Should we demand more or less?

[Beavah 205]

the requirements from joining to First Class are nothing to sneeze at, even with what some regard as an Accelerated program, it still is expected to take one year to get to First Class. Then add in the requirments to get from First CLass to Eagle. There is 1 year and 4 months of POR (POSITION OF RESPONSIBILITY) to do.

 

Yah, let's see... that makes 2 years and four months. Round it up to three.

 

A Middle School program, like Gern says.

 

Why would any self-respecting high school fellow want to hang around after that? Unless he's a bit young/immature for his age, and he needs the familiarity of a middle school program to build confidence as its "top dog."

 

That's the way some (I'd even say a majority) of troops run, eh? If the positions of responsibility are such that a 12-13 year old can do them, then they aren't going to be a challenge for a 15-17 year old. And in all likelihood, in order to stay age appropriate, things are goin' to be strongly "adult guided."

 

Beavah

 

[Stosh 3452]

Thanks Dances, I was about to bring up the Drum Corps issue.

 

Anyone ever wonder where the Madison Scouts Drum Corps originated as? They have competed all over the US for many years.

 

Our local Drum Corps competes nationally as well and it is made up of members from ALL the high school bands in the area, even as far as 50 miles away.

 

To say it is impossible for scouts to compete against high school bands with a totally different program hasn't seen how drum corps can compete against high school bands with a very similar program and still find common ground.

 

Stosh

[qwazse 4345]

Some perspective here ...

 

Scouting is a little like church. Every now and then someone pulls off a great revival. Folks say, "Let's have this mountain top experience all the time." Then the Almighty says, "Um, how about you get off this mountain and go into all the world ..." In scouting, we think we need super active scouts with the whole HS age troop doing high adventure or Jambo every 24 months, assuming that'll keep them engaged. Rubbish!!!

 

Yes we must have boys count the cost, but that cost should be: a weekly meeting, maybe a monthly meeting if you're in leadership, a campout or two every month. The reward: you learn values that make you a better musician/linebacker/striker/mechanic.

 

In my opinion, not only can a scout do band and sports. He must do band and sports or OA or some other time intensive community activity tailored to his interest. That's the only way in which he can work out the values he picked up on the scouting trail. For example, any fool can seem clean if a scouter is within earshot to call him on cussing, it's in the locker-room or soundproof band room that he'll find out if he's falling short on the 12 point of the scout law.

 

And no, helping younger boys qualify to take their patrols hiking and camping is NOT a middle school activity. It demands something that seems to come along after that Hebrew age of acountability. IMHO that something seems to come out the best when a youth has focused activities for 10+ hours a week to compliment his 1+ hour a week scouting experience.

 

So you got this 15 y.o. eagle whose done 2 high adventures + Jambo? What do you have to offer? One thing that I have seen very few bands/teams offer: about 4 SPL/PL's who will have his undying respect if in the following year he spares about 50 of his precious hours mentoring them and the diverse youth under them.

 

 

[GKlose 24]

Not only DCI, but there are community marching bands, community concert and jazz bands, and at one time, at least, there were VFW (or AmVets, or American Legion) drum and bugle corps. Here in the northeast, we still see fife and drum corps at parades. So, yes, I think there are rec leagues and rec league bands.

 

Some random thoughts: I didn't march in college, but my HS experience was pretty rigorous. It wasn't required to march, but it was certainly expected. I would guess that a regular (school day) band grade suffered if you didn't march.

 

I can't recall how many games there were per season, but there were at least 9 of them. We did a different half-time show for every game. We had summer practice, not so much for marching, but to start working on the music repertoire (I had to beg nights off from working at a local Scout camp in order to attend). Marching practice, without instruments, the week before band camp. Then band camp.

 

During band camp, we started working on 4 shows (each was 7 minutes long): the pregame show, our first week show, and then starting work on our second week show and our competition show. Also some basic marches for when we did parades.

