Bob White

I learned how to cook from a number of different places. The first was at home from my mother. She showed my brothers and I a recipe book and said that if you follow a recipe for pound cake and do it correctly you will end up with a pound cake every time. Thats what recipes do, they provide specific ingredients and specific procedures to yield a consistent result. Flexibility; many recipes allow a degree of flexibility where the individual cook can make minor alterations to personalize the dish. But flexibility has its limits, change too much or change main ingredients and it is no longer the same dish, alter certain ingredients and you will ruin the taste. Use the wrong procedure and it will be unrecognizable. I like Pot Roast. I know lots of pot roast recipes and they all have a slightly different taste, yet they are all instantly recognizable as pot roast. I can make pot roast for a small group of people or a large group of people and it is always recognizable as a pot roast. Now lets say that a hundred of us volunteered to make pot roast for a big event. When we showed up we would have a huge variety of pot roasts yet they should all be easily recognizable as the same dish, a pot roast. Butwhat if someone brought a raw hamburger to the pot roast party? Wait a minute you sayraw hamburger is easily recognizable as not being a pot roast! "WHAT?", exclaims the individual, how can you say that, they are in fact the same thing. Your pot roast is made of beef, he says. My hamburger is made of beef, they are the same thing. Do you know what YOUR problem is? says the hamburger bringeryou arent FLEXIBLE!. But as cooks we know the truth, it has nothing to do with flexibility, it has to do with knowing what a pot roast is and being able to see a hamburger and know they are not the same. Not there is anything wrong with hamburger, but when you volunteered to come to the event you agreed to make a pot roast, and you did not keep your promise. There are posters who have perpetrated a hoax on many members of this forum by saying that some posters are not flexible in how the scouting program is delivered. When in fact the problem is that they brought hamburger to the event. Scouting has specific ingredients and specific procedures that yield a consistent product. This recipe allows for flexibility, but if you alter main ingredients or change the procedures too much the result will not be the product you agreed to make when you volunteered to deliver the program. When people who know the program say thats not scouting it's because the difference between scouting and not-scouting is as easily recognizable as the difference between pot roast and a hamburger. You can expect the hamburger folks to stick together and argue for they similar but different product. Of course its scouting they will say, "we dress like scouts, so it must be the same thing". Or sure its scouting we went to the training and wear a trained strip". Looking at a recipe and following a recipe are not the same thing! Do I preach, perhaps I do. Where is the problem in that. A preacher spreads the word of God he does not claim to be God. He says this is what the good book reveals to us and if you believe and follow it there are rewards for you at the end. I have never claimed to be the be all end all of scouting, that is claim used by others to ridicule me. All I have said is this is the recipe given to us by the BSA and its a good program that works IF you follow it. There is no harm in that message for anyone. As a trainer and commissioner for many years, as well as a unit leader for 30 years, I am enthusiastic for what I know a real scouting program offers. I and a handful of others on this forum have said "this is what the program says, and if you follow the recipe there are rewards for everyone at the end". Not everyone likes that message, largely because they have either been mislead by others to believe that we think the program should not be fun, or that we are inflexibl. The real problem is we know hamburger when we see it. Our message is about Pot Roast, and folks that only bring raw hamburger are not going to like it. If anyone interested in learning how to cook pot roast I can recommend some resources where you can learn the basic recipe and then make SLIGHT alterations to fit your personal taste and the taste of those you serve it to. I also recommend the cooking lessons offered by OGE, Eamonn, Fscouter, and a few others. If you dont know the difference between hamburger and pot roast, and you have no interest in learning the recipe, then perhaps cooking is not calling. But please, stop listening to this silliness about scouting not being fun, or that I or other program supporters are 'zealots', or that we are 'inflexible'. These are weak and sad distortions of the truth, and I am hopeful that at some point these poster will tire of misrepresentations and try and justify their opinions without misrepresenting mine. Thank you for taking the time to read this. (Itried to remain shorter than Eamonns posts ) BW

