dkurtenbach

1. Get thread the same color as the border of the patch. 2. For each stitch, come up from the inside of the shirt through the back of the border of the badge. 3. Once through the badge border, pull the thread through; to complete the stitch, insert the needle into the shirt outside the badge border right next to where the needle came up through the border. When you tighten the stitch, the thread should be parallel to the border thread and disappear into it, rather than cutting across it. 4. When inserting the needle back into the shirt (step 3), insert the point slightly under the edge of the badge so you can't see the insertion point. You shouldn't see the sewing thread at all on the outside of the shirt when done (as long as you are working with an embroidered badge edge). 5. After inserting the needle back into the shirt (steps 3 and 4) and tightening the stitch, move the needle over to the next stitch point on the inside of the shirt and come up (step 2). Dan Kurtenbach Fairfax, VA(This message has been edited by dkurtenbach)

Twocubdad wrote: "I fear that BSA is already expanding beyond the means of most units to deliver on the programs they are selling . . . If we're going to sell these Mountain Dew experiences, BSA is going to have to rethink it's model for delivering them. Expecting a troop of 12 boys and three adults to have this level of expertise is unrealistic." I agree that a cool high adventure program is beyond the capabilities of many individual units. But for Scouts in such units, I think the model for such a program already exists. Each year, my council has lots of slots for provisional crews for each of the national high adventure bases, led by well-trained and experienced adults. Our council high adventure base is now offering a provisional crew option. There's no reason that additional, low cost, nearby adventures for provisional crews could not be created at the council level. Additionally, we regularly have troops or crews that end up with extra slots for adventure trips of all kinds and open them up to Scouts from other units. And we have troops and crews joining forces for adventure trips from the very beginning. Not every Scout will want to participate in high adventure, and we do have to maintain a great, fun program for them. But for those Scouts who do want high adventure, we should be able to provide it either inside our outside the unit. Dan Kurtenbach Fairfax, VA

Better than in 1962? Using computer technology and electronic communication. But that doesn't mean that BSA is doing it well now. As for what BSA is doing right, I'd agree that promoting high adventure and outdoorsmanship is one. It wasn't many years ago that I was very concerned that BSA was turning away from outdoorsmanship. I'd also add: retaining the Scout Oath and Law unchanged.

Many discussions have lots to say about things BSA is doing wrong or not doing at all. Just for a change of pace, what is BSA doing right? Dan Kurtenbach Fairfax, VA

The concept of Roundtable is fundamentally flawed: "Unit Scouters, we want you to come in here once a month so that we can give you training and information that we think you should have (whether or not _you_ want it or need it or already have it)." I think that is why a good Roundtable is a rare thing. For a lot of people, it is like the dentist summoning you for a checkup then spending most of the time going over how to brush and floss. Dan Kurtenbach Fairfax, VA

Whether what you had to say belonged in this thread or not, your comments really caused me to think and re-think about my views, and I appreciate that very much. Thanks a lot! Dan Kurtenbach Fairfax, VA

Yep, in the system I am describing, membership in the "community" is not treated as a right that is so precious that members can abuse it over and over again and only have to do a few pushups. Rather, membership is the benefit of a contract that the member makes -- in exchange for the ability to participate in Scouting, he agrees to live by a certain code; indeed, he swears an oath on his honor. If he doesn't hold up his end of the bargain, he's out. Whether he stays out and how long he stays out is up to him, because all he has to do is re-commit himself to live by the code, to make up for his breach. Because the point of Scouting isn't to build a community; it is to build individuals of character. Dan Kurtenbach Fairfax, VA

