David CO

When a boy went missing, it was a really big deal for my unit.  By policy, the entire troop had to stop what they were doing, split up into search teams, and find the missing scout.  After finding the scout, the PL would be instructed to keep his scout on a very short leash for the remainder of the camping trip.

If all of the boys in my unit were told to meet up at a certain time and place, and a boy didn't show up, he would be considered missing.  We would have to go find him. The whole issue of merit badge homework and service projects would be secondary to the issue of a boy going missing at camp.  

Addressing the actions of two scouts in front of the troop is worse than asking them to sing for lost gear. It's demeaning and embarrassing. The asms should be ashamed of themselves for such a poor decision. Would they do that to their own kid?

Yep.

SM babysitter?  Good grief. 

Thanks everyone for the input. We are scheduling a conference between the SM, the ASM's in attendance and the parents (myself included) of the 2 boys in question, to discuss the full nature of the events as they unfolded. I do believe there was some mis-communication going on between the boys and leadership. 

I'm sure there was.

You said that your son talked to the ASM about having merit badge homework to complete.  Did the ASM or the ASPL excuse your son from helping out with the bonfire?

I'm trying to figure out why the 3 ASM's felt that the 2 boys ditched their responsibilities.

Why would an ASM ever address such an issue unless the SM and SPL asked him to?

Maybe they did.

There have been many times in my career when the principal has directed me to really lay into a kid.  Give it to em with both barrels.  

The parents never knew.

Welcome to the forum, Beagles.

I think things are really messed up when a boy's merit badge "homework" has priority over building a bonfire. 

Sadly.  I can see this happening.  Multiple times I've overheard scout "private" conversations with inappropriate statements.  Boys trying to be men.  

 

A "boys only" environment does enable it.  Young men are learning how to communicate new interests in a "boys only" environment.  I'm not against a "boys only" program, but I do not think "boys only" has anywhere near as much value as people assert.  

 

I have overheard many similar conversations in the boys' locker room. I don't like it either. 

I know exactly what my pastor would say.  He would look the boys straight in the eyes and ask, "What exactly do you boys want to do that you can't do with adult oversight?"

This is exactly what I meant by the adults training the scouts around the adult fears. And I hinted at it, but qwazse said directly that it's not just the adult leaders that have to be convinced, the parents have to feel comfortable about the scouts independence as well. This is a good thing, as the parents watch how the adult leaders get the scouts up to a comfortable level of skills, they also learn about how the program works and develop a trust for it. They develop a lot of respect for the program and adult leaders.

 

However, let me add, each experience is a step forward in giving the scouts more independence. Generally the process to get scouts up to a level of skills that gets the adults comfortable doesn't usually have to be repeated. At least not to the full original process. So the adults can just keep pushing their fear boundary out farther at each step. As has been said, it takes a while, but you will find that as the scouts gain confidence in the adults and the adults gain more trust in the scouts, the maturity of the program will grow faster and faster. The hardest part of the process is just getting the adults to take the first step of wanting to give the scouts this kind of independence.

 

Barry

Again, it is not always a question of adults trusting the scouts and having confidence in the scouts' skills.  It is often a matter of not trusting all of the other people at the park.  

There is no simple stock answer to this question.  There are so many different variables involved.  First of all, it is not just a matter of trusting your kids.  Do you trust everyone else at the park?  

Is it hunting season?  Is there water involved?  Are there any caves or old mines?  What are the laws/rules about child supervision in that state?  

I would not allow any group of kids to go off on their own unless it is a planned excursion with the expressed permission of their parents.  

That would mean there are a lot of lousy scouts out there,   I believe that to be a false premise.  A good leader can make up for lousy scouts because the boys will follow if they really believe the leader cares for them.  It's basic human nature. No one follows a person that gives indication one is not important enough to be taken care of. 

 

When one has to start quoting Oath, Law, rules and bylaws in order to maintain group control, then it becomes blatantly obvious that the "leader" is trying to enforce authority from a source other than themselves.  To me that indicates a lack of leadership on that person's part.  Leadership stands on it's own merits.

Yes, that is exactly my point. A good scout leader does enforce authority from a structure other than themselves.  In scouting, we have that structure.

First, you object to the adults having authority because you say you believe in being boy lead.  Then you say that you don't believe in having a SPL because you believe in the patrol system.  Finally, you say that boys shouldn't even have to obey their patrol leader.

Well, Stosh, that isn't scouting.  Scouting is based on the scout oath and law.  It has structure.  It has ownership.  It has rules.  

No.  If the boys don't care to look at the bulletin board and would rather ignore the PL, then they are lousy scouts.

The Boy Scouts of my generation didn't just teach leadership, they also taught obedience.  A scout is supposed to obey his patrol leader.  When did this become so unfashionable? 

A scout unit is not a franchise.  

