MattR

BD, you'll never know if he felt he "got caught", but my guess is, if he felt he got caught he'd be angry with you. Since he was almost in tears, he probably knows he did something wrong.

Fred says: "Personally, I'm glad my troop does not have your attendance requirement. It's forces the older boys choose between scouting and other activities. I'm afraid at 14 / 15 years old, many will choose the other activities and it's the beginning of the end of their scouting career. It also puts the focus on the wrong place. Scouting is about character and advancement is not gate keeping." A lot of adults said we'd have a bunch of scouts quit if I put in an attendance requirement, but nobody else wanted to be SM so I got my way. A very small number of scouts did quit but most of them decided that scouts was important and they needed to put more time into it. There was something else going on as well. I used to spend a lot of time talking to scouts that were wavering on whether they wanted to stick it out. I tried to find ways to help them out. I finally said forget it, I was going to spend the time with the scouts that wanted to be there to make it the best program I could for them. That's when I came up with the requirements. I told scouts they needed to decide, and that scouting is a team sport. Patrol leaders can't learn to lead if they can't get older scouts to help them out. I made those decisions to help the PLs. The result is the patrols are forming identities, they don't want to be broken up, they want to go out on their own, and now scouts want to be patrol leader whereas it used to be a "nose goes" kind of thing. The older scouts are much more active and help out a lot more since I put in that requirement. Most scouts are unaware of the requirement because they just show up. One other thing, fulfilling the requirement is necessary for a POR, but not sufficient. They still need to do everything expected of them.

Scout food is about $10. If it's a district event that's another $8-10 (patch and a potty). The troop pays for gas to whomever tows the trailer. If we're in a cabin that would be another $2-3 per person but the troop usually covers that. Adults pay $15 for food but eat well enough just to make the kids jealous. We did Iron Chef at a camporee. It was fun. The adults put together ramen noodles, peanut butter, soy sauce, Shiracha, and cooked chicken. That was good.

I find the field uniform impractical in the field. In the summer it's way too warm. In the winter it's a poor layer and you'd never see it. It works in the fall and we really don't get Spring so much as winter or summer. So, I call it a dress uniform. I really like the idea of a uniform, and my troop has to travel in them, but I'd like to see a change. Well, the pants and necker are good, I guess I just don't like the shirt. Who needs epaulets in the outdoors? Who needs troop numbers on a shirt, or a council patch? Military field uniforms all have velcro unit and rank strips and it seems really practical and not nearly as blingy as a scout uniform. Scout uniforms have more bling than any other uniform. At troop meetings, the shirts are fine. But the emphasis is on the outdoors so the uniforms should be practical there first. I'd like to see different weights and materials and cheap enough so the scouts can own a summer and winter shirt. Make the patches smaller so they fit on a velcro strip and only the US flag and WOSM patch are sewn on. Everything else fits on a strip above a pocket. Simple and practical. We wouldn't need activity shirts if the field shirt worked in the field.

jblake, I was in college, we wanted to celebrate, so someone said, "let's make some sort of flambe thing." All we had was 151Rum. Plenty of adventure in a kitchen.

If it were me sitting down with him I'd make a small change. Before I'd tell him he won't receive the badge, and he knows he did something wrong, I'd ask him what he thinks the right thing to do is. If he says he doesn't deserve the badge then he gets it, I'm not the bad guy, and it's a good lesson in the end. He may also whine, in which case I'd continue with your plan.

I created campout attendance requirements. It makes it so much easier to have the discussion Eagledad mentions. What I'm learning is the clearer the expectations the easier it is for the boys to grasp them and harder for them to fudge them. The SPL or ASPL has to be on every campout baring an act of God. Same for PL and APL of each patrol. The PL is expected to go on most of the campouts (yes, that's fuzzy for a reason). My PLC just had to deal with a PL that hasn't been on a campout with his patrol since he became a patrol leader 4 months ago. The expectations above triggered a discussion with the boy and the PLC that was good. Turns out he's in over his head with all sorts of activities. They finally agreed that it would be good for the PL to swap with his APL until he can get things under control. The participation requirements made it easier to start this conversation. It's a tool, I try to use it wisely.

Thanks Kudu, nice read and answer. It's interesting that BP put an emphasis on the spiritual and there are so many people that are looking more for the spiritual. The Pew survey in another thread shows that. Maybe the BSA has an opportunity here.

The ladder idea is good in that it can help the troop see where it is and figure out how to move forward. Tampa makes a good point in that changing too much at once will cause so much failure that scouts will walk. And that's why adults jump in and rescue the scouts. "They aren't advancing, they don't have paper towels, I'll just fix the problem for them." Then we're back to square one. Maybe rather than fix the problem the adults should just note the problem and talk to the PLC. I'm going to take my set of ladders and give it to the SPL and ask him to define the responsibilities of the scouts and adults. I'll encourage him to bite off more responsibility for the scouts. I'll let him decide how much change he can handle at a time.

