The Latin Scot

I checked my copy of the 1979 Handbook and it does not include the waiver, though the 1988 handbook does. But nowadays there is no such "head start," though as a Webelos leader I wish I could give my boys a boost like that. All I can do is train them and prepare them! Which I guess is the best I can do. :-)

I think the motto of the Cub Scouts is still an essential element for any Boy Scout, or adult for that matter - DO YOUR BEST. No true Scout will accept anything less than his very best effort in all things, whether it's advancement, personal effort, individual integrity, or whatever. Mediocrity is never acceptable to the boy with Scouting in his heart. As leaders we model that ideal in the expectations we have for the young men we work with, and in the expectations we have for ourselves. Requiring 50% attendance at OA elections is a reflection of that principle. The purpose of the OA is to recognize Scouts who perpetually do their best and are willing to participate in a program that extends their opportunities to do good by offering extra service outings and camp experiences. But to successfully determine the Scouts that merit that kind of opportunity, there must be a viable portion of the Troop present who can accurately determine who those people are - the broader the demographic of voters, the more accurate the results will be. 50% is actually quite a low standard when you consider the point of the election. We want to know who the Troop really thinks is ready for the experiences the OA has to offer, so by requiring a large percentage of Troop members to be present, you are getting a better idea of just who those people really should be.

When I offer Den Leader Training courses for new Cub leaders in my council, that's actually a large part of what I try to convey. As a Webelos Den Leader, I think it's important to be aware of the local Boy Scout program so that I can sufficiently prepare my boys, not only for the program, but for the leaders and Troops up to which they will be advancing. My den feeds in to the Troop sponsored by our shared CO, so I always make it a point to attend their committee meetings and to know the SM and his assistants personally. That way I can give them information about the boys moving up soon, any special needs, et cetera, and I in turn can prepare my boys for the program and group they will be entering and the leaders with whom they will be working. I view the WDL as a bridging character between the world of Cub Scouts and Boy Scouts, so I try to be deeply invested in both programs so that I can provide the best Webelos program I can now, while making sure my boys move up to a solid Boy Scout program later. I don't have any kids of my own - I am not even married yet - so I don't know if I will ever be asked to serve as a leader in the Boy Scout Troop. But any Webelos Leader worth his salt will have Boy Scout preparation foremost in his mind as he prepares his activities and works with the boys under his care. This is the last year they get to enjoy to Cub program, so it should be geared towards the transition they are going to face when they move on to the boy-led programs coming up. My personal barometer of success as a Webelos Leader is this - any boy who fails to earn the rank of Scout within his first month in the Boy Scout program isn't entirely to blame. That responsibility lies with me - if I really do my job, they should have it done within the first week or two. When I first started, there were one or two boys who took a long while before making it to Scout. I took that to heart and made the necessary changes to my program and my leadership style. Since then (fingers crossed) none of my boys have taken longer than three weeks to get it done.

That wouldn't work because the SMC has to take place while the Scout is in the Boy Scout program. Work done as a Cub Scout, even a Webelos Scout, cannot be counted towards Boy Scout advancement.

If the Webelos leaders have been doing their job, you can cut another month off of that time frame - the requirements for the Scouting Adventure adventure are almost identical to those for Scout rank, so ideally they should be able to pass off that rank after their first meeting. That's always my goal with my Webelos Scouts; I prep them in the weeks leading up to their advancement to Boy Scouts so that they are prepared to meet with their Scoutmaster and pass things off at that first Patrol gathering. But it does take careful planning on the Webelos leaders' part, and close coordination with the Troop leadership as well.

LOL. Don't get me wrong, that sounds like a cute idea and it would be great for school or a family council or something - but not for Cub Scouts, where we have enough requirements to complete already!

Okay, that makes more sense. And I apologize for the long diatribe; I just had an instance a few days ago trying to deal with a neighboring pack that asked me to come do a training and I arrived to find their program was WAY WAY OFF, so I am a little skittish when I hear about using the Patrol Method for little kids lately, lol. And I have never heard of a "sit upon," but it sounds ridiculous, albeit cute. Don't we have enough to do without wasting time making fluffy chairs? I am totally with you on that one, haha.

This will be a crazy year for packs implementing both girls AND 5 year-olds! I am honestly relieved my CO isn't accepting either, LOL.

