Stosh

Hmmm. We've solved the problem with a variety of different options. Buck and gag is popular, but my favorite is public humiliation. Now that I have your attention, and before anyone get's bent out of shape, the Crew is Civil War Reenacting. We had one boy who did not fulfill his responsibility to have a clean weapon ready for the battle reenactment (safety infraction big time, so the issue was serious.) He was not allowed to participate in the reenactment battle that day (basically a time-out punishment) issued by an adult who is not part of the group and when the "battle" was over, he was court-marshaled and shot by firing squad. He has since recovered from his "wounds" and as far as I know, has never shown up for inspection since with a dirty rifle. By the way, this boy was not the only person that day who had to stand down from the battle because they didn't pass inspection. The lessor infractions (i.e. didn't help out with a canteen run as ordered by the sergeant) will have to submit to public humiliation. One young 14 year old had to wear the sign "Drunkard" stand on a barrel in the middle of camp for 15 minutes with a bottle of booze in each hand arms extended. Of course when his dear mother received the carte de vistas of this boy's exploits, they were prominently displayed on the home mantle. This young private never crossed the line again. Needless to say, a little ribbing, with a serious undertone often times goes a long way to instill discipline on a peer-to-peer level. In our crew that peer-to-peer works well. While the boys know full well that the BSA adults in the group are not on the same level, respect between them is. Boys that are treated as adults will react like adults. Those that are treated like children will react like them. In 8 years of working with the crew, one boy, one time said he would give a ride to his buddy to get him home and didn't. If that's the biggest discipline problem we've had to face, we count ourselves as blessed. Stosh

