Eagledad

This is what we did when our troop got to about 80 scouts. A troop in our district of 120 scouts showed us the advantages of using multiple smaller 6X8 trailers. The trailers can be pulled by mini vans if need. We are a back packing troop, so we encourage the patrols to take their own gear, mostly back packs if they can. If they can't their patrol QM contacts the Troop QM to request space in the trailer. The Troop QM is trained and responsible for the trailers, including keys. We typically only need one trailer to haul gear like troop tents, patrol tubs, shovels and dutch ovens. Mostly gear the patrols don't use on the trail. The real advantage of small multiple trailers is duri ng multiple troop activities. We do a lot of high adventure, so I is nice to having multiple trailers, especially with at least one smaller trailer that minivan can pull. Barry

This is the silent motto for the BSA adult leaders. Thanks Saltface, it’s perfect. To bad the adult leading the discussion of fast-tracking girls to Eagle can’t get it. Barry

This discussion is exactly what many experienced scouters on this forum predicted would happen. The non scouting public identifies Scouting only by the Eagle. And by golly the girls parents are going to get it for them. Greenbar who? Barry

That idea has been proposed for 25 years with “all boy” Webelos. We tried something like it in our district and success at a unit level is very dependent on adult cooperation and leadership because there isn’t any high level guidelines. The units are on their own. Like the Venturing units, likely success will last for one generation of adults. Our attempt at something like this was more about helping the cub level adult burnout problem. Troop growth would be a byproduct of the cub pack success. Barry

Your right. For me the answer was letting the scouts make the wrong decision and then figuring out how to react to their decision, so that I could react better to their next wrong decision, and react even better to their next wrong decision. For us to develop the skills to guide our youth to making the right decisions, we have to allow them to make wrong decisions so we can also practice of the skills of guiding them into making right decisions. A teacher taught my wife and I that lesson when our kids were still very young. His point was that most adults know that youth need to experience their wrong decisions to develop good behavior, but they don't realize that the parents aren't just born with the skills to guide their kids to good behavior, they need to practice those skills to learn them. They need to practice the reactions for guiding their kids to changing their behavior. A good example is my oldest child got a few spankings to correct is bad decisions. My youngest never got one because our skills developed over time. That is why I taught new adult leaders in leadership courses to push their limits of allowing bad behavior. How can they guide scouts to make good decisions if they don't learn the skills of reacting to bad decisions. The best disciplined troops are the ones where scouts had the most freedom to screw up because the adults practiced and learned how to guide them to be accountable to their decisions. I was a troop leader at the same time I was a Webelos Den leader. In comparing Webelos summer camps with Troop summer camps, I found troop leaders don't yell near as much or near as loud a Webelos Den leaders when working with their scouts. Nothing special about troop leaders except that they have more practice with dealing with scouts' bad decisions. It's complex, I know. I'm not explaining it very well. But, I agree with you Parkman. Barry

By the way, trailers are easy theft targets. We've had three trailers stolen, and our CO would not let us use their insurance. Insurance companies told us that custom painting the trailer is the best way to deter theft. And while that seems to be working with our newest trailer so far, it doesn't stop them. The bright red custom painted troop trailer down the street was taken in broad daylight. However, I understand why the insurance company recommended custom painting because the SM called the police immediately after passing their trailer be pulled down the street. Barry

That says it in a nutshell. Treflienne, I look forward to watching your program. Barry

I found that the bigger the trailer, the more it drives the camping part of the troop program. If the patrols find transportation for their own gear, exactly what needs to go into the trailer. I'm not saying don't get a troop trailer, but usually it's the adults that want one to fit their program, not the patrol's program. Barry

