Giving More Complete Answers

[Bob White 20]

Could the reason be that some people do not know what the BSA program is? So when they say one thing and the BSA says another they strike back rather than seeing it as an opportunity to learn the program?

 

Consider how many times have we seen examples of leaders on this forum accept as fact the many urban legends of scouting and not know the actual program?

 

Cutting corners off of Totin Chip Cards

Needing to be in uniform when traveling to be covered by insurance

Fixed Blades Knives prohibited

Scout Badge being a rank

Two deep leadership needed on Patrol Outings

Patrol activities in general

Scouts using power tools

The rules for advancement

Smoking at scout activities

The role of the Charter organization

Punishing scouts

Electing and selecting of Junior leaders

The role of the council and district

 

Just to name a few of the things that have been heavily debated on this forum for years with posters, despite the fact that the BSA has specific and readily available answers on all these topics and more.

 

Often, after a few posters give their 'opinion', one or more of the few posters who either know the program or at least know the resources of the program will answer using supported facts from the BSA.

 

How are the other posters suppossed to react? You would think something along the line of, "that's what the BSA program says? I didn't know that, how exactly does that work?" But that's not what happens here is it?

 

 

[Gold Winger 9]

"The stuff in BSA resources is the distilled wisdom of hundreds of units from all over the country."

 

The stuff in BSA resources is written by hermits living in caves after they come out of their hunger induced trances. It is then passed to acolytes who run through the countryside, preceeded by torch bearers and bell ringers, to tell the faithful what new words of wisdom have come from on high.

[Bob White 20]

See what I mean?

[Gold Winger 9]

BeeDub, when have I ever supported myth and legend? I may think that many of BSA rules are silly but I make it clear what is my opinion about BSA rules and policies and what is written. Unlike you . . .

[evmori 11]

Is that entire list urban legends? I'm not sure I understand what the point of that list is????

 

 

[BrotherhoodWWW 10]

"The stuff in BSA resources is the distilled wisdom of hundreds of units from all over the country. Certainly wisdom offered by individual posters on an internet forum has some value. What's not clear at all is why the collective wisdom provided by BSA is so frequently dismissed."

 

Interesting point coming from a moderator. One reason perhaps is in some cases i.e. actual unit relationship with their chartering org, BSA has a head-in-the-sand idea. The BSA ideal relationship is great but in reality it is not always the case. Another point that leads folks away is when some professionsal Scouters are pinned down about the literature they often will say that BSA literature is a Guide rather than "hard and fast rules!"

 

My personal view is that internet forums are a very valuable resource otherwise I would not read, post and reply to them. Often times folks are looking for more than just a quote of what BSA says. Sometimes folks want options that are more htan what BSA literature details. For myself I feel welcome to actually talk to my DE and our Council SE. It is a wonderful thing to actually discuss the program and its implementation with those that are paid to keep it alive. The ones I've talked to have always responded with helpfulness and kindness, never with simply a direct quote from a manual.

 

[SMEagle819 10]

Well said, BrotherhoodWWW.

 

 

[Bob White 20]

"One reason perhaps is in some cases i.e. actual unit relationship with their chartering org, BSA has a head-in-the-sand idea. The BSA ideal relationship is great but in reality it is not always the case.

 

What specific reference are you refering to? Do you expect the BSA references to explaion the right way or address every possible problem that a unit/Co relationship may encounter?

 

"Another point that leads folks away is when some professionsal Scouters are pinned down about the literature they often will say that BSA literature is a Guide rather than "hard and fast rules!"

 

But in fact some BSA references are just guidllines while others ARE "hard and fast rules". When you talked to the professional scouters, depending on which documents were you asking about, they may have answered you correctly.

 

The value of mentioning the references in the post is to avoid two opposing views from being a disagreement between two scouters of unknown knowledge and experience and instead focus on an answer or solution based on what the BSA program IS according to the BSA.

