Push for Coed Scouting

[Col. Flagg]

National heaved tradition off a cliff long before that. Traditional scouting was a handful of badges, service to community, and lots of camping and bushcraft. 

 

In any discussion about change of any kind in Scouting it always cracks me up that people resist anything in the defense of "tradition". We haven't had a traditional scouting program since maybe the 50s or 60s. 

 

I think we all lament the loss of scoutcraft, bushcraft, White Stag, etc. But I would argue that those defending "tradition", as you put it, are trying to stop what they see as the further erosion of that very tradition. I would add things like STEM, patch proliferation, merit badge colleges, worksheet MBCs, not using the PM, meddling adults (parents and leaders) and ineffective youth training as additional windmills which should be tilted in the name of "tradition".

 

Simplicity should be the name of the game. But that's my traditional, outmoded sense talking again.

Edited February 16, 2017 by Col. Flagg

[EmberMike]

Simplicity should be the name of the game. But that's my traditional, outmoded sense talking again. 

 

 

Sorry to say it, but I think it's true, those ideas are outmoded in the the BSA. Traditional scouting is over, and now it's about expansion and program growth. At least in theory and based on what we hear from National. Randall Stephenson said something in his National Meeting speech about how we all have to get on board with change, that growing the movement requires change to just about everything we do, including the program. And I don't suspect he was talking about going back to a more simple/traditional program. 

 

Personally I'm all for it. The more change, the better, because we need it. I'm afraid a traditional scouting program would bore the heck out of kids after a couple of years. We already struggle with membership retention. What happens when we literally have less for kids to choose from? 

 

If STEM or skateboarding or whatever trendy next big thing can be connected to the aims of Scouting and integrated into what we're doing, and thereby make kids more interested in Scouting, I say we do it. 

[Eagledad]

I think that anyone suggesting that this discussion is all about defending tradition hasn't been reading the discussion. If we have to put the discussion in simple terms, I would say quality vs. quantity. 

 

Barry

[Stosh]

Sorry to say it, but I think it's true, those ideas are outmoded in the the BSA. Traditional scouting is over, and now it's about expansion and program growth. At least in theory and based on what we hear from National. Randall Stephenson said something in his National Meeting speech about how we all have to get on board with change, that growing the movement requires change to just about everything we do, including the program. And I don't suspect he was talking about going back to a more simple/traditional program. 

 

Personally I'm all for it. The more change, the better, because we need it. I'm afraid a traditional scouting program would bore the heck out of kids after a couple of years. We already struggle with membership retention. What happens when we literally have less for kids to choose from? 

 

If STEM or skateboarding or whatever trendy next big thing can be connected to the aims of Scouting and integrated into what we're doing, and thereby make kids more interested in Scouting, I say we do it. 

 

And yet one could make the argument that if 4-H is doing STEM, the schools are doing STEM, why would the BSA need to be doing STEM?  One would think that with a different developmental plan these other programs can easily out compete the BSA.  4-H has it's outdoors as part of its programming, as do schools, Y's, and other community groups as well.  They probably do it at a far greater level, but none of these programs offer the diversity the BSA has to offer.  Yes a religious organization might have an outdoor retreat aspect of their program, but it is a small part of it and they don't worry as much about scoutcraft because they have adults running it, something which BSA tries to put into the hands of youth.  Last summer my church youth group went rock climbing.  I was a bit nervous, but most of the kids knew what they were doing because they had learned the skill in school and now were applying it in the church's youth program.

 

Each one of these opportunities for youth seem to be isolated and restricted and not the main focus of the program.  Traditional BSA incorporates a larger span of opportunities all in one program.  That is it's competitive edge.  No, it is not open to females because as part of it's traditional mission it is open only to males.  GS/USA is like minded in this approach but for females only.  It is an alternative to co-ed for those who wish a purely unisex approach. 