 

Once the season was underway, the pregame show (of course) and the competition show were the only ones we repeated. Practice 5 days a week, including games days (Fridays). There were times that a game would finish and then we'd hit the field to run through the competition show a couple more times (our director would commonly give us a "one good turn deserves another!" just after we finished a run-through. Then it was up early Saturday morning to catch a bus, play in a parade in some town, and then a band competition in that same town that afternoon.

 

A typical practice might include a pregame show run-through (until later in the season, that is), that week's show, the competition show and then prelim work on the next week's show.

 

As the season went on, there were times when we'd get new music in band class on Monday (and a new drill that afternoon in MB practice), and by Wednesday we had both of them memorized (7 minute shows), and we performed them on Friday night.

 

By comparison, our "pep band" (which played during home basketball games) was easy: most of the repertoire was already memorized from the football season. We'd add a few more things, but those were relatively easy to pick up.

 

I'm not sure if any other bands were organized the same way, but we had instrument sections broken up into squads of 4. There were section leaders, and squad leaders, and both had responsibilities. The squad leader, for example, had to make sure that the squad knew its drill assignments. The drum major, who ran practices, would typically address squad leaders, not individuals. Our band director was heavily involved of course, having designed the shows, and rehearsing the band during the day, but it was the drum major's show in the afternoon and evenings.

 

Our band director came out of the OSU/ROTC bag in the mid-60s, so I would think that he was basing it on his OSU marching band experience.

 

Guy

[Thomas54 10]

 

 

Please, DCI has 3500 college age music majors in it. Our Suburban soccer club has over 2,000 youths in it.

 

 

DCI does not equal rec marching band at any minimal test.

 

 

[JMHawkins 15]

If the positions of responsibility are such that a 12-13 year old can do them, then they aren't going to be a challenge for a 15-17 year old. And in all likelihood, in order to stay age appropriate, things are goin' to be strongly "adult guided."

 

Thanks Beavah, for putting your finger on something that's been bugging me. In the old troop that I belonged to, the idea of making First Class in a year would've been laughed at. First class was a two-year journey for most kids, and all our PLs were at least 14. We also tended to keep boys in their leadership positions for a year at least. Things were up for a vote of course, but the adult leaders encouraged us boys to stick with a position longer than seems to be typical today. We didn't churn through the different positions, checking off requirements. We - get this - assumed the purpose of holding a POR was to do the stuff that needed doing in order for the troop to run. It wasn't to check a box on your Eagle trail. The idea that a PL should run for another position after leading his patrol through one Snow Camp or 50-miler wouldn't have been well received. The guy just learned what he was doing - he ought to spend another year doing it before going on to something else.

 

I think 16 was the youngest Eagle we had.

 

Maybe our advancement was too slow, could be, but I worry that today it's too fast and the emphaisis is on advancing rather than experiencing. That might be the real difference between Band and Scouts. Band (and sports) don't really have the concept of advancement - your age determines which squads you're eligible for and your skill level determines if you have a spot on them. It's all about the experience for Band and sports, nobody gets confused on that.

 

 

[acco40 95]

Regardless of requirement "toughness" - the best way to keep 16 & 17 yr olds in the program is to keep out 10 - 12 year olds. Boy Scouts has kept lowering the age level at the bottom end but not the top.

 

I don't care what they are doing, but being 17 and in a program that contains 10, 11 and 12 year olds can be frustrating.

[JMHawkins 15]

Regardless of requirement "toughness" - the best way to keep 16 & 17 yr olds in the program is to keep out 10 - 12 year olds. Boy Scouts has kept lowering the age level at the bottom end but not the top.

 

I don't care what they are doing, but being 17 and in a program that contains 10, 11 and 12 year olds can be frustrating.

