When do we admit that something isn't working?

[Eamonn 61]

While I will never in a thousand years think of myself as a "Program Cop".

I do feel that I am obligated to play this game by the rules.

While there are some Venturing units that seem to have made Venturing work and work well.

As a program it just isn't working.

I have really tried to sell the program to organizations that would seem be a good fit for the areas of interest.

They either seem to be happy with what they are offering already or just not interested in what we have to offer.

The Crews that do seem to be making a go of it have adults who were already in Scouting.

This can and does work when the adult has a special skill or area of interest.

Sadly, many of the adults who get involved don't have the area of interest or the skills. Many lack a understanding of youth in this age group. This is one reason why so many new Venturing Crews are one year wonders.

I'm not sure about the age group? 14 through 20? I don't know too many 19 year olds who want to hang out with 14 year olds. Still by about 18 many of the members are off to college and are not active.

While maybe youth this age don't want to be pressured into chasing the mighty merit badge, they still like to work on advancement and they still like to be recognized, not having advancement as a method is a little silly.

I hear a lot of people talking about the decline in both Cub Scout and Boy Scout membership. Has no one noticed the decline in Venturing membership?

Has no one noticed that of the total available youth, we are just not reaching them?

When do we say that the time has come to admit that what we have just isn't working and sit down and start working on plan "B"?

Eamonn.

[SWScouter 34]

Interesting thoughts. I've been reading, "An Official History of Scouting." It talked about how the Rover program was growing quite well until WW2 and afterwards never recovered due to a number of the leaders & Rovers being killed during the war. Subsequently, other programs like Explorers were tried but never with the pre-war success of Rovers. Perhaps the lack of good, experienced leaders is a major issue with BSA's Venturing like it was with Rovers.

 

I know that around here, in AZ there are lots of Venturing Crews, but most of these crews are basically just older LDS Boy Scouts. You see, every LDS ward has four units chartered to it. Cub Scouts, Boy Scouts for 11-12 year olds, Varsity Teams for 13-14 year olds, and Venturing Crews for 15-17 year olds (I'm fairly sure but not positive about the age groups). I really don't know how the LDS church runs the Venturing program but I have a feeling that it is similar to a troop but with more religious/mission preparation type activities. There's a smattering of successful non-LDS crews here but I have no knowledge of the percent of successful ones.

 

SWScouter

[Beavah 205]

The successful crews in our area are all what Eamonn describes. Outdoor adventure crews (& ships) put together by Boy Scouters who have the skills and enjoy working with kids in that age group. Beyond that, I know of one historical re-enactment crew in our council, way on the other side.

 

On the boy side, they appeal mostly to Boy Scouts who have gotten tired of the little-kid stuff (including the uniform and advancement), or whose troops don't have an effective older scout/high adventure program. On the girl side, they draw primarily from sisters of active boy scouts who want to get outdoors, and friends.

 

Few really use the materials in a "tight" way the way that Packs, or to a lesser extent Troops do. They do tend to struggle a bit with "ongoing recruiting."

 

I've never understood Youth Ministry or Hobbies crews. The BSA really has nothing to offer these groups, and they do just fine with their churches or hobby associations.

 

To be fair, it's a hard age group for any non-school program to hold. We aren't the only ones who have trouble with the 15-18 year olds. But da program is a bit vague. The successful units all seem to "add to the program" a lot of their own stuff.

 

 

 

[Crew21_Adv 25]

Fellow Venturers,

 

 

Greetings!

 

If I may offer my own opinion (or opinions this may go on for a while, lol). Please take them with a grain of salt, though....

 

 

The basis of the Venturing Program seems good and sound to me. Five different programs for older teenaged youth to pursue. The biggest pitfall of most Venturing units, are when they become just a social group with no planning or agenda.

 

 

Even working with older youth may become slightly a chore. They have some creative and great ideas, but even with Officer Briefing, Officer Seminar, and VLSC, they have little of their own initiative to plan, execute, follow-thru and critique.

