Venividi

Recently ran a Baloo class for 20 people, and used this to keep it simple: 2 containers of waterless hand sanitizer 1 box food service gloves frozen hamburger patties - one per person registered, plus a few more 5 lbs of potatos. Sliced them with the food processor the night before, and stored them covered with water in a plastic container in the fridge, then transfered to a cooler. 3 lb of onions. also pre-sliced in a food processor 4 2 lb bags of mixed frozen vegetables. (Had one bag left over) 2 containers of margarine - used in the foil pack to help prevent burning Assortment of spices - seasoned salt, steak blend, oregeno, etc. Assortment of condiments to add after cooking was complete - catsup, mustard, bbq sauce, hot sauce. At the Baloo level, keep it as simple and inexpensive as possible, and discuss the other options and embelishments. One of the Baloo handout pages covers additional foil pack options.

This is a topic that key scouters in each unit should sit down and discuss so that everyone is on the same page. Much conflict in a troop results from differing expectations among leaders and parents, which could be reduced when there are common expectations. I had a recent conversation with a scout master about his trip to summer camp this year . The reply was effectively "It was Great! XXX number of merit badges for YY boys!" They are quite proud of the number of boys in their troop that reach Eagle. There are other scouters that discourage such high numbers of merit badges at summer camp, because it reduces the time spent on patrol actvities. Disagreements occur when leaders with these different views are in the same troop and have not discussed which to emphasise.

Twocubdad writes: BORs don't operate in vacuums. If the troop is all in agreement that this is how things work, denying this boy his advancement is going to be seen as picking on him and/or making a example of him because you don't like the way his dad is a bully. And that wouldn't be a totally inaccurate assesment. I respectfully disagree. From the description, the dad's actions are a concern for the troop, but not a factor in questioning the advancement at the BOR. The issue that the BOR was faced with was whether the lad had really completed the requirements. We have come a long way in the wrong direction when expecting a boy to meet requirements before he earns advancement is not the norm, but is seen as seen as picking on him. (It may be that the lad had met the troop's current standards to earn advancement, but I wasn't there, so cannot comment one way or the other.) The other boys in the troop know if the advancement was deserved or if it was rubberstamped. They won't say anything, but will see it as favoritism towards that particular boy. Yes, the BOR should take feedback to the committee and the SM, expressing their concerns if a scout that hasn't fulfilled requirements is brought to a BOR for advancement, and have a discussion about it so that all get on the same page with respect to expectations.

HICO_Eagle writes: "For those of you extolling the virtues of patrol cooking at summer camp -- why is this such a novel experience for your youth? Why aren't they getting those experiences and benefits from your normal activities?" I haven't seen it as a novel experience, but then, I am not looking for novelty. Rather, as a scouter, I was looking for ways to get patrols to come together as a team rather than as a collection of individuals. My experience and observations: On weekend campouts, there is a subset of patrol members each month. At summer camp, the patrol members are working together for an entire week. On weekend campouts, a month (or two or three for some boys goes by, and much of the teamwork skills have been lost because of the length of the intervening time. On weekend campouts, a patrol member that doesn't do his share for meal preparation is worked around, ignored, or sloppy work is let slide. At summer camp, the patrol members dont tolerate this for an entire week, resulting in peer pressure. That said, I do think that teamwork through the patrol method could be achieved by another activity - perhaps the entire patrol backpacking every day for a week, with all the necessary tasks of breaking camp and setting up camp every day. Or rock climbing every day for a week, with getting equipment, checking it, setting up, caring for it, etc. I have never seen a patrol do this at Summer camp. However, my observations at summer camp, that other than cooking and eating together, there is very little joint patrol activity. Perhaps a patrol hike once during the week, but mostly it is merit badges done individually or in small groups. An analogy for what I was looking for by using patrol cooking camps is what one sees with a theater group, music group, or sports team. These groups practice every day, and they practice together rather than separately. The members of these groups not only improve their individual skills, they also improve their cohesiveness as a group. They bond because they work together to achieve a common objective. I do recognize that other scouters may have found another activity for Summer Camp to serve as a group objective for their patrols, lasting several hours each day for the week, require the participation of all members working together, and resulting in a tangible group outcome. HICO, I congratulate you and your fellow troop members on your successful planning and going on campouts on our own. I agree with you that patrol camping without adults on the trip would be a great implementation of the patrol method. Unfortunately, I have not seen any patrol do so in this area. Best Regards, Venividi

