National Standardization

[Beavah 205]

Boy Scouts of America is a national organization and an Eagle Scout from Seattle should be the same as an Eagle Scout from Key West and so should any rank in between.

 

Yah, this was a great quote from da parent thread, eh?

 

And yeh see that sentiment a lot on da forums, whether it's about laser tag "rules" or LDS scoutin' or whatever.

 

I'm curious, what do other people think? Is this somethin' we should be aspiring to? For every little thing, or just for advancement, or only for "big issues"?

 

If we wanted to "standardize" for rank, to really make First Class the same everywhere, we'd have to establish a standardized test of some sort. No New Scout Left Behind. To get your First Class, yeh have to pay da testing fee and go to one of da designated test centers. It'd be really funny to see those Florida scouts show up with da gear for a real standardized, national, winter campout, eh?

 

Of course, you'd still fall into people tryin' to teach to the test, eh? Just human nature to be lazy. So you'd have to only offer da test at certain times, and add new test items every time.

 

I wonder, can we point to anything even in da professional world where performance is truly standardized on a national basis?

 

I think everyone knows my take on it. I'm an old conservative fellow, eh? Never surrender to the federal government what should properly be a local issue. Same with Irving Yeh can try to help people with their program by convincing 'em to try a different approach, but not dictate details from 8 states away. A few "big issues" are fine, but not much more than that. The stuff that makes for really good scouting is stuff yeh can't measure or mandate easily anyways - da character, skill, and youth-friendliness of the adult leaders.

 

And of course, really "standardizing" would require us to go to the GSUSA model of owning the troops directly, and abandoning the chartered partner concept. That national approach, especially for outing "rules", has really worked well for GSUSA, hasn't it?

 

Beavah

 

[BadenP 93]

Beavah

 

While your idea is both good and sound National will never force groups, such as the LDS, to capitulate or conform to a national standard that runs contrary to their own organizations goals and purposes. The reason, a potential loss of numbers and money and we all know what Nationals priorities are don't we. However you are correct all Eagle scouts should be receiving the exact same training and pass the exact same requirements nationwide.

 

This is one point where I strongly agree with Kudu, the scouting program of today is truly a sadly watered down version of its original program which lasted through the end of the sixties. Personally I don't know if we can ever achieve that high standard ever again, especially with who is in control at National. I would love to see it happen though.

[SSScout 1624]

But aren't things already "standardized"? Isn't that what the Scout Handbook is about? Unless we get specific "Train the Tester" requirements, then a Maryland First Class should still be equivalent to an Oregon First Class. It is the local folks' responsibility to see that the Scout really does know how to tie the knot and light a fire and ID Poison Ivy. That is where we have our discussions, how so and so isn't really REQUIRING the Scout to show "proficiency". Parlor Scouting vs Trail Scouting?

It's not as tho the Maryland Scout uses a different HB than the Oregon Scout. Different school systems use different textbooks, BSA uses ONE textbook.

We could, I suppose, start on about the "dumbing down" of Scouting, again. But that's been done.

 

As to teaching to the test, at our last IOLS, our Fearless Leader reminded his staff that we had a syllabus from National to teach, but it was alright to add our own experience to it. For instance, teaching fire building and safety, not only what was in the BSHB (10'safety circle, fizzle sticks, etc.), but such things as using Cheetos© to start the fire, or demo a fire piston, or tell the story about how the OA wanted a really well illuminated Camporee campfire program, so they built twin 8' high oak pallet campfires but neglected to arrange any water source nearby...and how certain Scouters spoke gently to them about it...

 

[IM_Kathy 32]

well if you look at 2 of more popular scouting organizations - BSA and GSUSA - you would see that BSA already has a standardized system through out.

 

you know that a 1st class scout has done A, B, C and so on... you know that an Eagle scout has done the specific merit badges and then selected a certain number of others to complete.

 

where as in Girl Scouts - we can get a girl transfer in from a different state or city and is currently a Cadette and has been in scouts since she was a Daisy, but we have no idea if she's learned first aid, gone camping at all, etc... They are able to move up to the next level of scouting regardless of what badges they earned or didn't earn - there are ZERO required badges!

 

I don't think BSA needs to have some sort of test that each scout has to take - they just need to do the work and progress through the ranks and their knowledge.

[John-in-KC 311]

I think the program as developed is designed to produce a standardized product.

 

I also think that the franchise/license/charter system means there will be variance. We aren't McDonalds or Subway, nor are we "The UPS Store." We don't put huge resources into compliance.

