Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
LeCastor

"A Philosophy of Traditional Scouting"

Recommended Posts

Interesting. I'm actually glad that The Scout Association has never taken legal action against the other smaller UK associations (BPSA, BBS, FSE). Although their methods may differ, their aims are the same and I consider them fellow Scouts.

 

The UK Chief Commissioner seems to agree with me as well.http://www.escouts.org.uk/forum/showpost.php?p=235364&postcount=50

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of the big differences between the Scout Association and BSA. I know that in the early years of the BSA, there were several scout organizations and if memory serves there was some violence between them. But BSA is very protective. heck they went after the Girl Scouts of the USA at one time.

 

But I agree I like how SA works with the other groups, as well as the Girl Guides. Wouldn't happen over here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very true, there has been numerous schisms in UK Scouting. The British Boy Scouts which broke away in 1909 was initially very successful and for a time looked like it might become the dominant force in Scouting. They even formed the first world scouting organisation in 1911, The Order of World Scouts, http://www.boy-scout.net/en/index.html Because of internal fighting the BBS's glory was short lived and today their are only a few remaining groups. This is the only one I could find with a group website; http://2ndgoringandstreatley.org.uk/main.php

 

Another breakaway occurred in the 1920's and led to the formation of a group calling itself the Kindred of the Kibbo Kift; http://www.kibbokift.org/ they rapidly started to follow a very socialist line and attempts by the UK Labour Party to make it its youth organisation resulted in another split and the Woodcraft Folk; http://www.woodcraft.org.uk/

 

The European Scout Federation wasn't a breakaway group but was formed in Germany after WWII as a way of bringing the youth of Europe together. They have a few groups in the UK. http://www.fse-scouts.eu/w/index.php?title=Main_Page

 

The Baden-Powell Scout Association was formed in response to attempts to modernise scouting in the UK during the late 60's. https://www.traditionalscouting.co.uk/ They're the largest of the breakaway Scout associations with a membership of a few thousand. Quite often a Scout group that has left the Scout Association because of seemingly irreconcilable differences will join the BPSA. http://www.fakenhamlancasterscouts.org.uk(This message has been edited by Chug)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Someone please help me out.

What am I not seeing?

Is "A Philosophy of Traditional Scouting" About dressing up in vintage Scout uniforms?

Has the Philosophy of Scouting really changed?

Aren't we still the value based organization that we have always been?

If Troops aren't doing traditional Scouting activities and we feel a need to lay blame? Shouldn't that blame be laid at the feet of the Troops who aren't doing traditional Scouting activities?

Do I need to buy Bell Tents and go running through the long grass to be a traditional Scouter?

I think not.

Ea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eamonn writes:

 

Aren't we still the value based organization that we have always been?

 

"Values-Based" Scouting: "Values" are a result of "Adult Association," which boils down to formal sessions in which Scouts' "advancement" is held hostage to character judgement by indoor adults. Values "experts" judge extreme camping to be an "old-fashioned" remnant of America's agrarian past. The only value of camping is to get boys to "sit side by side with adults of character." Therefore, switching to computers, aerospace, and soccer is still "Scouting."

 

Presumably "values-based" Scouting is convinced that the attraction of "soccer" will not diminish as quickly as "camping" when soccer players are forced to endure formal character judgement sessions where parents (who don't play soccer) decide if a boy's "values" are good enough for the Board of Review to count the goals he scored out on the field.

 

"Traditional Scouting:" The single aim of citizenship is learned by working together to plan and carry out Scouts' own backwoods single-Patrol adventures. Character is a by-product of extreme camping, in part the result of human struggle to cope with the raw forces of nature, and in part the non-structured influence of adults who can recognize an informal "teachable moment."

 

Anybody can experience the effect that Traditional Scouting has on "21st century boys" by simply holding a campout in which the Patrol Leaders space their Patrols Baden-Powell's minimum 300 feet apart.

 

Eamonn writes:

 

Is "A Philosophy of Traditional Scouting" About dressing up in vintage Scout uniforms?

 

"Values-Based" Scouting: The uniform is a symbol of "Scouting's deeply-held values," therefore only worn indoors. :)

 

"Traditional Scouting:" The uniform is an outdoor method.

