New First Class Requirements

[jkhny 10]

Reality check. Look at this for what it is. An attempt by out of touch National leaders to get more kids into Scouting.

 

BUT it's NOT going to work and is going to HURT.

 

Like it or not, Scouting is NOT "cool". It's down there with Marching Band and Chess Club on the "coolenss scale." And - like it or not - for kids in Middle School (the age group for 1st class, 7th or 8th grade seems typical), "fitting in" and being "cool" is a MAJOR focus in their lives.

 

We have a successful Troop - over 40 kids many having NO Cub Scout experience. We run a great High Adventure program. BUT Scouting is NOT cool. We cannot get boys to show up in uniform for the Memorial Day parade - the youngest may show up and the oldest Eagles, but not those in the middle.

 

You are NOT going to get some Middle School boys to voluntarliy admit to being in Boy Scouts much less talk to their friends about it. This requirement is going to be ignored or fudged.

 

The fact that this was even proposed shows the detachment shown by those in Texas and the "old-timers" in general. It's NOT 1950 anymore. It's NOY some Disney film with kids and adults clamoring to join BSA. It's NOT because people haven't been asked to join - as BSA so regularly touts. The answer is another topic.

 

Frankly, I and other leaders at Roundtable found this unconscionable - making it a "requirement" in any way shape or form. You have a Recruiter" strip for those that do so voluntarily. And the real gung-ho "Boy Scout" scouts are a bit of an embarrassment to the others - even higher on the "geek" scale.... and reality is, at least around here, those younger kids SO into Boy Scouts early on seem to outgrow that and don't last

 

BSA should be MORE worried about getting GOOD ADULT leaders into Scouting. GOOD Leaders running a GOOD program result in kids that WANT to join. And NOBODY here feels like BSA gives a damn about the volunteer leaders, no matter how long their tenure or how accomplished they are. Problem is, some of the really GOOD ones we already have are leaving and others who would have been interested in the past are really put off by all BSA is now associated with. The politicization of BSA and it's increasing conservative/religious slant is hurting among adults AND kids. I won't get into all the (deservedly) bad press. I had two parents in Cub Scouts confront me DIRECTLY during our first meeting and one GOOD Den Leader is having real reservations - on principle.

 

You should not be forcing kids to do this. It's adding to the "Amway" mentality where BSA is all about adding new members and selling popcorn. And THAT is all you'd think Scouting is about going by OUR Council.

[madkins007 10]

Isn't the new requirement about the same basic thought process as the Webelos requirement for visting troops, etc.?

 

I don't have a big problem with this other than that I wish it was part fo the Quality Unit Award or a new Unit Growers Program or something rather than a rank thing.

 

I'm trying to imagine how my own son would have felt about it. Probably mildly grumbly and then carry it out in a minimalistic way. With our pack's sister troop, there would have been a LOT of ex-Scouts to talk to!

 

 

[kittle 10]

My son would (or will) have a problem with this requirement. We drive 20 miles one way to his Troop. This is going to make it hard to get a boy to visit the Troop. My son is also homeschooled, which limits the number of boys that he would have to invite. Most of the boys that he knows (or actually like) are already Scouts.

 

[EagleInKY 14]

kittle - You're making too much of this. The requirement says that he has to "Discuss with a boy who is eligible for scout membership the benefits of scouting and your troop ". That can be a 5 minute (or less) converstation with someone he knows. Surely there is somebody (church, sports team, neighborhood, etc.) that he can do this with.

[scoutingagain 20]

Jeepers we're upto 5 pages on this. You'd think there was something really controversial like changing the uniform pants or reintroducing berets being discussed.

 

I think this is a good requirement. Is it there because there is a concern about membership? Maybe, but it encourages the best way there is to get new scouts. One to one communication about the fun a scout has with his unit. You can be fairly certain there will be few discussions among 11 year old boys about the politics of gay rights or if the BSA really is non-sectarian or if the local SE should be indicted.

 

And while scouts may be relatively low on the coolness list I don't think it's off the scale either. Particulary with those units that have an active outdoor program to point to. If scouts are known as an activity where kids go to collect Merit Badges it may seem relatively uncool. If they're known as a group that hikes, rock climbs, whitewater rafts, and goes places, etc. the coolness factor improves considerably. As I've noted before, my own son has been known to wear his troop activity shirt as a warm up shirt for wrestling matches. (It's especially satisfying when he defeats an opponent that notices the shirt and says something like, Oh I get to wrestle the Boy Scout.) I've seen the activity shirt worn around town by other scouts as well. I'll admit they don't casually wear their "Class A's" around but they do march, er I mean walk, stride? down the middle of town twice a year in their class A's during Memorial Day and Veteran's Day parades. This includes most of the high schoolers.

