Program Adaptations

[Beavah]

My colleague acco40 gets a bit pointed in another thread and declares:

 

Beavah, I think you take much to lightly the so called "rules" of the Scouting program. We, Scout leaders, have promised to deliver this program and would be ... violating the Scout Oath and Law if we "bent the rules" to our satisfaction because we, in our infinite wisdom, thought that we were really helping the boy by doing so.

 

I'm curious what others think, and in another thread on "How would you handle this?" I posted a program adaptation that I recommend to units to help kids who are stuck at Tenderfoot because of the pullups requirement. Specifically, I suggest:

 

1) If a boy can do 2 or more "good" pullups, make the requirement "doing one more."

2) If a boy can do only 0 or 1 pullups, substitute the "flexed arm hang" instead, just the way the Presidential Fitness Test or military academies do. Improvement then means "hang longer." But hangin' is also the best way to build up strength to do real pullups.

 

Yah, this is clearly exactly what acco40 is talkin' about, eh? Here I am substitutin' my own program adaptation to try to do right by a kid. Directly contravenin' "No changing the requirements" which seems to be the Scouter.com Golden Rule.

 

I make no claims to "infinite wisdom." In this case I stole a march from fitness professionals and military academies.

 

So what does the group really think? Am I an evil heathen Oathbreaker? Or is it OK to use common sense and judgment, and perhaps even the expertise of non-BSA groups, to do right by a kid?

 

I patiently await my sentence.

 

[acco40]

I'll bite.

 

The devil is always in the details. The specific tenderfoot requirements you reference states:

Record your best in the following tests:

Current results

 

Pushups _______

Pull-ups _______

Sit-ups _______

Standing long jump (_______ft _______in)

1/4-mile walk/run _______

 

30 days later

 

Pushups _______

Pull-ups _______

Sit-ups _______

Standing long jump (_______ft _______in)

1/4-mile walk/run _______

 

Show improvement in the activities listed in requirement 10a after practicing for 30 days.

 

Now, we all know that 10 year old boys usually don't have much upper body strength. As adults we should also be able to infer that the reason for this requirement is for the boy to make the connection that if he practices these activities for 30 days (the real meat of the requirement) his physical conditioning will improve! Now, if a boy can't do one pull up to start with (may only get from a straight arm hang (180 deg) to a bent arm of 130 deg) and after practicing for 30 days he still can't do one pull up but can get to 90 deg that is improvement!

 

I understand that some adults don't always interpret the requirements the same way (should the Scout show improvement line item by line item or if he has improved in at least one area does that constitute improvement?) but I don't like adults knowingly changing the Scout program because they feel they think they know what is best for the Scout (do one more pull-up for example).

 

I don't think the requirement should be conditional according to what the boy can do originally. Just read the requirements. It really is fairly simple.

[Beavah]

Yah, acco didn't vote on the verdict, but he did tweak my tweak Good, and some other adaptations, eh:

 

1) Count fractional pullups, pushups, and situps for improvement (acco)

2) Just use flexed-arm hang for everyone, so as not to single kids out by initial ability (modified Beavah)

3) Yah, yeh know a kid who can do 10 pullups has fairly little difficulty gettin' to 11, compared with a kid goin' from 0 to 1. Make it even by havin' every kid's goal to go up 10 percentile points in the Presidential Fitness Test. (just weird, but fun math for the homeschool kids!).

 

#1 might be appropriate for a unit whose CO doesn't care too much about physical trainin' as a component of fitness. I wouldn't advocate this one the way acco does. Just seems like it's shortchangin' kids on the Aim too much. "Congratulations, Johnny, you did 25.2 situps instead of 25.1." Nah.

 

#2 hey, the pros on the President's Council on Fitness accept this, and it's usually more fun, with more chance for patrol mates to cheer each other on, eh? Avoids acco's complaint about shiftin' between two methods.

 

#3 seems more "fair" for units that want all boys to exert equal effort at improvin' fitness. Might also be more useful to a Christian school that does the Presidential Fitness test, because it fits better in their program, eh? (Got just such a unit in our district that I visited tonight).