Once again you create a false argument. You suggest that to have a fun relaxed scout program you cannot follow the rules, and that to know the and use the program Methods you cannot have fun. That's simply not true. The two are not mutually exclusive. Can you not play a game AND follow the rules? If your family wanted to play Monopoly would say "yes, but only if I can ignore the rules and play however I want because that is the only way I can have fun"? Your choices are not logical. If you are going to have a spectrum then pick opposite ends of the same topic and not try to suggest that following the rules means not having fun or that having fun is against the rules. Neither end of the spectrum you offer is valid. Your attempt to control the outcome by obscuring the subject is an unfortunate choice for you to make.

do not confuse complaining about scouting with leadership ability With only 29% having attended basic training it would be mathematically impossible for the ones who by your definition "care" to not outnumber those who understand and use the program. (This message has been edited by Bob White)

"It is the ones who think they already know it all and refuse to budge forward that make the program more difficult." Perhaps, but does that include people who know a lot about what they are doing and have successful units that maintain youth member until they age out, and have scouts with high skill levels and advancement? Or just the Scouters who think they know it all but complain about the kids not being interested, the parents not being what they should be, and the handbook being awful, and the uniform not being what they want. and professionals not doing their jobs etc. etc. stc... There isn't anything wrong with knowing what your doing when it's the right thing to do is there? Because I know a lot of scout leaders who understand the program and know an awful lot about what they are doing and do it very, very, well. Certainly they are not in need of a good 'budging' as others might be?

So EagleDad am I understanding your post correctly? Some posters misrepresent what I post because "they like it so much that they want to express their take on it."??? I am sorry but that makes no sense at all to me. For what reason can they not share their opinion, without being untruthful about what I posted? You need to explain that a little more in depth for me because I don't get it.

Pappy In your opinion what would do more to enhance the BSAs Brand recognition and quality? A video from national showing the BSA program, or having more local units that followed the BSA program?

Our church does a Scout Mass every Scout Sunday that my family and I attend in uniform with other Scouts and scouters of our faith. Scouts are used as greeters, ushers, altar servers and lectors.

Pappy "Back to the Games thread - Yes - it wasn't the scouts's fault that he was poorly formed. I have no idea what that means. I do not believe I used a school model other than to say that specific skills cannot be expected to be learned by happenstance. Good leaders have plans, and that in Scouting outdoors is the classroom (not my original thought by any means this was introduced by Baden-Powell). None of my posts have ever supported tradition style classroom teaching, like the troops that do merit badge classes in troop meetings. I truly believe that some are so intent on not liking what the scouting program is that they do not actually take the time to read posts that support the program methods.

Pappy AND It's Me, Who are you getting this impression from? Certainly I have never supported the practices you attribute to me. What element of anything I have posted has suggested that troop or patrol scouting is or should be a sit down and listen traditional classroom style program? When did I post anything resembling or supporting an advancement mill? What SPECIFIC element or elements suggest a charm school? If your idea of scouting is to get untrained youth, that belong to other people, lost in the woods to "see if they can find their way back" then God help the ones who do not. That is very irresponsible behavior no matter what you believe good scouting might be. Your critisms are absolute fiction, I never suggested any of them and I welcome any evidence that I did. Hers is a great exaple from It's Me This can be seen in BW's earlier posts where he wanted 90 minutes of training for a new scout patrol. I NEVER SAID THAT. This was an intentional misquote by It's Me to misrepresent what I posted. What I said was that every part of a troop's 90 minute meeting can be used to teach, practice, or apply a scout skill. Anyone paying attention during BASIC Scout leadership training knows that. Now everyone may not take full advantage of the meeting to do that, but that is what the meeting is designed to do. Such intentional misrepesentations seems to have become a common tool on this forum as a way to discredit posters who support the BSA program and its methods.

My religion welcomes them to visit as much as they want, but they cannot be a member without learning and accepting the faith we share, and they cannot be leaders without first becoming members. Sounds familiar.

It's Me, Seriously, what elements of anything I have posted leads you you label it a Charm School?