 

Eamonn: As a Wood Badge course director, do you publicly insult your participants for "dressing up" in EXACTLY THE SAME "vintage Scout uniform" as Troop 238?

 

Yours at 300 feet,

 

Kudu

(This message has been edited by kudu)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Scouting has traditionally been values-based, as two of the primary goals of Scouting have always been producing good people and good citizens. As you know, Rick, the values of Scouting, particularly the Oath, Law, Motto, and Slogan, were formulated by adults, such as BP. I guess that makes Scouting's values the "result" of Scouts associating with adults.

 

Scouting's traditional attention to values does not diminish the importance of the outdoor program. One ought not blame Scouting's traditional values for the poor choices made by the corporation, especially in the early 1970's. Conceding that behavior trumps words, BSA says in 2011 that the outdoor program is Scouting's most important method. In 2011, my troop tent-camps every month, as do some other troops. Living where you do, you will appreciate what that means for Scouting in northeast Ohio. Less camping is typically a choice, not a BSA program standard.

 

Scouting, of course, does not regard the only importance of the outdoor program as being the occasion to "sit side by side with adults of character." Scouting since BP sees the outdoor program as the primary draw for boys ("bait" BP) and a golden opportunity to build good, physically fit people, and good citizens through the "game" of Scouting. That "game," indoors, is always a pale imitation of the real thing.

 

Simply as a matter of history (those inconvenient facts) Boards of Review when I was a Scout were all adults. They were also FAR tougher on values than Boards I have witnessed or heard about in the last thirty years. In the 1950,'s, Scouts were regularly told they needed to "come back" solely because they could not describe how they did a "Good Turn daily or how they had done their best to do so. I recall being asked, "Describe how you show that you are trustworthy" by my Board for Second Class (Gulp!).

 

During the relatively few, non-traditional years that Boards of Review were conducted by Scouts in the U.S., there was no official training unit for Boards of Review, and only very good training kept the Scouts from being far tougher on advancement candidates than adults, especially on matters of Scout skills but also on matters of values.

 

It is good, Rick, to see you list "citizenship" as an aim of "traditional" scouting. You have, in the past on this forum, contended that scouting was never about citizenship development. But what do we make of characterizing "citizenship" as the "single aim" of "traditional" scouting. And this characterization only one sentence removed from mentioning "character"? Scouting has always added character and fitness to citizenship as goals.

 

Certainly, BSA has never gone as far towards patrol autonomy as did BP in his early early writings. Neither has Scouting in the U.K followed that vision after its very earliest years. So we have labored on for over a century not doing it in what you call the "traditional" way. That seems to make the BSA's way "traditional." Nevertheless, I will again concede that adults are more "present" than I remember them being over fifty years ago.

 

But even you, Rick, seem to have adults present in your model. Otherwise, how could they pounce upon "teachable moments" as you have described. Of course, in the Age of the Lawsuit, BSA has more in mind than "teachable moments."

 

And Rick, in all my Scouting I was never with a unit that had adults appoint the Scout leaders as you have advocated. Oh, I know it has always gone on, but how "traditional" is that?

 

As to "extreme camping," that has never been part of Scouting, Rick, except by accident. Not traditional at all.

 

Ah, the Uniform. 100% Sanforized cotton. OD. (Some of the adults moaned about the loss of the khaki uniform.) As I recall, you would not have approved of 100% cotton. Still, after almost thirty years of Oscar, the uniform is less commonly worn on outings these days than when I was a Scout (1954-1961). However, more recently, the Uniform is again reasonably practical to wear in the out-of-doors. It may become more of a norm again. But, Rick, except in Rockwell's paintings, the Uniform was never 100% in the outdoor program except at camporees. It was especially rare when backpacking. (I saw my first group backpacking in 100% uniform at Philmont in 1989. We than used all of out sunburn first aid materials to try and deal with the results of three days that crew was in BSA baseball caps and Scout shorts. "Crispy Critters." Hats and trousers sure would have been better.)

 

The uniform IS, and has always been, a method of Scouting, as is the more important outdoor program. Defining the Uniform as merely a part of the outdoor program thus is not traditional.

 

I yearn for things Scouting that once were and even for things that never were. There is a difference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the rest of the world, "Traditional Scouting" is a technical term that refers to Baden-Powell's program as it existed in some arbitrary but specific year (usually 1965 or 1938). As such it is a game similar to Vintage "Base Ball."

