Competitions-- Healthy or Detriment to Character Building

[NeilLup]

Hello Mike,

 

I've been reading through this thread and one thing puzzles me that you wrote.

 

You contrast "Do Your Best" and "Do What you Can." To me, in the context of Scouting, those are exactly the same thing. Each boy is challenged and encouraged to do HIS best and to do everything that HE can. His own capability is the standard and he is being measured against himself, not against some other boy.

 

In the same spirit, in the Scout Oath, there is "I will do MY best to do MY duty ..." Again, the boy is being measured against himself and his own personal best.

 

If competition encourages each boy to stretch himself and improve his personal best (You beat me this time, so I'm going to get better and stronger so I can beat you next time. But either way, I'm doing my best and that's all that can be asked.) then it is healthy and positive. But when it is a method of reinforcing status and peck rights then it is a problem. And children do quickly revert to a "Lord of the Flies" situation.

 

So this, I would suggest is the challenge. If a skilled Scout leader can use competitions to motivate and encourage each and every boy, then they are a powerful tool. But when they become "I can do this and you can't" and particularly when parental egos get involved, they they are probably out of place.

 

In the Scouting books of the 1950s, they discussed "champ-nit" contests. In these, there would be a competition in some skill area like knot tying. The winner would be eliminated and the loser would continue. There would be a "patrol champ-nit" selected and finally, the patrol champ-nits would compete and the ultimate loser would be the "troop champ-nit" in the contest. The book suggested then having that troop champ-nit compete against one of the boys eliminated in the first round. It suggested that because of practice, that troop champ-nit would beat the first round winner.

 

If it worked that way, it would be great. But otherwise, otherwise, that kind of competition could be brutal. Great fun for the people running the contest and for the boys watching but not much fun for the champ-nit.

 

The Order of the Arrow made a subtle change in elections a few years ago in this vein. Previously, the number of positions on an OA ballot was limited so that about 50% max of the boys could be elected, regardless of how good the candidates were. Now, the Troop members can vote for all or none so that each boy competes against himself and no one else. It isn't necessarily easier to be elected and there's really no place to hide if one is not chosen. But now, the standard is "Did you do your best" rather than "Are you better than he is."

[Hunt]

I'd just like to add one point to this--if you are going to have competitions, they should be as fair as possible. Boys are especially sensitive to perceived unfairness, and the value of the competition will be completely destroyed if the boys think it is unfair. While life is not fair, of course, the Scout Law is a higher standard. I'd also like to second the suggestion that competitions should be varied enough so that everybody has a chance to be a winner at least sometimes--and the adult leaders need to be on the lookout for the boy who just can't keep up.

[Fat Old Guy]

Competition is great. Most people enjoy competition at some level, even if they don't win. Look at the people that enter the Boston Marathon and don't have a snowballs chance in hell of finishing in the top 1000. People play bridge, shoot darts, throw coits, and do all sorts of activities that are competitive.

 

The problem arises when the drive to win becomes a need and overwhelms the joy of the activity. We see that in youth sports all of the time. A team can go to the national championships, come home second and the coach tells them that they are losers. Where's the joy in that? They beat out thousands of teams and despite their best effort, the are told that they suck. They don't hear, "we'll work harder and try again." They are told that they suck and they'll be reminded of it for the next year, "If you don't work harder, you'll stay losers."

 

I know a youth soccer coach who will abide no "happy talk" in his car if the team loses. The radio is off. There are no jokes. Only discussion of why they lost. This could be on a three hour drive from a tournement. Insane.

 

Our society has lost perspective on many things and for some reason, the knee jerk reaction is to say that if an example is bad the entire set is bad. Some take competition too far so all competition is bad. 500 miles away, a boy used a pocket knife in a bad manner so all pocket knives are bad. Some guys wore trench coats to school and did bad things so trench coats are banned.

 

Neither competition nor trench coats nor pocket knives are bad by themselves.

