Eagledad

I'm gunna disagree. The problem with preK to first grade (toddlers) is the large gap of maturity with the 2nd to 5th graders. The challenge adds a lot of complexity for planning and running pack level activities. I also disagree with the challenge of sports, at least until 2nd grade. We had a couple packs defy Counsel pressure by starting their entry level at the 2nd grade instead of 1st grade. They maintained the same membership number that they had five years earlier with their Tiger program. I believe there is so much pressure on 1st grade parents confronted with the multitude of entry level programs competing for 1st graders that they are relieved to hold off a year. Actually I know this to be true because they told me. BUT for those adults who are concerned about competing programs, I would propose a program like the Girl Scouts have of a preK to 1st grade program that is separate from the pack. That way both programs can be designed independent of the maturity issue. And possibly help the burnout issue by not taxing the pre-k parents. Barry

Experts say volunteers of any volunteer organization give about 20 months before burning out. Asking a volunteer who is starting to burn out after 2 years to give one more year is not hard. I've done it many times. The problem is asking a burned out volunteer to give another two or three years (Bear Leaders). The heaviest drops in cubs when I was on district during the years around 2000 were from Tigers and 2nd year Webelos. I have heard that drop outs have increased during the bear and 1st Webelos years as well. I'm not sure why those years increased. I could only attribute it to a heavier Tiger program, but I didn't track data that long for all the cub years. Barry

I was on the District Membership Committee when National introduce the new and improved Tiger program in 2000. We had heard it was coming and we had hoped it was a scaled back program because we were already struggling with the burnout loses. Instead the new Tiger program required more adult time, not less. In fact the Tiger program alone require about 50% of the total pack adult volunteer time if done as requested. We predicted that troops would see a larger than normal decline of membership in 2005, and they did. I don't have the total cub numbers, but I believe less than 25% of Cubs from the Wolf age make it into the troops. I don't start with Tigers because the loses were huge in our area. A family program might stabilize that number some, but that one-hour-a-week will still be killer even with the whole family involved. Barry

We did this by getting a senior scout involved with the SM instead of the ASM. SPL, JASM, Troop Guide, or just an experienced respected older scout, it doesn't matter. The point was getting the scouts used to trusting the older scout as the trusted assistant of the SM. As a SM, I used the experience to get older scouts more mentoring experience. It starts out a little slow, but as the older scouts age and mature, they get used to the idea of being the trusted role models and mentors. Barry

Yes, making a program more interesting for older scouts is less about better activities and more about getting older scouts involved in the day to day management of the program. That is what you have been doing with your program. Once the older scouts have bought in to being the leaders of the program, they will naturally make the activities more attractive for all the scouts. The program will move from a First Class skills development program to a outdoors adventure program. Barry

The poor program causes the other problem of pulling the boys out. You have heard me say many times that is the parents pullout with their support, their sons will follow. Like all outside activities, scouting requires stamina for those dry times when the scout just isn't in the mood. When the program is so boring that the scouts are always whining, the parents eventually give in. The problem Sentinel is that this is a harder problem to solve than the Cub burnout issue. I could fix the burnout issue overnight simply by shortening the cub program. The troop issue has more to do with not providing a program that is interesting for older scouts. Much harder. Barry

Finally, a voice of reason. "Most" (more than 50%) new Venturing Crews in our area don't last more than five years because the adults of bad troop programs start the Crews. If they can't run a troop, what makes them think they can run a crew. Five years is about all the interest the adults have. Still, the BSA's biggest membership killer is a top heavy Cub program that drives families. Ironically the best way to fix the membership problem would be to bring the girls in at the 10 year age so the families aren't lost as a result of Cub program burnout. Barry

True, but the unit committee will make the choice for them. Unfortunately, that often leads to conflict. Barry

As someone who has a lot of experience working with multiple units in a single sponsor, as well as dealing with the struggle of finding enough volunteers, I can't see two separate programs working side by side. The charter will have to either pick supporting a single gender program or mixed. The forces of economics don't allow it any other way. Barry

It will be interesting. I've said here before that we had several mothers that specifically put their sons in our troop for the exposure to male adult role models. They made it quite clear they that while it was up to the SM, they would rather not have females camping with the boys (we had no restriction). We had several female committee chairman and they were up front that male role models would dominate the program. I also find it interesting that todays parents don't get that. I think the feminist have won in confusing equality with equal abilities. Barry

