qwazse

Slip it behind the wedding picture!

Not the worst strategy, as long as the boys realize they’re lost before they get hungry.

I love all of the white Lake Erie Council scouters in the comments lining up to counsel this badge ... without even seeing the requirements. I wish them well.

That’s a definite disadvantage. Our previous SM was just hitting his stride when his job promoted and relocated him. It’s time consuming for the rest of us to train new SMs. I don’t really know how rough it is on the scouts, though.

That was roughly the case for our last three. I’m hoping this third one can stick it out a little longer. Getting him onboard has been rough due to scheduling conflicts with training. But, being an Eagle Scout and having already raised two Eagle Scouts kinda helps. His job is pretty demanding, so he’s not at every meeting and activity. But, that’s not the disadvantage that you’d think. Our ASMs can get occasional practice being “the guy”, and our SPLs have a good sense that it’s on them to keep everyone on task. Basically there’s less room to take everyone for granted.

I get the impression that calling WB an "advanced scoutmaster" course comes off as niche and exclusionary. Not in my mind. Growing up, my Webelos DL could have used some advanced scoutmaster training. He was a good guy, but we were a lot to handle. Same for a lot of moms. They need a lot of resourcefulness training (i.e. 1st Class Skills), and they'll hopefully get that one way or another. Then they need to face down a world of doctors, teachers, and (sometimes) law enforcement -- in addition to their children and spouse. But I know that moms in my area (and that includes quite a few progressive thinkers) shrink away from any thought of being scoutmaster-ish. So, we play this little game of "Sure, we'll miss you on the camping with us, but while we're out enduring the elements for your boys, can you line up a fundraiser or two?" So, we call WB "advanced leadership" so DLs, CMs, MCs, and CCs feel inclined to take it. But, honestly, the course does not have a lot of specifics on how to run committees or dens. It teaches everyone how to be better scoutmasters. Even if you aren't in that particular position, knowing the thoughts and disciplines of your local SM/ASM makes you excel at your position. Along those lines, I'm not thinking that a "1st Class Skills" per-requisite isn't the barrier one would think it to be -- even for the disabled scouter who would have to go through the hoops of getting a medical waiver like some of our scouts do. It's a way of giving adults the feeling that, as far as the troop in their neighborhood is concerned, they've arrived. Such scouters would walk into WB with the confidence and experience that they passed muster with the people they care about. I think it would narrow your pool of "eligible" scouters only slightly, but those scouters might be more enthusiastic about the course.

As long as you're not dealing with scouts of predominately Mediterranean origin. We're all cousins anyway.

Every now and then I've seen CM, DLs, and MCs swimming, tying gear down, taking care of injuries, saying oath and law, etc ... one or two could stand to get on a fitness program ... a few of them have forgotten their rights and responsibilities. But, the issue is not about particular skills, it is about joining a community that inculcates in youth a vision of the pinnacle scouting experience of hiking and camping independently with their mates. This forum complains about pack leaders who aren't ready for the troop program, but we give them zero scenarios where they are accountable to a local SPL/JASM. Prior to advanced training, they don't uniformly experience youth leadership because there is no formal scenario where they are required to experience it. They haven't all seen a near-finished product. The expectation that in two weekends you could get every course participant to norm successfully when they all have different baselines is absurd on its face. Even more absurd is that some "roundtable discussion on what leadership is and how the various leaders have seen it" would serve as an adequate simulation of the leadership modalities that the seasoned scout can deliver. This is about getting more people to and through advanced leadership training. And, IMHO, the impediment is that our scouters lack holistic basic leadership training. Someone like @5thGenTexan could have benefited from first being accountable to some seasoned scouts. He wanted to pick up a book. Forget all of those cheerleaders with their knots and tartans. This guy wants to know the material before diving in. So ... give him the Handbook. Let him decide if it's worth the effort to master trail to 1st class. If not, he won't waste time applying for the course. If yes, then he will have spent some time showing what he could learn on his own to SPL/JASM. (You know ... those older youth who are bored with troop life and want a challenge. One or two of them might stick around if they knew scouting's future depended on them training the next class of adult leaders.) They could in turn help him fill in any gaps. If that was a negative experience, then stopping there will save him the time, money and discouragement of a course that opens with "let's all put ourselves in a den ...."