They also don't reference the Scoutmaster Handbook, the committee handbook, the Scout Handbook, PL Handbook, SPL Handbook...... and on and on. Let's not get confused between the principles and foundation that has kept our scout program unique and exceptional for generations; and the supporting structure of process that holds it's members on a path toward a successful program. Because the program has been following the same basic plan of building character for generations, we have come to believe that it is strong as iron and will withstand the fire of ignorance. However, not too long ago a member of this forum attracted a following through his charismatic dialogues for building men from boys. He seemed at first to talked the talk of scouting's values, and yet the more he talked, the more his extreme bitter anti-scouting diatribes leached into his posts. His elegant style fooled a lot of members who almost believed he was the 2nd coming of Badon Powell himself. And yet, three troops failed under his leadership in the short time he was a member of this forum. How many dozens of boys were driven away from scouting as a result of his self-serving narcissistic ideals of turning boys into men? The ideals of scouting aren't made of iron, they are fragile and can shaped and bent to the wills of any ignorant or self-serving adult. Aims and methods are important because they are a rigid framework intended for building character. That forum member spoke many times against Vision, mission, Aims and methods because he felt they prevented adults from giving boys the total freedom of just going out in the woods and camping. He hated BSA training because the context usually ran counter to his way of raising boys. He ranted against adults coaching, mentoring , guiding and even teaching. I always wondered if he saw the irony of his anti-BSA fundamentals being the cause of his unsafe reckless approach to boys learning from their experiences, and the reason parents pulled their sons out of his troops. His example of ignoring the basic principles is the very reason to have a solid structure for holding adults with good intentions on a fixed direction. Just how does a scout become a citizen of character and a leader of integrity when adults skip the steps between the Mission and the Scout Law? Is just going camping really all an adult needs to know? We have seen in countless discussions that adults aren't very good at just letting scouts make decisions in their scouting activities. Imagine if we just let all the adults go at it any way they want like the forum member I mentioned? I have to laugh; there was another forum member years ago who was also just as narcissistic as the member above, only in the opposite direction. He would blame just about all problems discussed here to adults not following the program. And, then he would list the documents and wording to prove his point. He believed every problems was caused by not following directions. While I believe his rigidness caused him to blow a gasket and get thrown off the forum, he was right most of the time. In most of our discussions, there is guidance for the adults in most situations. Adding "Leadership" to the Aims weakens the generations old structure of the program, but the greater harm is that it shows lack of faith by the professionals who have the responsibility to guard the program. There is nobody at the helm. Barry

First time I ever had to turn my hearing aid down on a forum. Barry

I was also trained this way. In fact we were shown that the top successful Fortune 500 companies try to hire and maintain employees who believe their principles and values structure as well. One teacher said that if an employee can't state the company mission in one sentence, the company has failed somewhere in their process of hiring and training. Now, I guess Leadership and Character could be the Mission Statement, but as the Girls Scouts have learned; shallow mission statements without a simple path of process will require continued to keep up with the pop culture. Even my scouts understood the difference between the scouts roles (8 Methods) from the adult roles (3 Aims, or 3 Aims Plus). But now National has added confusion of whose responsible for leadership? The Scouts with the 8 Methods, or the Adults with the 4 Aims? Barry

I had this very experience at summer camp with the "If I were not a boy scout, a _______ I would be" skit. Well one of the characters they were going to be was a proctologist asking the scout next to him to bend over so he could poke his finger .... When I told the SPL I was offended by it, he protested and said it is very funny for people his age. So, I talked to him on man-to-man level (not SM to Scout) and said that it is his decision and that I wouldn't say anything about it again, but I was offended and I'm sure others would be offended as well. I asked him to consider how that fit in the scout oath. Then I walked off with the promise that I wouldn't criticise his decision. The scouts had a couple days before campfire to think about it. I very much wanted his decision to be based on right and wrong, not the SM telling scout what to do. I was very proud of them when they changed the proctologist to a dentist. Along with that, the whole camp gave our troop a standing ovation for the skit. It was a good day for me. Barry

I can't imagine anyone learning the basic concepts of patrol method (especially "servant" Leadership) from WB. I have always felt patrols are only used in the course to divide participants into smaller groups, not to give participants a realistic experience of patrol method. Barry

