Eagledad

Oh, you meant qualtity control in a positive context, I understand and agree. Personally I've never seen a scout go shopping for a SM with different standards, it was always the parents. Still, there is a fine line between quality controller and gate keeper.

I'm not sure what you mean by quality control, but who's to say as Scoutmasters that your vision of the ideal Eagle is better or worse than mine? I'm just saying that our culture develops (brainwashes?) who we are. I know my father has a different idea of what an Eagle should be than I do. I imagine my sons have a little different vision that me and I was their SM. So yes, we should take some responsibility (and some embarrassement) for the kinds of Eagles we produce. We can certainly do better, but first we have to agree to what is better. Barry

What the society expects from the Eagle is representative of the time. When I was a scout in the 60s and 70s, OA Arrowmen held the highest honor in our troop. First of all only two scouts a year could be voted by their fellow scouts to be candidates for Ordeal. So only the best of scouts were selected. Ordeals back then sorted out the boy from the outdoorsmen and it would not surprise anyone if the scouts failed. Arrowmen were respected as special forces of scouts. They were the best of the best. Now look at the organization. Not that the Eagle wasn't held in high esteem as well, but even back then the Honor was a personal quest of climbing through requirements. I do agree with MattR that it's the SM who sets the bar on the Eagle in each unit, but I disagree that better training would produce better Eagles. The Eagle respresents a vision of the perfect scout. For some Scoutmasters the perfect Eagle is a woodsman who can survive in the wilderness for months. For others the Eagle is man of character that doesn't let temptation get the best of him. And then for others, the Eagle is the Gold Ring that represents accomplished academia. What is the true Eagle? You can't train visions in or out of someone, you can only train them to follow the directions of advancement. But for the most part, our culture instills what most of us consider are traits of a good citizen. And my experience is that most Scoutmasters are satisfied if their Eagles just represent a being good citizen of our time. Barry

Spelling...

Moose, it's not fair when you make up your own rules. There aren't three people watching. Barry

My Eagle older son (30 years old) is a 10th grade teacher in a high risk school. He was telling me the other day that after working with four principles and watching four different styles of leadership with varying degrees of success, he is starting understand the life long value of his troop experience. Barry

This is how our scouts were taught, except we didn't add tea, just drank the hot water. I remember our scouts were surprised that the Philmont staff didn't teach this technique. The sytem also teaches you not to burn your food because even tea can't cover that taste up. Barry

Deleted for not being Scout like. Barry

Wow cubdadinnj, you seem have hit all the topics. We will have to agree to disagree on some of them, but I think you are right-on here. The brilliance of the Scout Promise and Law IS that they are supportive of any individuals values because they are outward actions of respect to all others. How many times have I cringed when someone sais that not being inclusive of gays was against the scout law and oath. I would in no way allow a KKK recruiter in my house, but that doesn't prevent me from living up to the full extent of the Oath and Law. The Scout program today can work in any CO because of the brilliance of the Law and Oath as you say, provided the grown ups allow, support, and encourage those virtues. Good post.

Not exactly the same, but you reminded me of something similar. The scoutmaster of one of the best troops in our district once told me that the best scout he ever had never advanced past second class. This scout was a better a camper, leader, and all around scout than any other scout or adult this highly respected SM had ever known. The scout just didn't care about advancement. A few years later I had a scout just like him. He is truely a natural leader and was an outstanding all around scout, but he had zero desire for any of the processes of advancement in the program. How could the best SPL ever not want to advance. He in my persepective was the epitome of the Eagle and I felt he needed the Eagle to represent the kind of person he is, even today. So I applied constant pressure for him to advance, and I hurt everytime when I think about how I drove him off. That SM was trying to teach me something, why didn't I listen? I changed my philosphy about adults setting goals for scouts after that. You know what the say about "assume". I bare many scares of its humily. Barry

To be fair, the functions of the church model the moral direction its members should follow, whether the church leaders know it or not. On this issue, there is a fine line between hypocrisy and progressive surrender.

