HelpfulTracks

The way the GSUSA councils statement is crafted (or appears to be) is a PR black-eye. I can see this stance if they felt the money was being misappropriated or mishandled, but if they are standing on "control of fundraising" in a situation like this then someone needs to go back to PR school. These were GSUSA Scouts, doing a Scouting project and GSUSA has a problem with other Girls Scouts raising funds for the family because they want to control the all fundraising? Even if GSUSA has a valid reason, the optics are a nightmare.

NOAC had a couple of sessions covering this. By NOAC 2020 all lodges should have consulted with their local tribes and transitioned to regalia that fits that local tribe. As part of that we are also to get their perspective (and accommodate it) about females in these ceremonies. From some second hand discussions I have heard, there is a wide range of responses. Some tribes have been adamant no's on regalia at all, others are OK with regalia but not females doing ceremonies. Some tribes have been neutral or ambivalent. Apparently, some have replied that as far as this type "ceremony" goes, in their traditions have females doing them. In at least one case, the tribe considered this closest to oral history or story-telling, which has be traditionally a female role in their tribe. If a tribe falls into the NO females or no regalia category, that lodge is to use BSA field uniforms and sashes. There was a discussion of using black robes similar to the ones originally used at Treasure Island, but I do not think that decision has been made one way or the other at this point. There was some concern, particularly with Southern Lodges, that black robes and torches in the woods has it's own negative history. That has been expressly forbidden by OA National. Lodges are not to do any other ceremony or use regalia in any Crossover/AOL ceremony at all. In fact, Lodges have been told to not loan their regalia to troops or individual that want to do the old ceremony. In no way, shape or form is the OA to be involved in the use a ceremony other than the official one or in using regalia IN THE CEREMONY. I put emphasis on IN THE CEREMONY because there is one caveat, lodges may perform demonstrations similar to POW-Wow at the events, but may not perform ceremonies in regalia.

I know of appeals failing, but it is unusual. It usually occurs where there is clear evidence a requirement was not completed, or where there are requirements are disputed, like merit badges not earned, and there is no evidence that they were earned. This case seems more of an interpretation of what the project should be. I would appeal and be very prepared to discuss what was done in the project and how it was carried out. By rule, the appeal board will need the information ahead of time to "research" the issue in question. Caution: One thing I am not sure of is if he fails all of the EBOR (meaning it goes all they way to National and is rejected) if he can go back and redo a project an try again. Logically, he could, but there is nothing I have found that states that. There is a sentence that says an Eagle candidate may have only one review (the appeals process is part of that). I have asked that question in the past, but never received an answer that was backed up in writing. Before you initiate a review I would verify that he can go back if his appeals fail. I would verify that with NATIONAL, not just your local council. Since he is only 14 and has time to do another project, you may want to weigh your options.

No. To qualify for extension they must have never been registered as a Boy Scout. It should come up in the review process when the extension is requested. But it would not surprise me if some try and a few succeed in getting past the rules.

Uhh, can we the LDS Church’s help getting that adopted by BSA before y’all leave?!?

I am struggling to remember who was wearing black robes in the Shows. But there was definitely 4 in robes, so at the time I assumed it was the principles, though I don't remember them doing in portion of any ceremony. It may have been the principles or may not. I do know that this discussion that is being had is if to allow black robes as an option to the induction ceremonies. Nothing official on that front yet. Principles may currently wear regalia (area specific by next NOAC) or they may wear Field uniform for all ceremonies.

I guess it depends on what you mean when you say program. If you mean the AIMs and Methods (camping, advancement, leadership et. al) I don't think it will change much. If you mean moving to coed troops rather than single gender, I doubt that will change either. But it appears people who are much better at seeing into the future than me, already know that coed is a done deal. So if they are right, then that is a radical change. What I cannot understand is this, if someone is a supporter of keeping troops single gender, as I am, then why not stick around and work to keep it that way. Leaving Scouting to those that want coed, because you fear it will go coed, seems to be a self fulfilling prophecy.

As a side note, I cannot reconcile how some of the same people who vehemently support/defend the Patrol Method will disregard/trash Wood Badge. Both of which are basically Bill Hillcourt creations. The Patrol Method is an evolution of Scouting introduced by Hillcourt in the 1920's. Wood Badge was started by Baden-Powell in England, but had fits and starts here in the U.S. until Hillcourt got involved and just would not let it die. He ran through several iterations before it stuck. It continued evolve during his time in Scouting. So if BSA training and Wood Badge are a detriment to Scouting and the Patrol method and are negatively impacting your individual unit, as some have said, why not get involved on the training side rather than dismissing it or talking it down?

An interesting note. I have spoken with 2 different districts about round up in the last 24 hours. The Year over Year (unit to unit) numbers of new Cubs is up significantly. Not really surprising, since this is the first Roundup to include girls. What is mildly surprising is that if you take the girls out of the registration, the numbers of boy Cubs is also up significantly. Now, it is still early in Roundup and things could change, but it is encouraging. EDIT: We also have several ScoutsBSA female troops organizing, a couple with 20+ youth "signed-up" and 6+ NEW adults, along with 3-4 Adults with BSA experience.

No I am not kidding. As for training, I am a training chair and have and still staff many BSA courses. I always emphasize (some would say to the point of annoyance) youth-led, youth -run and patrol method. Never do for a Scout what a Scout can do for himself does not absolve adults from their leadership responsibilities, which includes training, mentoring, guiding, safety, YP and policy. I am not sure how that equates to Weeb3 or AOL2, but both Baden-Powell and Hillcourt referenced adult leadership, so I am comfortable that I am what they had in mind. As for my former troop, when I left the Scouts planned every outing, meeting and event. They ran everything from start to end. Other than things like Scoutmasters minute, securing, contracting and paying for the locations they selected for outings, making sure that we had enough transportation and that we were in compliance with the YPT and driving issues, the adults did not have much at all to do with the program. The SM and ASM's would give guidance with issues the Scouts brought to us, or maybe occasional whisper some question or advice into the ear of the SPL and PLs, but that is about it.

Because leading isn't synonymous to commanding. But even in command structures there are leaders besides those in command. When I was in the infantry, the Captain was the company commander, he sets the direction (based on higher orders). But the 1st Sgt was also a leader, as was the platoon Sgt and Section/Squad Sgt. At each level NCO's were autonomous and were the leaders of the troops. The President as C-in-C is not the only leader in the military, there are literally thousands of leaders. In Scouting adults lead by training, mentoring, and guiding, not commanding. Although, ultimately they are in "command" because they are responsible and will face consequences if they do not lead appropriately. Boys run the program. They plan and carry out the program. The lead others during that process. “Training boy leaders to run their troop is the Scoutmaster’s most important job. Train Scouts to do a job, then let them do it. Never do anything a boy can do.” Sir Robert Baden-Powell (also quoted on page one of Troop Leaders Training, 2010 printing) “Your Scoutmaster and other adult leaders will help Scouts become good leaders, then will step back and allow the troop’s youth leaders to take charge of planning and carrying out activities.” “An important goal of boy scouting is that troops are scout-planned and scout-led.”

I would find a new troop. You can attempt to change this one, but with the time it would take you might well hate Scouting before it’s done. good luck

“Adult led, youth run” is absolutely consistent with “Train ‘em, Trust ‘em, Let Lead”

I can believe that.

Exploring differences and methods to effectively communicate with youth of this generation. I