Three concepts of Scouting?

[GaHillBilly 10]

As I've thought, read about, and experienced Scouting since my son and I entered a year and a half ago, I've concluded that there seem to be three distinct concepts of Scouting:

 

1. Scouting as Baden-Powell conceived and described it;

 

2. Scouting as BSA describes it now (in literature both old and new);

 

3. Scouting as Scouters themselves have experienced it, as Scouts, and as participants in the local district and council.

 

I recently concluded that concept #3 dominates at least in my district. I've found that I'm far more versed in Scout literature than any of the local Scouters I've come to know. As far as I can tell, I'm the only leader in my son's troop who even owns a Scoutmaster Handbook, much less the G2SS or the Troop Program Resources.

 

What dominates the concept of Scouting that most Scouters I've met have, is not Baden-Powell's concept, which seems to be almost totally unknown, nor even BSA's official concept, as published, but their own personal experiences, which they take as an authoritative guide.

 

One ASM, who is a former Eagle Scout, even told me directly that he knew all there was to know about Scouting, and that I should ask him if I had a question about how something should be. This came up in the context of a question I'd posed about discrepancies between the troop's organization and BSA policy and standards. He expressed himself quite forcefully, so I dropped the question and backed down. But, I was left quite puzzled and confused because the troop's practice was not only in violation of BSA standards but was clearly hurting the troop. Eventually, I discovered that these practices -- bad as they were -- were the way he'd experienced Scouting, himself.

 

I have several questions:

 

1. How do you challenge definitions of "boy led" and "patrol method" and concepts of adequate training that are clearly contrary to concept #1 (BP's) and #2 (BSA's) above, but are 'how they experienced it'?

 

2. How can you most effectively break the 'sins of the fathers' cycle that inflicts on today's Scouts the sins and deficiencies of today's Scouter's Scoutmasters?

 

3. How can you most helpfully communicate 'that (Scouting) vision thing' to Scouters who've already 'got it' (and here's their Eagle knot to prove it!)?

 

GaHillBilly

[croushorn 10]

As youve seen fully well on this forum there are many ways of skinning a cat. Heres my simple advice:

People, who think they know it all, as they say, dont know what they dont know. Thats an arrogance issue that you ran smack into. You can offer some constructive criticism to the committee or other adult leaders about these issues, supporting it by citing sources. If you see someone on a rant about why something didnt work and can show them why it didnt through training or program documents, it tends to get their attention. Youre no longer a new guy. Over a years worth of experience in your Troops leadership is enough to warrant consideration of your opinions by fellow leaders. You may even find some welcome it as they havent felt comfortable in speaking up, having gotten the same lecture themselves.

The most useful tool Ive found in transitioning away from adult lead to boy lead is to make this your mantra: An adult should never do what a boy can. When I start to get into something or see another adult doing the same, I ask this of myself or out loud to them is this something one of the guys should be doing? You can never ask it enough.

Good luck!

 

[Gold Winger 9]

Just like text-book management rarely works, there are, as snoring bear said, many ways to skin the proverbial cat.

 

However, #3 is prevalent because everyone assumes that because he could play basketball that he can coach or referee. I'm here to tell you that ain't so.

 

Quite often the player turned coach will forget about teaching the fundamentals and concentrate on plays. Why? Because are boring and he didn't want to do that back then. The player turned ref will often spend too much time watching the game and the plays as a spectator and ignore the chaos raging around him.

 

Rulebook? I don't need no rulebook, I played basketball in high school.

 

Fortunately, in basketball there are checks and balances. If you are a bad coach, you lose games. If you are a bad ref, you lose your job.

 

How does the problem get fixed in basketball? If the person wants to fix the problem, the magic word is training. However, for training to have an effect, there must be a change in the knowlege, skills and ATTITUDE of the trainee.

 

First ask the committee to get a couple copies of the Scoutmaster's Manual and G2SS. We actually gave a copy of the G2SS to every ASM and MC who regularly worked with the boys.

 

I like asking questions, "what will the boys learn from this activity?" "How will this enhance the patrol method?"

 

 

[Bob White 20]

How much a person knows or thinks they know really isn't the issue. What is at question from GaHillbilly is...when what they think they know is not correct according to the program then how do you change them.

 

Ga,

Changing others is a long and difficult task and usually ends up in frustration for both parties. People change under two conditions, 1) After they first make a personal choice to change, 2) Once they are forced to change in order to get what they want.

