Just got word....

[TAHAWK 1420]

0_ __0 

[Stosh 3452]

My two cents...

 

The new boy patrol is something that my troop discussed, but never implemented. I can understand National thinking that Scouts that earn First Class in their first year tend to stay longer, but I think that we're just rushing them along. Do the boys really get anything out of being forced to earn First class in the first year.

 

I start every new year talking to my parents and explaining the program, and how it differs from Cub Scouts and why that is. My go to line every year is "I would rather your son stay active in the troop for seven years (11 thru 18) and at our last Scoutmasters conference say he enjoyed his time with us than be pushed earn his Eagle at 14 and drop out because he hated the program. While your son may not have made eagle, he would have experienced leadership opportunities, made lifelong friends, developed positive traits, and learned skills that will serve him for the rest of his life

 

I feel the key then is not rushing scouts to first Class, but offering a good program. Scouts will advance at their own speeds.

 

A NSP does not need to get to FC in the first year.  I don't push that.  Instead I work on seeing to it the boys get oriented to scouting, bond together as a patrol, and focus on age appropriate activities.  After one year and the next crop of boys show up, they "transition" into a regular patrol whether any of them are FC or not.  Basically it's a naming convention only.  Yes, they continue to work on their advancement to FC even in the second year, but the TG drops back into his regular patrol and if he's done a good job, the boys do just fine on their own.  The only time there wasn't a TG was when the new boys elected an older scout to be their PL.  I didn't notice any difference in the development of the patrol that first year.  Because of the bonding process that first year, the activities they are involved with are generally simpler in nature.  Outings, summer camp, camporees, etc.  When they get older and transition into a Venture patrol, their skill level allows them...as a patrol.... to go to high adventure together without having to break up the patrol.   if there still are boys not at FC, a bit of peer pressure goes a long way to motivate them to get ready for the HA activities.

[Eagledad 2777]

I agree that there is no need to rush. But it is can also be an easy goal to reach if the troop is focused on teaching scout skills. First Class rank is an achievement of mastering the craft of Scouting. If the troop (and I mean youth), are learning, using, perfecting and teaching other scouts the skills of scouting then First Class will come naturally and more likely, sooner rather than later, because they are doing & having fun..

Focusing on teaching scout skills is truly a slippery slope. i think the word that concerns me here is "teaching". Boys of the scout age learn far more by observing the skills being used in action than by instructor directing. Of course Scouts need some instruction to learn specific skills, but a troop that builds on learning skills as the highest priority typically misses the point of scouting. The main purpose of the program is developing moral and ethical decision makers. The practice of making decisions occurs best in the woods, not the classroom. A troop that focuses on adventure where Scouts see scout skills used is far more successful than a troop that focuses on first class in the first year.

 

Instead of making all the boys scout skills experts, make the program adventurous enough that if drives the boys to want more skills.

 

Barry

[Eamonn 61]

Have to say that this thread has got the little grey cells working.

 

Thinking back to when the earth was young and I  was a little fellow.

I became a Boy Scout (And yes this was before the change in the UK and we became Scouts.)

My aims were to do something with my pals, away from the watchful eyes of my parents and nosey neighbors and spend time away from the city.

I remained in Scouts because I was having fun.

Sure enough along the way, I picked up a fair amount of skills.

I was very fortunate in joining a Troop that was very active and we were camping, participating in stuff that held the interests of the thirty or forty Scouts who were involved.

 

When I aged out of the Troop, I became a Venture Scout.

Mainly because my friends were involved.

We were an all male unit. Interested in cars, girls, music and trying to just do whatever was fun.

Somehow almost by accident I did manage to become a Queens Scout.

Something that I'm more proud of now than I was then.

 

I became a Scout Leader (SM.) At a very early age. Maybe way too early?

I was very selfish had an ego as big as the great outdoors, but for all my failings I was very committed to Scouting, the Troop and the District.

Flustering and ruffling the feathers of the old timers in the District was something that I enjoyed !!

 

I wasn't married, didn't have any real hobbies other than Scouting, which gave me a lot of time to commit to the Troop, which had more money than it could ever spend, even with me making constant demands from the Group Committee.

 

Due to me being so very selfish, I steered the PLC into plans and into doing the things that I enjoyed.

My thinking being that if I was having fun and having a good time then it would follow that they all would have fun and everything would fall into place.

 

From the start of my time as an adult leader, I didn't have much time and looking back was guilty of maybe being a little afraid of Scout parents.