 

When our guys came home from their High Knoll trip this summer, they told all their friends. Some of their older ones have confessed they wished they hadn't dropped out.

 

If scouts are having fun, doing stuff their proud of, talking about it to their friends will be easy and some might even join.

 

SA

[TheFourGuardians 10]

I should start off saying I'm a scout and am not quite so well versed with these things as others.

 

 

Well, this is a rather odd requirement. Although I am a life scout, I do have many kids in the troop who aren't first class yet and will have to abide to this.

 

Hmm, this may be difficult to work with. I mean, it might be possible to get a kid to talk to a rather close friend about it, or perhaps call some of the scouts who left, but many scouts are not exactly for screaming that they are scouts. And, if there is any need for an example of a good reason, a few weeks ago someone spit at me because of my uniform. Quite the annoyance.

 

I can see the utilitarian purpose, but to be frank about it, most kids enter due to being in cubs, although we did have one case of a good friend of someone joining the troop, actually two. So, perhaps it can work, but the fact is equally true that these things came out of the scouts involved

wanting to do this with a good friend(me included, actually,) and not do to rank requirement. Putting a quota on this isn't going to work perfectly well, and the age choice, while it may seem appropriate, really isn't. Seventh graders, although I honestly can't remember enough about that grade, really aren't mature enough to accept scouting. Indeed I do remember how wearing a blue jacket had me, quite coincidentially, questioned if I was a scout in middle school. I'm sure that at first it may not seem perfectly relevent, but it does show that even at that stage many of the kids still have a correlation between scouting and so called "kiddiness." And I am sure that many of the popcorn drives, which, I would assume, make scouting look a good bit like a mini fundraiser and a "kiddy" one at that, combined lack of truely good publicity(both actual scouts doing things "scoutish" and lack of media coverage for anything good, which is a rather common plauge) do more to detriment the recruiting efforts than may be expected. It's just that no one really shows anything about what scouting is any more. I guarentee that most ("pre")teenaged kids have never heard of the Order of the Arrow, let alone Venturing. Perhaps if this were covered in these conversations, it might be adequate, but frankly most of these kids are not likely to be receptive to such things.

 

I do see some of the merit in this, but what really irks me is this pressure for recruitment. I hate to say it, but I think that they should leave that to individual troops, because they really do seem to need to clean up things at the larger levels.

 

THere are troops that need to reform and those that need to recruit, and forcing the second on to the first will destroy decaying troops and alienate those recruited. A good scout troop will do this on its own. A truly great one wouldn't have to.

 

I will bring this up next meeting so the non first class scouts know about it and know what to do.

 

Worst comes to worst I'll give them the numbers of some inactive scouts.

 

While I am for helping recruiting, I agree that having it as something more optional would be great. This is a relatively weak requirement to begin with, and really doesn't show anything truly related to first class level skills(if anything it is more attuned to star and life with the leadership aspect of it.

 

 

[BrentAllen 10]

So Scouting is not "cool." Please show me which of the Scout Laws says "A Scout is "cool."" Where in the Scout book does it teach a Scout how to be "cool?"

No, Scouting is not about being "cool." It is about building leaders, and, to me, finding a higher purpose in life - much higher than "being cool."

Those boys in the chess club and marching band are searching for a higher purpose in life - a higher purpose which will bring them greater fulfillment in life than "being cool." Members of the Atlanta Symphony Orchestra didn't get there by worrying about "being cool" - they got there by pursuing an interest, and trying to be the best they could be - regardless of how far up the "cool" meter they ranked.

Boys that excel in math and science are not "cool" but they go on to be scientist and engineers, to design and produce the very computer you are looking at. How "cool" is that?

If you and your Scouts are more worried about being "cool" than being a Scout, then you are missing the whole point of the program.

 

Anyone involved with any successful program knows you need new blood to keep the program alive. This requirement is teaching that lesson, plain and simple.

If you don't think Scouting IS THE BEST PROGRAM YOUR SON OR ANY BOY WILL EVER BE INVOLVED IN, you have missed out on what Scouting is all about. If your son is involved in a unit WHERE SCOUTING IS THE BEST PROGRAM THEY ARE INVOLVED IN, then what is the problem with asking him to mention the program to a friend?

 

[packsaddle 753]

Well stated, BrentAllen. I would extend your advice to life as well. The people who change the world may or may not be 'cool' when young, but for what they achieve, who cares about 'coolness'?

[TheFourGuardians 10]

Brent, I believe you misunderstand me.