For fear of repeating myself, my "master plan for scouter training" beyond youth protection would include no "basic" training should be considered complete until 1st Class Skills are signed off by an SPL/JASM. There are lots of reasons for this -- the simplest being that a scouter should be "all that" to scouts first and foremost. It's irrelevant what some district/council trainer says. But I digress. Yes, cubmasters, committee members, and crew advisors should master those skills. Some will need a district training weekend, others will need to visit a troop, or invite a skilled youth to their troop to help train them. The one-size-fits-all IOLS will be tossed aside. Position-specific instruction will come to the fore. Second, only open Woodbadge to "1st Class Scouts." This means that everyone goes through the trail to 1st class before the course starts. That's the starting point. Sitting with your patrol and reviewing what went well (or not) about your journey to 1st class rank. What kind of leadership did you experience along the way? Who along that trail would you like to emulate? Whose example would you want to avoid?

@TMSM, I hope #3 changes for you. The parents can certainly make it night and day. It was so easy for me to take the lead for summer camp this year because our committee did all of the sign-up and paper chase. Did they get some things wrong? Yes. Was it a big deal? No. Because we had some margin both in budget and cheerful parents.

Based on your experience with other scouters in your vicinity, you might be right. You've seen through some of the rah--rah mentality. They've grated on your nerves, and you're not inclined to keep knocking your head against the wall to get rid of the headache. The question then becomes: how have the scouts been treating you? Would you like that to continue?

We're civilian, and it's pretty much like your experience (except for no pedophiles, thank God). We try get a few years out of an SM, and the ASM's are half emeritus, half parents of current scouts. E.g., right now, our last three SMs have been parents of scouts, a former SM and myself (a former crew advisor) assist as the old guard. One ASM is a parent of a former scout, and the other a parent of a crossover. The same applies to our committee. Honestly, the best training I've had is around campfires with some of these old guard. There are advantages and disadvantages to longer term SMs who are stronger leaders. The advantage is usually the boys get a more uniform experience over time. The disadvantage is they get "locked in" to things working a certain way.

Slightly tangential: our new PLC had its first meeting. The concluded that Totin' Chip will be one of the activities to cover in an upcoming meeting.

Another more nuanced question: are scouts from one troop/crew permitted to attend another unit's campout as provisional guests of that unit? We've always taken this to be affirmative. An "official" example, most packs welcome den chiefs on a pack campout.

What is chartered is councils obligation: I know some COR's who object to their scouts camping with others. That generally comes straight from the CO. But many COs actually want to encourage their youth to share an activity or two. So, I take the agreement to read "What CO's have joined together, let no council put asunder."

It’s actually a great idea that units have been doing for a long time. BSA is trying to put and end to it out of a desire to ensure NCAP standards at all activities. It appears in he COVID FAQ because units were maneuvering to replace canceled council activities, this obviously undermines the council’s effort to limit community spread. So, to the specific issue of COVID cases in school, if your scouts associate with those students, you need to seriously consider suspending activities for two weeks from the time that student was infected.

A minority who don't understand plain English. One who also doesn't understand that the next POTUS could pack the court with a woman who they favor. What would they want the marketers at GS/USA do then? One just can't cow-tow to mobs. Even when they don't see themselves as mobs. There was a similar minority (including one of my scout moms) who were up in arms about what their sons were hearing live from POTUS last jamboree. Online, I defended a practice that, frankly, I am quite ambivalent about. I debriefed a scout upon his return. His mom had called him that evening afterword. He assured her that he wasn't expecting flashing red lights to suddenly appear the day he would first go to the poll. (I think he's eligible to vote this year.) This past couple of years, my faith in the youth of America has only grown. But you do bring up an important point. Twitter is the worst place for an organization to reside. A group should rely on their own website to produce, and defend, their content. On social media leaders of an organization should post under their own names e.g. Miss Firstname Lastname, VP of x GS/USA. That's the sheer genius of Bryan on Scouting, it's official, but personal too. So when he or another writer spouts off an opinion, I know it's him. When it's in Scouting Magazine proper, I know it's more official and impersonal. I don' have to like it, but I know darn well if I want to complain about it, the letter to the editor should begin with "Dear Sir/Madame, ...." (Okay, not really. But anything disrespectful will be deleted.)