 

 

I believe even our own teenaged youth are conditioned this way in life and school. Even in high school with a large teenage population, the school set the curriculum, teachers assign homework, give test and quizzes, and teachers grade. As creative as most teens are, they still have to follow someone else's established path. Some might call this next generation the Microwave Generation (gotta have it right now) things happen so fast in a teen's busy life, they have no patients to wait and work. Also, home and school place them into a cookie cutter approach to life, until they actually venture into the own independent life (I would say somewhere between age 18-22) That is when they only begin to be held independently responsible for decisions and deadlines. Many Venturing units desire to be entire Youth Led, but Adult Association is one of the Venturing methods. And unless a Crew has the Captain or Quarterback of the Football team, or the Homecoming Queen in their Crew, all other Crews need a lot of Adult Association to plan, execute, follow thru and critique.

 

 

I would like to use a couple of metaphors now to illustrate. Some people will comment about placing a carrot in front of the horse and kart. Also, baiting a hook just right so the fish will begin biting. Please don't think I am comparing any of our Venturers to the animal world. But, when we have one of our few Parents Nights (Venturing Court of Honor), our Venturers see just a few of their friends earning Bronze and rarely a Gold, the whole Crew becomes excited and desires to earn one themselves. Boy, do the get excited! "How do I earn one of those?!", is the common question for the night.

 

 

Unfortunately, this high energy excitement and motivation wears off very quickly, maybe two weeks, maybe a month if I am lucky.

 

 

Another pro's and con's. Again this is my opinion. Bronze, Gold and Silver Awards. The Venturing Recognition system is not an advancement, but still a recognition path. However, the steps between them are enormous. I cannot quote from any of the 40-50's Ranger handbooks, but these achievements require sooooo much work, they are spread over 2-3 years of Scouting. Venturers become disenfranchised with the recognition program. The lose their focus and mission. Then drift into a social crew.

 

 

Don't get me wrong. I do like the Venturing recognition program. But I do believe these achievements are too difficult. Similarly, just a few years ago, the Boy Scout program did away with the Belt Loops and incorporated those requirements into the regular rank requirements. A few short years after that, the Boy Scouting program did away with time requirements between Scout rank thru First Class. Many of the Boy Scout Merit Badge requirements reduced the 500 word reports down to 200 word reports. I can empathize. It is difficult for an 11 y/o Scout to write a 200 word report. It does not come easy. All these modifications were done while attempting to maintain the integrity of the Boy Scout ranks, but still entice Scouts to advance and not stray from their Troop and Scouting all together, these changes occurred.

 

 

Similarly, I do feel that Venturing may need to modify the Recognition program. Possibly even making them more attainable, more accessible, so that Venturers can earn them at a more rapid pace. What is the cure? I'm not sure, maybe simplifying the requirements. Maybe creating a Venturing belt loop program, as an immediate recognition program (and middle way to the Bronze Award). Similar changes caused huge waves in the Boy Scouting program, but we got over it. Now, I believe Boy Scouts are advancing faster and remaining interested and focused in the Troop and Boy Scouting.

 

 

I have emailed the National Venturing Youth Cabinet President Maggie Bell and cc'd a Cabinet mentor Craig Murray about this, offering it as my opinion.

 

 

So, getting to the point, my bottom line has three agendas.

Venturing Program Helps

Adult Association (enhanced)

Intermediate Recognitions or Simplified Recognitions

 

A cookie cutter approach, with more structured themed monthly program (similar to Cubs and Boy Scouts). Similar to the Program Helps and pre-written Troop, Den and Pack Meeting Plans of the other programs, a pre-written Venturing Meeting Agenda written inside the Venturing Leaders Handbook. More Adult Association, while maintaining the integrity of youth officer led, incorporate a Crew Committee review of each step or place an younger Associate Advisor on the committee (aged 22-25 maybe?). Simplify the Venturing Advancements, or offer intermediate recognitions enroute to Bronze, Gold and Silver. I honestly believe these changes would excite Venturers and Advisors alike, and most all Venturing Crews would flourish.

 

Calling it a Plan B, may be a stretch. I would prefer to say a more focused approach to Venturing, and modifying the program we already have.

 

Thanks for allowing me to rant. Whew!

 

Scouting Forever and Venture On!

Crew21 Adv

 

[Trevorum 24]

 

At our Commissioners meeting last night, we went over the "red list" - those units in danger of rechartering. All were V Crews folding because their members had gone away to college, they had recruited insufficient numbers to replace themselves, and they had no continuity of adult leadership.

 

[Eamonn 61]

You might say that I'm very much a "Company Man"?

