HashTagScouts

I'd hope Eagle would not be under discussion.  It's already bad enough that boys in Venturing can earn Eagle, but their equally registered female members can't.  

 

IMHO, not allowing girls to earn Eagle would just continue the pain.  The best change is done structured and planned, but relatively fast.  Drawing these things out just continues the damage. 

It never really had to be that way.  It's only my opinion, but the BSA frankly never did enough to really make the awareness of the Venturing Silver Award was (and even less so since changing ti the Summit Award).  The Silver Award was, again, my own opinion, even more of an accomplishment than Eagle for what was involved, and the Summit Award is still a pretty darn big accomplishment.  

Accessible for families does not equal family camping.    

It doesn't officially pout that stamp on it, but it also does nothing to make it not become the reality.  If the whole conversation is about accessibility, and not having to have parents "be in two places at once" (my summary of everything Mr. Surbaugh presented), then yes, you will have units making meetings and outings joint between male and female troops, and then you will have all the pressure of "why not allow my younger children to come" or "if my younger children cannot come, then how can both parents really participate?". As I posted on other threads on this topic, the unit my son belongs to already does this half the year because of the pressures, and now the flood gate will open.  I've been very cautious of even discussing all of what is going on with my son, but he already is ready to finish eagle and jump ship simply because of the "family camping" aspect- Scout outings no longer feel special, and feel constraining to him because the family outings have to be set up such as the whole event has to allow for inclusion of all ages/abilities.  The coed piece is less concerning to him- he has no problem with joining a coed Venturing unit that is all about adventure and cares little about Ventuing advancement.

Adults who are excited with the program typically have the energy and enthusiasm for developing a creative fun program that keeps the scouts excited even through five years.

 

I was told by experts in the field of human behavior that the average volunteer of any volunteer organization gives about 20 months before burnout starts to set in. That is not even two years. The real problem if you get into the meat of it is that burnout sets in just before Webelos. And the Webelos membership increased drop out rate shows it.

 

Barry

I agree 100% with your earlier assessment.  "Advancement Mill" mentality generally makes a troop look great from a distance, but my experience says that after 13/14 when the kid has hit Star (or at least on paper has done the requirements) and realizes that he now has to do the work all by himself, it is gut check time.  And when you factor in that he needs to do that work AND have to be a babysitter/instructor, there is little time left for fun and Scouting begins to be a drag.  They may still come to some meetings/events, if the theme is of true interest to them, but by and large their 'love' of Scouting has waned big time.

My own son flourished under such a system and hit Star by 13, Life by 14 and is now knee deep in his Eagle project at 14 1/2 (with 49 MBs, including all of his Eagles).  His interest in the troop is way down, but thankfully he is heavily involved this summer as a CIT at summer camp, got really involved in the OA (joined the Chapter & Lodge ceremonies teams, goes to all Ordeal weekends, went to Section Conclave), went through NYLT this past winter and interviewed for and was accepted to NYLT staff for next winter.  I don't have reservations on him getting to Eagle so young because he has showed me that he figured out that Scouting is far more than about advancement (also factor in that I was there along the way to make sure when his troop was signing on requirement X, that he actually could do requirement X, even if it meant going in the backyard and him demonstrating to me he knew it).  There are absolutely others out there like him, but far too few can figure it out at that age that they can still experience Scouting without feeling trapped.  I like to think that he learned some of that from me, because I was him at 14 as far as advancement, but Iwasn't fortunate enough to figure out there was more than just my troop to be had and was out of Scouting by the time I hit 17.   

I deal with women ASM's and SM's and OA guys in our OA chapter all the time (and a few Sea Scouts as well). The issue that should even be "a thing" is disheartening. 

I don't really see it as a male/female thing.  For the OA membership guidelines, male Venturers today cannot be elected to the OA unless they are also dual registered in a troop or Varsity team at the time of their election.    

In part, the majority of Venturers I've interacted from LDS and non-LDS, troop-based and non-troop-based, high adventure and non-high adventure crews have all been in the program because the genuinely want to be in the program. They didn't join the program on the promise of awards. They joined it on the promise of sharing experiences they wouldn't normally be able to do with their peers.

 

My $0.02.

This is pretty much my experience as well, they are two very different programs.  Crews have options on advancement, if that is the crew culture they want to develop.

I agree @@Stosh. What my unit has done is to announce each month who the top campers and service hour workers were. They are posted on the troop bulletin board and everyone can see each month who has what. Before elections, each candidate steps forward and their camping nights and service hours for the two year cycle, plus total camping and service hours, plus years of service are announced. That way the voters can see who the good campers and service provider are, not guess.

 

This approach really turned the elections on their head. Popular guys with low camping or service were not getting elected. Quiet, less popular kids with MEGA camping and service were getting elected in landslide votes.

 

THAT'S how to beat the current OA system. I agree, the criteria should be more strict and subject to a quantitative evaluation.

it certainly is one way to change the culture.  I also tend to lean more on the OA members in the troop should be deciding on who is eligible (using the current criteria) for the election.  

@@Scourge

 

I know after talking to a couple of the commissioners that there was a good many councils who "put greenshirts on Boy Scouts for the week and called them Venturers". So, I don't know how serious the opinions taken during the town hall will be taken?

Sadly, I find that a great many "Crews" are nothing more than older boy Scouts who have split from a troop(s), or in fact are just the older Scout Patrol of a troop.  I've also found a number that do not do any of the Venturing advancement program, but just do the same track as a troop.  So, take it with a grain of salt when we hear Venturing is all for integration on whos voice is actually being heard.  

