qwazse

Let's stop trying to infer from pictures (for all we know, the boys were busy practicing for an arm wrestling competition and suddenly noticed their SM's needed help assembling a new tent that one of them just puchased!), and boil this down to brass tacks: There are times when A: adults are fine with youth leading, and the youth are confident that they can do it. B: adults are fine with youth leading, but the youth lack self-confidence. C: adults are uncomfortable with youth leading, in spite of the youths' confidence. D: adults are uncomfortable, and youth lack the confidence to lead. E: adults are uncomfortable in their own leadership as well as the youths'. I would argue that this is not a continuum, take a snap-shot of any unit, Pack, Troop (girl scout or boy scout), or Crew and they will be getting one of these grades. Just like school, once you start making A's you get it, they tend to self-perpetuate. The right mix of adults and youth and this you have a Grade-A unit every minute of every day in the life of your unit. But ... B's happen. Most adults know when the unit is coming home with B work. If your unit generally makes A's , most youth probably know when they are slipping too. It takes a little coaching/cheer-leading to get away from those B's. And sometimes on the youths' side it takes asking for help. (I find the latter problem with my crew a lot. It is very hard for a teen to admit they need help.) On the other hand, it's all too easy to be satisfied with a 3.0 average. C's are where most packs and dens are by design. You have boys who think they can do anything, and adults who have spent a decade pulling them back from the brink of disaster. So, we've built a program where crushing defeat is unlikely (except perhaps during the pinewood derby:rolleyes:). But at some point that mentality has to end. Jr. high's mature very quickly, and their confidence begins to be well-placed. Even if they will take multiple tries to get that fire lit, you have to let them try. D's are a bad place. And many of us look at a snapshot of a troop at its worst and give their entire program that grade. I think that's because if the sampling is representative, a unit isn't long for this world. A D-average unit is full of youth sitting on their hands, adults who are distant and unapproachable, and a bully or passive-aggressive manipulator (youth or adult) can run the program straight into the ground. Just like parents should be in panic-mode with a report card like this, a unit needs to scramble and get help. A few years before I joined my troop, my SM had an SPL donated to him from another troop so that his program could be revived. It seemed to be a fairly common occurrence. Not sure how often that happens now, but I haven't seen it in my district. E's also happen. Some of the posts in this forum refer to scouters who were called to their position by their church, or the poor den leader who just had the job dumped on them because everyone else took one step back! Training and teamwork can remedy that quickly, but an E doesn't even have to be due to anybody's fault. A fatality can put a leaders in a serious funk, as can repeated failures because of circumstances (increased expenses, job-losses in the community, adults spinning off new units to avoid personality clashes). In situations like this, the CO might need to scramble to change leadership. Or, God bless them, the youth dig deep and remind us of what we're all striving for. What seems like a continuum is really folks failing to make straight A's all the time. Now there are many don't like calling anything short of perfect marks a failure. Personally, I'd rather know my shortcomings and receive unconditional love, rather than a pablum of "Don't worry honey, nobody's perfect."

When I was a scout and wanted to take First Aid MB at summer camp, my SM told me to take it from the SM in the adjacent camp (a retired Army medic). Not sure if the camp director ever knew. I got a partial and had to follow-up by bringing a buddy for a victim to demonstrate with to his front porch.

It's not really profit in the private corporation sense of the word. District events take time away from pro's doing other things (like promotions to potential chartered organizations and fundraising), so staff time has to be paid for. If the event is at a council camp, more demands are put on the facilities and the ranger. Those costs have to be justified. This is also how districts evaluate the quality of an event ... #s willing to pay to participate. Two many years of a low-revenue event, and it's time to free up that calendar slot for something different. Now, my crew has hosted events (Memorial Day flag placement) and the district volunteers have used resources to circulate flyers at round-table and forward E-mails, etc ... They haven't charged us for any hard-copies they made, secretary time, etc ... although by rights they could. So, somebody else's FOS or camporee payments went into helping my venturers with their service project. The specifications for how much to charge for what is not an exact science. There's just an overall budget that has to balance at the end of the fiscal year.

2C, I think you're spot on. I just want to point out that delaying Eagle doesn't necessarily mean the older scout will stick around. Son #2 is the last of his den to remain active. None made Eagle. A couple left the troop due to extenuating circumstances. The rest dropped at various ages between 12 and 17. None of those who dropped transferred to the crew (even though some of them had girlfriends who were venturers). So, although wanting to make rank is a good reason to stick with the program, I don't see it as doing all that much for retention. Rather, I think that boys who are confident that they will stick with the program aren't necessarily in a hurry to make rank!

The camp director would have to convince me of the need for me to be an MBC at camp rather than going off somewhere with my crew or troop. It would be a tough sell. Couldn't the boys just get instruction at camp then get my # and follow-up with me when they get home? Understand that I am largely satisfied with our camps teen MBCs. They were well supervised and mostly competent.

Two words that some of you aren't gonna want to hear: Unit commissioners.