Nonsense? Hardly. Let me reiterate: "The individual circumstances of the breach, thoughtfully considered, will usually lead the adult in charge to a reasonable determination. Can the boy stay at the meeting or activity (likely to be quickly recalled to play again once he decides to follow the rules)? Or does he need to go home -- to be welcomed back to the troop at such time as he shows that he (himself -- without a parent keeping him on a leash) will follow the rules (and makes good any damage he may have caused)?" In other words, the period between a lad being called for breaking the rules, and his acceptance of responsibility for the breach, could be a matter of seconds, or minutes, or perhaps the remainder of a meeting, or an afternoon -- he may never get sent home, if the adult, knowing the boy and the circumstances, determines that the lad's thought process might be aided by seeing the other Scouts having fun. It's about teaching a boy the rules -- the Scout Law. Individual responsibility for his own conduct in the troop, individual responsibility for knowing and agreeing to the rules. The threat of punishment by the troop just calls on a boy to think about his own personal discomfort, nothing more. Taking a lad out of the game until he is ready to play by the rules requires him to decide for himself whether he wants to continue Scouting. Comparing the game of Scouting to competitive sports? In competitive sports, the penalties are largely designed to compensate the other team (or other players, for individual sports) for the competitive advantage gained by breaking the rules. Scouting is not a competitive sport. To the extent there are competitions (such as patrol competitions, or competitions at camporees, for example), those competitions have their own internal rules and penalties related to the subject matter of the competition. That's not what we're talking about here. Though if we were, we'd want to include sports like hockey (penalty: sit down) and basketball (penalty for x number of fouls: sit down). Dan Kurtenbach Fairfax, VA

For the most part, we aren't counselors, social workers, clergy, or other kids' parents. We're just volunteer leaders, here to do the best we can for the boys who are here to play the game of Scouting. The game of Scouting has rules -- we call it "Law." When someone breaks the rules of the game he is no longer welcome to play. The individual circumstances of the breach, thoughtfully considered, will usually lead the adult in charge to a reasonable determination. Can the boy stay at the meeting or activity (likely to be quickly recalled to play again once he decides to follow the rules)? Or does he need to go home -- to be welcomed back to the troop at such time as he shows that he (himself -- without a parent keeping him on a leash) will follow the rules (and makes good any damage he may have caused)? That's all. We're not in the business of setting penalties such as suspensions or expulsions, or enforcing "three-strike" rules or "no tolerance" rules, or doling out other punishments. Such things are the realm of the boy's own parents. We're simply umpires. We're here to maintain a safe, healthy, and fair game of Scouting for those who want to play. Dan Kurtenbach Fairfax, VA

Shortridge, great post. I wholeheartedly agree. Dan Kurtenbach Fairfax, VA

Shortridge wrote: "I look at the programs my daughter is involved in - dance classes and youth theatre - and think of how they pitched themselves. Rather than selling the benefits, these programs - growing very rapidly - sell the fun. Few children in them are going to end up professional dancers or actors, and that's freely acknowledged. Yet many end up continuing from a young age into their teenage years because dancing and acting are enjoyable. Parents - and kids - are sold on the immediate fun, not on the future benefit of what dance and theatre will do to build their character." I would suggest that parents are not sold just on the immediate fun (though it is certainly good to have your child in a program where he or she is having fun). In addition to the fun, parents can _see_ real and rapid benefit to the child from things like dance and theater and piano and tae kwon do. Those benefits are things like physical fitness, development of confidence from performing in front of people, having to actually learn something worthwhile (physical or otherwise non-scholastic) and be able to _do_ it (possibly for the rest of their lives), and learning from experts. These are all things that Scouting comes close to, but often misses the mark. While we have physical activities, we generally don't offer any programs for regular physical training or practice in fitness. There are a few communication-related program elements in Cub Scouts, Boy Scouts, and Venturing, but they are all short-term, once-in-a-while things. And Scouts generally do not practice skills with the object of performing for audiences. Scouting has lots of worthwhile, life-skill type elements, but parents never really see the good stuff because it happens out in the woods. And while there is some learning from experts (such as through merit badges), very little is really long-term tutelage. Dan Kurtenbach Fairfax, VA