 

I agree with acco, tho. A carin' adult should "infer" the purpose for the requirement and how it connects to the aims of the CO and BSA, eh? Then interpret/adapt to do what's right. The goal is service to the boy and da Aim, yah?

 

Surely there are other jurors out there, though? Oathbreaker, or decent scouter tryin' to do what's right? (This message has been edited by Beavah)

[EagleInKY]

"A carin' adult should "infer" the purpose for the requirement and how it connects to the aims of the CO and BSA, eh? Then interpret/adapt to do what's right. The goal is service to the boy and da Aim, yah?"

 

 

Acco/Beav - I agree with both of you. There's a big difference in helping make the program work given the needs and abilities of the group compared to some of the real "modifications" to the program that we sometimes hear about here.

[Hunt]

I don't think this is a good example of a "tweak," because all Beavah and acco really did here was to interpret what the requirement means. I don't think these were "adaptations" at all. An adaptation or tweak might be to say that we'll substitute curls with a small dumbell for the pull-ups.

 

Also, if you're going to assume the power to interpret the aims for yourself, and then tweak the requirements to meet your version of the aims, it seems to me that you really can end up on the slippery slope that leads you to something too far removed from the BSA program.

[evmori]

The requirement states "Show improvement".

 

So if a Scout can do two pull-ups in 30 seconds and 30 days later he can do two pull-ups in 15 seconds, that is improvement. Nowhere in the requirement does it state the Scout must do one more pull-up to show improvement.

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

 

 

[FScouter]

I agree with Hunt; its a poor example. It shouldnt take a lot of soul-searching to help boys complete requirements. The concern is it sounds like a foot-in-the-door justification to make other far-reaching adaptations to change the program; changes that fall from ones self-anointed infinite wisdom to create a better program.

 

The BSA program has evolved over many years and is the product of hundreds of Scouters with a ton of wisdom. That collective wisdom far, far surpasses any one adults 2 cents worth. Its a good program, just follow it!

[John-in-KC]

The other, implied part of the requirement is INSTRUCTION. The Scout left to his own devices and simply trying to hang from the bar may not get anywhere.

 

Some coaching, guidance, mentorship ... hints on things that add upper body strength...

 

Adult Association... Personal Growth... the Methods of Scouting!

 

Bottom line, Beavah: Each young man who walks with us must be treated as an individual, especially on things that are individual and subjective in nature. If show improvement is not subjective phrasing, I do not know what is!

[Gonzo1]

I think the sad part is that the lad has been stuck for 2 years trying to make Tenderfoot. I think that's ridiculous.

 

If he shows imporovement, he passes.

[Fuzzy Bear]

I let my weight bloom for a couple of years and it has been a fight ever since. Bad feet and a sit down job didn't help one bit. I now work out 5 days a week from 5 to 6 AM and have being doing so for one year. I am doing my best to continue in spite of cold weather and early morning hours prior to going to work. I am not attempting an award. It is something I learned in Scouting.

 

Should a Scout not do what is asked? They need to let me know that they are doing their best first. If they have worked out for thirty days doing all of the required exercises, then they will have improved. If they have not worked out for thirty days doing the required exercises, then they have not improved. I doubt that an increase or a decrease in the numbers are the final verdict. Nothing is said about warming-up or a pulled a muscle. Are there alternative exercises for those with a broken arm? The benefits of working out are numerous. I am interested in the lessons learned as well as the requirements being completed.

 

Beav and acco40 are intelligent, caring Scouters and I know both will do their best in their jobs. I am sure their Scouts will agree on that issue, now and later. fb

 

 

 

 

 

[Beavah]

Hmmm... deadlocked jury so far. I might avoid jail yet . But at least a few would stick with the "collected wisdom of the ages" in the original requirement, and require a pullup from the lad. I always wonder if they've actually seen how committees compile materials.

 

... it seems to me that you really can end up on the slippery slope that leads you to something too far removed from the BSA program.

