Program Adaptations

[OldGreyEagle]

Ok Beavah, I will try take 2, as I said I sometimes have problems expressing myself. Lets just say, just saying mind you, that you know of a Troop that conducts Boards of Review that last at least an hour and for Life, its 2 hours guaranteed. Every bit of Scout scraft is revisited and demonstrations of lashing, knots and campass work is required amoung other skills. The Scoutmaster was a scout in the 60's and he wants his boys to be good woodsmen. Many scouts leave this troop as they find the scoutmaster overbearing. Some scouts find other Troops who follow the program, most boys are lost to scouting forever and will always have a bad feeling towards it. Should the troop refrom its ways? The scoutmaster means well, does that make him correct?

[Beavah]

Ok Beavah, I will try take 2, as I said I sometimes have problems expressing myself.

 

Yah, mebbe OGE. Or maybe your worldview is just different, eh?

 

You ask me again, in different words, when I would condemn another volunteer (and, indirectly, when I would condemn the parents and kids and organization who liked that volunteer's program and stayed with it).

 

That's not a question that would even come to mind for me. I don't believe it's the right way to think, at least about service in the BSA. Certainly it's not the way the BSA thinks.

 

The question for me as fellow Scouter and friend to the unit is "How can I be of service?"

 

"When would you condemn?" and "When is another unit's program not Ritually Holy (sacrosanctus)?" aren't useful questions to me, because they don't lead us to acts of friendship and service.

 

Our job is not to condemn. Our job is to provide materials, friendship, and support.

 

Our program is not Holy. Our program is Helpful.

 

Our role is to be of humble and cheerful service.

[SR540Beaver]

Hmmm....If I came across a CO and their registered leaders who decided to design their own uniform, change the requirements for ranks, change the names of the ranks, ignore the G2SS and register girls in the troop, I'd feel compelled to cheerfully provide materials, friendship, and support so they could do scouting the way they agreed to when chartered.

[FScouter]

"What is more important: the rules or the boy?"

 

Given that every BSA rule and policy is there to ensure the boy gets a full measure of Scouting, or to keep him safe, the answer is clear.

[Beavah]

A couple o' jurors (or prosecutors?) come back in with da Straw Man arguments. Ah, so much fun such arguments are! "Unless we Pidgeon Manage any scouter who doesn't do things the way we like, we're on the slippery slope to admitting girls, molesting children, and the end of Western Civilization as we know it." But yeh missed answerin' the question. Do you make the kid do a pullup, or do you change the requirement? Or, more importantly, do you call a fellow Scouter who does change the requirement for the kid an Oathbreaker? That is, after all, what started this thread, eh?

 

The charter agreement is a fine document on which to begin a partnership, if we actually read the whole thing and understand how the BSA applies it.

 

The rest of the partnership involves respect, charity, and service. It is more important that we do right than that we be right.

 

And the answer is always the boys.

 

Been fun yappin' with you all. May the Solstice renew you, the lights of Hannukah fill you with hope, Kawanza unite you to your heritage, and the birth of Jesus fill you with Joy.

 

And most especially, may the New Year find us renewed in our commitment to service to one another and to the young men and women we hold so dear.

 

Beavah

[Eamonn]

"What is more important: the rules or the boy?"

From what I've read in this thread that doesn't seem to be the real question!!

Like our good friend Beavah, I have attended a good many international Scouting events. In fact I served for almost ten years or so as Scout Leader (SM) in the UK.

I do not consider myself to be an expert on international Scouting. I like to think that each and every Scout organization

/association wants and is dedicated to helping all young people fulfill their potential and become confident, responsible citizens.

How they go about doing this is different from country to country. This doesn't make one better than the other or one right and the others wrong -It's just the way they do things.

As a Scouter in England I delivered the program following their rules (Policy, organization of the scout association) They do a lot of things very differently than the BSA. Some it seemed to me better than the BSA and some worse.

Why each country does things differently? Could be discussed in another thread.

I will admit when I first came over to the USA as a very young English Scout Leader to work as an International Camp Counselor, I didn't know the workings of the BSA and found a lot of what the BSA did as being very odd. I think at the time I was also guilty of a certain amount of "Home Country Pride". I knew that I was only going to be here for about 3 months, I never took the time to find out how the BSA worked and then at that time it really didn't matter as I had no plans of ever returning. (Little did I know that seven years later things would change.)

When I did move over here and did get involved with being a member of the BSA; my overall intend was much the same as it was when I was a member of the Scout Association. But the rules were different.

Both the Scout Association and the BSA are in the "Business" of serving young people, but they each have their own way of doing so.

Both programs are designed to meet the needs of the youth they serve. When followed I fail to see how the programs can hurt or harm a youth member.

Youth members get harmed or hurt when leaders choose to not follow the program and start making up their own rules.

So, maybe the question should be not:"What is more important: the rules or the boy?" But " What is more important the program or the rules that an adult leader makes up and imposes on the youth members ?"