Stosh: I have never been a fan of bringing new boys into existing patrols for a number of reasons.... ajmako: This is a concern, but I don't buy it as a big enough concern to rework the whole patrol system over. Part of being a patrol is having comraderie. Part of being a Scout is being friendly, kind, helpful, and several other things. Too often we use "older boys have other interests" as an excuse. But what are we really doing? Seperating inexperienced Scouts from experienced Scouts. That means we need a stratified program to accomodate the stratification. >>> I see your point and for some groups this can work very well, especially very small troops where there isn't enough boys at each level to warrant a stratafied structure. Personally I don't use the older boy/other interest as an "excuse". I lean this way to try and maintain a commonality interest especially for the older boys. I don't have a problem with the older boys working with the younger boys, but not every meeting and every outing. ajmako: What we're really doing is isolating the responsibility an experienced Scout has toward an inexperienced Scout into one person--the TG. It relieves the rest of the older Scouts from the responsibility, guaranteeing they will have other interests. We seperate and set aside the new Scouts so they won't get in the way of the older Scouts' program. And we isolate one of those older Scouts' from his peers and make him stick with the new guys. Those new Scouts need to interact with older Scouts, to be in the same patrol with them, because that interaction is what teaches new Scouts how to be Scouts. It's not just by the SM's example, the TG's example, and the SPL's example. It's not just by observing what those other patrols do. Yes, those older Scouts are more mature, and that greater maturity is one of the keys to learning how to be a Scout. >>> I'm sorry if I left this impression, it's not the scouts that are slacking by dumping on the TG and Instructor. (When we ask the TG and Instructor, or they come forward and volunteer for that POR, to make a commitment for the whole year with the NBP. It's the boy's choice/commitment, not some adult's.) In order to insure a successful NBP, the TG and Instructor must draw resources and assistance from the other patrols and individuals on occasion. For example: the NBP is going to learn to set up the tents. After a brief intro by the Intructor, each boy is paired up with a cooperating older boy patrol member and the two of them work at the tent. There is no way a TG and Instructor can do NBP all by themselves (especially the hands-on parts). This is where the PLC comes in handy in coordinating this intra-patrol types of activities and on occasion the new boys get a chance to do a one-on-one with the older boys. The older boys get a chance to be introduced to a younger boy and the new boy gets an opportuntity for a one-on-one full focused attention of a older boy. ajmako: The older boys will hold the POR's and out vote the new boys who may need the POR experience. It also doesn't allow the PL/APL to keep tabs on the new boy progress towards first class because he has responsibilities to other patrol members at the same time. Unfortunately, one of the PL's responsibilities is to keep tabs on the new boy's progress towards First Class. >>> We focus the attention of the Instuctor on this task so that the instruction of the NB's is consistant, rather than relying on the variance of the different PL's time and talents. The PL focus should be on leading the patrol, not advancement for one or two new boys. This means each PL needs to address his attention on one or two boys and the TG and Instructor have their attention split into as many patrols as have new boys. The PL has other responsibilities as well, but in a real patrol the PL isn't alone. Everyone in the patrol works to make the patrol a success. If you take away the new Scout, you take away one of the PL's greatest responsibilities. You take away one of the things that brings the patrol together--teaching less experienced Scouts and keeping the basic skills fresh. If older Scouts don't want to "hang" with younger Scouts, then I suggest we're not teaching them what a real Scout is. >>> As I said before this interaction with the younger scouts can be done with intra-patrol cooperation and the older boys can focus on the new boys rather than hanging with his pards. The older boys seem to appreciate this because they don't have to do it every time the patrol meets. It is a lot easier to keep the older boys interest in scouting if they have, lets say half their time to helping with intra-patrol activities and the other half doing some things geared just for them. This can't be done with fragmented patrols because each patrol has older boys that would need to leave their patrol, rejoin with others for half their program. And who plans that opportunity? A venture patrol should plan program for themselves the same way a NBPshould plan program for themselves. On the other end of things, the more we stratify the troop program, the more different sub-programs adults end up having to contend with, and the more complicated we make the job of planning. >>> LOL! Yeah, and the less adult interference, the more the patrol method has a chance to be really boy-led! :^) Each patrol should be doing it's own planning! The stratified patrols can then plan age/interest appropriate plans and also group plans that entail intra-patrol activities if requested. This opens the door to a far greater possibility adults will pick up the slack--especially with regard to the NSP. If we adults are too hands on with the NSP, the Scouts will expect adults to be hands on with the "regular" program. >>> Adults... Step away from the boys! We will forever be talking about what to do when our Life Scout cooking instructor has to miss out on the Venture Patrol's visit to the COPE course because he has to teach the NSP cooking. >>> the Instructor facilitates instruction, it doesn't mean he does ALL the training. If the Instructor's partner knows more about first aid and could teach it better, would it not be a good idea to have the Instructor line-up his buddy for an evening of NBP instruction? Where does it say he (i.e. Instructor) dumps his responsibility on adults? Some Scouters won't bother even asking, they'll just take over the job of teaching cooking and let the older Scout go off with his buds. >>> and if the Instructor coordinates this before he goes off to COPE, great! He's fulfilled his responsibility, a vital aspect/dynamic of leadership delegation. Now, if our Life Scout is in a real patrol and the new Scouts he has to teach are in the same patrol, the patrol can plan an activity on the COPE course and Scouts will be taught to cook by other Scouts without anyone missing anything. Those new Scouts won't feel like they don't quite belong yet because they do belong to the patrol and they aren't seperated out just because they're new. >>> I think with the smaller troops, one needs to blend the patrols. However, if you have a larger troop it is, in my opinion anyway, an opportunity to give the boys the option of being more interest/age level programmed to keep the interest of the older boys. That way if you wish to do something more challenging, you don't take away 1-2 boys from each patrol to do it. They are already grouped, working and planning their program as a natural part of their patrol planning process. It's also a special treat for the NBP to have the venture patrol coming in to help with tent setup training and each NB get's to pick their favorite older boy to help them. After all, isn't the whole idea behind a venture patrol and NBP meant to be stratafied? It allows a program focus that isn't possible with mixed patrols. Stosh

I wish to emphasize agreement with FScouter. Unpleasant task punishments get stygmatized and unless someone is getting punished, they don't do them. In our troop we try to emphasize the positive to avoid bad behavior in the first place. If there's a task that needs to be done, our SPL has been trained to give the most unpleasant tasks, i.e. kybo cleaning, to the best patrols, and the PL is trained to assign it to his best scout. Each scout is learning that these jobs go to those best qualified, most responsible and dedicated scouts. Important jobs are not given to slackers for punishment. Like the TP roll down the kybo, scouts quickly understand the dynamics of camp tasks and their assignment.