Sasha wrote: "I'm working on pack and troop recruitment right now with my DE to make it more exciting and more representative of what scouting really is. I looked at beascout.org this am and saw the pictures of boys doing things we never do. And I asked myself, 'why?'" I think the notion of "what Scouting really is" (as opposed to "what Scouting should be") is debatable, but perhaps in another thread. Assuming that you are talking about more adventuresome outdoor activities, I would suggest: 1. The first priority for many troops is to have campouts where T-2-1 rank requirements can be completed. The best setting for many of those requirements is a car campout at a nearby campground. 2. As you noted, "Lots of leaders are capable of presenting material from the handbook. Few do it in an exciting and boy-friendly way." And doing things other than a car campout is beyond the skill, enthusiasm, and/or comfort zone of many adult leaders. 3. Much of the really adventurous stuff is either (a) complicated for the troop to arrange on its own, or (b) costly if the troop goes to an outfitter or commercial vendor. 4. It takes thought, research, and imagination to come up with more adventurous activities for the troop that are relatively simple and cheap and don't require a lot of skill or resources to accomplish. Getting something like that going -- including getting the support of Scouts and parents -- takes a lot of work up front that many folks simply won't or can't do. Dan Kurtenbach Fairfax, VA (This message has been edited by dkurtenbach)

BSA24 wrote: "Filling out a project write up and having it rejected multiple times is not fun with a purpose. Even having a guide to advancement is not fun with a purpose. "Advancement in the Boy Scout program has become this dominating force of sea lawyering that isn't fun. "How is any of this arguing about advancement guides fun? How is being grilled in a BOR fun?" ------------------ The most disheartening trend I've seen in Boy Scouting over the last 15 years is the ever-increasing emphasis on earning awards for their own sake -- including Eagle Scout. That is, the goal is the award, not what the award supposedly represents. Eagle Scout, in particular, is viewed as an important resume item. The result is an ever-increasing number of advancement "classes," merit badge "universities," merit badge worksheets and homework. Boy Scouting has become school, with the same emphasis on grades rather than the underlying subjects. As I've stated previously, I think this is reflected in the Boy Scout rank requirements. I believe (and I know many disagree) that Advancement has become split off from Program, such that Advancement now has its own purposes and no longer reflects a goal of skill and knowledge proficiency, despite the language of the Rules and Regulations and the Guide to Advancement. The vast majority of Scouts, Scouters, and parents never see those interpretations, and go by what the requirements themselves actually say. And they -- and the unit practices that they develop -- cannot be faulted for strictly following the language of the requirements and interpreting "explain" as "explain," not "do," or for signing something off after it has been done correctly once, because that is all the requirement calls for. And parents like Scouting to be school. They want to see something tangible that shows that their investment in time and money is worthwhile. Not much to see on a campout or hike; but badges -- now badges mean something. Badges are progress. And by and large, adult leaders are parents too, and they like badges. Cub Scouting has trained them to like lots and lots of badges, and lots of lots of sign-offs, and lots and lots of progress. They can't be faulted for this either. I'm not sure how long the notion that Cub Scouting is more fun will actually last. The New Delivery Method seems to place more emphasis on getting through requirements and earning badges on a schedule. Dan Kurtenbach Fairfax, VA

There is a radio commercial I've been hearing the last couple of weeks, talking about stuff that accumulates in your house, stuff that you have to step over, stuff that has been there so long you don't even see it anymore. You've got junk! And they can haul it away. BSA has junk. We have to remember that our program is run by amateur volunteers, many of them coming in with no Scouting background at all and no idea of what Scouts do -- they just want to help and do something good for their kids. And I think BSA gives us an organization, administrative burdens, and even a program that is ridiculously complicated. Why are Achievements and Electives counted differently at the Bear level than at the Wolf Level? Why do we have Progress Toward Rank beads, rank badges, Arrow Points, Compass Patch, Compass Points, Achievement Badges, Academic Belt Loops, Sports Belt Loops, service stars, religious award knots, and Summertime Activity pins? What is Bobcat really? Why is the Arrow of Light rank badge different from other rank badges and worn in different locations? And this is all just Cub Scouts. And really, what the heck is a "ScoutParent"? (These are rhetorical questions, by the way -- not intended to be answered.) There is a lot of junk in Scouting that needs to be pulled out and hauled away so that adult leaders have more time to focus on good unit programs. Dan Kurtenbach Fairfax, VA