Getting back to the topic and clearing up what I think is a misrepresentation of what the scouting program is. Religious belief is undeniably a part of scouting. You cannot read the BSA Oath, Law, or Declaration of religious principle and not understand that being religious is and has been a part of Scouting since its beginning. Can anyone point out anything, anywhere, in the BSA training or BSA resources that says the BSA is secular? It does not exist that I am aware of. What you will find is that the BSA is "nonsectarian" and there is a HUGE difference in definition between nonsectarian and secular. How should Faith inform scouting, it should not, Scouting should each scout the opportunity and examples for developing a religious belief of their choosing and give them guidance by example and opportunity to give service to God. It comes back to selecting the right people as scout leaders. (This message has been edited by Bob White)

Twp points I would like to address in this post are ones made by Firekat and Pappy, Beavah. I think Firekat raises and excellent point in that now days time is a premium. You cannot expecct a scout to dilly dally waiting for adventure or for information. One of the elements that makes video games so attractive to scouts at this age is that they require the psrticipant to learn a few specific skills sets and as they take part in the virtual adventure they are advanced to a higher skill level where they must learn new skills or be more proficient at the ones they have already learned in order to get to the next level. Sound familiar? If you think you lose scouts to video games it is because they are doing a better job of using scouting methods than the unit you serve is doing. That brings us to Pappy's comment that "I don't need no stinkin badges" true as an adult you should be progressed passsed that stage of development for most achievements, and have developed a concept of self-reward. A Scout age youth however does need the badges. Recognition is not only a large part of the development of their self essteem, (but like in the video game) the satisfaction of advancing to "the next level" is a large part of what keeps them playing and learning more skills. The recognition program is a large part of the Advancement Method. Scouting is not just a game, it is a game with a purpose and we are supposed to be the teachers of both. Finally, Beavahs comment in his opening post to the thread, Patrols decide to run some canoe trips. Boy signs up because it sounds like fun. No classes, no lesson plans, no curriculum. Isn't safety afloat a lesson plan? Isn't safe swim a lesson plan? Isn't the older scout teaching the younger scouts a class? A set of merit badge requirements is a curriculum. You can't really believe that if a the older scout says "grab the thwart" that the untrained scout will have any idea what he means without it being pointing to and saying "that is a thwart" isn't that instruction? Are they not in an outdoor classroom? Did no one have a plan to teach that? Lastly, you what the scout to learn "without memorization". How exactly does a person recall information for use if it is not committed to memory? Perhaps what you meant isn't that scouting should not be "learning by rote" in which case one would have to wonder how you learned the Scout Oath and Law, and how you teach it today?

Gladly Beavah, but that was not an option you offered. You specifcally asked us to choose between the two and did not offer that there were other options. First, merit badges are not supposed to be troop or patrol activities. Their are designed to allow each INDIVIDUAL scout to determine their own path. So when a Scout meets with the Canoeing merit badge counselor, the ways they will be guided through the merit badge will be as numerous as the number of canoeing marit badge counselors in the nation. That is specifically the way the MB program is intended to work. Their instruction as counselors as far as to what and how they teach is very simple. Basically they are asked to 1) make the learning as hands on as possible. 2) teach whatever you want but it must include the specific requirements of the Merit badge. 3) You must base passing the mb only on the BSA requiremenst, 4) you must test each Scout individually. You cannot expect that any two councelors will teach the subject the same way, and thats expected. Some will be better than other and the scouts will learn from that experience as they learn the mb topic. One of the best canoeingcounseloirs I ever saw was a fellow who was building his own canoe in his garage. (when a scout came to work on the MB they started by helping him build the canoe, as he glued or sanded or even helped clean up the counseor talked to him about the different types of canoes, the parts of the canoes and what their function was, he showed them his other canoes and how they differed, while shaping and sanding the paddles he would explain the differnt strokes. he talk about his canoeing adventures and share photos of his trips. he showed them pictures of the currents and how to read them. They would work on the canoe several times before they ever got in the water, but when they got in the scout was prepared and could practice and apply the things he learned in the "classroom" of the counselors workshop/garage. Thats good counseling! (Do not try to say what B-P would have done, because B-P did not have merit badges. Merit badges are an American creation (created by Ernest Thompson-Seton) and B-P did not like them, so he certainly would not have supported patrols working on them.) Now if you drop the MB portion of your premise, and just ask how you would teach canoeing skills in a troop or patrol setting, that is an entirely different question. Given the two choices you offer I would have to pick...Neither. The first one is just bad and the second incomplete and not particularly safe or adventurous (and yes you can be both). As far as not having a plan, not only can I not imagine an adult going into this without a plan I cannot believe a scout would choose to go into this without a plan. And if they did then what have you taught them about the importance of planning? In fact YOU PLANNED in the scenerios you gave. You simply didn't do a complete plan. you idnedified what was going to be learned, you identified who was going to instruct, you identified how it was going to be instructed, you identified where it was going to be instructed, you just didn't finish the plan. You didn't set a goal to complete the plan. So you obviously aren't against planning, you perhaps are just opposed to finishing. I would think a scout given the opportuunity to learn canoeing would want to know when he could take the learning and go, and how he could evaluate his success. I think a scout would be far more interested and motivated in knowing a timeline than you are.

