Will Girl Scouting Do a Better Job Developing Future Leaders Than Boy Scouting?

[acco40]

The outdoors - camping, traditional scout skills, etc. is really a recruiting tool. It is not the reason most parents have their sons join scouting.

 

Kudu - what is you opinion on teaching today's boys on how to use a GPS? That was a great tool when we went to Double H in New Mexico. I stood out of the way, each boy was the "lead" for one full day (six day hike) and the boys had to deal with the peer pressure of the other 5 scouts. If he led them down the proverbial wrong path (we had no trails nor paths to follow) he got an earful. I don't give a hoot that there were not GPS devices in 1916. As an adult, I also don't give a hoot about the fact that the boys improved their orienteering skills, how to read a topographical map and a GPS device. What I did care about was that the experience taught them about teamwork, leadership, responsibility with the added benefit that they had fun.

 

Were you laid off by one of your hated "corporations" or something? I really don't understand your position. Of course, if we make the scouting experience a purely classroom environment - we will loose the boys to boredom. But, I've also lost potential Scouts because they couldn't stand the bugs, "non-mom" meals, etc. They were the rare ones who the "adventure of Scouting" didn't sit well with them (at the ages of 10-12). The BSA can't be everything to everyone but it does need to change with the times.

 

I don't interpret the Congressional charter the same way you do. The emphasis is to promote the ability of boys to do things for themselves and others (be prepared and service), teach them patriotism, courage, self-reliance and kindred virtues using the methods in common use by boy scouts on June 15, 1916. To me, the methods in use were how (not what) the boys were taught - living up to a standard code (Scout Law and Oath), requiriing the boys to pass certain skill/physical tests and awarding him with recognition/medals/patches, etc.

 

We know that some of the first aid skills that were taught in 1916 are patently wrong now. Are we obligated by our charter to not change? Of course not. We still have the same goals or aims as before. We still market the BSA by the methods we utilize - which includes adult association, the uniform, the outdoors, advancement/awards, etc.

 

[clemlaw]

>>>>we will loose the boys to boredom. But, I've also lost potential Scouts because they couldn't stand the bugs, "non-mom" meals, etc.

[thriftyscout]

GPS is a great tool for orienteering/hiking/etc but it has limitations. The fine print for every GPS I have ever seen contains some sort of warning about not being a substitute for paper maps/compass. Blindly following a GPS on a major outing is a good way to get lost (or mislocated for those who never get lost).

 

One of these days, I'll have to have a Scout show me how to use one!!!

 

[Eagle92]

Yep you can get lost following GPS and not using it in conjunction with a map. Just ask my sister

[Kudu]

Why not replace all those "outdated" baseball skills that Den Leaders find not useful "at work and home," and turn Little League into something that most boys will hate as much as modern Scouting?

 

After all, the ability to swing a wooden club "at work and home" became obsolete with the dawn of the Bronze Age.

 

83Eagle writes:

 

Little League and the game of baseball itself has changed over the past 100 years.

 

The changes to Little League are mostly to move it along, and to make hitting, running, pitching, and catching more (*gasp*) challenging.

 

The "Girl Scout Leadership" changes to Boy Scouts have been to remove Scoutcraft as much as possible, and to make it LESS challenging: To dumb it down, so as to "Broaden the Appeal of Scouting" by attracting boys who hate Scouting.

 

In fact since our current Chief Scout Executive took office, his media blitz has been to promote the expenditure of "major resources" on translators so as to attract 100,000 Hispanics who hate camping. See:

 

http://inquiry.net/leadership/sitting_side_by_side_with_adults.htm

 

For Little League this would also mean removing Physical Distance as a requirement. If you swing at a ball you get a hat pin (with a strict "no retesting" policy), BUT as with the elimination of the First Class Journey, running to a base would be considered by Leadership "experts" as old-fashioned and dangerous.

 

The goal (as in "21st century Scouting") would be to get each individual baseball skill "signed off" in isolation without being forced to actually apply them.

 

Then (as we turned Scouting into school), if you learn the three branches of government you get a "Citizenship" hat pin, likewise for "modern" Personal Management and Corporate Team-Building hat pins. When you collect enough hat pins you get to add "Little League World Series" to your business resume without ever have covered the Physical Distance between "old-fashioned" bases, just as you can add "Eagle Scout" without ever walking into the woods with a pack on your back.

 

83Eagle writes:

 

Nah, Johnny, you don't need that mouthguard and fancy helmet to play quarterback, just wear this leather cap and you'll be fine.

