Beavah

Where and when did people get the notion that MBC's could only be attached to a troop? The whole concept of MBC's is that the boys, with a buddy, reach out and contact adults who are not familiar to them. This was to teach the youth how to properly conduct themselves with adults. Yah, I'm curious. How many of yeh out there pretty much use only in-troop counselors? What do yeh see as advantages and disadvantages? Are yeh restricted by your CO's policy from using district folks? For those that are still making rich use of district counselors, how do yeh encourage it? How do yeh make it work? How maintain quality? Do yeh find the district maintains a good list? Advantages and disadvantages? Beavah

Yah, watching this thread progress is like watching a train wreck, eh? It's sad and ugly, but hard to look away. To my mind, da issue is so politically and emotionally charged that I expect real objective research is impossible to conduct or to publish in da U.S., if not the entire world. Those philosophy of science folks tell us that researcher bias begins with what they choose to investigate in da first place. I think yeh see that, for example, in some of da folks going way out of their way in what seems like an awfully stretched effort to ascribe homosexuality to genetics. On da other side, I think yeh see it in stretched efforts to link homosexuality to pedophilia. Having more experience with people and politics than with research, I'd hazard that any of da loaded, hard questions being raised here would ever find funding, or pass human subjects review, or survive da political side of the peer review process. It's all just too charged an atmosphere. As the climate scientists demonstrated, science and politics don't mix well, eh? And this issue is more ambiguous and more emotionally charged than da climate debate. I agree with Mr. Boyce. Da term "homophobe" is just another ugly pejorative meant to discount someone's view. Generally speakin', I think da only way to ever make sense of things is to stop all of the yammering like that so that da issues can be addressed with a level head and a sense of compassion. So I reckon that da truth is a more subtle and complex one, eh? Certainly, there seem to be striking similarities between da multi-partner behaviors and power relationships in some male homosexual communities and da multi-partner behaviors and power relationships of serial homosexual ephebophiles like some of da priests mentioned. Admitting that doesn't diminish that there are also some committed long term monogamous gay male couples, or that there are similarities between heterosexual multi-partner behavior and heterosexual statutory rape. For my part, I believe lived homosexuality is a serious personal sin. But then lots of things are personal sins, eh? I don't necessarily want da government involved in all of 'em. Or even the Boy Scouts . Jesus considered hoarding wealth to be a grave personal sin ("harder for the rich to get into heaven than a camel to pass through the eye of a needle"), but that doesn't mean I support government confiscation of wealth, or excluding da well to do from Scouting. We do well to try to dismantle da adversarial politics and legalisms around these issues so that we can see straight. From all sides. Beavah

The SE can do his thing with the FOS campaign, but that has zip to do with our boys earning money to pay their weekly dues and camp fees. Yah, seemed like this was a good thread to spin off to stop da hijack of the previous thread. I've seen some versions of "a Scout is Thrifty" over da years that made this notion of "a scout pays his own way" into a big deal, eh? Seems to depend a bit on da COs and adults involved; there's a stronger history of this value in some Protestant traditions than others, and yeh don't see it nearly as strong in other faiths. I've never been able to figure it. From da weekend campout at the BSA camp or state park to the Philmont Trek to da lights in the local meeting hall, scouts never really pay their own way. They're subsidized constantly by FOS donations, out of pocket expenses by adult leaders, and the generosity of da adult leaders time. Even when the lads are fundraising, we all know that they're rarely providing real value. From overpriced popcorn to first aid kit sales, folks are really paying to support Scouting, not because they really need or want da stuff that much. Then yeh add to it that by and large, parents pay their scouts bills, eh? They buy the rain gear and the backpacks. They shell out for Jambo and Philmont and dues. Directly, or indirectly buy buying a bunch of popcorn themselves. So I can't help but think this scout pays his own way thing is anything but a myth. I'm also not convinced it's a good lesson for the lads. We want these future corporate leaders and future parents to know that it's their duty when they reach those points to provide opportunities for others, especially young folks. Nothing teaches that better than knowing that great experience yeh had on top of Baldy was because of da deep generosity of a businessman who cared about kids. So creating da fiction that a boy is paying his own way works against our goals. To me, school is valuable. I support schools with my tax dollars and with my contributions to my alma mater. Kids in school therefore never pay their own way. To me scouting is valuable. I support scouting with my contributions, so that kids can experience scouting without having to pay the full cost... Or any cost, if that's what it takes. I just don't see anything wrong with that. Yah, yah, it's good to have the lads do some service and some fundraising, to help their fellows in need, to learn some work ethic, some salesmanship, and to give 'em direct experience with the generosity of their community. There's some good educational reasons for the boys to do some labor. But that's it, eh? Educational reasons. It just ain't practical for most boys to pay for either their K-12 education or their trip to Fort AP Hill. Providing those opportunities to the young is the duty of the old. And the young should learn that. My two cents, anyways. What are yours? Do any of yeh really have the lads pay da full cost of things? Any councils really expect the boys to earn the full $1.5 - $3K for Jambo fees? Does everyone turn down the person who doesn't want any cheese popcorn but wants to give money to support scouting without getting anything (or at lest anything they don't need)? Beavah(This message has been edited by Beavah)

