perdidochas

I don't think that a Scout Leader would be prosecuted for taking a digital device away from a minor Scout, provided that he/she states that it will be returned to the Scout's parent. That is what school officials in my county do all the time.

I think that you need to read the description before jumping to a conclusion. The price seems to be reasonable for the amount of silver contained. From http://www.scoutstuff.org/BSASupply/ItemDetail.aspx?cat=01RTL&ctgy=products&c2=NEW&C3=&C4=&LV=2&item=CAMPFIRECOINS&prodid=CAMPFIRECOINS^8^01RTL& Each heirloom-quality, 1" diameter coin contains one troy ounce of .999 fine silver and is die-stamped to highlight one of the 12 Points. Each coin's outside ring on front is inscribed with "A Scout is" at top and "Boy Scouts of America" at bottom. The reverse features a ghosted etching of a fleur-de-lis behind the best description of the Scout Law-"Words to Live By". Each coin is packaged in a protective acrylic capsule and placed in a leatherette gift box.

I've been Advancement Chair for about a year. The only thing you can add to what you are doing is that on occasion (maybe quarterly) I print out progress reports. I generally do a patrol or two each week, and get the boys to make sure they keep up to date with me, and ask them what their goal is.

I roll the tent, stuff the sleeping bag and the hammock tarp and hammock.

Beavah, The Constitution made provisions for those born before the Constitution was ratified. G Washington, etc., were allowed to be president per the Constitution. "No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty five years, and been fourteen Years a resident within the United States." I'm not a birther by far. I think it's a ridiculous idea (and honestly, the Clinton political machine would have dug up any information on this). There is no doubt that Obama's mother was an American citizen. I doubt very much that Obama renounced his citizenship as an adult, and it seems to e sketchy legal grounds to imply that if his parent's renounced his citizenship. That said, I think it's an extremely cynical political ploy on Obama's side to keep allowing the birthers to seem like moonbats, when he could stop this in about 5 minutes. I'm tired of hearing about the issue, and wish Obama would simply release the documents.

The fingerprinting has to be done at approved places, the background check by an approved company. The cost of $80 is it.

Twocub, Good points. However, in the anecdote you told about the autistic boy, wouldn't it have been better if the man had introduced himself to Den leader when he came up and joined them? Would have resulted in a lot less consternation. When I was WDL, I had one uncle that would take his nephew camping. The nephew lived with the grandmother (Uncle's mother), and wouldn't have been able to camp otherwise. I didn't feel it was my place to say anything about that.

Sounds like the Den Leader raised a brat.

Try hats, changing to sleeping clothes (I like polypro long underwear), another layer (I have a fleece sleeping bag that I put inside the el-cheapo 40 degree bag I use).

I've got no problem with EDGE. It's a good generic solution for people without teaching experience. Should work fine for the boys.

Rockford, It's part of Life Rank requirements as well: While a Star Scout, use the EDGE method to teach a younger Scout the skills from ONE of the following six choices, so that he is prepared to pass those requirements to his unit leaders satisfaction. a. Second Class7a and 7c (first aid) b. Second Class1a (outdoor skills) c. Second Class3c, 3d, 3e, and 3f (cooking/camping) d. First Class8a, 8b, 8c, and 8d (first aid) e. First Class1, 7a, and 7b (outdoor skills) f. First Class4a, 4b, and 4d (cooking/camping)

I was registered as a WDL for my younger son's pack and committee member for my older son's troop. As long as different units are involved, there is no problem with being registered with more than one position.

Thanks for all the input. I think my first action is going to be asking the Catholic Committee on Scouting. We've got a camporee coming up this weekend, so I think I'll try to talk to some of the other troop leaders who have Catholic churches for their CO. I'm a parish member of our CO, and I really like having my boys in a Scout Troop sponsored by our local parish. The committee is thinking about changing CO's, which I would not like.

Beavah, EDGE matches up (not perfectly) with most general methods of teaching. There is nothing about it that's radically new or different. That is what I base my claims on. There is no logical reason I can come up with that EDGE wouldn't work for most trainers and most students most of the time (of course there will be situations when it isn't appropriate, that's true of any model). Yes, EDGE is a simplistic model that doesn't take everything into account. A more experienced teacher shouldn't need it, and will use a much more sophisticated model. However, for use by boys in teaching scout skills, it will work. There is nothing in it that is radically different from the way most people teach things. From reading your posts about it, I think you envision it as the following: 1) Explain--spend half an hour explaining how to do it, with the students sitting down in a lecture situation. 2) Demonstrate-spend half an hour demonstrating the skill, again, with the students sitting down in a lecture situation. 3) Guide--spend five minutes guiding in how to do the skill 4) Enable the students to show the skill once. The training on EDGE (based on the PDF for the trainer to use, not personal experience sitting in on a training) says that the explanation should be no more than 10% of the time spent. It should be brief. Demonstrate should possibly be a bit longer. Most of the time should be spent in Guiding and Enabling. The order isn't fixed in stone, and there is nothing wrong with doing several explanations and demonstrations in using it.

I'm a committee member in a Troop sponsored by a Catholic Church. Our diocese requires that all volunteers get fingerprinted and take the Church's YPT. Not a big deal at this time (other than the extra time), but starting in August, our Troop (or the prospective new volunteers) will be required to pay about $80 per leader for fingerprinting and background checks. Are any other troops in FL thinking about changing CO's over this? We are, because it's going to cut into our budget (either personal or troop). According to our SE, our diocese (Pensacola-Tallahassee) is the last in the State to do this, and the rest of FL has been doing this for years. Can any other FL troops enlighten me about this? How do you get around it?

