Cub Scout Program Updates Starting June 24, 2024

[fred8033]

1 hour ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

...  Only difference was Cub Scouts was 3 years as Tigers did not come out until 1982.

Going back to three years would be a huge improvement.  Expanding cub scouts to be same size as boy scouts has been a killer for retention, perception, etc, etc, etc.   The current 5.5 years way too much.

[DuctTape]

3 hours ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

 

I had a similar experience to the one you described in the early 1980s. Only difference was Cub Scouts was 3 eyars as Tigers did nto come out until 1982.

It might have been 3 years for me, not sure. It was the late 70s, so before Tigers too.

[AltadenaCraig]

1 hour ago, fred8033 said:

Going back to three years would be a huge improvement.  Expanding cub scouts to be same size as boy scouts has been a killer for retention, perception, etc, etc, etc.   The current 5.5 years way too much.

I won't disagree that 5.5 has been too long of an expansion; however, the alternative allows youngsters to be captured by alternative programs (Y-guides, AYSO soccer, etc.), which all have programs for small-fry.  Without a BSA small-fry program, a youngster's life would already be full with alternatives before a BSA program ever gets a chance at him/her.

[yknot]

1 hour ago, AltadenaCraig said:

I won't disagree that 5.5 has been too long of an expansion; however, the alternative allows youngsters to be captured by alternative programs (Y-guides, AYSO soccer, etc.), which all have programs for small-fry.  Without a BSA small-fry program, a youngster's life would already be full with alternatives before a BSA program ever gets a chance at him/her.

I think it's a mistake to look at cubs that way. Some things are just different. Nature centers do a far better job with pre-school level programming than scouts ever can, or should. It's far easier for parents to just plunk down a few dollars and show up for a few sessions with the naturalist. Youth sports is similar. Young kids mostly sample -- they'll play soccer in fall, basketball in winter, T ball in spring -- and cubs is not a sampling program. I don't think we so much as lose kids to other activites, I think some activities are better suited to kids at these younger ages. A lot of parents want their 5 and 6 year olds running around the field or the court; they don't want more sitting and paying attention or wearing uncomfortable, expensive uniforms. 

[fred8033]

1 hour ago, AltadenaCraig said:

I won't disagree that 5.5 has been too long of an expansion; however, the alternative allows youngsters to be captured by alternative programs (Y-guides, AYSO soccer, etc.), which all have programs for small-fry.  Without a BSA small-fry program, a youngster's life would already be full with alternatives before a BSA program ever gets a chance at him/her.

Let the perception be that y-guides and soccer be the little kids program. 

Scouts should start when we trust them to start a fire and use a knife.  

[AltadenaCraig]

Excellent points made by @yknot & @fred8033.  YIS -

-Craig

[DannyG]

On 11/16/2023 at 11:53 AM, DuctTape said:

My cub experience was vastly different from what I have been hearing the last few decades. Cubs.  for me was NOT a family affair, nor a Pack-centric unit.

We had a den which met weekly after school at the den leaders house for an hour or so, then walked home or our parents picked us up. There were a couple pack meetings throughout the year, maybe 2 or 3. Pinewood derby and B&G are the only ones I remember. There were also a couple pack campouts, but we mostly stayed with our den. I do not recall ever really interacting with another den.

Each den meeting we would do an activity, sometimes a continuation from the previous week. No "requirements" were ever signed off by parents. AOL was an extra award one could earn as a Webelos, and there was only one year of it. There were only 4 years of cubs, iirc, Bobcat, Wolf, Bear, and Webelos.

This is the Cub Scouts I remember as a youth. This is an antiquated version. I do not believe this is how Cubs should be done today. For instance JTE encourages more frequent Pack meetings. Monthly is the ideal. 

Young children are active. The Cub Scouts program should encourage activity. This is how they learn. Get the young kids camping with their family. Put them on a trail. Cub Scouts can be an alternative to sports and Y-guides. Fill in the gaps that the other programs don't cover: outdoors (camping, fishing, hiking), service to community, etc.

[DuctTape]

18 minutes ago, DannyG said:

This is the Cub Scouts I remember as a youth. This is an antiquated version. I do not believe this is how Cubs should be done today. For instance JTE encourages more frequent Pack meetings. Monthly is the ideal. 