Yah, corporations are just groups of people, eh? Like other groups of people, they care about da community or at least about their image in the community. I don't see any particular difference between twisting the arm of a neighbor to get an unnecessary car wash, a few extra garage sale trinkets, or some hideously expensive popcorn and making a request of a corporate donation officer. At least in da case of the corporation, they're getting something of real value - public goodwill and positive exposure. That's more of a value than even da chocolate covered popcorn . And are yeh really telling me that your adult leaders don't pay for anything out of pocket? Yeh might be a first . Beavah

Yah, lots of reports like this out there. Word is that a few of the pilot councils have abandoned the mandatory training pilot because they kept runnin into these system errors. I hear they're trying to work on da issues, but I'd expect you'll see the deadlines continue to get pushed back.

Yah, I always love that one, FScouter. Yeh should try it on your SE during da next FOS season. Of course we are always soliciting and accepting money to help provide kids with scouting. I reckon it's safe to say that no lad has ever paid his own way. We celebrate da fellows like Waite Phillips who give generously so that boys may have experiences of great adventures that they'd never be able to achieve on their own or with their own resources. We call that "generosity", eh? It's something to encourage and be grateful for. Beavah

Yah, technically it's not kosher for a unit to solicit corporate donations, eh? Mostly because we don't want individual units interfering with FOS. Nothing will cheese off a SE more than losing a potential large donor because they've been nickeled and dimed already by a few units. However, it's just fine for a unit to accept free will donations made by individuals or corporations. Most often that happens when a parent in da troop has connections at the corporation (or is da owner!). I've seen a fair number of those, eh? Thing is, once your on a corporate donation list yeh tend to stay on, so often the donations continue well after junior has left the troop. And of course da CO can solicit monies for their youth programs and direct some of that to scouting. What's really not OK is endorsement type sponsorship, where da unit is doin' anything more than token advertising of a product or otherwise making it look like scouting endorses coca cola. That doesn't seem to be what you're talking about, though. Beavah

Yah, could be, O.T. Do yeh have any more questions, or did folks cover it for you? It's another program like Venturing, all male, wears the tan uniform with orange tabs, is sports focused, can earn Boy Scout ranks and awards. It's almost exclusively used by Mormon chartering partners, who break up their scouting by age to match their religious education program for boys. So Varsity is the age 14-15 program for them. I've also seen Varsity used occasionally by teams of a club-sport variety in rural areas, mostly just for access to facilities and insurance. Those don't usually use the uniform and Boy Scout advancement components. Beavah

Yah, perhaps it might have been more helpful to mention what exactly it was that yeh felt was inaccurate? We all make mistakes. Getting the right information is helpful. B

Yah, I reckon I lost you because I'm just being a gadfly, eh? The list was me compiling the summary of what other people were saying on that particular thread, eh? Trying to cut it down to short and pithy like acco's original list (which wasn't really his, he got it somewhere else). My main goal was that I didn't really feel acco's list worked very well, and that collectively we might come up with somethin' better. Me personally, I agree with yeh, EagleDad. I can usually get a sense for the character of a troop pretty quickly just by watchin' what's going on. Thing is, that's a sense that comes from a lot of years of experience, eh? It's not somethin' that an average parent will "get" in their first observation. Like as not, they'll see "chaos" where I see active, purposeful fun. Da numbered list was to try to capture things that sort of parent could look for. I'll come back 'round on my other thoughts either in that thread or after I finish some real work . Beavah