 

Instead of the chameleon approach of trying to duplicate every youth program in the market, it is always better to be the best in just one or two niche markets.  This is something the "everything for everyone" approach has tended to avoid.  No, the BSA cannot be everything to everybody, nor should it even try.  Church don't do it and are still successful, schools don't do it, but they have the tax funds to do more than the average non-profits.  Community programs don't do it.  They all try and specialize in what they do best.  Outdoor programs focus on going outdoor and do not focus on leadership development.  4-H has leadership development, but try and do more with outdoors, as well as STEM, and other means along the way.  Sports used to be unisexed, but that is changing and the dynamics have had to change with it.  Churches focus on ministry and that may include an outdoor retreat.  

 

If BSA tries to "do it all" it may not be in its best interest because it might be watering down what they do best.  One only has so much energy and to have a focus on a goal is always far more productive than the shotgun approach of trying to do too much with the limited resources.

 

So what does the BSA do best?  Well, in order to be everything to everyone, they have become a Jack-of-all-trades rather than a mastercraftsman.

[Col. Flagg]

Sorry to say it, but I think it's true, those ideas are outmoded in the the BSA. Traditional scouting is over, and now it's about expansion and program growth. At least in theory and based on what we hear from National. Randall Stephenson said something in his National Meeting speech about how we all have to get on board with change, that growing the movement requires change to just about everything we do, including the program. And I don't suspect he was talking about going back to a more simple/traditional program. 

 

Personally I'm all for it. The more change, the better, because we need it. I'm afraid a traditional scouting program would bore the heck out of kids after a couple of years. We already struggle with membership retention. What happens when we literally have less for kids to choose from? 

 

If STEM or skateboarding or whatever trendy next big thing can be connected to the aims of Scouting and integrated into what we're doing, and thereby make kids more interested in Scouting, I say we do it. 

 

Well, that's the rub, isn't it? BSA *thinks* they know how to fix the problem. Yet they've been tinkering with the program for decades and nothing has stopped the slow and steady drop, drop, drop of membership. It's the Chinese water torture of membership loss...no cultural appropriation intended.

 

I'm not sure BSA knows what's trendy. We are talking about a company that uses 1990s technology. Do we really want them trying to figure out what's trendy? Does BSA have a good track record of developing successful changes to their core program? Even their spin offs are floundering. I feel they have too many failing brands. Perhaps they should focus on just 1-2 key brands and 86 the rest.

 

I think I am more like those who feel that maybe we should just keep the outdoor program focus we have now and let membership hit equilibrium. Find the niche and stay there. Quit trying to appeal to everyone. Go for your core group and be the best you can.

[EmberMike]

And yet one could make the argument that if 4-H is doing STEM, the schools are doing STEM, why would the BSA need to be doing STEM?...

 

 

BSA has crossed into scholastic areas for decades. We didn't really need the Citizenship stuff, a typical social studies class at school covers most of it. But it touches the service element of scouting. It's hard to be a positively-contributing member of society if you don't know how that society works. Likewise, STEM connects to areas of scouting. We don't need it, but it could add something of value to the program in a modern meaningful way. 

 

 

If BSA tries to "do it all" it may not be in its best interest because it might be watering down what they do best.  One only has so much energy and to have a focus on a goal is always far more productive than the shotgun approach of trying to do too much with the limited resources.

 

So what does the BSA do best?  Well, in order to be everything to everyone, they have become a Jack-of-all-trades rather than a mastercraftsman.

 

My guess is that National realized a long time ago that it's tough to keep kids interested for a decade of membership if we're just camping, hiking, sitting around fires, and doing service projects. I wouldn't call it a jack-of-all-trades approach, the nature of the program allows for choice and lets kids learn from masters of their craft (in theory, assuming a MB counselor isn't a jack themselves). Pinewood Derby has really no connection to the original intent of Scouting, but it's there because kids love it and it's still a big draw for packs. Sometimes, trying to be more than an outdoor program has served scouting well. Sometimes, not so much. 

