Is every boy a leader?

[OldGreyEagle]

Just the sort of witty repartee that makes the internet a valuable source of amusement for oh so many.

 

GoldWinger you haven't lost a step, f_cbb can't you tell when you are being baited? What has the rudiments, intricacies and arcaneness of High School football rules have to do with the topic at hand?

 

Whether or not every boy is a leader, can we talk about that?

[kcs_hiker]

having both played and officiated high school football...I must admit that I skipped that whole discussion.

 

Being fairly new to the whole indoor vs. outdoor activities & manage vs. lead debate, I'm finding that I'm siding with kudu. I know that I personally don't like being managed, that I would much rather be led. Could someone point me to a good reference so that I can catch up on the history and specifics of this whole debate?

 

thanks

 

kcs

[Eagledad]

>>The theory that all of the Methods are "equal" was introduced in 1972, presumably to garner respect for the questionable new "Leadership Development"

[f_cbb]

*Puts on Math Jacket*

 

We concluded earlier that in 120,000 of player hours of football, one person threw up. This means that one single person, in relation to odds, would have to play about 34000 football games to have a 100% probability of throwing up during the game.

 

If we do the same thing to calculate your probability of throwing a winning TD, we assume you have a 1/30 probability of being the starting QB.

 

A Starting QB, on average, leads two game winning drives or comebacks a year out of 16 games in the NFL. As those are the only GW Drive stats available we have to use those for all levels. So, a QBs' probability of throwing a winning TD in a game is 12.5%. This, on average, states that any person on the football team has a 100% probability to throw the winning TD every 480 Games (Using the assumption that 50% of winning TDs are Runs 50% are passes).

 

So, statistics say that you should throw 70 winning TD passes for every time you throw up on the field.

 

 

 

Also, I either don't have time to read all the pages. That is why I use the search command. However, I don't need to do that, as I have seen the situation IRL personally.

 

A guy was sprinting down the sidelines and got horsecollared by our safety. (Yes, i know that it is illegal). When he landed he came down OOB along the sideline. The game did not stop for him, even though the medical staff were with him for 3 or 4 minutes before he got up.

[PeteM]

Have you all noticed that f_cbb and xlpanel sound very much alike, like they might be the same person?

[evmori]

Wise observation Pete! Two trolls in one!

[Mafaking]

 

I'll add;

 

What is the purpose of building fine young men of moral character if they just hold these attributes in silence? Most of us would agree that when we discuss leadership we are not discussing a duty manager style of "leadership" but a dimension within one's inner voice to go forward, to progress beyond his current situation. Maybe there is some evangelical type element to this development in that the program wishes to spread the moral attributes and good character beyond just those in the program. Thus a Boy Scout leader leads society through his high moral character.

 

The second comment is the reluctant leader. I have seen this many times in youths and in adults. These are people with the skills character and communication skills which would make them good leaders but these people have reservations about being the leader. Scouting can help these reluctant leaders develop.

 

As far a six month training, I didn't do this for the last elections. Instead I decided to use a portion of the 90 minutes per month allotted for PLC meetings as an opportunity to train the PLC. I'll show a power point, or hold a discussion on troop needs. Its a monthly training session in addition to being a troop business meeting.

 

 

[Kudu]

The theory that all of the Methods are "equal" was introduced in 1972, presumably to garner respect for the questionable new "Leadership Development" Method.

 

Eagledad wrote:

 

Not true, while many adults incorrectly use the methods equally, there is nothing by National that suggests it was intended that way.

 

The equal importance theory was introduced to use Hillcourt's invention of the "Methods of Scouting" against him by removing Hillcourt's Baden-Powell "Scout Way" Method and replacing it with the fake "Leadership Development Method" which in turn replaced Hillcourt's Scoutcraft Patrols with White Stag business manager Patrols:

 

"The Methods of Scouting.

 

"We have considered the aims of Scouting, and some of the evidence of achieving them. Here are the methods we use to get there. They are not listed order of importance--because they are equally important" (Scoutmaster's Handbook, 1972, page 34, double emphasis in the original, Eagledad).

 

Of course once "Leadership & Character" became the de facto "Aims of Scouting" the equal importance theory worked against turning Wood Badge into week-long business manager school and then kicking Scoutcraft out for the Cub Scouts. So the equal importance theory was no longer convenient for anything except justifying the dress-designer indoor hothouse Uniform during the heated debates of the 1990s.

 

It is significant that from the very beginning, the removal of Scoutcraft skills was justified by the assertion that Patrol Leaders need business manager skills:

 

"The skills involved in leading a patrol do not differ except in complexity from those used in leading a corporation, a labor union, or in doing a foreman's job in a shop" (ibid, page 39).