 

For the sake of the informal way in which the term is used in this thread, no reader needs to struggle with these endless debates to understand "Traditional Scouting." Simply plan a campout in which your Patrol Leaders set up their Patrols "a football field apart," and by Sunday morning you will understand everything you need to know about Troop-based "Traditional Scouting."

 

In other words, you can skip the rest of this technical post (plus all of the usual rebuttals) and not miss a thing :)

 

TAHAWK writes:

 

Scouting has traditionally been values-based,

 

Clearly Baden-Powell based what we call "advancement" solely on the mastery of objective Scoutcraft and Public Service skills. That means no "values" tests: No Boards of Review, No Scoutmaster Conferences, No wildcard Scout Spirit requirements.

 

http://inquiry.net/traditional/por/proficiency_badges.htm

 

TAHAWK writes:

 

I guess that makes Scouting's values the "result" of Scouts associating with adults.

 

For Baden-Powell only in the sense that a coach can profoundly influence a young athlete's character without holding all of the boy's game stats hostage to moral character Boards of Review by his teammates' parents.

 

TAHAWK writes:

 

poor choices made by the corporation, especially in the early 1970's. Conceding that behavior trumps words, BSA says in 2011 that the outdoor program is Scouting's most important method.

 

Despite what the "BSA says," the "CSE says" the same race card stuff as in the 1970s: It is "insensitive" to expect 12-year-old Hispanic boys to sleep in a tent away from their families:

 

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

 

TAHAWK writes:

 

It is good, Rick, to see you list "citizenship" as an aim of "traditional" scouting. You have, in the past on this forum, contended that scouting was never about citizenship development.

 

Only if I failed to make clear Baden-Powell's distinction between schoolwork "three branches of government" citizenship (BSA Merit Badges), and his version of hands-on citizenship training: Organizing regular Patrol outings without adult supervision.

 

TAHAWK writes:

 

Certainly, BSA has never gone as far towards patrol autonomy as did BP in his early early writings. Neither has Scouting in the U.K followed that vision after its very earliest years. So we have labored on for over a century not doing it in what you call the "traditional" way.

 

Baden-Powell's Patrol System was in effect at least until the 1966 Advance Party Report, and Green Bar Bill's Patrol Leader Training continued until 1972. Remarkably what he called the "Real" Patrol Method was technically possible until the Guide to Safe Scouting killed it for the BSA's centennial celebration.

 

If I remember correctly, when you were a Scout your Scoutmaster ignored Hillcourt's National "Patrol Leader Training" course (How to lead your Patrol into the woods without adult supervision), and when you became a Scoutmaster you did the same, using a local Council "leadership skills" program instead. So it is no wonder that you conclude that Hillcourt's "Real" Patrol Method did not exist.

 

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

 

TAHAWK writes:

 

And Rick, in all my Scouting I was never with a unit that had adults appoint the Scout leaders as you have advocated.

 

That is because (if I remember correctly) you have never been with a unit that allowed Scout Patrols to camp without adult supervision.

 

TAHAWK writes:

 

As to "extreme camping," that has never been part of Scouting, Rick, except by accident. Not traditional at all.

 

By "extreme camping" I mean the ONLY nights of camping that Baden-Powell counted toward what we call "advancement:" Unsupervised Patrol Camping, and unsupervised Journeys and Expeditions. I suspect that by the BSA's current Webelos III "nights of camping" standards, we can all agree that a Baden-Powell unsupervised 200 mile "Eagle Project" horseback Expedition through wild country would qualify as "extreme camping."

 

http://inquiry.net/advancement/traditional/journey_requirements.htm

 

The BSA program once included a version Baden-Powell's unsupervised 14 mile First Class Journey, and as recently as last year allowed unsupervised Patrol camping.

 

TAHAWK writes:

 

Defining the Uniform as merely a part of the outdoor program thus is not traditional.

 

I define the Uniform as a practical outdoor method: small "m." In retrospect Hillcourt's invention of the "Aims and Methods" was what destroyed his life's work, because it reduced BSA Scouting to a formal formula of Methods (capital "M") that could be changed and then used against him:

 

http://kudu.net/adult/methods/index.htm

 

Troop 238 camps in campaign hats and the long-sleeved Centennial Uniform. For what it's worth I consider that to be "Traditional" and worthy of our admiration.