Knot Head, You might want to consider doing a little guided discovery with your PLC before the decide about cooking at next years summer camp. Ask them for their assessment of how the younger scouts work together as a patrol. If your troop is typical, the newer scouts dont do that very well. There is also typically very few activities done as a patrol other than sitting together at the dining hall. Then ask them for ideas on ways for them to provide daily opportunities for the scouts to work together as patrols at next years summer camp. They may never have considered that they as the PLC have a responsibility to provide a program that helps the new scouts develop such teamwork. That then provides the SM with the opportunity to explain how cooking as a patrol helps the younger scouts to develop teamwork. A SM that I know told me how their troop had switched to a different summer camp that provided only dining hall food service. His older scouts noticed that the new scouts were less disciplined and had poorer skills after a couple of years there, and asked to switch back to a patrol cooking camp because of that.

There are more dining hall camps than patrol cooking camps because there is more demand for them. Patrol cooking is seen as more "work", less time for merit badges, less time for fun (according to various scouters that I have talked to whose troops attend dining hall summer camps). My experience is the same as that of GKlose and BrentAllen. I have seen that a week of cooking at summercamp does more to foster patrol teamwork than an entire year of cooking at weekend campouts. The main benefit is not learning cooking skills, but is the fact that the patrol has a goal that REQUIRES all to pull together for an entire week. I find that when scouters perceive patrol cooking is work, that attitude is picked up by the scouts, and they try to avoid it. When scouters perceive cooking as a fun, creative activity that is done together, the scouts learn that view. As I have fun cooking, my scouts did also. I think it comes down to what a unit's scouters want for their scouts. Emphasis on merit badges and individual advancement (i.e. "me")? - dining hall camp cant be beat. Emphasis on group citizenship (i.e. "we")? - patrol cooking camp is the way to go.

"To cut down on time spent in camp to give the kids more time doing the Jamboree activities. What do you want the scouts doing, having fun or cooking meals? " If done with the right attitude, cooking as a patrol is one of the most fun memories of camping. For most activities, scouts go out in pairs or threes. With cooking, the entire patrol works together to prepare a meal, and then sits down together to eat it as a patrol, with a feeling of accomplishment that "we did it together". I suspect that it is more likely that Jamboree would provide pre-cooked meals because either it is easier logistically for the huge crowd, or that it would be the lowest common denominator so as to accomodate scouts that haven't really learned to cook.

Shortridge, I like your thoughts from a perspective of a summercamp counselor. As a MB counselor, I also typically see scouts that havent read the MB book, or done much of any preparation. There is common view that the MB program is like school, where the scout goes to a counselor (or class at summer camp, MB university, or troop meeting), the counselor serves as a teacher, and the scout comes out with a MB in the same manner as he gets a grade at the end of a school semester. A few minutes of chatting with a scout to find out his readiness, his interest, and help him set some goals and expectations can help improve the MB program implementation. Same for a counselor talking to a scout, helping him set some goals, and scheduling follow up meetings. No need to chase down the scout; it is his responsibility to come back to the counselor. I hadn't considered the special challenges faced by summer camp counselors where they are expected to take a scout, no matter his starting point, and help him complete requirements for the badge. Good discussion.

From another thread: Should skills competence be addressed by the SM during the MB process? Of course it should. That's where the SM's role as gatekeeper comes into play. But I'm pretty jaded after five years of seeing history repeat itself. I simply don't trust most SMs to do their jobs. If that means beefing up the pre-reqs, I'm all for it. I wouldn't go as far as to say that most SM's cant be trusted to do their jobs, but with all of the things that a SM is responsible for (training leaders, working with scouts, dealing with parents, etc.) consider where the MB program falls on the priority list. There is the recommended way, and the way that gets implemented when other things take priority. I have seen more frequiently where scouts do all their MB's at summer camp and "MB Universities". I have issue with the trend. I like summer camp for swimming, canoeing, and other outdoor badges, but think that we have misplaced objectives when First Aid, Citizenship in the xxx, etc. are taken at summer camp or MB university. I realize that they are offered because there is a demand for them, and that SM's approve scouts to take them at these events because they are offered and it is easy. It is a circle that appears hard to break.