I'm not for "Big Tweaks!" As we have said over the past few months, some tweaks are acceptable and maybe needed.

Over the years,I have fell for the "Fastest Growing Program" and all that stuff.

Last year when I brought up the decline in Venturing Membership,at an Area meeting I was told it was due to some Councils adjusting membership totals. Some Venturing Crews,were being moved to LFL.

I knew that over the years the Venturing membership numbers had been? Shall we say enhanced?

In fact at that time, while of course I was not happy to see the membership go down, I was happy to see that maybe at long last we might get some idea of what the real numbers were?

Sadly the numbers are still going down.

 

I do believe that a program for older youth is needed.

I'm really happy that it is or can be coed.

I just think that what we have doesn't work.

Adding more and more Awards is not the answer, in fact it is only adding to the confusion.

 

The first step to fixing the problem is to see if we really do have a problem?

If we do? We need to admit it and see what can be done to fix it.

This might mean restarting from scratch and a complete make-over.

I of course know that nothing ever happens over night, but I would like to see something that works in my lifetime.

Eamonn.

 

 

[emb021 16]

I have to agree with some of Crew 21 Advisor's comments.

 

I think on of the bigs benefits we could get in Venturing is to have a series of "Venturing Program Helps" for several of the major types of crews.

 

Under the old Exploring program back in the 90s, they created over 20 different Exploring program helps. Only a few would be useful for Venturing (High Adventure, Sports, Religious Life). The High Adventure PH was pretty much pulled into the Venturing Leader Manual, which I always thought a mistake (not all Crews are camping/high adventure). the Sports one, which I recently scanned and would like to find a on-line place for it, could be updated and expanded for Venturing. The religous life one, which after looking over I've discovered to be nearly useless, could be updated and expaned to work alongside the Trust award. Other PH could be developed for other types of crews, and be available on-line (there was some discussion about this on the venturing yahoo group).

 

I know when I brought up the subject of PH to the National Venturing leadership, none were interested in doing this. I'll always felt this to be a mistake, as I think one of the problems of many crews is trying to figure out on their own what to do.

 

 

[CNYScouter 46]

I look at Venturing in our council and wonder the same thing.

 

If you look at our councils web site and newsletters there is nothing about the Venturing program.

In the latest issue of our councils newsletter they had the top sellers for popcorn.

In it were the top sellers for cubs and scouts none for Venturing.

One of the young ladies in the Ship sold $550.

 

Still Venturing was the only part that had any growth last year.

 

The District the ship is in has 2 large high schools in it with almost 6,000 students in them.

There are only about 125 Venturers registered.

The District where I live has twice the number of HS students in it and only has 1 crew with 4 or 5 members that is acts more like a Venture Patrol for the Troop it is associated with.

I also know that the Engineering Explorer Post in the District has almost 300 kids in it.

 

Most of the crews in the Ships District are specialty crews.

We have the ship, 5 shooting sports crews, a golf crew, a jr ROTC crew, a special needs adult crew and a civil war reenactment crew.

Almost all of these have been started in the last year or so.

I have yet to find one that really does Scouting and dont do much more than get together a couple of time a month to do their specialty and dont do any trips, service projects or super-activities.

 

Some of the Ship members have been meeting with one of the shooting crews over the winter.

Right now they seemed interested but I am not sure if just showing up and shooting will hold their interest in the long run.

I have already had some the kids from the shooting crews ask me what other activities the ship does as they were looking to do other things.

 

The 2 out of the 3 High Adventure crews in the district only exist on paper as the crew members are all in college.

The 3rd one will be folding next year as its crew members are off to college

The Troop associated with this crew will also be folding as once these kids turn 18 there wont be enough Scouts left to charter the Troop.

 

But, the council just to our west, where I took WB, has an active thriving Venturing program.

They are all High Adventure crews and the only specialty crew is the Sea Scout Ship that only exists on paper (It has a few members but they have yet to have a meeting).

They have an active Venturing Youth Cabinet and hold 4 or 5 well attended Venturing events a year.

I also know that the Venturing Leaders in this council are fully trained.

A good number of them were on WB staff or taking the course.

 

I know that very few of the Advisors in our council are trained.

We have offered Venturing Leaders Specific in the past but havent had anyone sign up.

