Eagledad

The discussion arose because posters were doing things so drastically different that their program can no longer achieve it's intended objectives. You even mentioned once your own sons enjoyed cubs more than the Troop. You certainly don't show respect for the program. I can only imagine you haven't observed scouts growing from their decisions because it is truly a wonderful feeling. Someone posted a video here a few months ago of a troop that in my area resembled more of a Webelos program than troop. The adults directed the cooking, kp, and other activities. The scouts appeared totally reliant on the adults. Yep, that is a troop that would need a lot of adults to administer the program. And I didn't see scouts making decisions that would force them to evaluate the results. I'm trying to understand what fears are causing such "dramatic" changes. What does Sandy Hook have to do with the number of adults on a campout? What can a 3rd adult do that the first two couldn't? I'm asking because I don't understand. Barry

Still? That’s what it was 25 years ago. So, a troop could still send 40 scouts on a campout with 2 adults. The issue isn’t liability or higher risks, the issue is more acceptance of helicopter parenting. Scouts will develop only to the maturity that they are respected. i know the solution, but do parents want a solution? Barry

I’m not sure what you’re are saying. What are the minimum number of adults required for an activity? Barry

SPL called me every Sunday night to discuss the next meeting agenda. Now in our case, the PLC met before the troop meeting each week, but I think the SPL can still brief the SM on the troop meeting agenda. But, this is where we could have some good discussions. I don't think the NYLT does a good job either. Before NYLT, our council course created PLCs with the participants instead of Patrols. Each PLC planned two meeting agendas each day and took turns running the course program each day. The course was a basically PLC practices and methods instead of Patrol Method. I don't know of any course now where the participants plan and run the course agenda like a PLC runs the troop. Barry

I agree with you, and for a different reason than studies. My experience of raising boys and girls and working with boys and girls has proven to me that boys learn differently than girls. They have different motivations for when and how they learn. They have different speeds or maturity for learning the same subjects. I could even predict the outcome of gender groups. I remember the leaders who jumped on this forum to brag about their girls were more advanced at learning scout skills than boys. Yep, girls learn skills more by instruction than boys who do better by application. Girls are more organized, which lends better for planning. But boys are more creative and are better at applying the skills. Now, the thought is that the mix would complement and advance the skills of the other gender, but I find that adults instead pit the genders against each other, like the adults who jumped on the forum to brag about their girls. Hard to beat nature of youth and adults. Barry

I also come from the old JTE. At first we thought it annoying because we did most of the requirements anyway. But when I learned to respect when volunteered at the district and council because a lot of units need some guideline to even attempt a quality program. Most folks on this forum, or any scouting forum, likely come from a average to better than average program. But, there are a lot of units that barely operate with BSA guidance because they simply don't have the knowledge and or skills. Yes, they get through training, but they have busy personal lives and truly only give one hour a week. JTE is a good reminder for them of a BSA Scouting program. I don't agree with some of the metrics like advancing every scout once a year or even some of the recruiting goals, but in general, the JTE has some guidance power toward a BSA run program. And this is how or program works as well. The responsibility for a good quality program is on the PLC. They are responsible for the three (silly me, four Aims) by applying the Eight Methods. They don't set numbers goals, but program quality goals by basically doing the Eight Methods. Our PLC is in the habit of doing a service project on every campout (as well as others in the communtiy). That is not a JTE goal, but in personal development and citizenship training exercise. A Patrol method program doesn't set advancement above other methods. The PLC provides a program where any and all scouts can advance to their personal goals. How many 12 to 17 year olds want to focus on advancing every year? We never got 100% on JTE, but our troop averaged one Eagle every 2.5 months. I don't know where JTE will go because it seems National is focused on a Political image of liberal social indoctrination. The thought of what National could demand from units through JTE is kind of scary. Barry Barry

