FCFY Calendar

[Bob White]

And Scouts in Baden-Powell's time did not start until what age Kudu?

 

And his advancement structure was not the same as the BSA today was it?

 

Your post suggests and app;es to apples comparison and it isn't.

 

 

[Bob White]

And Scouts in Baden-Powell's time did not start until what age Kudu?

 

And his advancement structure was not the same as the BSA today was it?

 

Your post suggests an apples to apples comparison and it isn't.

 

 

[Kudu]

BobWhite writes:

 

"And Scouts in Baden-Powell's time did not start until what age Kudu?"

 

Rule "244. (i) To become a Scout a boy must have attained the age of 11, but not have reached his eighteenth birthday, unless about to become a Rover, as in Rule 265 (i)." (Boy Scouts Association, "Policy, Organisation, and Rules," 1938)

 

"And his advancement structure was not the same as the BSA today was it?"

 

True enough. In fact "Advancement" is a BSA term and concept that is foreign to Baden-Powell's version of meeting requirements called "Progressive Training in Scoutcraft".

 

BSA "Advancement" is based at least in part on:

 

1) Classroom instruction shortcuts to the Aims of Scouting (physical fitness, citizenship, Scout Spirit, etc. requirements) rather than B-P's indirect "Scouting is a game" Scoutcraft approach.

 

2) Parking lot "Advancement" as opposed to Baden-Powell's required Journeys in which a Scout tests for himself his Scoutcraft skills against a deep-woods environment.

 

3) Checklist mentality (once something is checked off, a BSA Scout is "done" with it), rather than B-P's current proficiency Scoutcraft including the re-testing of core requirements and the annual re-certification of key Public Service Badges (no "Once an Eagle, always an Eagle").

 

"Your post suggests an apples to apples comparison and it isn't."

 

Why don't you research this while I am on the road and report back to us, in a spun thread if necessary?

 

The 1938 PO&R is considered significant in the history of Scouting because it was the final one that B-P edited before his retirement. Therefore it is his "last word" on the specifics of his Scouting program. It is not yet available online, but a pdf of the Canadian version can now be viewed at:

 

http://www.scoutscan.com/history/scoutbook_150dpi.pdf

 

See Sections 63-65.

 

Despite a different numbering system, most of the wording in these sections is the same as B-P's Scouts Association PO&R, but at first glance includes the following variations:

 

Canadian Tenderfoot

 

Must be 12 years old.

 

Canadian 2nd Class

 

Includes Scout's Pace

 

Does not include Pioneering (square & diagonal lashings, timber hitch, rolling hitch, and fisherman's hitch).

 

Does not include re-passing the Tenderfoot tests.

 

Canadian 1st Class

 

Includes a Savings Account

 

Substitutes training a recruit for re-passing Tenderfoot and 2nd Class tests.

 

Kudu

 

[Bob White]

Kudu

As it was you who made the comparison it seems only fair that you provide the missing facts.

 

What was the joining age for B-Ps Boy Scouts at the program level where they could earn First Class?

 

The advamcent steps to First Class in B-Ps UK program were considerably different than todays BSA advancement were they not? In fact other than their name they share little in common.

 

Your post suggests that they are the same award but that B-P took a longer time to teach and test the same requirements, and that simply is not an accurate comparison. But without the information that you left out, many people reading your post would not realize that.

[LongHaul]

Let me see if I understand this B-P concept, Kudu. Proper procedure is what ever the current Patrol Leaders in Council say it is. This extends from simple scout craft to first aid to proper swimming or boating technique. Having to re pass earlier tests ensures that you can still satisfy the requirements, unless of course the PLC has changed and the interpretation has changed. Then finally it is a test of endurance, 14 mile hike with another scout to see if you can survive because proper technique has no place here. Maybe I missed something but I thought the question of whether the scout was a MAN or not was decided at birth. My concept of Scouting does not include proving, testing or demonstrating male virility which is what I see in the methods you continually describe.

As for interchangeability, yes I think training should not be unique to a given troop.  Scouts should be able to interact with other scouts from other troops and not have their Scoutcraft skills be dissimilar.  Evidentially under B-Ps method the boys from Brent Allen's troop in Georgia and the boys from Beavah's troop in Minnesota would have little in common when discussing year round preparation for camping and hiking.  Unless they had the capability as a unit to travel great distances they would base their knowledge on local conditions because we don't teach we only experience.  Different strokes I guess.

LongHaul

[Kudu]

BobWhite writes:

 

"As it was you who made the comparison it seems only fair that you provide the missing facts."

 

I am literally packing a truck right now and then I will be off the Internet until I relocate in the south. Except for informal customs, the 1938 PO&R has all of the official answers. Perhaps a fellow FCFY-supporter can use it to support your position (which at this point I simply do not understand).

 

"What was the joining age for B-Ps Boy Scouts at the program level where they could earn First Class?"