 

The Congressional Charter allows us to sue out of existence "Baden-Powell Scouting" associations that seek to offer "Traditional Scouting" in the United States. This Traditional Scouting movement differs from the "Vintage Base Ball" movement in that Baden-Powell's program is changed only for advances in a) health & safety practices, b) environmental concerns, and c) light-weight camping technologies. See:

 

http://inquiry.net/traditional/index.htm

 

"Vintage Base Ball," on the other hand plays the game exactly as it was played in the 1880s: No gloves, for instance! See:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vintage_base_ball

 

So using "safety" as an excuse for turning Boy Scouts into Girl Scouts is a red herring.

 

83Eagle writes:

 

As far as I can see, Scouting is still fundamentally Scouting.

 

That is simply untrue.

 

Fundamental or "Real" Scouting is based on Physical Distance.

 

According to our Congressional Charter, one of the three "Purposes" of our monopoly corporation is 1916 Scoutcraft.

 

Baden-Powell tests Scoutcraft at each and every award level by Physical Distance. See:

 

http://inquiry.net/advancement/traditional/journey_requirements.htm

 

The most basic test of 1916 Scoutcraft is the First Class Journey, in which a Second Class Scout (alone or with a buddy) backpacks or paddles to a location seven miles away, camps overnight without adults or other Scouts, and then returns the next day for a minimum 14 mile Adventure.

 

In 2010, the reason that any boy who hates camping can get an Eagle Badge without ever walking into the woods with a pack on his back is that we have removed all Physical Distance requirements that require Girl Scout boys to camp away from a parking lot.

 

83Eagle writes:

 

Boys are still outside, camping and doing adventurous activities, and working in the patrol method.

 

It is simply untrue that the BSA still uses the "Patrol Method."

 

The Patrol Method is based on Physical Distance: Patrol Leaders are trained to take their Patrols hiking (Physical Distance) and on extended hikes called "Patrol Overnights." See:

 

http://inquiry.net/patrol/green_bar/index.htm

 

When camping with a Troop, Baden-Powell's Patrols camped 300 feet apart (Physical Distance).

 

BSA "Girl Scout Leadership" experts took the Patrol Leaders' position-specific training away from them and replaced it with EDGE theory. Likewise they took the Patrols and Patrol Leaders out of Scoutmaster position-specific training, and replaced it with EDGE theory.

 

83Eagle writes:

 

And our troop today does much more when it comes to boy-led, adventure-filled programming than I ever did as a Boy Scout in a top-down troop 20+ years ago.

 

That is simply untrue for the official program.

 

20+ years ago, the First Class Journey had been reduced to Camping Merit Badge requirement 8b: "On one of these camping trips, hike 1.5 miles or more each way to and from your campsite, Pack your own gear plus your share of patrol gear and food."

 

This last vestige of testing Scoutcraft with Physical Distance no longer exists now. Boys who hate camping can substitute (for camping 1.5 miles away from the parking lot): Riding their bike around for four hours, or floating downstream on an inner tube while eating cupcakes.

 

Imagine if we hated indoor Scouting as much as we hate camping! Boys would be able to substitute riding their bike and floating downstream for the purest form of anti-Scouting: Indoor Citizenship and Personal Management!

 

83Eagle writes:

 

Of course, the program has evolved.

 

That is simply untrue.

 

Evolution is based on competition.

 

The Nanny State forbids American boys from a free market in Scouting, which is why Leadership "experts" have been able to turn Scouting into a Girl Scout program that most boys hate. If the Nanny State established Little League as the government's only approved baseball corporation, then Wood Badge Leadership "experts" would rush in to turn Little League into Girl Scouts, because boys would be forbidden to join other competing baseball leagues.

 

It is "competition" that makes Americans free: Except for Boy Scouts.

 

83Eagle writes:

 

But the argument seems to be about emphasis in the delivery of the program, and whether or not certain skills are arcane or still germane to 21st century youth.

 

Only to those who want to turn Boy Scouts into Girl Scouts. When Leadership Development was introduced in 1972, two million Boys left Scouting (30% of membership, according to the BSA).

