Jump to content

Assistant Scoutmaster as Advancement Chair?


Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

The neuroscientists tell us the prefrontal cortex is still developing until 25.

But, to be honest, I don't think mine finished until I was 35 ;)

My wife agrees.

Edited by InquisitiveScouter
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 119
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Concur.  That is why BSA doesn't do it.  They give you the minimums.  We use BSA directives to establish the minimums, and then rely on judgment, experience, activity or subject matter expert adv

The real question is, what is the minimum number of adults to charter a unit? Four, in five positions. 1 x COR (dual hatted as a MC) 1 x CC 1 x Additional MC 1 x Unit Leader (

Hi @Chadamus, Sorry to be a few days late here.  It's probably also worth noting the BSA publication, "Troop Leader Guidebook, Volume 1" describes a role of Assistant Scoutmaster for Advancement

Posted Images

3 hours ago, yknot said:

You have loaded an awful lot of things onto the backs of the suppositional 3rd or 4th adults along on this imaginary outing we're talking about. If I'm reading you right, you are saying that having an extra adult or two turns a scout outing with 20 or 30 kids into a risk desert?  That 20 or 30 kids will somehow not find something risky to do? You're saying that having "an heir and a spare" along is contributory to youth anxiety? 

I don't know how to interpret opinions like yours -- and I've read similar ones elsewhere on this site. I don't know  where the resentment towards adequate adult supervision comes from. I can recall many conflicts and sometimes it was blatant parental interference and sometimes it was leadership negligence rightfully being called out -- like setting up camp under deadfall in a windstorm. 

I also cannot follow your logic regarding BSA. To most of the public, scouts is a generic term. They hear or see someone doing something questionable, and their reaction is  -- Well,  there they go again...  They don't know or care whether you are part of BSA or not, they just know you are "a scout."

I can only try. 

The experience of,  let us say "some," is that the presence of adults tends to foster a reduction in youth taking, or being allowed to take, responsibility. This is  a reduction in the amount of  Scouting taking place.  Hence, for the first 80+ years of the BSA version of Scouting, a patrol of Scouts could go on a hike, preappreoved by the SM, to be sure,  without any adults being "present."   I have not knowingly witnessed adult presence causing "anxiety," but I miss things. (There was the drunken father at Summer Camp, but that was unrelated to numbers of adults present.)

This experience was reduced, towards the end of Boy Scouting, to adult-free day activites only in the "front county." 

Noting this latest, and revolutionary, change is not a matter of "resentment."  The "risk management" folk at BSA,  tucked in their "bubble" and clueless as to what "Scouting" is supposed to be, were destroying Scouting to help save it from rapacious personal injury lawyers. I didn't resent the changes at all, hoping that the potential baleful influence of adult presence could be mitigated by training adults that "Scouting" is a youth-led program, with adults "leading" indirectly through coaching, mentoring, and offering themelves as resources. 

But BSA began demphasizing Scouting decages ago in favor of what none of the giants of the first 75 years would even recognize - expressly stating that aduts are present to "supervise" the youth.  More like school than Scouting.  The retired head of training, nationally, told me in 2014 that this was less a matter of deliberate change of policy than BSA "misplacing Scouting."   As an Eagle son of an Eagle SM, and the father of two Eagle Scouters himself, he hoped to influence change by reintroducing the Patrol Method - Scouting -  to Scoutmaster basic training, after an abolute absence for thirteen years.  Alas, that was not to be.  I assume the big bosses could not even understand the points he advocated.  Bill Hillcourt? Who?

I am unaware of instances  of non-BSA "Scouts" doing "something questionable" since BSA acheived its virtual monopoly  of boys in Scouting in the early 1930a. but it surely has occurred.   Since 1-1-19, female "Scouts" in large number belong to separate  organizations.    The GSA was critcized by NBC for allowing Girl Scouts to march in the 2017 Presidential Inagural Parade, carrying United States Flags. - like the soon-to-be  extinct Boy Scouts, already anathema to the illiberal.  "Questionable" to some, like statutes of Lincoln.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, TAHAWK said:

I can only try. 

The experience of,  let us say "some," is that the presence of adults tends to foster a reduction in youth taking, or being allowed to take, responsibility. This is  a reduction in the amount of  Scouting taking place.  Hence, for the first 80+ years of the BSA version of Scouting, a patrol of Scouts could go on a hike, preappreoved by the SM, to be sure,  without any adults being "present."   I have not knowingly witnessed adult presence causing "anxiety," but I miss things. (There was the drunken father at Summer Camp, but that was unrelated to numbers of adults present.)