I wouldn't necessarily pin this on LDS. All politics is local, and I've seen every manner of adult leader try to pull these shenanigans. Get enough of them in one district and suddenly everyone thinks they've built the better mouse-trap. Rattling off quotations from the advancement guide won't get you anywhere. Just try to make a compromise where you can get a photocopy (or, these days, simply picture) of a blue card. Use it to find your counselor or requirements to complete. If the boy completes them, either get it from the SM for signature, have the MBC (if he's in-troop) ask to see the blue card, or have the MBC sign the BC copy. If the man wants more work for himself, let him at it. Bottom line: your boy will know he's doing the requirements and will have the dignity to ask to be recognized for it.

Awesome goals, just need one translation. What's a "nights away permit"? I suspect BSA has something(s) similar. Just curious to what it amounts to.

Don't worry Mash, It's all fine and good until a stumbling drunk kid sits down at your crew's campfire! Before that happens, next time (and it might be years before you'll deal with the same issue again) run it up the chain of command. It's natural to assume that the other unit is managing their own house wisely and will keep to themselves. I've seen enough situations where it's just better to act swiftly and get everyone to tow the line. Because this behavior is sufficiently rare, it's also easy to be blindsided -- as my co-leader was when our "campfire incident" happened. She let the kid's leader escort him back to his camp. I would have insisted he be taken to the medic's station, informed the camp director, and try to confirm that there was nobody passed out in the woods with alcohol toxicity. As it was, I took notes and forwarded the details to the director It doesn't sound like your situation was anywhere near that calamitous. But parents can be naive, a cooler is not a locker, boys see more than most of us realize, and nights can be very long. We all could use protection from our own stupidity from time to time.

Absolutely, the boy should have responsibility over his own blue cards Partial MB's may be lost by the boy, in which case he starts from square one. But they may be lost by the SM just as readily. My brother resents to this day that his SM left town with no forwarding address and all the troop's records of his advancement were lost. Your son should at least ask for a copy. And, the district should have a list of MBCs. It doesn't really matter if he goes to a different counselor to complete the badge.

Burka shaming! To the core of my Arab-American heart, that has to be a thing! What else ... Uniform police shaming! Knot shaming! Bead shaming!

OS ... thanks for the reply. Great perspective with lots to think about, but ... I would suggest minimizing the drama about Youth Protection and Hazing. Sitting with a scout in a public location (especially with troop adults dropping by) for a couple of hours is not a YP violation, and assuming no allergies, eating a PB&J sandwich is not hazing. I get the make-everything-work-for-everybody strategy, it's great when that happens. But, sometimes boys go through that effort to contain costs, and nobody shows up for a cheap night out. It's a stinkin' lifeboat problem. Save 1 and lose 5! I wish I could say every story I've heard of fronting cash outright helped develop a boy, but it just as often helps develop a lech. Likewise, I wish I could say every story I've heard of tough love helped instill self-reliance, but just as often it helped instill self defeat. Knowing which story a fella's really in is very very hard.

SMM, great stuff, those venturing videos. Guess how many boy scout leaders are required to review them? How often are they shown at roundtable, etc ... ? I think most camps have a "one strike, you're out rule" regarding harassment. Most leaders hear it at evening meeting day 1, and maybe if they have a moment those leaders will warn the boys who they think most vulnerable to such behavior (along with dozens of other announcements). But, right when you think your best boy would never ... the potty-mouth opens. Meanwhile, most camps would give a unit a couple of days to shore up its dress code. So, even if the young women's leaders were trying to be compliant, it's setting 1 in every 50 boys up for failure. Regarding your example of the objectifying behavior of your boys once they were out of earshot of those college girls. I think most of us here would handle it much the way you did. ("Hey guys, what's it say on page 118 of your handbook?") But on the outside chance any of the ladies heard what the boys said, would you have sent them home? Most scouts and scouters aren't prepared for that kind of swift action against their boys, but that's what they are face when adults let scenarios like these play out. And summer camp has traditionally been a place where leaders could let their guards down. Does swift justice really allow boys and girls to correct their behavior so as to build mutual respect and understanding? Troops aren't prepared. In fact some of them are primed to look down on Venturing. Crews need to be sensitive to that. Girls do need a way to demand respect, without it wrecking a boy's entire week. I'll join you at my crew's fire circle (they're pretty good at getting those things lit, no matter the weather) ... just as soon as I hand off to my CC the list of scouters who should be recommended training.

And, if you are thoroughly rankled by someone doing it wrong ... you're probably doing it wrong.