 

If you walk into an auditorium of "21st century" sixth-grade boys, they will at first make fun of you and your uniform. But if you present Scouting as the same "dangerous adventure" activities that appealed to their great-grandfathers in 1916: As the program preserved for them by an Act of Congress: As the program that Leadership "experts" seek to destroy, then you will a few hours later register 28% of these "21st century youth" in the BSA. Old-school Scouting attracts about three to ten times the percentage of Total Available Youth (TAY) that your local Council extracts through promoting the official dumbed-down Girl Leadership version of Scouting.

 

For a how-to guide to recruiting an additional 28% of sixth grade boys, see:

 

http://inquiry.net/adult/recruiting.htm

 

Yours at 300 feet,

 

Kudu

 

Troop Scuba Diving Merit Badge Program:

 

http://www.inquiry.net/scuba_diving_merit_badge/index.htm

 

[83Eagle]

Well, kudu, you've obviously put a lot of thought into that issue and, since your points are mostly differences of opinion or interpretation I'm not going to argue with you about each one. My belief is that scouting is still scouting, although I will admit my perspective is focused on the 30 years of my personal observation and not the last 100.

 

However, I do take issue with you repeatedly using Girl Scouting as a mocking description of how you perceive Boy Scouts to be. Not only do I think it is inaccurate, but I for one am very proud of my Girl Scout daughter.

[Kudu]

83Eagle writes:

 

However, I do take issue with you repeatedly using Girl Scouting as a mocking description of how you perceive Boy Scouts to be.

 

That is the point of this thread: Get rid of Scoutcraft so that Boy Scouts can be more like Girl Scouts.

 

Yours at 300 feet,

 

Kudu

 

 

[83Eagle]

That is the point of this thread. Get rid of Scoutcraft so that Boy Scouts can be more like Girl Scouts.

 

That is your interpretation of this thread as filtered through your point of view and whatever agenda you have. Nobody mentioned "get rid of Scoutcraft" until you did.

 

Your creating the term "Girl Scout boys" as a perjorative...well, it says a lot. That's all I have to say on the matter.

[moosetracker]

83Eagle While I disagree with Kudus or anyone putting down women as known inferiors to the superior male, and so a known insult to liken a man into this inferior race as a put down. (Same thing with calling them gay.)

I think he has it correct that the OP feels that Leadership should be the main reason for scouting, and that the GS have it right to emphasis more leadership & Citizenship over fun activities and they we should change to do the same.

Leadership IS the main reason I have my son in boy scouts and why I encourage him to be in it.

My view is that some of the scout skills and methods we use are a bit outdated and not overly useful in the 21st century.

I think that we and the BSA should take notice and determine if we indeed have a 21st century program that prepares our boys to be future leaders and future bread-winners. The GSA certainly seems to be ready to do that for our girls.

Personally I think GS must have asked the few remaining girls in their organization and not the multitude of girls that have left their organization. If they are changing to work more leadership and citizenship in such a fashion as to make a promotional video that is all about that and nothing about the fun things you can do in GS, they got it wrong. If I were a girl listening to that to figure out if this would be something to get involved in, I would steer clear. If I joined and all they did was have me lead community service projects, I would bore quickly. Sorry Girls do mature faster than boys, and maybe can take more in serious stuff, so you could probably get them to do more with Leadership, and community service but they also want fun.. They want camping and rock climbing and would be happy to learn leadership skills to get them out to doing fun stuff. But Leadership skills with no purpose or totally for helping the community will not interest them for long.

GS will be losing more girls with this new program. How do you teach Leadership & citizenship to empty seats?.. Better to keep the fun and the scout crafts and have filled seats be around, during the fun they will learn a smaller amount of Leadership & citizenship, but they will learn it because they are there, to learn it between all the good times.

I dont know how much of Kudus program will survive the changes National intends to make to safe guide against lawsuits. If CSE Mazzuca does change it to take out camping & scout craft to try to reach others who are not interested in scouting, he will lose more boys and Adult leaders then he would ever hope to gain, because he will have nothing of a defining purpose to attract anyone with. Learning independence, confidence, citizenship, and leadership is not a program unto itself, they are side benefits. Other sports, other activities all claim their program will achieve that while learning this fun thing.. Children join for the fun, and if they learn those side things so be it. They will not join a BSA that only promotes the side benefits. Its like only serving broccoli for dinner. Broccoli might be good for you, but who wants to come to the dinner table for broccoli alone? Girl Scouts has changed to only promote broccoli.. Good luck to them. I hope we dont follow.

I am hoping the new regulations dont squish Kudus program. Again I dont see many being able to follow it totally, but if more strived to be closer to it, you will have your independence, confidence, citizenship, and leadership while the scouts are just having fun.