 

Yeah, what I remember of the old troop is that the 6th and 7th graders were the patrol members (not many 5th graders, I don't remember if Webelos didn't cross over in 5th grade then or if the troop just picked them up later - I dropped out of Cubs before my Arrow of Light and then rejoined as a Boy Scout in 6th grade). 8th and 9th graders were the PLs, and 10th+ graders were the "old kids" who basically had their own patrol (led by the SPL). The "regular" patrols were pretty much on their own (under their PLs) and the older boys didn't interact directly with the patrol members that much - they worked through the PLs, who in turn worked extensively with the younger boys. I think that kept the age overlap reasonable.

[qwazse 4345]

Regardless of requirement "toughness" - the best way to keep 16 & 17 yr olds in the program is to keep out 10 - 12 year olds. Boy Scouts has kept lowering the age level at the bottom end but not the top. I don't care what they are doing, but being 17 and in a program that contains 10, 11 and 12 year olds can be frustrating. - acco40

 

Yeah, I saw that troop of "over 15"'s every year at summer camp. It just kept getting smaller and smaller and smaller ...

 

Meanwhile, when my crew started, none (that's zero, nada, nix, nill) of the boys who were also in a troop left it. They didn't start attending crew meetings more and troop meetings less. In recent years, only half of the 14+ year-olds in our "sister" troop responded to invites to join our crew. (One did so reluctantly because he wants to go on a Seabase trip we're planning.) And the troop has A SWARM of little'ns! They can be frustrating, but I don't see them keeeping older boys away. In fact the only practical difference between the crew and the troop is that the troop has more frequent meetings and younger boys are present.

 

Therefore, I must conclude that the reason many boys are uniquely attracted to the troop is a) they like a weekly routine, b) they like the privelage of be mentoring, c) the want a break from the girls they see in school all day, and d) they don't love paperwork like a real Boy Scout should so the youth application gets lost.

 

 

[Beavah 205]

Yah, I just don't get da notion that people think older boys won't work with younger fellows. There is a limit, and I agree that the way we've lowered the age for joining Boy Scouting into the 5th grade is a bit too young. But I've never really seen an issue with older fellows and sixth/seventh graders at the end of a first-year program. As long as they're not dealing with crying and homesickness kind of baby-stuff, the older boys are usually just fine with the younger guys.

 

What doesn't seem to work as well is the age-stratified stuff, where the attrition just causes patrols to fall apart/be consolidated at the high school level.

 

Beavah

 

[JMHawkins 15]

Yah, I just don't get da notion that people think older boys won't work with younger fellows.

 

They'll work with them, they just don't want to be doing the same thing as the younger boys. By "same thing" I don't mean going on the same backpacking trip, I mean doing the exact same things while on (and planning for) the trip.

 

Looking back, the 6th graders were learning how to make camp, the 8th graders were teaching the 6th graders how to make camp, and the 10th graders were teaching the 8th graders how to teach the 6th graders. Everybody was learning new stuff and engaging their brains in different ways, even though we were all trying to get camp set up before it got dark.

 

Course, it can only work that way if it's boy led. If the adults are doing all the leading, there's nothing for the older kids to do.

[Twocubdad 665]

I think we need to change the way we look at this.

 

Now that my sons are almost 16 and 18, I'm gaining a new appreciation for the maturation process boys go through and how Scouting fits into it.

 

Take my older son, for example. From the first day of cubs he was Uber Scout. First kid in his den to earn Wolf, all 21 Webelos pins, held just about every POR in the troop, three jamboress and was SPL of his jamboree troop this summer. But he's been on one or two campouts in the past year and makes a troop meeting maybe once every 6 or 8 weeks.

 

He in the thick of his senior exit project now. We were talking about it a few weeks ago and he says, "You know, Dad, this is just like doing my Eagle project. You do all the planning and scheduling, making budgets, recruiting help. Then when you start, all that goes out the window and you have to adjust your schedule and solve problems and work around to other people. This is a whole lot harder than my Eagle project, but it's all the same stuff I learned doing it."

