Monopoly - Revisited?

[Eamonn]

Please correct me if I'm wrong.

But we were talking about tweaking the Scouting (BSA) programs.

I asked if we thought tweaking was OK?

What tweaks we seen as acceptable?

I didn't ask what tweaks were unacceptable, but I was going to!!

Again please accept my apology for screwing up the original thread.

Eamonn.

[CNYScouter]

I think Monopoly and Scouting are a good analogy.

 

As is Monopoly, Scouting is a game. A game with a purpose.

 

As with all games there are rules to follow.

In Scouting there are 8 simple rules. They are called methods.

 

As with any game, you must take the time to learn the rules on how to play Monopoly or Scouting.

 

Scouting, as with Monopoly, many people play the way they think it should be played and not the way Parker Brothers intended it to be played.

 

Monopoly, if played the way it was designed, achieves its intended goal.

If the game is tweaked it may or may not achieve its intended goal.

Monopoly has a measurable and distinct end to the game.

This is where Scouting and Monopoly differ.

Scouting does not have a measurable and distinct end to the game.

 

If you tweak the Scouting program, how can you tell if you have achieved its intended goal?

 

The only sure way to know if Scoutings goals are being met are to use the rules (methods) to play the game (teach the Aims).

 

 

[OldGreyEagle]

I think we should define what is meant by a tweak, is requring a boy to earn the pioneering merit badge to make Eagle in your troop a tweak? it does require advanced scoutcraft skills.

 

Is having the troop elect the SPL and then also elect the ASPL a tweak?

 

Is requiring a scout to do knots at a BOR or scoutmaster conference a tweak?

 

One man's tweak may be viewed by another as total desertion of the program, just what is meant by tweak?

[FScouter]

The distinction is important. Call it a tweak, a variation, an adjustment, or whatever. The important point is whether or not the change can be supported in the BSA publications. BSA gives wide latitude. The publications spell it out. The limits seem clear enough. There should be no question that minor adjustments are fine as long as they are within the limits. The key is whether or not the adjustment can be supported in the BSA publications. If it cannot, its a departure from the program rather than an adjustment.

 

I will call a tweak to be a change made beyond what is intended by BSA. A tweak cannot be supported at all in the publications. Its a departure from the program.

 

Any adjustment that is supported in the written publications is not a tweak, its just a different way, a variation.

 

Some things are hard and fast such as rank requirements. Others, like how often boards of review are scheduled are more flexible.

 

Scheduling boards of review 3 times a year instead of 5 or 6 times is not a tweak. Eliminating boards of review is a tweak.

Specifying the occasions when the uniform will be worn is not a tweak.

Specifying that the uniform pants are not required is a tweak.

Establishing guidelines for boy leader nominations is not a tweak.

Boy leaders appointed by the SM or approved by the committee is a tweak.

 

If in doubt, look to the publications for support. If support can't be found, theres a good reason.

[Torveaux]

One major difference that I believe makes this intellectual exercise rather pointless.

 

Monopoly is a game that is purchased and used. The owner is free to do as they please with it. Parker Brothers is not attempting to build character, they are merely attempting to make a profit.

 

I think people still read too much into or out of the 'rules' to get consensus on what is a tweak.

 

In my book, ignoring moronic rules like 'official' pants is a tweak. They add nothing to the program.

[FScouter]

Agreed, it is a pointless discussion. We all have our different opinions about points minor and major that do or do not add anything to the program. Call it tweaking, departing from the program, or whatever. One with a mind to change what he wants will define his change as a minor tweak, or maybe even an enhancement. He'll never say he has departed from the program.

 

 

[evmori]

Switching or replacing the monthly themes use for your unit would be a tweak.

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[Kudu]

These "follow the rules of Scouting" discussions will remain "pointless" only for so long as liberals, libertarians, and moderate Republicans (including those who plan to remain in the BSA) fail to recognize that Scouting is literally (not figuratively) a monopoly game.

 

It is only the lack of competition that allows the BSA to play to their religious-fundamentalist political base on "values" issues; and to produce unpopular, inferior products like the BSA uniform. This will not change until we work together to actively to support legislation and trademark litigation to allow freedom in the American Scouting marketplace.