 

Sure if we had a new Lad join the Troop or cross over from the Pack, I would make sure to visit their parents at their home. Introduce myself, go over what we did and what was expected.

But the last thing I wanted was a parent getting in my way or taking away from what I seen as a very important part of being a Scout.

We held a Troop birthday party once a year made a few presentations, sometimes showed a move that covered some of the stuff we had done.

Gave the parents a cup of tea, a piece of cake and I was happy to not see them till next year.

 

The leadership of the Troop was myself and a Leadership Team of about eight adults who were all best friends all maybe a little bit nuts? But for the most part were as willing as I was to put the time in that was needed.

 

There is no real way to measure the success of a Troop.

But within a couple of years we were the Troop winning almost all the District competitions.

We had a membership of between eighty and ninety youth members. (Boys).

This of course fed my ego to no end.

 

Getting used to Scouting on this side of the pond ( USA.) Wasn't easy.

I didn't understand and maybe still don't !!

The emphasis on advancement.

The lack of outdoor activities that many or most Troops in the area where I live offer their Scouts.

Sadly we have Troops that are happy to offer two or three weekend camp outs and a week at the same Summer Camp every year and think that this is Scouting.

 

Worse still, at least to my mind is when I visit our Council Summer Camp and see Troops camping with more adults than there are Scouts.

Parents who seem happy to buy a uniform shirt.

Hang out by the campfires for a week and only leave to eat at meal times in the dinning hall.

 

They say with age comes wisdom?

I'm working on that one.

I do now realize that parents have to be managed.

Just having them around doing diddly-squat  is not an option.

However..

For a few years I served as the Skipper of a Sea Scout Ship.

We had about a dozen male Sea Scouts and half as many female Sea Scouts.

 

My experience with girls was next to none.

Sure I'd had a few girl friends,  and Her Who Must Be Obeyed falls into the category, but girls !!

I wasn't sure about.

As it turned out I had a wonderful time working with them.

They seemed to really embrace what we were doing, picked up the skills a lot faster than the boys, even the Eagle Scouts !!

But to make it all work we needed a female leader.

 

The parents of the female Sea Scouts did seem to want their kids to be part of something that they had never been offered.

They gladly served on the Ships Committee but trying to get them really involved and learn even the most basic of skills was just not going to happen.

A couple were happy to go on the charter as Assistants and were even happy to participate in weekends away with the Ship.

 

I of course was a true gentleman and did everything possible to ensure that they were comfortable and involved in as much as they wanted to be or as little as they wanted to be.

But I couldn't help feeling that spending time on them was taking away from the time I should have been with our youth members.

 

Am I a sexist?

Lord knows that I have never thought of myself as one.

I work with female Corrections Officers who are as good as the best male Officers.

 

Maybe somewhere deep down I think that maybe I'm a little scared of parents?

All this talk of family?

Boy I'm not so sure about it!

Lads join Scouts to do things away from their family.

Scouts and Scouting does a lot to aid and help cut the apron strings.

 

I look at my son.

He is a lot more involved in doing stuff around the house than I ever have been.

He runs the sweeper, does laundry and cooks meals for his wife and himself.

While I admit that the laundry room is a place I hardly ever visit.

Maybe the household roles as I knew and know them are changing.

But a Mum leaving the family home with young kids at home to take the Scouts away for a week?

I kinda think is a tall order.

Are there some women who have and do this?

Sure there are.

 

I do think that we are going to go co-ed.

The reasons why can be discussed at great length.

 

My great hope would be that before we make such a big change, is that maybe we take a long hard look at the entire organization.

There is room for improvement.

There are things that clearly just don't work.

Maybe now is the time for that "New Broom."

 

Change and changes are coming.

Not everyone is going to be happy.

Some great adult members will opt to walk away.

While that is a real shame, but maybe it is the price that we have to pay.

 

I'm guessing that even after whatever might be coming??

There is a very good chance that very soon after there will be tweaks.

Even before the tweaks Units and some CO will make their own tweaks.

 

Seems to me and it is just my own personal opinion.

That we are not heading in the right direction and something needs to be done.

But hopefully whatever is done is done with transparency, careful thought and some understanding for the volunteers we have who do so much.

 

Eamonn  

      

 

   

[Snow Owl 53]

Has anyone gotten anything official?  Our SE never tells us anything so we are officially the last to know. 

 

I am NOT trying to reopen or open he discussion of yes or no, or the Pros and Cons, just looking for any current info.

