rethinking my position

[Lisabob 13]

Well that's an interesting (if rhetorical) question Barry. I suppose it depends a great deal on how the PLC operates. If it is reasonably youth-led then that's not likely going to happen. But in adult-led troops it can. I've seen both versions play out in front of me. One should acknowledge that it is not hard, often, for adults to push scouts into decisions. We're the adults after all and untested, untrained scouts are used to deferring to adult decisions in most other aspects of their lives.

 

I have to agree that bullying can be a natural result of untrained boys trying to get things done. There's room to teach them a better style of leadership there, even to boys who are just mimicking what they learned at home in terms of leadership methods. While not optimal, bullying that occurs for those reasons isn't insurmountable. The type of bullying I strongly object to is of a much more nefarious sort, name calling, foul language, sexual taunting, and use of physical force (or threat of same) to intimidate or belittle others. There's no excuse in the world for that sort of behavior, it is intentionally malicious, and it upsets me greatly that it seems to be a regular part of some troops' cultures. However, there are apparently some adults who don't see it or don't get it. Or won't stand up to it.

[Stosh 3452]

One has to overcome a lot of societally acceptable behavior to train up leaders in today's world. But the trick is training them properly and if one uses certain tactics, the only recourse, even for the trained boy is to bully. We often don't realize that as we instruct the bully in the skills of better management, behavioral modification, task completion, goal setting can all be abused and distorted until one goes from an untrained bully to a well trained tyrant. I'm thinking this may not be a good thing. To think a true tyrant can't learn to better cover his actions with acceptable language and manipulation methods really doesn't teach leadership as BSA would like to see it accomplished. Does Eddie Haskill bring any examples to mind? Some of the most effective bullies I have met tend to be exceptionally charming when there's a need to be.

 

Can a group bully itself? Yep, they do it all the time and it can happen in a boy-led program. It's called peer pressure and this as well can be both positive and negative. Initiation rites is a classic example of how groups can bully themselves. To think this can't happen in a scout group only emphasizes the magnitude of some SM's inability to see the obvious.

 

Stosh

 

[Eagledad 2777]

>>Can a group bully itself? Yep, they do it all the time and it can happen in a boy-led program. It's called peer pressure and this as well can be both positive and negative.

[Stosh 3452]

Depending on one's dictionary they are using bullying can fit into many categories/definitions from intimidate, persecute, mistreat, browbeat, harrass, cruelty, overbearing, threaten to hurt, frighten, quarrelsome, badge, domineer, or tyrannize someone forcing them to do something they don't want to do or forcing them to do something you want them to do.

 

So, to what degree is acceptable in the BSA program for directive leadership?

 

How many SM's have ever used the phrase: "Or else..."?

 

The reason there's bullying in the BSA program is because how it's set up to function. A certain degree is acceptable and somehow the boys have to figure out where the arbitrary line is that they can't step over.

 

Stosh

[Lisabob 13]

OK I think we've gotten off on a tangent here with the bullying stuff. It is a problem in the troop my son is part of and in ways that I don't think are open to interpretation or shades of grey. I don't want to list specifics but this isn't a matter of hierarchy or having someone in charge.

 

But beyond the bullying issue is the matter of adults either not knowing or not being willing to follow the program. I hate to sound like BobWhite and I'm of teh opinion that probably no troop does everything by the book. So I'm certainly not looking for perfection and in that sense I don't think such a thing exists. But I do think we at times get pretty far off the beaten path. Leaders might have been trained 10+ years back and not to denigrate that, but memories of training may not run that deep, things may have changed, and people's perspectives and how they apply whatever they remember from training also change. So what happens is that people make up stop-gap measures to deal with problems as they arise, and then those stop-gaps become "the way we do things here in troop AAA." The next guy who comes along picks up those stop gaps, modifies them a little further to suit the need, and before you know it you have mostly good people going way off course.

 

I think that it is really important that adults in any unit be open to feedback, rather than ignoring it, dismissing it ("oh they were just looking for a reason to leave") or otherwise diminishing it ("that's a one-time problem, not a trend or symptom of an underlying problem"). I have sort of gotten to the point where I find it hard to put up with this any longer. So, I will try to find a time to talk with the SM and CC for the troop and let them know what I'm seeing. I don't expect it will have a lot of impact though, as feedback along these lines in the past (not just from me) has been soundly ignored.

 

[Lem 10]

It seems that in any organization there is the established SOP and then there are the unofficial pecking orders. In sports the coaches and adult assistants are given a fair amount of respect by the players- (more than say the usual youth - adult relationship). In the Young Marines and Junior ROTC I have heard they establish a model similar to the armed forces in terms of chain of command and learning the parlance of the respective services. I was in Air Force ROTC back in the 1980s and that was certainly the model. And I am sure that all these various organizations have another informal established set of relationships that are based on friendships, cliques, mutual respect and the flip side. This is why the idea of teamwork is so stressed when these various units are training- so when the situation is professional, the baser instincts of the young people are put on hold and the training takes over.