Yah, OK... an update... 1. Outdoors at least once a month. 2. There is good retention of older youth who have stuck around for the program and continue to be active. 3. The older youth are seen to be actively helping younger scouts, managing patrols, handling problems, directing the activities. 4. The adult leaders successfully rein in/redirect/re-educate interference by other adults. 5. Well established finances/financial planning. 6. Parents appropriately involved in support tasks that fit their expertise/interests. 7. Scouts, especially older boys, demonstrate personal success in other activities and a service-minded nature. Alumni go on to successful lives with a service trend; some alumni stay as ASMs or help out occasionally when back in town. 8. Good SM minute focused on ideals; kids buy in. You can ask a boy about doing the right thing and he "gets it". 9. No provisional patrols, ever. 10. There is good patrol spirit, scouts identify with their patrol. There are patrol competitions or at least friendly rivalries. 11. Advancement should be mixed; not all kids the same age should be the same rank, different boys should have different numbers and types of MBs. 12. Mix of in-troop ASMs and active parents. Not just one or two active adults. 13. Scouts buy into the troop uniforming standard. 14. Adults seem committed and enthusiastic. 15. Program activities offer variety and change somewhat from year to year. 16. Troop PLC conducts an annual planning conference (or some equivalent). 17. Troop runs at least one TLT/JLT experience each year that is fun and at least partly outdoors. Boys (not just adults) talk about it positively. Any more? Any edits? Beavah

Yah, none of da bicycle stuff in G2SS is boldface policy, eh? It's just a compendium of guidance and advice, which has to be adapted to your local circumstances and experience. IMHO da cycling stuff is poorly developed compared to other sections, and has not been revised on a regular basis. Treat it as rough guidelines, follow da Merit Badge requirements, and use your own judgment about the skills the lad has, the terrain in your area, the quality of his bike, etc. There's a reason why you're the MBC, eh? Yeh have the experience and local knowledge to make judgments like this. Counting the number of times bikers have been shown on wet pavement or trails in Scouting Magazine or Boys' Life over da years is left to the reader . I don't know of any units that have run longer bike trips that haven't at some point biked when it's wet or windy. That should probably read "is more challenging" rather than "unsafe". Just da way camping in the wind and rain is more challenging than the dry and sunny. Point is to know the kids' skills and their gear. Beavah (This message has been edited by Beavah)

Jeffrey H writes: Plan well ahead for your campouts so they don't get cancelled because of late reservations(e.g., campsites or facilities are full and the Troop can't get in). Our Troop seems to be falling into this pattern and we are not the campout/outdoors Troop we should be. We have good intentions, but poor follow-through. Our Troop is boy-led and our PLC plans the campouts and events calendar. However, the boys become discouraged when the Adult Leadership falls down on the reservations side of the planning. Reservation planning is led by one of our Troop Committee members with input from our Scoutmaster. It's not working well. In the last 6 months, we have had to cancel 2 trips and make a major site change on another because we waited too late. Yah, Jeffrey, sounds like da perfect time for the boys to take over making the reservations from the incompetent adults! Seriously. The boys should just do it. Nothing stops a lad from making a reservation. If a deposit is required, have the boy get a check from da troop treasurer and mail it. I think being deliberately incompetent as adults is a great way to get the boys to step up into leadership and planning, eh? Any other suggestions for Jeffrey? How does your troop or crew handle the reservation side of planning? Beavah

Yah, I'd say my answer is a qualified "yes." Qualified in part because I reckon we should always be humble and recognize that there are other great programs out there that also meet the needs of many kids, and partly because it's clear we don't have da depth of adult leadership to accommodate every kid without a decline in program quality. We see some evidence of that in how scoutin' is conducted in various stakes and wards where participation is mandatory and adults are recruited just to fill spots. But I can't tell yeh how many times at EBORs young men have talked about how Scouting more than any other activity really enhanced their lives, and made 'em who they are as a person. Of course if all boys were Boy Scouts we probably wouldn't see tragic tales like this one my news feed picked up today (yah, yah, I use da NPR news feed sometimes. Don't pick on me too much. ) http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=128954676 Beavah (This message has been edited by Beavah)