 

And of course who can forget the White Stag Wood Badge victory slap to the face of Bill Hillcourt:

 

"In general, patrol leader training should concentrate on leadership skills rather than on Scoutcraft skills. The patrol will not rise and fall on the patrol leader's ability to cook, follow a map, or do first aid, but it very definitely depends on his leadership skill" (ibid, page 155).

 

Eagledad wrote:

 

I am not in Kudus camp that natural leaders should be the only leaders of the troop. I have worked with many scouts who in their early years showed no leadership potential and then one day just blossomed into THE leader of the group.

 

In Kudu's camp the same thing happens WITHOUT business theory. Scouts don't jump ahead in time machines; it is easy to see a potential leader blossom as he takes on responsibility.

 

Eagledad wrote:

 

I believe more in that a Troop is the real world scaled down to a boys size,

 

No, Eagledad, "Every Boy a Leader" means a Patrol scaled down to the Cub Scout level.

 

It is easy enough to measure business manager Patrols against Bill Hillcourt's definition of a "Real Patrol." In what percentage of business manager Troops do the Patrols hike and camp without adult supervision? Failing that, how many feet apart do the best Patrols camp on monthly Troop campouts?

 

The Eagledad camp should have the courage of its convictions and take BSA Lifeguard position-specific training away from BSA Lifeguards just like they did to BSA Patrol Leaders!

 

Go ahead, Eagledad, force BSA Lifeguards to sit with the BSA Patrol Leaders through the same stupid TLT and EDGE theory as the Troop Scribe, Troop Historian, and Troop Bugler and then select your Lifeguards through six month popularity contests.

 

There are only two possible outcomes: Either you scale swimming down to the baby pool level (as White Stag Wood Badge did to the Patrol Method) or you accept drowning deaths as a "valuable lesson" that "elections are not popularity contests" as Holders of the Wood Badge are always so proud to chant.

 

Wood Badge theory flunks the Swim Test:

 

Let us translate all this something for nothing theory into what "Aquadad" would write if Wood Badge got its hooks into the waterfront and dumbed BSA Lifeguard down to the Cub Scout baby pool level so that every Scout had a chance to hold BSA Lifeguard as a six month POR, just as White Stag Wood Badge removed managed risk from the Patrol Method and dumbed it down to the Cub Scout family campground level:

 

Eagledad wrote:

 

I am not in Kudus camp that natural leaders should be the only leaders of the troop.

 

Aquadad would agree:

 

I am not in Kudu's camp that the best swimmers and rescuers should be the only Lifeguards at the waterfront.

 

Eagledad wrote:

 

so I dont like the idea of the SM picking and grooming leaders. Instead we went the route of developing leadership skills in all the scouts and letting them pick and choose their leaders based from the experiences of the activities.

 

Aquadad would agree:

 

So I don't like the idea of adults picking and grooming BSA Lifeguards. Instead we went the route of developing Lifeguard skills in all the Scouts and letting them pick and choose their Lifeguards based on the frequency of drownings at the baby pool.

 

Eagledad wrote:

 

Scouting is a wonderful program for providing an avenue for boys to develop leadership skills while not actually having to be the top dogs of the group.

 

Aquadad would agree:

 

Lifeguarding at a baby pool is a wonderful program for providing an avenue for boys to develop business "leadership" skills on the waterfront while not actually having to be the top dog swimmers and rescuers of the group.

 

Eagledad wrote:

 

Simply having some responsibilities that encourage a scout to communicate, delegate, and plan for a future event develops skills of leadership.

 

Aquadad would agree:

 

Simply having the responsibilities of being a BSA Lifeguard encourages a non-swimmer to communicate, delegate, and plan for a baby pool event, thereby developing skills of business "leadership."

 

Eagledad wrote:

 

If done correctly, the grub master and cheer master are great positions of responsibility for a young scout to can gain those skills.

 

Aquadad would agree:

 

If done correctly, the Grubmaster and Cheermaster make great BSA Lifeguards. The problem I see in most Troops is that the Troop doesn't respect those positions enough to use risking lives to encourage business "leadership" development.

 

Eagledad wrote:

 

The whole objective to developing skills is not to develop great leaders, but to give scouts the confidence to be leaders.

 

Aquadad would agree:

 

The whole objective to developing skills is not to develop great Lifeguards, but to give Scouts the confidence to be Lifeguards in ankle-deep water.