 

Yours at 300 feet,

 

Kudu

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kudu,

One thing that really irks me is that I tend to think if we both could sit down and have a face to face chat, my feeling is that we very well might find that we have more in common than not.

I don't for a second let alone a minute believe that you believe all that?? Call it what ever you like about Value Based Scouting having to do with Advancement,Soccer and camping.

I'll gladly stand up and proclaim that we have way too many adults who just don't get it. They hold Eagle Scout as the be all and end all of what Scouts and Scouting is about and seem willing to take short cuts, look for loop holes and allow advancement to be the driving force for all they do. Which sadly at times includes forcing and enforcing their will on the Scouts that they are supposed to be serving.

I'm willing to bet that when I posted about Traditional Values you knew the values that I was talking about.

All that good stuff we find in the Oath and Law.

I agree that Scouts learn a heck f a lot from working together.

Much as I hate the term "Classroom" in Scouting. The outdoors and Scouts camping is the classroom where they learn and put into practice working together.

I was deeply saddened when I read that Patrols are no longer allowed to camp as Patrols without any adult supervision.

I'm not talking about 100 yards away from adult interferences.

I'm talking about Patrols who organize, plan and carry out a real Patrol camp.

My feeling is that the Scoutmasters and the adults we have just don't have the know how to train the Scouts /PLC to be able to do this.

I'm not sure what went wrong, where it went wrong or how it went wrong.

I know that the leaders I see just don't have the skills needed and worse still seem to have no interest in getting these skills.

Troops seem happy to gather up as many parents as they can, get them into a Scout shirt then sign them up as leaders.

I have no idea why this is happening?

The last thing I ever want to do is baby sit a group of adults. (OK, I do it at work!).

I personally never had more than six ASM's and most of them were far better at traditional Scout craft than I'll ever be.

 

Re: "As a Wood Badge course director, do you publicly insult your participants for "dressing up" in EXACTLY THE SAME "vintage Scout uniform" as Troop 238?"

I spent a some time thinking about what uniform the staff would wear.

I had some people on the staff who thought we should look like a Rockwell painting.

In the past I'd been through all the sillieness of keeping an eye on what the course SM was wearing and having to change so we were all uniform in uniform.

I'd sat through a development weekend where over an hour was spent discussing if we should wear long socks or short socks.

In the end being as we had Venturers on staff and the Boy Scout uniform isn't part of Venturing (The red jacket and campaign hat.) We went with the uniform that of the position that the person held.

I also strongly dislike hats of any sort.

I own a couple of campaign hats and a goodly supply of rain covers for them. But I find them to be a real nuisance. So we had a ball cap made for the course and everyone, staff and participants wore the same hat.

People were free to wear whatever length pants they wanted.

Some of the female staff members made it clear that they were uncomfortable wearing shorts.

 

If Troop 238 is happy with their uniform? More power to them.

My argument about the Scout uniform has always been about the hight cost of it and my feeling is that as long as it costs an arm and a leg, parents will be unwilling to allow their sons to wear it as anything but some kind of a dress uniform.

 

While my Scouting days are almost over.

I know that come hell or high water, there would never come a day when if I was SM the Troop Meeting, be it indoors outdoors or on the moon would be devoted to the Merit Badge Class of the week.

I'm willing to have any Scout who I signed off as having met the skills needed for First Class Scout prove to anyone that he has indeed mastered the skills.

I've sat through PLC meeting where the Scouts have looked like deer caught in the headlights and acted like the three vultures in Walt Disney's The Jungle Book:

"What shall we do?"

"I don't know!"

"What do you want to do?"

"I don't know?"

And yes I have stepped in and yes I have given more than a friendly nudge to get them thinking and coming up with things they didn't know that they wanted to do.

I've also had PLC where I've been very politely been informed that I'm not needed and to just have the vans ready.

 

 

I do believe that we have a problem.

My thinking is that the leaders are not receiving the outdoor training that is needed.

This is a kinda Catch 22 situation. The Scouts coming along have not been trained and so it goes on.

In the last long term plan the BSA set a goal of recruiting one million more volunteers.