 

Yah, I don't really get the "slippery slope" arguments, eh? There's nothin' slippery about it. The slope is as solid as a staircase. You can walk up and down it and choose exactly where you want to be. Each CO has its aims and values, and uses the Scouting program with BSA support to do the best job it can to help kids. Da original "slippery slope" quote referred to central organizations like governments taking away the liberties of individuals and groups, eh?

 

As we see, each of da jurors adapts or "reinterprets" this particular program piece to balance their own view of the importance of fitness, their own view of the relative wisdom/effectiveness of the requirement in achieving that aim, the troop's need for consistency, and the individual needs of each boy for support.

 

Fuzzy's my juror, though. Despite all the different implementations of this program piece, he says it's all Scouting, because it's all based on caring adults doing their best.

 

We should support that, eh?

(This message has been edited by Beavah)

[Fuzzy Bear]

We used to have a Forum member that intelligently defended the right and wrong or the black and white of the letter of all rules, regulations and guidelines. I must admit that his arguments were quite compelling and sometimes I miss not having something solid to lean on from such argumentation. Using his approach, it becomes a slippery slope or easy to dismiss the problems that arise from the numerous individual issues that may confront us at any turn in the road. His argument would be that you simply don't know enough about the program to make an informed decision. In many instances, I am sure that is the case but I fear we suffer from "Information Overload".

 

Information Overload is about the reams of Scouting literature and training for the new member. For the old members, the problem is compounded by the reams and reams of literature, changes and training programs that they have been through over the years. Sometimes the new member is at an advantage in making "correct" decisions since they would not fall back on past training, knowledge and experience. Sometimes the older member is at an advantage because they have a better perspective based on many choices from past information.

 

I don't believe we will ever see two programs run the same way but we will take note when a program is too far removed from the main stream. We need to also be black and white on many issues concerning safety and those involved with money. I personally believe in a hierarchy of concerns but then that would bring us into a confrontation as to which things are the most important. It is just easier and safer to point to the Methods of Scouting and leave it at that.

 

fb

 

 

 

 

[OldGreyEagle]

Beavah, as I certainly prove multiple times I dont always coounicate my thoughts well. I spend quite a lot of time on a post only to have a subsequent poster explain exactly what I had in mind in half the space, so bear with me.

 

When you say the CO chooses from the prgoram where it wants to go, it gives me great agina. While I agree there is tremoundous flexibility in the Boy Scout program, there are some parts that I hold sacrosanct. I realize you also may have sacrosanct items that you hold that I would not. The question is, what are those items?(This message has been edited by OldGreyEagle)

[Beavah]

there are some parts that I hold sacrosanct. I realize you also may have sacrosanct items that you hold that I would not. The question is, what are those items?

 

Yah, OGE. Da problem is that I think that's the wrong question, eh?

 

I've been on staff at a bunch of International Jamborees and a host of international events. In sitting with Scouting colleagues from around the world, I can't recall your question ever comin' up. Mostly, we sit around and share what each of our programs does, our methods, our successes and failures. The interest isn't in judgin' who's "not doing real Scouting." The interest is in sharing ideas and comparing different methods with friends who care as much about kids as we do.

 

The only people who come across as donkey's tails are da ones who think their nation's rules should apply to everyone else, because only they know about The Program, or Safety, or...

 

Same goes within the BSA.

 

The real question, especially for those of us who work at regional, council, and district levels, is not "what is sacrosanct?". It's "How can I be of service?" In this grand game of Scouting, how can I be a friend to your unit? How can I best support you? What can I learn from you? What can you learn from me?

 

Ours is a role of humble service, and genuine friendship. The question "what is sacrosanct" almost never gets you to an act of humble service.

 

And givin' yourself angina is a waste of a good heart.

 

 

(This message has been edited by Beavah)

[Stosh]

Discussions such as these always intrigue me.

 

When all the fuss and feathers have settled down, all the theorizing and speculation run it's course, it leaves me with only one question in my mind to "solve" such sticky wickets.

 

What is more important: the rules or the boy?

 

Then I make my decision.

 

Stosh