DuctTape

We have done similar. I was wondering about more like a sports draft. It could include some pomp and circumstance which coupd add to patrol spirit. Raven PL: "The Raven Patrol selects John Q Smith from pack 86". *applause* JQSmith is presented the Raven Patrol emblem by the SPL. Patrols might even be encouraged to have den chiefs among their ranks to "scout" future patrol mates. Just thinking aloud here...

I have never seen it done, but has anyone ever had a plc induct new scouts into their patrol like a "draft"?

As cubmaster you should be making the arrangements for the campout, the den leaders need to do the rest. Re:sleeping. i am an outdoors guy. i sleep better camping than at home. a lot is getting used to it. BP slept in a hammock (illustrations show it was probably a "stretcher bed" aka cot).

GSA is an unsecured creditor? who knew.

I think some of this stems from scouters trying to create loopholes by saying "we won't call it a scouting event" simply as a means to avoid the rules when it clearly was a scouting event.

Barry, do you still have the documents for that course and would be willing to share them.?

Yep. It also promotes the "one and done" mentality and worse disincentivizes teaching, leadership and growth.

I get the point, however in my travels far too often the "scout learns" is the same thing as "the scout is tested". In the learning phase it is expected for the scout to teach others, to develop leadership as well as ensure they have learned the skill. If an adult just signs off because "they saw them do it once" or even without the scout being a significant part of the process, it denies the scout the real benefit of the advancement method and the sign off is the goal, not a method. Without having the scouts "ask" it denies them the opportunity to take ownership of their own journey, grow in self-reliance, and personal responsibility. I can see some instances where the PL could ask one of his scouts to "do xyz " and let him know that this would count as being tested for a tenderfoot requirement. However, as the scout grows, they should be taking more and more responsibility for their own advancement. I am sure this discussion does not come close to dealing with all the iterations and best practices. There are many ways to accomplish it.

I agree to an extent. The training is done while doing the activity. But this training is not when the requirement has been met. This is the first phase, "A scout Learns". After the scout has learned the skill, taught is to others and feels like he is ready, then he goes to his PL or mB counselor and says, "I'd like to be tested on xyz" . A scout who successfully passes the test, then is recognized as having "earned the badge".

no. those are not hallmarks of "toxic masculinity". Hallmarks of toxic masculinity are: denying young men the opportunity to express emotion except for anger. Promoting violence as the only acceptable means for conflict resolution. Treating women as objects. And defending all of these as the way to define "manliness".

I agree with most of what has been said. As far as dividing, if you do decide to go with NSPs, let them decide how to group themselves. While it might seem easier to say "two groups of eight". They might prefer a 4-6-6, while not necessarily "ideal by the book", the patrols are not for forever either. Then begins the difficult balance scouts changing patrols vs maintaining patrol culture. This is where adult association mentoring comes in to help scouts "make ethical decisions".

looking at the project phases, I would suggest more on the phases of the "execute the project", not the phases of the eagle application. At the very least encourage the scout to plan out these phases so the "day" of the project he isn't trying to figure out "what comes next" and "who is doing what". For example: At minimum for any project: Phases could be. 1. Prep area 2. Stage 1 of project (detail) 3. Stage 2... 4. Stage 3... 5. Cleanup area

As a related aside, for years we have heard the refrain regarding summer camps as advancement focused (mB mills in worst cases) because "that is what scouts and their parents want". At the same time we see camps struggling to stay afloat due to steady decreasing attendance. It appears that the common refrain is not an accurate reflection of reality as scouts/parents are voting with their feet. So, to stay on topic councils should reorganize with a focus on shoring up attendance and financials of their summer camp (and other offerings). First recommendation is to begin operating camps which "may provide advancement opportunities" but are primarily "a weeklong adventure for scouts with their patrol; emphazing fun, leadership, and doing things for themselves and others."

Agreed. And to add one other aspect, the oft quoted "Train them, trust them, let them lead." has a specific order to it beginning with training.

Yes, the Chartering Org being the PTA makes all the difference.

The NFL? Not sure about assets, but definitely dependent of parent company.

I have never had an issue. No different than sleeping under a tarp on the ground. There is condensation on the underside of the tarp. This is true in tents as well. Sometimes moreso due to lack of airflow. I wonder if the texas climate plays a role. I will check with some fellow hammockers in TX.

Is a hammock a possibility for you?

As I have stated before the JTE is a measure of quantity not quality, therefore not a way to measure "excellence". I think it thus a barrier to improve units, and scouting in general as it perpetuates "check box" philosophy which then permeates other areas of program.

Training regarding how "The Methods lead to the Aims". How to use each method specifically to reach the aims, and also how inappropriate use is a hindrance. These could be broken down into multiple modules. 1. Overview of Methods to Aims. 2. Using each method to best accomplish the aims. (one for each method?). In person, hands-on training is best but digital is better than nothing. IMO only in-person training should "count" as training. Digital is a resource summary, but not complete training. I would incorporate this philosophy into all trainings (except YP.)

Somewhere along the way I learned the word "thrifty". Now where was that again?

I agree the structure and guidelines are good. The problem is lack of focus on quality in all levels of scouting.

True. I was responding the the idea that scouting is expensive for the scouts, and troops. I apologize for not being more clear.

It doesn't have to be this way. The quid pro quo in days gone by was the networking between the business leaders in exchange for their businesses supporting scouts both financially and with time. It is unfortunate that todays business leaders see scouting, education, community, etc... as a resource for their business to exploit instead of engaging as partners (with their "payout" being the networking between each other). It is short sighted on their part.

I think your recognition of the low hanging fruit is spot on. Scouting doesn't have to be expensive at all. Very little in donations is needed, those would supplement but the scouts could do things to earn their own way for a campout. At its core, Scouting has little $ cost. We (BSA) has taken the easy, yet expensive approach. To buy high end tents for a troop is expensive. It is cheaper for scouts to make their own. Boys Life used to have plans for all kinds of camping gear to make. As did the Fieldbook. A new patrol comprised of scouts gathered from the "low hanging fruit" mentored by a Scouter with vision can help deliver a high quality scouting program at very little cost.