This experience was reduced, towards the end of Boy Scouting, to adult-free day activites only in the "front county." 

Noting this latest, and revolutionary, change is not a matter of "resentment."  The "risk management" folk at BSA,  tucked in their "bubble" and clueless as to what "Scouting" is supposed to be, were destroying Scouting to help save it from rapacious personal injury lawyers. I didn't resent the changes at all, hoping that the potential baleful influence of adult presence could be mitigated by training adults that "Scouting" is a youth-led program, with adults "leading" indirectly through coaching, mentoring, and offering themelves as resources. 

But BSA began demphasizing Scouting decages ago in favor of what none of the giants of the first 75 years would even recognize - expressly stating that aduts are present to "supervise" the youth.  More like school than Scouting.  The retired head of training, nationally, told me in 2014 that this was less a matter of deliberate change of policy than BSA "misplacing Scouting."   As an Eagle son of an Eagle SM, and the father of two Eagle Scouters himself, he hoped to influence change by reintroducing the Patrol Method - Scouting -  to Scoutmaster basic training, after an abolute absence for thirteen years.  Alas, that was not to be.  I assume the big bosses could not even understand the points he advocated.  Bill Hillcourt? Who?

I am unaware of instances  of non-BSA "Scouts" doing "something questionable" since BSA acheived its virtual monopoly  of boys in Scouting in the early 1930a. but it surely has occurred.   Since 1-1-19, female "Scouts" in large number belong to separate  organizations.    The GSA was critcized by NBC for allowing Girl Scouts to march in the 2017 Presidential Inagural Parade, carrying United States Flags. - like the soon-to-be  extinct Boy Scouts, already anathema to the illiberal.  "Questionable" to some, like statutes of Lincoln.

Well, if it's not resentment, then you've made it clear you don't like it. I understand the loss of not being able to free range our kids. I grew up that way. It's a better way to grow up. However, the reality is that that world is gone for reasons too numerous to list here. For scouters to try to hold onto that mentality now for this one particular aspect of troop management doesn't make any sense.  It's hard to believe that it is really just that intolerable or outrageous to have enough adults on hand to maintain YPT in the event of an unanticipated event, especially when out with a larger group of scouts. It's not like scouts just did this for no reason. We've been a virtual supper buffet for child predators for decades.
 

  • Sad 1
  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

You are certainly entitled to your opinion, as is BSA entitled to its contary opinion.   

Some opinions are, of course, hard to believe.  

I wonder if the public schools will require adult "presence" for the student's daily"front country" hikes - to and from school throyugh rea far more dangerous than the "back country."  They REQUIRE the children to attend.  FBI statistcs indicate the children are safer going to and from school than they are once at home.  Most child molestation is by "family."  Were "bangers" up and about earlier in the day, those statistics might change.

Link to post
Share on other sites

While we can point to other institutions such as schools that require a lower adult presence, the BSA is simply not in a position anymore to do that.  

We can mourn what once was, but the reality is that even if the BSA had the ability to go back to the way it ran 30+ years ago, it really should not.  Perhaps one day down the road trust will return and processes will improve, but that is unlikely to occur in any of our lifetimes.

The best thing for Scouts now is to figure out how to best operate in this new reality.

Edited by ParkMan
typos
  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, ParkMan said:

While we can point to other institutions such as schools that require a lower adult presence, the BSA is simply not in a position anymore to do that.  

We can mourn what once was, but the reality is that even if the BSA had the ability to go back to the way it ran 30+ years ago, it really should not.  Perhaps one day down the road trust will return and processes will improve, but that is unlikely to occur in any of our lifetimes.

The best thing for Scouts now is to figure out how to best operate in this new reality.

I’m not sure what you’re are saying. What are the minimum number of adults required for an activity?

Barry

Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, TAHAWK said:

You are certainly entitled to your opinion, as is BSA entitled to its contary opinion.   

Some opinions are, of course, hard to believe.  

I wonder if the public schools will require adult "presence" for the student's daily"front country" hikes - to and from school throyugh rea far more dangerous than the "back country."  They REQUIRE the children to attend.  FBI statistcs indicate the children are safer going to and from school than they are once at home.  Most child molestation is by "family."  Were "bangers" up and about earlier in the day, those statistics might change.