 

Protection of the Eagle Scout brand is one area where we do put an effort at compliance. Why else do we have a minimum of a District guest at an EBOR? Why else does the District Advancement Committee approve ELSPs? Why do we tell MB Counselors "do not add to, do not take from" requirements?

 

I am a product of 1960s era Scouting. It was a good program. It needs specific tweaking for the 21st Century:

- LNT vice browse beds!

- Use of signalling mirrors and emergency fires when isolated in the backcountry, vice semaphore and Morse. Further, use of data communications in the 21st Century.

- First aid techniques of today, not of then (tourniquet, anyone?)

 

Those are small things. The big things ... independent, capable Patrols, Troops which form microcosms of society, and give youth a lab of life, units which practice the Methods of Scouting ... including Outdoors, that were there in the 60s ... need to stay there.

[Beavah 205]

you know that a 1st class scout has done A, B, C and so on... you know that an Eagle scout has done the specific merit badges and then selected a certain number of others to complete.

 

Nah, yeh really don't.

 

There's a huge variance between the skills of different First Class Scouts, or Eagle Scouts, as yeh see from the forums. Some units run kids to First Class in a year with only three single-night outings. Some take two or more years with 60+ nights out. Some units yeh can rely on a Tenderfoot being able to do a pull-up, others yeh can't. Some units a boy with First Aid MB will be completely at home as a first responder to a major auto accident, some the lad will have a hard time puttin' on an ankle wrap.

 

I can pick up an advancement report from my council and tell yeh at a glance which is which. There are some units where da average work hours for an Eagle project is less than 50, and some units where it's never less than 400. Some where every lad earns First Class on the same day and others where some lads finish 7 years of scouting at Tenderfoot. Yeh can sit some EBORs where yeh know that even the shyest kid will talk at length and with passion about Scouting, the Oath and Law, etc. And yeh can sit some EBORs for some units where yeh can be pretty sure that even outgoing lads will stumble through the Oath and Law and not really be able to say that much about how it applies to 'em without prompting.

 

Heck, even da schools where there are big, expensive efforts to "standardize" never succeed, eh? A high school diploma at one school is goin' to mean somethin' different from a high school diploma at another. Not sure why we'd be any different.

 

Beavah

 

[OldGreyEagle 5]

Every once in awhile I put out an idea about having BSA Ceritfied Troops. Much in the same way there are various private professional organizations. Post Secondary Educational Istitutions don't HAVE to be accredited, but most are, the accreditation means the schools meet certain standards.

 

Why not have the same thing with Troops? You don't have to be BSA Certified, well, wait, it wouldnt be BSA Certified, you get your Charter from the BSA, I need another Acronym..... for a private certifying body Ok CSA, Certified Scouts of America. After being certified you get to add to your Troop newwletters you are a CSA BSA Troop. THis means you meet the standards which will be the same from Seattle to Key West, or perhaps from Nome to Marathon. Standards that are verified by an accreditation team of like minded adults who visit your troop to be sure you are doing it the "right way" and then get revisited every 3 years

 

Do you want to be a member of the CSA?

[Beavah 205]

Yah, we try that with Quality Unit (now "Journey to Excellence"), eh? A "national certification".

 

Doesn't really get at what IM_Kathy is talkin' about, though, just as with school accreditation yeh still get a really, really wide range of of quality.

 

B

 

[NJCubScouter 1389]

I'm not sure whether this thread is about what we're "aspiring to" (as mentioned in the first post), or what we are actually succeeding in doing. In advancement at least, National is clearly "aspiring to" a national standard, which is "Satisfy the requirements." The fact that there are differences in the level of success in meeting this standard does not mean there is no standard or that we shouldn't try to meet the standard. There are a lot of things working against achieving uniformity in enforcing the advancement requirements as written: The size of the organization, the fact that the unit-level leaders are all volunteers, the fact that district- and council-level leaders who might wish to enforce uniform standards and mostly also volunteers, the fact that many units seem to have "traditions" that seem to involve something other than enforcing the advancement requirements as written (no more, no less), and perhaps also the fact that units are "owned" by other organizations that have their own things that they want to stress or de-emphasize, which may result in some "warping" of the requirements.

 

Beyond just advancement requirements, I see some possible sources of non-uniformity right here in this forum. When someone asks a question, especially about things like the patrol method, several posters in this forum will often direct the person to an older version of a BSA publication, such as a Scoutmaster's Handbook from (when? I'm not sure, probably the 40's or 50's.) Or older versions of the Fieldbook, PL Handbook or some other book. Leaving aside the question of whether the older book may have "better" information than the current version, it's a certainty that if you have different people using different versions of handbooks because the current ones aren't "good enough", you aren't going to have one standardized national practice. Now, some might see that as a good thing; if you don't like the current versions, the fact that some are using older versions at least means that the "old ways" are being practiced in SOME units. But it's not standardized.