 

Eagledad wrote:

 

So I think the answer to the question is complex. Not all boys are natural leaders but they all deserve the chance to become one by learning good leadership skills.

 

Aquadad would agree:

 

So I think the answer to the question is complex. Not all boys are swimmers but they all deserve the chance to become Lifeguards by learning good business "leadership" skills.

 

Eagledad wrote:

 

My simple answer to the first question is A troop should develop a program where all the scouts learn leadership skills naturally through the scouting activities. The scouts will sort out the rest

 

Aquadad would agree:

 

My simple answer to the first question is a Troop should develop a program where all the Scouts learn business "leadership" skills naturally through being BSA Lifeguards. The Scouts will sort out the rest through six month popularity contests in the safety of baby wading pools.

 

Kudu

 

 

 

[BrentAllen]

Wow, Kudu. Tough week at camp?

[Mafaking]

 

 

Kudo,

 

I am not sure what you are driving at. Is it that as a lot sum of leaders we have misinterpreted the current program? Fore instance, we unit leaders have elevated youth Leadership above all program elements based on a mis-understanding of the current program. The program has it right its just done incorrectly.

 

Or is it that the current program has been so diluted that following it will not achieve the founder's outcome? Examples could be, that the patrol method has been compromised into the troop method and "boy led" is a only a phrase like "built better".

 

To whom to you cite as the fault of the program running astray, the program designers or the program implementors?

 

 

[kcs_hiker]

"I am not sure what you are driving at. Is it that as a lot sum of leaders we have misinterpreted the current program? Fore instance, we unit leaders have elevated youth Leadership above all program elements based on a mis-understanding of the current program. The program has it right its just done incorrectly.

 

Or is it that the current program has been so diluted that following it will not achieve the founder's outcome? Examples could be, that the patrol method has been compromised into the troop method and "boy led" is a only a phrase like "built better".

 

To whom to you cite as the fault of the program running astray, the program designers or the program implementors? "

 

I choose b)

 

truly boy led leads to far too many liability issues since traditionally boys tend to settle differences with their fists

 

parents won't tolerate that

[Eagledad]

Wow Kudu, I cant put my (bewilderment?) into words. I never read so much, misdirection and hibbery jibbery just to say, Yep, Barry and I disagree. At least I think we disagree, I can't really tell.

 

>>The equal importance theory was introduced to use Hillcourt's invention of the "Methods of Scouting">In Kudu's camp the same thing happens WITHOUT business theory. Scouts don't jump ahead in time machines; it is easy to see a potential leader blossom as he takes on responsibility.>No, Eagledad, "Every Boy a Leader" means a Patrol scaled down to the Cub Scout level.>The Eagledad camp should have the courage of its convictions and take BSA Lifeguard position-specific training away from BSA Lifeguards just like they did to BSA Patrol Leaders!

[Kudu]

Mafaking writes:

 

To whom to you cite as the fault of the program running astray, the program designers or the program implementers?

 

You must make that determination yourself or it is just another opinion.

 

Seems clear to me:

 

1) Take position-specific training away from BSA Lifeguards like we took it away from BSA Patrol Leaders.

 

2) Open up the selection process for BSA Lifeguards like we did BSA Patrol Leaders by holding popularity contests every six months so that any Scout can use BSA Lifeguard for POR credit.

 

3) Train these BSA Lifeguards just like we do BSA Patrol Leaders: TLT, EDGE, and NYLT.

 

Now you tell me: If you see a problem with that is it the fault of the program designers or the program implementers?

 

Kudu

 

[BrentAllen]

Comparing BSA Patrol Leader to BSA Lifeguard is apples to oranges.

 

Comparing Leadership to Lifesaving is apples to oranges.

 

That is, unless you have distilled the teaching of leadership down to a single page of requirements, as is BSA Lifeguard. If you have, please email it over; I could use it.

[Kudu]

Brent,

 

The primary job of a BSA Lifeguard is to keep order and manage risk so that his lifesaving skills do not get used.

 

Likewise Patrol Leaders.

 

When Baden-Powell writes about giving a Patrol Leader "real responsibility" he is not talking about duty rosters, or supervising cooking and cleanup

 

He means significant Patrol Hikes and Overnights without adult supervision on at least a monthly basis.

 

Every rank includes an unsupervised "Journey" or "Expedition." His King's Scout, the equivalent to Eagle, was 50 miles by water or trail (200 miles by horseback).

 

So the definition of "real responsibility" includes water activities.

 

Likewise for Bill Hillcourt: a "Real Patrol" is a Patrol that hikes and camps without adult supervision.

 

Have your Patrol Leaders gotten there yet?

 

Kudu