Should the US move to a one-unit approach?

[Beavah]

Yah, in da previous thread, fred8033 offers:

 

I've heard rumors of a one-unit approach. I really hope it's more than just lip service of automatically registering cubs in the same COR's troop. I hope it really is re-engineering scouting to be a one-unit concept. Maybe different meetings and different outings. But, designed to be one unit.

 

I can't speak to da rumors. Seems like a good discussion, though.

 

Of course most of the world works this way, with one scout "group" that runs from age 6 to age 25, movin' from young Cubs to Cubs to Scouts to Ventures to Rovers within da same bigger organization. It's quite successful. At da same time, a lot of that world has more highly resourced Scouting, where governments subsidize youth programs, includin' Scouting.

 

On the downside, yeh still tend to see attrition at da upper levels, which makes 'em progressively weaker. As close as I can tell in da U.S., it really takes 2-3 cub packs to feed a strong troop in most cases. Some of that is demographic, eh? Packs are associated with elementary schools, which have a smaller population. Typically 2-3 elementary schools feed one middle school in a similar fashion. That gives yeh a big enough population to be able to do middle school things.

 

So my worry would be that da one unit model would lead to more but weaker troops, as though kids stayed in a small elementary school all their life even though their interests expanded and broadened.

 

What do folks think?

 

Beavah

 

 

[fred8033]

I had not thought about the weaker troop issue.

 

You are right in that, RIGHT NOW, it does take multiple packs or so to feed a troop. In our city, we have equal number of troops and packs "officially". Unofficially, some of the packs are pretty small and about to fail. So, a troop in our city needs multiple packs to support itself. BUT ... one healthy pack can keep a troop going.

 

In another words, a perfect troop is between 32 and 50 scouts. So troops need six to eight new scouts each year. A healthy pack can easily graduate six to ten Webelos. Plus troops gain one or two scouts each year thru other channels.

 

The trouble is there are too many unhealthy packs. Though there are multiple reasons, one reason is that it takes awhile for adults to "get" scouting. By the time, adults get it, they are moving into troops. By being more then just partnered, truely integrated as one unit, packs would have more resources, do way better and graduate more scouts into Boy Scouts.

 

....

 

One solution is to have packs that don't have a troop to be re-chartered under an existing troop's charter org. I'm betting most pack charter orgs wouldn't notice one way or the other. So troop 123 would have packs 123 & 124.(This message has been edited by fred8033)

[fred8033]

Weaker troops ... Just looked at my district, we have 39 troops and 40 packs. In my experience, that's not enough packs for troops. I don't know how many are living functioning units. But we are very close to one-on-one now. Hmmm....

[Eagledad]

I dont think you can know if it would create more weaker troops, the reason the BSA loses so many scouts at the younger age is because administration of the pack program today burns out families before they get to the older program. The administration of the one-unit program has to be less complicated than the present Cub program for the program to even have a chance of improved performance. Can it do that?

 

Also, I wonder if there is larger risk of losing more scouts because poor administration of the one unit would affect all the age groups instead of just a couple.

 

Barry

 

[Brewmeister]

I don't see the benefit. We already have an attitude of entitlement from troops...feeder troops just waiting for the boys to cross over and doing little if anything to recruit or encourage.

 

If they are in the same unit there would be even less of an interest of the "real" scouters working with the lowly cubs, IMO.

[Cambridgeskip]

Sounds like you are trying to move to the "group" system like we have in the UK.

 

It has it's advantages but I don't think it provides answers to the bigger problems that many of you refer to on here.

 

What it can do is provide additional support for adults. I am the equivalent of SM but above me I have a Group Scout Leader who can take up slack on admin and management issues. Which is great. But the other side of that coin is that either you have the resource to provide that support or you don't. If you do all this would do is formalise the arrangement. If you don't then it won't produce that resource.

 

On recruitment it will again just formalise arrangements, if you have a cub pack or packs that naturally feed into a troop and you have a good relationship with them for recruiting new scouts then it just ties you in more formally with them. Simply putting you together will not magically make SMs or PLs go and meet the older cubs and actively recruit them. It may provide an obvious place to go if you are new to things.

 

Where I think it does help is providing parents with an obvious and foreseeable structure in terms of where they will go and who their leaders will be.

 

From what I have read of your system cubs is far far to complex. It's the only country I have ever seen that has it divided up into sub age ranges. Move into one cub age range and it seems to me that you will free up an awful lot adult resource.

[ScouterAdam]

This model would be based upon how the UK/Canada et all run their Units. It's a good system, plus they include girls. However, even with that system there are issues. Which funny enough, they complain about the same things we do...

[Eagledad]

>>This model would be based upon how the UK/Canada et all run their Units. It's a good system,

[Basementdweller]

My unit functions this way now.

 

the Troop and Pack meet at the same time and location. The boy scouts are hosts and activity directors at the Pack camp outs, they help at the blue and gold and Pinewood. The 2nd year webelos are invited on 3 campouts or events with the troop. We have 90% join and are still members after their first year with the troop.

 

It surprises many parents that they must fill out another application when there boys crossover.

 

[Eagledad]

>>My unit functions this way now.

[perdidochas]

I think it would be horrible. I think the break and change is good.

[perdidochas]

To clarify, our Boy Scouts cannot stand Cub Scout meetings. Too much noise and chaos. The Boy Scouts are pretty quiet. I will admit as a third year Webelos leader, I felt the same.

[Eagledad]

Before the Canadian Boy Scouts changed their program in the 90s, they had what many believed was the most successful Boy Scout program in the world using the one-unit system. So Im open to the idea depending how National changes the administration part. The BSA loses most of their membership between Webelos crossover and the first year of the Troop program. If a one-unit system could dramatically improve those losses, it would in my opinion be worth the effort.

 

BArry

 

[qwazse]

Then there's those pesky co-eds, of which half of them are only entering at age 14 (from who-knows-where? Venus maybe). They don't know patrol methods -- really don't need to depending on their focus, wear different bling, AND they can be multiples of other units.

 

Even if you go co-ed from the bottom up, I think other scout associations make a clean break between the Middle vs. High School age groups. I don't think any of us die-hard BSA types would easily buy into that model.

[bigbovine]

"My unit functions this way now.

 

the Troop and Pack meet at the same time and location. The boy scouts are hosts and activity directors at the Pack camp outs, they help at the blue and gold and Pinewood. The 2nd year webelos are invited on 3 campouts or events with the troop. We have 90% join and are still members after their first year with the troop. "

 

We just started a Troop to go with the Pack and pretty much did it to operate much in the same manner. Over the 3 years I have been involved, I have seen some struggles caused by the fact that when kids leave the Pack, parents go with them with little care of what happens when they are gone. One of the things I have done to alleviate that was to become as knowledgeable about Scouting as I can. The next was to encourage others to do the same.

 

I think it would be a good idea to go to one Unit, but realize it may not work everywhere. Maybe they could make it optional?