John, If we were any other kind of CO/Crew combination I would tend to agree with you. One simply can't protect a church council president who wants to be SM from all the various conflict of interest situations he/she will find themselves embroiled in. However, our CO is an adult version of the crew (Living History/Reenacting). Both organizations are under similar by-laws and expectations, the crew being more strict than the adults. We often have coinsiding activities. For example the crew is having an activity next Saturday which the CO membership is invited to participate in and before the year out invitations will pass back and forth from both sides. Presently we have only two registered adult crew leaders who are not also CO members. One of those two is a college student who has aged out of the Crew and hasn't joined up with the CO as of yet. The other adult is a parent of an under-aged boy who's a registered boy scout (12 years old), but not a crew member. He falls in with us for our activities. Stosh

ajmako, you are correct. Yes, like a good/bad Den Chief, the TG can have a major impact on the NBP. It would bode well, to appoint a well qualified person for the POR. Our TG is Star rank while the NBP PL is 2nd Class and the APL is Tenderfoot. The PL/APL are younger boys, more the age of the new boys, while the TG is older and sets more of an older brother image for the patrol. I don't like the idea of a NBP designation either, but I do like some of the things it brings to the troop as a whole. Unless one has multiple feeder packs, the boys generally come into the troop with a leg up on working together as buddies/teamwork. It offers them a place where those directly around them are not a leg up on them. Kinda like safety in numbers where those around you feel like their in the same boat as you. We place older boys into the NBP to give real leadership and the new boys look to them for it. Our NBP also has a TG. His responsibility is not to lead, but to guide the Target-First-Class program for the boys. He is responsible for working with the Instructor who does the teaching, and the TG is there for support in their learning. The TG becomes the liason between the boys and the PL/APL if necessary, the Troop and the Adults. He's their protectorate and advocate when they need one. Each POR person the new boys come into contact with do so for different reasons. PL/APL for leadership examples, Instructor for learning scout skills, and TG for counseling and advocacy. All four of these POR's provide the NBP a safe, learning, developing environment their first year. After the first year, these boys step back the NBP becomes a regular patrol. They have had a year of learning skills, watching qualified leadership, given mentoring and protection and now they are ready to do it for real for themselves. If their numbers have dwindled, they can on their own initive, petition other patrols for membership or merging. I have never been a fan of bringing new boys into existing patrols for a number of reasons. Obviously the boys are now separated from those they have been with in scouting for many years, the older boys have other interests and operate on a different skill/maturity level. The older boys will hold the POR's and out vote the new boys who may need the POR experience. It also doesn't allow the PL/APL to keep tabs on the new boy progress towards first class because he has responsibilities to other patrol members at the same time. I guess it's just a matter of what each SM/ASM's skill level is and what works best for their troop. Not all troops can support a NBP and so they shouldn't have one. Our troop as a whole has difficulty supporting a NBP so the responsibility is focused into the hands of the NBP PL/APL, TG and Instructor. We've done it both ways over the years and this seems to work better for us. Your mileage may vary. Stosh