Interestingly, I felt I got more out of the new WB than the old because the skills side and the patrol experience wasn't new to me in the old course. I will admit that I learned a lot of new skills for teaching, which is what the course was intended. The new course fit more into my adult life of being a team leader. What I learned in the new course has helped me immensely in my job as a manager. I have to plan 10 years ahead on projects and organize teams for those projects. The problem with the new course is that the staffs don't know what the participants are supposed to get out of the course, so they just follow their parts as presented in the syllabus like actors following a script. But one size fits all doesn't work for personalizing the participants experience. Easy tickets huh! I had not thought of them that way. As the ASM of Troop Guides, I approved all the tickets and I took that job very seriously. And I coached the TGs to take that responsibility seriously as well. Every night we discussed each participants unit positions and their future plans in scouting, then we talked about how to enhance their scouting career with ticket items. In most cases, I found the participants made their tickets harder than required, and more often not applicable to their responsibilities. So, we coached them to first see the purpose of their ticket and then write it to be more specific. I also asked them to sit down with their unit leaders to discuss the tickets as well. I found that the participants finished the course with more purpose and more confidence than when they started the course. They were excited to go back to their units. Done correctly, writing the ticket made scouting more fun for them. If we could go way way back in the forum archives before the new WB course was introduced, we had a few discussions where we talked about the ideal WB syllabus for that generation of leaders. That was at a time (much like now) where the troop program was suffering from an imbalance of inexperienced adult leaders. Ironically the new course is very close to what I feel was ideal syllabus at the time. The present course, or at least the new course then, taught how to first figure out a vision or purpose to all the goals and tasks of the unit. Then, how to build a team to accomplish those goals. The district used to send me out to problem units to help get them on their feet. Understanding the unit goals and then building the team was how I got them going forward again. So, I really like todays WB course in that since. I still think that is the right objectives for scouters coming into the program because it focuses on the adult side of running a performing unit. Where WB has gotten off course is in trying to make it the mountain top experience to match the reputation of the previous course. The previous course was designed to take the best dedicated leaders and make them even better. They were truly the best of the best. Problem was it started loosing it's prestige when some scouters used WB to feed their egos. Originally the WB graduates were to humble themselves in helping other scouters become better leaders. But I think the course started recruiting too many scouters to fill slots instead of picking just those who showed the right qualities. That's where it lost it's way .That is the kool aid we are fighting now. I've written and introduced several courses in scouting, including a council level JLT, but I'm not sure how to fix this one. On one hand, it doesn't need to be near a long as it is for the objectives it's trying to teach. On the other hand, I believe the Ticket Items are the meat of the course and they require the staff and participants some time to evaluate the participants future in the BSA. And, the course length also separates out the more dedicated volunteers who plan to stay in awhile. The real problem with courses of complicated objectives is writing a syllabus that anyone could organize, run, and achieve the same goals. Believe it or not, the old WB course is a lot more simple because the objective was only to pass along advanced teaching skills. I learned over the years that writing a syllabus that scouters all across the county could use productively is extremely challenging. Now with the induction of more inexperienced adult volunteers, training is going to have to change to fit their needs. It will require some real thinking. I'm not sure National is up to it. Barry

How the scouts choose to go depends on the weight of responsibility. I have watched our scouts add and eliminate positions as the leadership evaulate the work of the group versus production of each position. Scouts hate work, so given the freedom, they will find the shortest path to everything. I knew our PLC figured it out when they added an ASPL for the new scout class that doubled in size, but eliminated that position next year with a normal size class. As qwazse points out, an adult taking on the SPL, or any POR, hides the weight of the responsibility from the team. And, I should have added, that any scout can carry out the responsibilities explained in the PL and SPL handbooks. It's not about the patch, it's about getting the team functioning efficiently. Honestly, my recommendation for a new young troop using the SPL and PL Handbook is more to shape the adults minds to a "patrol-method troop" program because they would otherwise force their own vision on the scouts. Usually the adults vision forces scouts to wait and follow the adults when it should be the other way around. As long as the adults are using the same guides as the scouts, everyone's energies are going in the same direction even if nobody is really sure of the goals yet. If somebody has a question, everybody pulls out the same handbook to check. Barry