Rubbish. Showing girls that they have the potential to adjudicate on the highest court of the land is no more political than having boys hear from the siting POTUS. I once attended a lecture by the director of our local Planned Parenthood. I can vouch that she was an excellent speaker. That is not a political statement. We held strikingly disparate views on specific issues and agreed on others; regardless, sitting in a hall and listening to her lecture is not political. It's called growth and understanding. The people who find political incorrectness in everything are making the "politicial" statement. Like I said, the only way to respond to such rhetoric is to double down and clear the air. A good example https://scoutingwire.org/chief-perspective-presidential-visit/

What if this isn't about optics? Suppose the GS/USA's litigation against Scouts BSA gets appealed all the way to SCOTUS. Could this be an attempt to get the judge on record with an opinion so she would in a few years have to recuse herself?

Oh, and I'm buying cookies from any scout who knocks or phones.

My gut ... If you are in a no-win situation, double down. If it's your thing, you still invite POTUS to jambo. If it's your thing, you still honor women who achieve greatness. And, you encourage the detractors in your entourage to do the same. Meanwhile, if you have a buddy who is replacing his classic Farah Fawcett poster with a full-size ACB, you call the helpline. I don't know which one, but he's gonna need it.

I think this is the advantage of working the patrol method in the face of contemporary youth protection requirements. If a troop with three independent patrols needs two registered 21+ year-old adults to chaperon each them when they are doing separate activities. It's unrealistic to have the SM and the same ASM at every patrol activity and meeting and troop activity and meeting plus round table and training -- even if those two adults are able to keep to themselves and maybe attend rountable online while the Flaming Arrows are refurbishing their Klondike derby sled. If you get parents to "buy in" to the troop as a federation of patrols, than a couple of those parents need to get with the program so that their child's patrol can be all it can be. It happens rarely in my troop, but there's nothing better than being able to drop in on a handful of scouts and responsible, trained, parents, do my thing, and hear that they can handle the rest of the evening. A half dozen trained adults yields a couple of really good ASMs (even if their official position for the time being is MC). Encourage a that many to onboard every year, and you have a handful of ASMs in your depth chart . Some stick around even if their child leaves the troop! Stepping up to SM for those adults is no longer a big step. This is not so true, I found, for crew advisors. Very few adults were willing to wear the co-advisor patch. From our older scouts, there's been some demand for us to restart the crew. I'm making it clear to the adults that our venturers will benefit from a younger advisor (i.e., not me), so any plans for a restart might involve a search for someone willing to cut away time from their career to assist me. Basically, I need a fellowship of young adults willing to be available for my venturers while I make sure they are fully caffeinated.

Fears are always uneven. The small patrol meetings might be the best compromise. How spread out are you all geographically? Is there a farm or local park where you could camp? What is your school district doing? All are driving factors. If you could walk to a park and meet with the PLC, that would help.

I’d be right over.

G2SS policy was meant to prevent stupid, which happens fast. It happens real fast in units that cut corners, of which not seeking guidance from council is a hallmark. This pack sought guidance because they were in the unique situation of available qualified supervision but lack of access to other district/council wide events: In other words, they were in full compliance with the very significant, but often ignored, page 1 of G2SS. Specifically this sentence: Why review reference material when “such activities” are said to be disallowed by the pack? Well, first is to understand why packs aren’t allowed to have their own events. Second is to understand what goes into holding a district event according NCAP standards and the Shooting Sports Manual. When a group of scouters can convince their SE that they can meet and exceed NCAP standards and the council would not otherwise be providing those same standards to those particular scouts, councils will try to work with those scouters. Otherwise we risk cubs and parents doing these activities on their own. Safety lectures (the most important part, I felt, for my kids to hear) will be missed, and bad things will happen. In other words, there’s the Guide to Safe Scouting and there’s actually scouting safely. We want the former to enable, not impede, the latter.