We don't need to use other words, inaccurate words, to describe scouts, units, charters, and Chartered Organizations.  We already have the right words. 

The scout is not the customer.  He is the beneficiary.  Chartered Organizations charter scout units for the benefit of the scouts, but being the beneficiary does not make the scout either the owner or the customer of the scout unit.

A boy is not the customer of his parents.  A boy is not the owner of his parents.  The family relationship is not something that fits the commercial model of a customer and owner.  

There are many natural associations and voluntary associations that do not fit that model. Scouting is one of them.

Who is running the unit?  The IH or his/her delegate.

Baseball predates the YMCA.  Its exact origins are unknown.  Baseball is often credited to Abner Doubleday, an active duty officer during the American Civil War, but this isn't entirely correct.  

Baseball existed, in some form, before the Civil War.  During the Civil war, the YMCA was very active in providing the young soldiers with sports equipment, so that they could have some recreation during the pauses between engagements.  This often included baseball bats and balls.  They didn't use mitts back then.

Abner Doubleday encouraged his young troops to play baseball.  He thought the game promoted all the positive characteristics he sought in young men, including sportsmanship and good character.  After the end of the war, he promoted baseball as a sport for boys and young men.

So, baseball first gained widespread appeal during the Civil War, with some credit going to the YMCA.  But no, there is no record of the YMCA actually inventing baseball.

Dr. James Naismith invented basketball.  William G. Morgan invented volleyball.  Both were YMCA instructors at the YMCA Training School, which is now called Springfield College.  Yes, both of these sports were custom designed with the aims and goals of YMCA in mind.

That's not the "documented" I meant....

I agree with you.

 

What I was getting at is that with scouts, the "documented program" that we are all trying to follow focuses on it....the game outline for scouting is doing this stuff with character in mind

but while sports coaches might make their own efforts....leagues might even... but I don't think that the focus or reason for playing the game is character.  They are there to play the game first, the game is the focus, not character building

but again with scouting, the documented program is all designed around character building...

 

I agree with you that so much of the program has leaned towards paperwork and book work too much...

When the YMCA invented basketball, they actually did start with the idea of character building.  They deliberately designed the game to advance the greater goals they had in mind.  Same with volleyball.

I am a graduate of a YMCA college.  I studied YMCA history and the history of sports.  Yes, building character in young men is exactly what they had in mind when they first created these games.

You will be pleased to know that this historical fact is well documented.  Look it up.

Baden-Powell was a big fan of YMCA.  He personally knew the founder of the YMCA. He took a lot of his ideas from YMCA, and he had YMCA people involved in the early days of scouting.  

The phrase, a game with a purpose, actually started at YMCA.  

I firmly believe in the idea of a game with a purpose.  Scouting is a game with a purpose, but it is not the only game with a purpose. 

I've been watching all of these NFL players refusing to stand for the National Anthem.  They're not helping me make my point.

There are a few bad apples in every barrel, but I haven't seen the kind of widespread misconduct you describe.  

I have heard the same sort of nonsense about scout leaders.  There is a lot of talk out there about scouters being a bunch of child molesters or something.  It's not true.  I have always found scouters to be a great bunch of guys.  A little nerdy, perhaps, but good group of guys.

The few times I have encountered loudmouthed coaches, they have been inexperienced guys who thought, like you, that this is how coaches are expected to behave.  They were acting out a stereotype they had somehow gotten into their heads.  A friendly conversation was usually enough to correct the problem.

I have been to literally hundreds of training sessions for coaches.  I have never once heard a supervisor tell coaches that they should yell at or berate their players.  I can't even imagine a park district supervisor, YMCA director, or school athletic director doing so.  

I really don't think spreading a false narrative about sports programs and the good men who coach in them is a good strategy for promoting scouting.  

the sports thing is interesting to me....

I'm not a sports guy at all.  I'm the guy who's eyes gloss over as soon as someone talks about the game....  I find it rather pointless to watch others playing a game.  The games to me are pointless, and it drives me nuts the importance that so many folks give it.  I also hate that so many of the so called role models in that area are overpaid uneducated and downright trashy people

but the thing I have observed over the years.....

many exceptions of course, including the over testosteroned and rude sports folks.... but I'd have to say that a good many of sporty folks I have observed over the years seem to be perhaps socially better adjusted than non sporty types.  Sporty kids are often polite and well mannered, confident, and have larger groups of friends

I'd have to guess that just as with scouts, there is a huge variable in that some coaches are much better than others, but I'd guess that most coaches try in their own way to teach character...it just may not be such a consistently documented "part" of the program.....they aren't all singing form the same hymn book like we in scouting are.

Actually, the documentation part of scouting is the part I enjoy least.  Scouting has become too bookish.  Too clerical.  Too bureaucratic. I want to spend my time outdoors working with the kids.

