TAHAWK

The objectives of BSA were and are defined by adults. The third quote is fro Eisenhower, You disagree. So? The last quote is from Robert Greenleaf, verbatim. https://www.greenleaf.org/what-is-servant-leadership/ We get to disagree with each other. No one is the final arbiter here. Apparently not even Robert Greenleaf.

Got a printout of my official BSA record today. It reveals that I completed basic Scoutmaster training on January 1, 1911. (And Stosh thinks he's a vet. ) Then again, almost everything I did between 1954 and 2007 is absent. Armed with the official printout, I went to the Scout Shop to purchase a 100-year Service Pin, only to discover that 90 years is all they catalog. Age discrimination? Given that some have been told they are not qualified by training of record for certain positions, I find this fanciful official record amusing in the "funny peculiar" sort of way. As I told B-P, "You may have something here."

If you define "leadership" in a given way, you may decide a given syllabus does not teach "leadership."

No offense taken or intended. Things are as they are. In my experience, some benefit. Others do not. Wood Badge is a title for different training courses run, these days, by councils. They differ by staff. Staff quality, as I have posted multiple times, varies. Good staff overcomes defects in syllabus. Poor staff can fail to deliver a strong syllabus. The Wood Badge syllabus is not perfect - was probably better as written by Blanchard and Assoc. Every "participant" experiences a different course because every experience in the course if filtered through that person's experiences, knowledge, and attitudes. The ability to absorb information, aside from critical issues of teaching skills and syllabus quality, varies, and not in strict relationship to intelligence of the students, to call them a non-PC name. Previous experiences of all sorts and many attitudes affect learning. Trust, to name one factor, strongly impacts willingness to accept concepts as valid or even to listen to them. I am unwilling to endorse Wood Badge for all Scouters and as delivered by all staffs. I do endorse given courses becasue I know about the staffs of those courses. Consumer research is prudent. I disagree that someone, based on a necessarily limited sample, can accurately predict how all, most, or any particular participants will experience Wood Badge. If anyone has done a scientifically valid survey of Wood Badge participant's perceived outcomes , I would like to see it. http://blog.scoutingmagazine.org/wbw/ http://www.sparkpeople.com/myspark/team_messageboard_thread.asp?board=0x5967x45877195 http://scouter.com/index.php/topic/19003-woodbadge-patrol-yells/ http://scouter.com/index.php/topic/18892-a-round-of-the-gilwell-song/

That's easy to believe. Not everyone can teach. Not everyone can learn in every situation. Not everyone knows as much as they think they do. Not everyone is the final arbiter of whether Wood Badge is worth the time and effort of others - or even most. Apparently, Wood Badge, as taught by that staff, had nothing to offer you. Sorry you were baffled instead of helped.

You spend hours and hours with other dedicated Scouters and there was nothing to learn? I think that's the attitude I am is talking about. I guess sadly for me, I still have lots to learn.

Sorry you've seen that.

Ageism!

Found among the 527 Scouting Commandments: "BOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA SCOUTER CODE OF CONDUCT On my honor I promise to do my best to comply with this Boy Scouts of America Scouter Code of Conduct while serving in my capacity as an adult leader: . . . 6. I will not discuss or engage in any form of sexual conduct while engaged in Scouting activities. I will refer Scouts with questions regarding these topics to talk to their parents or spiritual advisor."

As suggested by several anecdotes here, "good menus" can be encouraged by cooking competitions and other examples. Adult ideas are fines. Adult cooking codes are not necessary.

How about for the goals selected by the participant? Automatically a bad idea? We have a Scout "group" (Scouts and Cubs) in the center of Cleveland because a laid-off machinist, instead of being bitter, spent his off time working his ticket by starting the unit, one of the few in that area not run by paid "Scouters." Could he have done it without Wood Badge? Sure. But taking Wood Badge was the occasion for him to experience the "ticket" leadership tool, and starting the unit was his main goal. After two years, he found a good job, but he still keeps the group running. A great man who found something of value in our imperfect world.. I last saw Bill when he came here to support Wood Badge in 1992. But what did he know?

Some will quit. When Blanchard and Assoc. does the Game, there is no debrief. It shows what it shows: even normally good people can succumb to temptations, creating issues within a group and between groups. Look, you just saw them do it for NOTHING - meaningless points. What might someone do for social approval (AKA life and death) or money (or the benefits" of phony membership numbers or sham advancement figures)? And what is "winning" anyway? A gold Journey to Excellence patch? Wooden beads? Does learning by actual experience apply only to Scoutcraft.

"I DON'T WANT TO BELONG TO ANY CLUB THAT WILL ACCEPT PEOPLE LIKE ME AS A MEMBER". As told by Groucho Marx, Groucho would probably have been proud not to be a member. Has anyone considered wearing three (or four) walnuts on a thong? Many learners from the original WB were horrified by the "leadership" version that started circa 1972. The original version was to train learners in teaching all Scoutcraft through the then-extant First Class requirements. The second version took time away from Scoutcraft. If it is planned to effectively be an optional part of basic training, how does it translate into an epitome ?

And the course is no longer aimed at experienced Scouters. The goal is for all Scouters to take it.

Worth thinking about. Alcohol and tobacco kill many times more than all other drugs combined. The recent nightmare d'jour - H - is killing "only" 50,000/year. Obesity? Dunlop's Disease?

