ParkMan

After the adjustment in requirements a year or two back, I thought 18 months to First Class is the new number. Not sure if that's national or just our take. I really don't mind an 18 month journey to First class: Scout - 1 month Tenderfoot - 3 months Second Class - 9 months First Class - 15 months That all seems like a pretty leisurely pace to me.

Yep - like many things in Scouting, I think the OA has lost it's luster because the people in it have stopped giving it luster. One can't be entrusted with the OA in your district, phone it in, and expect it to be a great program. I think many havn't gotten that message.

The BSA's fundamental flaw in training is that they assume basic training is sufficient. It is not. The fundamental problem with all of this is that the program is too complex to be understood in a basic training. Look how much time we spend around here talking about patrol method and boy led. It's ridiculous that every troop does this a different way. For the BSA to really fix this, they need to either: - reduce the complexity of the program - develop a real Scoutmaster training. To go to SM training, you should have been an ASM for a while and understand the basics well. Like Wood Badge (I duck as I write this), the staff needs to be pulled from those Scoutmasters that really understand the program. This should be followed up by a mentoring program. Take those experienced Scoutmasters and have them mentor the new Scoutmasters.

We did Universal once. We spent a day driving there, stayed at a local campground. Got up the next day and did the park. Stayed late, had dinner at the park, and then went back to camp. Next day we packed up and went home. It wasn't cheap, but it wasn't crazy expensive like when my family stays in the park at one of the resorts. It seemed to work pretty well. I've got a couple of teenage kids. They seem more interested in Universal than WDW. I love WDW, so it pains me to say that.

I love the concept of Venturing. Honestly though, I'd be okay with it going away. As a movement, Scouting in America just doesn't seem to know what go do with it. If it goes, I'd like to see a focus on improving the Boy Scout program for the 15-18 year olds. The elements are all there, but far too many troop see their older boys get bored by the same thing year after year.

The reoccurring theme I see here is the atrophying of our district committees. I imagine this extends to the commissioner staffs. I'm guessing that there probably wasn't ever a time when there was a nation full of well formed district committees devoid of politics and personalities. But, I am guessing that something happened 20 years ago that has led to a slow erosion of them. What that is I don't know. I'm not entirely sure it matters. The point is that we're at this point where district committees are struggling. That leads to what I see,in my community - irregular troop program quality, poor recruiting, poor community events, etc. Everyone is focused on their own unit. I'm still of the belief that the way out of this is through us volunteers building back up those district committees and the unit commissioner staffs. They are still the most logical way to focus on strengthening Scouting across a larger community. Create good community events. Increase the ability of packs, troops, and crews to recruit kids and grow. Improve the quality of training and as a result the delivery of program. I'm guessing that's how it worked in the early days of Scouting when the program grew rapidly.

My recommendation is for us volunteers to get re-engaged at the district level. If you really want to improve tbe,program in your area, this is where to do it. Get involved with district program, camping, training, or membership. Sure, skip the finance part. The BSA is supposed to be volunteer led, professionally guided. I'd worry less about what the council employees are saying and just do the right thing for the units in your area. Maybe we use this forum as a place to brainstorm how to do that?

Sounds pretty weird. Makes me wonder if something happened that resulted in it. Given the tight budgets, can't imagine they're doing it on a whim.

I saw those performance problems too. It was pretty slow. Took me about 90 minutes. I thought it was a very good improvement over the old materials. It was much more matter of fact and focused on the problems at hand. It really felt like the authors were saying - "we're taking this seriously".

I'm not sure the answer. Again, I'm fine firing the council staff and trying your approach. We struggle for district volunteers now, so I'm skeptical. But let's try it. It just really saddens me the culture that exists where everything council or professional is bad. I think it's sad to treat a group of folks who have chosen to dedicate their careers to the movement like this.