"No man is much good unless he believes in God and obeys His laws. So every Scout should have a religion....Religion seems a very simple thing: First: Love and serve God. Second: Love and serve your neighbour." (Baden- Powell, Scouting for Boys) It should be noted that Baden-Powell in his day was not much liked by the Catholic Church, and was critized more than once for his opinion that no one religion holds all the right answers as to who and what God is. While he considered himself Christian, he felt that nature was the best church and that rather than being taught a belief in God it was better for one to discover a belief in God. Probably the best way for a scout leader to promote a Scout's "Duty to God" and being "Reverent", is by personal example and how they live the values of their own faith each day.

"A fundamental principle of advancement shall be that the boys' progress is a natural outcome of his activities in the unit." Nothing in that statement suggests that the activities are not planned. If you wait for learning to happen by happenstance not much 'learnin' is gonna take place. Again you strongly suggest that someone suggested that scout instruction is a sit down and listen kind of learning and no one has suggested that in any post yet except for yours. I do not understand your persistant reference to it. Have you looked at any information regarding Baden-Powell and how he taught scouts? Or how he taught scout leaders to lead the program. Have you ever read the teaching agenda for his Brownsea Island camp? There were even parts that were specifically lecture. B-P used planning in his life in and out of scouting. Do you think his actions as a British spy or as the commander at Mafeking had no forethought, no planning, no goals. To think that the lessons of scouting will just magically happen simply by having a patrol has no basis in logic or in application. (This message has been edited by Bob White)

As far as the two proposed methods for earning the merit badge..I would choose neither. Neither one follows the Scouting program methods. There are variety of better ways than either of the methods we are offered in the opening post.

As a Scoutmaster we rarely camped as a troop, each patrol had they own sitye (6) and the adults had a separate site. Once a patrol had their camp site selected they would come get the SPL and show them where their site was. Later that night the SPL would take me on a tour to show me where they were. the Scouts always knew where to find the adult's site and my tent specifically in case of an emergency. On the few occasions when we were in the same area such as a group campground I was always very pleased that we looked nothing like other troops, when everyone else pitched tents in a circle or square pattern (to look pretty)the troop I served were in patrol clusters with everyone pitching their tent facing down wind (you get better air circulation through the tent and better structural stability in a strong wind). They had better outdoor skills than the adults that "RAN" the other troops and would "TELL" scouts where to put their tents. the SPL and ASPL ate with the adults (so that we could do some subtle coaching and counseling as we ate) or they ate by invitation with a patrol. Onm accasion patrols would invite an adult or adults to eat with them, usually to either discuss an issue or to show off a new recipe. BW