 

As for "quality unit," the Centennial QU program really did NOT enforce a nationwide "standard." It emphasized certain areas and basically you had to improve in those areas, with the amount of improvement determined through the "goal-setting" process. Under "Journey to Excellence" this has changed. The new program states some very specific standards that have to be met, though they now have different levels. So I guess the Bronze level is now the National Standard, though you could also say that the Gold and Silver levels (or is it Silver and Gold?) are additional standards for "higher" recognition.(This message has been edited by njcubscouter)

[Kudu 186]

NJCubScouter writes:

 

When someone asks a question, especially about things like the patrol method, several posters in this forum will often direct the person to an older version of a BSA publication, such as a Scoutmaster's Handbook from...the 40's or 50's

 

The 30s and 40s, actually:

 

http://tinyurl.com/368exou

 

If you want to understand "things like the patrol method" you must be able to distinguish between Literal Meaning and Metaphor.

 

The purpose of BSA Training or "Standardization" (as in dumbing Wood Badge down to the Cub Scout level) is to replace the LITERAL meaning of Scoutcraft terms with Fake Leadership METAPHORS, so as to "broaden the appeal of Scouting" to the least common denominator.

 

In NJCubScouter's example, the "old" meaning of "Patrol Leader" and "Patrol Method" (these terms were capitalized in the 3rd and 4th editions) is LITERAL: A Patrol Leader (the most competent Scout in a Patrol) literally LEADS the Patrol on Patrol Hikes and (if competent enough) on Patrol Overnights without adult supervision.

 

In the "Patrol Method Presentation" of "SM & ASM Specific Training" we literally removed the "patrol leader" and the "patrol" and replaced them with the Fake Leadership METAPHOR called "EDGE."

 

The new handbook even goes a step further by introducing this Fake Leadership as "Scoutcraft."

 

Yours at 300 Feet,

 

Kudu

 

"Scuba is a Game with a Porpoise"

http://inquiry.net/scuba_diving_merit_badge/index.htm

 

Literal: Being in accordance with, conforming to, or upholding the exact or primary meaning of a word or words.

 

Metaphor: A figure of speech that constructs an analogy between two things or ideas; the analogy is conveyed by the use of a metaphorical word in place of some other word. For example: "Her eyes were glistening jewels".

 

 

[OldGreyEagle 5]

Kudu, we both agree that the Patrol Leader's job is to bring up his patrols competency so that the group may function on their own on a patrol outing

 

Very often those with high skill sets have no way of imparting this knowledge to others, they know how to start a fire and can't imagine anyone who cant. The people with the high skill sets end up as patrol leaders,as they should

 

How do these high skilled people transfer their knowledge to others?

[Kudu 186]

OldGreyEagle writes:

 

Kudu, we both agree that the Patrol Leader's job is to bring up his patrols competency so that the group may function on their own on a patrol outing

 

That makes two of us, OGE

 

OldGreyEagle writes:

 

Very often those with high skill sets have no way of imparting this knowledge to others, they know how to start a fire and can't imagine anyone who cant.

 

"Very often"? I hear this all the time, but it sounds like a theoretical dilemma. My experience is that Natural Leaders love to show off their secrets: "You make a little cave in the tinder, like this. Then you put the lit match into the little cave, like this."

 

The bottom line is that a "Real" Patrol Leader is chosen for his ability to safely take his Patrol on Patrol Outings, in the same way that a BSA Lifeguard is chose for his ability to keep the waterfront safe (not to teach Scouts how to swim).

 

The destruction of Scouting by "Standardization to the Least Common Denominator" is two-fold: 1) Scoutcraft and 2) Leadership.

 

1) In Troop24's example of an Eagle Scout, remember that any cupcake from Seattle to Key West can get an Eagle badge "literally" without ever walking into the woods with a pack on his back. So Eagle Scouts no longer need "Scout" in B-P's "Literal" meaning of "to Scout" as a verb. Eagle is now a "Metaphor" for abstract stuff like the "Aims" of Scouting, "ethical and moral choices," and in the CSE's most recent attacks on Scoutcraft: "Character and Leadership."

 

See:

 

http://inquiry.net/leadership/sitting_side_by_side_with_adults.htm

 

In other words, "Once an Eagle, Always an Eagle."