In our council, we don't get 99% of the services from volunteers. Yes, volunteers handle things like training, camporees, day camp, etc. But, anything having to do with registration, Eagle paperwork, most Council Camp upkeep, and Summer Camp is done by professionals. I'd be game for that - let's cut the staff by 75%. Here's my guess how that goes... Our councils sound like they are similar in size. We're a council of about got about 26 professional staff at any given time. Looking over the staff list, it looks like it breaks down as: - Scout Executive - 1 council registrar - 2 office staff - 2 finance and accounting - 2 camp staff - 2 in program support - 12 in field service - 4 in development A 75% reduction would mean a staff of 24 becomes a staff of 6.5. I'll round up to 7 people. That becomes: - Scout Executive - 1 registrar/accountant/office staff - 1 camp staff - 1 in program support - 3 in field service I think we''d see a very different level of professional support from the council as a result. I suspect our relationship with the council would become more like our relationship with National. I'm just guessing, but I doubt we'd ever see a DE. The DEs will all be focused on things like creating new units. With no more development team, I think the days of free camping at council camps would end. We might even see a council registration fee. The flip side, is that I think districts might actually flourish. Today, our DE is really the glue that makes our district work. Remove the DE and the district would struggle for a while. Troops would have to begin to work together in a more concerted way if they wanted stuff like camporees to still happen. Some would fail, but some would succeed. That might actually be a bonus. These are just my guesses. But, again, I'd be willing to try and see.

Welcome to Scouting. Thank you for volunteering! It sounds like you're enjoying Scouting and will have a tremendous impact on the Scouts in your den. In my experience, Packs all have a certain culture. Coming in and trying to change things can result in lots of extra work for those other volunteers around you. That's when leaders get frustrated. As a new leader, my recommendation would be to attend the meetings and learn. During that initial time, attend the meetings and see what goes on. You will very quickly go from being the new leader to one of the experienced folks in the room. Having been there will be very helpful in a few months when the next group arrives. Having a bigger impact on the pack is easy once you figure out what the Cubmaster is trying to do. Figure out his goals and how you can align yours with the CM's.

That's correct. In most councils the registration fee goes to National. The local council gets none of it. The funding model for local councils is funny. They provide the bulk of services to local units, but then generally raise money outside of the troops to support that. I can only gather that there is a historical reason for this. I don't love what this leads to. Yes, I wish the council never asked for money. But, short of every family spending another $150 to pay for the council, I'm not sure what else to do.

Both the BSA and GSUSA have seen significant membership declines. Some of this is undoubtably societal.

I understand that some packs have a Cubmaster/den leader program meeting and a separate committee meeting. The committee is just business talk. Unless you're a huge pack, I like the combined model myself.

In our pack, we always wanted the den leaders to attend. So much of what we covered involved them. Pack meeting plans, campout plans, join Scouting plans, advancement, etc. These always had some impact on, and needed the involvement of, the den leaders. So, we were glad to have them. If your pack is organized in a way that you cover this in a different forum, then it may be less important.

Thanks for all the thoughts in response to my last set of questions on this. My basic thinking going in was that there would be things we can make sure we do in a troop's program that will put the boys in situations that develop these traits. I do see the other line of thinking - that it's the myriad interactions and decisions a scout makes in the context of simply being in the program that do that. That's something for me to think about. BTW - I hope that no one misunderstands my comments about the mom's being involved. I'm very appreciative for what they do and am glad to have them. Some of my absolutely favorite Scouters are moms. If anything, it was just thinking through the idea that mom's in the program have an impact on this topic too. It just got me to wondering if perhaps there were some things we'd stopped doing along the way that maybe we didn't even realize.

I'm so very sorry to hear your frustration. I fully understand being frustrated and burned out. I've had such a frustrating experience in my role in the troop. It wasn't until recently when I decided to walk away from the troop and focus my Scouting energy other places that I've even begun to get some excitement back. I'm also sorry to hear about your experience with money & the council. I've got other non-profit volunteer experience and one thing I've learned is that money is always important. A council consists of full time paid employees - folks who don't have a job if the FOS presentations don't come in. Summer camps close when the money doesn't come in. This isn't a for profit entity, but they have to pay the bills. The scouts in my troop pay $0 every year to the council. Yet, we have a DE, a professional staff, and a camp to use for free. When we helped organize a camporee a few years a go, the adults were incensed the $3 a scout was going to be council for overhead. Your council does sound a lot more political than mine. Our council leaves the district alone. Short of someone really awful, I cannot imagine the council pushing back on any volunteer appointment. They are just happy that anyone is showing up to do the district jobs I think. Yeah - they don't provide much in the way of training - but I'm OK with that. We adjust. Again - sorry to hear about your really awful experience. Scouting needs all the dedicated volunteers it can find. Driving folks off is a shame.

