More rules . . .

[evmori]

Rooster & Fat Old Guy,

I guess we just haven't given the Scouts enough time to hear their inner voices. OK Lotus position HMMMM.

 

Rules are necessary to keep order. The Scout Law & Oath have nothing to do with order.

 

Bob,

You must live in Camelot where the sky is always blue & the grass is always green. Either there or Stepford!

 

My Troop has rules. And there are consequences if those rules are broken. Just like real life! And none of our rules require a Scout to listen to his inner voice!

 

Ed Mori

1 Peter 4:10

[Bob White]

"They'd say, "Bob White says that we shouldn't run in camp." That's a suggestion from an authority figure which translates into a rule.

 

So is the thread about having leader guidance or having troop rules? You keep changing the premise.

 

First the scouts would not say I told them what to do, because I don't tell them. I ask them questions and they tell me. Actually I ask the junior leaders. By the time they come to a troop at about 10 1/2 they know right from wrong in most cases. We teach them how to identify why things are right or wrong and how to use that to develop a character base. It's a process that takes years, but it's not years of following rules, it's years of learning to make decisions.

 

If you rely on unit rules to get the results you want from scouting you will never develop leaders, only followers. They will be unable to formulate a decision without someone or something to tell them what to do, or how to do it.

 

Instead of telling them what to do, try scouting.

 

Bob White

 

(This message has been edited by Bob White)

[Rooster7]

actually I have had dozens of groups of great kids. I can't image how anyone could do this work for 27 years and have only one group. The troops and packs I have served have changed each year as new scouts come in and older ones graduate. All have been great. Some started great others became great as they progressed. We are there to make that happen.

 

When I said, perhaps you are blessed with a truly unusual bunch of boys - by unusual, I meant a large group of boys whose always thinking of others and their well-being. Ive seen that quality in a few boys, but rarely in young and/or new Scouts. Occasionally, Ive seen the majority of a troop act in such a way. But never to the point, the troop had no need for rules.

 

BTW, just so theres no confusion, plenty of great kids have passed through the units that Ive been associated with. Interestingly, many of these great kids obeyed the rules but most of them found a way to break a rule every now and again. Does that mean most of these kids are imposters? I dont judge a Scouts ability to live up to the Scout Oath and Law based on an occasional lapse of judgment. Why? Because living up to the Scout Oath and Law is a goal. Its not something that a boy can keep in his heart and mind every moment of the day Especially when hes being distracted and tempted by some outdoor fun with a bunch of rowdy boys.

 

We build a moral conscience in youth, the inner voice. We do not do it through rules we do it through methods and rule making is not a scout method or skill.

 

Yes, that is the goal. Although, I dont think we should take personal responsibility or credit for building that moral conscience. Rather, I think its our goal to point a Scout in the right direction. We should encourage him to seek standards that go beyond his own selfish being. But a goal is simply that a goal something to reach for, something to strive for, and its not accomplished so easily simply because we (the adult leaders) desire it to be true. While we are using these Scouting methods to move towards that goal, we including all of the Scouts, still live in the here and now some call it reality. If we pretend that the goal represents reality, then we are being Pollyanna and thus creating a situation, which will lead to chaos.

 

Many posters seem to use rules to substitute for leadership.

 

I find that to be an insult by inference. I dont think you have any quotes from this board that indicate the person advocating rules, believes or wants the rules to relieve the adult leaders from mentoring the boys. That last statement seems to be a reflection of your own bias.

 

Rooster I have been a unit leader in 4 troops and 2 packs (due to job transfers) NONE used any rules outside those defined in the scouting program. No one to this point has yet given any evidence as to one we need.

 

Conversely, there are many on this board including myself who have had experiences much different than yours. The need that youve apparently have never witnessed before, is to address a bunch of boys whod rather have fun, which includes (on many occasions) not thinking about others before they act. I dont know Bobmaybe were all horrible leaders who want to use the rules as an excuse not to lead Or, maybe this collective behavior in boys that I speak of, is only seen in boys that are beyond hope Or, maybe those adults in the BSA who lack the total understanding of the Scouting program that you posses, created these monsters through their ignorance and/or negligence. Judging by your previous statements, in and out of this thread, you seem to be of the impression that the latter is very possible.

 

If you want to control a scouts behavior, forget about making new rules, teach scouting!

 

Its a goal! I agree but while youre working on it, there needs to be controls to keep things in place.

 

A question for rooster ed and some others who believe unit rules are needed. Rather than tell those of us who deliver scouting without a bunch of extra rules that it's impossible, why aren't you asking how to make it possible in the units you serve?