 

Baden-Powell's Scouting is based on Literal "Current Proficiency," which is the opposite of the Metaphorical "Once an Eagle, Always an Eagle." To continue to wear any Badge a Scout must be retested every 12 to 18 months. On a practical level "retesting" means that the Scout must help his Patrol Leader teach that skill to get signed off again. So, if the Patrol Leader is the best Journey Leader but not the best teacher, he can delegate to a Scout who needs retesting (or, in the case of a new Badge, to have the PLC approve what we call a "Blue Card").

 

2) Before Fake Leadership was introduced in 1972, "Patrol Leader Training" literally taught a Patrol Leader the position-specific Scoutcraft necessary to physically "Lead" his Patrol into the woods without adult supervision.

 

See:

 

http://inquiry.net/patrol/green_bar/index.htm

 

"Leadership Development" took the Scoutcraft out of Patrol Leader Training and replaced it with a Metaphor called the "Nine Leadership Skills:" A "Standardization to the Least Common Denominator" (AKA all "Junior Leaders").

 

See:

 

http://inquiry.net/leadership/9skills.htm

 

"In general, Patrol Leader training should concentrate on leadership skills rather than on Scoutcraft Skills. The Patrol will not rise and fall on the Patrol Leader's ability to cook, follow a map, or do first aid, but it very definitely depends on his leadership skill."

 

http://inquiry.net/leadership/index.htm

 

Yours at 300 feet,

 

Kudu

 

 

 

[OldGreyEagle 5]

Kudu Says

 

""Very often"? I hear this all the time, but it sounds like a theoretical dilemma. My experience is that Natural Leaders love to show off their secrets: "You make a little cave in the tinder, like this. Then you put the lit match into the little cave, like this." "

 

You have never heard of the technical expert being made team leader and then the team falls apart because the technical expert has no concept of leading a team?

 

"The bottom line is that a "Real" Patrol Leader is chosen for his ability to safely take his Patrol on Patrol Outings,..."

 

So, what we are saying is that unless one is a natual leader, a "Real" Patrol Leader the boy will never be a leader and assumes a subservient role? there is no mentoring the boy?

 

 

[Kudu 186]

OldGreyEagle writes:

 

You have never heard of the technical expert being made team leader and then the team falls apart because the technical expert has no concept of leading a team?

 

No.

 

That sounds like something that happens in corporate offices.

 

Baden-Powell and Bill Hillcourt are talking about Literal Leadership: To physically Lead a Patrol into the woods.

 

A Natural Leader has more than technical skills. Off the top of my head I look for:

 

1) Above average IQ

2) Adult-level verbal skills (which often get him in trouble at school).

3) A love of the outdoors to the degree that Scouting is a priority over sports and after-school activities (if that priority changes, then he may no longer be the Patrol's Natural Leader).

4) A dynamic embodiment of Scout Law (which has its own boy-logic, and is not always in line with the adult emphasis on Loyal and Obedient).

5) A physical bearing of some kind that discourages intimidation by other boys when the adults are not around.

 

You can't teach that with National Standardization.

 

"The bottom line is that a "Real" Patrol Leader is chosen for his ability to safely take his Patrol on Patrol Outings"

 

OldGreyEagle writes:

 

So, what we are saying is that unless one is a natural leader, a "Real" Patrol Leader the boy will never be a leader and assumes a subservient role?

 

The goal of a "Real" Patrol is Adventure, not "Leadership Training."

 

All swimmers "assume a subservient role" to the BSA Lifeguard. If the goal of a Patrol Outing is Fun & Adventure then so what if everyone is "subservient" to a Real Patrol Leader, like we all are to a BSA Lifeguard?

 

When I swim, I am not bothered by my "subservient role" to a Lifeguard (or a Dive Master) one-third my age, are you OGE?

 

It is only when we "Standardize to the Least Common Denominator" with dumbed-down Positions of Responsibility for Standardized POR requirements (for mass-produced Eagles) that a non-swimmer would care about "getting his turn" at being the BSA Lifeguard for six months. To accomplish that new goal, we must dumb swimming down to baby pools and splash pads in the same way that we dumbed the Patrol Method down to Troop Method camping.

 

OldGreyEagle writes:

 

there is no mentoring the boy?

 

Can we "mentor" a boy who is afraid of the water into becoming a BSA Lifeguard? I guess, but absent the hard-core adult supervision that we find in the Troop Method, I think the Scouts are better off under the most competent Natural Swimmers with position-specific Lifeguard training.

 

Yours at 300 feet,

 

Kudu

 

Life After Scuba Diving Merit Badge:

http://inquiry.net/scuba_diving_merit_badge/index.htm

 

[OldGreyEagle 5]

So there is no mentoring of a boy,

 

The strong survive and weak struggle, I had not seen that as the scouting way, but I have been wrong before