 

The easiest way to develop leaders who use and follow the BSA program is to purposefully select them at every opportunity. That includes for unit positions, district/council positions, training staffs, every position in scouting.

 

If scouters knew that in order to be an adult volunteer that they either needed to follow the program or they would be kept in their own small corner where they could do the least amount of harm, then I think they would begin to pay attention to the program Methods and policies that they are obligated to use and follow.

 

The only good news is that for the most part only a small percentage of people who do not follow the program seem to last more than a few years. Oh there are always exceptions. But if the local scouters are smart they keep these kinds of leaders close enough to expose them to good scouting, but far enough away to keep them from infecting other portions of the local program.

 

Unit level volunteers are the responsibility of the charter organizations. The district and council can offer resources to guide them along the right path but the charter organization needs to take responsibility for who they select and who they retain. The BSA has little control over them.

 

The District and Council volunteers should be selected for their ability to do their job according to the BSA programs, and Council and District administrators should not tolerate volunteers who do not follow the official program in a positive and supportive way.

 

 

[Eagledad 2779]

Ive told this before and it has been awhile, so the numbers may be a little off, but I used to poll troop level folks at Wood Badge. I found about 20% (give or take) of adults owned a Scoutmaster Handbook, 5% had read half of it and about 2% had read the whole thing. These were adults who were taking Wood Badge, most of whom where not entry level scouters.

 

Im impressed with your observation GAHillbilly. I agree with your observations, but I think every new adult leader, no matter their experience starts off at concept three and works their way through concept two as they get experience and training. I do agree that some folks kind of hang in concept three, but most will move down to a large degree to concept two. There are several reasons why you have folks that hang around three, lack of training, arrogance, ignorance, or lack of self esteem.

 

From my observations, the best boy run Scoutmasters are the ones who moved on to Concept One. While the BSA provides enough literature and guidance for an adult to develop their program into a good boy run program, they dont do a good job of developing the philosophical mindset that adults need for progressing to a mature boy run program. Badon Powell and even they early BSA developers did a much better job of painting the big picture of scouting from a philosophical point of view. As an example, the simple phrase we all seem to hang on "Scouting is a Game with a Purpose" came from that generation. What you find is those adults who wanted to go the extra distance of boy run found themselves researching the literature of scoutings founders because there isnt much literature (if any) like that provided today.

 

There is only a very small group of folks who spent much time trying to get to your first concept. But those scouters usually stick out of the crowd as well as their programs. Many of those adults stand out here on this forum.

 

I think this is a very good subject if we can stick with how to get folks from Concept Three to Concept Two. But I think we must start from the point that most scouters are not like your example of your guy who thinks he knows it all. Of course there are those kind of folks, but most folks are trying to just move forward from what they already know. They may appear to be arrogant, but I find they are very willing to listen when someone they trust stands up to guide folks. Remember, less than 5% of the population are natural leaders, so the rest will follow when given the choice. When a leader stands up, the rest will follow.

 

The problem you present is when a leader happens to be the guy in your example. So how do we handle folks like that? By the way, I find there are a lot of women that fit in that description as well.

 

We once had a very successful Troop in our district lead by such an adult. It was a well oiled merit badge mill of almost 200 scouts. Everyone knew it, but what are you going to say to such a successful person? Typically adults from that troop were at least half of my Scoutmaster Specific course. A group of those adults once approached me at a council event and explained that they wanted to turn the troop more to what I had trained, but there was no way they could stand up to the very strong minded SM. And they were right. This SM was the kind of person that not only knew how to run such program, but he also knew how to get folks to donate six digit money each year to the council.

 

Ive gone long, but I think what you are asking is how do we confront those small group of adults in the third group who have the kind of personality to drive a program the wrong direction.

 

 

Barry

 

[GaHillBilly 10]

Thanks for all the responses so far. Barry, your response is particularly pertinent. I believe I need to remind myself again and again not to 'tilt at windmills' (a la Don Quixote), but to focus on what can be done, and avoid letting myself become frustrated at the other stuff.

 

Also . . . just to give a better perspective on things, the ex-Eagle leader and I are now co-operating pretty successfully (or at least it seems to me!). My point in mentioning him was simply because his remark was such a clear example of the "Scouting = my experience of it" equation, not that he's remained stuck there.