[cocomax 150]

I was a scout back in the 1970's I remember driving to Camparees listening to Disco on the radio. . .  We all had tons of energy and camparees were all about companion between patrols and lively campfires.

 

It was boys doing scout stuff for fun and it was really fun.  I was scout from 11 until I was 17 and I made First Class, it changed my life for the better. 

 

Just last year I went to a camparee and what did I see .  .  .  

 

Hundreds of scouts and scouters sitting in lawn chairs looking at smart phones most the day.

 

Scouts moving slow and looking bored with nothing to do. 

 

Three young eagle scouts trying to teach a class on knot tying, but did not know how to tie a bowline or taunt line or how to lash two poles together. They were fumbling around with their cell phones trying to figure it out. 

 

Lady scouters yelling at their boys lined up in a row at the top of their lungs for 5 minutes or more.

 

Scouters trying to convince scouts that scouting is fun and they should stay in.

 

Scouters frantic about pushing their boys to get their eagle by age 14 because cars and girls will distract them and pull them away.

 

Merit badge classes where scouts just sit around listening to someone talk and talk and talk. . . . school style.

 

Instead of normal campfire they had something called a "beading" that consisted of a group of crying adults insulting each other for 45 minutes with random patrol yells thrown in, they spoke of feelings and visions and leaving a legacy. . .  but the scouts and cub scouts watching this had no idea what was going on because it was all inside jokes, insults and expressions.   

 

This is what a camparee has become?  Really?

 

It appears to me the Boy Scouts has been damaged badly.  It has been transformed from a fun outdoor adventure into a boring advancement driven school setting.

 

The program has been changed to fit the needs of the current local leadership, leaders that don't like camping, don't do hiking and anything the least bit adventures is too dangerous.  What our local leaders can do is run a smart phone,  run a school style program with long boring powerpoint presentations, and push advancement.

 

The Boys Scout program is so broken that all we really have left is advancement, so that is all scouts do anymore.

 

Adding girls to Boy Scouts will make scouts seem even more school like, adults will have to take more control of the situation.  We are on a path from the old idea of the "Boy Lead Troop" to now form of scouting that will be nothing more than a "Class of Children in a Troop".   I see that even wood badge is now teaching that "Boy Scouts are Adult Lead".

 

I do not think the Girls themselves will be much problem. I do not think they can hurt Boy Scouts much, if at all. I think the big problem will be the new influx of leaders and parents that girls will bring with them that will push to make Boy Scouts a safe space for girls,  and bring to Boy Scouts the adult driven interpersonal drama that we already see in Girl Scouts.   It will require more control from the adults over the "children" to keep the peace.

 

Advancement is mostly boring, it that is all you do.

 

Boy Scouts has become boring.

 

Girl Scouts has become boring.

 

Being boring is why Boy Scouts is in trouble.

 

My question is has Boy Scouts become boring because of the program or because both the Boys coming in and new Scouters are boring and they bring a lack of energy with them. . .

 

I am a 51 year old Scouter (First class scout) that wants to go on long hikes, hike to strange and interesting places, go caving, explore ghost towns, go to Death Valley. . . lets go!

 

A Scout should be Scouting! 

[HelpfulTracks 478]

Focusing on teaching scout skills is truly a slippery slope. i think the word that concerns me here is "teaching". Boys of the scout age learn far more by observing the skills being used in action than by instructor directing. Of course Scouts need some instruction to learn specific skills, but a troop that builds on learning skills as the highest priority typically misses the point of scouting. The main purpose of the program is developing moral and ethical decision makers. The practice of making decisions occurs best in the woods, not the classroom. A troop that focuses on adventure where Scouts see scout skills used is far more successful than a troop that focuses on first class in the first year.

 

Instead of making all the boys scout skills experts, make the program adventurous enough that if drives the boys to want more skills.

 

Barry

 

I cannot agree that teaching is a slippery slope. Older scouts using the EDGE method to show a younger scouts how to pitch a tent, build a fire, use a map and compass, build a pioneer gateway etc., is in my opinion, exactly what scouting is about. In fact it is part of the requirements for rank advancement to teach.

If a scout sees a another scout struggling to set up tent improperly he should step in and offer assistance.

 

"Let me explain to you about setting up your tent.

Now I'll show you

Now you try it.

Good, you have it, now pass it along."