 

I, and most of my troop if not all, are not concerned with such trivial matters, and while it may be that this is a skill that perhaps shows a trancedence of care for trivial people(whether or not that is part of the scout law is really confusing. I cannot see how it follows kindness, but it isn't exactly self respecting (mentally awake that is.) I assume that scouting would not take such things seriously, but it is rather conflicting, even if the answer seems obvious, but that is irrelevent, I suppose.)I do not mean to be rude, but such a personal attack seems out of context. I am not reffering to my troop but to kids as a whole. I do believe that such attacks on my chararacter and that of my troop are out of order and respectfully ask that these things be discussed without such belligerence. Perhaps I misread you, as is often done on the internet, and if so I apologize for any confrontation that appears to result from this post.

 

 

Rather, I am assuming most first class scouts are in sixth grade, maybe seventh. At this stage I am not positive on the level of maturity they may have. Now, while it may work well to have them practice such skills and becoming stronger leaders. Indeed, facing adversity amongst one's peers is something that everyone eventually needs to overcome. If that is the basis behind this requirement, perhaps it is more acceptable than simply a recruitment goal, which I find to be fairly dishonorable if only because it seems to really discredit the program.

 

I do not mean to make it seem as though such abstract and generally irrelevent concepts "coolness" and the like are meant to be guides, but rather that at this age kids are rather sensitive to it, and perhaps the level of maturity in those scouts needs to be fostered(and perhaps this requirement can do that, but it continues to me to be nothing more than a recruiting tactic.) However, I can think of few people of that age that would be able to talk about scouts like that. Not that there is a necessary problem with it, and at high school levels I assume it is probably worse(I go to a rather strange school so I cannot comment on the general trends of high schools. There are people who have come in full scout uniform at my school for whatever reason, and this I assume is out of character for most high schools.) Perhaps, therefore, raising this skill early is of more importance.

 

Overall, it is not any of the above that irks me so much as this idea behind recruiting psuedo-quotas. I like the idea of having more scouts in some troops, but I know of some troops that also don't have need for those things and may not be ready for more kids.

 

I apologize if my previous post made it seem as though kids should succumb to such silly things as "coolness" but rather I was questioning the motives of National for instilling this requirement and if it was appropriate for that age. However, looking at it from another angle provides this view. I can support it if it is meant to also strengthen the first class scout to be, but otherwise it seems almost shallow. That is my primary objection to this thing, it is just not genuine, it seems forced to me, and in a bad place. An individual scout can recruit, but often these things have a time and a place, and while putting some idea of pressure on making this thing happen may be good, I would perhaps like to see this as a requirement for communications as opposed to the current one, or for some other honor.

 

Perhaps I am wrong though, as is likely, but I simply cannot see the way that this skill is related to first class.

 

BUt, in all fairness, it is likely my vision which is failing rather than council's. It is likely my distaste for unnecessary changes and a preset notion for what a first class scout is, etc. that have led me to argue this. Ultimately it is simply a rather compounded emotion that has led me to dislike this requirement in part, based off of something I cannot touch. Perhaps a natural instinct to quarral and question instilled in teenagers. ALso a possibility I am sure.

 

No matter, to be frank, this requirement is no harder than tying a square knot, and is truly an introduction to public speaking, communications, and leadership, much as tying a square knot can be seen as an introduction to outdoorsmanship. I hope I have not set a bad image of myself to you, but I do have a tendency to question things that change and often disagree with them for no matter, save those changes I consider necessary beyond a doubt. In fact, that really does describe me well. Perhaps I should learn to overcome that instead?

 

I apologize for my commentary, but I tend to do such things often.

 

[BrentAllen 10]

TheFourGuardians,

My post was not written as a direct response to you. If it had been, I would have started the post as I started this one. I follow general rules of courtesy on the web:

1. If I am typing a message to a specific individual, I will address it to them.

2. I do not hide behind an alias. I find people are much more courteous if they are speaking as themselves, instead of having to hide their true identity.

3. I try to avoid personal attacks, and try to deal only with facts and the truth.

If you took my post as an attack - well, I can't help you with that. You are seeing something that isn't there.

[Hunt 11]

TheFourGuardians, there was no reason for you to apologize for stating your views. You did so calmly, and with an attempt to see both sides.

 

BrentAllen, I'm sorry to say that your response did seem aimed at what TheFourGuardians had to say, and did read like an attack. Your response "I can't help you with that" is pretty rude, too. Maybe you could have said, "I certainly didn't mean my post as an attack--I'm sorry if you took it that way."

 

On the merits, TheFourGuardians was making the clear point that many youth don't consider Scouting to be "cool," and this may inhibit younger scouts from wanting to tell others about it. Anybody who can't see this is ignoring reality. The whole purpose of this new requirement is clearly to recruit, and you don't recruit 6th and 7th graders by telling them about the character-building elements of scouting--you do it by telling them that it's fun and has cool activities. In other words, Scouting IS cool, if it's done right--it's just a false impression that it isn't cool.