HelpfulTracks

OK, following a train of thought here.

if Down Arrow = un-kind but un-kind is not verboten, then un-kind is not verboten, which means water guns are ok!

I move that we settle this and all future disputes a 20 paces with Super Soakers!

Can I get a second?
 

56 minutes ago, qwazse said:

Actually, the Scout Spirit doesn't have time specifications ... although one would think it's implicit. But, take 2nd class ... a scout describes how he followed 4 points of the scout law other than the ones he chose for tenderfoot. Suppose for one of those four, he gave an example of something he did before he earned tenderfoot. As written, he would still meet the requirement. By extension, a girl scout who shows multiple ways that she was following each point of the oath and law could meet the requirement.

“Demonstrate Scout spirit by living the Scout Oath and Scout Law.”

I have always interpreted that to be something that must be shown, not tell someone about. The telling of how the Scout fulfilled 4 points of the Law was more for the Scout benefit, sort of a self awareness of how he was living the Oath and Law.

As far as demonstrating, to me a big part of that is how the Scout interacts with his Unit. Is he helpful, does he participate cheerfully, is trustworthy and friendly towards other, etc.

Perhaps I read it too literally, but that has been my understanding.

But each situation is unique.

That begs the question. Is calling someone un-scoutlike because you disagree with them, well.......un-scoutlike.

Cooking MB teaches you sort of an urban survival skill - hopefully you learn enough to not starve if you cannot eat out every night. Though some Scout will take it to higher level.

It does not teach you to be a Chef any more than Swimming merit badge teaches you to be an Olympic swimmer or Chess MB makes you an Grand Champion. It may spark the desire to achieve those things, but it is just a starting point for most Scouts.

Is anyone from the Forum headed to NOAC this Summer?

43 minutes ago, LeCastor said:

I thought it might be a good idea to post some resources on here that might help us inform our fellow Scouters how best to let the Patrol Method/System run rather than trying to run the Patrol Method/System.  

This one is from our Canadian friends at The Dump.  

Patrol System.pdf

 I swiped this fron LeCastor's post in another thread.

Thanks!
I am going to still that link in put it in the thread I started about best practices.

Ooooo, down votes, I haven't  seen them used before in the forum!

Am I the first?!?!? Did I win?!?!?

18 minutes ago, EmberMike said:

I've sent my letters in support of Sydney and I stand by my statments here and in those letters.

Based on this thread I can say that I'm infinitely more supportive of the Irelands than I am of some of the sentiments expressed here, and certainly the jabs at the family because of their financial status or various other personal or professional aspects of their lives, not to mention the ripping apart of Sydney's motivations to earn Eagle, something I doubt very many boys are ever subjected to.  

Occasionally this forum strikes me as one of the most un-scout-like environments a person could encounter. This thread is certainly a case study in that phenomenon. 

Good for you, we are all entitled to our opinion.

Based on the comments and tactics of the Ireland's, I don't think it unreasonable or un-Scoutllike, to be circumspect of the request for special considerations. If it is then I will gladly wear that mantle.

Enough of this nonsense, I need to go do that Googly thing and figure out what a Linked-in is and what a resume if for.

1 minute ago, EmberMike said:

So all of the stuff a kid did from ages 11-15 should be easily repeatable at 16? How many kids in your unit do you think could do that?

Well, if they couldn't then they didn't learn them very well.

But, If they earned their ranks through First Class under the current SM, they could tie knots and do first aid.

2 minutes ago, EmberMike said:

It's on his professional website. You've never written a resume or filled in a LinkedIn profile I take it? 

No, never.

5 minutes ago, EmberMike said:

The difference is that some requirements are almost identical from one scouting organization to another. Tie these knots. Demonstrate this first-aid skill. And in an environment that is very similar to the BSA in many cases. Especially Scouts Canada.

Those requirements should be easily repeatable. If not then they didn't learn them very well in the first palce.

5 minutes ago, EmberMike said:

The BSA, as far as I understand the rule, does not allow credit from things done outside of scouting. So that YMCA lifeguard cert wouldn't count. But requirements for the Scouts Canada Swimming Challenge Badge, for example, some of which happen to be nearly identical to the BSA swimming badge requirements (the differernce being meters vs. yards for demonstrating specific strokes) can and should transfer over. In both cases the requirements would have been completed in similar settings, in the course of scouting-related activities, and demonstrating the same specific abilities. 

If if BSA were to allow them to transfer, it is still at the discretion of he MB counselor. 

I hope his son or daughter know first aid.

I think he just broke his arm patting himself on the back.

Then there is silliness in the other direction.

A troop requires ILST for its leaders. (Fair enough)

A young man is asked to be the OA Troop Rep. He is told he needs to take ILST again but cannot make the training the weekend is offered.

The potential rep has held several troop positions, including PL, ASPL and SPL twice. He has taken and taught ILST, He has taken NYLT and is staffing it. He has taken and taught OA's LLD and taken NLS training. He has or currently holds Chapter officer, Lodge Officer and Section committee chair.