When you say "acting as patrols," do you mean in regards to camping only, or through the whole program in general? I will be frank - as a Webelos leader and an child educator I am not in favor of this idea. The patrol method is, specifically, allowing the boys to manage their own affairs, and leaving them to their own devices when it comes to activities, cooking, etc. Boys of Cub Scout age are too young for this practice to work. There is solid educational, pedagogical support for the leaders guiding activities for boys this young. They need to have solid, positive modeling for how activities are supposed to work in the first place, and they don't have the self-discipline, knowledge or skills they need at this age to do that on their own. As a Child Development Specialist, I would intervene immediately if I knew a Pack near me was attempting to fully implement the patrol method. The Webelos program is where preparation for the Patrol Method begins - they practice it for a month, and then spend time talking about it and how it succeeds (or fails) based on their experience. They do NOT implement it fully; the purpose of the adventure is to prepare them for Boy Scouts by giving them a sample of what the program will be like - it is not the program itself, nor should it be. Jump-starting the Boy Scout program by pushing it in Webelos is not age-appropriate, nor is it wise - the programs are different for a reason, and the boys are being short-changed out of the wonderful Webelos program that is in place by skipping forward to the Boy Scout methods without giving them the full Webelos/Arrow of Light experience. What surprises me is that the scaffolding of skills and knowledge clearly delineated from rank to rank seems to be largely ignored by this move. Each Cub rank's adventure are specifically designed to gradually move boys towards Patrol practices, but by setting the example through attentive adult leadership appropriate to their ages. Tigers especially need hands-on support from their leaders and parents, not just to get things done safely and correctly, but emotionally as well - remember, these are still children, and they deserve to be treated as such. Once they are old enough for Boy Scouts, you can loosen the tether on them more safely. Now, as far as cooking and setting up at camp activities - sure, let them help out, and PLEASE make them a part of the fun. But DON'T expect them to be self-sufficient at this age, and don't treat them like patrols. The Den System is designed for boys this age - don't move them up before they are ready, don't cheat them out of the Cub Program by skipping ahead, and let them be children with loving, involved leaders who help and guide them so that, when they are finally old enough for Boy Scouts, they are truly prepared for the program. *** Despite all this, a nice dining fly set-up is always nice, and looks great at festivals and events.

From blog.scoutingmagazine.org: https://blog.scoutingmagazine.org/2018/02/14/after-roaring-success-lions-will-move-from-pilot-to-full-time-part-of-cub-scouting/

Welcome to the forums! Glad to have you.

Do I count as a Millennial if I was born in '83? I dunno, as a teacher I have to keep a sharp eye on my e-mails in case parents or administration has notifications that I need to be aware of - if I take longer than a day to reply to a message, there is always a dang good reason for it. So maybe that disqualifies me from being part of that generation, lol.

It was signed in DC, so Eastern time. Sorry, I forget that because I live in California, my 11:03 is different than yours.

Happy Birthday BSA! Begun at exactly 11:03 am, February 8th, 1910. Here's to 108 more years of serving our nation and its youth! I have sat at my computer for the last 15 minutes just to be sure I posted that at exactly the right time, lol.

I think this is wonderful! Congratulations Mr. Eugene Cerniglia!

Huh. I have never had a designated "snack time," and I haven't had a single comment made about it in the 2+ years I've been the Webelos Den Leader. Sure, every now and then I may have extra cookies that I share with them, or extra holiday candy or whatever, but it's never a regular thing, and if anything it makes the boys more eager to work for them whenever treats do somehow materialize. But nobody has ever asked about it, and I don't think it's something I would ever really consider, at least not for boy the age I'm working with. Besides we're usually up and doing so much that there just wouldn't be a convenient moment for them to stop and munch on snacks during meetings.

The only thing that can doom Scouting is people who allow themselves to believe that Scouting is doomed. If we embrace the pessimistic idea that Scouting's days are numbered, then sure, it won't last long. But while I may not be able to rescue the perceptions of cynics and fatalists, I can certainly save Scouting in the eyes of the boys in my Den or Troop. I can instill in them the ideals and aims of Scouting, and lead them to believe in the power of this movement, however it may be distorted or warped by reactionaries and so-called 'progressives.' I can motivate them to live the Scout Oath and Law, and learn the lessons and skills embodied in the Scouting movement since the beginning. Scouting is only dead if you let it die. But so long as it lives in me, and in those who believe in it, it can never truly go away. So why give up hope, when you can instead labor to instill hope in the boys you work with? You fear the end of Scouting as you watch the top come crumbling down? Then counteract the collapse by establishing a foundation of bulwarks from the bottom up - build it up in the boys, and they will hold it up in the future. I refuse to subscribe to fatalist ideologies that simply wait to claim "I saw it coming!" when they end comes. Poor fools; they just end up waiting and waiting forever ....