[Stosh]

As mentioned in other posts scouting has a strong social dynamic to it that maybe STEM, sports and career oriented programs do not.

 

In Cub Scouts rank advancement is non-existent and an award system is used instead.  This means it is not expected that the scout progress through any particular skill achievement.  Instead the boys are there to have fun, whether it be a game, a craft project a derby competition or a day in the woods hiking with one's friends.  Boy Scouts add to that a progression of skill, leadership and character development because the boys are older and can handle the additional challenge.  The games, projects and competitions are still there.

 

The specialty of Scouting both for males as well as females is this unique opportunity is done within age as well as sexual considerations.  Cub Scout programs tend to not address activities that are not of a male oriented interest..  Socially they get plenty of inter sexual contexts in school, church and park playgrounds but not those that will be of general sex oriented interests.  Whereas clothing styles might appeal more to what interest the female population it doesn't do much for males.  And vice versa, girls might not be into guns and hunting as much as males generally are.  I'm not saying there isn't opportunities for a few here and there, generally the interests do vary among individuals.  But as a group they tend to take certain tracks, for good or for bad.  At this point, BSA and GS/USA have a distinct advantage in this area that will go away as an option and the program will devolve into a more general interest of both male and female with nothing out there unique for boys or girls alone.  I think this dynamic will be lost to scouting if they go co-ed and now have to compete with schools, churches and Y's that offer that kind of programming.  Going head-to-head with these other groups puts them in direct competition with them with no unique aspects to tilt the scales.  4-H with 3 times the membership could in fact be advantage over the competition.  Like Gypsy Rose Lee said, "Ya gotta have a gimmick!"  What's BSA's gimmick to set them apart?

 

And by the way, how  many of us guys didn't have a secret club house growing up that had a sign on the door "No Girls Allowed"?  Same for the gals.  Maybe we ought to take our cue from our childhood.  Kids today are no different than when we were that age.

Edited February 16, 2017 by Stosh

[qwazse]

... In Cub Scouts rank advancement is non-existent and an award system is used instead.  This means it is not expected that the scout progress through any particular skill achievement. ...

To curb the heckles of confused Cub scouters ... there are ranks in Cub Scouts and there is an advancement method.

But the scope of any rank is about one year to earn commensurate with grade level. Never more. In other words, your chances for AoL are not diminished if you never bothered to earn Wolf or Bear ranks.

It's just a warm-up to Boy Scouts' seven year challenge.

 

I'm wondering if some girls out there just don't see GS/USA's recognition program as a similar marathon? Do any of them see the MB program as more concrete, and that makes it more appealing?

[RememberSchiff]

What's BSA's gimmick to set them apart?

 

The Aims and Methods of Scouting.

 

[MattR]

I'm not a fan of lots of programs. I'd much rather see one program that's flexible enough for the leaders to modify. A 10 sizes fits all strategy is just another way of micromanaging what the adults can do. In software this is called feature creep and it never works. A clean simple model is always better.

 

I'll tell you one thing scouts has that none of these other programs have, and it's the ability of the parents to have fun and participate with their kids. Everything else is just the parents standing on the sidelines and watching. STEM would be boring for me and I'm in that business. The reason it's boring is because I have 10 more years of college than any of the kids and it would be like me going for a hike with a two year old. The outdoors is the great equalizer. I had an amazing amount of fun with my son. As he got older he passed my abilities and I loved it.

 

But then again, I bake my own bread and have a cast iron skillet. So what do I know?

 

As for coed, I think the best approach would be to support what the parents want. Coed, single sex, whatever the parents want. I have enough faith in the program that it will balance out.

