About this Methods Thing...

[tortdog]

Regarding the 11-year old LDSers, they still do outdoors. The limit is that they camp only 3 times that first year. Once they hit 12, they are supposed to camp once each month. The LDS Church just thinks that 11-year olds are not yet ready for camping each month, and wants the 11-year olds closer to home.

 

It's a policy decision...not religious doctrine decision BTW, because frankly I don't see a problem with my 11-year old camping.

 

Now, what do the LDS units do to work within this rule? In our own unit, we drive our boys up to Boy Scout camp each day before breakfast and take them back when it's dark. That way, the get scout camp but we follow the LDS policy.

 

They still get all the training for outdoors, though. They still meet all the other requirements. They just don't sleep overnight once/month as do our older boys.

[FScouter]

"The methods are ways of doing things but are not requirements."

 

So, Ed, what is your objection to the Methods? They don't work for you, or you have better methods (or ways), or what? Why do you feel the Methods should be optional? Why would someone go to training an NOT use what was learned?

 

Give us some insight.

[evmori]

So, Ed, what is your objection to the Methods?

 

I have none

 

They don't work for you, or you have better methods (or ways), or what?

 

They work fine.

 

Why do you feel the Methods should be optional?

 

I never posted I thought they should be optional. You have made that assumption.

 

Why would someone go to training an NOT use what was learned?

 

I don't know. Why?

 

And apparently you missed my post

 

We do use the methods in my Troop. My point is/was they aren't required!

 

 

Bob,

Sorry! I didn't check the accuracy of your post that was questioned. My bad.

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

 

[FScouter]

"We do use the methods in my Troop. My point is/was they aren't required!"

 

I guess what you're not making clear then, if you use the Methods and believe that they work, is WHY you keep insisting the Methods are not required? What is your purpose in continuing repeat that statement?

 

If Scouters come to these forums for information and guidance, would it not be a good thing to guide them to the proven Methods? Are you suggesting that other methods (or ways) are better? What methods are better?

 

What is the real message you're trying to communicate by saying "not required" ??

[Kudu]

Bob White,

 

Thanks for your feedback and information.

 

A few minor points:

 

> (as I pointed out this is a book on training scouts not training

> scoutmasters).

 

I don't understand your distinction. For instance, the introduction to the old BSA Scoutmaster Fundamentals handbook said that it was in the tradition of "Aids to Scoutmastership" (of course, it also misquoted B-P as saying that "Scouting is a Game with a Purpose"). It seems to me that a book on training Scoutmasters has to be about training Scouts, unless you are talking about some kind of "train the trainer" course or the American version of Wood Badge.

 

> In Baden-Powell's words taken from the Aids To Scoutmastership..

> "The aim of the Scout training is to improve the standard of our future

> citizenhood, especially in Character and Health;

 

Baden-Powell saw the Aim of Citizenship as being accomplished through training in Character and Physical Health. This is another possible approach to building a "methods" model of Baden-Powell's Scouting game, because in his "National Inefficiencies" chart he lists his 16 program elements under the two categories of Character and Health, see:

 

http://www.inquiry.net/traditional/b-p/scoutmastership/intro.htm

 

> Character Citizenship and Fitness. Seems to me the BSA has kept

> very true to its origins.

 

I find the single Aim of Citizenship more easy to understand and explain than having Three Aims (four, if you count "Mental Fitness" as being different from B-P's Physical Health). But that is just a matter of taste.

 

> But I wish you well in your 'new' program.

 

Thanks, but it is not my program. I am just acting as an outside advisor to a group that is importing a pre-existing UK Tradition Scouting program.

 

 

[evmori]

FScouter,

They are the Methods of Scouting not the Requirements of Scouting. Should we follow them? Yep. Do we have to? Nope.

 

Posters on this forum want everyone to think everything in any BSA manual or publication is a requirement. Not true. That's my point.

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[FScouter]

Ed, You're right.

No one is going to get arrested for ignoring BSA publications and training. You don't have to do anything BSA says. You can do whatever you want. You can pick and choose whatever you like. Nothing is "required". I suppose by your way of thinking, the Boy Scout Handbook and the Scout Law are not required either.

 

Your only "point" seems to be smugly declaring yourself to be a contrarian.

 

Happy "scouting".

[evmori]

FScouter,

You obviously are missing my point. I am not saying just because it isn't required we shouldn't be doing it. What I am saying is not everything is a required like some believe. And your assumptions about my way of thinking is wrong.

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[FScouter]

Has anyone ever heard the story about the "Little, Little Manny and the Big, Big, Coo"?

[Kudu]

> I'd say rather, that the trouble starts with the very idea that "methods

> are not required", as if the methods are some kind of option, or a helpful

> suggestion from BSA. What does it take for some to understand that

> Methods are not optional? Must BSA write a legal document that must

> be signed by the adult leader and notorized? "THE METHODS ARE

> REQUIRED - SIGN HERE".

 

I'm new here, so I will take the flame bait.

 

> So, Ed, what is your objection to the Methods? They don't work for you,

> or you have better methods (or ways), or what?

 

From the mean-spirited nature of the personal attacks against Ed, it should be obvious that the BSA Methods of Scouting have seen better days.

 

What we now call the "Methods of Scouting" were introduced in the 4th Edition of "Handbook for Scoutmasters," edited by William Hillcourt. Hillcourt's first Method of Scouting was "The Scout Way (A Game, NOT a Science)."

 

If The Scout Way was still "required," would we see the kind of fundamentalist approach to the rest of the Methods that we have witnessed in this forum?

