership Development was, until recently, a "Method," rather than as Aim, but leadership dovetails nicely with citizenship.

By my reading of https://troopleader.scouting.org/scoutings-aims-and-methods/ it's now BOTH an aim and a method (?!?).

5 hours ago, TAHAWK said:

Seeing that explaining the PM was an advancement requirement for the newish Scout rank, I asked BSA last year what the correct answer would be.  They could not say.  Beyond embarrassing, were they but capable of that..

If anyone on this channel can point to who within the BSA is responsible for integrity among its publications (including websites), please let me know as I'd be happy to volunteer to help where I can.  My experience was with TRADOC (Training & Doctrine Command) which performs this function for the US Army.  I don't know that BSA needs an entire bureaucracy (none of the other uniformed services has a TRADOC), but BSA obviously need some help.  Nowadays such a function could easily be organized online and performed remotely by a cadre of professionals teamed with capable volunteers.

50 minutes ago, T2Eagle said:

It's always seemed to me that GSUSA' s failure to build institutional knowledge and experience into its units was its real weakness. 

At first blush I agree.  When I followed my son into our troop a dozen years ago I was mentored by our SM and ASM's and allowed to grow into an ASM role at my own pace.  These GSUSA mothers, on the other hand, are sensing they'll be thrown right into the deep-end (to mix metaphors) if they're to provide a meaningful experience to their girls as Cadettes.

Nevertheless, back in the day, before the GSUSA allowed their program to ignore the outdoor component, somehow their structural model DID work.  I'd be curious to your thoughts about what might have made up for the lack of institutional knowledge among successful GSUSA troops in the past?  Meantime I'm more inclined to point the finger at their lack of mandatory outdoor training than their structural model.

Tonight my small linked-troop of five registered scouts will be visited-upon by a GSUSA troop of TEN junior girl-scouts.  Why the interest?  Among the several BSA advantages discussed elsewhere in Scouter.com (greater outdoor challenges, perceived prestige of Eagle vs. Gold Award, etc.), two stand out as fatal impediments to this troop of Juniors moving on to Cadettes:

1. Their leadership, primarily mothers, are resistant to the perceived expenditures in tents, stoves, cook-sets, etc. required to support outdoor overnighters; and
2. These same leaders are at best reluctant and at worst fearful of employing the equipment, even if they possessed it, because they have no experience or training in how to use it.

As 5th-grade Juniors, these girls will be moving on to middle-school soon, so its a natural time for their leadership to begin evaluating the next step in their program.  Unfortunately for the GSUSA but fortunately for my BSA linked-troop, these leaders are highly supportive of their girls' ambitions but have no appetite for the investment in time and treasure that it will take to fulfill them. My female ASM heard about the murmurs and approached the leaders about our program:  "THAT sounds like the answer!" was the reply and tonight we'll gauge how ambitious their girls are for a meaningful outdoor experience.  Opportunity knocks.

Although I'm heartened as Scoutmaster of this linked-troop, I'm also a bit dismayed as I'm also the father of a GSUSA Gold-Award recipient.  As I've said many times, if the GSUSA had marketed an outdoor program in general and their Gold Award in particular as effectively as they've promoted Thin Mints and Do-Si-Doe's we wouldn't be having this discussion.

21 hours ago, qwazse said:

An easy free solution to mapping is caltopo.com. I use it regularly. ... Save it as a .pdf.

Caltopo.com is fabulous.  And for way more than an orienteering course:

How many times have we scouters emphasized "a compass isn't much good without a map - and vice versa" when referencing the 10 essentials, only to accompany scouts on a campout or hike where at best only a few carry both?  Good topographic maps are expensive, not to mention bulky & unwieldy for younger scouts, so until now it's been easy to justify slighting this "essential".  But with caltopo.com no more excuses!  We've saved .pdf's of caltopo.com maps we've created of our usual hangouts and distributed links as @qwazse suggests.  Now we regularly see scouts referencing their own simple 8-1/2 x 11" maps. Our troop's overall map & compass skills have markedly improved since we discovered caltopo.com

45 minutes ago, qwazse said:

The internet -- especially 5G and 6G -- will make it possible for the remaining 400K boys and girls who are interested to execute the patrol method (by some other name) absent any governing organization.

This.  Heaven help me I wish I had the gaming talent.  Some kind of small-group competition combining geocaching, Fortnite, and Pokemon-go would be a winner and right up our alley.  Alas, my crystal ball goes dark beyond that.

9 minutes ago, qwazse said:

When methods change significantly, I think we need to know.

Well, I'm happy to strongly agree with you on that.

I've been thinking hard about why I'm so worked-up about this.  @qwazse pointed out the Mission of the BSA hasn't changed, so what's the big deal?  That reminded me of what set me off in the first place:  The 2019 Guide to Advancement.  On the facing page to page one, in large bold print, are two statements: the Mission and the (now four) Aims.  Both printed in the same large-bold font, and only these two statements so featured, tells me the BSA places the same value on both.  Well then, either the Aims should't be proclaimed so prominently or they shouldn't be trifled-with.

And with "Leadership" so close to the "Leadership Development", and by burying the Methods among several paragraphs on GTA p. 11, it raised my doubts about National's commitment to Methods as well.

