Bob White

Sorry Its Me but your argument falls apart immediately. I am not asking posters about how the program holds up in the book. I am asking for real life situations when the program was followed and it didn't work. As you see by the reply's so far, no one can think of a time when that happened. This is not a question about theory or philosophy. This is about application. So your "works on paper" argument is not relevant to this thread. John Daigler, Following the program is following the program whether you have been a leader for a month, a year or ten years. AdrianVS The program of the past fit the circumstances of the past. The scouting program today evolved in its methods to fit todays circumstances. Notice that even with the attempts of philosophical side-stepping by a few posters, no one who is actually involved in unit leadership has been able to site a single instance where using the methods of scouting did not work. Why is it so hard for some to approach the possible conclusion that the reason may be that it really does work? BW

What you are seeking is called 'moulage', make-up that simulates injuries. there are a number of websites that can help you if you just enter that word in a search engine. Here is one the scouts will enjoy. http://www.swcp.com/~russo/moulage.html I am so glad you are looking into this, it is the BEST way to teach first aid and keep the fellows interested everytime. Good Job! BW

Actually Eamonn what you are doing now is much closer in line with the national procedure than you previous method was. So got you into trouble was not the program but when someone strayed. What the national advancement resources say is that a counselor can counsel as many badges as he is qualified and approved for. So if you had people doing the counseling incorrectly or for badges they were not qualified to do then who was responsible? The district and council advancement committees, the same group who now are starting to review and approve your counselor applications. How often are they to do this? Every year. So it was not the national program that messed you up, it is in fact returning to the national program that is solving the problem. Can ANYONE come up with a situation where using the program did not work? We have had hundreds of posts this year from folks with problems stemming from parents or adults not following the program, and yet no one can come up with an example of when using the program did not work. Why then do so many posters claim they purposely do not follow the BSA program??

Another good topic, but what I am specifically seeking are times when the program was followed and it did not work.

Romboman When and where do make this clear to them? What message do you think this sends to them about circumventing authority?

BadenP Another good point and also worthy of discussion but it is not related to this thread. I am asking for times when the program methods were followed and they did not work. BW

Laurie that's an excellent point and a discussion worth pursuing...but not on this thread please, the topic is when did you use the program and not have it work. I agree that when others stray problems will occur. I think it deserves its own thread. thanks BW(This message has been edited by Bob White)

There are around 300 councils in the BSA each with an OA Lodge. Is it your conclusion that this is a national problem based on the situation in your one Lodge?

Mich, I read the BSA program materials, I learn them and practice them until I understand them. That was the personal agreement I signed when I joined, that I would folow the policies and procedures of the BSA. membership is a partnership, my part of the deal is to support and follow the program to the best of my ability, isn't it? Isn't that why you are trying to do the same thing? I do not fault you for trying to understand and follow the program, why would you fault me? Asking questions is good. I ask them too. I asked you one when you first posted the thread and you have not yet answered. Given the two situations you offered wich one or ones do feel insulted the other scout? Bob white (This message has been edited by Bob White)

Barry, could we get one example in detail of how the program was followed and did't work. But first. The program we follow today is 94 years old with seceral evolutions along the way. Todays socirty is not the one it was 94 years ago, the children are not the same as 94 years ago and scouting is not the same. Over all they are better. As scouting discovered better methods they evolved. The program today is different then the program was 90 or 70 or 50 or even 15 years ago. It's better, and 15 years from now it will be better still. As far as two units doing the same thing and getting different results, that has not been proven yet. Nor has the larger troop proven thet their method is better. If the leadser continues the discussion I believe that can be proven. Now could you give a specific time and explain what happened when you followed the program and it did not work? Thanks Bob White

I prefer scoutldr's response. As far as the G2ss is concerned it says that teasing, bullying and verbal abuse is not to to tolerated. It also says it is the adult leader's resonsibility to step in immediately and stop it. I support that rule. B:)b White

We get an awful lot of advice on this forum that begins with "here is what I do". We also hear about a lot of problem that have a common element. The program wasn't followed. I would like some detailed accounts (from those who have taken the Scout Leader training for their position) of how following the BSA Scouting program failed to work for them in their position. B:)b White

District Committee

NJ I double checked and nothing I said about the content or purpose of the modifications is incorrect. Not sure where you feel you were lectured? Do you really believe this process was begun over two years ago to come to a pont where it would be open to public opion in an effort to sway a presidential election? Can the stealth helicopters be far away? Acco, the CO has always been responsible for providing a meeting place. Which organizations are included are in a related portion of the rule which they explained was not related to the input they were looking for. What the rule says is not that the school must allow everyone, just that if they allow anyone they cannot disallow organizations such as the BSA or other patriotic groups. If the PTA doesn't pay then if these rules are added they will not be allowed to charge the scouts or other similar organizations. Why would the Young Republican want to recruit members who were too young to vote??? "Do you think Blattman Elementary would agree to "own and operate" a youth group that only allows atheists? Or that excludes Jews? Or that only allows Catholics? " RED HERRING ALERT! This is not about who a school can sponsor or what group it can operate. The text is specific about that. This is about access only. Read the text again. BW