Of course EDGE has basis in the real world. It's just an acronym for 4 things that good trainers incorporate in training. Tell what you are going to teach them, show it, guide the learners through it, and give them a chance to do it in a real situation. Now, in the "real world" or academic world, is there an idea known as EDGE. No, there's not. Does that make EDGE useless and invalid. No, it doesn't. Again, is it the best model, no, but it's not the worst either.

Beavah--you are creating a strawman version of EDGE. For the square knot requirement using EDGE (Tenderfoot requirement): Explain--square knot is used to join two pieces of same-sized rope together around an object. Demonstrate--tie a square knot. Guide--Work with the student to tie the knot. May need to re-demonstrate, etc. but that's part of the real EDGE (not the strawman EDGE). Enable--Give the student a chance to use the square knot for real. (maybe tie a bundle up with it). No talking in front of an audience. No time for an ADD boy to get bored while seated.

I think the best answer to your quandary is committee member. That allows you to see the inner workings of the troop, and help it along, without the temptation of turning it into Webelos III for your son. I was a Den Leader for both my sons (at different times in their Scout career) and was the WDL for their second year for both. I am also Advancement Chair for the troop they joined. I like being a Committee member rather than a "leader." I get to help behind the scenes, but don't have the responsibility of being there all the time. Camping as an adult with Boy Scouts is a great experience, and much more fun than Cub family camping. First, don't have to do most of the work. You have to help the other adults as a semi-patrol, but that's much easier than being responsible for a family at camp. Very relaxing sort of camping, in my book.

Acco40, Some schools have the teachers teach adjacent grade levels. For example, 1st and 2nd. I can see the advantage of either way. I was a WDL for two separate groups of Webelos II. The good thing is that I did get better at some aspects of being a WDL. The bad part is that I didn't know the boys nearly as well in my second group. (I had been the Bear and Web. I leader of my first Web. II den, and had been the Tiger Cub Den Leader of my second Web. II den (several years later)).

""A few more years and a Scouter's lifetime career might be filled just by taking mandatory training.... " It does seem to be heading in that direction. I plan to retire before that happens." That's why they pay us the big bucks....

Beavah, Good suggestions. I think the teaching requirements for Life Scout are part of that whole apprenticeship model, at least if the prospective Life Scout has mastered those skills.

J in KC, Well said. Some methods work to teach some people, some to teach other people. Some methods work with certain teachers, others with other instructors. EDGE isn't a bad framework to give Scouts to use. When they have more experience, they will figure out what methods work for them. Until then, EDGE is just as good of a framework as most anything. It's better than no guidance at all or hiring French Mimes. From what I can gather by reading this thread (and the one that spun it up), Qwazse is very text oriented in his teaching (and learning). Beavah is very hands-on. Both can be effective, but aren't effective for all teachers or students. For example, I can't learn how to tie complex knots by way of the handbook. Sure, I can copy the illustration with a rope, but it will be out of my head as quickly as close the book. If somebody shows me a knot without a use for it (i.e. miming how to do it), the same will happen--it will go in and out of my head . I need a combination of a demonstration and an explanation to learn the knot--and for the most part, I need three or four repetitions of that over a period of time (i.e. with at the least hours in between repetitions). I also concur with pchadbo--teaching a skill to another is one of the best ways to learn the skill to automaticity. That's why I like the Life Scout requirement of teaching Scout skills. In terms of OGE's post about Education majors, My observation is that education professors are either exemplary teachers or they are horrible teachers. Rarely are they in between. Also, to some degree I would make my own version of the old saying: "Those who want to, do, those who would rather talk about it, teach" I love science, and loved teaching about science. I don't much like actually doing science (as a researcher). Yes, I can do science, I would just prefer not to, I'd rather talk about it.

I'm with Skeptic. Unless you define camping as backpacking and canoe camping only, most Scouts camp a lot. Yes, it's mainly car camping, but it has the same purpose--get the kids out in the woods/outdoors doing something. My Tenderfoot who just completed his first year in the Troop has done 16 nights in a tent as a Scout since May 2010. (6 of those nights being summer camp).

So, Beavah, While you are teaching how to put up the tents, aren't you talking about what you are doing--maybe explaining/questioning about where to put the tent, etc.? In terms of claiming that you don't explain, of course you do. The thing is EDGE tells you that you need to tell why you are doing something, show how to do it, guide in doing it and giving them a chance to do it. The EDGE model per the Trainer's EDGE training says that it's not a linear model. You can explain while you are demonstrating and guiding. You can explain a part, then demonstrate, then guide then back to explain, and do the Enable the next campout. The strawman version of EDGE is that you do it in that order exactly, etc. Besides very simple skills, it shouldn't be done exactly as EDGE. Also, as the guide explains, the Explanation should be no more than 10% of the time spent in teaching the skill. The thing is, using the EDGE model is a good idea for teaching the scouts to teach a skill. It reminds them that they have to Guide and Enable, with Enable probably being the most important thing for long term skill retention. As you said, otherwise the scouts would tend to basically demonstrate and do little else. My basic statement on this is that I think you use the EDGE model whether you consider it to be that or not. It doesn't fit the textbook EDGE, but the text of EDGE says that there is no real problem with doing DEDGE or DEDEDGEG, the important thing is that all four steps are done.

Nice dodge Kudu, but you didn't answer the question other than with silly remarks. Again: Below is how I would use EDGE to teach putting up a tent: First, explain the basics of putting up a tent. (Explain) Second, show how to do it. (i.e. the scouts learning with their eyes) (Demonstrate) Third, have the scouts put up tents (i.e. the scouts learning with their hands). (Guide) Fourth, have several campouts where the scouts put up tents. (Enable) Please explain how that is not using their hands and eyes to learn how to set up a tent? How would you teach the new scouts how to put up a tent?