I think the Patrol model may not work in the organizations I mentioned. Perhaps the patrol method only works in scouting. But as I have stated in earlier posts, I am not really sure that BSA has a rubric for recognizing and grading leadership, applied training, and the like. The default reaction seems to always fall back to well as long as the 12 laws are being learned scouting is doing its job.

 

The Military and Athletic organizations are all based on the model of professionalism and training for an end-game- whether that be victory in the field or in the battlefield. I am not sure what winning is in Scouts. That may be the problem- winning is a nebulous or amorphous concept when reading the posts from the various scouters.

Maybe all this soul searching and navel gazing is due to the fact that we really are not dealing with the same reality and National does not mandate a very firm and structures SOP. Scoutmasters are told that they are scoutmasters but not scouts, and master of what? They are not to be the master of the scouts- that is the patrol leader. But how does this work? How would this work in any other situation where results were demanded? Where would the accountability lie?

I think, folks, that the model is broken.

 

 

Jeff

 

[fleetfootedfox 10]

Lisabob, I don't mean to imply that scouting is all about rank, but slow progress is usually a symptom of some problem. I agree scouting is not all about the rank, but from the time they are cubs they are taught to do their best. I don't know your son, but I wonder if 1st class after 5 years is his best. Maybe it is, or maybe it's just too late now that he is older (at least 14) to prod him along the way you might have been able to when he was 12. However, if he is not learning to do his best, then what is he learning?

 

You say you don't want to bribe your son, but is it fair to say that he is under-motivated? Maybe there are other ways to motivate him. Also, although you can't force him to do merit badges or do them for him, you can keep track of what he is lacking, offer to help him or find others who can, etc.

 

Of course, the word "bribe" carries negative connotations, so maybe my use of that word was a poor choice. If you are a "my glass is half empty" kind of person, you might even say that the rank patches and merit badges are essentially "bribes" to get them to do the work that they require. However, we prefer to call them "recognition", not bribes. I don't think there's anything wrong with making deals and offerering additional motivation. Once he's done the work, he'll realize, "that wasn't so hard.... why did I put it off?"

 

Of course, I have seen boys get pushed to eagle and stop attending troop meetings as soon as that is achieved. I don't like to see that, because when they are older hopefully they are more mature and ready to step up into more leadership positions.

 

Regarding the bullying, having not witnessed it first hand I don't know what you call bullying. Boys get rough and tease each other and some people call that bullying. I wouldn't. Of course, bullying and hazing should not be tolerated.

[Lisabob 13]

Scouter760, I think we have a basic disagreement here and we may just need to agree to disagree.

 

Regarding "progress" in scouting, there are many ways to measure that. My experience is that some boys are strongly motivated by external matters like receiving merit badges and rank advancement. Others do not seek that sort of external reward and do things primarily because they want to see what they can achieve or do or learn for themselves or simply for the sake of doing it (not to achieve a patch). And yes, some are just lazy, or perhaps uninterested, or perhaps not ready to take on the responsibilities of the next level. In fact, a lot of boys rocket through the first few ranks, only to hit a plateau at 1st Class, because Star and Life require very different skills, some of which kids just need time to mature before they are ready for those ranks. The same is true of a lot of boys who get to Life and hang there for a long time before they are really ready to do their Eagle projects (if they ever get there).

 

Advancement is a tricky method. It should be used to serve each individual boy's developmental needs. Pushing advancement down the throat of a boy who isn't all that interested in external motivation brings up a question of what the advancement is worth and also of who accomplished it. I know, for my kiddo, that if I push and plead and prod and engage in arm twisting, a) it is likely to backfire and b) whatever he does get, would be suspect in terms of "ownership." At that point it becomes more about my pride than his growth, and I'm not willing to go down that road. He has been very active in his troop since joining. He has the outdoor skills, the service, the leadership aspects. He has had a lot of opportunities to develop character and other intangible traits. He has earned a lot more than the minimum # of MBs, but relatively few Eagle-required. He has used the MB program to explore topics of interest though. He knows my feelings, that I'd like for him to finish up the few remaining items for Star, and then Life, and then Eagle. At some point I rather hope he'll do it. But if not, it doesn't necessarily mean he hasn't done his best. It may be that he has found other ways to get fulfillment out of however long he spends in scouting.

 

So I am not particularly worried about my son's rank. In fact I'd rather have him go slow and know that he well and truly earned the rank to the best of his abilities, than to push him through on my timetable just because I want to have outward signs of "progress." One has to have some respect for the individual child here.