It ran for the first time in 3 years at Scouting University but only one person took it.

 

I do think the suggestion of more intermediate steps in the Advancement program is a good idea.

I think that for a youth that has never been involved with Scouts before these are pretty daunting steps before any recognition.

 

Although I see that Venturing is growing in our council I am not sure if the type of crews we have will sustained any long-term growth.

 

I still think the jury is out if the Venturing Program is working or not.

 

 

[MollieDuke 10]

In our area, there was a Venture Crew that recently folded also due to those older recruits leaving for college, but that said, there were problems prior to that.

 

Example: While I believe that it SHOULD be a higher level of performance than Boy Scouts, I feel that a Standard First Aid course is a bit extreme. A healthcare provider type certification is a great mid-range program. Why do I feel this way? It's mainly due to the fact that these kids in our area were WAY to involved in other things to devote 16+ weeks of intensive training to the Standard First Aid course, so just didn't do it.

 

Example 2: I also feel that there is a great deal of requirements that would work well where I used to live in a smaller city, but here in seriously rural America, I cannot find the places listed to go visit much less get there and back in a meeting. I feel that it is mostly designed for urban/inner city/small town places and has little to do with rural America. This continuously frustrated these kids.

 

Now, I know there can be some level of variation with the Crew Advisor, but it shouldn't have to be on every little thing. I think this was a great idea in the inception, and I still believe in the program, but in reality it doesn't take into account many of the unique problems such as rural America and the length of time with a real conception of how busy most high schoolers and college students are these days balancing work/practices/and school work.

 

I think that here where I live, that Venturing is not viewed as doable by the kids. It's been hard for some of our youth, but several did earn their bronze award finally. Then, they were on their way to the next one and left for college, so that ended it altogether as they decided not to re-register.

 

I feel that this program cannot be as popular as it should be unless some revisions are made just simply because the nature of the age span and the lack of resources in rural areas make it nearly impossible to perform well unless it's on a college campus in a city atmosphere.

 

This is just my experience, and I know there are those out there who will disagree, but before you do, just remember that I'm just one of many experiences with this program and this is what I viewed with my own eyes here in Rural, USA.

 

 

[John-in-KC 311]

Looking from a large suburban metro...

 

My District alone has 10K kids in various high schools, public and private.

 

A lot of the young men in these schools have a primary interest in varsity contact sports: Wrestling, Football, Basketball, Soccer. Many are hoping (sometimes wishfully thinking) for college scholarships, and they are putting incredible time and energy into their sport.

 

We can't have varsity contact sports based Venturing Crews, based on my understanding of the G2SS; Varsity football teams and interscholastic or club football competition and activities are unauthorized activities. Now, there's not an explicit prohibition against wrestling, basketball, and soccer, but... if you comply with the spirit of the Guide... and these kids don't want to do other things. They are laser lighted on athletics!

 

There's also the issue of time: HS kids who are committed to any field of endeavor (theater, band, athletics, forensics) are already busy folk. The successful leader has to figure out how to make the bureaucracy of Scouting (apps, charter, fees, training, leader selection practices) make sense with the established institutional program.

 

Further, many parental groups within the HS extracurricular programs are loosely organized. Beyond that, they are short-cycled: The faculty member is the continuity, save for the parent who has two or more children with the same interest passing through. Of the parents in my sons' HS band, I expect a 50% turnover next year ... their kids will be out and gone. Scouting ideally relies on long-term adult associations to the movement.

 

Just random thoughts; take them for whatever they may be worth.(This message has been edited by John-in-KC)

[RangerT 10]

I do not think the problem with Venturing is the program as much as it is a total lack of understanding on how to administer the program, the lack of vision from the so called experts at National, and the desire of old time scouters to turn it into a glorified boy scout troop. It is a coed program run totally by the youth around the interests of those youth, that's why the adults are called advisors not masters or leaders.

 

Eamonn, many sea scout units are folding at a faster rate than Venturing crews, mainly because of the high monetary cost of maintaining a boat or ship, insurance, fuel, etc.

 

I have been an advisor for six years now and my crew is thriving, one reason is because the teens run the program according to their interests and needs, not mine. Advancement really plays no part in Venturing, and is not supposed to, those ambitious enough to earn awards do so and those who don't want to can fully participate in the activities and are not made to feel like outcasts. I wanted to keep my crew at around 25 members for logistical reasons, we are now at 60 members and none want to break off to form a second crew. They enjoy the dynamics of our group as it is.