 

GaHillBilly

[Bob White 20]

"Remember, less than 5% of the population are natural leaders, so the rest will follow when given the choice. When a leader stands up, the rest will follow."

 

It is said that 64% of all statistics are made up.

 

I would be curious as to what total percentage of the population are in leadership positions? Which population are we discussing? At what age in their development was it determined that they were leaders and came by it naturally and not through observation, practice, training, or power.

 

Being able to make people follow you does not mean that you are leading them in the right direction.

 

 

[Eagledad 2779]

Don't get stuck in the mud Bob, I got that statistic from a leadership course a long time ago and they used the words "World Poplation". Actually we were taught 3.5%, I shouldn't have rounded off. After my life experience, I agree with it. Even with scouts, you see it in those boys who at age 11 have the gift. My youngest SPL at age 13 had such a gift.

 

Also, it really doesn't matter what age, experience or training folks have, the statistic represents those folks who have the natural ability to sway people to follow. That doesn't mean they lead in the right direction and even have good leadership skills. It only means they have that something about them that when they talk, people listen and willingly follow. Most politicians fit in that group.

 

Don't make a big deal about it, it has nothing to do with folks who have learned and developed the leadership skills to manage groups to success.

 

I've always said that scouting was for developing the other 96% into great leaders.

 

Thanks for the clarification Ga, and again thanks for presenting your observation. Actually what you presented is wisdom derived from your experience. I think it goes a long way torward how you develop adults into better leaders. It is these kinds of things that help other folks understand better the situations they are in, and how they progress beyound it.

 

Barry

[Beavah 205]

Yah, good observations, GaHillBilly.

 

I think there's all kinds of reasons for it, but the biggest is that personal experience is so much richer, eh? Personal experience offers sight, sound, taste, feel... and most especially, feedback! Dat's why I reckon Merit Badge Mills are such a plague, eh? They give a whole generation of future leaders the wrong set of experience and feedback.

 

Trainin' and materials, by contrast, are flat. Very little feedback, eh? And each person readin' or listenin' has to fill in the sight, sound, taste, feel, etc. from their own experience in order to try to understand what da words mean. So lots of folks read the materials differently or have different visions comin' out of trainin' because they brought different experiences into trainin'. Most good parents and coaches, for example, bring in their own experience of child-rearin', includin' havin' strict rules and adult control to keep things from bein' chaotic or dangerous. They go to trainin' and hear "boy led" as meaning "let the boys choose their patrol name" not "let the patrol camp on its own." We all know that it takes a lot of feedback in the field - of grabbin' parents and pulling 'em away from the lads - before the real lesson sinks in. Trainin' and materials don't offer all that feedback.

 

Yah, I agree pretty strongly with BobWhite here, eh? I think for a program to be successful, it has to be pretty darn careful selectin' people up front. Yeh have to recruit Scouters of the "right sort" as B-P suggested, ones who come with the right personal experience and nature already built in. Those are da ones who will move quickly to level 2 and then level 1 as Eagledad suggests. If yeh select poorly and don't correct the selection fast, no amount of BSA materials or trainin' will do a lick of good. To change those folks, yeh have to give 'em a few years of new experiences to build from, and lots and lots of hands-on feedback. IMO event that only gets 'em up to mediocre most of da time.

 

I don't think BobWhite's right, though, that those who don't do Scoutin' well only stay around a few years. I think there are a lot like GaHillBilly or Eagledad mention who find some success (or even a lot of "success" in a 200-person troop) and are with us for da long haul. My observations are that some of those folks have a lot of "ego need" that they get filled in scoutin'. Tryin' to change 'em just runs into the underlyin' fragile egos and gets yeh in trouble. In some places, there's a lot of district folks that fit this bill.

 

Most of 'em, though, do a fine job of runnin' their vision of scouting. A troop of 200, even if it's a badge mill, must have some fine points that attract and keep kids. Perhaps they did select the right person, for the kind of scoutin' program they needed or wanted. If da older lads are becomin' good people, I don't argue the details. Scoutin' is a big, diverse program, with a lot of flexibility so that units and COs can achieve their own goals.

 

Beavah

 

[Stosh 3452]

A lot of people follow a carrot on a stick, but that doesn't make the carrot a good leader.