While of course not all of this one million (Which didn't happen anyway!) Would be working with the youth. I think we'd serve the Scouts better by recruiting people who want to do more than just sit around a camp fire while keeping an eye on their son. People who really want to learn the skills that Scouts need to be able to have more fun, face new and exciting challenges and feel confident about themselves both now as Scouts and later when they grow up to be adults.

 

I may not feel the need to wear a campaign hat.

But for me, no matter what todays date is. I'm still doing my best to give the Scouts in my charge the best possible Scouting experiences I can.

That's what the poor unfortunate guys who had me as a Scout did.

So maybe that's traditional Scouting?

Ea.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rick, we need to do this in stages I think.

 

STEP 1: Does anyone but Rick feel Scouting is not value-based?

******************************************************************************

Eamon, you say, "I was deeply saddened when I read that Patrols are no longer allowed to camp as Patrols without any adult supervision."

 

I presume you refer to G2SS, but having two (or more) adults "required" or "present" does not mean that they have to be involved in leading. To me, until I hear more, it does not mean they have to be in sight or within shouting distance. Alarm bells and the hated cell phones can push them pretty far away.

 

The right adults won't be a problem. The wrong adults don't need G2SS to be a problem.

 

As I explained to Rick some months ago, the lack of campsites within walking distance of the Orange County sprawl meant we had adults drive us on Patrol campouts in the late 1950's, but they kept to themselves -- as they had been emphatically instructed by the SM. We might see them drinking coffee and talking that adult stuff, but we pretty much forgot they were there until they asked if we were ready to go home Sunday afternoon. (Gee, I wonder why they didn't seem to want to eat with us? A hamburger that falls in the ashes is definitely still food.)

 

Eamon, you also say, "My feeling is that the Scoutmasters and the adults we have just don't have the know how to train the Scouts /PLC to be able to do this [organize, plan and carry out a real Patrol camp]. I'm not sure what went wrong, where it went wrong or how it went wrong. I know that the leaders I see just don't have the skills needed and worse still seem to have no interest in getting these skills."

 

That observation suggests a need for better training of adults in planning outdoor activities and and in passing those skills on to Scout leaders. EDGE is interesting, but not as nuts-and-boltsy as TTT.

 

We also need adults willing to let the Scout leaders lead. They won't learn how to apply skills by watching the adults exercise those skills any more than I reached a decent level of skill riding a bike solely by watching someone else ride (or, worse, listening to lectures on bike-riding).

 

If the adults don't know, they can't teach, and if they won't let go, the teaching can only foster frustration.

 

You also allude to Scouts who don't know how to plan. Once there was JLOW. One day was not much, but it was something. Now, the only leadership training outside the Troop are NYT and Philmont courses, They lack the coverage to be effective. National has promised a new district-level course for a decade, but lacks the wit or will to get the job done.

 

So the guys in the Red jackets can do. Put on a course. First we did it for our troop. Then we opened it to our district. Forty-five Scouts who were or wanted to be leaders attended. We didn't ask for permission. We didn't see that we needed any.

 

Finally, you also opine that "the leaders are not receiving the outdoor training that is needed." I presume you mean the adults. That is a sore spot with many veteran Scouters. As most here know, Wood Badge, once solely Scoutcraft instruction, now is limited to how to light a backpacking stove - sometimes taught by staff that does not know how to light a backpacking stove. Basic training when I retook it in 1982 had an outdoor weekend with twenty-four hours of outdoors skills training, some way past First Class level. Staff hjad to chase the learners way at 4:00 PM on Sunday. Instead, today, basic training ends with IOLS, which is supposed to be restricted to First-Class skills -- unless the adult pops for Powder Horn or Philmont courses. Few will do that, so the general level of outdoor skills declines.

 

So organize an Advanced Outdoor Skills Course. I started with the District Training Chairmen and gathered staff based on one criteria: "Who are the excellent presenters on outdoor skills and what will they be excited about presenting?" Happily abandon one-hour session limits. Add some youth staff. Open the course to Scout leaders and Venturing leaders instead of just adults. Things can really get rocking. The SE thinks it's a great idea. (After thirty-two years we have an SE who thinks training is important. One change he has made is eliminating all use fees for training events at the Council camp, halving the cost of training. And yes, he thinks outdoors skills training is important.)