 

Simply stated, your experiences do not reflect reality, at least not the reality that most people I know experience. I believe you may have been a part of some really outstanding units. But if what you say is true, then I think you were really fortunate to have a group of boys that allowed those units to function as they did. Did you ever consider the possibility that most of these boys were pretty close to the goal before you even tried to influence them with the methods of Scouting? Otherwise, I dont see your examples as being typical.

 

Wouldn't you rather be able to get the results of scouting without all kinds of unit rules?

 

Sure. But most things worth achieving dont come that easy.

 

Id also rather gain the results of the cross without the realization that I am a lowly sinner who deserves condemnation. But if it were not for the laws of the Old Covenant (the rules) and Christs sacrifice on the cross, Id never realize my need for repentance or the need for a Savior. Nor would I strive for a righteousness that pleases God, because Id still be in the dark.

 

Creating a well thought-out set of rules for the troop will set boundaries and establish consequences for the boys. It also helps ensure that all boys are treated equally. Whats wrong with that?(This message has been edited by Rooster7)

[Hunt]

It seems to me some of the issue here is just semantic--but here are some more thoughts.

1. Some rules primarily convey information. For example, surely nobody would object to a troop having a "rule" like the following: "The closet in the back of the room may not be used for storing troop supplies because it is used by the church for hymnals." Obviously, BSA doesn't have a specific rule or procedure that covers this.

2. "No running in camp" is a rule, whether it is written or unwritten--if there are consequences for a person who continues to violate it after being instructed/counseled/requested to desist.

3. Adult leaders of troops are responsible for the safety of the boys. If they believe that BSA's safety rules are inadequate in some way, I see nothing wrong with a troop safety rule that goes farther. There might even be local considerations that the national organization is unaware of.

4. On the other hand, I think it's likely true that many troop rules are unnecessary, overbroad, and often in direct conflict with BSA rules and procedures--this is usually based on ignorance (i.e,. merit badges have to be completed within two years--a false impression in my son's troop).

[evmori]

"If you rely on unit rules to get the results you want from scouting you will never develop leaders, only followers."

 

But if one can't follow effectivly, how can you be an one lead effectivly?

 

Not all Scouts will be leaders.

 

Ed Mori

1 Peter 4:10

[Bob White]

Rooster, I invite you to go back and read the thread again. You have misrepresented much of what I have written.

 

I never said rules were not needed. I maintain that the rules you need for scouting have already been written by the BSA. A unit has no real need for written unit rules IF they know the scouting rules and methods.

 

Do I think the better a leader understands scouting the more they will see that other rules are unneeded. Yes.

 

My response about "an unusual group" was not about the word "unusual" but the sigular word group. I, like other leaders have worked with a different "group" each year, and We have not had the need for additional rules for any of them. That was my only point.

 

Being able to make decisions based on the values of the Oath and Law is not the goal of Scouting, it is the Mission. A goal is what you want to accomplish. A mission is a purpose to exist. I would hope that you approach your mission in life differently than you approach your goals.

 

You plan to accomplish a goal. You live your mission. We want scouts to live the mission. That is not accomplished through rules, it's done through the methods of scouting. This is not pollyanna, this is the whole point of the scouting program. It is a unique education system, but it is a system. it has several interelated parts. You change a part and you effect the entire system.

 

No one has yet to give a needed troop rule beyond those already existing or dealt with through the methods of scouting. Even Hunts effort misses the mark. for the Church to say "don't use our closet" is the church's rule, not the troop's.

 

You say "The need that youve apparently have never witnessed before, is to address a bunch of boys whod rather have fun, which includes (on many occasions) not thinking about others before they act." There in is the elegance of scout leadership and the reason we see this differently. You are trying to address a entire bunch, and the scouting program says you address the individual scout. You don't teach groups to think or change, you lead individuals to change.

 

Do I think everyone on the forum are a bunch of lousy leaders? Absolutley not! I think there are many flavors here. There are a number who know and use the program. There are those who are new and looking for help. There are those well on the way and looking to sharpen thier tools. But there are a few, who have done it wrong for so long that they think they are right. They are those who admit to not using the elemnets of scouting as they have been developed and then complain that the program does not work. How would they know if it works or not if they do not use it? They also tend to right an awful lot of rules.

 

Bob White

 

 

I hope future posts can address the discussion without further snide remarkes about me personally.(This message has been edited by Bob White)

[Twocubdad]

DING!

 

Thank you, Mr. Hunt! No more calls please, we have a winner!