A little Lad joining a BSA Boy Scout Troop is taught the Scout Oath and Law.

TRUSTWORTHY

A Scout tells the truth. He keeps his promises. Honesty is part of his code of conduct. People can depend on him.

I think the BSA is depending on the adults to deliver the program as it is laid out in BSA publications and material.

LOYAL

A Scout is true to his family, Scout leaders, friends, school, and nation.

When we take it upon ourselves to not be true to the program, we are in fact being disloyal.

HELPFUL

A Scout is concerned about other people. He does things willingly for others without pay or reward.

Not following the program shows lack of concern for the Scout and is not helpful.

KIND

A Scout understands there is strength in being gentle. He treats others as he wants to be treated. He does not hurt or kill harmless things without reason.

A good many of these Program Adaptations end up hurting the Scouts and are not kind.

OBEDIENT

A Scout follows the rules of his family, school, and troop. He obeys the laws of his community and country. If he thinks these rules and laws are unfair, he tries to have them changed in an orderly manner rather than disobey them.

Some will say that these Program Adaptations fall under the heading of some sort of Civil disobedience? This is not trying to have them changed in an orderly manner rather than disobey them.

CHEERFUL

A Scout looks for the bright side of things. He cheerfully does tasks that come his way. He tries to make others happy.

Surely we have an obligation to cheerfully take on the task of delivering the program?

THRIFTY

A Scout works to pay his way and to help others. He saves for unforeseen needs. He protects and conserves natural resources. He carefully uses time and property.

Doing things the wrong way is not using time or resources wisely.

BRAVE

A Scout can face danger even if he is afraid. He has the courage to stand for what he thinks is right even if others laugh at or threaten him.

Standing up for the values of the program can at times take guts.

CLEAN

A Scout keeps his body and mind fit and clean. He goes around with those who believe in living by these same ideals. He helps keep his home and community clean.

When we set the ideals of Scouting to one side, what sort of example are we setting?

REVERENT

A Scout is reverent toward God. He is faithful in his religious duties. He respects the beliefs of others.

Even if I believe the people who are guilty of these Program Adaptations and I personally think that they are in the wrong. I still can respect their view and would hope that they would return the favor!!

I see the program as being there to serve the youth members and help meet their needs. Sadly at times I see these adaptations, no mater what the intention was or is, as some sort of adult arrogant ego trip or at times a real lack of understanding the program.

Eamonn

 

(This message has been edited by Eamonn)

[SR540Beaver]

The only requirement is to show improvement after 30 days. Nowhere is it specified the number of repetitions a boy has to do to satisfy improvement. So, modifying the requirement isn't needed nor is it allowed in scouting. If he has even fractional improvement after 30 days, he has met the requirement as it was written.

 

That was the original question. The last question had to do with when it was appropriate to correct someone misusing the scouting program and doing it to their own liking. Apples and oranges.

[Gonzo1]

Beavah,

 

Usually, I'm right there with you, however, I must disagree with you here. It doesn't say anything about add a flexed arm hang. If he improved, he passed.

 

 

[Beavah]

Yah, Gonzo, sorry to have yeh on the other side of the jury, eh? But maybe I should clarify. There are two separate questions here.

 

The first is that "improvement" generally requires an increase of at least one. So, for pullups for a 10 year old, where we recognize that if a kid starts at zero there's a huge effort that must be made over a much longer period of time than 30 days in order to get to one, does the leader fudge in favor of the boy? Whether the fudge is "I'm going to count 1/10th of a pullup as 'improvement'" or "I'm going to substitute the flexed arm hang" really doesn't matter. Neither is in the BSA materials, though one shows up in other professional literature because it has less risk of injury (hint: it's the flexed-arm hang).

 

I perfectly understand those who say, "No, fitness is more important than FCFY, and we're going to work with this boy until he makes one pullup even if it takes a year." But I also understand those who say "no, trying and having an early success at making Tenderfoot is more important to the boy, and to our long-term goals." It's a unit's and scouter's choice.

 

But this is just an example, eh? The second and more important question is "if a scouter makes a modification like this to help a boy, is it OK to holler at him in public about violating the Oath and Law?" Is it honest to imply that any program adaptation like this one causes "kids to be harmed or hurt" as one poster suggests? Or tell the boy or the boy's parent that the scouter is "just wrong?". Or imply that letting a boy do a flexed-arm hang means that you must be admitting girls and conducting 12 hour boards of review? In other words, even if in your opinion the Umpire made a bad call, is it OK to go shout at him and kick sand in his face?

 

My answer to the first is the same as jblake's. The kids come first. Modify if you need to (and if you're going to modify, go with the professional recommendation ). Whether you need to depends on the unit culture and the kid. As to the actual choice I'm agnostic; I trust the scouter to make the right call for each kid and each unit. Personally, I'm kinda fond of really working with a boy over time to improve, eh?