So I think what you're saying, or maybe what I want to hear, is that at the pinnacle of scout leadership, the SM is coaching and asking questions and only very rarely needs to make a decision. This seems very dependent on good scouts that want to do a good job. I talked to a few PLs last night and started asking them why we do things the way we do (why elections every 6 mo, why adults collecting permission slips, etc) and a lot of light bulbs turned on. I asked them could the scouts handle these things and how would they do it differently. That was a good discussion. I looked closer at the ladder graphic and it doesn't really help me. I like the idea of showing everyone where we are but this doesn't really help. I chucked it and started over. First of all, there are lots of parts to the program. New scouts, older scouts, campouts, high adventure, service projects, meetings, gear, patrol leadership, advancement, ... one ladder is not enough. Next, I like Stosh's idea of either you manage or you lead, but I broke each in 2. So four levels. Level 4) The scouts are merely participating or have no clue this is part of the troop. At most they get to decide from a small set of choices given them. Adults do most of it, or at least make all the decisions. Level 3) Scouts manage a task for an extended time frame. Decisions are constrained and adults have to approve. It's open loop so if things go wrong, an adult will step in or the problem will likely repeat the next time. Scouts need to participate. Level 2) Scouts lead a task for an extended time frame. They care about the result and the people involved. They recognize when they're in trouble and ask for help. Adults ask lots of questions and keep the scouts focused. Scouts need to care. Adults need to bite their tongues. Level 1) Scouts look at the big picture. They train others. They will identify problems and come up with solutions on their own. Adults rarely step in. Scouts need to be self motivated. So when I look at this for my troop, we're all between level 2 and 4. When it comes to picking patrol leaders and patrols and dealing with troublesome scouts, they're at 2. QM is between 3 and 4, depending on the adult working with them. The SPL is so close to level 1. The calendar and campouts are a 3, but recently a 2. Advancement is between 2 and 4, depending on what adults are around. Sorry about blathering on, but this helps me.

There's no doubt these guys are idiots and they are lying through their teeth to rationalize what they did. At the same time the death threats and the media attention is solely because they are associated with the Boy Scouts. I've been to this park and it's just a giant play ground. The kids absolutely love playing there and it shows. There are paths worn everywhere. People carve their names into the sandstone. There is not much of nature left to enjoy. The idea that these yokels destroyed some pristine natural area is a farce.

Well, it's 100 years old, but a good place to start. If I strip out the legalese and write it in a more current style I come up with: The purpose is for boys to be skilled in the outdoors, benevolent, responsible, courageous, honorable, and patriotic. ​That seems a lot more succinct than Reinforce Ethical Standards. I'm not sure the kids will think much of it. Sports is about winning and winning strikes a chord within a boy. Maybe honor and courage can take the place of winning.

I looked at the ladder thing and it brings up some questions. For the top level it says the adults won't step in unless it's a safety issue. When it comes to bad decisions that's fine as long the the result of the bad decision is timely. Forget food? Hunger. But what about decisions that aren't very timely. Let's say the scouts decide no new Webelos this year? Or maybe a decision just goes against the grain of scouting, such as not camping anymore, or not helping the younger scouts, or the flag ceremonies have become a joke. Or maybe just a PL being a butt. What's the feedback that addresses those issues? Some of those cases could be handled by scouts that think something is wrong. What's the mechanism to do that?. But there are also things that maybe only the SM sees. I agree with Barry that the SM is the keeper of the flame, so they ultimately do have say in decisions. So can any troop ever get to that top level? Or am I just reading this wrong?

Stosh and Barry, you're both making some great points. Being able to gauge, even if it's subjective, how boy-led a troop is is a great idea. Barry is right that it has to account for the age and maturity of the scouts. Everyone seems to think boy led is a binary value and everyone says yep, we're boy led. Rather, wouldn't it be great to have some categories and how to evaluate them? It would be a great tool for improving a troop, both scouts and adults. Rather than numbers why not just grades? A - we're out of a job, hooray! B - We're proud of our boys. C - Needs a lot of coaching. D - Deer in the headlights. F - Maybe it's time for a change. I don't know what good categories would be. Who knows, maybe the SM and PLC should include this in their planning campout. The scouts decide the responsibilities of the scouts and the adults. You know, that's just a simple, good idea. Start with Barry's discussion of ethics and then ask the incoming SPL what he wants to be responsible for, and implicitly what the adults won't do. For a new 12 yo SPL that discussion will look a lot different than for a 17 yo SPL. The older scout might even ask for more than the SM expects. The SM can write down all the things that are done by scouts and adults and the SPL chooses what he thinks he can handle and come up with a way to ensure he's doing a good job. Essentially, let the scouts define the expectations and consequences. A wise SM would give the boy not quite enough rope to hang himself. I think it would be great to have a discussion with the SPL along the lines of, if you say you're going to do this and you don't, there may be some scouts that quit the troop or at least vote you out, are you prepared for this? What's more boy-led and adaptable then asking the SPL what he will be responsible for, and then holding him, and the adults, to it? I really like this because it solves a big problem I have. I don't like being the bad guy/enforcer of standards but nobody else will do it. By giving the scout complete freedom in picking his responsibilities I'm no longer the bad guy. Granted, a few things are not on the table, like med forms and signing Eagle apps, but a lot of others could be. It might be tough figuring out what all the responsibilities are.

