Should BSA develop a "Classic Scouting"

[RememberSchiff]

From Stosh in another thread

Maybe BSA ought to develop a program called "Classic Scouting" and quit with this New Scouting "stuff".

 

Would it be a reset to 1960? 1950? 1930?

 

Would scout advancement work be only on the next rank?

 

Would instant recognition go away?

 

Would adult volunteers be treated like adults?

 

Would MB books return to black and white and the only part read would be the cover?

 

What would "Classic Scouting" be?

Edited March 8, 2017 by RememberSchiff

[Stosh]

I would go back just far enough to where the membership and interest was the highest and before a lot of the "new ideas" began on the scene. 

 

If one were to review some of the earlier literature and publications of BSA, one would find that the processes we use today are no where near the intent of processes of the past.  For example, if one wishes to be a FC scout, today all one needs to do is show they have been exposed to scoutcraft knowledge.  In years gone by, the scout had to prove he knew all these requirements all in one test that would take several days.  I do believe at one point the camping MB required 50 nights of camping, today's it's less than half that amount.

 

I do believe that today one can't retest at a BOR.  I believe originally the BOR WAS the test!

[RememberSchiff]

http://www.artofmanliness.com/2013/04/15/the-boy-scouts-of-america-then-and-now-a-comparison-of-the-1911-and-modern-handbooks-and-merit-badges/

 

 

Edited March 8, 2017 by RememberSchiff
Added link which was overwritten. My bad.

[Col. Flagg]

 

From Stosh in another thread

Maybe BSA ought to develop a program called "Classic Scouting" and quit with this New Scouting "stuff".

 

Would it be a reset to 1960? 1950? 1930?

 

Would scout advancement work be only on the next rank?

 

Would instant recognition go away?

 

Would adult volunteers be treated like adults?

 

Would MB books return to black and white and the only part read would be the cover?

 

What would "Classic Scouting" be?

 

 

I'd love it! Go back to working on ranks in sequence and include MBs as part of that path. Keep mastery of the core skills in S-FC but add in MBs a few at a time. Focus on outdoors and hands-on. KEEP instant recognition. Nothing wrong with giving a kid a rank badge after the BOR! Eliminate worksheets.

 

We need a matrix of what to keep and discard.

[David CO]

The social engineers at BSA would never allow a "Classic Scouting" program.  

 

The people who are advocating for all these changes aren't really interested in scouting.  They just want to deny us our scouting program.  Once they achieve their goals at BSA, they will just move on to destroy some other program.

 

But if were were to do something like "Classic Scouting", I think we should start with a living museum program, with reenactments of scouting practices during various eras.   

 

I doubt that BSA would allow even this.  Not only do they want to consign our scouting program to history, they also want to rewrite history to deny that our religious, moral, boys only programs ever existed.

Edited March 8, 2017 by David CO

[Eagledad]

 

From Stosh in another thread

Maybe BSA ought to develop a program called "Classic Scouting" and quit with this New Scouting "stuff".

 

Would it be a reset to 1960? 1950? 1930?

 

Would scout advancement work be only on the next rank?

 

Would instant recognition go away?

 

Would adult volunteers be treated like adults?

 

Would MB books return to black and white and the only part read would be the cover?

 

What would "Classic Scouting" be?

 

Interesting thread. It has appears to be a condescending response to the discussions of BSA changes. OK, I get it, frustration drives the need to resist the resistance. 

 

But I'm curious about the instant recognition question (statement?). I have been in scouting since the 60's and I can't recall instant recognition ever being an issue. What is your concern?

 

Barry

Edited March 8, 2017 by Eagledad

[qwazse]

As a biologist at heart, I do believe bird study should be required. In recent years, national and local debates about environmental issues are lost on many, simply because they aren't watching the flora and fauna in their community. Any required MB's should focus on mindfulness and observation, less on regurgitating facts.

 

I do believe that this shenanigans about the age 18 deadline should end. I don't think we should encourage scouts to procrastinate or nudge adults to earn eagle, but if after earning 1st class at any age, they should not be discouraged if they are so inclined. Wood badge should be open only to scouters who've earned 1st class rank. I guess that means that cub leaders and such will need to master some outdoor skills ... pity that.

 

I'm ambivalent about the service project. (Which wasn't required early on.) I think it should be turned into a "project management" or maybe "grants and contracts" merit badge. Should it be required?

 

Likewise, there should be a required "pedagogy" (a.k.a., EDGE) MB rather than all of these scattershot requirements. Maybe require it for Star, and fold in that 2nd cyberchip requirement.

 

I think homemaking will need to be added as fewer young adult men are getting married, nor are they going into the military and learning about living an orderly life. Again, not sure about requiring it.

 

I'm not that bothered about the three ranks at once schema. Depending on what your troop/patrol does, it may need those tenderfoot scouts mastering selected 1st class skills before ranking up. But that should cut both ways. If a 2nd class scout seems to have forgotten a skill for his next rank that he had mastered the year before, he should be requested to demonstrate it again.

 

Regarding BoR's and testing: we need to accept the fact that there will be variation, and not brow-beat scouters who do things differently. Recommendations of when and how.

[blw2]

yeah, I don't get that one either... don't really see an issue with instant recognition.

 

I do think the focus has been muddied and lost.

