fred8033 Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 Crew21_Adv wrote in another thread about the UK's one unit concept for scouts ages 5 to 25. What do people think about this? It's intriguing to me as it eliminates the dreaded Webelos transition. Other comments? Does this resemble 4H or other groups too much? Personally, this sounds like a great idea to me. All my sons could be in the same unit at the same time. Different activities. Different skill levels. But the same unit. Thoughts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Basementdweller Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 Let me see.... The Pack committee for the most part is the same as the troop committee who is for the most part the same as the Crew committee. While in the BSA organizational chart they are three seperate units...to parents and kids it is one organic unit. There are no boundaries, or walls to speak of....the troop and crew help the pack as requested...... All three units meet at the same time and place... Like I said in the other thread....our parents are surprised by having to fill out another when the boys transition to the troop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eagle92 Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 Actually it's not one unit, but one group. If memory serves, and it's been over 15 years since I was there and changes have occurred to, so please correct me if I am wrong. You would have 5th Deal Cub Scout Pack, 5th Deal (Sea Scout) troop, and 5th Deal Crew (?) each with their own CM, SM, and Advisor, and other leaders. BUT you would also have a GROUP Leader and support leaders who would work with all three units. And each unit does things with the others. In theory, the Charter Organization can run things that way. I knew of a unit where the committee for the Pack, Troop, and Crew were the same, and in addition to normal committee work, they also worked with the units. However the only joint activities were between the Troop and Crew, Crew membership had bylaws stating only Life, Eagles, and ASMs between 18 and 20 allowed AND they had to help support the troop, and Webelos invited to activities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwazse Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 Oh, but the little fiefdoms! What would people do without them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beavah Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 Hi fred8033, What you're describin' is the norm for Scoutin' in most of the world, not just the UK. To my knowledge the U.S. is the only scouting that is broken up into separate units in the way we are. There are a number of Group activities throughout the year, and the Rovers often function as leaders/assistant leaders for the younger scouts in particular. Then there are also individual level events for Ventures, or scouts, or mini-Scouts or whatnot. U.S. scouting is far more school-like / school based, eh? Separate divisions that map onto the elementary / middle school split and the high school split, age-based/grade level program at least through elementary school and for many troops all the way through into high school. Gotta switch buildings and switch units when yeh move from elementary to middle school. To my mind it's never been very natural. Beavah Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Basementdweller Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 Guess I am surprised that more groups don't function like ours....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fred8033 Posted May 10, 2012 Author Share Posted May 10, 2012 Everyone - Thanks. I must admit from what others have written and what Beavah wrote, I'd prefer moving toward a one-unit concept. If nothing else than for the simple fact that wolves, bears and webelos often drop out because they get bored and don't have much visibility into troops and crews. They perceive scouting from the cub scout view. If they could see more about what's coming, I think they would get more excited. Having a "one unit" view would reveal that. Plus the "transition" between cubs to troops and from troops to crews is an unnatural step that also puts the choice in place to just drop. I think it would also help the continual problem with Cub Scouts, leader turn over. Most cub leaders get up to speed around the time their cubs move on. It does not promote a strong impressive program. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shortridge Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 There's nothing stopping us from running our operations like that now. A pack, troop and crew all with the same CO can run things jointly and work closely together, sharing resources, leaders and expertise. But it does require some coordination, and most COs are too weak or too uninterested to get involved at that level. It's unfortunate that BSA doesn't do more structurally to strengthen the CO model - but I guess it's in the SE's interest to have uninvolved CORs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Basementdweller Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 Yes there is..... SM, CM and WDL egos and attitudes...... The single biggest turn around for our Pack and Troop was the all hands mentality....The SM, CM, CC, COR CA all go to the cub recruiting nights....This fall we hope to have the crew gals help out too.... The webelos join the troop and crew for opening....... Till ya remove the internal barriers it will never change...... We did it about 3 years ago now and have nearly 100% cross over into the troop and the troops retention rate has gone to high 90's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwazse Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 BD, stick with your model and pretend that's the way it works all over the country. I got blow-back over suggesting something like this for crew/troop. Old SM: "I don't want to hear anything about the crew in this [committee] meeting." Not blaming the guy. He was trying to accommodate everyone and their stupid boundaries* -- plus he had to reckon with me who was not about to care. New SM and I just let the committees pretend they are running their separate units, and we pool resources whenever the kids ask us to. It kinda hurt membership (new troop spun off as a result), but the kids and parents we have left are civil to one another. Fred, the basic hindrance to the one-unit concept (aside from the pettiness) is that BSA doesn't have a program for 7 to 13 yo girls. This makes it a bit of a leap for a female Venturer, for example, to be a den chief. Chances are she never was even a "Pack sister". Regardless, she has a learning curve that she may not want to surmount. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fred8033 Posted May 10, 2012 Author Share Posted May 10, 2012 qwazse - 13 year old girls can be venturers now. But your points are well taken. Did like the suggestion that SM and Crew advisors be present during cub recruitment. Great idea. Can't see it happening with current structure. But still a great idea. If nothing else, a one-unit concept would help eliminate the attitude void between cub scout leaders and boy scout leaders.(This message has been edited by fred8033) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Basementdweller Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 We run a sibling den..and are still playing with the BPSA as a alternative for recognition for the girls.... Just need to find a leader for the BPSA den.....The old BSA guys absolutely hate it....but I have approval, CO and Committees, if I can find a leader.......The program is much more difficult for the age level and the lady who runs the sibling den says it is too difficult for her. might be something the crew gals might like????? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emb021 Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 As Eagle92 pointed out, this concept have been around for a long time, and actually is known as the 'whole scout family' within the BSA (atleast back in the 50s). However, its NOT "one unit". Its one GROUP (which we would call a Charter Org) that has all the program units (cubs, scouts, venturers, etc) under 'one roof'. Instead of separate committees for each, one committee for all, under leadership of a 'group scoutmaster', with each unit having their own (cubmaster, scoutmaster, venturing advisor/skipper- using BSA terms) leader. The ONE thing I see preventing this from working in the BSA is the silly overlap of the Boy Scout program with Venturing/Sea Scouting. Too often we have Venturing crews 'associated' with Troop who are treated as auxiliary groups to the troop, NOT as co-equals. At least in my area, while you see COs who have troops & crews, too often the Packs are with separate COs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mdlscouting Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 Hmm. It's a very interesting idea. I know that right now, our Pack and Troop are very close knit with one another, but there is a significant amount of duplication of resources. Gotta have 2 Treasurers. 2 Popcorn Kernels, 2 of this, 2 of that... I'm not sure how well it would work administratively, given the way the BSA has things split. But I'd be all for something that builds that unity between Packs and Troops. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwazse Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 ...The old BSA guys absolutely hate it.. Well, what a surprise. Hopefully they'll wise up and shut up before the youth hear them. Most kids don't get that even a disagreeable adult can be supportive once they see that the youth really care about a situation. If you have a couple of mature venturers (one male and one female is fine), you should approach them with the offer "How would you like to start something completely different ..." Wahooker: one of the hypotheticals that folks blew smoke about (fanned by our former UC) was my crew being a drain on the troop treasury. We had separate books from the start, but ya know what? When there isn't a problem, someone will make one up just so they can have something to fix. It's called putting the BS in the BS of A. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now