Yah, let's see... so far we have: 1. Outdoors at least once a month. 2. There is good retention of older youth who have stuck around for the program and continue to be active. 3. The older youth are seen to be actively helping younger scouts, managing patrols, handling problems, directing the activities. 4. The adult leaders successfully rein in/redirect/re-educate interference by other adults. 5. Well established finances/financial planning. 6. Parents appropriately involved in support tasks that fit their expertise/interests. Yah, Buff, I don't know quite what to do with yours, eh? Maybe yeh can come up with a few signs & symptoms that diagnose things like good patrol method?

Yah, you guys are all too smart . Let's say da criteria for success are those from the "Should all boys..." thread. That is to say, a "successful" troop is not based on numbers of youth. Instead it's based on the youth participants and their parents saying after several years of experience with da troop things like: "Five years later, my now 14-year-old son is fairly close to becoming an eagle scout.. I could not be more pleased and proud... It certainly has become the most important and best extra- curricular activity he has participated in thus far in his young life... He appreciates nature and the need for conservation and sustainability. He enjoys helping the younger scouts. He can happily be without creature comforts and technology for weeks at a time. And very importantly in today's culture, he can be at peace with silence. He has learned more about ethics and values in scouts than through sports, school, religious, and other activities and organizations." Stuff like that. Real outcomes for kids/young men. Of course, maybe that's a characteristic of a successful program too . Beavah

Yah, that's a good criterion, eh? Let's see if we can make the list objective enough to be useful in that context - either for a parent searching for a troop or a commish forming a general impression of things. Beavah

Yah, in da previous thread acco posted a list from somewhere of some characteristics of successful troops. I confess I didn't much care for it. A lot of da items I felt were pretty superficial, and I've seen many excellent troops that wouldn't fit the cookie cutter. But a few I felt hit da mark pretty well. So I'm curious if we could make a better list, eh? What are da core characteristics of a successful troop? Yah, yah, we all have our favorite peeves and prejudices, whether it's full uniforming or 300 feet of separation, but I think we all recognize that there are quite a few great troops out there that either aren't fully uniformed all da time or that don't camp 300 feet away all the time. So let's try to set those hobby horses aside and just focus on what we'd really expect to be fairly universal signs and symptoms of a healthy program. Beavah

Yah, sounds like a unit that's havin' some issues with adult support. Small troop, so relatively few adults to draw from. One adult has life happen and has to skip a campout and suddenly yeh don't have two-deep or enough drivers. So I think you're doin' the right thing by stepping up as a volunteer in an area where yeh feel you can help. I reckon we all know some kids who left Boy Scouting at age 18 having never earned Tenderfoot. Sometimes, it's just da pull-ups . Don't let advancement be your metric for judging a kid or a program. Look for whether those kids are learning and having fun. Usually when lads get behind advancement-wise in da younger years, it's because the adults or older boys just aren't focused on it. When that's the case two things happen - requirement completion isn't watched for and recorded, and book-worky type requirements that aren't a direct part of da troop program aren't planned in. So you'll find kids who really can light a fire and have done it several times with an unsigned book, and a lot of kids who are missing signoffs for things like memorizing da parts of the Scout Badge or knowing what EDGE means. So you can help as an ASM by helping corral adult and youth leaders to sign books or record things electronically, and then calling attention to things that are needed so da PLC and SM can think about planning them in. That can be a huge service, eh? All that paperwork can otherwise take a back seat to other urgent needs in a small troop. Just doin' that will be enough. No need to change or push advancement in other ways. It will happen naturally enough. As far as da canceled campouts, I reckon the troop just needs one or two more adults who are enthusiastic about camping with kids. Help your committee to recruit 'em to volunteer, and that problem will also go away. So nothin' too bad here. No need to be running off to another troop. I bet if yeh think about it, you can find da few additional hands your troop needs just among the parents of your son's friends. Beavah