[Eagledad 2777]

This,

 

I cannot agree that teaching is a slippery slope. Older scouts using the EDGE method to show a younger scouts how to pitch a tent, build a fire, use a map and compass, build a pioneer gateway etc., is in my opinion, exactly what scouting is about. In fact it is part of the requirements for rank advancement to teach.

 

is not the same as this.

 

If a scout sees a another scout struggling to set up tent improperly he should step in and offer assistance.

 

 

While your focused on teaching, I was speaking more in context of using the method of advancement as the main program objective.

 

I'm tempted to repeat my thoughts on advancement vs adventure. But I will rely on my previous posts to support my point that a program of advancement will never have the foundation for building character, nor will the program develop a maturity that is attractive for older scouts. Advancement is limited to the finite skills in the program.

 

Listen to this scout leader:

 

 

I am a 51 year old Scouter (First class scout) that wants to go on long hikes, hike to strange and interesting places, go caving, explore ghost towns, go to Death Valley. . . lets go!

 

A Scout should be Scouting! 

 

Barry

[HelpfulTracks 478]

This,

 

 

is not the same as this.

 

 

While your focused on teaching, I was speaking more in context of using the method of advancement as the main program objective.

 

I'm tempted to repeat my thoughts on advancement vs adventure. But I will rely on my previous posts to support my point that a program of advancement will never have the foundation for building character, nor will the program develop a maturity that is attractive for older scouts. Advancement is limited to the finite skills in the program.

 

Listen to this scout leader:

 

 

Barry

 

Honestly I am not following you post or meaning, or the distinction you are drawing from my previous post,  so I will go back to what I stated before.

 

Advancement can be achieved through mastering scouting skills, which can be done through activities the scout is doing and having fun. I fail to see the slippery slope in any of that.

[Cambridgeskip 658]

 

 

I do not think the Girls themselves will be much problem. I do not think they can hurt Boy Scouts much, if at all. I think the big problem will be the new influx of leaders and parents that girls will bring with them that will push to make Boy Scouts a safe space for girls,  and bring to Boy Scouts the adult driven interpersonal drama that we already see in Girl Scouts.   It will require more control from the adults over the "children" to keep the peace.

 

 

 

I am curious as to why you think that will be the case? I don't get why it follows that bringing in new adults will create the environment you describe?

 

Different country I know but the none of the adults, be they men or women, create drama or seek to change things to make it a "safe space". The only thing done in that respect is certainly we won't tolerate any form of sexism, same as we won't tolerate any other form of bullying, but scouts now with boys and girls looks broadly like scouts did when I was one 25 years ago and it was just boys.

 

Maybe it's because the vast majority of our adults are not parents of the scouts. These are the mugshots of our current crop of adults (or most of them, a couple not there), only one of them is a parent. I'll leave you to guess which one it is! Of 17 adults between two troops 9 came all the way through scouts and came out as adults at the other end. 1 is a parent. And 7 were friends of existing leaders who got talked into signing up!

 

I'd suggest that despite some muddling through initially you may well find that in 10 years time those female leaders you need are former scouts who have gone all the way through.

[fred johnson 936]

Maybe it's because the vast majority of our adults are not parents of the scouts. These are the mugshots of our current crop of adults (or most of them, a couple not there), only one of them is a parent. I'll leave you to guess which one it is! Of 17 adults between two troops 9 came all the way through scouts and came out as adults at the other end. 1 is a parent. And 7 were friends of existing leaders who got talked into signing up!

 

I think UK has a great model for unit leadership.  I am referring to encouraging unit leaders to be younger than a specific age.  Scouts need leaders that are not parents of scouts in the unit.  Cub Scouts is different, but the Boy Scout program is damaged by heavily involved family members that muddle the program and the experiences.  

 

A favorite example is the set of unit leaders that after a heavy intense rain rushed all the wet stuff to a local laundromat to be dried.  While I applaud the energy and enthusiasm, they denied the scouts an important learning experience.  .

 

#1  That they can overcome adversity.  They'd find a way to get through the night, hang up the wet stuff and survive.  

#2  That they don't need someone to rescue them.  

#3  That they should secure their tents better.

Edited September 25, 2017 by fred johnson

[qwazse 4342]

Oh, yay! I can get on my downfall-of-civilization soapbox.

I cannot agree that teaching is a slippery slope. Older scouts using the EDGE method to show a younger scouts how to pitch a tent, build a fire, use a map and compass, build a pioneer gateway etc., is in my opinion, exactly what scouting is about. In fact it is part of the requirements for rank advancement to teach.

