Pure Scouting

[Fuzzy Bear]

Here is your opportunity to tell the readers about your version of Pure Scouting.

 

For some, it appears that Scouting has, much like color mixing, color, hue, and saturation with the ability to mix, match and to increase/decrease intensity levels.

 

For some, it may be that Scouting is a process of learned objectives that can be achieved over a period of time.

 

For others, it may be an either/or proposition where a group of people come together to engage a program.

 

It has been some time but for a few years I visited the Philmont Training Center for several programs. I took note that I could leave my tent to go to the bathroom and on the way, stop in on any number of group conversations and fit right in as though I had been there from the start. Few took note that they did not know me, nor I them but we spoke the same language and almost knew the same (kinds) of people. We had similar problems and our goals were understood to be the same. I found the interchanges to be stimulating and the acceptance to be refreshing. My wife took note that I spent a long time at the bathroom.

 

First, I agree that Scouting looks like a quilt of many colors. It is messy for several reasons. Few of us are in one place or program long enough to give historical definition but if we were able to observe, we would see several things happening.

 

Let's take one example of a unit's progression. A DE visits a CO and there is an agreement struck for them to engage the Scouting program. The next Sunday morning a call goes out for leaders. Nobody answers but someone hears about it from another Church and she decides to be the SM. She recruits some of her friends and the first Charter is completed with the minister being the non-participating COR. A couple of the names on the new Charter were used from existing people in the District as a temporary measure. Little communication occurs between the COR and the leaders which is the first big step (backwards) and then a UC comes along and tells them about training. Only one of the ASM's goes and finds out about needing a committee. A couple of parents are asked to be that committee. One had been a Second Class Scout when he was 12, so he is the chosen CC.

 

The training was run by a new person that moved into the area. Because he had been trained a few years before, he was the only person to take the job, so he became it. It was felt that he could pick right up where he left off and he could learn the new things while teaching it. Since he did not have experience running a Venture Crew, he left that part out for future reference as well as a few other things. The UC was experienced but he was newly appointed to the WB Staff and spent most of his time going to meetings and doing some other Council stuff. He was unable to check in on the new group but he once called to ask the SM, if she had purchased a SM handbook.

 

The new SM went right out and purchased a SM handbook. She read the first few pages and decided that she knew enough to get things going. One year later, the DE shows up to sign the new Charter. Everyone is happy to meet the "Executive" and he is able to get all the signatures.

 

I could go on and on but these kinds of things happen with frequency. So, if a person is observing this group from a safe distance, then it is not surprising that the new group begins to do things in novel ways. It does not mean that they are actually doing the Scouting program. It does not mean that the CO is happy with what is going on. It does not mean that the DE accepts their program. It does not mean the DC is blessing all programs simply because they have three adults signing the Charter and they have two-deep leadership. Since the unit approximated several goals, everyone is happy about that part because their part is completed. Other parts may be totally unexplored territory for the new unit.

 

I believe that all of this means that there is "potential" if everyone agrees together on what goals Scouting has to offer. If there is disagreement, then there needs to be further sit-down meetings to hash it out and decide who is going to do what. This seldom happens. In all of my years of Scouting, I have yet to see that happen. Yet, there are many, many units with experienced leaders communicating with their COR's and everyone is trained. Sometimes they approximate the model of Scouting and sometimes not. Even here, we find it hard to agree. There may be many reasons for our lack of agreement. I still believe that there is great potential for Scouting to work. It is by far the greatest youth program around. fb

 

 

[t158sm]

Take for instance the 48 or so participants in a Wood Badge course. Even though each one of them receives practically the same training in the course, they will all come out of the course with a different experience and a different understanding of the course. Each participants life experiences will somehow find a way to come into play, as well as a multitude of other influences. External forces will make their presence known within each unit, along with the simple dynamics within the unit.

If 48 different units are represented in the course, there could very well be 48 different versions of Scouting.

Are some of these units more of a "pure Scouting" nature than others? Perhaps. But then would any one of them be more right than another? Remember Scouting is not an exact science.