 

WOW! I doesn't get much better than that. He's taking what he learned in Scouting and applying it to his real life. Who would be better off if instead he hung out with the troop every week and cranked out another two or three Eagle palms?

 

Boys are going to move on from Scouting at different times, just like the earn ranks at differnt rates. Would it be reasonable to say you must earn First Class on your 12th birthday? Life precisely on you 16th birthday? Why do we expect boys to all come in to a precise landing at the end of their Scouting careers on their 18th birthday? If a boy is ready to move on at 17 and take the experiences he learned in Scouting and apply them to the rest of his life a year "early", I'm perfectly fine with that.

 

Producing Assistant Scoutmasters is NOT a goal of Scouting. So why do we want to run the program as if it were? Would we not better serve our Scouts if we helped them out of the nest when they're ready, even if that is somewhere short of age 18? And if some of them sail on to other interests at 16 or 17 is that a success or failure?

 

Second Thought--

 

I can't think of another program where the expectation is for boys who join in the first grade will stay fully involved through high school. (Okay, I guess by definition we have that expectation of SCHOOL, but I'm talking about outside activities.)

 

Take any sport. Think about the huge numbers of little boys who play tee-ball. What percentage of those boys play varsity baseball? In our area, I bet we had close to half the kindergarten and first graders playing tee-ball. Now, out of 3500 high school students there are maybe 25 boys on the baseball team?

 

Why do we expect Scouting to be any different? Part of the process of growing up is learning what you enjoy and what you are good at. Why are we disappointed when boys discover they enjoy and excell at activities besides Scouting? Membership in any program like Scouting is going to be a very broad-based pyramid. I would expect the numbers of Tigers to 18-year-old Scouts to be similar to the tee-baller to varsity players.

 

I also think it is a false comparison to look at Scouting vs. "sports". More accurate would be to look at Scouting vs. baseball, or vs. basketball. There's a big difference between a varsity football player vs. a kid on the tennis or golf team. Sure there are common elements, but also a lot different.

 

Every different sport attracts different kinds of kid and have their own specialized structures and support systems. The coaches are (hopefully) experts in that one sports. There is a tremendous focus on that one sport in terms of training, equipment, attitude.... Even school teams, in addition to the tax-payer supported coaches and facilities, have huge booster clubs raising money, driving vans, handling equipment.

 

Scouting, by contrast is the equivalent of trying to run an all-sports league. Join our troop, come to one practice every week and we'll play football a couple weekends a year, baseball in the spring, basketball in the winter and still try to work in lacross, soccer, golf, tennis, track and all the rest.

 

For the young boys, this is great as that's exactly what they want -- a taste of everything so they can decide what they like and what they're good at. By 15, the boys have specialized and narrowed their focus to one or two activities. They're all over football and golf, but check out when we move on to soccer and swimming. A Scout may be all over our ski trip in January, but would rather have a root canal than strap on a backpack and hike 20 miles.

 

That's the struggle we're having in our troop now. We're trying to run an "all-sports" program for the older boys by trying to put on a variety of high adventure activities. Frankly, it's a tremendous undertaking for both the youth and adult leaders. Unfortunately, we're stretched thin and we aren't doing a very good job of it. For every HA activity the PLC tries to put on, two-thirds of the boys aren't interested. We're putting forth a huge amount of effort and still getting low turn out.

 

Of course, the problem is there is no common activity the older guys are passionate about. I know the boys well enough to know what their interests -- SCUBA, film making, one guy plays in a garage band, hunting, wake boarding, and snow boarding. How do you build a TROOP progam around that? Yes, except for hunting, there's a merit badge for everyone of those and each everyone of the Scouts has the MB for his interest. Problem is, if we try to put on a program around those activies, we would have ONE Scout show up for each one. Well, that's not true -- we'd still have the 30 11- and 12-year-olds who show up for everything.