 

It is astounding the number of posters on this forum who debate what the BSA program is even AFTER they are shown the answer in an offical BSA resource.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Lisabob 13]

Bob I get what you're saying and sometimes that does happen, you're right. Of course it is also problematic that BSA resources are sometimes written in murky language open to competing interpretations, or even on occasion, that two separate BSA resources appear to contradict each other. What's a poor scouter to do? Then there's the issue of whether a particular BSA reg actually applies in a given situation, and there may be many alternate interpretations there too. Judgment calls such as these rarely have an open-and-closed answer.

 

With regard to the CO/unit relationship, well it is a lot like what the BSA resources tell us about the UC/unit relationship - looks great on paper, often does not happen that way in reality. The way I take BrotherhoodWWW's comment on this is not that the BSA should spell out every last possible twist and turn in human interactions between CO and unit leaders, but rather that when a problem occurs in that relationship, the BSA guidelines are merely a starting point and sometimes not an especially helpful one. Often people come to this board looking for input based on others' experiences, much like people go to Round Table to share and learn from the expertise of other scouters (if RT consisted of just "by the book" answers, nobody at all would go - they'd just stay home and read the book!).

 

All that said, there are times when a "book" answer is exactly what is needed, or at least it might be useful to include along with advice/opinion. I appreciate knowing that if I need an obscure book reference, or even a not-so-obscure but quick book reference, I can almost certainly get help on this board. Don't take it personally when people want something other than or in addition to the book answer though!

[Bob White 20]

"Of course it is also problematic that BSA resources are sometimes written in murky language open to competing interpretations,"

 

No, they really aren't. In fact considering that some are actually written by lawyers the resources of the BSA are written in exetremely simple language. It is true that some people try to obscure the language in order to weasel out of following the program, but there is nothing in the resources of the BSA that can not be easily comprehended by anyone with the a high school education.

 

"or even on occasion, that two separate BSA resources appear to contradict each other."

 

With all the resources on scouting avaliable in the BSA you would be hard pressed to find a half dozen examples of that. Even if you did there are ways to get the answer clarified.

 

"What's a poor scouter to do?" 1) get trained 2)read the manuals that affect your position 3) when in doubt get QUALIFIED help.

 

As an example the national office has telephones.

 

As for the unit /CO relationship, if what you have does not look like what the BSA program shows, that is NOT the BSA's fault. Nor should you expect the BSA to solve that problem without your involvement. Lots...LOTS of units have excellent relationships with their CO.

 

Here is the short cold heartless truth of it. The CO OWNS the Unit, the volunteer WORKS FOR the CO. If the two cannot get along it has NOTHING to do with the BSA program. Learn to play nice together or end your relationship, but stop blaming others. Need help? Not a problem, if the volunteers in your scouting District know their jobs then there is help for you to improve things. But quit blaming the BSA for a problem that they did not create.

 

What I take personally are the personal attacks leveled at me when a person asks a question about the BSA program but then doesn't like the fact that there is an answer to it in the BSA.

 

I also think that a lot of good people get attacked on this forum by folks who do not know and do not want to learn the BSA program.

(This message has been edited by Bob White)

[Lisabob 13]

hmm, I don't recall having said that it is the BSA's fault when a CO and unit have problems. Often as not, it is both the CO's and the unit leaders' faults - I suspect you and I can agree on that.

 

However, as it pertains to this board, usually the question is not who is at fault; rather, it is what to do about the underlying problem, often a problem newer volunteers inherit unwittingly from years or even decades of prior CO and unit leaders. And there, the BSA literature is not always that useful because it describes the way the relationship OUGHT to be, not how the relationship actually IS for some units (not all units, I'm aware of that - some have wonderful CO relationships and I admit I envy them). In that sort of case, quoting BSA policy and then getting miffed that people aren't responding with grateful thanks is unhelpful.