 

Are you looking for an answer other than "11"?

 

Your post suggests that they are the same award but that B-P took a longer time to teach and test the same requirements....

 

I guess we agree that they are not the same requirements.

 

B-P's program has some similarities to the BSA's Scoutcraft requirements of the 1920s (the BSA's First Class Journey seems to have disappeared shortly after William Hillcourt's arrival). So compared even to the BSA's own traditional program, the current FCFY is really First Class Lite.

 

Longhaul,

 

Tenderfoot through First Class training and testing was the responsibility of the Patrol Leaders. According to the 1938 PO&R, the retesting of Tenderfoot and Second Class skills had to be to the satisfaction of the Scoutmaster.

 

Proficiency Badge skills were learned by the Scout on his own initiative and then tested by experts in the community called "Examiners" (the equivalent of the Red Cross, for instance). Key Badges were renewed annually and King's Scout candidates were required to re-qualify for all of their previous Badges!

 

The custom was for a Scout to apply to the Court of Honor for permission to meet with an Examiner. Permission would be granted only to Scouts who helped "move the Troop along."

 

As for turnover in the PLC remember that the BSA's "Leadership Development Method" encourages that through regular elections and POR requirements so that Scoutmasters always have a new supply of "Junior Leaders" to teach leadership theory to.

 

A Court of Honor is the opposite of the "Leadership Development Method" because the object is to stick with the Troop's most qualified leaders.

 

Kudu

[Beavah]

Evidentially under B-Ps method the boys from Brent Allen's troop in Georgia and the boys from Beavah's troop in Minnesota would have little in common when discussing year round preparation for camping and hiking.

 

Yah, I dunno, eh? Do they have snowshoes and blackflies down there in da Georgian hills?

 

Now most folks say we both talk funny. Does that count?

 

B

 

[Bob White]

Good luck with the move Kudu, I know how fun they can be.

 

My point was your post suggested that the two First Class wre equivalent but that B-P took more time.

 

So in B-Ps time you had to be 14. If a 13 year old joined the troop could he have completed the requirements for 1st Class in a year. You didn't say.

 

Another thing you didn't explain in your first post is that the two 1st Class ranks are related only in name.

 

"Baden-Powell required that a First Class Scout be 14 years old, so if it had been in his nature to propose a First Class emphasis Program he might have called it "First Class in Three Years"!

 

So what? They are unrelated.

 

 

[Kudu]

BobWhite writes:

 

"Good luck with the move Kudu, I know how fun they can be."

 

Thanks.

 

"My point was your post suggested that the two First Class wre equivalent but that B-P took more time. "

 

BSA First Class lacks a number of Traditional requirements including observation, tracking, signalling, retesting, and the First Class Journey.

 

How quickly did you advance as a Scout? Looking through our family album recently I was surprised to see that I always wore my Uniform in my birthday party photographs and that I only progressed one rank per year.

 

"So in B-Ps time you had to be 14. If a 13 year old joined the troop could he have completed the requirements for 1st Class in a year. You didn't say."

 

OK, yes. A 13 year-old would be required to "Have at least one month's satisfactory service as a Tenderfoot and satisfy the S.M. that he can repass his Tenderfoot tests" before being awarded the Second Class Badge. And then "Before being awarded the First Class badge, A Second Class Scout must have attained the age of 14 years, and satisfy his S.M. that he can repass his Tenderfoot and Second Class tests...." There are no other time constraints in Baden-Powell's Tenderfoot - First Class program.

 

"Another thing you didn't explain in your first post is that the two 1st Class ranks are related only in name."

 

I don't understand what you mean by "related only in name."

 

Kudu

 

[Bob White]

So a scout could earn Tenderfoot to first class in B-P's day, facsinating.

 

I do not recal how long I took at each rank, it was 40 years ago.

But Tenderfoot to First Class advancement was different then in the late 60's than it is now. We had to do tracking, and star gazing, hiking, and signaling, but then there are things scouts do today that I didn't have to do a scout.

 

But then I never complained about how things used to be because so far I am told time travel in impossible. So I pretty much live in today and today's Scouting program. Looking back is fun if you are planning a class reunion.

 

Related in name only meant they have nothing else in common but the name.

 

So what they did in B-Ps day was differnet they what they did in my day which was probable different than how they did it in your day which is different then then do taoday and I will bet a dollar that in te not to distant future it will change again.

 

Thinks change, thats life.

[BrentAllen]

"How quickly did you advance as a Scout?"

 

Interesting question. I still have my one and only Scout Handbook, with all the ranks and dates.

 

Scout - 7/24/74 (11 years old)

Tenderfoot - 10/8/74

Second Class - 3/18/75

First Class - 11/14/75

Star - 4/6/76

Life - 6/21/77

 

 

[Beavah]

I will bet a dollar that in te not to distant future it will change again....Thinks change, thats life.