"Regarding Stosh's questions about the TG, perhaps I didn't say what I meant quite right." Nope, your explanation is very good. "The rotating PL thing was only supposed to be the first half of the NSP tenure. During that period the TG has many but not all of the roles of a PL--he teaches skills, and makes sure the PL's responsibilities are met." But listen to the comment I made. TG acts as PL, that means no one else can be PL and the TG has usurped the rotating PL responsibilities and more importantly - authority. I get the feeling the rotated PL isn't really a functioning PL, just a ego building training tool. "He (the TG) teaches" An Instructor POR should be doing this for the boys. "Make sure the PL's responsibilities are met"... It seems to me that the TG (with emphasis on GUIDE) is actually in the role of leader rather than guide by insuring the PL's responsibilities are met. Whereas it is surely boy-led, it's in reality an TG assigned as a functioning PL who really runs the NBP. "The PL does the job as far as he's capable, with the TG holding his hand, and picking up the slack." Yes, the rotating PL is following, not leading.... The directive and authority flows from the TG. "Once all the patrol members have had their taste of PL or APL, the patrol elects a "permanent" PL and the TG takes a step back. His role is strictly Instructor/Mentor." Having their "taste" of PL/APL is not a real taste. It seems rather contrived and not very effective. What it does teach is that there's someone else who's really running the show that's watching over your shoulder and who will have the final say-so in the long run. If the pattern is taught this way, then one will have an SPL with a SM watching over his shoulder when he gets older. This is what he was being taught from the beginning. Once the PL gets elected and the TG steps back, the new PL is in virgin territory the same as if he had simply started out that way. However, I'd bet good money someone's still going to be close by looking over his shoulder. "That is theoretical of course, and as Beavah points out, not much use in making it happen. I've never gotten it to work that way, partly because I never really thought much of the NSP concept. Even when I was NSP-SA my orders were simply to "help them build a patrol." The TG assigned to the patrol was a no-show, and he wasn't replaced. We rotated PL's for a while, but it was just six Scouts, and I didn't see where it did much good. It didn't hurt anything either." In a practical sense, there really wasn't any real leadership training. It was just a "lets see what you can do without any training" kind of approach that the new boys aren't ready for. It offers a greater risk of failure for the boy than success. (as you unfortunately found out) "That patrol--they called themselves the Beaver Patrol BTW--wasn't the greatest patrol in the troop when my job was complete, but they were a patrol. I guess I did a good job since they gave me their patrol flag when I left the troop a couple years later. Personally, I think those Scouts would have done much better going directly into an experienced patrol. That wasn't my call." The boys appreciated the leadership you gave, but did they develop leadership of their own or relied on your leadership? I think they gave you the flag because of their appreciation of your leadership, not theirs. "The NSP formed the next year fared a lot better since they had a TG with an excellent grasp of the job, and they had been together all through Cub Scouts. They rotated PL's, but I wasn't their SA, so I couldn't say whether they gained anything from it or not. Just my luck, I get the NSP full of misfits, and the next guy gets the NSP full of squared away Scouts." I'm not so sure you can rightly conclude that. Boy-led will always have a better chance of success than adult-led. Cubs frequently develop an strong affinity to their Den Chiefs more so than their Den Leaders. You just weren't going to win that one from the beginning. A good TG will function in the NBP like a DC will in a Den. Once we realize that the boys themselves will function better with our (adult) support rather than leadership, the happier everyone is going to be. You did the best you could under the circumstances, you just weren't going to win this one. :^) Stosh

I admire your lofty goals and undaunted ambition, however, after 20 years as scout leader and another 16 years as a church youth group leader, I have come to the conclusion that not everyone wants to be saved. I have learned also not to spread myself to thin (yeah, right), but there's only so much one can do and if saving everyone was possible, there would far less problems for today's youth than they have. It's not that there are those out there that haven't tried, good quality people, skilled and talented people, but it just doesn't happen. May I suggest: focus on that which you can do. Put out a good quality, worthwhile program and you will attract marginal youth to your efforts. Don't be disappointed in the response. If only a few show up, do your best for them and quit worrying about the others, they have made their life's choices. Work with those that chose you. Stosh

It's kind of strange how each example seems to cast the TG in different roles. One he's a substitute PL, then moves to being an instructor, and finally stepping back out of the picture. Why not have a PL and Instructor and have the TG do the TG role? It sounds like someone is appointing a "real" patrol leader (TG) for the NBP. The boy elected "PL" is nothing but a training session for the boy and not really a POR. If it walks like a duck.... No amount of smoke a mirrors can change the reality of the situation. Maybe it's a lesson in having a POR and having someone else usurp you as they see fit. The NBP PL just follows along the leadership of the TG.... Sorry, but it doesn't sound like leadership to me. Stosh

No matter how hard one tries there is alway going to be the impossible bump that can't be overcome. NBP member cannot go to summer camp this first year because dad doesn't have the time to take off from work to come along too. Our answer to the boy? "That's unfortunate, maybe next year." My bet is on this boy never making it until next summer. Any thoughts? Stosh

Not only is there a lot less work for the adults under the BP method, but the boys come on-line with their leadership earlier than if the adults "meddle" in the patrols. If they support the patrols instead, the environment of leadership is encouraged and expected. The boys tend to step up and take charge when they feel there is no adult competition which they know they will lose of challenged. I do like the permanence of the BP approach and that if tne boys wish to move from one patrol to another it's up to the patrols to decide that. We have "patrol transfers" allowed when the boys request it.

One might wish to check with the scout troops in the area. They do many things that would fulfill the Webelos requirement for AOL. For example, we maintain woodduck houses that need to be periodically checked and would require a "hike" of about 5 miles to get around to them all. The cubs could tag along and learn something. There are advancement requirements for the scouts as well, that would require hiking. All your Webelos leaders need to tap into these scout resources right away and make use of them. When I was WDL, I made quite a bit of contact with the troop rather than trying to reinvent the wheel for each of my advancements. Otherwise a fun day of hiking, stop and make hobo dinners at lunch and hike on home. It's supposed to be a get off the sofa, out of the house, blow some stink off, kind of event where the boys go and do something fun outside.