If a scout sees a another scout struggling to set up tent improperly he should step in and offer assistance.

 

"Let me explain to you about setting up your tent.

Now I'll show you

Now you try it.

Good, you have it, now pass it along."

But, he doesn't have it. The thing about human memory is, it forgets! And be it one skill or another, it will be forgotten. If all that was used is EDGE, the student will be left unlearned and totally dependent on his instructor.

A scout must not first be explained a skill, or shown a skill, or condition muscle memory to do a skill ...

He must be shown a reference about a skill and, to the best of his ability, read it!!! That way, the teaching of his instructor has some permanence beyond the bounds of human memory.

 

The EDGE method falls woefully short in that department. <Rant over, for more see http://scouter.com/index.php/topic/7204-edge-why-dictate-it/?p=304641>

 

It's not book work per se that scouts find stifling. It's book work that doesn't "come alive." I think some of the girls who are interested in BSA picked up the Boy Scout Handbook or Boy's Life, taught themselves a few skills, and concluded "This is fun. More please!"

[Eagledad 2777]

Honestly I am not following you post or meaning, or the distinction you are drawing from my previous post,  so I will go back to what I stated before.

 

Advancement can be achieved through mastering scouting skills, which can be done through activities the scout is doing and having fun. I fail to see the slippery slope in any of that.

The slippery slope is using advancement to drive the the program instead of outdoor activities for adventure. Advancement tends to limit the troop program to activities themed toward getting requirements signed off for rank. Adventure instead encompasses all the eight method for the purpose of a fun hands on outdoor experience. It's all to easy to let skills requirements drive the theme of the troop activities.

 

I consider instructional teaching a red flag indicating that our program isn't doing enough outdoor activities to pass the skill along by simple observation. 

 

Of course there are times when instruction is required to pass along a skill. But, the program should be driven so that desire to learn a skill is motivated for participating in program activities, not for advancement.

 

Funny story. Our troop spent a month getting ready for a weekend of search and rescue activities. The troop meeting activities also included first aid instructional activities to prepare for the victims of the search and rescue. What the scouts didn't know is the older scouts set up a car wreck simulation near the camp. They had a blast spending learning how to apply makeup for simulating blood and broken bones. We hiked the troop about mile into camp so that we would walk on the road of the simulated wreck. I will never forget how slowly those scouts approached the accident scene when they realized that they happened on to a bad wreck. Of course as they got closer, they recognized the older scouts and what they were doing. The older scout did an excellent job the next hour quizing the scouts of the injuries and first aid that should be applied. Everyone enjoyed the experience and learned a lot. Even the adults. 

 

Fast forward six months as our Troop Convoy driving to summer camp witness a car overturn on a wet road. Several adults trained in these things attended to the people in the vehicle while the rest of us (about 100 total) stood safely on the side of the road out of harms way. Our concern was another car loosing control into the scouts. I will never forget the first year scout who walked up to me and said in all seriousness, " we get trained for this exact situation and you won't let us help." I don't remember what I said to him, but I took his frustration as a compliment to the program.

 

Barry

[TAHAWK 1420]

"I cannot agree that teaching is a slippery slope. Older scouts using the EDGE method to show a younger scouts how to pitch a tent, build a fire, use a map and compass, build a pioneer gateway etc., is in my opinion, exactly what scouting is about. In fact it is part of the requirements for rank advancement to teach.

If a scout sees a another scout struggling to set up tent improperly he should step in and offer assistance.

 

'Let me explain to you about setting up your tent.

Now I'll show you

Now you try it.

Good, you have it, now pass it along.."

 

After 52 years working with youth in Scouting (and many years in youth sports coaching), I would respectfully suggest that consciousness on the part of the supposed learner of a need to learn is a precondition to successful teaching.  

 

 

"But, he doesn't have it. The thing about human memory is, it forgets! And be it one skill or another, it will be forgotten. If all that was used is EDGE, the student will be left unlearned and totally dependent on his instructor.

 

A scout must not first be explained a skill, or shown a skill, or condition muscle memory to do a skill ...

He must be shown a reference about a skill and, to the best of his ability, read it!!! That way, the teaching of his instructor has some permanence beyond the bounds of human memory.

 

The EDGE method falls woefully short in that department. <Rant over, for more see http://scouter.com/i...e-it/?p=304641>

 

It's not book work per se that scouts find stifling. It's book work that doesn't "come alive." I think some of the girls who are interested in BSA picked up the Boy Scout Handbook or Boy's Life, taught themselves a few skills, and concluded "This is fun. More please!"

