dkurtenbach

Venividi wrote: "(I)t is the unit's responsibility to decide on the quality level that they want, the standards they expect, and then implement a program that provides it." Venividi, well said. denP, I've signed up as your 11th "ignorer."(This message has been edited by dkurtenbach)

[badenP wrote:] In this forum we debate and argue over rules everyday, yet the councils don't seem to follow them, many of the scout leaders fudge on them, and National doesn't seem to care one way or the other, and the result is the disjointed program we have today, producing substandard scouts and Eagles. IMO we should take all the advancement guidelines, procedures and regulations, and the G2SS and burn them since few are following them anyway and no one from council or National is enforcing them or can enforce them. However if council is meeting their numbers and money quotas, junior is ge

denP, we know what happens when we ass_u_me. Ask my Council's Camping Director and Camping Chairman, the last couple of Deputy Scout Executives in my Council, and the current Central Region chief about my "fall back and play dead attitude." LOL. This topic offers interconnected issues at all levels, from whether National has the right idea about what summer camps should be doing all the way down to whether a 15-year-old first year camp staffer should be entrusted with teaching Environment Science. Some problems can be fixed on site with a word to the Program Director or the Camp Commis

TAHAWK wrote: "The decision to offer MB's that are not, or cannot be, adequately staffed is a decision - not an act of God." That statement presumes that the decision-maker knows that the merit badges are not or cannot be adequately staffed. But who is the decision-maker? And whose opinion matters concerning whether a merit badge is adequately staffed? The Area Director who believes that the staff members teaching the badge don't know the subject matter of a particular merit badge well enough? Her boss, the Program Director, who has 50 Scouts signed up for that badge and no

"God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference." You can demand all you want from your camp, district, council, and BSA. That doesn't mean you can effect change in your camp, district, council, and BSA. You need something else. To effect change, you need (a) to have or be able to create conditions in which the change you want is both possible and likely to be successful, and (b) you need the leverage to permanently move the powers that be. Calling the powers that be "bozos" probably won't

When I was younger and had fewer years of Boy Scout leadership under my belt, I used to "rage against the machine" far more than I do now, and one of my pet peeves was summer camp. I don't like the advancement-based (as opposed to an outdoor skills and outdoor adventure-based) nature of the typical summer camp program, and I don't like it that the advancement program was often poorly executed. Now I'm much more cynical, or perhaps just old and tired; but the wall we beat our heads against consists of this: (1) These days, most Scouts, most parents, and most Scout leaders want their Sco

The tents are big canvas (approx 8x8) on wooden platforms, each with two cots. You do not need your own tents.

EDGE (Explain, Demonstrate, Guide, Enable) and Hondo (a reference to the movie "Hondo" in which John Wayne's title character, on learning that a boy can't swim, promptly tosses him into water over his head) are two different, even opposing, approaches to teaching a boy _how_ to carry out a task. The problem posed in the title of this thread is about motivation. As the old Boy Scout Roundtable training used to say, Roundtable was about giving troop leaders "the WILL to do and the SKILL to do." So, how do EDGE and Hondo affect the WILL to do while providing Scouts with the SKILL to do?

I think most folks use the two terms interchangeably -- the important distinction is not "led" vs. "run" but "youth" vs. "adult." Dan K.

1. You don't want Scouts who wouldn't fit in with your troop's vision and style. (I found that out the hard way.) 2. You DEFINITELY don't want parents who wouldn't fit in with your troop's vision and style. (Ask Stosh.) It may feel bad to not be successful recruiting Webelos Scouts, but you may be dodging more than a few bullets. And if your program is successful by your definition, who cares? Your troop has to have a great program for the Scouts it has, not the Scouts it wishes it had. And when you do have visiting Webelos, don't do anything special for them. For the go

Good explanation from ScoutNut. Let me see if I can phrase it another way that might be helpful. Tiger, Wolf, Bear, and Webelos are first and foremost the names of the grade-level programs (or sub-programs of Cub Scouting) that the boys participate in. Boys are called by the name of the grade level programs they are members of. Thus boys in or entering 1st grade are Tigers; boys who have completed 2nd grade or are in 3rd grade are Bears; boys who have completed 3rd grade or are in 4th and 5th grade, but have not yet left the pack, are Webelos Scouts. For each grade level program they

Some good posts. I see adults having three different roles in a Boy Scout troop. The first is Program Oversight: health and safety, compliance with BSA and chartered organization rules and policies, and ensuring that what happens in the troop is a _Scouting_ program. Program Oversight forms a protective and prescriptive shell that doesn't really vary much in size because it isn't dependent on the capabilities of the boys. Inside that adult zone is the boy-run program zone. The second adult role is Coaching and Mentoring -- but not dictating to -- youth leaders so they can carry

AlabamaScouter wrote: "I froze the patrols . . . I've decided that the new scout patrol will merge with the oldest patrol . . . I think it is important for the boys to stay with the group they came in with." There are a lot of "gray areas" between: (a) the Program Oversight areas that adults control (making sure that the troop maintains a safe and solid _Scouting_ program within the rules and policies and methods of BSA and of the Chartered Organization); and (b) the Boy-Run zone within that protective and directive shell, in which Scouts get to make the plans and decisions about _their_