 

As for the bullying stuff, I am not talking about ordinary rough and tumble kid behavior. I'm talking about intentionally harming people, doggedly questioning people's sexual orientation (not in jest or off-hand comments but in really deeply offensive and systematic ways), deliberately making fun of boys with learning or physical disabilities, intentional put-downs of younger kids, forming a group to target one individual boy, destroying his gear intentionally, etc. These, to me, are pretty cut-and-dried, and not matters of "kids will be kids" or ordinary play getting a little out of hand. And they're not all (or even mostly) directed at my kid either - but this is a pattern I've witnessed in the troop where older boys behave this way and get away with it, with nothing more than an occasional slap on the hand if even that. The result, I'm sad to say, is that the pattern appears to repeat itself as those boys who do stick with it learn to behave that way to future incoming scouts too.

 

 

 

[fleetfootedfox 10]

Well, there is something to be said for your approach. However, I would like to offer up the suggestion that in the real world we are often judged by other people based on standards of performance that are not always individualized and are beyond our control. A boy may be getting what he wants out of the program without ever making rank, but other people may view his performance as lacking and will likely feel he is not doing his best.

 

When he applies to college, the admissions office will look at his high school grades. If he did not make good grades, it will not help him to argue that he didn't feel grades were important as long as he was learning and having fun. Also, when he goes off to try to get a job after college, they will want to know if he has any degrees and what they are. If he went to college for 4 years but has no degree to show for it, it will not do him much good to claim he felt the diploma was just a piece of paper and he felt he got whatever he could out of college and was happy with his own performance.

 

So, you may feel it is wrong to judge a boy's scouting performance based on rank, but I would say this is how the world works, and might as well get them used to it.

 

[Lisabob 13]

Fundamental difference. Scouting is not school and it is not the job world. It is a place for boys to try new things, build new skills, and challenge themselves in a reasonably low-stress environment. We live in a very achievement oriented society, where grades, material possessions, money, prestigious job titles, etc., are all outward measures of "success" that are widely expected. It might be nice for some kids, particularly high-achieving kids who have plenty of pressures elsewhere, to have scouting as a place where they can choose for themselves what outward benchmarks they think are really important to reach for, and at what pace they seek to achieve those, if at all.

 

As I said, we'll need to agree to disagree on this I suppose.

[Lem 10]

We are all actors who are seeking our role to play. I never wanted to be a star athlete- but I enjoyed tackling and blocking and special teams. It was fun to hit and to help out and be a part of a team- especially a varsity team. I liked knowing kids who really were talented in sports and in art and academics. Some mediocrity is just fine. Our vocation is special. But the other things, like target shooting, playing sports, or collecting bugs, or whatever we do as our little indulgences, are more often than not done for other reasons than prestige and rewards.

 

I understand both arguments playing out here. If Lisabob's son is happy being a 1st class scout- who is anyone to say that this isn't just fine? He might be a heck of a lot more of a scout then a lot of life and eagles out there.

 

The back bone of the Marines is not the officer corps, but the NCO's and the faceless jarheads. All Marines are pretty darned proud to be Marines. And they have earned that pride.

 

Scouting I would think should be a little like that. There should be implicit in their training a constant reminder of who they are, what they represent, and why it is good and bold and true and special. They have made decisions that are not just different, but in many respects harder than other boys. They should be lead to believe that they are being prepared for a life of service and sacrifice and honor. They should be taught by their: scoutmasters" that there is a flipside to the scout laws, and that it is the way of the beast.

 

Boys think in terms of good and evil. If we keep it grey, they will more easily be lead astray.

 

The behavior that Lisabob has described is so offensively 180 out of phase with scout law that I think she has a case on principles to go right to the SM and demand that the specific behaviors and incidences be addressed.

 

Jeff

 

[Eagledad 2777]

I am a firm believer and proponent of the BSAs mission to develop boys into men who make ethical decisions based from the Scout Law and Oath. In my own words I like to say that we develop citizens of character and leaders of integrity. I also believe that the when used correctly, the 3 Aims and 8 Methods are almost a genus system of reaching that mission. I know genus is a bold word, but I have watched the system repeatedly work so well that Im still amazed by it.

 

That being said, we have had discussions and debates of the most important method and if methods should be applied equally. My experience is that each boy needs some methods more than others to grow toward a balance in better character. A natural leader may struggle with advancement where as the nerdy sort of fellow flies through advancement but struggles mightily in leadership. Of course most boys struggle with uniform at some point in their life and Patrol Method is difficult even for many adults to understand.

 

And yet, we adults seem to struggle with the idea of letting a boy choose his path through the scouting program.