I've heard of a handful of units dropping across the country, but nothing earth shattering. I know a few local COs are doing more than shrugging it off, but I don't know that they are kicking the scouts out. However, my concern has always been with the new scout parents. I'm afraid new parents will think it easier to just the skip political controversy than finding themselves picking sides. But, I've been wrong before and I hope my fears are misplaced here as well. Barry

Be careful about what gets lost and stolen and asking for their insurance to pay. Barry

While I fully agree with the point of your post, there has been no debate, argument or even really a presentation of ideas in this discussion. Read from the very first post and I think you will agree the discussion can at best be described as rehash of Alice in Wonderland. Just the rant as a result of bad grammer should expose the bizarre nature of tone. LOL, then we are entertained by Packs proclamation that we no chance of convincing the other. Of WHAT?, misspelling. Lets at least keep whats left of this discussion honest, there was no attempt to be less than friendly courteous or kinds by most of the participants. In fact, in light of how the discussion (discussion?) actually layed (grammer again) i think there was a tremendous display of friendly, courteous, kindness as well as peace, patience, and self control. Barry

So much anger, so much anger.

Great post Eagle Claw. I fully understand your comments on NYLT. I am a big believer of youth training. In fact I was the council Youth Leadership Development Trainer of which I was responsible for all youth leadership training. From all my years of leading a boy run troop and administering leadership traning for youth and adults, I have concluded it's the adults who really need to attend NYLT. In fact I started encouraging troops to send an adult from their troop to staff NYLT even if they didn't have any scouts attending. not that many took the suggestion. The biggest problem with troops is they don't encourage the scouts who attended NYLT to use some the things they learned. They just don't know how really. So we had our NYLT participants create a list of about 4 or 5 things they wanted to try that they learned from the course. We had the SMs sit with their scouts on the last day of course and create a plan together of how to implement their scouts ideas. Of course we prepped th SMs first to why we were doing this. It worked pretty good. I know this was a little off topic, sorry. Barry

I'm assuming you are asking my opinion of what "boy run" looks from the outside. Independent decision making and group dynamics without the adults. Barry

NSPs aren't forced? LOL. Ok that is a whole different discussion, but with the same answer to this discussion. If two different SMs use the methods differently with equal success, is one program worse than the other? And what if those two different adults went to the same training. I used to have this same discussion with another respected scouter on this forum on our differing opinions of running a boy run troop. He at that time believed there was only one way to run a program to get the BEST results and until everyone was of the same mind (his), they could never achieve his vision of perfection. While I was SM, I guided a servant leadership style program. I know through the years of your post that you did too. But we have a completely different vision as well as completely different program style to reaching are vision. Can you conceive a way to train other adults to use servant leadership without changing their style of using Aims and Methods? Our troop did not put a special focus on advancement and yet we have as many Eagles percentage wise as the Eagle Mill down the sreet that is three times bigger. The only striking difference was the average age of their Eagles was 14, ours was 16. They are known locally as an Eagle Mill, but can we honestly say they don't use servant leadership? How can we measure when a troop uses servant leadership and when they don't? I know a lot of SMs who say they are boy run (including the Eagle Mil troopl) but look nothing like our boy run program. How do I tell them they are doing it wrong? Does anyone reading this thread believe they dont encourage a servant leadership style with teir scouts? I'm not saying National couldn't do a better job encouraging servant leadership, but I do respect the challenge. I'm not really sure you and I agree on the concept and that was how we each ran the troops. Yep, you have to respect the challenge. Barry