Wow I thought this was a joke at first ... As a den leader, I would be appalled if I wasn't invited into the monthly committee meetings. In fact all parents, den leaders, and interested parties expected to be at our committee meetings, and we have a great program going. But I would hesitate to be part of any program where the den leaders, the very core of the Cub Program, are not welcome.

Ah, the yearly meteorological meanderings of the marmota monax ... Remind me why we get six me weeks of winter if he sees his shadow - doesn't that mean the sun is in fact shining, which should be indicative of impending spring, yet an overcast sky means he doesn't see his shadow, and thus somehow, more winter? This is why I would never trust the weather with an overgrown rodent.

I agree with the plaque idea; in fact the Scout Store offers a number of examples that would be perfect, appropriate gifts. Have it engraved with a lovely message and relevant information regarding his tenure, and it would be just the thing. Regardless of whether it's entirely appropriate or not, I feel a gift card is the gift that says you don't know me. A nice plaque or even a statuette is a dignified memento he can put among his personal effects in a place of honor. I would go with that if possible.

Yes I do. Just as much as you do in fact, and your question, while rhetorical I assume, brings out an important point that must be made. It is a bit condescending to imply that, if one really knew BP's writings (as you do), he would come to different conclusions than the ones I have drawn. You imply that you must have a broader knowledge of his works than I do. However, I have also read nearly all his writings available in the US, and a few still found only in Britain, so I'm afraid your attempt to undermine my comments by labeling them as "unique interpretations" cannot be based on a greater familiarity with his writings, nor on any other evident advantage of intellect or literacy - so it can only be based on the fact that you disagree, and so you want to dismantle the conclusions of my post by trying to show a superior understanding of the Scouting program than mine, made through a suggestion that what I got out of his works really wasn't important - it's really just knights and such, nothing important. Unfortunately that is not so. I have also read every edition of the Scouting Handbook (all of which I own), all of William Hillcourts writings, decades of manuals and fieldbooks and magazines and articles - yes, I understand what Scouting was meant to accomplish every bit as much as you do. And we disagree. And - that's okay, There will always be differences of opinion. But before we can find a place of accord where we can more forward, we have to find where we agree. You did not, for example, seem to have read my post very carefully. I never said character was not important in the early days. I said that it has been emphasized far more now than it was before - and that has always been a changing feature of the program. For a few early decades the push was all about the outdoors and woodcraft (a term we never hear in Scouting anymore). Then there was a period where it seemed citizenship was the holy center of all things Scouting (oh those heady WWII years), and in the 70's there was that odd attempt to focus on skills of Scouting instead of the aims of Scouting. During all periods, the same things are taught and the same virtues are extolled, but with each new generation different aspects of Scouting seemed to capture the wants and needs of families.These days it's leadership and character development. But in the earliest days, frankly, much of it was "making boys into better men." I see I received my first downvote ever for my last post. In a way, that makes me feel like I must have said something right. Nowadays, to claim that any activity, character trait, or quality of character is inherently masculine or feminine is anathema, and considered a dated concept. But I hold to the essential idea that men and women are different in fundamental ways, and that neither can reach its full potential without the other, because each is distinct from the other. Our complementary natures make us more than the sum of our parts. Nowadays, that's going to be looked down upon as we gender-wash our programs. But the early leaders and founders would have taken those differences for granted. It's amazing that in these times, they have to be defended. Fortunately, I don't mind being unpopular for doing so.