 

Eamonn has used the game of "Monopoly" as a metaphor for the game of Scouting. But the problem is not as neo-conservatives like to frame it: Should volunteers "tweak" the rules, regulations, and program elements of the BSA?

 

The problem with Scouting in the United States is that the BSA monopoly on Scouting for boys allows it to move Scouting away from the programs and good-natured mainstream Scouting philosophies of William Hillcourt and Baden-Powell, toward an authoritarian model which is the very opposite of the game that teaches citizenship through indirect methods.

 

Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

 

From the very beginning, it has been the BSA that has "tweaked" the Scouting program!

 

For the first couple of decades the BSA did not even use Baden-Powell's Patrol System!

 

The first Handbook for Scout Masters instructed Scoutmasters to lead the Troop themselves, to divide the Troop into "Patrols" by arbitrary differences in height & weight or social class, and to systematically disenfranchise the Patrol Leaders so that they would not get "swelled heads." For example, "if the Scout Master wants to delegate the work of the patrol and troop, the whole group should reach a decision in regard to the plan" see:

 

http://www.inquiry.net/adult/methods/1st/

 

It took somebody from Denmark to straighten out the BSA for a while with one of the greatest inventions in the history of Scouting:

 

William "Green Bar Bill" Hillcourt's Original Six Methods of Scouting:

 

The Scout Way: Scouting is a game (1. A Game, NOT a Science);

Patrol Method: played by boys in boy gangs (2. Scout Patrol)

under boy leaders chosen by the gang. (3. Boy Leadership);

Men in Scouting: guided by a man (4. Scoutmaster)

backed by other men of the community. (5. Committee & Council);

Activities: Scouting provides the boy with an active outdoor life, (6. Adventure in the Out-of-Doors)

grants him recognition for mastering various skills, (7. Advancement);

Uniform: and gives him a chance to wear an attractive Uniform. (8. Scout Uniform);

Ideals & Service: It holds before him the ideals of a true Scout, (9. Scout Law)

and encourages him to "help other people at all times." (10. Oath, Service, Good Turns).

 

See: http://www.inquiry.net/adult/methods/5th.htm

 

But after the great Dane retired, it appears that politically-correct progressive forces (perhaps Miki101 can clarify this) eliminated two of these Methods (The "Scout Way" Method and The Uniform Method), transformed The Outdoor Method into some kind of socially "relevant" study of rats and other urban wildlife, and invented a two new "scientific" Methods called "Leadership Development" and "Personal Growth" (the later being lists of "behavioral objectives" by which a Scout's growth toward the Aims of Scouting could be measured).

 

The 1972 Seven Methods of Scouting

 

1) Scouting Ideals;

2) Patrols;

3) Advancement;

4) Adult Male Association;

5) Outdoor Program;

6) Leadership Development;

7) Personal Growth.

 

See: http://www.inquiry.net/adult/methods/6th.htm

 

Hillcourt came out of retirement to write the BSA's best Scout handbook ever but, except for the Outdoor Method, his program was never really restored. To this day we still suffer from a dress designer's indoor Scout Uniform, corporate leadership theory rather than Patrol Leader specific training, and countless other BSA-tweaked program elements & policies.

 

The solution is not to change the BSA directly, but to work toward establishing freedom in the marketplace so that its policies will be shaped to attract Scout, Scouter, and individual Sponsoring Organization "consumers," rather the heads of a couple of very conservative religions who dictate "Scouting values" to the rest of us.

 

The BSA's monopoly on Scouting is not absolute!

 

It appears that in 1924, the BSA attempted to force the Girl Scouts to use the term "Guide" rather than "Scout," claiming that use of the term "Scouting" was an infringement on their trademark (sound familiar?). See:

 

http://www.inquiry.net/adult/bsa_vs_gsusa.htm

 

Perhaps there is an opening here somewhere for religions that see the wisdom of working together to establish secular alternatives to the BSA (a self-defined "religious" or "faith-based" organization).

 

As far as I know, the only organization that is actively fighting in the courts for freedom of choice for Americans in Scouting is "Youth Scouts".