Demonstrate Scout Spirit and Living the Scout Oath and Law has been a source of contention since the day it was given power to judge a boys behavior. It's nothing new. The struggle is that there isn't a defined set of actions for Demonstrating Scout Sprite, and the result are different adult interpretations of Scout Oath and Law. You would not believe how many times National deals with this conflict on Eagle applications. And 9 times out of 10, the scout wins. Or maybe it is better understood that the troop leadership looses. So what is a parent supposed to do when they feel their child is being wronged by some self-righteous adult whose only authority is some traditional paper hierarchy of a national youth organization. They stand up against the oppression of course. Sadly, the side with the greater pride is the winner because after all, volunteerism isn't worth the heart-ach. And, ironically, Scout Spirit takes a beating because the adult role modes can't play nicely. As our program grew and the Scoutmaster matured along with learning from the experiences of dealing with the high expectations of parents, we got better at explaining what new families should expect from the program. And I know it worked because I got fewer calls in the evening from parents who felt they weren't getting their monies worth. Of course no matter how much we preach our expectations and methods of reaching those expectations, some parents still struggle with their son's less than perfect performance. So, they try to push back. Units the deal with these conflicts the best are the ones that maintain a consistent program. Troops with strong Committee Chairman have the least trouble because they usually work side-by-side with the SM. It doesn't matter how strong or weak the scoutmaster's perform, everybody look's up to them for program direction. So if the CC and SM have a full understanding and agreement of the vision (expectations) and the methods for working toward those expectations, the program is strong; no matter how weak it is. That is why I always encourage CC's take the Scoutmaster Fundamentals training with the SM. They rarely do, but the point is understood. Generally units search first for a SM to build a strong program. But I encourage units to first find a "strong" CC, because they will find the "strong" SM and the two together will build an outstanding program. I kind of went off on a rabbit trail or two, sorry. Barry

I had a few scouts transfer out after my head to head meeting with the parents. I listened patiently and then quietly replied to how and why my actions with their son were appropriate, and supported by the troop committee. I would remain consistent with my scoutmaster style. I tried to not lead the meeting a do or die type of conclusion, but I did leave them an out that there are other programs in the area they might find more acceptable for their family. Sadly, in most cases the scout didn't want to leave. I did track many of those scouts through my sons and about half them aged out of their other troop program because their parents stayed involved. Barry

Same thing; you don't actually know the true motivation or true future anymore than the rest of us. Ok, we do know something, BSA is loosing the present membership and the plan is add new membership instead of fixing the cause of the present decline. Now that sounds like a solid plan for developing a healthy program. Barry

When a poster states a theory and then finishes with a comment of not understanding the point of other posters stating theories, it's time to walk away from the computer. Barry

That's very interesting Eagle, thanks. My wife was a leader in the GSUSA while I was a Scoutmaster, so it was easy to compare. She didn't last long because the program just had no point. When she tried to run her troop like a BSA troop, she was stopped by the higher leadership. If the BSA wanted to partner with a Girls program, Campfire would be the way to go because the program closely resembled the BSA. They have been struggling with membership ever since they opened up to gays. Campfire was at the time a very values and traditional program. It didn't hold well to liberal progressivism. I don't know how they are doing today, but we haven't seen Campfire candy sells for a long time. Barry

When I took my kids to the local Scoutorama, the first place they ran to was the Pioneering area with the 3 story tower and 2 story rope bridge. Boys can build that! Pioneering was a lot easier in the days without self supporting tents, tarps and elaborate camp cook boxes. Even tripods struggle with wash basins near latrines and stoves replacing campfires. Technology has replace the need for knowing the proper knots for more comfortable camping. Pioneering towers and bridges help romanticize the skills that boys in general find boring. A clever SM then uses imagination to push the scouts a little further with visions of gadgets and camp aids. Barry