 

 

[red feather]

Do Your Best vs. Do What You Can.

 

That bothers me at a core level. Doing your best leaves no easy outs. Do what you can does.

 

If you are doing your best then you are holding yourself up to a higher level of achievement. Do what you can opens a lot of doors that allows an out depending on the circumstances.

 

I am not expressing myself well, words are not coming.... maybe these...

 

A Scout Is....

 

Not what a scout Maybe.

 

yis

 

 

[hops_scout]

Good point Red.

 

As many of you know, I play multiple sports and am in high school. Guess what, I get to deal with competition on a daily basis. Whether it be a starting position in a sport or getting the highest grade in a subject or whatever.

 

One positive thing I use competition for is when I'm lifting weights. I try to match (though usually doesnt happen) one of my partners even though he is extremely strong though I've been lifting longer. Though I know I wont do it, you still have to try. Now, weight lifting is one where you have to be smart when you lift too because getting too much weight too quickly can be very bad.

 

 

[mikeb]

Hey NeilLup, Red Feather got it. Read his post and think "that's what mikeb was trying to say."

I get the impression you may think that I am some type of hyper-competetive person. Let me assure you that is far from the case. I just feel that intentionally avoiding competition in our Scout activities is a bad idea.

I would also like to proclaim to the world that I for one am not man enough to participate in a "champ-nit" contest. I think that's one BSA idea better left in the past.

 

meanpc, your sense of the subtle (or maybe not) sarchasm in my post was on target. It's a bad habit of mine I need to work on. I guess I'm going to have to continue accepting "trophies" until I become a nicer person. As for the money-per-boy thing, to use a really bad catch phrase, I think we are going to have to agree to disagree on it.

[Eamonn]

I have sat back watching this post.

Mainly because at times I see competition as healthy and something that has been as big a part of Scouting as using knots and lashings. Then I have seen it used badly and the end product was poor winners and bad losers.

Looking at myself I know that I'm not a good loser. I hate to lose.At times I dress this up by telling everyone,even myself that "I'm goal orientated." But I tend to look at the goal as the finish line and I want to be there and I like to be there first.

When I was a young Scoutmaster in London, the district held a lot of competitions. I was very guilty of using the troop to feed my ego.I chose the teams and only the best Lads got to compete. If and when we didn't win the Scouts were very upset, not only because they hadn't won but also because they had let me down.It took me a few years to work on that and get it right.

I have coached Soccer teams and have to admit that when my team went on the field the aim was to win. No ifs Andi's or but's that team went on the field to score more goals then the other team.

I have seen Cub Scouts get very upset when their car lost in a Pinewood derby. I hate to see a little Lad in tears. But no matter what the prize is there is going to be winners and there are going to be losers.

Our local soccer club has now started playing games for the very young players where there is no goal keeper and no score keeping. This seems like a good idea until you talk to the players, you bet that they know how many goals they scored and you bet if Tom got six and Fred got ten, Fred will let him know it.

At troop meetings I have used games to reinforce a Scouting skill.

Like it or not when it comes to advancement, one sure way to spur a Lad along is to have him watch his pal get ahead of him.

Competition is a useful tool but it has to used carefully. While I do not agree with fixing the results (Yes there have been times when it has been suggested that we fix things, in order that everyone wins.) I am guilty of fixing the competition in order to highlight a skill that someone might have.(A patrol that might never win a race would win hands down at a quiz.)

I think that the bottom line is that competition is fine as long as it's done within the confines of the Scout Oath and Law.

Eamonn

[Fat Old Guy]

"I have coached Soccer teams and have to admit that when my team went on the field the aim was to win. No ifs Andi's or but's that team went on the field to score more goals then the other team."

 

That's usually the reason to play any game. I play to win but I never let winning or losing interfere with my enjoyment of the game. I enjoy winning and I love doing my victory dance but if I lose no one will die, I won't lose my house, and my children won't be sold into bondage so there is no reason for depression.