But it is suggested that he is not qualified to hold the OA Rep position unless he take ILST AGAIN.

For full disclosure, the aforementioned Scout is my son.

4 hours ago, Col. Flagg said:

Re: Transfer Eagle Credit: Unless BSA has documented and specific rules for such a thing, no one should be given any credit toward ANY rank or badge unless they were in the proper Scouting program AND the rules allow for it. Do do otherwise is violating the GTA.

This!

I can see certain things occasoinally fulfilling requirements for MB but should be very limited. And if I were to err, I would err on the side of no requirements transferring.

I will continue to beat the drum that if you want more merit badges, do more activities and fewer (or no) classes.

Get on a river or lake and show a Scout how to canoe. They will meet the requirements with a few exceptions. (And that is true for most merit badges). They will engage because they are having fun, if they want the badge it will be easy enough to earn. If they don't then they will still have fun.

2 hours ago, EmberMike said:

I think that's kind of an unfair assessment of her motivations. She didn't join to get Eagle, she joined to tag along with her brother and take part in the adventures she saw him having, and she genuinely enjoyed the scouting expeirence......

I think she has always been concerned with the foundational value. From what I see, she conducts herself like a true scout. She's clearly brave, she's loyal to the organization, she is resourceful and ambitious, she embodies many of the qualities that we usually hope to see in an Eagle candidate.

Maybe I am wrong. But I am basing my assessment on what she has said in numerous interviews. Time and time again she has referenced wanting the Eagle Scout award as her motivation

Please read her and her fathers own words..

Quote

Sydney Ireland "They (BSA) think that having the Venturing program is enough, but Venturing does not have the Eagle rank, but they just think since the program is similar to the Boy Scouts that that is enough, they can say that they let in girls, but they really haven't let in girls at all, because they don't allow them into their main program, which is the Boys Scouts which does have the Ealge rank and other ranks that are recognized internationally."

Quote

 

Gary Ireland (her father): "The Eagle rank gets you into colleges and gets you, it is one of the few things you can put on your resume from high school that will help you get a job. There are companies that look for Eagle Scouts."....."We need the international community to put pressure on the Scouts."

"We hope that people around the world will send up videos as to why this is so important, and particularly since the United States is going to be hosting the International Jamboree in 2019. Are girls going to be allowed, girls from coed troops from around the world going to allowed to participate? Or are they just going to preclude and discriminate against our own girls in the United States?"

"It''s great that they have the Venturing program, but to come in as a marginalized member of a group, the Venture program is fantastic, but you have to also be able to earn the Eagle rank and get those rank advancements and be responsible for the advancement of other young Scouts."

 

Mind you, Mr. Ireland claims to be a Scout Leader (SM I believe), to teach other SM's and staff NYLT. Given that, some of his statements are puzzling.

As for showing Loyalty, I would look at those comments and ask Loyalty to whom or what?

8 hours ago, qwazse said:

Some honor. In a girls' mind, these statements say "your Silver will never be as polished as my Eagle."

Then we wonder why directing a girl towards Venturing Silver comes off as hollow.

If you are talking about perceived "prestige" and brand recognition, then you are correct, the Summit does not measure up to the Eagle. That is understandable. The Summit is less than 5 years old, the Silver, it's previous iteration had near a half century gap where it did not exist. The test of time is, in part, what helps create the brand recognition and "prestige". The current award did not exist when some current Venturers first joined the program. It is virtually impossible, and silly for anyone to think, the Summit Award would be able to match the Eagle in those perceived values in such a short time.

But that is part of the problem. As Scouts and Scouters, if brand recognition and "prestige" are how we determine the value of an award and the effort we will expend chasing it we are sending the exact wrong message. While time has helped the Eagle award earn a high place of honor, it is the journey and what it takes to earn that are the foundation of its value. Youth and adults are too busy looking at the shinny object they can put on their shelf or resume and have lost sight of the real value. That is much of the issue I have had with Miss Ireland, her statements clearly show she is concerned with the shinny object, not the foundational value.

If one believes the Silver/Summit Award does not measure up to the Eagle in terms of effort to earn it, then it does not deserve to be seen with the same prestige as the Eagle.

If one considers the Silver/Summit awards  on par with the Eagle in terms of effort, but a hollow offering compared to Eagle, then they are missing the real value of the awards to begin with.

8 hours ago, qwazse said:

We still haven't found the right balance with venturers. Activities are fine, but pulling off one event is a limited accomplishment. The requirements for the awards on paper make for a well-rounded individual, but there is no sense in most youths' minds that they need a badge for that. And certainly, if no investment is made in encourage the majority of scouters nation-wide to honor venturing's highest award, maybe crews are right to ignore Silver/Summit as well ... and instead push for girls to be recognized via boy scout rank advancement.

Why are activities not enough? Why must "accomplishment" be part of the equation? Most Venturers I have met (male and female) are there for the high adventure. In fact a few of the males left Scouting without their Eagle because they were not interested in the advancement, they wanted more activities and less pressure to advance. We do not need to invest anything to get someone to honor any award. And we certainly do no need to push any Scout (male or female) towards advancements as if that is the Holy Grail.