Young children are active. The Cub Scouts program should encourage activity. This is how they learn. Get the young kids camping with their family. Put them on a trail. Cub Scouts can be an alternative to sports and Y-guides. Fill in the gaps that the other programs don't cover: outdoors (camping, fishing, hiking), service to community, etc.

I disagree that the way we experienced it is not useful for todays youth. Den-centric can be just as active as the leaders desire,  just as pack-centric can be boring inside stuff.

A den is much easier to organize a hike, or outdoor activity too. Family attending a campout is much easier as a den too. I also disagree with the current parent sign-off. 

[SolderedBugle]

Starting from Lion, it has been difficult (programmatically) to get familiar with the program while working with existing leadership in joint den meetings. We are working well personally and the kids work well, but finding the crossover is already running dry. 

 

Having more alignment between den goals is going to be helpful since I will be helping to guide the Lion leaders next year.

 

Reading more about the length of the program, I can see the potential for burnout in any activity. But I disagree that the program should be shorter. For scouts with older siblings, the lower ranks give them access that they wouldn't have had in the past. And in some states (CA) younger and younger children will be starting elementary school (4 and a half years old, maybe younger). Many scout programs are tied to elementary schools. Traditional scoutcraft and outdoorsmanship is beyond the younger kids, but they are happy to learn and play even if they cannot do it alone.

Rather than make the program shorter, I wonder if it would make sense to have the program be easier to jump in and out of. Many kids are trying various sports and activities. To some parents, scouts is just another activity. But instead of being 2 months long it is 12 month to 12 years long.

Edited November 18, 2023 by SolderedBugle

[Tron]

The main point of these changes which most people seem to have missed is that each rank is vertically aligned now. This helps a pack in 2 ways. First of all a pack suffering from lack of leadership can more easily combine grade levels into a "mixed" den and keep the whole program running. Secondly the pack leadership can align when they do the related adventures month-to-month so that the monthly pack meeting/outing aligns with what the cubs were learning all month. This brings the cub program into alignment with how a troop should function (practice in meetings, execute in outings). 

These changes are going to be fabulous; they are going to lead to better recruitment and retention for both cubs and scouts bsa.

[Armymutt]

21 minutes ago, Tron said:

The main point of these changes which most people seem to have missed is that each rank is vertically aligned now. This helps a pack in 2 ways. First of all a pack suffering from lack of leadership can more easily combine grade levels into a "mixed" den and keep the whole program running. Secondly the pack leadership can align when they do the related adventures month-to-month so that the monthly pack meeting/outing aligns with what the cubs were learning all month. This brings the cub program into alignment with how a troop should function (practice in meetings, execute in outings). 

These changes are going to be fabulous; they are going to lead to better recruitment and retention for both cubs and scouts bsa.

Except that the program is already essentially that way.  We had a campout and knocked out requirements for every den, whether it involved knot tying, out door code, leave no trace, hiking, etc.  The program already had that feature.  I'm not sure what's fabulous about making AOLs now spend a lot more time finishing up.  There's no way a den can complete 8 adventures in 6 months with a quality program.  

[dk516]

3 hours ago, Tron said:

This helps a pack in 2 ways. First of all a pack suffering from lack of leadership can more easily combine grade levels into a "mixed" den and keep the whole program running

Yes and no. I had a multi-level Den years ago because of lack of numbers. The first year was easy and everyone was working on similar steps for the requirements between the ranks. The second year was actually a lot more tricky to make sure for the "younger" rank part of the Den it did not simply become a repetition of what they already did with older rank during the previous year.

 

3 hours ago, Tron said:

Secondly the pack leadership can align when they do the related adventures month-to-month

Most Troops I know recruit in February March in order to have at least 2 full outings and the spring quarter to bring incoming AOLs up to speed for the summer camp "shock". Wanting to provide a serious program in 5th grade will have to compress the programming time for AOL adventures for them to cross over in March since pretty much all Packs I know in our area do not do rank advancement throughout the summer. It'll certainly need some finetuning and I guess we'll see what this is going to do to the Pack-to-Troop transition or how much of the AOL in reality will just end up being pencil whipped to be able to cross them over in February / March timeframe. 