 

I know specialization was one of the original objective of Venturing, that crews would specialize in activities. But I've never seen a crew work that way. I think we had one snow skiing crew years and years ago, but -- surprise! -- they folded over the summer and never started up again.

 

A tough nut to crack.

[perdidochas 658]

Twocubdad wrote:

 

Second Thought--

 

I can't think of another program where the expectation is for boys who join in the first grade will stay fully involved through high school. (Okay, I guess by definition we have that expectation of SCHOOL, but I'm talking about outside activities.)

 

Take any sport. Think about the huge numbers of little boys who play tee-ball. What percentage of those boys play varsity baseball? In our area, I bet we had close to half the kindergarten and first graders playing tee-ball. Now, out of 3500 high school students there are maybe 25 boys on the baseball team?

 

Why do we expect Scouting to be any different? Part of the process of growing up is learning what you enjoy and what you are good at. Why are we disappointed when boys discover they enjoy and excell at activities besides Scouting? Membership in any program like Scouting is going to be a very broad-based pyramid. I would expect the numbers of Tigers to 18-year-old Scouts to be similar to the tee-baller to varsity players.

 

 

 

I agree with the above. My boys tried tee-ball, soccer, baseball and basketball (and are about to try competitive swimming). They have already given up on baseball and basketball, but have stuck with soccer. They chose what they liked best. I've always asked them the same about scouting. Every year in Cub Scouts, I ask if they are having fun and want to keep doing it. About to do it in Boy Scouts for my oldest who crossed over last March. So far they have chosen scouts. They might not always. I've kind of felt the same as a leader. The current group of Webelos II I'm working with, I lead when they were Tiger Cubs. Only 5 of the 10 I have have remained in Scouts. Two of them took a year or two off. In between there have probably been 20 Cubs that participated for a year or three.

[Stosh 3452]

Like school, church and family, scouts tend to be there for the boys with a worthwhile program for all of them during their developmental years. Sports, music, etc. cater to a few during certain times of their lives. T-Ball through Varsity for baseball, but the kids come and go according to their ability. All these programs offer a ton of opportunities and are flexible as the boys mature through the years. And like school, church and family, scouting can continue on throughout the life of the individual. The schools may change, the churches may change, the family changes, troops change, but the underlying dynamic stays the same.

 

One of the strongest assets of the scouting program is it's ability to be there for all boys throughout their lives. It's tough getting 10 70 year olds together for a bit of scrimmage bball. But 10 old scouters can still pack it up and head out into the woods.

 

I'm thinking today's BSA doesn't really take itself seriously and is often times more focused on numbers, $$'s, etc. and leaving the real value up to whoever us running a unit. As long as the unit has the numbers, sends in the registration, makes a stab at popcorn, schedules a FOS, then the councils are happy.

 

Stosh

[Horizon 97]

Twocubdad nailed a lot of the issues. To do another comparison, compare to NON school sponsored athletics such as soccer.

 

AYSO has more than 50,000 teams and more than 650,000 players (boys and girls) with brackets from U5 through U19. They offer recreational soccer plus they are experimenting with a competitive bracket. In AYSO EVERYONE plays, regardless of whether they come to practice. Players are guaranteed to play half of every match as long as they show up. Parents can choose to use it as a drop off babysitting operation. Every player makes a team. Every team gets to play. Nobody is turned down. The goal of the recreation league is NOT winning, but fun soccer. Outside of headquarters, everyone is a volunteer (much more so than Scouting as a matter of fact).

 

I used to serve on our local board, and I still coach and ref. Our largest group of teams and players is at the U10 level (8 and 9 year olds). After that, boys start to drop out as they focus on fewer extra-curricular activities, get more involved with school, or if they have the money and talent switch into club soccer. This is not much different from what we see in Scouting.

 

Cubs ramps up to our "middle school" program. Sometime in middle school, the dedicated boys stick around, some of the differently focused boys switch to Venturing/Exploring, and others drop out.