There are thousands of books and plenty of seminars and college courses devoted to coaching youth sports. There is no shortage of opportunities for young coaches to study and learn how to coach.  I don't think individual youth sports programs need to duplicate this stuff.  It it has already been done, and it is readily available to anyone who wants it.

I agree that there is less paperwork and book work in sports than in scouting.  I think the coaches and players like it better that way.  I certainly do.

How does baseball develop character? Scouting actually outlines how they do it. How does little league baseball do it? Is it documented?

Little League Baseball runs in-services on that exact topic.  LLB tells coaches that character development takes place mostly at practices, not at games.  I totally agree.

If you only attend the games, like most parents, you will never see all the hard work that takes place behind the scenes. The heavy lifting takes place at practice.

By the way, how about the umpires?  Would you include all the middle school and high school umpires who work for Little League Baseball when you consider leadership and character?

I can see how youth sports develops character...teamwork, focus, setting and achieving goals, respect, overcoming adversity (especially if you team's not that good!)

 

I think where Scouts is different is in the opportunity to develop leadership...there are plenty of opportunities through a Scouting career for a scout to define a vision and lead other to fulfilling it.

Yes, there are opportunities "through a scouting career" for scouts to develop leadership.  Absolutely true.  But most of these leadership opportunities do not take place in Cub Scouts.  

If we are still talking about Little League, we should be comparing Little League to same-age scouts, not to the full range of scouting ages.

As with scouting, leadership opportunities in sports programs increase as the boys get older.  At the age level I coached (middle school), I would expect the boys to be leading their calisthenics, laps, stretching exercises, and standard drills.  Once they have learned the ropes, they can do that stuff themselves.

Also, not all team members are players.  We also have trainers, equipment managers, and score keepers/statisticians. These non-player positions of responsibility make up about 20% of a team.

We haven't even touched on fund raising and concessions volunteers, who are not necessarily members of the team, but who associate with and provide support for the team.

If you take into account both the players and the non-players on a team, an average sports team has as many positions of responsibility as a scout unit of the same size.

I can see how youth sports develops character...teamwork, focus, setting and achieving goals, respect, overcoming adversity (especially if you team's not that good!)

 

I think where Scouts is different is in the opportunity to develop leadership...there are plenty of opportunities through a Scouting career for a scout to define a vision and lead other to fulfilling it.

Sorry about the -1.  It was a mistake.  I was trying to hit the quote button.

I am sorry to hear that sst3rd is "dun."  This is a decision we all have to make at some time.

I hope that he reconsiders his decision to have a bonfire.  When the Lone Scout program was changed, many years ago, my family saved all the old stuff for future generations to see.  We still have it.  

The OA regalia belongs in a museum, not a bonfire.  Of course, it is his property and his to do with as he wishes.

Yes they do say it. I was asking how do they do it? Scouting has obvious programs that build character. What part of the little league baseball program officially works on character building? I've already said that people may learn character by simply living their lives but that's not the point. You've pointed out the difference between scouting and other programs that compete with us. Everyone says they build character but do they have programs in place to do so and how do they do it really?

Actually, you did ask if they had character building as a stated objective.  They do.  I'm glad we now agree on that point.

How well they do it will vary from team to team and coach to coach.  Just like scouting.  Scout units and scout leaders also vary in how well they advance character development.

As Cambridgeskip says, kids don't join scouting for character development.  They join to have fun.  They join for the game.  We scouters understand that scouting is a game with a purpose.  Parents and kids often don't get that.

It is exactly the same in sports.  The games have a purpose.  They develop character, courage, and loyalty.  I would also add strength, confidence, leadership, sportsmanship, and perseverance.  All good things.

Yes, sports programs do develop character.  They do have programs, policies, methods, and materials in place to promote character development.  Yes, they do.

I disagree with your statement that I point out the differences between scouting and sports programs.  Most of the time, I am pointing out the similarities.  In fact, when I was an Athletic Director, I felt that the two activities were so similar in their goals and values, I wanted scouting to be in the athletic department.

I don't see scouting and sports as two competing programs.  I see them as parallel programs with nearly identical purposes.  I don't care whether boys join scouting or sports.  I really don't.  I just want them to participate is some physical, outdoor activity that promotes good health, morals, and character.  

I guess it depends on what program you're in. Rec sports don't necessarily build character. Some clubs and organizations are not focused on character development as part of their program. Of course character development does happen simply by living but I think we are talking about character development being a mainstay of the program. A stated objective if you like. That's not what sports or some organizations are about. I do agree that FFA and a few others do have that as an aim.

Almost all youth organizations and sports groups have character development as a stated objective.

For example, the Little League Baseball shoulder patch, which is worn on our uniforms, says, "Character, Courage, Loyalty."  Pretty good values, I think.