[Tron]

On 11/21/2023 at 10:37 AM, Armymutt said:

Except that the program is already essentially that way.  We had a campout and knocked out requirements for every den, whether it involved knot tying, out door code, leave no trace, hiking, etc.  The program already had that feature.  I'm not sure what's fabulous about making AOLs now spend a lot more time finishing up.  There's no way a den can complete 8 adventures in 6 months with a quality program.  

It's not essentially that way; hence the realignment and updates. 

 

On 11/21/2023 at 1:50 PM, dk516 said:

Yes and no. I had a multi-level Den years ago because of lack of numbers. The first year was easy and everyone was working on similar steps for the requirements between the ranks. The second year was actually a lot more tricky to make sure for the "younger" rank part of the Den it did not simply become a repetition of what they already did with older rank during the previous year.

 

Most Troops I know recruit in February March in order to have at least 2 full outings and the spring quarter to bring incoming AOLs up to speed for the summer camp "shock". Wanting to provide a serious program in 5th grade will have to compress the programming time for AOL adventures for them to cross over in March since pretty much all Packs I know in our area do not do rank advancement throughout the summer. It'll certainly need some finetuning and I guess we'll see what this is going to do to the Pack-to-Troop transition or how much of the AOL in reality will just end up being pencil whipped to be able to cross them over in February / March timeframe. 

True it can be tough to keep any repeat issues from becoming a boring situation; however, mastery through repetition is a thing, and changing up teaching style can alleviate these issues. 

As for the troops recruiting issue: the answer seems to be, that AOL is no longer meant to be a prep year to join a troop. 

The 6 month time frame has always been an issue; I have had many discussions with other den leaders and asked them how they fit the current AOL program into 6 months and no one can quite explain it. Based on personal experience most AOL den leaders are straight pencil whipping the program plan as it is designed right now.

[Eagle94-A1]

9 hours ago, Tron said:

The 6 month time frame has always been an issue; I have had many discussions with other den leaders and asked them how they fit the current AOL program into 6 months and no one can quite explain it. Based on personal experience most AOL den leaders are straight pencil whipping the program plan as it is designed right now.

In the pre-2015 program, as soon as a Webelos den completed the Webelos Rank, they began work on the AOL. The entire reason why BSA went from a 9-12 month Webelos program in the 1980s and earlier to the 18-24 month program was because studies showed it took the Webelos, and their parents, that look understand the differences between Cubs Scouts and Boy Scouts.

I am friends with one of the 411 committee members that came up with the current program design. I asked can we still start working on AOL as soon as they completed Webelos, and was told yes, they shorted the number of required activity badges for the few that joined in 5th grade. But the goal was to cross over no later than March, so that they would be prepared for summer camp.

When I did training on the 2015 program, I told the pack in attendance just that. Those packs that do start the transition from Cubs to Scouts in 4th Grade have better prepared new Scouts who remain in Scouting longer. Best example I can give is the Webelos 2/AOL Den that began the transition in 4th grade, and in December of 5th grade, just before Cross Over on January 2nd, did their last activity badge, CASTAWAY. The den had their individual shelters built and started cooking lunch before the Scouts completed their shelters. Heck one Cub had his shelter completed, and lunch cooked before the DL had his shelter completed.

So if done like above, it should be no problem to complete AOL in 6 months of 5th grade.

BUT,  I know that people have said the new program was never intended to work like above, and that the person who told me it could, one of the committee that created the program. was wrong. And sadly7 whomever wrote the current WDL/AOLDL training did not know why Webelos went from 9-12 months to 18-24 months. With the new program, I see a lot of folks pencil whipping Cub Scout advancement, and a lot of new Scouts, and their parents, getting culture shock when the Cross Over.

[mrjohns2]

10 hours ago, Tron said:

As for the troops recruiting issue: the answer seems to be, that AOL is no longer meant to be a prep year to join a troop. 

The presentation said that ONLY the AOL is intended to be prep for Scouts (6 months for AOL) vs. previously all of Webelos (18 months Webelos and AOL) being prep.