[Fuzzy Bear]

I don't fault the training for varied outcomes as much as I do the participants that come to the training with their varied backgrounds and learning abilities. The bigger problem is that no matter how well trained, they return to a unit with varied backgrounds and levels of training. In most cases, it is not a one-person show and others may be in positions of authority to control the use of the effects of the training. In some instances, a person simply does not understand how to engage training outcomes with their unit. WB tries to do this with the Ticket and has found success. Problems generally arise after the Ticket is completed and the person is no longer working their Ticket.

 

Let's take one idea of the boy run unit. It sounds good on paper and when training with other adults it is even fun. When put into practice, it is threatening to parents and other adults that perceive that kids cannot be responsible. This simple, practical and helpful principle is many times set to the side because of control issues. It is somewhat difficult to detect, since many times projects are viewed from a distance by others. Adults may plan, gather the materials and build a project then the Scouts merely set it up. Boys may even take credit for it. They get an award and everyone is happy, unless the project loses and then the adults step in to find out where the judges went wrong. I have witnessed this concept by WB trained adults that viewed their own training as a mark of competitive distinction rather than one that allowed them to assist Scouts in their efforts to make ethical and moral choices by instilling in them the values of the Scout Oath and Law. fb

 

[Beavah]

Here is your opportunity to tell the readers about your version of Pure Scouting.... let's take one example of the boy-run unit

 

Yah, the best youth-run Scoutin' I've ever seen has been international. American Scouting is way too controllin' / rules-bound for the rest of da Scoutin' Movement. If yeh want to see how it's really supposed to be, go to Bill Hillcourt's native Denmark, or visit scouts in any of the Scout Associations that came more directly from the BP model.

 

But in the U.S., here's one troop that did pretty well on the "boy run" bit, from a former district before we re-configurated some years back.

 

Adults did:

* In-troop JLT for a week every June. All PLs, APLs, troop positions expected to come. Other 1st class scouts interested in running for positions could request invitation from SPL with their PL's recommendation.

 

* Once a month JLT "refresher training", usually with a fun outing or activity. Some "new ideas" introduced this way.

 

* Recruiting adults for tasks when arm-twisting was involved, and keepin' adults in line.

 

* Quiet coaching / SM minute, etc.

 

* CO requested a couple of specific service projects each year, and did one adult-run fundraiser that provided funds for most capital equipment.

 

* Financial & safety oversight, helpin' knock down barriers.

 

* Merit Badge Counseling (except there was one boy who was an Extra Class HAM radio operator who counseled Radio MB, close as I could tell, and a couple youth BSA Lifeguards and HS Swim Team members seemed to be the only ones who counseled Swimming MB).

 

* Other tasks as requested by the youth leaders.

 

Youth did:

* 20-minute PLC's after each troop meeting, but SPL routinely called PLC meetings on his own as needed, with no scouters present.

 

* 6-month planning day at end of June JLT and a December weekend. Set all events, assigned events to patrols or individual PLC members.

 

* Determined the activity budget and dues. QM decided on purchases less than $250.

 

* Ran all fundraisers (except for adult arrangements like permits, space rental contracts). No popcorn sales, only work projects.

 

* Did all safety planning, put together all driver maps (and assigned youth navigators to cars), did all meals by patrol.

 

* Determined patrol membership.

 

* Decided on "official" uniform. Designed own patrol patches, special awards.

 

* PL or APL did all T-2-1 instruction & signoffs. SPL, ASPL, or TG sat on all T-2-1 BORs. JASM sat on Star/Life BORs.

 

* PL's handed out T21 ranks at COHs. SPL handed out SL ranks. JASM handed out MBs. Patrols conducted opening/closing.

 

* Regularly got together for informal activities. This unit had a large "scout shed" and youth leaders had keys, and could go and take out equipment after school, etc., without adult supervision.

 

* Helped plan and conduct training for new ASMs.

 

 

They were only a mid-sized troop, about 30 kids or so, but very active and "tight." Great kids. Not all of 'em made Eagle, but I'd venture to say each one was Eagle. All that havin' been said, I don't think this is the only or "pure" version of Scoutin'. And I don't see intelligent variation in method or desired outcome as a bad thing. This troop would not fit all boys/families, eh?(This message has been edited by Beavah)