It's not a matter of picking favorites. It's a matter of sharing favors, of receiving a thing in the spirit in which it was given and responding accordingly WITHOUT compromising. This isn't all that new ... It seems St. Paul had to address this issue with Timothy regarding food offered to idols. (In the ancient Mediterranean, eating spoke louder than words. ... Actually, it's probably true there today as well. ) Basically, he said if no one told Timothy a meal was a sacrificial offering, no-harm no foul. But if someone wanted to make it an issue, he should respectfully decline the meal. We also know that Paul gave thanks before meals in front of a pagan audience, but that seemed to be after he had sailed for days through storm with everyone involved and showed real leadership in the process. He also spoke in pagan forums, but only after being asked to after being overheard proclaiming his "good news" with other monotheists in the marketplace. There are other examples, for example, William Carey began an end to the Indian practice of Sutee (widows throwing themselves on the pyre of their deceased husbands), not by converting anyone to Christianity, but rather by studying Hindu writings and consulting with Hindu scholars and gaining their assistance. And, similar actions by folks of other persuasions fill our history. In short, the way around this problem is not through carefully chosen words. But through getting to know and trust everyone involved, understand their fears and apprehensions, let them know they are welcome as is, and work in ways that build trust. So, on a day-to-day level this kind of thing works in a small group of, I don't know, about eight boys. Some hints: If your "scouts own" is taking more than 15 minutes, you're probably doing it wrong. If you're saying "We pray in Your name" rather than "I pray in Your name as others here reach in they way they trust", you're doing it wrong. If you're saying "take of your hats" rather than "please remove all non-religious headgear" or "please assume a posture of reverence according to your tradition", you're doing it wrong. Little things like that go along way in recognizing "Hey, we're out here as strangers in these woods, trying to bring a little of our faith to bear on the day. It oughta be a little strange and different -- yet mysteriously comfortable -- for all of us." In larger crowds, like Rick says, you need to be clear about what's on the agenda. Nothing should be mandatory. And you should schedule it for a time where people actually choose to gather, not while they are waiting to be there for something else.

My only suggestion is get to know the training coordinator if you are going for anything that involves certification (e.g., CPR, leader-specific training, etc ...). I've had various problems getting certifications registered. Not everyone records things in an efficient or orderly manner. It's hard enough to chase these things down when you do have a rapport with council staff. Being a guy calling from out-of-council can make it harder. Regarding program for your youth, if you a participating in a neighboring district's activity, be sure to call ahead and ask if there's anything your adults could do to assist in administering the activity.

I suppose that's fair. Most of us (no offense to my fellow Panther alumni) considered the Mountaineer as the Boy-Scout-of-Every-Year.

Just saw that I never posted this, but it still kind of flows with the rest of the conversation. This is where "know your audience" comes in. (That includes recognizing God as part of the audience.) Sometimes the 100% Evangelical Christian audience can be the most critical, and getting help from your youth pastor was the right tact. As LeCastor testified, going it alone is thoroughly overwhelming. In fact, my men's group includes a pastor/missionary who often fields sermon passages to us. Iron sharpens iron, etc ... You do understand that "spirit", "breath", and "wind" are the same word in Greek and Hebrew? The phrase seems to be getting on your nerves because Christian orthodoxy is very specific as to the person-hood of the Holy Spirit, and because of our secular understanding of weather etc... a reference to wind now sounds like mechanism more than maker/messenger. That wasn't always the case. But, E441, as a post-modern Christian (which distinguishes your generation from many of us "moderns" on this forum) you have your guard up against anything that would inadvertently venerate mechanism over Maker. When we read a "cute metaphors" you read "pagan tendencies", and you don't want to be responsible for sending someone down a path you would never walk. (Note to pagans: not trying to downplay the importance of the animistic leanings to your faith .. just trying to help a Christian boy walk the fine line that welcomes everyone without compromising his duty to God.) This is where that scout motto comes in. Be prepared by taking time in advance of the service to talk to participants of minority faith. Ask them if and how they would like to participate, if something in the script is patently offensive, and if they can suggest away around it. I have found that this has really brought me closer to fellow scouts and scouters.

I think friendliness is a hallmark of this forum. I may stridently disagree with about half of what's said here, but I would be glad to have any of you around my campfire (so long as you bring a little wood for the fire, or spin a good yarn as we watch the embers die ). Just like any real campfire, I'll take my leave when someone resorts to cussing. But, I also love tangents, and may stick around longer than need be to follow one ... So, thanks moderators, for keeping us focused on the task of scouting.

Working on Cit. World, son #2 actually took the time to interview a friend who was a scout in another country. It wasn't a conversation he would have had otherwise. I'm not against a little bookwork in a MB. Why? Because one of the essential steps in learning a skill (as you'd all know if you ignore BSA's EDGE method) is referencing. But I agree that councillors who are passionate about their topic trump a parent who is putting his/her hat in the ring because they are more passionate about their boys' convenience.

LC ... just let them know that there are troops out there (one in Steeler country in particular) that dropped FCFY and have the same percentage of boys making Eagle. Ken, sounds like we're opposites. Mainly because we already have a program without MBs. It's called Venturing. The recognition rates are disappointing. If I had my druthers. I'd keep the MB program, and ditch service hour and EDGE requirements. For folks that are really EDGE addicts, create a Pedagogy MB, if they insist on it being required, require it for 1st Class and increase the number of MBs required for Eagle. While we're at it, replace the Eagle service project with a Service Projects MB, require it (could be earned any time in the scout's career) and increase the number of required MBs for Eagle. That way when folks harp about why kids take until 18, the kids can say "Look, gramps only had to earn 21 MBs, I have to earn 23!"