They are both full of sugar. They both have a high glycemic index. HFCS is much cheaper than sugar, allowing inflation-adjusted prices for pop to fall, allowing greater consumption of fructose at the same cost. (Remember when the standard pop bottle was 8oz.?) A "small" beverage at McD's is 16%. The cup costs more than the pop. Free refills !!! Graphing juvenile obesity, it tracks quite nicely with the sharp incrase in consumption of HFCS - now up to over sixty pounds per juvenile per year. Volume for volume, OJ has Vitamin C, plus potassium, thiamin, and folate, all lacked by pop, and would cost significantly more, discouraging consumption. Water !!!

Far be it from me to accuse BSA of a practice of regularly writing clearly, and you caught them again. Their policy/rule/regulation is that you should not violate their policy/rule/regulation, without having a policy/rule/regulation. Not in the Scouter Code of Conduct: "8. I will not possess, distribute, transport, consume, or use any of the following items prohibited by law or in violation of any Scouting rules, regulations and policies: a. Alcoholic beverages." Not in the Guide to Safe Scouting: "As outlined in the Scouter Code of Conduct, Scouting activities are not a place to possess, distribute, transport, consume, or use any of the following items prohibited by law or in violation of any Scouting rules, regulations, and policies: alcoholic beverages or controlled substances, including marijuana." Even this in Scouting: "Model Good Behavior If the adults in your household drink responsibly, you don’t need to go on the wagon to set a good example. In fact, says Foster, kids need to see adults using alcohol responsibly. (They certainly see enough irresponsible drinking on television and in the movies.) “It’s important that kids grow up in environments where it’s either not there at all or it’s there and used responsibly,†he says. So should parents who imbibe wait to drink until the kids are in bed? Foster doesn’t think so. “It’s better to have it out in the open and be able to talk about it than to sneak,†he says." http://scoutingmagazine.org/2014/04/help-scouts-venturers-avoid-drug-alcohol-addiction/ So we have a real clear rule on home-made alcohol stoves but no rule on alcohol except not to violate a rule that cannot be located or no longer exists? Please, someone, prove us wrong. http://www.scouting.org/scoutsource/HealthandSafety/GSS/gss04.aspx

No. It's not.

After years here, and in life in general, I conclude that the obvious answer is, "Of course they are." Just as your adult rules (opinions) are more important - valid - than mine. It takes real effort to give the other guy's opinions equal weight with ours. Some cannot even consider a different opinion. Human nature.

It has been repeatedly noted that the quality of the Wood Badge experience is largely dependent on the quality of the staff. In many councils, staff selection is solely based on the ability of the staff candidate. In others, it is, sadly, based on other factors - cliques, politics, size of financial contributions. Sorry you have not had a good experience. The GOL debriefer is a really key staffer. Did yours bring up the subject of temptation?

The "youth-led troop" is one aspect of the Patrol Method and naturally follows from the Scout-led patrols which plan the troop program to be led by the leadership team (PLC) headed by the SPL. If program centers in the Scout-led patrol, where BSA still says it belongs (when BSA bureaucrats are not contradicting BSA's own words), the Scout-led troop follows as the night the day. Stosh, I owe too much to Scouting to give up simply because things seem to need change. I can try to change things where I am and support those trying to change things nationally. My Grandmother had a sampler in a frame on her wall. Her grandmother had sewn it. "And let us not be weary in well doing: for in due season we shall reap, if we faint not."

Is it "intrusive" to have a rule against an adult having a cold beer on a hot day? What if it's really hot? His favorite chef's knife? (Against the rules at Camp Frontier - no fixed-blade knives allowed on the property. Axes fine.) About any rule is "intrusive" to some extent or another. It's all balancing, and people disagree. Only some WILL NOT go along with rules they don't personally approve.

No need for cover. What they routinely do that is shameful is: 1) allow Scouts who don't know the subject to teach ("Bear bags are made of special material so the bears can't smell what;s in them."); 2) allow Scouts to decide who gets a signed Blue Card; andc 3) have those Blue Cards signed after zero individual testing/passing. Not Trustworthy. 100% scam. All to raise $$$. At least the mistaken advancement-mill SMs are not doing it for money, just out of a mistaken belief that advancement is a goal - the same blunder as Journey to Mediocrity. But BSA is responding, if belatedly and without admitting the depth of the scandal, first with the rule that the honest SM can block awarding the MB if he determines it could not, in fact, have been earned, as with the 16-year-old "Counselor" or impossibly-short time available. Next should come refusal to certify camps who lack Merit Badge Counselors for Merit Badges that they "offer." ("Pssst. Kid! Want a Personal Management Merit Badge from scratch in five fifty-minute sessions? Get your troop to Camp Runamuk.")

BSA - here and there- still says all the right the words, as it says many other things. But there is no pressure, recognition, condemnation, reward - nothing to create a positive or negative incentive - nothing to show it means it. The "funny" thing is that the few troops who use it here have robust membership, fantastic outdoor program, service projects to be proud of, and good advancement that comes out of their program. They supply the lion's share of district and council event SPLs and NYKT staff. They are greatly admired - but from a "safe distance." I mean, you wouldn't want to actually do that, would ya'? Meaning what you say and doing what you say would be dangerous stuff !