Scouters need to focus on the mission and aims. Let the Scouts determine if they want to advance or not, and support and encourage them in either case.

In some ways Venturing feels pure. Much like what I imagine it was like in the early days of Scouting. The focus is on the activity and less about the formal advancement.

4 hours ago, Stosh said:

How many young people join scouts to do their duty to God and Country and help other people at all times and how many join to make it to Eagle.  This is the rub that chafes me.

I think most join to have fun. Hopefully we can instill the character and purpose of duty to God and country and helping others. If they earn their Eagle, then good for them.

As for how I divide my limited time. If a Scout has a singularity of focus, I tend to divvy up more of my time first for those that focus on service, second for those that want to have fun and lastly for those whose singular focus is Eagle Scout. Fortunately, most Scouts I meet have a reasonable balance of all 3.

8 hours ago, qwazse said:

Firstly, I've never met a Venturer - at least one who was never a Boy Scout - who would want to work toward Eagle. The lion share don't want to work toward any recognition - a big problem with the program. The ones who do want to be recognized, want to be recognized for earning their award (be it Silver or Summit)  that already has an Eagle on the device. IMHO, NESA needs to either broaden its scope or go away. We have created an class of boys who are actually deluded into thinking that their rank is better than Venturing and Sea Scout awards -- (pardon the report from boots on the ground).

I would not ask anyone to join a troop merely for rank advancement. I certainly would not give any venturer of mine up to a troop so they can earn an award attained by 7% of Boy Scouts instead of an award attained by mere fractions of a percent of Venturers. And I certainly would not approve the application of any Venturing female who things that by signing on this year she may count it as tenure in a troop next year!

6 hours ago, qwazse said:

A good enough project for either award gets you 15 minutes of fame. And a military pay bump.

There are already Venturers and Sea Scouts with a silver eagle at the end of their ribbon and a GS Gold award. NESA should shine the spotlight on these champions and give their Eagles something to aspire to.

You have mentioned NESA a few times lately. It has a very negative vibe when you do.

Beyond that, why should NESA broaden it's scope or go away? It is after all, the the National EAGLE SCOUT Association, the alumni group for Eagle Scouts.

Bring other awards under that umbrella does not make sense. It would be like the Stanford alumni association promoting Duke alumni. OR closer to home the Philmont alumni association promoting Northern Tier Alumni. By it's very nature is outside their scope.

There is nothing wrong with Silver/Summit award, I would be proud if my children earn it. But, putting aside its tangled origins, Venturing and its awards, do not have the history behind it that the Eagle award does, in either length or continuity. Because of that I would not expect that it has the cache of the Eagle, but that does not make it any less and honor to earn.

BSA did not have an official alumni association for Eagles for more than 60 years after Scouting started. Venturing (20 years old this year) and it's awards (Silver and not yet 5 year old Summit) have not had the time to mature and grow a critical mass of alumni. Perhaps in the not to distant future it will.

Seeing how as the Patrol is the fundamental unit of Scouting, that the Patrol Method is the only method and that today in Scouting we do not see patrol method being used enough or very well, I thought I would start a thread on Best Practices.

Not just how to define what patrol method is, but what adult leaders can do, and maybe more importantly what they should NOT do in order to create an environment where a true boy-led patrol method environment takes hold.

I'll start with a few:

A gang of boys, friends, with common goals and interest, that work together to have fun and accomplish their goals. To use current vernacular, I see patrols as self-organizing and self-directing.

Self-organizing in the sense that I don't think adults should assign boys to patrols except in rare circumstances. They boys need to figure out their won patrols, who they want to hang out with. The boys pick their own leaders and for how long.

Self-directed meaning they make their own plans about what they want to do, what is important to them. They decide how they are going to make their Scouting experience fun. They divvy up responsibilities how they see fit. They fix their own problems. They put their own plans into action and ask for adult help when needed to accomplish that.

Adults step in when asked, when safety is an issue or when a youth cannot accomplish the task, (like driving them somewhere, or signing waivers, permission forms and contracts). Adults coach from the sidelines, one-on-one (staying with-in YP guidelines) and discretely.

More importantly adults lead by example. I make it a point to ask PL if I can speak if I feel the need. When I am done, I thank the PL for allowing me to speak to HIS patrol. This way they boys know it is their patrol, not mine, and the the PL they selected in charge, not me. 

Please add you thoughts. The best way to help spread patrol method is to talk about it so others see the example.

Just now, LeCastor said:

Let's do it!

I would love to, I just have to convince my wife now!

Maybe, I could take her on that trip to Ireland she wants and arrange a SLIGHT detour for a day of Scouting Adventure, lol.

Ohh, my (not so) inner Scout nerd is going bananas.

I would LOVE to make that trip.

15 minutes ago, Stosh said:

I think with the bunch here, we'd have to take applications for that position, I don't know if I could pick just one.  @HelpfulTracks, are you applying?

I could never be that funny!