Sometimes these things can't be helped. I am the CA of a venturing crew and the president of the CO. That makes me the Executive Officer AND crew Advisor. After 8 years of working with the crew, I'm not going to step down just because the CO elected me president/senior officer. And when I'm not doing that, I'm ASM of a scout troop, have been for almost 15 years now. Any of these combinations need to be evaluated on a case by case basis. I don't think I could be pulling this off if it wasn't for the fact that I have been a registered BSA member of some sort for almost 30 years now, plus another concurrent 34 years of working with non-BSA youth groups.

Gonzo, My comments were not directed to the posting under Patrol Method as much as the lack of discussion on how patrols fit into the problem being described. One of the adult responsibilities towards the patrols is to provide support and in this case defend them against such obvious attacks by power hungry parents. Surely the patrols individually cannot do this, the PLC was intimidated enough to crumble, and the committee hasn't the gumption to step up to the plate and do it's ultimate job SUPPORT the boys. To me this is the classic example of how adults take leadership from the boys. Full frontal attack against the boys with no other leaders stepping into protect the leadership development of the boys. When I "train" the NBP and TG, their #1 responsibility is to protect the members of the NBP. It is not advancement, it is not assimilation into the troop, it's establishing themselves as an autonomous group to function in the scouting program. The PL and APL along with the TG are to stand in supportive defense of the patrol until the members get it on its feet. I was encouraged at last night's meeting when I went over to check on the NBP. It had been quite some time and they hadn't produced a patrol flag, but had been working independently on advancement. I asked why there wasn't a patrol flag for the boys. The PL looked squarely at me and said, "With all due repect Mr. B, the material is lying right here on the table, and we'll get to it when we have time. Right now the boys want to work on this advancment." It isn't very often one can take one in the chops and come up feeling proud of the boy's development. Earlier in the evening when the NBP was lining up in the back of the room to do the flag ceremony, a boy from a different patrol said to them that's not the way the troop does flag ceremonies, the APL (PL was in front calling the commands) with the boys said, "That might be true for the troop, but this patrol will be doing it this way." It is important that boys who are not confident as of yet have scouts and adults around them to protect them from those who wish to take away their leadership development and opportunities. This is a valid way of supporting the patrol method. In the case of the example Gonzo provides, a number of adults need to step up to the plate and defend the patrol method. This adult needs to either 1) be trained, or 2) asked to leave. There shouldn't even be any discussion of this, especially not in front of the boys. "With all due respect, the boys have planned out their program this evening, if you wish the flyers to be handed out, you might ask the SPL to have the patrols consider it." Stosh

Once one gets good at it, it takes thread, scissors and a pin and one can switch out a patch in less than 5 minutes. I have never used the plastic thingy, personally I think it looks like someone is too lazy to do it right. Ever see any other organizations dangle patches? A patch implies sewing. Stosh

A uniform by definition means one-common form/style. If people find it necessary to customize the uniform, then it is by definition no longer a uniform. No one ever said that the uniform was to be stylish or contemporary, it was only meant to be of one form. Unless everyone conFORMs (with common form) to the uniFORM (one common form) then they have defeated the purpose of what they are trying to do. Stosh

If this topic is under the patrol method category, why has no one mentioned the patrol thoughout the whole discussion? If it's BSA aim to promote the patrol method and everyone is out vying for position of power, who's helping/supporting the patrol and patrol method of scouting? Stosh

The hook is for the pocket knife. However, the hook is not very strong and one could lose the knife is snagged on something. Just be careful and you'll be ok. There seems to be a tendency to remove the hook and/or take them off prior to purchase. (This is a ready supply of extra hooks for those who may want them or who have lost theirs). I use 2 hooks, one for my pocket knife and one for a brass match safe, neither of which I wish to put in my pocket with keys and change to get battered around. If the boys are worried about their knives getting lost, use the 3-4' parachute cord to make a lanyard to secure to the knife and belt rather than making cat-toys with it. That way the extra cord can be stuffed into their pocket or pants and out of the way and if the hook released unexpectedly, the knife is secured with a rope. It also keeps the boys from laying their knives down and getting lost. Stosh