"Mainly centers around service projects" While it is hard to tell from a distance, I would suspect that service projects are seen as "work" rather than "fun", so there may be a "what's in it for me?" feeling, so they take a pass on coming to the service project if they dont need the hours for their next rank advancement. It will likely take a combination of many things, over an extended period of time. After all, if all boys were great citizens, they wouldn't need scouting. Some ideas to try: For Troop Service Projects: Ask the PLC to take responsibility for increasing attendance at future troop service projects. Peer pressure works better than adult prompting and prodding. When charging the PLC with this responsibility, you might end up with blank stares and need to seed them with some ideas such as: having food/pizza for those that are there; a special outing for participants; keep a tally of service hours worked and a special reward for the patrol that has the highest number of service hours per patrol member over the previous 3 months. Ask the PLC to select the troop service projects. At the meeting before a service project, the SPL could talk about the "helpful" part of the scout law. Set expectation that all patrol leaders will call their patrol members the day before a service project and remind them to come. And follow up with the SPL to make sure that he follows up with his patrol leaders to see that they made the calls. Once seeded, the boys may come up with some ideas of their own. Add an hour or two of service work to every campout. Over time this will ingrain a troop culture that providing service is part of being a member of the troop. Start to include SM minutes that touch on "helpful". Ask individual boys at SM conferences a series of questions about how they feel when they do good things for others, what do they consider when choosing to participate or not, etc, and let them talk. Ask how his participation at service projects (or lack thereof) meshes with the scout law; and let him talk. Ask him what kind of help he likes to give, and let him talk You may end up with a good discussion where a scout realizes that he feels good about himself when he helps others. Special recognition for service project participants at COH's. Enlist parents help by reminding them of scoutings purpose, and the role that service to others plays in developing character and citizenship. Eagle Projects: When reviewing a scout's Eagle project plan, if it doesnt include specific steps that he is going to take to get people to work on his project, remind him that leadership is more than making an announcement to show up at a given location at a certain time. Discuss some ideas that he can use, (such as serving food, providing motivation and recognition of those that help him, making personal phone calls rather than a general announcement at a troop meeting, etc.). Remind the scout that he cannot expect troop members to show up at his project just because they are members of the same troop. Motivating others to participate is part of a leaders role. It will take a while to change the troop culture. Eventually, a scout planning an Eagle project will have learned how to do this as a troop member; first as a patrol member observing how the youth leaders get the scouts to participate; and then as a PLC member with responsibility for motivating others to participate. Hope you find some ideas that are applicable to your situation. Good Luck.(This message has been edited by venividi)

"Tell a Scout he has to attend all 4 meetings every month to go on that month's camping trip and the first time he misses one meeting because of another issue and can't go on the trip may be the last time you see that Scout bother to come anymore." WOW! I didn't see anything remotely like that in Themis' question. Not even while trying to read between the lines. Themis, Welcome to the forums. I like seeing new forum members and the prespectives they bring. Venividi

I think that it's not liability behind the ban, but rather, PR. I suspect it is a way to show that scouting values life as part of their values. Perhaps they thought this necessary because they have made themselves a lightning rod on other social issues. I had always found it a bit ironic that the youth group of our chartering organization (a church that actively preached about peace) would have laser tag outings, but the troop they sponsored could not.

"If you want to keep your older Scouts participation up to your standard, give them a program they WANT to participate in. " Thus if the program the boys plan is one that some of the scouts do not want to participate in, lets take that planning away from them so we can give the non particpating scouts a program that they want to participate in. I respectively suggest that sometimes people's interests change over time. And people choose to do other things with their time in keeping with their current interests. Just because some scouts choose not to participate does not mean that there is a poor program; they may no longer be interested in camping/backpacking/etc., or in leading others or planning in those endevours. Lets congratulate those folks and wish them well in their new found love of theater/football/computer club/key club/hospital aide/ or wherever the new interest happens to be. And let them know that if they are still interested in scouting activities, and want to help plan activities that they are interested in, they are welcome back.