 

But I wish to offer a friendly amendment of point #5 which is that some rules may appropriately relate to local customs and traditions. Example 1: it is the tradition at our council camps that hats are doffed when entering the dining hall. It is acknowledged to new scouts and leaders that those in full uniform have the option of wearing a hat indoors, but that the custom of our council is to remove your hat in the dining hall. Over time the custom has been rendered to a rule posted outside the dining hall doors and enforced as such. Personally, I don't like the rule (due largely to the fact that after a day of wearing a hat in the summer heat my hair looks like something the cat hocked up), but being obedient and supportive of the tradition, I obey the rule.

 

Example 2: Is the previously-discussed ban on electronics. This is a matter of communicating the unit's expectation of how it perceives courtesy. One unit may believe that a courteous Scout refrains from using electronics on outings to avoid disturbing others. Another teched-up unit's expectation of courtesy may mean bringing spare batteries to share. Adding "Remember electronic aren't allowed" or "Don't forget to pack double-As" is simply communicating the unit's expectations.

 

I'd also like to comment on Bob's position, which I generally support. To me, the practical application of Bob's ethical decision making process is that occasionally the decisions made by the troop become rules of the troop. This is really a process of institutional memory than legislative, law making. Your "no running in the campsite/house" story is a good example of this. As a unit, your troop has made the decision that running in camp is a bad idea. Rather than allowing new Scouts to hurt themselves or destroy a tent on the way to discovering this truth for themselves, your troop communicates this bit of group judgement to the new boys in the form of the campsite/house story. But just because this "rule" was derrived from a ethical/moral judgement doesn't make it any less of a rule. If it's violated, boys are reminded of the rule ("No running in the house!") and I dare say that if someone or something were injured due to a violation of the rule they would be held responsible. (And just because you don't want to call this a "rule" doesn't mean it isn't one. You can dress a pig in high heels and an evening gown, but that don't make her the prom queen.)

 

Hunt's hymnal closet is another good example. Instead of being a church rule, let's say it came about this way: The minister had given permision for the troop to store equipment in the closet, but one Scout -- a member of the church who helps distribute hymnals on Sunday morning -- realizes this is a bad plan. He suggests to the PLC that if they better organized their primary storage space that they wouldn't have to inconvenience the church, thereby being both helpful and courteous. The PLC makes a very moral and responsible decision to do this and backs it up with a troop rule reminding Scouts that in the future they are not to store troop supplies in the hymnal closet.

 

How is this anything but Scouting at its best?

(This message has been edited by Twocubdad)

[Bob White]

Your points are well taken but have a major error. In the example I gave the troop never made a rule. We in fact have no rule about running in camp. We have an understanding among the scouts that they themselves discovered that running in camp is a bad idea.

 

I have never seen a scout in the troop punished for running in camp. I have seen eqipment damaged and the scout who ran in camp and caused the damage charged for the repair or replacemment. We have had a couple trip and fall, but that could have happened anywhere. They don't run becasue they each determined it to be a bad idea. When someone chooses to run they also consciously choose to accept the consequences (just as the speeding driver does). So the individual scout controls the running not "the troop". If was authority bsed they would run like banshees as soon as the authority figure was gone. The choose not to run becasuse they made the desicion based on values.

 

This is what makes Patrol camping possible. By training the scouts to make value based decisions they can be trusted independent of adult leadership. Leaders with lots of rules do not want independent scouts. They want to be the authority figure that everying is dependent on.

 

Bob White

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Rooster7]

Bob,

 

It doesn't really matter what you call it. Whether it's a mission or a goal, my point remains the same. The boys don't start off from day one in a troop living the Scout Oath and Law as if its ingrained in their very being.

 

I hope future posts can address the discussion without further snide remarks about me personally.

 

Would you be referencing this statement?

 

...those adults in the BSA who lack the total understanding of the Scouting program that you posses, created these monsters through their ignorance and/or negligence. Judging by your previous statements, in and out of this thread, you seem to be of the impression that the latter is very possible.

 

I have to admit, it was somewhat snide - But it is based on numerous responses from you on a litany of subjects whereas you have inferred exactly what I have stated. And you continue to do so, by closing your last post with this little gem:

 

They are those who admit to not using the elements of scouting as they have been developed and then complain that the program does not work. How would they know if it works or not if they do not use it? They also tend to write an awful lot of rules.

 

If you don't like snide remarks, then don't make them yourself. I don't mind exchanging a barb or two - I'm a big boy and can handle anything you dish out (which is plenty). But don't pretend to be a victim, when you're the one intent on throwing out insulting insinuations indiscriminately as if it's your given right as an institutional pillar of the BSA.

 

Hope this helps (okay, that was snide),

 

Rooster7

 

[captainron14]

Here's another....

