Stosh

Saw that ad, it's fantastic. So where's our PR people in all this?

I'm all in favor of the STEM Scout program as long as it stays separate from the Cub and Boy Scout programs and makes enough money to keep the Councils off our backs at FOS time.

T- shirts and blue jeans.... I'm retired. I have flannel shirts to put on when it gets colder. Underwear is a Walmart purchase and socks are optional.

At the beginning of the year the boys plan their calendar and figure out how much stuff costs to make the program happen. They they decide on whether or not they want to fundraise to cover the costs or pay out of their pocket. They are seriously looking at no summer camp next summer because of the cost and will do a week long canoe trip of their own creation instead. Whatever money is raised this year will be taken into account for next year.

And this is why the split needs to be completely made. Otherwise the Venturing Crew becomes nothing more than a Venture Patrol with girls. And if one is using the Patrol Method, the Venture Patrol should be dictating what it does or doesn't do for the other boys, not some adults making mandates as to why they have to interact with the younger boys. This is the number one reason why Venture Patrols don't last very long in a troop. At least with a totally separate Venturing Crew they can go off and do their own thing without adults interfering in their focus. I have done the Venture Patrol idea, but I was an ASM at the time and the SM basically gave it a "try". Once the Venture Patrol began to meld into a nice unit focusing on more mature activities, the SM stepped in and told them they had to be more involved with the younger boys. Immediately they all quit and joined a Venturing Crew where the SM couldn't mandate to them. Had the Troop and Crew a connection, that wouldn't have been far enough apart and the boys would have sought out a non-CO related Crew. All in all,hey didn't lift a finger to help out the younger boys and all it did was leave a bad taste in their mouth. One doesn't need a Venturing Patrol to turn off the older boys, all it takes is a little adult lead emphasis as the boys are spreading their independence wings and they will fly whether one wants them to or not.

The further down the road this BSA journey goes, the happier I am that I'm 65 years old and won't be able to "help out" anymore.

First of all BSA is co-ed down to the Cub Scout level. It's called STEM Scouting and it focuses on the indoors where the bugs can't get to you and cause harm. The outdoor stuff is still boy only until one gets t the high school level (age 14) then it's co-ed. The last real bastion of uniquely male only child development program remains with the BSA. Going co-ed would destroy that and make it just like any other activity out there. When one gets right down to the basic core of the program major changes will be readily at hand with a co-ed program. Take the Patrol Method for example. Co-ed patrols? That would mean a male and female adult for every outing and they would be 300' away from the boys/girls patrol areas. Basically going co-ed will necessitate the YMCA/church youth group approach of separate facilities for everything and that does not bode well for any program that is working at a more primitive approach to the outdoors. Co-ed would facilitate an adult-led troop approach to the program because it would be far less efficient under the current guidelines of the BSA to do it with the Patrol Method. This would be the next generational step that began the demise of BSA since the 1970's.

First of all a Venturing Crew is not a co-ed auxiliary of some Boy Scout troop. It needs to be run independently of the troop mentality. It's focus is on mature activities, not tying square knots and lashing towers that no one can climb. It's not going to summer camps and camporees and hanging out with Boy Scouts. One of the biggest failures of many Venturing Crews, in my opinion, is the Boy Scout leaders, trying to keep their older boys active, start a Venturing Crew using Boy Scout methods that had they been applying appropriately in the troop, wouldn't need a Venturing Crew in the first place. Sharing of leadership personnel, committees, equipment, etc. are all indicators of future failure of the Venturing Crew program in that setting. I was a successful Venturing Crew Advisor for over 12 years and definitely would make a concerted effort to change hats when moving back and forth between the two programs. I would suggest that if the daughter and her friends want to start a Crew and as dad want to help, start with finding adult support for the crew independent from those running the Boy Scout troop. The Crew has it's own support staff, it's own program, it's own equipment, it's own focus, it's own finances and fundraisers, and if it comes in contact with any Boy Scout troop it is for recruiting purposes only. Anything short of that one runs the risk of undermining the Venturing Crew's chance of success.

I bet this could be adapted for the different units to send to the parents.

I really don't see any need for the Oath and Law in the STEM program of Scouting. STEM promotes knowledge in the fields of science, technology, engineering and math. It does nothing for leadership development, character building, moral choices, etc., those things that uphold the Oath and Laws. I'm thinking that STEM is just the balance the parents want between physical sports and mental aptitude. Both look good on resumes, sitting in the woods doesn't.

i normally don't discuss Scouting with the Mrs. and she does go along on activities that are of interest to her. We were sitting out on the back of the house having our morning coffee and I brought the subject of STEM up to see what her reaction would be. it was: "Really?, you gotta be kidding me. That sounds like going to school." She wasn't really a fan and she wasn't really interested in knowing more about it. If you don't wear a PDF, helmet or heavy boots, she isn't interested.

Welcome to the forums.

So riddle me this.... why is bugling, which no one really knows what it's supposed to do is still a POR?

It's really too bad the scout isn't old enough for high adventure programs like Philmont, NT or Sea Base. Maybe someday....

Why would I want to hang around a middle school? It wasn't fun the first time, I don't think it's gotten better for me over the years. My kids didn't like it either.