I dont see the new GS new program as being a sissy program. It is just a bad program idea. Bad for girls and bad for boys. Neither will be attracted to it.

 

[Eagle92]

Are traditional skills like pioneering (knots and lashings)in an age of plastic sliders on tents, velcro, and bungee cords outdated? Ask the Marine who's slider on his tent broke while in the field and used a tauntline hitch instead? Or ask the shuttle astronaut, who said he would use a specific lashing to fix something temporarily, only to wait 2-4 hours while engineers on earth figured out that, yes that lashing would work.

 

Are traditional skills like orienteering (map and compass work) outdated in this age of GPS? Ask my sister whose GPS unit ran out of batteries, the lady I met whose GPS unit told her the most direct route to place, but if she looked at a map would have cut her 5 hour trip to 3.5 hours, or ask me how I managed to planned a return trip home with 3 kids when the original route was impassable due to severe weather conditions and I had not GPS unit?

 

Are traditional scout skills like using wood tools and firebuilding outdated? Ask the guy who had hypothermia in the Canadian wilderness whose group had to build a fire with wet wood in the rain (ok they had a little help with the firestarter in my survival kit )

 

Are traditional skills like first aid and lifesaving outdated? Ask the boy who was rescued by the scout who knew lifesaving techniques, or the girl who was treated by a scout until EMS arrived?

 

So are traditional scout skill valuable in the 21st century? You be the judge?

 

As for leadership being an important element of Scouting, I must respectfully disagree with Kudu on this. I think it is. Using the Patrol method as envisioned by GBB, the youth elect the PLs, and they serve at the whim of their patrols. PLs are not doing a good enough job, the patrol can elect a new PL. And while the current method of selecting a SPL has have changed over time, I do like the fact that the SPL is responsible to the troop as a whole. They don't think he's doign a good enough job, they don't reelect him.

 

So leadership does have a place in scouting. If you know your scoutcraft, and use the patrol method you will bear some responsibility in your patrol and troop: QM, Instructor, PL, etc.

 

One of the challenges as I see it is that folks want PLs and SPLs to be perfect and not make mistakes. PLs need to be self sufficient and do things without adult about so that they can " take chances, make mistakes."

The PL who approves a menu, not realizing that the portions are way to little, will learn to go over things better. The PL who doesn't listen to his "expert" scout on orienteering, and leads the patrol 1/4 mile off course learns form that. The SPL who places his two "mischievous" patrols too close together learns from that mistake (after dealing with the shaving cream everywhere).

 

Part of leadership is teaching those underneath you. Teaching those scouts who are T-2-1 the basic scout skills. Teaching your APL or ASPL how to take over in case something happens to you. Part of it is using your resources: materials at hand, expertise of those scouts, etc. And i can go on and on.

 

My employer is big on leadership and tries to promote from within. And My department is charged with education, both for people doing their jobs, and for helping to prepare them for leadership roles. My boss is constantly being amazed at some of the things I have done and learned in Scouting. And I admit some leadership principles which I find so elementary b/c I did learn them at the 11-13 years of age, and had to implement them in the 13-20yo range (OA and Sea Scouts), that I am amazed that folks really need to learn them as adults.

 

Sorry for the ramble.

 

 

[Kudu]

 

acco40 writes:

 

Kudu - what is you opinion on teaching today's boys on how to use a GPS?

 

See my thread: "GPS Wide Games"

 

http://www.scouter.com/forums/viewThread.asp?threadID=276229#id_276229

 

acco40 writes:

 

I don't give a hoot that there were not GPS devices in 1916.

 

Neither do I.

 

Those six days sound splendid! There's nothing wrong with gadgets that get Scouts outdoors, as long as they do not replace map and compass skills.

 

The point of the Congressional Charter (and Baden-Powell Scouting associations world-wide) is to preserve the Scoutcraft program of 1916. That does not prohibit adding stuff, but the goal of Leadership Development has always been to make Scoutcraft "optional."

 

acco40 writes:

 

As an adult, I also don't give a hoot about the fact that the boys improved their orienteering skills, how to read a topographical map and a GPS device.

 

"As an adult," I do.

 

acco40 writes:

 

What I did care about was that the experience taught them about teamwork, leadership, responsibility with the added benefit that they had fun.

 

My point exactly. It was the fun outdoor "experience" that "taught them about teamwork, leadership, and responsibility."