SeattlePioneer wrote: "The program of each unit is unique. How can you mass market a program that is unique to each of hundreds or thousands of different units? "You may be able to create a generalized interest, but you aren't going to be able to have people sign up on a website and then be assigned to a particular unit. "Each unit is too distinctive, I think." ------------------------ I think that BSA suffers from putting out a product that is highly inconsistent from unit to unit. Of course, there is a fear that improving consistency from unit to unit would mean not only eliminating units that fall below a certain minimum standard, but reducing the quality of highly successful units to make the product more uniform. There is also a widely-accepted notion that the ability to have distinctive unit programs and personalities rather than one-size-fits all is a great strength of Scouting. Thus I think it would be very difficult to make any structural changes to Scouting programs in the interest of improving unit-to-unit consistency. As SeattlePioneer noted, that is a big obstacle to marketing and recruiting. Dan Kurtenbach Fairfax, VA

Advancement Committee Policies and Procedures, #33088, 2008 Printing, available online at http://scoutmaster.typepad.com/2008AdvancementGuideBook.pdf Page 23, fourth paragraph: "Educators and counselors agree that the best way to build confidence is through measurement. Self confidence is developed by measuring up to a challenge or a standard. Peer confidence develops when the same measuring system is used for everyone when all must meet the same challenge to receive equal recognition. Confidence in leaders comes about when there is consistency in measuring when leaders use a single standard of fairness." Guide to Advancement 2011, #33088, 2011 Printing, available online at http://www.scouting.org/filestore/pdf/33088.pdf Page 18, paragraph 4.2.0.0: "Both adult and youth leaders approve Boy Scout and Varsity Scout advancement. This permits greater emphasis on standards and more consistency in measurement, but it also places another level of importance on teaching and testing."(This message has been edited by dkurtenbach)

Make no mistake -- Baden-Powell's "level of effort" standard ("Do Your Best") was long ago abandoned by BSA for the Boy Scouting program. The predecessor to the current Guide to Advancement, "Advancement Committee Policies and Procedures," was very explicit on this point: "Educators and counselors agree that the best way to build confidence is through measurement. Self confidence is developed by measuring up to a challenge or a standard. Peer confidence develops when the same measuring system is used for everyone when all must meet the same challenge to receive equal recognition. Confidence in leaders comes about when there is consistency in measuring when leaders use a single standard of fairness." The current Guide to Advancement has toned this down somewhat, but retained the concept: "Both adult and youth leaders approve Boy Scout and Varsity Scout advancement. This permits greater emphasis on standards and more consistency in measurement, but it also places another level of importance on teaching and testing." Dan Kurtenbach Fairfax, VA(This message has been edited by dkurtenbach)(This message has been edited by dkurtenbach)

2010 census data showed a male population, ages 5-17, of 26 million. We have approximately 2.5 million youth members in Cub Scouting, Boy Scouting, and Varsity Scouting. I have two concerns in particular about current BSA programs. First, BSA has largely abandoned recruitment of Boy Scouts from sources other than Cub Scout packs. Even the recommended Boy Scout program recognizes this -- the New Scout patrol and First Class First Year are built around groups coming into a troop in a narrow time window in a particular time of the year. Ironically, the Boy Scouting program is perfectly designed for boys who were _not_ Cub Scouts and for boys even two years older to join and advance at their own pace. Second, I have long believed that Scouting's biggest challenge is the wide variation in the quality of programs delivered by Scout units. There are some very good unit programs, and some very poor unit programs, and everything in between. I think the absence of any enforcement of minimum quality standards makes possible lots of small units that don't have enough people resources to survive, and lots of units of all sizes with poor programs. And there are way too many kids whose Scouting experience will not be particularly good, and so won't bring their own kids to Scouting in twenty years. Yet the incentives to professionals and districts and councils make it more important to keep poor units on the books than to get kids into good programs. Dan Kurtenbach Fairfax, VA