I admire CCs who value the program because they are more responsible for program quality than most realize. Basically the CC is responsible for bringing in the right volunteers to support the vision. Mot CCs just fill in vacancies, but the good ones recruit specific talent for specific responsibilities. That being said, volunteer sources are limited. Most units do the best they can with the resources they have. When I was at my prime as a "boy run" "Patrol Method" leader of a very successful program, I in my arrogance and immaturity believe every troop should be like ours and that any troop that wasn't like ours was a failure. Then I was recruited to volunteer for district where I was responsible for membership and unit quality. I learned over the years that if the families are satisfied with the program and believe they are getting their monies worth, the unit was as high quality as mine. It just had a different style that match the style of the fine adults leading it. I don't know your resources or the quality of your program, but I think you as the CC are asking the right questions to understand your situation better. Good job and I hope you find a way to work your concerns. Lots of us are here to help, but your the one on the ground and your unit is better for you. Barry

The BSA was loosing membership even before the recent membership policy changes as a result of a program structure that makes managing a unit challenging for volunteers. I have said many times that the sensible way to work the problem is fix the internal issues first. OK, that doesn't seem to be the path National is taking. So, in my mind, bringing girls (family) into the program is like the Titanic taking on more passengers with baling buckets. Even in the best case scenario, the girls membership will eventually level out leaving the program with the same internal problems that is causing the present membership to leave. In other words, bringing in girls to save the program is only a temporary solution. Barry

You know, I wished I had thought of that. There is training for rappelling, swimming and boating. Why not Pioneering! I like it. Barry

Anyone that watched the GSUSA over the last 40 or 50 years noticed that the organization has a lot of support from the womens rights groups. Way to much in some peoples' opinion. However, the GSUSA was noticeably silent during the BSA gay drama when they have the weight to apply pressure. Nothing official, but the rumors were that so long as the BSA stayed away from the GSUSA membership, the ladies would play nice. I wonder if we are about to see weight of their influence. So, on a different note; I don't know how these things work at the National level, but is there anything that shows the public who works for National and describes their responsibilities? Can't the volunteers apply any pressure for accountability? WHO ARE THESE PEOPLE? Barry

The Y-M-C-A song keeps going through my mind. When I was a District Membership Chair 18 years ago, Counsel was working with all the membership chairs to recruit more high school age youth in the program for "after school" activities. I forget the name of that program, but it didn't go well. This sure sounds familiar. Another aspect of this I'm curious about is the religious sponsorships. Originally for the Methodist, the Boy Scout program was sponsored by the men's division of the church. I wonder what they are thinking. Along with that, scouts are presently not welcome in schools as a result of the atheist membership restriction. The older youth program I was talking about didn't have the restriction, so the BSA was working with the High Schools to get them more involved for "after school" activities. I have said for a long long time on this forum that the BSA will have to put less emphasis on the religious part of the program to maintain a liberal progressive direction. I know first hand that this was a set goal by gay activist back in the early 90's. Many youth scout programs around the world have taken god (or God) out of their program completely. Family! Of course family, like the YMCA family. On the plus side, maybe the BSA will add work out rooms to their camps so families can work on their physical fitness after work like the YMCA. Might be a good approach for attracting overweight Familyscoutmasters. I wonder what a Familyscoutmaster patch looks like. Barry

I used to compare notes with my Campfire USA Leader neighbor and feel they provide a better program than the BSA Cubs. In fact, I used a lot of the Camp Fire material while I was a Cub Master. There older scout program is pretty good too. Barry

Hmm, help me stosh, the key point of your theory isn't clear. The NSP and Venture Patrols didn't exist until 1990. What method of Scouts groups did Green Bar Bill (William Hillcourt) guide the Scoutmasters to use from the 1920s thru 1980s? Barry

I agree, if the troop program is strong, they aren't looking to change. We actually had several scouts join Venturing while staying active in the troop program so they could get twice the adventure. Typically these were our more active scouts. So yes, they fit both programs in nicely. I admit that I was one of those insecure adults early in my Scoutmaster career afraid of the Venturing program. But as our troop matured, so did my attitude toward other programs. I come around and welcomed OA and Venturing. Some boys just can get enough of this scouting stuff, so I was glad other opportunities where available. As I matured and started working with other troop leaders, I tried to guide them that if the scouts were leaving for Venturing, their troop program was the problem, not Venturing. But, successful Venturing programs were also hard to find in our area. The problem is generally the adults of lousy troop programs were the same adults of Venturing programs. And that just doesn't work well. The good Crews are still around. The not so good crews rarely made it past five years. Barry