Actually, scouts shouldn't need any adults if the program is running correctly. National only recently change the policy where adults are required on campouts. Our program was built on a theme of putting the adults out of business. Of course adults are required for some functions like driving and BORs. But, if a patrol is willing to hike from town to a camp site, who needs adults? The crux of the problem is the modern fear that youth must be 35 years old to have the maturity for activities without adults like camping. Programs with those adults will never mature to wear their scouts have the maturity to safely camp without so called adults. Those troops are basically advanced Webelos III programs. Anyone that is treated like child will not mature beyond a child. Barry

When I coached scouters developing their Woodbadge ticket, I spent most of my efforts on showing them how to set realistic goals. The goal that I had to contend with the most was getting all new scouts to first class in one year. I had to explain that in a boy run program, they don't have, or shouldn't have, that kind of control over the scouts. So, instead set the goal to develop a program where any scout of any age could earn First Class in one year if the scout chooses to make that their personal goal. It doesn't occur to many people that improving the program has more long term benefits than just trying to push one group of scouts to a goal they may not like. With the irony that the scouts leave the program as a result Of course National could create a few temporary drives to recruit scouts that reach their goals, but does that help in the long term? What if they don't reach these carelessly thought out goals? You think the sexists' GSUSA is going to stand back and watch the so called BSA professionals recruit out or their only resource without responding? They might even make a goal to beat the BSA's recruiting goal of girls. Folks that know me know that I am highly critical of the changes National has made to the program for the last couple of generations because they have only added more burden on the adults and fed a continued membership decline. These goals they are setting or a reflection of their mindless approach to changes in the program. Barry

Sometimes the district goes overboard. That is when the SM is brought in to bring balance into the situation. I wish Districts would follow the letter of the guidelines and just approve a qualified proposal, but many feel they are Eagle Project quality control for their area and set high expectations. And, like qwazse said, each district may have different expectations, so that sometimes causes conflict or confusion. Talk with your SM. Barry

I was thinking about this, we averaged 40 scouts at campouts with about 10 adults. That number of adults was more a requirement for transpiration than attending to the scouts. And I would guess, that excepting for assembly, the scouts' would struggle to think of a time when they saw more than two adults at the same time. Patrols are, or supposed to be, self supporting. Our adults camp at least 100 feet or more from the patrols, which is almost out of sight in the woods. So our scouts are use to feeling independent from the adults. Maybe times are changing, I haven't camped with the troop in few years. But, if the patrols requires any adults for reasons other than YPT, the program might be missing something. Barry

Why? Barry

Ah, thanks. Still, I've never held much respect for it as an Eagle requirement. How many meals will a scout plan, cook and eat in their scouting career of an Eagle? At least a few of the additional skills in the Swimming MB are somewhat advanced. To require a badge that the subject is already the foundation of the Scouting program suggest doubt on the program. This is the same principle reason the GSUSA has lost respect for much of it's program structure in the last 40 years. They have basically said our girls are better leaders because we tell them they are better leaders. They rely on words as the behavioral teachers of their program. First of all, humans don't learn that way. 2nd, that puts a lot of responsibility on the integrity of the individual leaders. BSA use to tell their leaders to just do the program, the scouts experience will do the rest. Barry

I've always struggled with Eagle requirements that involve normal scouting skills. Let's stop the bleeding and stop. Merit badges were originally added to the program to give scouts a taste of other interest outside scouting, possibly a career. Should camping and cooking really be a requirement for what every scout does on every campout? The Eagle should represent scouts who display above average decisions of moral and ethical character. Order of the Arrow once required those traits from their candidates,. Which is why Arrowmen were held in such high respect. Arrowmen weren't honored for their badges, rank or stature, they were honored for their everyday honorable actions.. In general terms, we shouldn't be adding the requirements of the average scout's experience. In the case of this badge, we shouldn't be adding requirements to the BSA basic program principals. It's hypocritical at best. It mis-represents the structure of the program at worst. Barry