 

Who knows if we can "win." But we can make some impact. Do not go gently into that good night.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

STEP 2

 

"Kudu": Clearly Baden-Powell based what we call "advancement" solely on the mastery of objective Scoutcraft and Public Service skills. That means no "values" tests: No Boards of Review, No Scoutmaster Conferences, No wildcard Scout Spirit requirements.

 

First, BP expressly provided in Scouting for Boys that a Scout who did not follow Scouting's values -- who "breaks his word of honor, or otherwise disgraces himself" -- should be removed from Scouting. That would be the enforcement of values. One cannot "advance" if one has been expelled. Conformity to values was a given.

 

As to value-based tests for advancement, that too is traditional. BP said several times that it was effort, not actual proficiency, that should determine if a "proficiency badge" was awarded by a Scoutmaster: "Moreover, there is only one standard by which a boy is judged as qualified for a badge, and that is the amount of effort he puts into his work."

 

That is a value-centered standard, not an "objective" one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

TAHAWK

While there are many leaders in Boy Scouting who are willing to make the effort and take the time to acquire what I might consider the skills needed to lead a successful outdoor program.

It does seem that over the past few years there has been a shift in the make up of the people who are volunteering.

When I arrived here in the USA Troop leadership was much the same as it was back in the UK.

Most Troops had a small group of very dedicated adults who were willing to take the load and knew what they were doing.

Training and Wood Badge? From my observation, was seen as being something that was nice and a good thing but not really necessary. Maybe because in the area where I live the guys in Scouting tended to be blue collar workers and finding vacation time for both family and Scouts was hard enough without spending time at training's?

Still it seemed that these guys knew what they were doing.

Again in the area where I live the guys involved with Troops tended to see their role in Scouting as a life-time commitment. Once in they weren't and didn't go.

Parents today foe whatever reasons seem to be afraid to let their kids out of their sight. Moms spend hours traveling to and from soccer games to watch something that they just don't understand.

Parents seem willing to fudge the requirements that a Cub Scout does at home because Lord forbid another Lad get a little ahead of their son.

Dads don't join Boy Scouts out of any love for Scouts, Scouting, camping or the great outdoors. Their sole reason for being there is to keep an eye on their kid.

Just like the Moms who don't understand soccer, these guys don't really understand Scouting.

For them the bits that they do seem to get and understand are based on advancement and the mighty Eagle Scout rank.

The fast track to Eagle is merit badges.

So these Watch Dogs don't see the need to learn new stuff.

Why should they bother, when it's so much easier to herd the Scouts off to summer camp, Merit Badge clinics and the like?

Attendance at training's like the Outdoor Skills for these guys is much like the way they see the Merit Badge Classes that their son's are pushed into.

Something that you need attend, but it's OK to hide behind the "Super Scout" that each Patrol seems to have and allow him to be the driver.

Some return after training with a training high.

But in next to no time all the good ideas and all the yearning for new skills and new knowledge are squashed and replaced with "We don't do it that way!"

Where we once had small teams that worked together we now have camp outs where at times the adults outnumber the Scouts.

There was a time when I wished that we had more active parents.

Now I question active doing what?

How many leaders does it take to tend the fire?

Isn't there more to Scouting than just using a Dutch Oven?

The active Scouting life-span of these parents who sign up is about 3 to 4 years. Once their son can manage to explain to them that he is tired of being under the watchful eye of Dad and that he is bored and wants out. Both Father and son are gone and gone for good.

 

So as not to come off sounding that all is lost.

I do think that maybe it's worth the time to come up with more in-depth training for the interested leaders.

I'm going to give it some thought, work on it and get back to you.

Eamonn.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tahawk writes:

 

First, BP expressly provided in Scouting for Boys that a Scout who did not follow Scouting's values -- who "breaks his word of honor, or otherwise disgraces himself" -- should be removed from Scouting. That would be the enforcement of values.

 

I believe that the "or otherwise disgraces himself" wildcard appears only in the 1908 edition.

 

At any rate Scout Law states that only when a Scout has been put on notice before the fact, can he lose his membership badge:

 

1) Where a Scout provides sworn testimony: "If a scout says 'On my honour it is so,' that means that it is so, just as if he had taken a most solemn oath."