 

A good leader will lead whether anyone follows or not. There is such a thing as a poor follower as well. My leaders are all taught to follow before they lead.

 

Stosh

[GaHillBilly 10]

"A lot of people follow a carrot on a stick, but that doesn't make the carrot a good leader."

 

Hadn't heard that one before . . . it sure does apply to a LOT of situations near (and not so dear) to me. I think that sentence will be showing up around our troop, a LOT! :0)

 

GaHillBilly

[Twocubdad 665]

I have a slightly different take on it.

 

I see your #2 concept as the goal -- the shinning city on the hill, if you will. Most of us are trying to reach the city. Some are closer than other, some are wandering in the wrong direction.

 

It is for each of us as leaders to evaluate our unit and resources and chart the best course for our units to get there. I understand, for example, that giving Scouts free-rein to do as they please at summer camp would be the ideal. But given the program at our camp and the maturity level of our Scouts, for now I believe it is best that they attend all the merit badge classes they commited to. Another example-- I don't yet believe out PLC is at a level at which they should be deciding discipline issues. They've not had the training, experience or, again, maturity, to take that on.

 

BP said, "teach boys to lead, then let them lead" (or something close). That's not an all-at-once, everything-or-nothing, sink-or- swim proposition. In three years our troop has come a long way toward being Scout-led and using the patrol method, but we've not yet reached the top of the hill in every aspect. We are teaching the boys to lead and letting them lead to the extent of their ability.

 

The city we're heading for is a big one. It's kinda hard to tell when, exactly, you crossed the city limits. When you get there there may be parts of town you like better than others. There are lots of different places to call home. Some units may hang their hats on high adventure, some on service or other parts of the program which fit their Scouts and leaders well. That's part of the beauty of the program.

 

I get frustrated with people who quote BP, the SM Hand book or other resources and try to tell you "this is how the program must be run. Either it is the BSA program or it's not." On the other hand, there are people who either don't know the program or choose to ignore it. The vast majority understand the program and are doing their best to implement it.

 

I think most Scouters have a good understanding of the program as it should be run. But not everyone is there yet. Whether or not you son's troop is headed on the right direction, the wrong direction or run off into a ditch is an evaluation you need to make.(This message has been edited by Twocubdad)

[Buffalo Skipper 13]

Like each of us here, we all have had different experiences, which, leads each of us to a different perspective on your question. I feel I am fortunate, that here in my district, more troops than not are pretty close to #2 as you describe. But I see #1 and #2 as not being that far off. Have you read BP's Aids to Scoutmastership? You can find it on the web for free, without too much trouble. Sure there are some differences in today's BSA from what BP discusses, but I am amazed at how dead on he was in that book, even though it was written some 89 years ago.

The more I learn about BP, the more respect I gain for him. There was intuitiveness about his approach rarely seen, even in skilled leaders. Aids to Scoutmastership is more about the "how" of reaching scouts rather than the technical aspect of running a troop. I look to it for inspiration and guidance as much as I look to the SM handbook. One of my favorite sections is entitled "Why a Troop Should Not Exceed 32"; another is "Patrol Leaders' Council--Court of Honour" (thats court as in a judicial, disciplinary body).

I always keep my binder close by. It contains the SM Handbook, Committee Guidebook, Safe Guide to Scouting andAids to Scoutmastership. I have read each cover to cover several times and refer to them regularly.

When I first stepped into our troop, we had about 10 scouts, and though not in a bad position, the troop was struggling. It was boy led, but barely. Over the past years and with the support of the SM and other leaders, slowly re-introduced youth training, the patrol method, effective PLCs and consistent uniforming. We are up to 20 boys and are preparing to recruit and cross over another 2 dens from 2 packs this year. These things take time, but they do work if you work your plan.

[Eagletrek 10]

Thanks Buffalo Skipper for bringing up the publication "Aids to Scoutmastership." What a great guidebook on the theory of scout training. I really wonder how many folks currently involed in the program have read the publication? Secondly, I wonder how many folks involved in the Wood Badge program have read the publication? Answer "honestly" now!!!!!!!

 

If all folks involved in the scouting program read, comprehended, and followed the intent of this pub, scouting would be much better off, IMHO.

[Gold Winger 9]

I have copies of both "Aids to Scoutmastership" and "Scouting for Boys." Unfotunately, not only are they written in a foreign language, they're in black and white and won't make sense unless they are colorized.