I'm struggling here, arent you the one who in past discussions favored patrols with the single interest of earning Eagle, and feel older scouts should move on to Venturing? For any culture to gain footing in a boy run troop, the younger scouts have to learn it from the older role models, don't you agree? Maybe my misunderstanding is that see a "change torward leadership emphasis". I cant imagine a line drawn in the program for a change. I beieve Scouts need to experience a service type program from the day they join, not just a service or servant style leadership, but a servant style culture. Then there doesn't have to be a place designed (by adults?) to change emphasis. Servant leadership is a natural result of a servant culture. Does that make sense, or am I missing you completely? Barry

I still can't see where you are going jblake, but I'm not sure do either. So, since we agree that a change in culture requires a change in top management (adults in this case), is it reasonable for district to consider a change when when the families are happy with program? If the families are satisfied with a Eagle Mill, should there be any attempt to interfer. If yes, then how?

So without conditions, you are a "yes" with Fruits of the Spirit. Just don't call them Fruits of the Spirit. I get it. Thanks

I'm confused where you are coming from and where you are going. Are your original thoughts a segway of something you want to teach?

Ah, I see where you were going. I don't look at advancement as balancing between self and serving others. I look at advancement as actvities for improving skills and character. From the day they joined, our scouts were taught to set small goals to acheive large task. Learn one knot and set a goal and create a plan to learn another. For me it was as much about learning to set goals and create a plan of action as it was to learn the knot. Do that all through the First Class requirements and scouts become very good at assessing large projects and developing a plan to achieve it. Character development also came in through the scouts responsibilities. Typically new scouts were given the task of Cheer Master or Grub Master. From there they were taught self reliance, independence, responsibility, AND service to others through the actions of the job requirements. The task were small, but challenging for the age and maturity of the scout. In fact, I had in my mind a purpose of character and leadership growth for every action a scout performed in the program. Rank was not my responsibility, building citizens of character and leaders of integrity, was my passion. I even told the scouts that if their was something they did that I couldn't justify in developing character, they could take it out of the program. LOL, uniform was the first challenge they threw at me. Kudu and I have compared programs for many years and really the only difference in our basic philosophy is that he thinks the leadership should go to the more natural leaders like Badon Powel did. I build a program of developing leadership skills for all the scouts and let them choose their paths. Otherwise, in my opinion our two programs side by side out in the woods look about the same.

Sorry jblake, I don't understand the first question, isn't "eschewed" opposite of "toward"? I'm sure it's me, my English teacher son says grammer is not one of my strengths. The answer to the second question is that usally any kind of culture change requires new adult leadership. In fact, that is how several Eagle mills in our district proactively changed to move towards a more boy run program. The biggest problem I found with adult leaders of Eagle mills was the fear of doing anything different would risk scouts not getting the Eagle. That sounds obvious, but a lot of adults really can't grasp the concept of the scout controlling his destiny because they may not choose the Eagle. While I was SM, someone asked me why so many of our scouts didn't get Eagle until they were almost 18. I told him that they were busy. He said outside looking in, it could appear they were pushed at the last minute to get Eagle. I told him that percentage wise, we have more scouts age out of the troop than any other unit. Maybe they really are busy.

I said in another thread that for a troop to breed servant leaders, the troop must have a servant culture. Leadership is just one behavioral attribute of many a boy can develop in the troop. A servant culture is one where the scouts consider the team before themselves in all their decisions, whether they are leaders or not. Advancement is just a tool to develop growth and skills. It only becomes a problem when it becomes the vision for stature. First Class is really a set of skills that give a boy confidence to survive in the woods and be a productive part of the team. When advancement becomes a stepping stone of stature, then it will challenges the servant culture because the growth doesn't benefit the team. The worst leaders are the ones who don't try to grow from the experience. If you want a scout to age out of your troop, then use the program to constantly challenge him both physically and mentally at every point of his life. Advancment is one of many tools to do that. The problem with troops that loose scout after they get Eagle is they don't have a program for them after Eagle. Eagle is the goal, so the design of the program ended there. A troop that focuses on anThe troop set Eagle as the highest goal instead of one of many growth challenges. Barry