Way too much paperwork

way too much classroom and sitting around explaining and talking

 

I love remembershiff's post contracting the camping MB requirements!

[blw2]

is should have added.... I think there is way to much complication.....

simple requirements

simple bullet points

basic and easy to understand....and more experience based (I like the camp 50 number of nights in a tent you've set up by yourself).  In those few words, there will be oh so much more experienced and learned.... and therefore required.....but never stated as separate points....& I see nothing wrong with that.  You don't need to outline stuff like "present yourself ready for camping, with the appropriate gear.."  That stuff would have automatically been covered time and time again in those multiple camping trips with the SM to reach those 50 nights!

 

keep it simple!

 Wood badge should be open only to scouters who've earned 1st class rank. I guess that means that cub leaders and such will need to master some outdoor skills ... pity that.

so you are saying that to get WB, a scouter must have been a scout as a youth, and have achieved the rank?

[qwazse]

...

so you are saying that to get WB, a scouter must have been a scout as a youth, and have achieved the rank?

Of course not. Earn it as an adult in your troop. Maybe den chiefs could sign off pack leaders!

 

Every scout deserves an accountable leader.

[RememberSchiff]

When I was a scout (there he goes again), there was no instant recognition. I waited until the Court of Honor to receive my rank patch and card.

 

There were two reasons for this.

  1. Taught scouts patience,

  2. The troop had no cache of rank patches, nor was Mrs SM inclined to visit Council more than once a month. She also typed the information on the rank card.

 

Seemed reasonable.

 

So far, it is interesting the varied opinions on what would be "Classic".

Edited March 8, 2017 by RememberSchiff

[NJCubScouter]

In looking at the comparison of the Camping MB requirements, perhaps there is something symbolic in the fact that actually going on camping trips has dropped from requirement # 1 to # 9 - and something MORE than symbolic in the fact that the number of required nights camping has been reduced by 60%.  The first 8 requirements in the 2012 version are all about preparing for camping trips, talking about them, talking about different kinds of tents and sleeping bags and etc. etc., as opposed to actually camping.  (Although you could say requirement # 8d (cooking three meals) - the last sub-requirement before # 9, is supposed to be done on a camping trip, although it doesn't actually say that.  But that's still pretty far down the list.)

 

When I saw Stosh's reference to "Classic Scouting" in the other thread, I thought he was referring to the "membership policies."  Perhaps I was incorrect.

[NJCubScouter]

So far, it is interesting the varied opinions on what would be "Classic".

 

Yes, it is, and since this is all completely hypothetical anyway:  If the BSA wanted to satisfy everybody it would probably have to provide several different "Classic Scouting"s, maybe one for each decade from the 1910's to... whenever each person thinks "New Scouting" started.  I suspect some people in this forum would choose the "Classic Scouting" that corresponds to the period when they were Boy Scouts - the 50's, the 60's, maybe some people would even choose the 70's (meaning the "improved Scouting program"), although I know that is heresy among many here.  And then some of our younger members would choose the 80's, 90's or later.  

 

Or maybe we could pick and choose.  Maybe one person's "Classic Scouting" would be the 1979 handbook but with Bird Study added as an Eagle-required MB.  Maybe another's would be the 1972 handbook but with Camping Skill Award required for First Class (as it was after 1976-77 or so) and Camping and Cooking MBs also required for Eagle.  And for the more seasoned folks out there, maybe the 1959 handbook (the one with the smiling, waving Scout with the overseas cap on the cover) with whatever changes you would have liked to seen at the time.  There could be more different "Classic Scouting"s than Heinz has varieties.

[skeptic]

I would go back just far enough to where the membership and interest was the highest and before a lot of the "new ideas" began on the scene. 

 

If one were to review some of the earlier literature and publications of BSA, one would find that the processes we use today are no where near the intent of processes of the past.  For example, if one wishes to be a FC scout, today all one needs to do is show they have been exposed to scoutcraft knowledge.  In years gone by, the scout had to prove he knew all these requirements all in one test that would take several days.  I do believe at one point the camping MB required 50 nights of camping, today's it's less than half that amount.

 

I do believe that today one can't retest at a BOR.  I believe originally the BOR WAS the test!

It also was normally done by the TLC or PLC, choose your dated acronym.  Leadership skill of major import: learn how to fairly evaluate success or failure of other scouts by peer review.

[JosephMD]

I would go back just far enough to where the membership and interest was the highest and before a lot of the "new ideas" began on the scene. 

 

If one were to review some of the earlier literature and publications of BSA, one would find that the processes we use today are no where near the intent of processes of the past.  For example, if one wishes to be a FC scout, today all one needs to do is show they have been exposed to scoutcraft knowledge.  In years gone by, the scout had to prove he knew all these requirements all in one test that would take several days.  I do believe at one point the camping MB required 50 nights of camping, today's it's less than half that amount.

 

I do believe that today one can't retest at a BOR.  I believe originally the BOR WAS the test!

 

I remember my first BoR in 1989, it was terrifying, I was told up front that my knowledge of what I learned would be tested, and it was.  This was probably already against the rules in 1989, but I'll tell you, I could demonstrate any tenderfoot skill, this testing continued through first class.  Even though it was scary at first, I wouldn't change it.