All really good posts. I've helped several new troops get started and each one is a little different because of the skill levels of the adults. Remember, in a scout run program, adults have to learn more faster than the scouts if they don't want to get in the scouts way. The challenge is to give the scouts as much decision making responsibility as their maturity can handle without taking the fun out of their program. In most cases, the adults don't respect the abilities of the scouts, and the scouts don't understand the purpose of the program. I'm a big believer in the SPL and PL Handbooks because they help the adults and scouts learn the program together. Scouts learn to trust the adults when they feel they are a team. By the way, the troop may not be ready for the SPL yet, but the SPL Manual has a lot of guidance for a new troop trying to build inertia. Where adults have to feel their way is measuring the maturity of the scouts. 10 to 13 year old boys (not sure about girls) would much rather play Capture the Flag than plan the meals for the next camp out. Of course part of making decisions is doing the boring stuff, but it wears on the younger scouts quickly. I usually recommend just 3 or 4 months for the first couple of election cycles to prevent burnout. I assure you the an 11 year old doesn't mind handing over the responsibilities if they are truly making decisions for the group because it's hard, very hard. As the patrol and/or troop starts to get the swing of things, the election cycle should be extended to the normal program standard. As for the adults, the biggest challenge is allowing the scouts the room to make decisions, while giving just enough assistance to help keep the program moving forward. Faltering is when the scouts aren't having fun. There are no easy examples to know when the adults need to apply some subtle assitance to help the scouts. But, I recommend the SM monitor the young scouts enough to know when the fun is over. Scouts should look forward to coming back next week. If they don't, then likely they have max out and need some help. That being said, the biggest problem with new leaders is adult intrusion on the boys (umm, youth) program. For example, there is never a time an adult should stand in front of the group with the youth leaders unless the youth leader gave them permission for a temporary moment on the floor. When a scout stumbles, their first reaction is turn to the adult for help. And the adults reaction is to step in. When adults are out-of-site, they are out of mind. Scouts need to build the confidence of pushing on to the next item and go to the adult later for guidance when they have a moment. Adults should stand in the back behind all the scouts. I also suggest that adults never put the scout sign up first. It's the scouts troop or patrol, the youth leaders should always put the sign up first to control the group. If the adult needs the groups attention, they ask the youth leader of the group to get control for them, then patiently wait until the group is down to a quiet roar. The adult thanks the youth LEADER and continues. I've even done this during Scoutmaster minutes. By the way, when scouts felt the need to talk to their buggy during a SM minute, I took that as a cue that I need to improve my presentation. Adults should talk as little as possible. Words from adults are sleeping pills for young scouts. I have seen adults go on and on for 20 minutes just doing announcements. For some reason Scoutmasters need to feel important by talking and talking and talking (Practice making Scoutmaster minutes only 2 minutes long). I found that scouts don't start respecting the adult leadership until they have a need to ask the adults for help. Standing there watching chaos creep into the activities requires adults biting down on a stick, or a bullet for the squeamish, but scouts don't like chaos anymore than the adults. When the scouts come to the SM for help, they really want it and are ready to listen. As I said, how much guidance adults need to give to scouts of new program is challenging, but scouts do learn fast. So, adults need to learn the skill of backing up and giving more of the decision making to the scouts as they gain experience and confidence. Even 11 year olds with three months experience are more mature and need more room. It's much better for adults to let the scouts go to far to find their limits than to assume the limits and hold them back. I often say I made more mistakes as a scout leader than I did right, but scouts are amazing if you let them go to their full abilities. As for SPL or not, I agree with letting the scouts fill responsibilities as is needed. But, the handbooks suggest SPLs, so there is a balance of doing what is needed along with following a plan. The scouts will figure it out as they go back and forth. Barry

This is really the the best response to many of our discussions. Barry

Yes, I do this every day at work because we have a lot of high educated people over 50 years in age. And it got me through my scouting years. But there will always be “that” one person who thinks they are always right. That’s the one who you develop good leadership skills. Barry

I blame the staff, specifically the Troop Guide ASM and the Troop Guides. The course provides enough time for the Troop Guides to evaluate the participants so they can help them prepare for their assigned responsibility in the unit or district. The Troop Guides are supposed to work with the Troop Guide ASM on the best way to help each participant develop Ticket Items that would give them the most tools and experience for their unit responsibilities. With the right team helping the participant focus on more specific experiences, the Ticket Items are generally less work for more skills development because they are written specifically to the needs of the participant. Sadly the Troop Guide and Troop Guide ASM staff positions are generally handed out to adults next in line for WB Staff, not because they have the experiences or skills to truly develop the participants. Barry