BD, and others, the answer was buried in there under consequences. We had a problem with patrols not doing flags at meetings. So, I talked to the SPL about what a good consequence would be and we came up with the entire patrol, during the game, will instead practice their flag ceremony and figure out how to not miss their responsibility next time. Once they're done with that and they talk it over with the SPL, they can join the game. So, the other scouts are playing games and these guys are having a discussion about responsibility. Great motivation, and the scouts were in on deciding the consequence. They actually do a great job at that. If anything, I tend to tone down the punishment they come up with. As for having the SPL responsible for waking up the troop, the SPL and I made a change. It's the PL's responsibility to wake his patrol up and get them to flags, with their patrol flag. This is all about making the PL the most important position in the troop. The PLs like it.

I don't know about percentages but I've recently realized that the things that prevent boys from making decisions are lack of maturity, lack of trust between scouts and adults, and fuzzy boundaries between the adult and scout responsibilities. Immature boys just don't make decisions and a lack of trust kills confidence. Fuzzy responsibilities encourages boys to defer to adults and for adults to step in. Making a short, clear list of responsibilities (as well as consequences for not meeting their responsibilities) makes it easier to pull back the adults and for the boys to know it's their problem. I've recently had a lot of luck with this idea. Everyone is happier. Well, the scouts and I are happier, some of the parents are not at all happy with the chaos or some of the ideas these guys come up with. And by short I mean short. I don't care what they eat as long as it has some protein and a fruit or vegetable. I don't care where they are until flags Saturday morning as long as they're quiet from 10pm to when everyone wakes and that they look out for each other's well being, I don't care when they wake up or if the eat breakfast.

We get close to 200 trees and, I believe, over $10/tree, so a little over $2k. If you'd like, I can get you exact numbers. KDD is right, you want to check things out. You also want to do this in neighborhoods where people own their houses. We do a mix of neighborhoods, some nice, some not. We live in a town of 150,000 so we don't get the big city attitude. The idea that someone would limit scouts from selling popcorn if they aren't from your area is, honestly, embarrassing. I'm sure there are people that rip us off. There are also people that really like Boy Scouts. Maybe we're lucky and live in an area with a lot of people that are philanthropic. When we first tried this I said we had to ensure payment and one guy said no, just trust people. Especially around Christmas. He was right. Maybe try it on a small scale first. Maybe just 200 flyers. That'll get you maybe 20 trees. Remember, 5 trees will fill up a small pickup. 200 trees is a few very big flatbed trailers with built up sides.

A few more questions. 1) I'm not sure you really answered the previous question. How do service projects fit in with the outdoor program? You said they're important, but how do they complement learning outdoor skills, which is really a selfish thing when you get right down to it. I'm not asking because I'm a butt, I'm getting somewhere with this. 2) If service hours are not important and "doing" is the best way to learn a skill, then how does the SM encourage a scout to do the right thing? Does the troop just plan a number of service projects and the expectation is the scout will show up to most of them? That's more in line with what I do now anyway. I'm afraid that just talking about doing the right thing will never stick in a teenage boy's brain. Firing a gun is fun and it's easy to get them to want to do that. Collecting food for the food bank is not fun and likely not meaningful until a scout is older. 3) This is really what I'm after. What is a short description, less than a sentence, of the purpose of scouting? I ask because when I looked at the BSA website it looked like a horrible mess written by a committee of psycho babblers. Because the purpose isn't clear the training isn't clear, and the program isn't clear, and the boys and parents aren't sure what it's all about. it's an inkblot test and people see what they want to see in it. You seem to like to make things simple and this is a time where some simplicity would be a good thing. I don't expect anyone at national to read this, but at least when I talk to parents I can sound coherent. I don't mind if anyone else chimes in as well. If I were to rewrite the BSA website I'd write "Developing the type of man that every woman wants: Confident, compassionate, and adventurous." It's a bit cheeky but the moms and dads that know little of the outdoors need to hear something better than "Reinforce Ethical Standards" if they're ever going to encourage their kids to go camping with us.