It all boils down to how much one trusts the boys to actually lead themselves? If every time there's a bump in the road the adults step in, it's not really boy-led. Didn't the boys walking around in circles all afternoon have enough spit to say this was stupid to the adult dad? Surely a sense of integrity, confidence and leadership from the boys would go a long way with the SM and the Dad battling it out. Sounds like a mom and dad fighting over the kids in a divorce. Had proper boy-lead patrol training been done, it would have encouraged the boys to stand up for themselves even if it means going toe-to-toe with the SM and parents. I teach my boys the phrase "With all due repect...." when they wish to take on an adult interfering with their leadership opportunities. Set a goal and aim at it with whatever program you wish, but stick to your guns. If one is going to be adult-led, let the boys know so their expectations are adjusted correctly. If it's going to be boy-led, lay out the program's expectations, If it's going to be some combination in between, make sure the line in the sand is clear so the boys know the boundaries. It's not an issue of what's better, but what works best for your people. Of course, who makes that decision will be the ultimate dynamic of the eventual program. :^) Stosh

Not a problem Beavah, I'll take my 2 paragraphs of puffery elsewhere. Happy Scouting! Stosh

I believe the preferred method is sewing. Being a temporary patch one would surely never want to glue one on. Occasionally the patch will come with a loop to hang on the button and some scouts use the plastic thingy to put their patches in. Although there is no advancement requirement or Merit Badge for sewing, it's a skill all boys should know. I teach my NBP how to thread a needle, pin and sew a patch. Boys should also be able to sew a button on and patch a tear or seam separation. And as far as my venturing crew is concerned, learning to sew can and does save them hundreds of dollars. Otherwise they can wait weeks for their mom's (who many can't sew either) to find someone to sew on their patches. My boys have found some very creative ways to sew on patches, but they are the ones doing it. Some are crooked, some have the wrong color thread and some have a tendency to fall off after a couple of weeks, but they are learning and the more MB's they earn the better they'll sew. Stosh

One must remember that Scouting today is more than just what is written in the current edition of a handbook. At one time, Morse Code was a Second Class requirement and Signaling used to be a Merit Badge. Well, not anymore, but my boys are all fascinated by it and exploring it's possibilities (mostly for school study hall because it avoids the paper evidence of note passing). We're working on American Sign Language as well, more practical and current to today's world. Isn't it kind of strange that BSA provides for an ASL interpreter's strip and very little resource to provide for the boy's training? Not everything is in the handbook/literature. One of the more interesting things I have discovered in the older books is in the novels. Before the days of electronic media, boys learned by reading and BSA provided many of their skill and moral lessons in the writings commissioned by National BSA. Patrol methold, leadership styles, problem boys, etc. are all spelled out. Now some of these lessons are no longer acceptable in today's BSA. These boys were more independent than we allow boys today. Safety? Litigation? whatever, the liberties and independence we do not teach are two important factors of growing up that are no longer in vogue. Kinda like Signaling. As a National Certified EMT-A, I can assure you the teaching of the BSA on First Aid taught by the BSA is not always "by the book" either. There's a big to-do right now on the merits of changing how CPR is being done. To stick with just what you were taught does not allow any room for problem solving, thinking on one's feet, adjusting the program to the present situation or any other kinds of situations the boys will find themselves in sometime in their adult lives. Besides leadership, there's independent thinking, problem solving, and many other dynamics that "scout" had to learn to effectively function in the military setting. While our boys are not in that situation in our day and age (????) they could very well be some day in their lives. A number of my scouts (including 3 of our last 5 Eagles) joined the military and are serving our country as we speak. They joined up right after high school? Another is home already, returned from the Gulf, disabled and decorated. His only regret was having to leave his pards behind. The lessons taught and were once taught by BSA go far beyond the literature of today's BSA program. But B-P has instilled a legacy that goes way beyond what's in print today. Stosh