I think it does have to be fixed at the national level. Great unit programs attract youth, yes. But great unit programs are temporary and largely dependent on specific individuals and local conditions -- factors that cannot be readily duplicated in other units. No youth joins Scouts to have his character built. As long as National persists in making intangibles like character and leadership the _public_ message and identity of Scouting, we make lots of conservative adults happy but it doesn't help with membership. WE HAVE TO KEEP THOSE PURPOSES, but stop trying to market them to the general public. Youth want fun and challenge. Parents want results they can see: performance (as in sports) and achievement (as in school grades and Scout ranks and awards). So, emphasize outdoor adventure activities where it is obvious that there is both fun and challenge, the activity is easily understandable, and parents can easily observe as spectators. Things like COPE, zip lines, mountain biking, climbing, pioneering, cooking. It doesn't all have to be spectator-friendly games and competitions, but we need a lot more of that. Make it easier for youth and their parents to "try" Scouting without long-term commitments. Sports have seasons. Scouting needs something similar so that there are multiple times during the year when a youth (and parents) could join a unit without feeling like they are stepping into to the middle of something and without fear that it is too late to get integrated into the group or that they have a lot of catching up to do. Eliminate complicated organizational and administative structures. Streamline organization and administration, with the organization of sports leagues as a model. Elminate barriers to continued membership like the Webelos-to-Scout transition and programs that overlap in age ranges. The more understandable the activities and the easier it is to join and participate, the more accessible it will be to youth and parents. Dan Kurtenbach Fairfax, VA

Changes to particular sections of the Guide to Advancement? Sure: Delete them all. Abolish the Guide. Include all interpretative comments right there in the back of the Boy Scout Handbook and in the annual Requirements book, integrated with the rank requirements themselves so that they are up front and obvious for everyone to see. Dan Kurtenbach Fairfax, VA

The "Note" to Second Class requirement 3f doesn't say anything about fire bans. It doesn't say that lighting the fire is not necessary _if there is a fire ban._ In fact, 3f goes out of its way to say "an approved place" and "an approved time," which seem to mean that the firebuilding should take place only when it is okay to build fires, because presumably many of those fires _will_ be lit. So the Note does not make sense as simply a response to fire bans, because the other wording in the requirement deals with that issue. But 3f is perfectly consistent with "tell," "explain," and "describe" requirements. It is perfectly consistent with the fact that an Eagle Scout need never have hiked a single mile on his own feet, even though he has to "explain" the rules of safe hiking. It is perfectly consistent with an Advancement scheme that does NOT demand competency in order to complete a requirement. Dan Kurtenbach Fairfax, VA

Second Class Requirement 3f: "In an approved place and at an approved time, demonstrate how to build a fire and set up a lightweight stove. Note: Lighting the fire is not required." BSA says it here clearly and explicitly: Lighting the fire is not required. How can a Scout know that he built the fire correctly if he doesn't have to light it? If you think bnelon44's interpretation of the Advancement requirements is crazy, explain 3f. Looking at 3f, it makes perfect sense that the other rank requirements as written say nothing about proficiency or retention of skills or actually _doing_ whatever skill is being "explained." The vast majority of Scouts, leaders, and parents have never heard of BSA rules and regulations or the Guide to Advancement and will NOT use them as the basis for interpreting advancement requirements. They will use the literal language of the requirements, and they will be legalistic about it, because that's how our society is. Advancement HAS been split off from competency in Scout skills and knowledge, and now serves different purposes. Dan Kurtenbach Fairfax, VA

It is unlikely that the troop would ever be pressured to move Scouts into a Venturing crew. If I recall correctly, some attempts at that were made very early on after Venturing was created, and they were not welcomed by Boy Scout leaders. Boy Scouting, after all, takes a lad all the way to adulthood at age 18, so (from the Boy Scouting perspective) there is no need for a follow-on program; rather, the need is to continue improving troop programs so that more older boys will age out instead of leaving Scouting. I'm merely suggesting that perhaps BSA has a different perspective. Rather than the Boy Scouting view ("our program -- including advancement -- can keep a boy busy and active for seven years"), perhaps BSA understands that it has a 3-4 year Boy Scout advancement progression that boys meander through with lots of breaks and detours, taking twice as long as necessary. That's a lot of lost time in which a youth could otherwise be busy and active and productive in a Scouting program, and in which BSA could be working on character development. So, BSA can't make the Boy Scout requirements tougher (Scouts, parents, and many leaders would revolt), it can't add additional ranks into the progression (Scouts, parents, and many leaders would revolt), and it can't lower age-out to 15 or 16 (Scouts, parents, and many leaders would revolt). So the only other option is to have additional programs to keep older youth interested in Scouting. Dan Kurtenbach Fairfax, VA