 

> "... the methods of scouting are not requirements however if you do

> not incorporate them in your program you can't really have a true

> scouting program."

 

The definition of "true scouting program" is the central problem here. The BSA is just one "brand" of Scouting, in the same way that McDonald's is just one brand of burgers. The difference is that Congress granted this private corporation exclusive rights to terms like "Scouts" and "Scouting," so, by law, Scouting is whatever the monopoly corporation says it is.

 

If Congress granted McDonald's a similar monopoly on terms like "burger," then by definition burgers would have to be fried, and flame-broiled ground beef would not be a "true hamburger program."

 

In countries (like the UK) which allow more freedom in the Scouting marketplace, small alternative Scouting associations offer different kinds of Scouting. I currently have a BSA Troop, but obviously I would also like to try a Baden-Powell Scouting program to see how it works.

 

Likewise, I'm sure that a 1960s style William Hillcourt Scouting program would have a small but dedicated following in the United States. It is all a matter of taste, of course, but I don't see anyone in the BSA with Hillcourt's ability to envision "a true Scouting program" that is worthy of an absolute corporate monopoly on Scouting.

 

His 1947 model was more universal to Scouting as an international movement, see:

 

http://www.inquiry.net/adult/methods

 

Note that in Hillcourt's Methods, "Boy Leadership" is a subset of the Patrol Method. In practical terms this meant that "Patrol Leader Training" consisted of teaching Patrol Leaders how to conduct Patrol Meetings at their homes, and how to run Patrol Hikes and Patrol Campouts. I suspect that these Patrol activities (which are still a part of other Scouting programs) would not be so rare if the BSA trained Patrol Leaders how to be Patrol Leaders, rather than teaching general abstract managerial skills for the sake of non-PL "Junior Leaders." This, I think, is a direct result of the "required" Leadership Development Method (and the resulting leadership advancement requirements).

 

Likewise, "Personal Growth" is not a Hillcourt Method. As far as I can tell, "Personal Growth" is just a natural result of Scouting. What Personal Growth in Scouting is not the result of the other seven methods?

 

Therefore, I only "require" seven of the eight Methods. I only allow "Personal Growth" once a year, which is popular with the parents because they don't have to buy as many sneakers :-/

[schleining]

The methods are there for us to run a great program.

I whole heartedly agree with Eamonn's post. Suggest a reread of it to all.

Anyway- I think that while the BSA may not require something, somethings are best to do. The Methods are time tested and true ways of achieving the Aims of the Scouting movement.

You know- there is no where that says a Scoutmaster can require his Scouts to live the Scout Law daily... I do becasue at every meeting we say the Scout Oath. In the oath the Scouts make a promise to live the Scout Law. So I hold them to there promise. This supports character building. And when I say I hold them to it... I do. I see the Scouts around town, at School, at Church etc. When I see them soing something that is contrary to the Scout Law.. I stop them and suggest they remember their promise.

I am sure that this is not a requirement, but it is a good thing to do to support the AIMs of Scouting.

We are leaders of Scouting in America, how can we do our best if we do not buy in and support the AIMS and METHODS that are outlined for us by the BSA.

So far as picking and choosing... NO... use what we have. Add to it if that is needed, but do not take away from time tested methods.

 

FINALLY-

The tone of this and other discussions in this forum have really taken a nose dive. As I close this post allow me to remind everyone that a Scout (and his leaders) are Trustworthy, Loyal, Helpful, Friendly, Courteous, Kind, Obedient, Cheerful, Thifty, Brave, Clean, and Reverent.

Like those twelve points of the Law which take no more weight than the next, our Methods too stand alone and above all else work.

 

Jerry

[FScouter]

"The tone of this and other discussions in this forum have really taken a nose dive."

 

We sometimes do that in these forums. The strong positions we take and the frustration we experience when others don't see it our way sometimes leads to high blood pressure, red faces, bulging arteries, and flared nostrils.

 

For my part, I have changed my views on a number of issues over the years, due to the exchange of ideas found in these forums. Other views have solidified. Either way, I know I am a better Scouter from the ideas posted here from everyone that participates in these forums.

 

Things do at times get hot under the collar, and I'm certainly guilty of spouting views that could be worded better to not add gasoline to the fire. To everyone, including regular participants, lurkers, and Ed too, please accept my apologies. Looking forward to more constructive discussions.

 

 

[schleining]

I love a spirited debate like the next guy BUT....

My point is that we need to remember who we represent in this forum...

Weather or not you agree, because we come in this very PUBLIC World Wide gathering area...and by the fact that we all claim to be Scouters... and we are discussing Scouting matter... we are de facto spokesmen and women of Scouting.

You (as in everyone)can opt out of that label if you wish, but the simple truth is that this forum is a written documentation of a discussion that is representative of Scouting and its leaders.

 

Just as we are not allowed to wear our uniforms to politcial rallies and we should never get on TV and talk about policy, Council or National, we need to be carefull how the outsider looking in to the Scouting movement views us as its leaders.

 

Yes the debate gets heated and folks get hot under the collar, That is exactly when we need to show the World via the Web that we can have a debate and still manage to live the Scout Law.

 

Jerry

[Fuzzy Bear]

I realize that the Eight Methods of Scouting are not required but I would like to see Method number 9 added and then required by all.

 

It is called sitting on a log around a campfire. If we all were required to face each other, we wouldn't be so quick to use both barrels to settle our squabbles.

 

Humor might be our first shot instead.

 

 

FB

[evmori]

Actually, Fuzzy, I would be the same in person as I am here. I don't believe in having different persona.

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10