"Well, we're suppose to be making men here, not boys." Have to admit to never knowing what this "Making Men" thing is all about." >>> You're kidding right? "then he is on the ground doing 15 push-ups" Might be seen as making boys into men? I can train a dog by installing fear into him or her. Of course being that I love dogs, I much prefer to teach the dog that when he does what I want him to do he will get rewarded by a kindly pet and kind words. Boys will grow into men without any help from us! >>>> If you really believe this then BSA is wasting an awful lot of time. And why is it that I come across 45 year old boys every day of my life? I'm not in any rush to see the Scouts I serve become Men or Women. I'm happy that they are young and I want them to enjoy being young. Making Boys into men is not the same as preparing young people to make ethical and moral choices over their lifetimes by instilling in them the values of the Scout Oath and Law. My goal is for a Scout not to do the stuff that he or she shouldn't be doing because they know that they shouldn't be doing it -Even if they can! A Scout who decides not to use bad language because it's wrong and because he shouldn't is very different from a Scout who decides not to use bad language because he will end up in front of the Troop looking like a twit doing push-ups. One way is right and the other is just plain wrong. I'm happy to do my best to help build youth into quality citizens by: Building Character, Fostering Citizenship,Promoting Fitness. Scouting aims to build self-confidence, problem solving, compassion, acceptance of personal responsibility, and leadership skills within each Scout. This allows the individual boy well prepared for life in an adult world. >>>>> LOL and what do you think making men out of boys means if it doesn't mean just exactly what you just said? We spend a lot of time talking about building character. I think when we talk about building character we mean the qualities of a person that makes him self-sufficient, motivated, charitable, concerned for others, and willing to accept the responsibilities placed before him. Last time I looked this was still the Boy Scouts Of America. -Not the Men Scouts of America. Eamonn. >>>> Gotta love it! You don't make men out of boys, but we all take them in as wide-eyed tiger cubs boys and watch them step into adulthood as mature, confident adults (i.e. adults?) on their 18th birthday? I've worked with boys in the scouting program for many years now and when they cross over into adulthood when they finally age out of scouting, they are men. We have done our job of making man out of a boy. B-P calls it citizenship. By the way, I have had a number of men younger than 18 in my scouting units over the years. On the other hand I have seen some of the boys I've had over the years many years later still not showing signs of adulthood in their lives. None of those ever made it to Eagle.

"I was refering to a statement from Kudu, about his assumption of Adult Association. Please show me where I mentioned anything else you posted about what an SM does. All of that is explained in the SM HB - again I ask, do you even have a copy?" Hmmmm, cheap shot, but I'll answer anyway. After 20 years as an adult leader, the last 9 doing double duty in two units, I've perused a few handbooks along the way. If nothing else, I collect them and have read every edition since 1911. I have also read much of scouting's history and it's development over the past 100 years. I can guarantee my scout library is a lot larger than yours. I have at the present 10 scout books on my computer desk right now, a pile of 12 more on the floor within sight, three book shelf units one in my living room and one in my dining room and another in the basement. Two books are lying on my night stand and the 1930-31 Boy's Life editions I was reading this afternoon are on my coffee table. Do I get to count the two training manuals on the back seat of my car THE BOYS WANTED TO BORROW? (Emphasis mine) Actually the amount, variety and range of reading I do allows me to view current day quips and quotes, power bites and snipes with a greater depth of understanding than just the few words on a printed page. When you know the history of something, you know it's life. Maybe now we can move on to something other than questioning my reading ability. "It explains what happens if a BOR feels a Scout isn't ready to advance. Sorry you don't like it, but it is the BSA method!" Nope, A Scout is Kind. Not from anything that supports my understanding of BSA methods. If a BOR is a last shot to pass muster and a group of adults hold the judgment trump card over the work of the boys, then the troop BOR people have failed to understand what a BOR is all about. First of all no scout is sitting in on a BOR unless a wide variety of different people have signed off on all the requirements and the boy has had a chance to chat/visit with the SM who if s/he's doing it right will be the first to congratulate him on his progress and accomplishment. If the BOR doesn't like what they see: 1) They were not there to witness the boy's efforts and accomplishments when he was fulfilling the requirements. 2) The SM failed miserably by allowing a boy to get through his SMC just to be humiliated by a group of adults who say his efforts weren't good enough. 3) The committee failed miserably in selecting qualified members of the BOR who should have been praising this boy, encouraging him in his efforts, giving him support as he moves on to his next rank, and trusting the involvement of a lot of people prior selection of these BOR members. 4) the BOR members have failed miserably to understand that when the boy comes in and sits down he has by all BSA standards fulfilled his advancement requirements and they have no business questiong the judgment of others in front of the boy when he is sitting there expecting his earned praise and instead getting crapped on by adults. 5) In no way is such practice accepable according to any BSA policy I have read anywhere. I have sat in on Eagle BOR's where the boy was so nervous he couldn't get out the 12 Scout Laws correctly. Does that mean the BOR people should have sent him "back to the drawing board"? Fortunately not everyone has read the SM Handbook as well as others have. They ribbed him a little, told him to sit down, relax, and take a deep breath. They assured him he had already earned his Eagle and this was just a formality so that they could be the first to congratulate him on a job well done. Then they went on to chit-chat casually about his scouting experience and his eagle project. The boy left that BOR walking on clouds. That is what scouting is all about! Not rules and regulations that forgot what B-P started in the first place. "Question - in your boy-led, patrol-only method, who ensures the 3 Aims are met and the 8 Methods are used?" The boys do. They can and are trusted to fulfill their responsibilities. They pick it up in the training literature that they go through and then teach to the other boys. "If you think adult role modeling and mentoring in Scouting is a very small part of the program, then you are missing the whole boat. Here are just two examples where an SM made a huge difference in the life of a Scout. Imagine if the SM had just sat back and did nothing, not wanting to interfere with the boy-led patrols. Frank Logue was in my Troop, same age as me. This is from a sermon he gave a few years back. Personal testimonies are not proof of anything. They do nothing to prove anything other than the boy had a good experience in scouting. I can give you (including my personal story) bad experiences with adult involvement in the lives of the boys. And with the ratio of boys Eagling compared to the number jointing in the first place, there seems to be more negative experiences than positive ones. "Without Adult Association, as described in the SM HB, these things would not happen. Stosh, you can go ahead and put a lot of other words in my mouth, but what I'm saying is clear and simple." I don't have to put words in your mouth, I just quote what you said in the first place. Adult Association can be interpreted in different ways. 1) Adult-led, directed, maintained and established, or 2) adults that encourage, support, guide, and trust the leadership development of young boys growing into adulthood. You will find that adults that allow the boys to own their own leadership for real will garner the most acolades.