First of all, thank you for the link to that article @Eagledad. I found it well-written, level-headed, and much-needed voice of sense in society's ongoing war against families. As for the idea of Scouting focusing on "leadership training and character development," and those being "gender-neutral" (never one of my favorite terms) -you will find after reading through Scouting's published materials over the years that those have been pushed and emphasized far more now in the past two decades than they ever were before. Yes, they were always a part of it, but you are failing to recognize that the very idea of Scouting, the core of its foundation and the center of all its facets, was the idea that boys are different from girls, with a greater need for active, adventurous learning, and that society lacks, indeed, desperately needs, a channel through which restless boys could learn the skills and knowledge they need to become strong, intelligent, honorable men. Who would dare presume that masculinity is important to Scouting, that "making boys into men" somehow matters in our programs? Oh yes. Lieutenant-General Robert Stevenson Smyth Baden-Powell, 1st Baron Baden-Powell. Or just Old BP as the kids called 'im. If you do not understand the central place masculine development has in Scouting, and the massive importance it had to Baden-Powell, Daniel Carter Beard, William Hillcourt, Earnest Thompson Seaton, and all the early founders of Scouting, then you do not understand what Scouting was meant to accomplish. The very impetus of Scouting was the recognition that more and more boys were growing up in urban or suburban settings without opportunities to develop in ways that align with masculine development. Boys learn differently from girls, and new trends in lifestyles made it increasingly difficult for millions of boys to get the physical, intellectually stimulating and involved experiences they require to prepare themselves for life. This became painfully clear at the end of the 19th century, when tens of thousands of boys, scions of the industrial revolution, wandered the dirty and polluted streets of cities around the world looking for whatever activities might keep them busy in a world of stifling urban development and increasing poverty. They needed something to pull them out of the slums and gangs and troubles of their situation so that they could become good and honest men who could learn to work and provide for their families and contribute to their communities. They needed to be rescued. It was the general recognition of that need that caused multiple Scout-like organizations to suddenly appear all over America at the same time Baden-Powell was refining his "Scouting project" in England with one purpose in mind - not to create a leadership factory, but to help boys avoid the pitfalls and bleak futures of a continually emasculating society by creating a program that would counter the disturbing trends of the day with a program that would help active boys become strong men, help curious boys become intelligent men, help honest boys become honorable men. So effective was his model that soon all the other organizations in America adopted his program, added to it their own structure and cultural flavor, and created the Boy Scouts of America. Its immediate explosion of growth can be attributed to one single idea - boys want to become good men, and Scouting can help show them how. That was the heart of Scouting - boys could enlist in a Troop, have exciting adventure and run their own groups all while having loads of fun - and all of it was designed to help those boys become better men, by tailoring it specifically to how boys learn, what boys love, and what boys need. You cannot take that idea of "making boys into better men" out of Scouting unless you completely and utterly ignore its very raison d'etre. It is meant to help develop positive masculine virtues in boys to create better men, who then become better leaders, citizens, and family members. And the trend of the last two decades towards taking that part out of it, as can be seen in the changes to the Scouting Handbook over the past few editions, has affected the BSA in negative ways. Scouting was truly a place for boys to explore their world and channel their energies in safe and productive ways as they figured out what it meant to be a man. Now that it is slowly feels the pressure to become just another activity program to put on a resume, it is losing the very thing it tries so hard to build in its member - confidence. And the declining numbers of the past few years is reflecting that. If National would ignore the boo hoos of the far left and stick to its central purpose, of making boys into better men, it would probably surprise itself with how successful the program could be again.

Understood. That kind of focus will certainly be important after High School when you more on to any kind of university, college, or trade school setting!

This is mildly amusing to me ... when you say "actually enjoy my time before Eagle," does that mean that most people ... don't? Or that somehow things will change after you earn it? Don't get me wrong, you have a lot going on in school, and you should definitely focus on that for the time being. But that's always the risk boys run with Scouting - every year they get even busier, and for too many boys, 18 comes before they know it and they are left with more hurdles than they expected when they actually get to the application process. I was talking a few months ago with a 13 year-old Life Scout who was telling me a similar feeling he had; he said he was in no hurry to get his Eagle, and that he wanted to spend time enjoying Scouts before getting it done. The point I made to him then, which I make again now, is that this line of thinking wrongly implies that once the rank of Eagle is earned Scouting somehow "ends." Get your kicks in now Life Scouts, because once you get your Eagle the fun stops and the wilderness is closed and it's time for you to move on with your life! I more or less told him that if he quit Scouting as soon as he got to Eagle, he missed the whole point of it, regardless of how old he was. Fortunately he took those words to heart - he turned 14 last week, and his Eagle Court of Honor is this Friday. You can and should be happy with where you are at, but at the same time, it does mean that you are choosing to wait before moving forward, which is by definition a degree of procrastination. It isn't saying whether it's good or bad or right or wrong - it's simply that for now, you are putting off your Scouting advancement, and will presumably get back to it at a later time. It is important to prioritize, and right now school comes out on top for you. For that reason though, I would think it somewhat pretentious to put "Eagle candidate" on a resume. It comes off as an attempt to take advantage of the reputation of Eagle Scouts by stating, more or less, someday I might be one! or not, but still - hire me! The proper term for an Eagle candidate is a Life Scout, but it seems people just want employers to see the word EAGLE in hopes that it will give them some edge over other applicants. It would appear from past posts however that you are more than capable and experienced enough to put out a good resume already; you don't need to pad it by suggesting you are working to become something that, as of now, you are not. Later when you have completed the requirements and pass your Board of Review, you can definitively place "Eagle Scout" among the other honors and awards you have earned.

This is ADORABLE! Campy (tee hee!) as all get out, but I love it!