 

2) Where a Scout is charged on his honor to carry out a specific duty: "Similarly, if a scout officer says to a scout, 'I trust you on your honour to do this,' the scout is bound to carry out the order to the very best of his ability, and to let nothing interfere with his doing so."

 

http://inquiry.net/ideals/scout_law/chart.htm

 

So only if a Scout then breaks his honor by telling a lie under oath, or by not carrying out an order exactly when trusted on his honor to do so, would he then "lose his life" as a Scout. That sentence would be decided by the Patrol Leaders in their Court of Honor, not by the Scoutmaster or a committee of parents.

 

That is the opposite of "Scout Spirit" requirements where the Scoutmaster is provided with an after the fact subjective wildcard to judge a Scout's "attitude" as a final hurdle to every "rank" badge.

 

Tahawk writes:

 

As to value-based tests for advancement, that too is traditional. BP said several times that it was effort, not actual proficiency, that should determine if a "proficiency badge" was awarded by a Scoutmaster:

 

Proficiency Badges were not awarded by Scoutmasters, so they did not have any leverage there. Tenderfoot through First Class was handled by the Patrol Leader. More advanced badges were determined by outside Examiners.

 

See 405 (i) & (ii):

 

http://inquiry.net/traditional/por/proficiency_badges.htm

 

Tahawk quotes B-P:

 

""Moreover, there is only one standard by which a boy is judged as qualified for a badge, and that is the amount of effort he puts into his work."

 

Several times? As far as I know, Baden-Powell wrote that only once, in his autobiography (Lessons from the Varsity of Life,) late in life, in 1933 when he was 76 years old. In the next sentence he writes "This gives direct encouragement to the dull or backward boy..."

 

That sentiment does not appear five years later in his last "Rules on how to play the game of Scouting for Boys except for a few specific exceptions designed for the "dull or backward boy:"

 

"406. Special tests for physically or mentally defective boys are available on application to I.H.Q., through the D.C.

 

"430. (1) Swimming. Swim 50 yards. If a doctor certifies that bathing is dangerous to the boy's health he must, instead of this, pass one of the following badges...

 

"9) Journey. Go on foot or row a boat, alone or with another Scout, for a total distance of fourteen miles... In abnormal circumstances the Local Association may give permission for the paragraph to be made easier to exceptional cases."

 

Yours at 300 feet,

 

Kudu

http://kudu.net

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You asserted that BP provided strictly objective standards for advancing.

 

My point was that BP provided, at the onset, for subjective, values-based standards for Proficiency Badges (best effort) and subjective, values-based standards for even BEING a scout.

 

How those values-based, subjective standards were administered is a different issue. But as it happens, the "Scout Law" section of Scouting for Boys says nothing about advanced warning. It does not say, for example, "and is warned that he may lose his "life" if he fails to obey."

 

"If a scout were to break his honor by telling a lie, or by not carrying out an order exactly, when trusted on his honor to do so, he would cease to be a scout, and must hand over his scout badge, and never be allowed to war it again - he loses his life." SFB at p. 49

 

 

If you have a version of Scouting for Boys written by Baden Powell, as opposed to the fantasy "World Brotherhood Edition" written by Hillcourt, in which there is a material difference, please let us know.

 

(Not surprisingly, when Seton wrote the first BSA handbook, he included the language: "breaks his word of honor of otherwise disgraces himself.")

 

Nor does the Scout Law section of Scouting for Boys say that only a Court of Honor enforces BP's subjective, values-based standard.

 

Compare:

 

"A scout's badge repesents and is called his "life.

. . .

He will be called upon at some time or the other to risk his life, that is to perform some difficult task. , and if he fails it he loses his life - that is his badge. Is such case a Court of Honor may allow him to remain in the patrol, but he cannot have his badge back again, unless he performs some especially good work. Scouting For Boys at p. 38.

 

TO

 

"f a scout officer [that is, a Scoutmaster] says to a scout. "I trust you on your honor to do this," the scout is bound to carry out the order to the very best of his ability, and to let nothing interfere with his doing so.

 

If a scout were to break his honor by telling a lie, or by not carrying out an order exactly, when trusted on his honor to do so, he would cease to be a scout, and must hand over his scout badge, and never be allowed to war it again - he loses his life." SFB at p. 49

 

 

In any event, the "Scout Spirit" requirement to live the Oath and Law is OUR statement of BP's standard and has been thus from the first set of rank requirements. That is, it is traditional.