 

If you are a liberal, libertarian, or moderate Republican who really wants to change the BSA--rather than just talking about it--consider supporting the Youth Scouts rather than short-sighted reformist groups like Scouting For All. See:

 

http://youthscouts.org/news.html

 

Kudu

 

 

[Eamonn]

"Agreed, it is a pointless discussion"

I'm sorry you feel that way!!

I think that a lot of the Tweak-ers know that they are tweaking. In fact a lot of them are very proud of the tweaks they have made.

Sometime back OGE asked about Attendance, we know that adding attendance to rank advancement is not something that should be done, but we also know that it is done and is in fact in the Sea Scouts requirements.One might ask if it's OK there why not use it in Boy Scouting?

Someone once said to me that "Boy Scout Troops should be like restaurants; one on every corner and a Lad should be able to find the one that he likes best" (OK, it was a Field Director who was at the time pushing membership.) But if they are all selling the same thing, the same way why bother?

My problem with Tweaks is that I'm a little worried if we go to far there isn't going to be a real program. While I really don't want to reopen the discussion on duty to God, I was a little taken back when people seemed to be saying that we could tweak what I see as a core value of what we are all about.

Still having gone on about tweaks and tweak-ers I have to admit to trying to do a little tweak of my own!! I haven't done it, but I did ask if we could start a Cabin Boy and a Cabin Girl program in our Ship!! I have our SE looking into it, seeing if we can use Scoutreach as a way of doing it. Of course if he says that it can't be done, that will be the end of it.

Could it be that I'm the cowardly tweaker?

Eamonn.

 

[evmori]

Not every part of the BSA program is etched in stone. There are a lot of areas that could be defined by every unit differently & that would be OK. Tweaks!

 

Wendy's, McDonald's & Burger King all sell hamburgers. But, they are all different. I prefer Wendy's while Eamonn might prefer McDonald's. Having a Scout Troop on every corner would be the same thing. They would all have Scouting and they could all be different.

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[dan]

Whenever I go into Wendy's, McDonald's or Burger King and ask for mushrooms on my hamburger they say I cannot have mushrooms on my hamburger! I really enjoy mushrooms!

They will not tweak the hamburgers for me.

I guess I could buy my own mushrooms and bring them into Wendy's, McDonald's or Burger King and add my own mushrooms but they really do not like people bringing food into their restaurants.

I guess I will stick with Chilis. They have hamburgers with mushrooms on them.

[SemperParatus]

I am pretty confident in theorizing that every scouting unit has tweaked something, somewhere, at some point in time. Any unit claiming to be in 100% compliance with the BSA rules, regulations, publications, etc. etc. for all time since its inception, is deluding itself and is tweaking the truth. We all do the best we can, we follow the program as best we can, we consult the publications and get trained to learn the BSA model, we can strive to be a BSA-modeled troop in every respect, however, tweaking will exist as long as humans are involved. If you want a tweakless world...lets turn volunteer leadership over to the computers.

 

Personally, I think the quirkiness of units is a good thing. It adds to the flavor and diversity of scouting. I can't imagine an ice cream store selling only vanilla year-in and year-out staying in business very long. You need the chocolate, strawberry, cookies n' cream, fudge swirl, mint chocolate chip, and chunky monkey to add variety to what would otherwise be a very boring, and ultimately unsuccessful, endeavor (I don't mind adding to the metaphor list since I would much prefer ice cream over hamburgers). Its in the diversity that scouting gets its strength and future success, not from each and every unit looking like it came from the same cookie cutter.

 

Obviously, outlyer units that have strayed so far from the BSA-way that they are hardly recognizable as a scouting unit need to be addressed accordingly. But, in such cases, we are dealing with more than just tweaks.

 

Eamonn, what possessed you to propose a Cabin Boy/Girl program in the first place? If its not in the manuals, then why would you even look to implement such an idea? Sometimes, tweaks can make a program better.(This message has been edited by SemperParatus)

[dan]

I am not a big fan of ice cream, I like the stuff Dairy Queen sells, but is it really ice cream? They only sell 2 flavors they have been in business a long time.