I expect leaders to . . . - Sign up only if they really want to help out. - Sign up only if they are willing to have fun with Scouting. The last thing I want is a leader who treats it like work. - Do only as much as they can reasonably do without taking time away from other important matters in their lives. - Not feel guilty when they can't help out with a campout or activity. - Get along and cooperate with the other leaders, despite difficult personalities. - Conform to my rather easy-going philosophy as long as I am Scoutmaster, or volunteer to take over the job. I have a

For our troop's 40th anniversary I built a display for all the ribbons that had been gathering dust in a leader's attic. I took a six inch wide pine board about 4 feet long, and attached some 1/4 inch plywood pieces cut into the shape of an eagle's head and wingtips, and wooden letters with our troop number on the front and Boy Scouts of America on the wingtips. Stained brown (except for the head -- white -- and the letters -- clear), I put a bunch of small eye screws on the back, then strung the ribbons on safety pins five at a time, and pinned them to the eye screws so that they hang down

One of the responsibilities of adults in the Boy Scouting program is to ensure that the youth program is a _Scouting_ program, not a video game club or a marching band, or something else that doesn't satisfy the Purposes of the Boy Scouts of America, the Methods, and the Boy Scouting program as set out in BSA publications and training. That sphere of adult control also includes ensuring compliance with applicable laws, rules, and policies; the desires of the Chartered Organization; sound safety rules and practices; and of course the Scout Oath and Law -- a responsibility shared with the y

Adult-imposed competitions in an adult-imposed format to vindicate a rigid adult notion of what patrols should look like? Nah. That is adult-led stuff. Let the boys choose patrol competitions that they want as elements of their program to enhance their program goals. As long as their choices are within BSA rules and policies, comply with the Scout oath and law, and don't overtax the troop's resources, competitions are youth responsibilities. If they succeed, it is due to the boys' efforts; if they fail, the boys will learn from them. Dan K.

Oh, my. A case of distantus punditus maximus. They rejected the "patrols by rank" idea, which, by the way, required some real creativity and intelligence from the Scout who came up with it on the spot like that. As should be abundantly clear, they were looking for an objective organizing criterion, rather than a subjective one, or one that relied on chance. And they found one. Sorry they didn't conform to the "mixed-age patrols is the only good way" adult preconceived notion; but their decision stayed within the bounds of BSA rules and policies and the Scout Oath and Scout Law, in additio

Beavah wrote: "Sounds like yeh might be overemphasizing advancement method in your troop, dkurtnbach. Boys are seeing da core of scouting in your troop as being rank instruction. Yeh should perhaps think about how to re-balance your use of da Methods." Quite a conclusion to draw from that one little story. And incorrect. Actually, I'm constantly being pestered by ASMs and parents about my UNDER-emphasizing advancement (in their view) -- requiring that boys who want to advance have to take the initiative. No "classes," no pushing Scouts to finish this or that requirement, no pointing o

In December at our troop planning conference, which was well-attended by Scouts, I gave the boys a list of issues I wanted them to deal with. One of those issues was the organization of patrols. Our troop has never had "permanent" patrols, and there was usually a reorganization at least once a year. Over the last couple of years, however, the "reorganizations" had become chaotic, with boys constantly wanting to shift around as friendships evolved (or devolved), and almost weekly efforts to change patrol names. So I handed this problem to the boys and sat back. My only instruction was that

Yo, Stosh! Stosh! Hey, the issue is over here! Come back! 8^) I know, I know, you get a little excited. That's fine. I'm just not sure how any of that addresses the quite specific issue that thriftyscout raised in this thread. But thanks anyway! Dan K.

Stosh, getting back to the original issue -- having enough boys from a patrol going on a campout that the patrol is a real, functioning patrol on the campout. My view is that if your goal is Scouts working together in a real, functioning patrol on a campout, you need a bare minimum of 4 boys but ideally 6 to 8. But what you're getting is 2 or 3 boys from each of the troop's "standing" patrols, and they don't want to "move in with the neighbors" for the campout. I definitely agree that this is an issue that the boys can deal with: Tell those 12 boys, or 20 boys, or 50 boys, that in orde

Let me suggest an answer to my own question: "What do you think you can accomplish on a campout with a larger patrol attendance that you can't accomplish on a campout with only 2 or 3 patrol members?" As Baden-Powell stated in _Aids to Scoutmastership_: "But first and foremost: The Patrol is the character school for the individual. To the Patrol Leader it gives practise in Responsibility and in the qualities of Leadership. To the Scouts it gives subordination of self to the interests of the whole, the elements of self-denial and self-control involved in the team spirit of cooperation an

thriftyscout wrote: "I would like to start pulling them together into a patrol so that they can have a better program based upon the original BSA program often cited by Kudu." Please don't take any of my comments as being critical in any way of what you want to do. I'm just very interested because the situation you are in seems to be very common. So I go back to my earlier question: What do you think you can accomplish on a campout with a larger patrol attendance that you can't accomplish on a campout with only 2 or 3 patrol members? Put another way, what are you doing that cause

Stosh, I'm not talking about "reverse engineering" the campouts with 2-3 patrol members. I'm talking about reverse engineering "ideal" campouts with 5-8 patrol members in attendance to see what makes them good. Take those campouts with high patrol member participation, and work backward to try to figure out what factors lead to a high level of patrol member attendance. I suspect that the possible causes will be different now than they were 50 years ago when there weren't as many organized youth activities on weekends and Scouts didn't have nearly as many conflicts. Most of the patrol w