 

 

When I pointed out that BP himself urged subjective standards for Proficiency badges, you replied:

 

"Proficiency Badges were not awarded by Scoutmasters, so they did not have any leverage there."

 

and

 

"Several times? As far as I know, Baden-Powell wrote that only once, in his autobiography (Lessons from the Varsity of Life,) late in life, in 1933 when he was 76 years old. In the next sentence he writes "This gives direct encouragement to the dull or backward boy..."

 

That sentiment does not appear five years later in his last "Rules on how to play the game of Scouting for Boys except for a few specific exceptions designed for the "dull or backward boy."

 

 

 

As you had cited Proficiency badges, I felt BP's comments were on point.

 

Not sure about the meaning of your second comment. Is it that BP had "lost it" at age 76 but "found it" six years later?

 

Shall we try BP's comments on the new "Efficiency Badges" in April, 1910: "These badges are merely intended as an encouragement to a boy to take up a hobby or occupation and to make some sort of progress in it; . . . they are not intended to signify that he is a mater in the craft which he is tested in. Therefore, the examiners should not aim at too high a standard, especially in the first badge.

. . .

[O]ur object is to get all boys interested. . . .

 

The Scoutmaster who uses discretion in putting his boys at an easy fence or two to begin with will find them jumping with confidence and keenness. . . .

 

At the same time we do not recommend the other extreme, . . . of almost giving the badges away. . . ."

The Scouter, April, 1910.

 

"Our standard for Badge earning is not the attainment of a certain level of quality of knowledge or skill, but the AMOUNT OF EFFORT THE BOY HAS PUT INTO ACQUIRE SUCH KNOWLEDGE OR SKILL.

BP, Aids to Scoutmastership, 1920

[Caps as in original].

 

The specific admonition by BP that effort was the standard appeared also in Scouting in November, 1921.

 

"Our standard for badge earning -- as I have frequently said-- is not the attainment of a certain level of quality of work (as in school), but the AMOUNT OF EFFORT EXERCISED BY THE CANDIDIATE" [Caps as in original].

 

So BP thought he said it several times -- "repeatedly." And he thought that was the case before "Lessons from the Varsity of Life"

 

Just facts.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you have a version of Scouting for Boys written by Baden Powell, as opposed to the fantasy "World Brotherhood Edition" written by Hillcourt, in which there is a material difference, please let us know.

 

There, that kind of attitude is precisely why there are no "Scout Spirit" requirements, Scoutmaster Conferences, or Boards of Review in Baden-Powell's Scouting. Advancement in his program is based on the mastery of hands-on physical skills, not forced "values-based" word game contests with adults.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rick, I posted (among many other things): "If you have a version of Scouting for Boys written by Baden Powell, as opposed to the fantasy "World Brotherhood Edition" written by Hillcourt, in which there is a material difference, please let us know.

 

You replied: "There, that kind of attitude is precisely why there are no "Scout Spirit" requirements, Scoutmaster Conferences, or Boards of Review in Baden-Powell's Scouting. Advancement in his program is based on the mastery of hands-on physical skills, not forced "values-based" word game contests with adults."

 

 

Rick, I know you are clearly displeased with those words, but I have no idea why. What sort of "attitude" is reflected in my statement that you quote?

 

I suppose it could be that I called it a "fantasy version" of SFB. I did so because it is so different in so many ways from BP's work that is seems silly to use the same title. I am sure you could list dozens of differences.

 

Otherwise, I made a request. If BP, in fact, abandoned "or otherwise disgraces himself" as a basis for being thrown out of Scouting, I sincerely would like to know where and when that happened.

 

As to the substantive aspects of your statement, we have already established that BP emphatically had value-based requirements to even be a Scout, enforced by "officers" - adults, and values-based standards for passing Proficiency Badges, applied by "officers." Sure, no "Boards of Review," unlike traditional American Scouting.

 

As for "hands-on physical skills," some BP-era Proficiency Badges did require such skills. Others, as a simple matter of fact, did not and, instead, required demonstration of specified knowledge, such as Citizen, Clerk, Interpreter, and Starman.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×