I know scouters like to compare BSA to the school environment but there are some very significant differences. There are cameras everywhere today in the academic setting.  No child is ever really "alone" with a teacher, coach or bus driver, because there are cameras in hallways, in classrooms, at sports facilities both inside and at the field houses, in offices, and on buses. It's a very different situation.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, yknot said:

No child is ever really "alone" with a teacher, coach or bus driver, because there are cameras in hallways, in classrooms, at sports facilities both inside and at the field houses, in offices, and on buses. It's a very different situation.

Perhaps you are in a different school district than I am.  We have many cameras, but there are way more number of small rooms, nooks, crannies, blind spots where there are no cameras.  If an abuser is a coach, they can create opportunities.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/1/2021 at 8:19 PM, Chadamus said:

Please don't misunderstand that I'm not trying to convince, but instead seeking clarification. Surely based on the the above one can see how there is clearly room for interpretation.

Yes. The wrong interpretation. 
 

SM and ASM are not to be advancement coordinators. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, fred8033 said:

Perhaps you are in a different school district than I am.  We have many cameras, but there are way more number of small rooms, nooks, crannies, blind spots where there are no cameras.  If an abuser is a coach, they can create opportunities.  

That's true. But there are also plenty of nooks and crannies in the woods and behind the boulder or on campgrounds and no cameras at all. Plus in school or sports settings you've got 3 minutes to pass for class before someone notices you are missing or 5 minutes before a coach or gym teacher wonders why you are not out of the locker room or your parents are in the lot waiting for you. It's really not the same kind of risk environment. There are risks, yes, but they are not comparable to scouting. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, yknot said:

I know scouters like to compare BSA to the school environment but there are some very significant differences. There are cameras everywhere today in the academic setting.  No child is ever really "alone" with a teacher, coach or bus driver, because there are cameras in hallways, in classrooms, at sports facilities both inside and at the field houses, in offices, and on buses. It's a very different situation.

 

There were no cameras in my High School classrooms or teachers offices. (2012 graduate) I remember having to make up assignments after school where I was totally alone with the just the teacher, and during my study hall period I'd go down to the band room to practice, and it'd just be me and the band teacher there. Maybe that's changed in the last 8 years, but I'm skeptical. Abuse does happen in Schools. There's no point pretending that it doesn't. That doesn't let the BSA off the hook. 

Yes, child abuse does happen at School or on Scout outings, but when I've read the stories of some of the abuse in the Church, schools or in the BSA, I've been amazed at the level of access predators have been able to have to their victims outside of the environment where they met their victims. Not sure what the solutions are to preventing that, but that is likely why the BSA YPT rules are so expansive and try to dictate what interactions BSA volunteers and youth have outside of Scouting events. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

Two?

Still? That’s what it was 25 years ago. So, a troop could still send 40 scouts on a campout with 2 adults.

The issue isn’t liability or higher risks, the issue is more acceptance of helicopter parenting.

Scouts will develop only to the maturity that they are respected.

i know the solution, but do parents want a solution?

Barry

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Sentinel947 said:

There were no cameras in my High School classrooms or teachers offices. (2012 graduate) I remember having to make up assignments after school where I was totally alone with the just the teacher, and during my study hall period I'd go down to the band room to practice, and it'd just be me and the band teacher there. Maybe that's changed in the last 8 years, but I'm skeptical. Abuse does happen in Schools. There's no point pretending that it doesn't. That doesn't let the BSA off the hook. 

Yes, child abuse does happen at School or on Scout outings, but when I've read the stories of some of the abuse in the Church, schools or in the BSA, I've been amazed at the level of access predators have been able to have to their victims outside of the environment where they met their victims. Not sure what the solutions are to preventing that, but that is likely why the BSA YPT rules are so expansive and try to dictate what interactions BSA volunteers and youth have outside of Scouting events. 

Things have changed dramatically since 2012. Why? Sandy Hook. That shooting quickly and forever changed school security and surveillance measures. Other incidents since then have contributed but the environment is completely different now and forever will be.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, yknot said:

Things have changed dramatically since 2012. Why? Sandy Hook. That shooting quickly and forever changed school security and surveillance measures. Other incidents since then have contributed but the environment is completely different now and forever will be.

Sadly, at my daughter's school two years ago, there were rapes in areas of the stairwell that were out of camera view.  We can't rely on security cameras.

The reason I used to tell people in YPT training was that a 12 year old is a horrible witness.  Always have another adult at least in ear shot of a conversation with a single scout.  YPT protects both the youth and the adult.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...