While I see both sides, I would prefer a new Venturing honors program.  It seems as though any boy can get into the OA without any outdoor or leadership skills whatsoever.  Some members that I see in it would've never in a million years qualified thirty years ago.  As an outsider looking in, the Order of the Arrow looks like a hollow shell of a former great organization.  Why?  Because standards dropped and everything was dumbed down.  An exclusive Venturing honors society would be much more high speed and something I would be interested in joining. 

I would have to agree that a great many in the OA today do not belong, and do nothing to contribute to their Lodge let alone to the sections/national.  

We also have to remember that Venturing is not so much focused on the overnight outdoor experience in its' advancement program.  I would absolutely like to see the standards raised for the OA, but can't see how Venturing can fit into that picture unless it becomes a requirement of Venturing to have tier II and tier III adventures have minimum # of overnights (or more focus on increasing the # of tier III versus tier II overall).

I don't see how that is going to be tenable in practice.  On paper, sure.  But if the premise is "accessibility" then having the boys do one thing while the girls do something else isn't going to cut it.  They might be separate troops on paper, but it's going to be co-ed in practice.

If there are enough adults who want their daughters involved, then nothing stops them from having the COR charter a female troop and keep it separate on paper, but coed in practice by having both units share meetings and outings.  Whether the BSA is declaring the program is not coed, it will be irrelevant as units will force it to be so.

There's nothing stopping anyone from going to the scout store and buying any patch or rank badge, except for eagle.

 

To be honest, I'd be interested in a modified venturing. Ranks up to first class, 11-21 (but split into two age ranges) and more emphasis on outdoors and leadership/teamwork and less on advancement. Call it retro scouts.

Not entirely true- you need to have a valid Advancement Report to purchase merit Badges and Rank patches.  It's often subverted, but there is supposed to be that valid check and balance from the local Council.

Not really.  I have quite a few BSA units I drive by to get to my unit.  Why?  Because the council saw a need for a unit in a large part of town that wasn't covered geographically.  3 units of Cubs an no Troops. I said yes and that was that.

 

So if BSA goes co-ed, it becomes generically the same dynamics of any other co-ed group.    To answer your other post by blw2 it does make a difference to me whether or not the program is all-boy or co-ed.  I guess I wouldn't be half upset as I could be, Venturing was co-ed and I had a crew for 13 years.  But with Cub and Boy, the program has not just going co-ed, it's just a half step to Family Scouting and I work just with youth.  Helicopter parents officially in the program don't really appeal to me at all.

 

By the way, boys really won't mature and build character with the parents hanging around interfering with their progress to adult independence.

Stosh, appreciate your feelings.  I am struggling with the same thing with my sons troop now, even before the BSA gives a bona fide blessing on this.  The troop has always done summer trips that are 99% adult run and open to families, a Thanksgiving campout that is the same, and now making two other campouts in the coming year "family campouts".  It takes the boys out of leadership learning and makes the concept of registered adult leaders irrelevant.

 

EDIT: From my daughter...who is in our Venturing Crew..."Why don't they just lower the Venturing age? Who wants to be in the same unit as their BROTHER?!?!?"

 

If only BSA listened to their members and their potential members, they might actually meet people's expectations and needs.

Agreed- why not do this? I hear many of the arguments about not wanting Eagle to become something that both boys and girls can earn, to which my reply is that the BSA has dropped the ball in a major way of promoting that the Venturing Summit Award (and even more so when it was the Silver Award) is every bit as significant of an achievement as Eagle. This is what the BSA needs to be focused on is putting far more energy into building up the reputation of Venturing.  Stop the nonsense of putting resources to Varsity and Explorer.   

Within the council i am in, Crews are by and large just 'older boy patrols' of BSA troops.  They do little to capture anyone outside of the boys already in Scouting, and when they do go outside that circle it is really only to siblings of the Scouts.  I can think of only two Crews in the whole council that didn't start from the efforts of the troop or from a splinter from a troop. 

As to the OA suddenly being supportive of the measure of coed- REALLY?!?! Then why have then been so mute on allowing Venturers into the OA for so many years?! Today, only those boys dual registered in a Crew and Troop are eligible for election, so female Venturers are excluded entirely.  Only when a female turns 21 can they be nominated as an adult for OA.  How about fixing that issue first? 

My sons troop goes to a camp outside of our council for summer camp (he also works staff for that camp), so I am on their newsletter feed.  I received the same type of invitation from that council SE, though it was more overt and mentions ongoing discussion and studies about the addition of girls to the non-Venturing programs.

I am not in favor of making the whole program coed, simply as I believe that both boys and girls need to have time to be with other boys or other girls.  It has nothing to do with limiting the activities that girls can be involved in.  Honestly, it is a crying shame that the Girl Scouts have allowed their program to become so awful, and I totally understand the perspective of girls from our area that "want to do the same things the boys get to".  To me, it doesn't mean they have to do in one group- though I don't have a problem with there being opportunities for both BSa and GSA troops to do shared events such as hikes or even campouts.  I've had boys in my sons troop talk to me on this topic, and they don't favor their sisters tagging along, and want their time away from their family dynamic.  My fear is that for all the "additions", we are also going to see losses and will have sacrificed the very institution.  Looking at other countries that are coed, I think my concerns are founded in reality.

Let's say, as an example, a professional Landscaper gets paid handsomely to do yard work for a client.

 

He asks for troops to help in a "conservation project" of raking leaves and removing them 

This, to me, does not qualify as a 'service project'.  if I was asked to do this for my unit, I'd ask for a share of the $$$ and consider it a fundraiser, but not a service project.  I also don't consider fundraising hours as service hours, but I can say that not every other troop out there thinks the same as I do.