"This was changed for all groups last year so now a $25 fee per hour is charged to all groups. That's fine as long as they do it for ALL groups. The modification says that cannot charge some groups less but Scouting groups and other simialr programs MORE than the least amount it charges others. "Should an aerobics instructor who wants to use the gym for her high priced clients be treated the same as a Cub Scout Pack for the use of the gymnasium for 1.5 hours?" That is not what the rule says, you need to read it again. "But, ultimately, a CO is required to provide a place to meet. Unless the school is the CO and they're not letting a unit meet there, this seems to be a tempest in a teapot..." This is not just about meetings. It also oncludes recruiting. if a school allows the 4-h to recuit within the school it must alow the BSA. This is about tying the loss of funding to illegal reverse discrimination being practiced by some government funded public facilities funding. Merlyn's argument as usual is a red herring. The BSA's right to determine its own membership is legal and has been upheld by the Supreme Court. The discrimination against the BSA and other patriotic organizations is illegal and has be proclaimed so by the courts. This rule merely threatens facilities that take part in such illegal acts with the loss of funding. The law already is on the books, what this act does in determine the penalty for violation of the law. Bob White

(This message has been edited by Bob White)

Then which do you do? The syllabus is guide to through the trainig, it is not the trainer, that is your responsibility. AS you now agree the infoprmation is in the syllabus for you to cover with the participant. Do you? If so then what are you complaining about. If not, then why are you complaining about the syllabus and not fulfilling your responsibility as the trainer. It just seems to me that you are complaining over something you have total control over. B:)b White

Not at all. I am disappointed that a Training chairman would misrepresent the contents of the training the way you did.

Perhaps sst3, you should explain to the scouts that they can vote for as few scouts as they choose, rather than as many. Remind them of their responsibility to elect only the scouts they feel represent the values of scouting. I maintain that if a unit is electing poor examples of scouting into the OA the problem is not in the election mechanics, but in how scouts are trained in citizenship by the unit.

Actually this rule has been in the works for nearly two years. As far as its proximity to the election, what do we do, shut down every step of the legislative process for 2 months prior to any election so that nobody can call foul? As any lawyer will tell you this isn't a new rule it modifies an existing law. Also if you read the document (and this is still in a very early stage of development) you will see that it pertains to far more than the programs of the BSA. In general it ties government funding of public facilities to equal access to all organizations regardless of how the management of the facility "feels" about that organization. This is already a law, but what this modification does is tie the funding to obeying the rules. It further requires that access be granted at fees equal to the lowest fee charged to any other organization. This protects the Scouts and other organizations from being unfairly charged for the same facilities offered to others. We pay the same taxes we have the same rights to facilities paid for by those taxes. Is this political? What law isn't? Isn't barring the Scouts from these facilities political? Political problems more often than not require political solutions.

(This message has been edited by Bob White)

I asked cubbobwhite what elements were in the previous version of Cub Basic Training that are not in New Leader Essentials and Cub Leader Job Specific. The following list was given in response. 1 *Outdoor Program 2 *CS Sports and Academics 3 *Boy Behavior 4 *What is Cub Scouting? 5 *Purposes of Cub Scouting 6 *Methods of Cub Scouting 7 *The roles of the other leaders in the pack Assuming the Cubbob white has the same syllabii from the BSA that the rest of the country has, here is where each of those4 topics are covered. 1. In New Leader Essentials and Cub Job Specific 2. In Tiger Den Leader, Cub Den Leader, and Webelos Den Leader Training in the Advancement Portion. 3. New Leader Essentials 4. New Leader Essentials 5. New Leader Essentials and in Every session of Leader Specific 6. New Leader esentials 7. Job Specific but only as it relates to your job in the Pack. (page numbers available on request) So you see everything that was in the old version is in the new one except it takes less time. Why? Because that was what the volunteers said they wanted. As far as needing 5 trainers, 5 classrooms and 5tv/vcrs every time you do the training, that is simply not true. No One said you had to do them all at the same time. The new program is modular. It is designed to be able to format to suit the needs ot the trainer and the trainees. Consider these options. Hold NLE on a sparate day. Then on one Saturday Schedule the Den Leader training in 3 shifts. 8am-11am for Tiger, 11am-2pm for Cub Den leaders, 2pm-5pm for Webelos Leaders. On the next Saturday 9am-12pm Cubmasters, 12pm-3pm Committee members. Two trainers could easily do this with one classroom and one TV/VCR, and one video projector (optional). Here is another way. One session a week for 5 weeks Do NLE as a one hour segment prior to Roundtable for two months. There are lots of other ways to do this training without do all 5 sessions at the same time. The syllabus is flexible, but the trainer has to be too. (This message has been edited by Bob White)

Cubbobwhite Please answer the question to the best of your ability. I made no provision as to how many lines were used to cover it. What was in the Cub Leader Basic That is not in NLE/Leader Specific Training courses? Then I will respond to both of your answers. B:)b White

"I have been over ruled several times within the BOR for not wanting to advance a Scout to Star & Life that has just been a paper Asst PL,.. And they were correct to over-rule you as being an active APL is not a requirement for rank. Now then the thread only veered off topic for two posts and was then was quickly returned. As long as you do not take it astray by not answewring the recent questions which were posed to you we shall continue on course. If you do not approve a scout who has not met the camping requirements, or who does not exemplify the values of scouting, and if you educate the scouts on the responsibility they have for casting a thoughtful ballot, what is the problem??? The election is not easier it simply allows all worthy candidates to be elected rather than just a couple of them. B:)b White

We agree on how they are the same cubbobwhite but do you see no differences? If so, please list them as you did the similarities. Also -please respond to my question. Can you name any information that was in Cub Leader Basic Training that is not found in NLE/Leader Specific training?