 

So my question to those failing crews is what are you doing wrong? Venturing is not boy scouts or even sea scouts, if you follow what is in the manuals and run it according to the guidelines it can not fail. My guess is that crews that fail are too controlled by the adults who have a vision far different from the teens, trying to be a glorified scoutmaster or whatever.

 

My crew does some outdoor activities, many service projects, they go bowling, to the movies, trips to the ocean, have visited Washington DC, love to go on weekend retreats, play sports, to name just a few things we do. About half the group earns bronze and gold, a few silver awards and a few have earned the Quest and Trust awards, three are finishing Ranger shortly. We follow the pubs from National, half my crew are female and we are growing every year, so again I have to ask those failing crews WHY!!!(This message has been edited by RangerT)

[trailpapa314 10]

Let me start by saying this is my first post so take it easy on me.

 

I stated a Venturing Crew in April 2005, Oil City, PA French Creek Council. We started with no support from Council or the District. My background is from Boy Scouts so yes of course I opted for the Outdoor Crew. Our initial registration was 3 male 2 female, of which the males are Boy Scouts all Eagles. The Crew actually voted and decided what they wanted to do and they said stay as an outdoor Crew. From that point to today the Crew has grown to 20 youth members of which only 5 are Boy Scouts, and 8 are females, the ages go from 14 to 19 and they are like a big family. My Crew is run by the youth of which none of the officers have any prior Scouting background. I have a young lady for Crew President and last year when the Crew was asked to host the District Klondike Derby, the president at that time an Eagle Scout asked this young lady to chair the activity. Her reply was sure...What is a Klondike Derby?? Well she did what everyone adult wise in the Council said would not happen and ran an extremely successful Klondike Derby. This year again we have been asked to host the Derby and she didn't even bat an eye saying sure no problem. She has been extremely busy with planning the event and looks forward to now assisting on the District Activity Committee planning furture events.

 

The key as I see for the Crew to not be the 1 year and out the door...is a couple of items:

1. Have fun!!!

2. Let them run the show within Safe Scouting Guidelines

3. It is best for them to learn by their mistakes...they hold each other more accountable that way.

4. I don't push the Recognition stuff down their throat...they work at their own pace.

5. We meet each week (ie. week 1 business meeeting, week 2 recognition work if any, week 3 community service, week 4 away from the meeting place do something, and if a week 5 we have a games night with pizza soda or something of the sort.)

 

Sorry about this being long but success breads success and if I can help anyone out there with any issues feel free to contact me.

Tim

[Stosh 3452]

Excellent post for a first one. But I'd like to also add....

 

We do everything "wrong" and are successful. As a general outdoor post, the prescribed format you have suggested from BSA is excellent and would recommend it for anyone wanting to start a crew. However, one must also realize that in order to be successful in certain other situations, one must toss out some or all of the rules.

 

As a US history crew with current emphasis on Civil War reenacting, everyone's a private except for the advisor and one of the assistant advisors. They happen to be a Lt. Col. and Capt. by earned rank in the hobby of CW reenacting. This means all the crew members and all other assistant advisors are privates. If the event does not require the leadership of the Lt. Col. or Capt. they too fall in as privates.

 

We run our crew as if it was 1860 and the kids love it. Our charter members are aging out and are coming back and signing on as assistant advisors. We have no president, no vice-president, treasurer or secretary. We have adults in charge of everything. Obviously one does not want a 15 year old quartermaster in charge of 10# of black powder rolled up in paper.

 

Obviously with 7 years of success and more kids coming into the program, we must be doing something right. The By-laws of the group is the closest we get to having any programatic directive from the BSA. As captain of the chartering organization, I would assume that for the most part, I'm as close to the equivelent of the Scoutmaster from Hell type situation as anyone can get. So far I haven't had any complaints. I must also add that as an ASM for the past 15 years, the youth have ownership in the program as a whole. After every event we all sit down and evaluate, suggest improvements, discuss safety, etc. to make sure the event was worthwhile. There are no officers at this point, everyone from the advisor to the newest member are all equals. Everyone's comments carry the same weight.

 

 

Stosh