 

 

I agree with most of the observations that you make, but I think this is a whiff. 

 

1. A person may be as good a reference as any book or video, and often is better, especially if a respected leader (by which I mean youth, as opposed to "Scouter" or "adult.").   A human resource can react to the learner's reaction and answer the learner's actual questions in the there and then with no need to anticipate or assume.  (This is not to denigrate in any way having Scouts find out about things themselves - a different issue.  But see my comment above about a learner's recognition of an opportunity to learn.)  So how to learn about building survival fires?  A day with Lofty Wiseman (lead SAS survival instructor for seventeen years) in the filed with the right kit or a day with How to Survive in the Woods?

 

2. EDGE expressly involves making the learner independent of the teacher.  It expressly contemplates the learner, having learned, acting independently of the teacher and only referring to the teacher as a resource at the learner's initiative - as he might refer back to a book or video.

 

3. What cements skills in the experience of, at least, many skills teachers is the learner using the skills, not the explanation or consulting any reference.  That would be Guide and Enable.  We used to call this the "Application Phase" when Bill was the chief Scout Skills authority for BSA.

 

4.  What I see Scouts disinterested about is knowledge that seems irrelevant -- the knot to be learned for advancement but with no use thereafter.  That is like learning random sequences of letters and numbers.  So NOT "You must learn this cool knot to advance" BUT "You can use this cool knot to build your survival shelter on the Wilderness Survival Campout." - followed by that use actually happening. (Throw those tent rope adjusters away!)

 

People that are not good at EDGE would probably not be good at what came before.  At least EDGE contains in it Bill's "Never do for a Scout . . ." concept and "Explain" can easily be the "Guided Discovery Experience" of back then.

[HelpfulTracks 478]

Oh, yay! I can get on my downfall-of-civilization soapbox.

But, he doesn't have it. The thing about human memory is, it forgets! And be it one skill or another, it will be forgotten. If all that was used is EDGE, the student will be left unlearned and totally dependent on his instructor.

A scout must not first be explained a skill, or shown a skill, or condition muscle memory to do a skill ...

He must be shown a reference about a skill and, to the best of his ability, read it!!! That way, the teaching of his instructor has some permanence beyond the bounds of human memory.

 

The EDGE method falls woefully short in that department. <Rant over, for more see http://scouter.com/index.php/topic/7204-edge-why-dictate-it/?p=304641>

 

It's not book work per se that scouts find stifling. It's book work that doesn't "come alive." I think some of the girls who are interested in BSA picked up the Boy Scout Handbook or Boy's Life, taught themselves a few skills, and concluded "This is fun. More please!"

 

I apparently have been taught a vastly different version of EDGE method, because it is not done in a vacuum and it is not done only once. There is nothing in the EDGE method that says a scout cannot have read about it or even learned as skill to some extent, or tried and failed or tried an succeeded to some extent.

 

I learned/and taught via the EDGE method long before I knew the term EDGE method. It simply a 1,2,3,4 process and I am done.

 

Using the example above.

 

Sammy Star Scout sees, Nate New Scout putting up his tent but struggling.

Sammy goes over and ask if he needs help. Nate says sure. AS they work together Sammy is teaching Nate.

As they start to tie down the tent, Sammy ask if Nate knows what a taught-line hitch is.

Nate says no. Sammy explains what it is and when and why they use it. Sammy shows Nate how to tie the taut-line on one corner of the tent. Nate ties the next corner and guides as needed. Nate finishes tying the rest under the watchful eye of Sammy.

Sammy tells Nate let's go set the dinning fly and practice some more. And Nate learns a few more things beside taut-line hitch.

When they are done, Sammy tells Nate great job and that tomorrow you can use those skills and learn a few more when we do some pioneer work.

The next day as the Patrol/Troop builds a monkey bridge Nate gets that chance to tie a taut-line a few dozen more times and learn more knots.

Older Scouts and adults are watching over and guiding as needed.

 

This happens over and over again in different situations and needs and before long Nate can tie a taut-line in his sleep and is teaching other Scouts, Webelos and Cubs. He is passing it along, being helpful, friendly and courteous, he is showing character and leadership.

 

Not sure how that brings about the down fall of civilization.

 

I see this happen routinely in real life with my scouts.

 

So what am I missing?