 

Again, that does not mean BSA policy ought to tell people how to fix every last problem. Often what is needed is a sounding board, a sympathetic shoulder, a place to vent, a different perspective, or some input from others who have been there/done that and (one hopes) learned from their experiences.

 

[Beavah 205]

The stuff in BSA resources is the distilled wisdom of hundreds of units from all over the country.

 

Nah, that's not necessarily the case, eh? Or at least it's an awfully optimistic view of da writin' and publishin' process.

 

I think where the BSA sometimes tries to do the "distilling wisdom" bit it runs into a very common problem with materials. The average of a bunch of opinions isn't necessarily that valuable, or even that good. Often times, one individual writin' with a depth of wisdom does a better job than a committee. Especially when it comes to coherence, as Lisabob points out. Yah, just look at the stuff by Green Bar Bill vs. some of our more "written by committee" documents!

 

My point was different, though. I meant that generic responses from program materials designed for a whole country and multiple (very different) CO's and setups are sometimes not that helpful for the needs of a specific person or unit. Our goal should be to be helpful, eh? Listenin' and thinkin' first seems in order.

 

I think when we do listen & think first, we see some things we wouldn't otherwise. While we know that there's no mention in BSA literature anywhere about cuttin' corners off of Totin' Chips or Fireman Chits, we all know that's a technique many troops use to give lads who need it an improvised reminder/warning. Done well, it works just fine. In my youth as a ski patroller, I'd occasionally cut a corner off a lad's lift ticket for bein' reckless. Didn't mean a darn thing, really, but it conveyed the message that skiing was a privilege that could be taken away - without havin' to go all the way, and usin' an easy-to-understand symbol rather than a lecture. Worked great most of the time .

 

Beavah

(This message has been edited by Beavah)

[Bob White 20]

LisaBob,

 

I will agree with you that there is no BSA literature that could possible have in it the explanation of how to solve a unit /CO relationship because there is an unlimited variety of what could be the root of the problem. Would you agree with that?

 

And since ther is no BSA literature that would address that then obviosly it has never been refere to as existing in any forum thread. Would you agree?

 

And since no such reference could possible exist, and since no such resource has ever been refered to ...then why did you use uit as an example to support your premise???

 

You wrote " well it is a lot like what the BSA resources tell us about the UC/unit relationship - looks great on paper, often does not happen that way in reality."

 

Just what paper would that have been???

 

 

Beavah, I can always count on you.

"While we know that there's no mention in BSA literature anywhere about cuttin' corners off of Totin' Chips or Fireman Chits, we all know that's a technique many troops use to give lads who need it an improvised reminder/warning."

 

If the BSA thought that giving someone FOUR chances to misuse an ax or knife was a GOOD idea, don't you think that they would have incorportated that into the program by know.

 

I got my Totin Chip in 1965 and at 11 years old I thought that was a stupid way to control safety with a potentially lethal tool. It is frightening to thing that such a ridiculous procedure has lasted this long.

 

It shows just how many leaders have relied on word of mouth folk lore to learn scouting, rather than actually learning the program of the BSA and thinking about how those lessons are applied in the field.

 

 

 

 

 

(This message has been edited by Bob White)

[SMEagle819 10]

Bob White wrote:

You wrote " well it is a lot like what the BSA resources tell us about the UC/unit relationship - looks great on paper, often does not happen that way in reality."

Just what paper would that have been???

I believe that paper is "The Annual Charter Agreement" form. Link provided:

http://cubmaster.org/charterpartneragreement.pdf

You can read it at your leisure. Briefly, it states what the CO agrees to do and what the Council agrees to do. I am speaking from experience here: It is then signed at the bottom by a representative of the COR (usually, although the signature line says "For the Chartered Organization") and a representative of the council (usually the DE). According the the second page of the form, a meeting should be called for between the CO and the Council to "the concept of working together" (direct quote). This usually comes with the recharter package. So, at least once a year, a council rep and a CO rep should meet face to face according to this offiicial BSA form.