Years ago Matt and I agreed in a discussion that Scoutmastering is 50% with the scouts, and 50% with the adults. If the Scoutmaster wants to keep these kinds of struggles to a minimum (minimum can still be a lot), they may eventually have to assume the bad guy role of gatekeeper for the program values and process. Sometimes they have to be authoritative (flex their position of leadership muscle) to force a specific direction. Right or wrong, the program has to move forward. Of course the SM may find their decision was wrong down the road. They take comfort in knowing that humility is the fertile ground where character grows. Barry

If not experienced scouters, than who? I seem to remember several posts on this forum asking the experienced scouters to stay on with the new program so as to help get these new units up to speed. Girls units are not under a microscope of the experienced scouters. It just appears that way because cheerleaders of the new program are over-promoting the girls to the point that experienced scouters are just expressing concern of the qualities of the whole program for all the scouts. The cheating adults at the camporee was just one nauseating example of adults going too far. You think the comments of that situation are unfair? Actually you would find hundreds of post on this forum of group advancement concerns for the last 30 years. Ever since National started pushing crossovers by dens instead of individually by age, experienced scouters have observed a shift toward group advancements. And why not, it's more efficient in keeping the promise of "1st Class in the 1st year" found in each Scout Handbook. The concerned now, as it has always been, has nothing to do with girls, but more of protecting, or promoting, the traditional program where individual scouts are encouraged to make independent decisions without influence from adult direction. Group advancement is also a typical approach for adults without any other scouting experience because they don't have the wisdom to understand the greater value of developing character from independent decisions. I will include professional scouters and volunteer elite scouters in that group. For all those adults, promotion of stature is easier and faster to measure the adult performance of their program as a whole. Egos. We will assume the best of adult intentions in that they are not cheer-leading groups of girls to be the first female Eagle in their area. Well maybe not the adults who cheated the boys at the camporee. I'm sure that is an unusual situation. As for minimum rank by summer camp, not a big deal really for most of us. We all want scouts confident enough to camp for a week in the wilderness. But at some point the adults should hand it off decision making to the scouts. When do you feel comfortable that they can do that? Barry

We had an Eagle scout who in a six months time frame was our SPL, a Venturing Crew Leader, planned a high adventure trip for a Troop Crew to Montana, and was very active member in OA. Remarkable doesn't even describe this kid. He also got a high enough score on the SAT to earn a full scholarship to MIT, THAT SAME YEAR. I agree with Qwazse that the BSA undersells opportunities within the program for it's members. I grew to be disappointed with adult leaders because while they think they are pushing a scout beyond his goals to reach Eagle, they are actually limiting or holding the scout back by not marketing all the other opportunities. The program provides scouts with many opportunities where they expand their knowledge, experience and joy of adventure. In fact, there are so many opportunities that I doubt more than a handful of leaders even know them all. Our council developed the Junior Leadership Training so that a scout who had the passion to teach could have experiences all they way to NYLT course director while still registered as a scout (Venturing). I know it can be done in any council, but our council actually showed the scouts how to reach that goal. Before 1980, less than 3 percent of scouts earned the Eagle. Which coincides with the proposed number by experts of natural leaders in the population. But, there are so many opportunities for scouts who, while may not be interested in leadership, can still reach mountain top goals. Thanks Mrkstvns Barry

Well, no official instructions, so it's how you want to approach it. We cook the meat, then set it off to the side and cook the box of macaroni & cheese. When the mac & cheese is ready, we throw the meat and other fixings (sometimes a little water or tomato juice to then it out) into the pot. Seems to work for hungry college students and scouts. Now, my personal favorite is adding a can of corn, but I'm in the minority there. Barry

Ever do Chili Mac & Cheese? Pretty good. Created it during lean times in college. Barry

Exactly. And if the leaders in either organization approach the problem by not talking about the difference, than we in our ignorance can't define the differences clearly to the public or potential new members. The forum is in a weird place right now on deciding what should be discussed, or not discussed. But internet forums are today's go-to resource for clarity. We need to get smarter by asking the right questions. What should be discussed (or not) should be defined by rules of civility and courteousness. Then we don't have to worry about stepping on toes. Rather, we become educated teachers. Barry