 

My answer to the second is that it's always wrong to chastise the umpire, even when he makes a bad call. It's poor sportsmanship in baseball, and a poor example to kids everywhere else. Doin' it in the service of "program standardization" or some such claptrap is no excuse. It's just another version of the self-appointed uniform cop.

 

Some disagree, eh? They like bein' self-appointed program cops. Fills egos or somethin'. I just find it kinda embarrassing.

 

But enough, already. Go be with family. Go delight kids.

 

And God Bless us, everyone.

 

[SR540Beaver]

"The first is that "improvement" generally requires an increase of at least one."

 

Says who exactly? Improvement means improvement. The requirement never states a number. I may be wrong, but I don't recall anyone advocating a rule of one more. Follow the requirement as laid out and there is no need for fudging.

 

"The second and more important question is "if a scouter makes a modification like this to help a boy, is it OK to holler at him in public about violating the Oath and Law?"

 

To date, I have not seen anyone here advocate hollering at another scouter in public about how they implement the program. Lettingthem know that they are doing something incorrectly is courteous and helpful. I'd tell them they were going the wrong way on a one way street too and not feel bad about helping them do it according to the program.

 

"They like bein' self-appointed program cops. Fills egos or somethin'. I just find it kinda embarrassing."

 

No, we just made a promise to deliver the program as designed and like to see the integrity of the program maintained across the board. Like I've said before, the BSA provides a skelton for the local unit to hang some meat on. There is plenty of flexibility. What a CO should never do is redesign the skeleton to their own liking. If they want to do that, they need to design their own program outside of scouting.

[Gonzo1]

Beavah,

I think you're getting a little sensitive on this one.

 

I don't think it's OK to change the program. Suppose the scout does a longer long jump, runs/walks faster, etc. but does the same on pull ups, I think he improved enough.

 

I'm a UC. I attended a troop meeting where the troop had a BOR, they had 2 committee members and A LIFE SCOUT SIT IN ON THE BOARD. While this is wrong, I did not come unglued. I asked the BOR chairman what was going on, he said they let older scouts sit in and participate on younger scouts BOR. At the next committee meeting, I addressed it and with the COR, I called him and let him know the next day, no scouts sitting in on BOR' ..... no changing the (da) pragram.

 

 

As for the exercises, if he improved in the other areas, did the same in pull ups, pass him. I don't think it says he must improve in EACH area, but I could be wrong on that.

 

Merry Christmas.

 

G

 

[bowhunt120]

I think Gonzo nailed it in his last post. One very important aspect of my job involves...reading. But not the normal reading we all engage in every day. No, in this reading, I must dissect sentences, noticing not only the words that are there, but also taking note of those that are NOT. This has become an integral part of the application of Scouting requirements for me. As Gonzo hinted, the requirement states "...show improvement in these activities." It DOES NOT state "...show improvement in EACH of these activities." If the boy shows an overall improvement, he should pass. However, I would balk at passing a boy who only improved in one of the activities. "...these activities" is plural. Improving in just one activity is singular.

 

Also, I helped my own son learn to do a pull up over the course of the month. We progressed from various forms of assistance to a full, dead-hang pull up that he did by himself. So it is possible for a 10 year old to learn to do a pull up.

[dan]

Some disagree, eh? They like bein' self-appointed program cops. Fills egos or somethin

 

 

Reads to me like the pot calling the kettle black.

 

In the area where I reside there are approxametly 6 troops within 20 miles that have at least 40 scouts per troop. And at least 5 other troop within 20 miles that have less than 40 scouts. It seems that this area is going a good job of reaching the youth. But I feel I could create a troop and have over 100 members in less than 6 months. How would I do this? I would do some small program adaptations.

I would make the monthly meeting short maybe play a fun game and have a nice tasty snack. No opening or closing. The outings would all be planned for the scouts, advancements hand feed to them including eagle projects, make it as easy as possible for the scouts. None of this boy lead stuff. We (the adults) would make it fun and easy for the scouts. Advancement would be fast and easy. The scouts would be having fun and advancing. I would include girls (and maybe even some others that should not be a boy scout) in the meetings and camp outs and lots of pizza delivery during the outings. I know I can find a CO that would like to run this type of program.

 

 

The first step on the slippery slope is usually a small step.

 

 

 

 

 

[Gonzo1]

bowhunt120

Welcome to the forum!

 

Dan, It seems like what you propose is the YMCA, Awana, or Royal Rangers, our Methodist youth group, maybe Campfire Girls, I mean Campfire (they slipped on the slope).

 

 

[dan]

 

It seems like what you propose is the YMCA, Awana, or Royal Rangers, our Methodist youth group, maybe Campfire Girls, I mean Campfire

No, what I proposed was some slight adaptations to the BSA program. I could create a troop/crew and stay within the BSA program, at least within enough so that the BSA would not question what was going on. When should program adaptations stop? When the COR say enough? When you are no longer doing scouting? When teaching leadership stops? Letting pull up requirement is changed to a pull down? Where is the line?