I think that BSA's membership and Advancement ideal would be for Boy Scouts to earn Eagle rank by age 14 or 15, at which point they can turn their full attention to the Venturing crew they have transitioned into, and earning Bronze, Gold, Ranger/Quest/Trust, and Silver. A 17.9 year old Eagle Scout in a troop means a lost opportunity -- a youth that is unlikely to become a Venturer at that point, meaning that (a) BSA will be unable to count 3 more youth membership years (since Venturers can continue to age 21), and (b) 3 or 4 prestigious awards going unclaimed. I don't mean that to sound cynical. Simply put, the longer a youth is active in a BSA program, the more BSA can influence that youth's character, citizenship, and fitness. An active Boy Scout in an action-packed troop program can experience pretty much everything Boy Scouting has to offer in four years -- including holding multiple positions of responsibility, attending two or more high adventure bases, and spending lots of time training younger Scouts. What often happens is the Life Scout lull, where the Scout spends a lot of time pursuing non-Scout high school interests, then becomes more active in Scouting again when it is time to "finish" Eagle rank. It should be no surprise that BSA might want to recapture that "lull" time by getting the Scout engaged in a different BSA program, particularly one that will carry him beyond his 18th birthday. Dan Kurtenbach Fairfax, VA

What I think we have in the Guide to Advancement is a case of the Advancement folks at National trying to give the Advancement method too much credit for the character development that is the product of Scouting. So we get lots of long passages about how Advancement does this and that for boys and what Advancement is supposedly really all about. Unfortunately, the Guide to Advancement doesn't match up with the actual requirements. But really, much of the fog laid down by those passages is really just intended to avoid answering one question: Why are the rank requirements so easy? I think the answer is that "one-and-done, no retest" is a pragmatic response to our current culture, which has a fixation on self-esteem and therefore demands frequent awards for even the slightest accomplishment (for example, participation trophies and laudatory end-of-season speeches by coaches about every player). If awards aren't coming regularly and frequently, then the parents conclude that their child isn't getting anything from the progam, and they move on to something else. It isn't good enough to focus on fun activities where a boy learns from doing things and completes requirements at his own pace -- too random, too little accountability. And so we have a program where even pre-Tenderfoot Scouts can earn merit badges, where we have clinics and colleges and universities geared to awarding badges, where we push to get to First Class within the first year, where summer camp is about sitting in classes listening to lectures, and where requirements only call for telling, explaining, or describing, or just doing something once or just a few times with no fear of ever having to do it again. We have a program that loves young Eagles, loves lots and lots of Eagles, loves Scouts that earn dozens and dozens of merit badges (even though only 21 actually count for Eagle), and creates a new award on nearly a weekly basis. But . . . While the Advancement system in Scouting has been corrupted for the sake of membership numbers, that does not mean that things like real skills and outdoorsmanship have fallen out of Scouting. On the contrary, outdoor adventure, and BSA's marketing of outdoor adventure, have never been more prominent. Exhibit A -- the Summit, BSA's new high adventure base in West Virginia. We just have to realize that skills and adventure are not directly linked to Advancement. Advancement is not the path to mastery of first aid or camping skills, and rank level or completion of a merit badge is not a measure of skill. At best, the Advancement requirements merely introduce Scouts to skills. Skill development is not a product of Advancement, but of outdoor adventure -- the unit program. That is what gives the Scout real challenges and builds confidence and self-reliance. So what I thinks need changing in the Guide to Advancement is for it to cease being a self-congratulatory, self-delusional pamphlet. Rather, stick to explaining the boundaries and procedures of the existing advancement requirements rather than wallowing in supposed purposes, meanings, and outcomes that don't actually appear in those requirements. Dan Kurtenbach Fairfax, VA (This message has been edited by dkurtenbach)