Our troop became the DE's favorite troop for disabled boys. Our first Eagle was deaf. The reputation was actually a worry for me because we are true boy run patrol method troop. Some disabilities require more assistance than a typical patrol can handle and parents had to make tough decisions. I will never forget telling the father of one scout that we were unable to keep his severely mentally retarded son safe in our troop. He had wandered off into the woods in the middle of a cold rainy night without any clothes and if not for an alert older scout, he could have been really hurt. On the other hand, I have many stories of patrols accepting different scout own even when some of those scouts went out of their way to resist their acceptance. There were NO lectures of how they as scouts are obligated to accept every difference from every scout. There was no reward for being Trustworthy, loyal, helpful to the disabled or different scouts because they were exceptionally different. Why would there be? Scouts are supposed behave that way with everyone. The patrols figured out how to get around the challenges because they had to work together as a team at every meeting, campout and patrol activity. Either work it out, or fail as member of the team. It's that simple. That is why I struggle with minds determined to color the program as something less when in reality very few other youth programs can live up to the BSA minimum program standard. I don't mind badges where scouts can choose to learn more about the subject. But making any a badge a requirement suggest the basic program is lacking and needs a boost when it does not. Such requirements are forced by those being self-serving bureaucrats looking to showoff their self-righteousness Barry.

I've been sitting here thinking about how times I have heard the members of a EBOR ask the Eagle candidate for an example of how they applied the Scout Law and Oath in their life. Usually the answer has something in common with the premise of this subject. National has really missed the boat here. Barry

The problem is the appearance of indoctrination, not education. At the very least the MB has a lecturing knee-jerk feel to it. By the nature of the program's core values, Scouting has always been a safe place. Will a MB change that? AND, there will always be bad acting by unit leaders. Will a MB change that? The BSA already has the core values in place to guide and judge acceptable behavior toward other peoples differences with a proven program method to practice those values. The program shouldn't add more repetitive systematic bureaucracy that does nothing to improve the method of implementation.. If folks at National want to give the appearance a being progressive without the appearance of self-serving wokeness (what ever it's called), they should have shown how the present program has been doing exactly what the MB is implying for over 100 years. There is no controversy because the practice of considering the differences of others is the Scouting program. I'm perplexed how the folks at National are so blind to the opportunity of marketing this program as a program for guiding youth in the habits of being sensitive to others. Barry

My life observation of these things is those with a strong personal opinion for controversial changes are the ones likely to pencil whip (aka process without meaningful results) to insure the ideal is forced in the system (program).. Barry

As usual, National missed the boat by not marketing the program as a natural for developing habits of DIVERSITY, EQUITY, AND INCLUSION. They only have to show how the BSA Mission is to develop young people into ethical and moral decisions based from the Oath and Law. But no, National is following the politically correct route and setting an image of making change where none is required. I wonder how many even know their Vision and Mission. I have many stories of scouts and parents telling how the activities or our units changed their sons understanding of other's differences. Lately, I wish I could round up a few dozen scoutmasters to meet with the fine folks at National and take them out to the woodshed for misdirecting the program. They need a proper education understanding why words rarely change behavior without reinforcement of experience. The BSA has always been on the forefront for developing the habits of making right choices.. Barry

You’re probably right. The confusion comes from everyone trying to be the smartest person in the room. Barry

Sorry for my confusion, but what is being debated. Barry

Ironically, using the term in the context of her post is also bigotry. Barry

Your lens doesn't see the heart of man, just actions in a sliver time. Without the heart, anyone (everyone) is a victim or abhorrent, depending on the mood of the viewer. Nobody is safe with that lens. Barry

Of course. But, I wonder, should I be shamed for reading To Kill A Mockingbird in high school back in the 70's? Should the school be shamed? Let's burn it all. Shesh. Barry

I disagree. Barry

As this forum proves over and over, feelings and perception are in the eyes of the poster. My personal observations and discussions with young adults is they either believe the program is either good for youth, or they have no opinion at all. My opinion, based more from this forum than personal discussions, is that perception with people of all ages is based on experience with the BSA. Which is why those with no personal experience don't have really have an opinion. The only adults I observe with a negative opinion appear to have a personnel bent toward the BSA. And that makes sense to me. Scouting is a great program for youth with a noble 110 years of working with youth. Why would anyone have a negative opinion of that unless they have some personal negative experience? Barry