 

If we replaced the NYLT Wood Badge course with six days of off-trail hiking (and nightly "Thorns and Roses" practical feedback) Patrol Leaders would come back as real-world "leadership" experts able to do what Patrol Leaders are supposed to do: Take their Patrols on Patrol!

 

acco40 writes:

 

Were you laid off by one of your hated "corporations" or something? I really don't understand your position.

 

My position is clear enough.

 

The only reason you do not "understand" is that you use "ad hominem" logic: "If you can't argue the facts, then argue the man."

 

Boy Scout "Leadership Development" has always used "ad hominem" to replace that which is measurable (Scoutcraft) with "innovative" Fake Leadership formulas, and thereby drive boys away from Scouting.

 

Presumably similar corporate Leadership techniques against internal critics (of replacing real and measurable assets with "innovative" toxic bundling) was what allowed these "hated corporations" to lose tens of trillions of dollars two years ago, in the same way that the BSA drove away 30% of membership.

 

acco40 writes:

 

We know that some of the first aid skills that were taught in 1916 are patently wrong now.

 

Those specific first aid procedures are not mentioned in the requirements (then as now) precisely because they are subject to change.

 

The 1916 program is a good game:

 

http://inquiry.net/advancement/tf-1st_require_1911.htm

 

acco40 writes:

 

I don't interpret the Congressional charter the same way you do. The emphasis is to promote the ability of boys to do things for themselves and others (be prepared and service), teach them patriotism, courage, self-reliance and kindred virtues using the methods in common use by boy scouts on June 15, 1916. To me, the methods in use were how (not what) the boys were taught

 

You are dead wrong. Scoutcraft is clearly listed as one of the three "Purposes" of Scouting:

 

Sec. 30902. Purposes

 

The purposes of the corporation are to promote, through organization, and cooperation with other agencies,

 

1) the ability of boys to do things for themselves and others,

 

2) to train them in scoutcraft,

 

3) and to teach them patriotism, courage, self-reliance, and kindred virtues,

 

using the methods that were in common use by boy scouts on June 15, 1916.

 

You leave "Scoutcraft" out because the purpose of Leadership Development has always been to leave Scoutcraft out.

 

acco40 writes:

 

We still have the same goals or aims as before.

 

No.

 

Not even the so-called "Three Aims" are specifically listed because the "Aims and Methods of Scouting" are only a theory: One that corporate Boy Scout Leadership Development abused to subvert an Act of Congress.

 

Certainly none of the specific "goals or aims" trotted out to defend the replacement of Scoutcraft with Fake Leadership are mentioned in the Charter: Stuff like "Ethical and Moral Choices," or the 1965 goals upon which are based the CSE's current attack on Scoutcraft: "Character and Leadership."

 

acco40 writes:

 

We still market the BSA by the methods we utilize - which includes adult association, the uniform, the outdoors, advancement/awards, etc.

 

And how well does that marketing work? 2% TAR? 6%?

 

Whatever that number may be, any Scouter can register 28% TAR above and beyond the BSA's best efforts, if he "markets" the adventure of Scoutcraft alone:

 

http://inquiry.net/adult/recruiting.htm

 

Yours at 300 feet,

 

Kudu

http://kudu.net/

 

[Nike]

Whenever I am in a leader meeting I make a point to remind everyone that the girls want to be outdoors. No little girl ever told me she wanted to be a GS so she could be a leader. They want to go camping and shoot bows and cook on a real fire.

 

In my mind, the gals at GSUSA HQ in NYC (got that old Pace's commercial in my head now) have lost sight of what we on the ground know the girls want. The girls want the cookies, crafts, and camping that are now so derided by our national leadership, if you want to call it that. The new Leadership Experience checkpoints were written to enable Council and higher org grant writers to do the job faster and with more standardized data. It's relatively useless to leaders.

 

I figure that the most basic outdoor skills taught in Girl Scouting should enable you to survive in or around your home without utilities for 48-72 hours. If a middle school GS family is in a pretty par natural disaster, and the GS can administer basic first aid, using a map and compass safely walk a mile or two with a buddy (and know when she can't/shouldn't), dress appropriately for the temp and weather conditions, start a fire or camp stove, know to boil water for five-ten minutes, how to cook some basic meals for herself and her family and provide basic sanitation, as a leader, I've done a good job. All the list making and community inventorying and self appraisal yammered on about in the Journey books take a real backseat when push comes to shove.

 

A leader keeps her head while all others around her are losing theirs.