 

One of the issues I see is that scouting in the US is so politicized that it has an image problem. For whatever reason the BSA has a red image and the GSUSA has a blue image. The problem is that most parents don't want red or blue for their kids, they want a good program. I have problems going into schools and talking about scouts. I can't meet parents. This isn't just hurting the BSA, it's hurting all of scouting. So if the GSUSA isn't the least bit interested in boys, or their dads, then I'm fine with creating a program that poaches their turf. The parents would be happy with a single scouting program. At the same time, I want all the people on this forum that want to keep an all boys program to have that option because I know there are just as many parents that want an all girls program. My daughter wanted the all girls version of the BSA program. She didn't want to be a boy scout, she just wanted to do what the boys did.

 

I'd say ditch venture scouts, run the scouting program to 21, and let the CO decide what the age limit is and the sex(es). It would encourage scouts to stick around until they're 21 and be a younger face that the teenagers can look up to. That's the cool factor that UK scouts has that we don't.

 

That gives a younger and older scouting program. Fold all the non outdoor programs into one and do the same thing with ages and sex. That leaves two programs and the CO can make what they want. Gays and girls are up to the CO, as is the program.

[Stosh]

 

What's BSA's gimmick to set them apart?

 

The Aims and Methods of Scouting.

 

 

 

Now there's a catchy idea that will draw in many parents..... Of course that doesn't do much good on any promotional material the Scouts may be using for recruitment.

[Stosh]

To curb the heckles of confused Cub scouters ... there are ranks in Cub Scouts and there is an advancement method.

But the scope of any rank is about one year to earn commensurate with grade level. Never more. In other words, your chances for AoL are not diminished if you never bothered to earn Wolf or Bear ranks.

It's just a warm-up to Boy Scouts' seven year challenge.

 

I'm wondering if some girls out there just don't see GS/USA's recognition program as a similar marathon? Do any of them see the MB program as more concrete, and that makes it more appealing?

 

One does certain things to earn a knot award, whether it be tenure, participation and/or training.  At the end one is awarded a knot.  I can be 5 years into scouting and earn that award or simply be nominated for it.  But it builds on nothing like a level of ranking would provide.  I know of boys who were never a Tiger, Wolf or Bear but earned AOL similar to how one earns the knots.  On the other hand I have yet to hear of any Eagle Scout that didn't first earn the ranking levels of Tenderfoot, Second Class, First Class, Star and Life first.  Those are rankings. 

 

Through popular usage the Cubs are called ranks, but it tends to be confusing to parents coming into Cub Scouts not having been involved in the Wolf and Bear program.  It appears to them as something their boys "missed".  If that be the popular misconception how many boys do we miss getting into the program if they feel they have missed an opportunity. 

 

To reiterate how important it is we correct this misconception, I have had boys tell me their friends don't join Boy Scouts because they never were a Cub Scout.  That line of thinking is not what I want floating around the neighborhood. 

 

I don't think it too farfetched to think there might be those out there that believe if one misses out at the start in order to get Eagle they have to go through the Tiger to Life progression.  It's no different than the ranking of the school system.  No one graduates High School unless they first have passed K-11 rankings.

[RememberSchiff]

Now there's a catchy idea that will draw in many parents..... Of course that doesn't do much good on any promotional material the Scouts may be using for recruitment.

You're kidding right?

 

Our scouts made a recruiting poster with troop photos illustrating the Aims and Methods of Scouting. We found it very effective.

[TAHAWK]

Boys join Scouts primarily because it's a value-centered educational organization?  

[Stosh]

Of course I'm kidding.  But one has to wonder how in depth the thought processes have to go to get to the sales pitch.  If I said adult association to a single mom it might spark something for her and her son.  Even Character development, too.  But to say OUTDOOR ADVENTURE to a boy his eyes light up.  Not necessarily for the gamer in the basement or the girl who's more interested in dance recitals.

 

Seriously we have a group in our area that has a baton twirling group that marches in parades throughout the state.  They have a huge contingent that needs a semi truck to haul around their equipment and a bus or two to get everyone to an event.  Yet after seeing them for 40+ years I have never seen a boy in the group.  They have a gimmick and it works for them, but not on boys.