I'd not seen the form. That is very specific. Interesting to see all the hoops for and early adopter program that heads things off by 6 months or so. They should've just done it from the start. Take your licks once and be over it.

I think we agree. So how you structure the kids at a particular rank is not known to the BSA. A pack doesn't even have to pretend. Just find a male & female to run a den and give the kids the same den number. BTW - not suggesting that a scout leader should be dishonest or anything. Just fully expecting that operational realities will trump the theory.

I'm sure it's just a matter of time. My guess is the most everyone will ignore it anyways. If I recall correctly, there's reporting of who is in which den during recharter - so it seems easy to forget about.

Thanks for the feedback so far. This is helpful. To provide some more context. I've got no idea what's going to happen with our troop in a year or two. Will we be co-ed, will we be boys only, no idea. I'm not concerned with either outcome as we'll adjust and run the best program we can. When I read the original article, my thought was "yep, makes sense." I've got a son and two daughters. I don't really raise them differently - that all get the same feedback and opportunities from me. I teach my daughters how to use power tools and my bring my son to the ballet. But, I can clearly see there is a biological component to their behavior and development. I'd be lying if I said there was not. So, as a parent, I walk a line. I encourage their natural traits, but provide every opportunity to cross-train (so to speak). Again, when I read the article, I felt like "yep, this makes sense". However, it's written like so many other articles of this type - it's a lot of identification of the problem, some hand wringing about how we're going off the rails as a society, and then very little about what to do about it. So, I'm stuck. As a Scouter, I only have to guide a program for boys today. So, I don't have to worry about how my program today addresses the traits and needs of girls yet. Again, that may change someday, but it isn't my concern right now. So, I feel like I'm the position to do something about the masculinity question. We do what you describe Tampa Turtle. Yet, I also notice that many of our most active volunteers are moms. In fact, just about every committee position is a mother. Dads tend to be ASMs. But, most of them are pretty busy and are not all that active. So, I'm wondering if we're really all that masculine as a unit. It's honestly the moms that are pushing the troop to do things. They don't want to micromanage the boys - but they want to see the boys doing stuff. The moms are honestly way more into boy led than the dads. If our troop was run by the dads alone, we'd show up in the parking lot on a Friday afternoon and wing every camping trip. Honestly, the adults in our troop are a lot like the way that folks describe many venture crews. The moms get stuff done. The dads just kinda show up. So, this brings me back to the basic question. if we wanted to make sure we're promoting our boy's masculine traits, just what would you do? The teamwork idea makes a lot of sense to me. Another I've thought of is fostering competition that drives teamwork. Another is pushing the boys to take more leadership roles on.

I think I'm looking for something a more in terms of program today. We've been a troop for 25+ years. I've got no idea if we're teaching these guys to be masculine or not. That's what I'm trying to put my finger on. Just what kinds of things should we do in our program to make sure we're teaching these young men to be masculine?

I'm still somewhat lost on the specifics here. I like facts & figures - probably why I'm a CC. I still have a "boys only" Boy Scout troop. I've got an opportunity to focus on teaching these guys to be masculine. What things should we be doing to help ensure that?

I'm not aware of a policy that would be against it. Giving a gift card would be appropriate in my book. It's not really any different than the pack buying him something. Myself - I'd prefer a gift that said something about Scouting and my time in the pack. A card signed by everyone, something special special to your pack, or something from my time as Cubmaster. Maybe a picture of me from my first pack meeting or camping trip. Or perhaps something practical I'll use everyday. Years ago someone gave me a ridiculous key chain. I use it everyday and think back fondly to when it was presented. I think I'd sit around with some leaders and brainstorm about memorable stories about the Cubmaster. See if anything neat pops out of that.