Dairy Queen will not put mushrooms on my ice cream either!

 

What metaphor?

[Lisabob]

Ah, this is what I love about this board. Dan, you'll be happy to here that the Wendy's down the street from me is advertizing the mushroom swiss burger on its sign today!

 

Here are some of the pack level tweaks I've seen, some more ok than others in my view.

 

Tweak One: Parental involvement in den meetings beyond Tigers

After Tigers, parents aren't required to attend den meetings, but I know several den leaders who make it clear that they expect parents to attend anyway, at least the vast majority of the time. A few other DLs I've met discourage parents from "hanging out" at den meetings.

 

I'm ok with this either way, as long as the basic YPT protections are observed and the boys, parents, and leaders are comfortable with how things are going. My personal preference is to have parents attend (and help) though, particularly with the younger dens.

 

Tweak Two: Pack Meeting Structure/Format

My son joined a pack that has a history of holding "traditional" pack meetings every other month, and "alternate" meetings (field trips, camping, overnighters, etc.) the opposite months. In most cases the basic components of a pack meeting were built in, but the look and feel of the alternate meetings was quite different. This is a long-standing tradition for this pack and it seems to work for them. Boys, parents, leaders like it and after a while I became convinced that the pack was equally able to promote the ideals, values, and purposes of Cub Scouting this way. Maybe even better than a more rigid approach, as attendance was always, always high at the pack meetings (both types) and to my knowledge nobody ever uttered the "b(oring)" word about this pack's monthly meetings. It certainly distinguishes them from other packs in the area, who hold only traditional-style pack meetings.

 

I saw this as a tweak. Others (outside the pack - ie, some district training/RT staff) saw it as abandoning the BSA format for pack meetings every other month.

 

Tweak Three: BALOO. When is it required and when isn't it? I have gone round and round with some folks about this. (here's a link to one council's description of BALOO requirements: http://www.gpc-bsa.org/Programs/Training/Baloo.asp).

 

My own DE informed me that(his view, based on a statement such as the above link) a BALOO-trained person does not need to actually be present for the entire cub camping experience; all they need to do is be listed on the tour permit and attend *at least part* of the event. Further, some district professionals have asserted that the BALOO requirement applies primarily to camping and not to other types of sleep overs like museum/zoo sleepovers or lock ins. This is not my interpretation at all. Our pack always chose the most cautious interpretation (BALOO-trained leaders present the whole time at any overnight function, anywhere) but I know other packs who regularly choose the most liberal interpretation because they're stretched thin on BALOO-trained adult leadership and don't want to cancel events.

 

I don't like this one. This is a safety thing and an insurance thing in my book, not to be "tweaked." Also I suspect my DE might beat a hasty retreat from his interpretation if something happened after the designated BALOO person had already gone home.

 

Tweak Four: Leaders serving multiple positions, like CM/DL or CC/DL. This shouldn't happen but it does all the time. I understand why this isn't supposed to occur but if the other option is not to staff these vital positions, well, I can see why people "tweak". Unlike the BALOO situation, I don't think this is likely to cause an immediate safety concern - this is more of a long term leadership development issue. This seems to be less of a problem within troops, where the line between committee and ASM/SM positions is more clearly drawn - not sure exactly why that's the case, but I guess that's a positive thing.

 

Lisa'bob

A good old bobwhite too!

[Beavah]

The old Soviet system was very good at uniformity. Uniformity like that often looks attractive in theory as a solution to poverty (i.e. poor units). But the theory wasn't so... the result of enforced uniformity was impoverishing everyone.

 

Adaptation of the program to local circumstances and the needs of kids and the capabilities of leaders is not only a good thing, it is a necessary thing for success.

 

If you tweak the Scouting program, how can you tell if you have achieved its intended goal?

 

Dat's easy. You measure the outcomes. Are the scouts who have been in the program demonstrating good citizenship and character and fitness? And do they attribute at least some of that to their scouting experience? National tweaks the program every year... and probably collects less information on the resultant outcomes than the average unit does.

 

Kudu is also right (albeit a bit lost in the political polemic) that the BSA's program is a very substantial "tweak" of how scouting is practiced in the rest of the world.