 

Yah, like da value of that dollar, eh?

 

I don't have any problem with changes. LNT is a necessary change in our way of thinkin' and doin' business that's important. I don't miss signaling; I reckon portable radios are an improvement. I get a kick out of kids doin' GeoCaching. I like my new-fangled outdoor gear and backpackin' stoves and such.

 

Those and others are all genuine changes in technology or practical changes to keep with our spirit and mission, eh?

 

I think, though, that all changes need to be evaluated. They should be evaluated by national program folks, as best they can. But they also should be evaluated by local folks who are watchin' the outcomes for their kids. Does this change accomplish our Aims better? or not? It might be that da answer sometimes is "not." And in that case, we do our job for the kids by changin' what we do to find what works for us, and share that information with others. That's da best way for national program folks to change things, eh? Hearin' from folks in the field that couldn't make things work and tried somethin' different. Better than sittin' around in committees and theorizin'.

 

I reckon Kudu's critique is not lookin' to go back to the past, but to do the best job we can for the kids now. He's makin' a claim, and perhaps a valid one, that we may have weakened our expectations over time. "Grade inflation" of a sort. Where we used to expect learning, includin' learning things well enough to be "re-tested" on 'em at any time, now yeh only have to pass a test once. Where we used to require First Class Scouts to travel the wilderness on their own for many miles, now we require them to car camp three times with their troop. Where we used to trust da youth to be responsible for honor and standards for advancement, we've now decided they're too tough, better have adults do it.

 

BW's right. Da ranks are similar in name only. But we've got to ask whether we're doin' a better job now buildin' self-directed learners and older boy leaders or not, eh? If yeh think you are, great. If not, time to think different, perhaps.

 

Not every new thing is a good thing, eh? As Voyageur points out, about some things like da Constitution, it might be good to be a touch old-fashioned. At least it's worth considerin' the Founders' Intent, rather than just blowin' it off. Maybe about a few things in Scoutin', too.

 

Beavah

 

[Bob White]

The question isn't are we doing as well as we did a hundred years ago. That really doesn't matter since we do not serve those youth or live in that time.

 

But the BSA still exists after nearly a hundred years. That answers that question to some degree. The question is are we doing the best we can for Scouting a few years down the road, and there are hundreds of volunteers selected from across the country who work on national scouting committees who put their time and effort into that question every day.

 

Will those changes please over 1.2 million adult volunteers? Of course not. If 99% of all leaders approved of the Scoutiong programs that would still leave over 12,000 scouters complaining about Scouting on Internet forums.

[BadenP]

Bob,

 

Your constant party line of the BSA is always right no matter what does get a little tiresome. Kudu's methodology of using BP's original program does not make him wrong because he disagrees with you, he is successful with his youth and that is what is important. He is not violating the BSA program overall he is enhancing it teaching the kids what scouting skills they want in addition to those required. Many scout leaders feel the BSA program is so watered down that the boys are looking for alternatives to scouting.

 

The original program served well for many, many years, the focus of National today is so off the mark it will be a miracle if scouting lasts 30 more years. If by some miracle National wises up soon and sees that it is in the basics that Scouting was built and thrived maybe we will see boy scout membership begin to climb again, otherwise we will witness the demise of this great movement that is so desperately needed today. So look outside the box for once and try to learn from other viewpoints instead of dismissing them as "NOT SCOUTING!" The diminishing numbers of boy scouts over the last 20 years really says it all.

 

Moderators : Please let this post stand instead of erasing it as you have done to my others, thank you. F-Scouter I am sure it was you.

[Bob White]

Baden-P

I feel for you, I really do. I understand how my support of the scouting program must annoy you. It must be awful.

Imagine how tiresome it is for those who support today's program to hear leaders not use it and then complain of all the scouts who quit?

 

As far as Kudu, I see nothing wrong with his understanding of what scouting used to be, but do not live in 1907. We live in a different age and a different society than your namesake did.

 

I think Baden-Powell would be pleased with the vast amount of his program that still exists in the world of Scouting and even in the BSA, I think he would be disappointed however in how few leaders bother to either learn it, or use it.

 

I learn new ways to teach skills all the time from the world around us. You do not have to alter the program methods or violate laws and policies to use them to enhance a scouting program. Tens of thousands of scout leaders do it all the time.

 

As I mentioned before if 99% of adult volunteers follow the program and only 1% did not, that would mean 12,000 adult volunteers are not following the program. Imagine the damage those 12,000 adults do every year.

 

Now let's consider that only 29% of program leaders have even taken BSA basic leadership training. So how many of the 71% that have not would you guess actually know what a scouting program is supposed to be, and what it is not supposed to be?

 

You should be relieved that comparatively few posters seem to actually like the scouting program. I would hope that the many that do not will continue to give you comfort.

 

Best wishes to the scouts you serve,

BW