Comparing a German Gymnasium program (a college track program) to a US high school is comparing apples and oranges. The Gymnasium picks the students that are allowed whereas a US high school takes everyone, irrespective of ability or disability. Consequently you get back what you put into the US schools. For kids that want a good education and are motivated, they can take IB and AP classes and their education is excellent (and will easily get you into European universities). Kids in the US can also mix and match subjects as kids move from teacher to teacher whereas everywhere else teachers move from class to class. If you like math and music then take all your electives there. This flexibility allows kids to grow up (asking a 5th grader to make a decision about college is a bit of a stretch). It also supports the really bright kids that are, for example, taking calculus as Freshman and Sophomores. This is all supported in my local, public, high schools. There are also the local, public, charter schools that have more of an emphasis on academics. This isn't to say that US schools are all wonderful. That's nonsense too. A lot of inner city schools are abysmal (although the best schools in the country are mostly inner city.) The problem is partially the parents that don't care what their kids do in school. Another problem is the culture that has formed about trying not to hurt a child's self esteem by giving bad grades. Grade inflation is rampant and backfires when they get to college.

Kudu, I have a question for you. How do service projects fit in with the outdoor program? Since you'd like the focus of scouting to be outdoor skills (as would I), is there a need for service projects? My view is that the outdoors develops confidence and doing service develops compassion, two very useful characteristics.

My plc has a meeting after every campout, so roughly once a month. A couple of years ago it dawned on me that while the committee was meeting for an hour or two once a month, the plc was getting everything done in 20 minutes a month. So I decided the scouts weren't doing much leading. They certainly weren't making many decisions.

We print out something like 2000 flyers with pre-addressed envelopes stapled to them. The first weekend we distribute them. The second weekend we pick up any trees we find. The money shows up over the next two months as people remember to mail them in. Some people call when we miss their tree and we have to pick a few up the next day.

We just ask for a donation. Some are cheap and some are very generous. The donation makes it a lot easier as we just make two sweeps through. First to hand out a flier and the second to pick up any tree we find.

Forget popcorn, half of that is going to the folks that don't want to help you. We never reach our goal with popcorn. Cubbies are much cuter. Not sure where you live BD, but if the leaves fall off about this time of year, buy some rakes and some tarps and have kids offer to rake leaves. $10-$15/hour/scout is reasonable. People hate raking leaves. Could be a great team building activity for patrols. Big kids rake, little kids stuff bags. We do the Christmas tree pickup and ask for donations. One week we pass out a lot of addressed envelopes with a paper explaining what we're doing and the following week we drive by and pick up trees. People mail us checks. It is about $8/hr/scout for the whole thing. You'd have to do that in the nice areas as real trees seem to be a luxury anymore. BTW, 200 trees takes up a LOT of room. Too bad the Kroger store closed, they have a fund raiser that gives you 5% of all purchases. You put $100 on the card, buy $100 worth of groceries, and eventually $5 gets mailed to you. Reload the card, repeat. Actually, maybe you could go door to door in the nice part of town and see if people will adopt your troop and use cards with your troop as the beneficiary. Write a monthly letter of what your troop is doing and how the money is being spent and send it to the people that use the cards. People would feel good about helping you out and it wouldn't cost them much at all. Kroger gets steady customers. The problem is all of the other non-profits may be doing the same thing. That's what happens in our town. But for people without kids, there may be an opportunity.

Pros: The calendar sounds like fun. Very active. Must be a lot better than what you had. Having a lot of adults volunteering can be a good thing. Having older scouts teach the skills is good. The comment about the SM restricting the adults. Cons: SM picking patrols (I used to do that, now the scouts handle it). Not allowing 300' because of safety concerns (i.e., do the adults trust the scouts? Train, trust, lead?) Suspecting the generals surround the monthly plc and coach (are the scouts deciding anything at the PLC?) The meeting of bringing in 3 patrol boxes for 40 scouts sounds boring (no hands on). No wonder only 40 out of 90 showed up. So what are the other meetings like? Maybes: With 90 scouts there is sure to be a few that are exceptional in front of a crowd. I'd watch the patrol leaders. What are the patrol activities and what do they do at the one meeting a month that's a patrol meeting? If it's only advancement: con, if it's a mix chosen by the PL: pro. If the uniforms are the biggest issue and the PLs don't lead, that's a con to me. With 90 scouts how many go on high adventure trips? Many trips have limits of a dozen people, they would need 3 per year. Do they have high adventure trips every year? How do the patrols function on the campouts? How was your son treated when he visited? Ignored:con, welcomed: pro. The real question - are the patrol leaders leading or are they glorified secretaries? If they are leading, it sounds like a great troop. If not, it's still doing a lot.