Scoutnut, As a scoutmaster, I would consider your son active; den chief is an important troop position that provides a link between a den and a troop. I see it as one of the best troop recruitment methods. Working at cub day camp and other events, he is demonstrating his commitment, and is informally a representative of the troop. In my book, that would be not only be fulfilling his duty to the troop, but exceeding expectations by reaching out beyond the troop.

Gern, I didn't mean for my comment to come across as an attempt to shame a scout into staying active, though on re-reading what I posted, I can see how that came across. I think it is important to let scouts know that the troop needs them. Older scouts want to be needed; they want to know that they make a difference. In a scout led troop, scouts do have a duty to their fellow scouts. When they had come in as new scouts, older scouts led the troop, taught skills to the new scouts, planned and ran campouts, etc. It is now their turn. The point that I wanted to make, but failed, was that in a scoutmaster conference, you can talk about the needs of the troop, the duties that come with membership, and that the troop really needs them. The second part is to back that up with action. For example, if an older scout has accepted a role as instructor, agreed to teach a certain skill at a specific meeting, but isn't prepared and doesn't do so, then if an adult steps in and does it for him, one message that is sent is that they really arent needed. Of course, then another friendly chat with the scout about what is going on in his life, and how fulfilling commitments is called for. Hope this makes clearer what I meant to say.

WHAT CAN WE DO TO KEEP OLDER SCOUTS ACTIVE ( caps for emphasis). Chats with the older scouts reminding them that they have an obligation to the troop. That the troop needs them to be successful. That boy led isn't just chairing a meeting on Monday night, but also that there are older youth prepared to teach skills to the troops newer members. That they are truely in charge, so that if it doesn't happen, that there isn't an adult that takes over for them.

It all boils down to what your goals are; what drives your program. Is your goal to develop character, citizenship and fitness, is your goal to give out awards, or something else? Once you define your goals, what you should do in this situation becomes clearer.

In another thread, CNYscouter raised an all too common situation - a scout dragging his feet with those pesky items like Eagle projects and letters of recommendation. Letting the other thread continue the discussion of what the proper rules and regs are regarding delivery of letters of recommendation, I think the whole foot dragging thing and how best to deal with it is a worthy topic in itself. CNYscouter's son's situation reminded me of a similar scout a number of years ago that was footdragging with a final MB or two. The troop advancement chair went out of her way to be available. She chased him down once or twice, as he was footdragging about going to see her for those final things. While we would all like to see scouts get Eagle, how much assistance and what type of assistance do you feel is appropriate for foot draggers? Encouraging talks and coaching? Certainly Running interference? maybe, maybe not. Chasing down a scout that has missed appointments without a making a courtesy phone call? I dont think so, though our advancement chair did. Parsing council procedures to gain some extra days? I am not so sure - it reminds me of how the same people are consistently late by a consistent amount of time (whether it be church or scout meetings). By my thinking, it may just provide a few more days to procrastinate. If there is footdragging, perhaps the award is not that meaningful to the scout; that experience and development that have occurred over the past years are satisfaction enough for him, and he is only going through the motions because it is expected of him by his leaders and/or parents. Opinions?(This message has been edited by venividi)

Crossramwedge, I read into your situation that there is an underlying issue of the committee and the SM are not on the same page. Perhaps the SM cannot bring himself to say "no" to a scout, even when that may be the best thing for him and for the troop. If the other scouts see a scout being given advancement rather than earning it, the message they are receiving is that advancement is a joke. Advice: sit down with the scoutmaster and the COR rep (if you are fortunate enough to have an involved chartering organization), and lay out expectations for advancement. If the SM still insists on signing off on scout spirit when it is obvious that it is lacking, then the BOR should review with the scout what he needs to do to gain the approval for the rank advancement. Document this in a letter to the scout, and schedule a new BOR when he has completed them. Secondary advice: If the SM hears what the committee wants with respect to standards, but insists that breathing and the correct number of MB's are the only real standards for advancement, then you need to either take the difficult step of searching for a new SM, or else continue on with the low standards. Third advice: I caution you not to refer to any scout as not being Eagle material. Any scout can be Eagle material, if properly motivated. It appears that this scout is not currently motivated, and does not have to be, because of the currently low standards that have been established. Good Luck