It always struck me as strange, that when I was a kid, I was confirmed around the end of 8th grade. At that point the church dealt with me as an adult. We had one more year of Sunday School where we learned how to teach, set up a 16 mm projector and show a film, slide show projector instruction, do flannel boards, build curriculum, tell stories, etc. It was taught by a local public school teacher. We were a ready supply of fill in SS teachers and looked forward to the opportunity to actually teach a class. At the end of the year, the entire class staffed all the teaching positions in Vacation Bible School summer program and from that point on attended the adult Sunday School activities and Bible studies. The church recognized us as adults even though the rest of the world didn't. But then again, they did teach us the way. I have often thought Scouting could have benefited from such an approach. But then that was 50 years ago and in today's world, the kids just aren't "mature" enough to pull it off. At least that's what the adults say.

I still think it's BSA's way of promoting co-ed scouting down to the Cub years while tapping into the urban market. I see it as too much classroom, but that's the environment that parents feel the kids will be safer in than out in the great outdoors. For me, I don't see ANY adventure in the process anywhere. While I liked many of these subjects in school, I still did not go back to any of the classes after school and participate in any of the programs as a form of entertainment or personal satisfaction.

If I sign on with a valid commitment/contract with a business and they change the rules in the middle, Isn't that a breach of contract? When I was in college I started with graduation requirements spelled out in the academic handbook. When I graduated, the programs had changed, the courses had changed, even the different departments changed. If I wanted to I had the option to change to the new requirements at any time or stay with what was stated in the original contract. I graduated with a degree in Business Administration under the School of Arts, Letters and Sciences instead of the new School of Business. When all the smoke settled it made absolutely no difference whatsoever to any of my employers. If my kids want to stick with the old requirements because that is what the BSA promised them, it's fine with me. If they lose their book and need to buy a new one, they use whatever requirements are listed in the book they have.

Whatever it takes for the boys....

I don't think it's as much about Science, Technology, Engineering and Math as it is about co-ed scouting for 3-12 grades. It's a marketing shift to capture the scholastic market and leave the sports to YMCA and Boys & Girls Clubs.

It's pretty obvious what BSA is up to. They wanted the Exploring program to go co-ed and opened it up to "General Interest" posts (old boys only Exploring) and career posts. Then when enough time had passed and no one was paying attention they broke it out into Learning for Life and Venturing, but now the boys only Explorers are gone. So we have Cub Scouts and Boy Scouts and it's boys only, but STEM Scouts is the new co-ed answer to getting girls into the program through the back door like they always do and GSUSA is looped out of the picture. They got away with the Venturing/Exploring end around now this is for the younger guys and gals. If you watch the overview video, the Class-B uniforms with the STEM logo being sold of course by BSA are prevalent in all the scenes, even lab coats for the adults. This is where BSA is putting all it's eggs in the basket at this time. Co-ed scouting using the STEM excuse to make it not so dorky. Computer camps, space camps, etc. watch out, here comes the BSA! Cubs and Boy Scouts will still be there, but they will be the tag along program like Learning for Life became with the dropping of the Exploring program. Maybe the new Boy Scout program will be the field research arm of STEM. Outdoor lab instead of an indoor lab. A little bit of everything for everyone.

@ "Time is finite. I spend so much time on my unit there is literally nothing left after family, friends, work, religion and scouts. Someone has to lose out, guess that's my district/council." I agree. My boys are all taught that Family. School and Church are all a higher priority than Scouting and there never seems to be any hassles. The kids seem to make time for Scouts if it's important to them. Last weekend I was camping with the Mrs. and my daughter, husband and granddaughter for the weekend. Saturday the scouts came out and the Mrs. and I took the boys and their families out on a hike. Mrs. is big time naturalist and worked with the Scouts to get the Identify 10 Plant requirement in besides getting in our monthly outing. So, how much time did it take, how much double dipping and scheduling to make time did that involved. Tonight is date-night for the Mrs. and I and it's a beautiful day for kayaking with the local kayak/canoe club in town. Friday night is a big campfire with my two daughters' families with specialty on making S'mores. Now that I'm "retired" I don't have as much time because I get a wee bit lazy on having to focus on the scheduling. Now it's just a free-for-all and as long as I'm outside, that's all that counts. By the way, my involvement as a UC is about 1-2 hrs a month and it's a bone worth tossing to the district to keep them at bay.

Hmmm. Not only am I a UC for another troop on the district level, I'm a SM of a struggling new troop start up. Not only is my ASM of the new troop but she is also the DC for our district. It's not an issue have having enough time for everything, it's an issue of making enough time for everything. Excuses are nothing more than feeble attempts to explain failure.

What people don't understand is there are plenty of other programs out there that see the benefit of Scouting and design programs for that reason. YMCA has a lot of outdoor programming. Schools are developing outdoor curriculum. AHG and TLUSA have cropped up. 4-H is still going strong. K.A.M.O. was just started up in our neck of the woods in 2008 and is growing. (Kids And Mentors Outdoors). Why is it that BSA in it's infinite wisdom changed everything away from what everyone wants?

Since when has "opening a can of worms" deterred anyone on this forum? Yeah, we get a bit testy along the way, but for the most part, the forum stays quite civil as compared to many of the other ones I have been on. And the "bit testy" part is nothing more than the passion we all share for Scouting, it's a good thing.