A Scout is Courteous - that should take care of the vocabulary problems. A Scout is Kind - that should take care of the name-calling problems. A Scout is Clean - including one's mouth.... A Scout is Reverent - Speaks for itself Not a problem, when it comes to signing off on Scout Spirit, a discussion can be held on this at the appropriate time with each scout that insists that bad and/or abusive language and name-calling is no big deal and boys will be boys. Well, we're suppose to be making men here, not boys. Stosh

Once again I fail to see the point being made. "The Adult Association is described as follows, at least in my copy of the SM HB: "Boys learn a great deal by watching how adults conduct themselves. Scout leaders can be positivie role models for the members of their troops. In many cases a Scoutmaster who is willing to listen to boys, encourage them, and take a sincere interest in them can make a profound difference in their lives." Where does it say anywhere that the SM makes decisions on how the patrols, troop or PLC are to be run? Sounds like an appropriate statement where the SM and other adults SUPPORT, ENCOURAGE and TAKE AN INTEREST in the boys. No where does it say they do one bit of work, decision making, directing or controling. "How many success stories have we heard where a boy comes from a single-parent family with no father figure, and Scouting made a huge difference in their lives? Those kind of stories aren't going to happen without Adult Association! " Not a problem here, but having a SM or adult role model is scouting is a VERY small part of the whole package known as SCOUTING. "And don't give me the "BOR & SM Conference is taking power away from the PL's" argument. The SM conference, as described in the SM HB, is a conversation to see if the boy is ready to advance. Same thing with the BOR. It is also a great time for the SM and Committee members to take a pulse on the troop - how are things going, what needs to be improved. Teaching boys how to interact with adults is a very important skill - more so than learning how to tie a square knot." Taking the pulse and placing judgements are two different things here. What if the BOR decides the advancements were not met and the boy needs more practice or he doesn't show scout spirit on a level they expect or any one of a hundred other interferences adults may attempt to do to undermine the patrol method? These kinds of things do happen in the non-boy-led programs and they do change the makeup of their troops. One hears constantly the adults on this forum starting out their forum posts: "What do I do?...." If it's a boy-led program, the boys are not in harm's way and its challenging the boys, then the answer is ALWAYS: DO NOTHING! let the boys figure it out for themselves. If they need help, they'll ask. Until then do nothing but observe and let the boys be. I don't have a problem with the program of the BSA, but I surely have a problem with how so many of the SM and other adults interpret for themselves the program. Unless they are meddling in the affairs of the boys, they just don't seem to be thinking they are doing something for the boys. Stosh