I am an advocate of the SM providing the name of a qualified counselor. I am reminded of a story told by my neighbor, a school teacher who received a call from a scout that wanted to meet with him on citizenship in the world. He explained to the scout what he needed to do, and set up a time to meet. When they met, the scout hadn't done any research; but rather wanted the counselor to lead him through the requirements while they met. The counselor instead said they would need to set up another time, so that the scout could be prepared. He didnt get a call back, and was surprised when the scout received the merit badge at the next court of honor. The scout chose to go shopping for an easier counselor. Another story: I received a call from a parent looking for a skiing MB counsellor that would sign off on skiing MB because his son had gone on a ski trip. I explained that the scout needed to call me, and that I would need to know that he had done all of the skills for the badge, not just ski for the week (there are some specific skills that need to be done, not just free skiing). Surprise - he found another counselor willing to sign off. If the troop wants the MB's to be meaningful to the scout, the troop should be directing scouts to counselors they know will make it meaningful.

"The problem with the subjective nature of this requirement is that it can be used arbitrarily to impede a scout that a leader does not like for whatever reason. " That's why I like the team approach to scouting. Hal goes on to describe a situation where an ASM had an issue with a scout, it was brought to the attention of others (in this case the CC and SM), and resolved. Seems that checks and balances worked. Ideally there are enough ASM's to allow at least one of them to get along with a scout an SM or other ASM just doesn't mesh with. At least that is how I think it is supposed to work. And is it fair that all of the folks listed would apply requirements differently? I believe "yes". All CO's likely have objectives that differ from each other. Each adult leader should be acting in accordance with their CO's objectives (and be replaced by their CO if they are not). Plus each individual brings a unique set of experiences, which is beneficial when considering the adult association method.

Yes, recess sounds good until that is all there is. At my first PLC as a new scoutmaster, the scouts said that they wanted to have an "unplanned" campout; i.e., they didnt want to plan any activities in advance. Needless to say, it was one of their worst campouts. It didn't stop them from proposing future campouts with no plans; to them not planning was easier than planning. A suggestion(s): between now and the next election have frequent short talks with the scouts that show promise. Tell them you have confidence in them, praise them when you see them showing initiative, and a few weeks before the election, encourage them to run for (choice of leadership position here). In the meantime, spend extra time with the current leadership and let them know that you are disappointed in what they have done so far, that it shows that you and the other scouters need to work with them on their leadership skills, and that you are expecting more from them in the coming weeks. Also consider meeting with the PLC for a half hour before each troop meeting, where they discuss their meeting plans with you. Make sure that they know that you expect them to come to this meeting prepared with a plan, and if they do not, that you will have no choice but to ask them to step down. A day or two before meeting day, call the SPL and review his plan in advance, ask him to call his patrol leaders to review plans, and to call you back once he has done so.

You dont say whether scouts with better leadership skills are running, and the scouts elect lesser qualified scouts instead, or if the better scouts are not running at all. If it is the later, a culture can develop where PL and SPL is seen as an undesireable position because meetings are chaotic and unorganized, and the stronger scouts dont want to take a postition where the other scouts are being unruly because they dont see the possibility of being able to change it; or because those positions are seen as extra work that they don't need to do if they already have completed a POR for their next advancement. If the former, then I suspect that the scouts, though they crave order and structure, vote the person that they perceive would be the most "fun", and the person that will bring order and discipline is usually not seen as the "fun" one. Think Lord of the Flies on a small scale.

daddy0, You are right. that is why there are also Positions of Responsibility that qualify. Positions such as quartermaster and historian, where a scout takes responsibility to make sure that the troop equipment is inventory is kept accurate and follows up with scouts that may not have returned equipment prompty, that the equipment is cared for, and repaired or replaced when needed, etc. Or historian, where a scout keeps a scrapbook (or web page) filled with pictures and reports of all the trips and campouts the troop has taken during the period that he serves, and perhaps creates displays for courts of honor with those pictures and reports. These positions do not require leadership, but do require that the scout take responsibility and fulfill the requirements for the position. Cheers

Mafaking, I think teachers frequently get caught in the wash from helicopter parents. I think the abundance of letters home for signature a reaction to complaints from helicopter type parents that see their child's report card and then blame the school for not warning them that junior wasnt turning in home work or doing poorly on tests.