Here we have the BSA...literally thousands of pages of regulations, requirements for badges, endless adult training and protection, etc. etc. etc. ...but no clear cut policy on what do to with Scouts that engage in drugs, tobacco, alcohol, violence, abuse, whatever? Yup. Advancement is just a national program material. Da instructions around advancement are part of that program feature. Just rules for a game. Training and YP stuff is da BSA's responsibility under the charter agreement. By contrast, serving youth and membership decisions are the responsibility of the CO, and we've got a lot of different COs. Some units, like I said, work with juvenile offenders. Every one of their kids would likely be expelled from another troop. Some units have a strong religious mission, and will expel families if they convert to a different faith. Some units have adult leaders who are bona-fide experts in youth drug treatment or psychological care. They can handle "problem" kids that other units can't. Other units are young and inexperienced, and probably should expel a boy who is consistently mouthy, just because they need to establish some norms and a comfort zone to build from. No way to write a uniform "policy," and no desire to do so. That having been said, I think we could do a bit better job helpin' leaders with youth behavior stuff. The materials for special needs kids are getting better, eh? A lot of adults just aren't experienced at working with groups of kids with different issues, and some training help and guidance is somethin' that's needed. Like I said, I think most inexperienced adults tend to hold on to kids a little longer than they should, because they overestimate their own ability to handle it. And because they have big hearts. I reckon most units draw a pretty hard line on da stuff like ADCmohegan and WestCoast mention. Criminal conduct will get yeh tossed from almost every unit. You'll see some difference on the borders with minor misdemeanors, perhaps based on who da victim is; petty theft from or a fight with a tentmate may be handled as an internal discipline matter where petty theft from a store during a trip will be more likely to get a kid bounced. Minor vandalism done as a poorly-thought-out joke at camp might get yeh a full day of service work with the ranger, where minor vandalism to anyone else would get yeh tossed. Most units will draw a pretty hard line on older-to-younger kid physical stuff or teasing, but be much more tolerant of younger-to-older kid stuff. An 11-year-old takin' a swing at a HS linebacker isn't likely to get more than a reprimand from the youth leader (or da natural consequence of being picked up and bodily carried to the SM ), where da linebacker takin' a swing at the 11-year-old would almost certainly be gone. That's my loose experience, anyway. Curious what other folks find in their troop or area. Beavah

Yah, what shortridge said, eh? Yeh can think of scouting in a sort of top-down way, where each level is responsible for "developing" the next lowest level. In that case, yeh are best appointing youth leaders rather than electing 'em. At least yeh have to impose conditions that do that sort of screening. Alternately, yeh can think of youth leadership as more of a collaborative, bottom up thing, where the boys develop themselves and each other. They seek out resources and offer help as needed. That's more of a traditional scouting approach. A PL who needs help with something turns to a patrol member or a fellow PL who has that skill, or seeks out an adult MBC or whatnot on his own. The structure of "getting developed" isn't formalized and fed to 'em. In that context, "natural" leaders in different areas tend to develop, and more kids participate more fully. It has a much more kid-like feel than da top-down SM-develops-SPL-develops-PL structure. I think that's the hardest thing for a SM to figure out unless they really had a good scouting experience themselves. Most adults are much more comfortable with the organizational chart "boss" model of top down, especially our military folks. So they force that on da kids program. It takes a lot of kid savvy talent to really encourage the personal growth and friendship based stuff that makes for real independent and mutually supportive PLs and patrols. Lots more group conversations than adult-driven "mentoring" conversations. And lots more trust in da ability of kids to step up and be responsible not just for activity tasks, but for their own structure and development. Beavah