In my post in the other thread on this same topic I explain how we promoted and guided scouts into Patrol activities. It is not a matter of CAN patrols do them. They can, in fact as others have pointed out is has been a specific element of scouting since DAY 1, it is a question of DOES the adult leadership know and understand this element, and do they make sure the scouts have the opportunity to grow in skil and maturity through the Patrol Method. I grimace when a scout leader says "my scouts are not ready or able to do activities on there own." What they do not realize is that what they are saying is "the adult leaders of our troop have not seen to the development of the scouts we are supposed to be serving". If you have scouts who have been under your mentoring for YEARS and yet you believe they do have the skills and maturity to be left alone without and adult, then you have been doing things very, very, wrong.

As a Scout our patrol (Hawks) di patrol activities on our own ALL THE TIME. These ranged from biking to the local public swimming pool for the day to overnight campouts on some private land a few miles from our home. At our peak our troop had 8 patrols and most of us did patrol activities separate from the troop activities. As A scoutmaster twenty years later, with 6 patrols in the troop, mostdid patrol activities on their own outside of the troop activities, at first they did them with two adults with them, then with two adults nearby, and in the final stages with no adult leaders on the activity. It depended largely on the readiness of the patrol and the nature of the activity. It was the leadership goals of the adult leadership team to train boys to go from dependence on adult leaders to independence from adult leaders as they grew through Scouting. We realized that the best way for this to happen was to focus on they they ability to lead and cooperate as a Patrol team, and to have a high level of scouting skills. Patrols going on a patrol outing needed to have my perission as the SM to do so. They were rarely denied. As they did each activity we added more requirements to the plan they had to present and diminished the amount of adult participation required. Fo a patrol to be able to go out without adults on an overnighter they had to show they were prepared. They needed to shao a plan; Who is going, What means of transortation are they using (we prefered hiking or biking, What is their travel route, What was their agenda, What troop equipment are they needing (patrols had their own euipmentthey could always take on a patrol outing but they needed to specifically request troop equippment), Where are they going, When are they leaving and when are they returning, and why are they going. We also had a parents permission slip that each scot had to produce a week prior to a patrol opvernighter that explained to the parent that no adult would be p[resent on the outing. Scout outings while always having plenty of time for fun needed a purpose or mission to accomplish. It had to have a skill improvement aspect, merit badge application, or service to others. Rarely did scouts leave the troop prior to aging out. We never did merit badge classes as part of troop meetings, yet nearly every scout aged out as a Life Scout or Eagle Scout. Several of the scouts from the troop served on campstaff at council summer camp, Philmont, Sea Base, and Northern Tier High Adventure Bases. That's what happens when you follow scouting as a fun way to teach and not just a game.

The premise of this discussion ingores what scouting is...an educational game. Baden-Powell introduced through scouting a concept of education that was unheard of at that time. The use of the "outdoor Classroom". Scouting from its very beginning was designed as education geared to the character of a boy. A character that Baden-Powell was convinced was built on energy, wondermemnt of nature, a sense of adventure and a vastly undeveloped knowledge of the world around him. Scouting was never meant to be, and is not today, only a game or only a classroom, but an ingenious mix of both, designed by one man and understood and followed by hundreds of thousands of Scout leaders since him... just...evidently...not all of them.(This message has been edited by Bob White)

As I look back, no one has written that scouting should be like school, or run as a traditional classroom, but you keep suggesting that someone wrote it and supports it. Perhaps you would share where that was ever said. Adults cannot teach youth unless they are licensed? That's gonna throw a monkey wrench into merit badge counceling "Eh!". You might ask Kudu how far back in scouting the "Outdoor Classoom" moedel goes.

That not only makes a lot of sense but that appears to be the track that the BSA is already on.

The BSA has a book available at your local scout shop or on-line at http://www.scoutstuff.org titled "Staging Den and Pack Ceremonies" that is filled with different scripts for all kinds of situations including rank advancement.

You can alread get almost every form on-line at the national website. Why has that not done away with councils if you see that as their primary purpose?