I was a brand new Scoutmaster (by default, he quit, I was the ASM) I took our Troop on a service project to the local Veterans Home for the annual VET Olympics. The boys helped out by escourting the Vets to each event and helping at the BBQ.

The POW/MIA group was giving rides in their "Tethered" Hot Air Balloon. Up and Down.

Well, as a thank you, the boys were given free rides.

I did not think anything about it until a day later. When my DE called me to chew me out after he saw the troop in the paper.

Oops!

 

CR14(This message has been edited by captainron14)

[Twocubdad]

I wouldn't describe that as a "major error" in my thinking. More accurately I'd say I'm not willing to stretch the semantics as far as you are.

 

My dictionary defines a rule as a "usual, customary or generalized description of expected behavior." That precisely defines your No Running in Camp rule. Because you choose to call it otherwise makes it no less of a rule. Because it isn't written down, voted upon or formally enacted makes it no less of a rule. And because your Scouts can choose to abide by the rule or not makes it no less of a rule. That, by the way, is true of all rules.

 

If your purpose is to allow the Scout to make his own ethical choices, why do you have another Scout shout "No running in the house!"? By his actions, hasn't the Scout made his decision? Shouldn't you accept his choice?

 

 

[hops_scout]

We solved the running around camp real easy---- we tell them they must kiss a tree if they get caught running. It doesnt happen often.

I dont know when or how it came about, but people have been told that for as long as I can remember-- Cub Scouts, Girl Scout outings I've been on, Boy Scouts, etc

[Bob White]

"It doesn't really matter what you call it. Whether it's a mission or a goal, my point remains the same. The boys don't start off from day one in a troop living the Scout Oath and Law as if its ingrained in their very being

 

And you come around now to my very point. This is why we are here as scout leaders. To use the methods of scouting to to ingrain the values, NOT to write superficial rules.

 

And you know which remarks, when you or the other couple Post them. Scouts are not the only ones with a conscience.

 

My remarks were not directed at a specific individual but were in response to your question.

 

I did not have anyone shout to a runner to stop. The scout, knowing what he was seeing was unsafe, did it on his own.

 

BW(This message has been edited by Bob White)

[evmori]

"So the individual scout controls the running not "the troop"."

 

So if the individual scout can't or won't control his running the troop does nothing? Based on what you have posted, Bob, it would seem that way.

 

Ed Mori

1 Peter 4:10

[Adrianvs]

OFG:

 

"One tenet of life in the service is that a suggestion by a superior is an order. When the Cap'n says, 'Sailor, that trash can looks pretty full' that really means, 'I want that trash can emptied.'"

 

 

BP:

 

"...the Scoutmaster has to be neither schoolmaster nor commanding officer, nor pastor, nor instructor...He has got to put himself on the level of the older brother, that is, to see things from the boy's point of view, and to lead and guide and give enthusiasm in the right direction. Like the true older brother he has to realise the traditions of the family and see that they are preserved, even if considerable firmness is required. That is all."

 

"Therefore, to get them to carry out the Scout Law and all that underlies it, the Scoutmaster himself should scrupulously carry out its professions in every detail of his life. With scarcely a word of instruction his boys will follow him."

 

 

Pollyanna? Perhaps. Scouting? Absolutely. I think we have lost touch with the model of leadership proposed by the founder and replaced it with a model that treats adults and youth as officers and inlisted men, respectively. As long as the adults keep the kids in line with orders, then the program is running fine. Perhaps this is the Cub Scout model, but it isn't Boy Scouting.

 

Sure, the dynamics have changed. The original model included one scoutmaster acting as older brother and a couple patrols of scouts. Now, we have ten adults acting as officers supervising twenty youth. The scouters have their own culture now, and distance themselves from the scouts to the point that their example really doesn't matter to the youth. The scouts can do as they wish as long as they don't annoy the scouters.

 

Remember, Baden-Powell's military background had a little to do with the way the patrol is organized and functions and nothing to do with how scoutmaster's relate to scouts. Far too many adults are involved in scouting to be a "superior."

 

Perhaps Cub Scouting has it's place (this is a quite debatable notion for me). But, do not let it's dynamic influence your troop function.

 

Rooster, your Old Testament law analogies are interesting, but the application isn't complete. The Commandments and Levititical laws were given by Moses. Who is the lawgiver in this case? The BSA? No, it appears you see these rules on the troop level. In practice, every adult becomes a law-giver to his personal whims. That's a lot of Moseses running around.. Perhaps the Law has already been given, and every self-appointed rule-making scouter is just another Korah.