@Eagledad's tale of two Scoutmaster's is cautionary.  Our Aims & Methods are what help us identify true-north Scouters from charismatic posers who are simply winging-it.

@qwazse:  I'm in agreement with many of your positions on scouter.com, but on this I'm afraid we'll have to agree to disagree.

I'm encouraged that several others apparently agree with me that National's words are important, that we're attentive, and most of all that we're disappointed when guiding principles are capriciously and deceptively changed.

@qwazse:  I'm not trying to be quixotic about this.  Like you I'm trying to be realistic.  Perhaps some, including National, see Aims & Methods only as a marketing pitch, but in all of my professional training when the vision, mission, and values of an organization are firm and resolute, the better the organization.

I'd even go farther to say that if BSA reconciled the principles embodied in the Aims and Methods (Leadership, Leadership Development? Aim? Method? huh?), we could resolve many of the quality issues we debate in this forum.  I don't disagree with your observation that "We have scouters who say, "All I do is teach boys how to stack sticks and keep a fire going" ... from their perspective, everything else flows from that", but what about those of us who hold the BSA in higher esteem?  Shouldn't the organization's executives be asked to answer when the principles of that organization are apparently so pliable?

... and I did smell the coffee and am already on my second cup, thank you.

Amen @ParkMan.  The Scout Oath & Law are the only policies & procedures we need.  Clarke Green, nailed it for me on a ScoutmasterCG post from 10 years ago:  https://scoutmastercg.com/troop-rules-or-resolutions/

Quote

If we respond to problems by instituting troop rules or policies we become enforcers.

Few rules don’t have legitimate exceptions, so we also become judges.

When rules are broken there must be a penalty, so we end up having to dole out punishment.

As the matrix of rules and policies grow most of our time is spent enforcing, judging, and punishing.

A system of enforcement, judgement, and punishment obscures the aspirations embodied in the Scout Oath and Law, and our aim of building character by examining those aspirations.

I think we are much better off seeking resolution to difficulties rather than reacting to them with rule making.  When a concern arises we ask: ...

“What part of the Scout Oath and Law would you apply?”

14 hours ago, RichardB said:

If I remember correctly, it was 2014.  Five years ago.   

Moving forward to stay informed, I'd suggest you make sure you have a valid email address associated with your membership @AltadenaCraig and  / or subscribe to https://scoutingwire.org/volunteers/.  You get weekly updates.    

@RichardB - Thank you for taking time to respond.  I've seen other posts of yours and I gather you're either a professional scouter or closely-tied, so I want to also thank you for standing-up to my plaintive request for someone accountable to reply.

Nevertheless, your reply really frosts me, it is so condescending.  I've been a subscriber of Scouting Wire since its inception on March 5, 2015.  I'm also a lazy manager of my gmail account and am in possession of all 215 eMails I've received from "ScoutingWire" since.  I was able to perform a simple search and I'm sorry to say NONE of them makes any announcement of the change to the Aims of Scouting.  I agree that Scouting Wire would have been a great vehicle with which to announce the change, so its absence only frustrates me more.

If the change occurred in 2014, before Scouting Wire, then I concur with the others on this thread that several resources up through 2017, including the 2015 Guide to Advancement, reference only the original three Aims.

So I'll challenge any other BSA authority -- Do the Aims and Methods of Scouting really mean something or don't they?

39 minutes ago, RememberSchiff said:

I agree with your concerns. 

Somewhat reminiscent of the mid 80's when suddenly an 8th Method appeared - the Uniform Method. This was unexpected and odd as the uniform was and remains optional.

Just to put my money where my mouth is, here are three actions which I hope National would take regarding any changes to Aims & Methods:

• Immediate notification to all scouters of the added Aim upon adoption of the bylaws by the Executive Committee (while I wouldn't expect everything the ExComm does to be so advertised, the Aims & Methods are foundational lists which are emphasized during initial training across the org - Scoutmaster Corps, Troop Committee, and Charter Org.).
• Commented by Michael Surbaugh in an end-of-year video or memo to all Scouters
• Two or three PowerPoint Slides released to every Roundtable Commissioner to be shared at Roundtable.  The slides would specify the change, the rationale behind the change, and place the change in context of Methods (which retains Leadership Development as a Method), answering "is it an Aim or a Method?"

Thank you, @RememberSchiff.  Both of the references you cite clearly identify four, not three, Aims.

But am I off the mark in feeling that these references only underscore my point?  These references make it absolutely clear the change was intentional, and 1.0.3.0 identifies it as "significant"!  So why make such a significant and intentional change without championing it across the organization?

Again, either they mean something or they don't.

@qwazse & @Cburkhardt :  regarding the GS Troop's decision to enter Scouts BSA rather than Venturing, I expect it's because BSA policy requires them to do so (at least until they achieve First Class) in order to eventually attain Eagle:

Quote

To preserve the integrity of the Eagle Scout Award, all requirements must be completed while the individual is a registered member of Scouts BSA, or after achieving the First Class Rank in Scouts BSA (as specified in the BSA Advancement Guide, an individual after earning First Class Rank in Scouts BSA may transfer primary membership to Venturing or Sea Scouts and continue to work on Eagle Scout requirements).

https://filestore.scouting.org/filestore/pdf/Implementation-Details-for-Scouts-BSA-Final.pdf

It will be interesting whether they eventually become Venturers after they earn First Class.