 

I have always taught adult leaders that if we could only have a boy for one day, shouldnt our program be rich enough that that one boy leaves a little closer to our mission of growth in character.

 

So, when I hear of a scout who leaves the troop on his 18th birthday as a tenderfoot, I dont pause with a moment of regret. There are eight methods to help a boy grow into a man and advancement is only one. If we are lucky enough to have a scout leave on his 18th birthday, I can only think that his family and community are blessed by how this scout will serve them in their future.

 

I love this scouting stuff.

 

Barry

 

[fleetfootedfox 10]

While the hypothetical of an 18 year old tenderfoot is interesting, that's not what we're talking about here. I think a much more realistic and probably very common scenario is of a boy quitting out of frustration due to not making progress.

 

Not knowing the actual real boy we're talking about, I don't know if he is really happy with where he's at or if he's just so frustrated with being in a troop he doesn't like that he doesn't feel motivated.

 

To me it seemed like a red flag, especially given that the parent is talking about how unhappy both of them are with their troop. Maybe he would be more motivated to advance if he was in a better troop.

[Lem 10]

I can imagine that the social forces acting on a teenage boy must be enormous. Especially those forces like girls and partying and gaming and all the stuff that is either irrelevant or hostile to scouting and the scout ethos.

Remember, the teenage high school world is pretty ruthless, and boy scouting is a bulls eye of epitaph spewing morons.

The kids I have encountered who have either quit scouting or have not wanted to join have the same comment- scouting is seen to them as totally gay.

It is that tender time right after the crossing over - 12-14, when boys get that shot of hormones and the horizon of possibilities changes. Are they men yet? Are they less then men? Should they wear a red necker and go on a hike with a bunch of pals? And who are all the fat older guys in green shorts?

Scouting is becoming a more and more closeted activity for boys because it is growing increasingly queerer in comparison to the casual world of hooking up and hanging out and getting stoned.

An in depth and academically sound sociological comparative study of teenagers in different activities like band, scouting, sports, etcetera would be interesting. Why does scouting lose so many boys at the same time that High school has so many join various clubs and teams?

My own theory is that scouting seems to a majority of boys to be tame and boring and gay: Except of course for the ones who either don't care what other boys think, are from strong families and pro scouting communities, or are themselves tame and boring and gay. It becomes a tricky self fulfilling prophecy.

Who has not found it ironic that while BSA national has been fighting the Homosexuals; Boy Scouting has been getting the rap by kids of being pretty gay?

I think the solution is to man-up scouting. Increasing the dangerous components like climbing and weaponry and hunting and bring in new elements like paintballing, ATV and motor-cross. Form a better working relationship with NASA and create a specialized group of scouting themed around preparing for space exploration a junior astronaut league. Get scouting working with colleges and universities to create scholarships for kids who specialize in meteorology and other disciplines. And work with the military and auxiliary organizations like Civil Air Patrol to get boy scouts flying.

My 3 cents worth

Jeff

 

[ScoutMomAng 10]

Lisabob!

 

Are you wearing MY shoes and living in my house???

 

I too am the District Membership chair for a failing district, (although I am pulling higher numbers this year than last). I, too, am on the committee of my son's troop which is in the same predicament as your son's troop except for the bullying part. I however, wear many other hats (WeBeLoS den leader 6 yrs running, Pack Committee Chair, Pack Popcorn Kernal and Pack camping chair). I am also dancing with the idea of starting a Venture Crew in our city because my daughter wants to be in a crew and there isn't one in our city. However, in order to start a Crew something else must give if no leader for that steps forward.

 

My husband took of SM about a year ago for the troop and is working on changing the troop but some of it is a waiting game. Many of the boys whose parents are the "issue" soon turn 18 and graduate from school. A few of those are only days from turning 18 and are hurrying to complete requirements for Eagle because daddy said so (if you know what I mean). We think in another year the troop will make the turn around it needs to make but I'm not sure my son can wait and I really am nervous about putting my second son there this spring when he earns his AOL.

 

For me, in your shoes, I would take a step back for awhile from the troop to see if this is what you really want to do. Don't quit yet, just don't make yourself so "available" for them. That is my plan when the WeBeLoS cross over in the Spring. While I'm stepping out of WeBeLoS I will also step out of Committee Chair, and Camping chair to see what the other parents do. If somebody realizes that I'm not doing it all anymore, maybe they will step up and take it on. In the meantime, I plan to get that crew started. If my son decides to move from the troop to the crew, then that will be what happens. He will still be able to earn his Eagle as a crew member, so there will be nothing lost there. What my hubby decides to do with the troop after that is just that.

 

As for your son, why don't the two of you go visit some crews in the area and see if that is what he wants to do? He may like it much better.

 

I wish you all the luck in your endeavors in the troop and best wishes.