Practically speakin', I think this is just different for different units. I know units and adults who felt takin' the Lord's name in vain is grounds for removal, and I know units that don't think anything rises to that level short of what would put the lad in prison (and then they'd still visit). Depends a bit on the mission of the CO and the sort of kids the unit serves, too. Heck, we have some juvenile offender specialty Venturing units. I think da real issue is honesty. Yeh remove a kid when you honestly recognize that your current adult leadership, youth, and parent community don't have da ability to meet his/her special needs, or when the youth themselves have honestly made a decision that implies separation. So that's goin' to vary. Some units with a lot of good kids, understanding parents, and very capable adult leaders can take on a few kids with very special needs or problems. That is good, honest labor... da work of the Just. Some units have adults who are barely makin' it handling the slings and arrows of ordinary lads; they don't have the spare resources to take on a special case, and when one comes up they'd best cut bait... otherwise that special case will bring da whole group down. As a group, I think scouters err on the side of overestimating their ability and not removing a kid that really should be removed. Takes some real strong character to step up on these things sometimes. Yeh see a lot of youth (& adult) behaviors that really tear units apart when a youth has been kept even though the unit can't handle him. But sometimes, a unit that has a lot of strength can handle a problem with great compassion. I saw somethin' a few years back on da web somewhere... a report from a SM who had a few kids caught using marijuana on a trip, and how the troop had kept the kids and truly changed their lives. But that's rare, eh? So how's that for a long-winded "it depends?" Beavah

So I have to ask...short of a reenactment of Columbine or VA Tech, exactly what does warrant removal from a troop? Yah, Engineer61's query merits its own thread I reckon. What do folks think? Beavah

Yah, I'd say generally most troops don't need an SPL. We have a heck of a lot of one-patrol troops out there (or troops with two patrols that really should be one patrol troops because da patrols are too small to be viable). Most of da rest of the troops are in the mid-sizes around BP's ideal mid-30s to 50-ish. At those sizes, an SPL might be helpful, but often isn't needed. Very few reach the size of Eagledad's old unit. Da thing I see with SPLs a lot is the sort of thing Eagledad hints at, with the "SPL being trained for the SM position." In adult run units, there's a sort of pretend youth run thing that happens where the SPL is taught to act like the running adult... essentially, like the Scoutmaster. Those units make this SPL-as-Scoutmaster thing their version of youth run. It works OK, but it really doesn't have the depth and power that a real youth run patrol program has, where there's a collaboration of equally strong PLs of different interests and skills. I think that's da easiest trap to fall into for newer SMs. Patrol method youth leadership is a hard thing to "get", but SM/SPL/Boss style is easier. Even the no-adults thing can be a trap, if by no adults we mean "run it as though there were adult-like controllers". The real test of patrol method youth leadership is when the lads need neither the adults nor the artificial adult structure. So in that way, I think it's helpful for young SMs (and old SMs who want to learn a new trick) to dispense with da SPL and try to build a robust patrol method and set of Patrol Leaders first. At least until the kids feel a need to "coordinate". Thing is, when that happens I think the lads are less likely to choose one "coordinator" so much as they split up duties. Da "one coordinator" thing is usually an adult thing. Hardest thing as always is gettin' the adults to grok patrol method youth leadership. Kudu is often right in that, though I reckon more honey than gall is called for sometimes . Know what I mean? You have a few PL's and the boys are ready to vote another PL...could one of the current PL's become the SPL? I know a few troops where da PLC elects the SPL, rather than the whole troop. Seems to work well for 'em. Has the advantage in that da PLC has seen the fellow work on things, eh? They're much less susceptible to a funny speech by da group clown. Beavah

Yah, both Calico and GaryMiller have a point, eh? EagerLeader, I think you've gotten da full range of views. If a lad is really a bad behavioral problem on a consistent basis and this was just the most recent "blowup", might be yeh have to step in as SM and move to a new SPL. Do be thoughtful about da other "ifs", though. If this was a lad who was not set up for success and then as a result was getting henpecked by adults and mom all week, and then was grumpy on top of tired, maybe yeh need to think in Calico's terms. One of da funny things on the list is that we all "see" different things when we read an account, based on our own experiences in troops that might be different from yours, and with kids who might be different from this lad. Calico reliably sees the boy's side, and da chance for adult failure. I fairly reliably see the leaders' side, and da risks of too much bureaucracy or hovering parents. Others come from different perspectives. Yeh just have to find the one that fits. But take 'em all under advisement. Sometimes, too, certain kids just get under our skin. It's a different kind of kid for each adult, but we all have 'em. If this lad is one who just gets under your skin, maybe yeh want to see if there's an ASM who seems to get along well with him who can be the "primary SPL advisor". Remember, this scoutin' stuff is fun, eh? Don't take any of it too seriously. Do what yeh can, then start a super-soaker fight. Beavah