Designing A Church-Based Replacement For Scouting -- Thinking Outside The Box

[Scott Lloyd]

I was a scout against my will. I didn't really enjoy the experience, I didn't care about the merit badges, and I wasn't interested in the activities. 

 

I was told at the time that earning Eagle would look good on your resume. Maybe that's true for entry level jobs. Putting that on a professional resume would make you look unsophisticated. Not because you were a Boy Scout, but because you would put something like that on a resume. 

 

Anyway, I would think just making the youth activities fun and engaging would be a suitable replacement for anything the BSA has to offer. 

It may offer some traction in some lines of work, but I have to say I have never felt hindered in my chosen profession by not being an Eagle Scout.

[Stone holm]

 

It may offer some traction in some lines of work, but I have to say I have never felt hindered in my chosen profession by not being an Eagle Scout.

 

Actually, my sons who made Eagle are split on whether it helps or hurts on a resume. One attorney avoids it because it is associated with discrimination -- he also doesn't emphasize his religious affiliation because it is considered far right. Interestingly he is the active one. The other attorney, thinks that it is important for resumes, he is the inactive one. The accountant buries his for the same reason as the first attorney. The teacher thinks it is basically irrelevant -- oddly, he is active and has been a Scout Leader.

[sethpayne]

This makes sense.

 

I would hope that any replacement would have more in the way of flexibility in appealing to interests than did Scouting -- at least the way it has been administered in LDS units.

 

I completely agree.  Mormon youth are an impressive lot and I think there are a lot of things we could do to help prepare them for a wide variety of life experiences and really set them up for success.

 

Imagine young LDS being mentored by a local experts.  This has practical benefits of course: think of an LDS youth working on an impressive art or science project prior to college admission.  Done correctly, it could be a real boost to the youth who are looking to go to college, or technical school.  To say nothing of the fact that the experience itself would be pretty awesome.

[sethpayne]

It may offer some traction in some lines of work, but I have to say I have never felt hindered in my chosen profession by not being an Eagle Scout.

 

I think it is a myth that being an Eagle necessarily or always helps with school or job prospects.  It doesn't hurt ... but given AP classes and all of the many many other things young people can be involved with, I don't think the Eagle has the same cache it may have once had.

 

I never reached Eagle and, like you Scott, don't think I have been hindered in any way.

[strappinglad]

If I might pry that thinking box lid up just a bit, we do some first aid in Scouts, so what about doing something about mental health ? A significant portion of society will experience  mental health problems or come in contact with  someone with mental issues . Many of our youth find it difficult to deal with the challenges of life re missions , post secondary schooling etc. What might be done to strengthen our youth in this area ?  This has been a taboo area of discussion ,but it is impacting all of us more than ever.

[Scott Lloyd]

I completely agree.  Mormon youth are an impressive lot and I think there are a lot of things we could do to help prepare them for a wide variety of life experiences and really set them up for success.

 

Imagine young LDS being mentored by a local experts.  This has practical benefits of course: think of an LDS youth working on an impressive art or science project prior to college admission.  Done correctly, it could be a real boost to the youth who are looking to go to college, or technical school.  To say nothing of the fact that the experience itself would be pretty awesome.

Well, perhaps that has been somewhat the intent behind merit badges -- but probably not on the scale you are envisioning.

[Stone holm]

Well, perhaps that has been somewhat the intent behind merit badges -- but probably not on the scale you are envisioning.

I agree he is describing the merit badge system if done correctly

[Sine Saw Square]

I find the idea of the Church revamping the YM program without Scouts as a basis to be very interesting and probably for the best.

 

I'll try to put some outside-the-box thinking into my response.

 

A new program should:

Be scaleable. I've been in wards where there is 1 active boy scout. The Scout program doesn't work well when the troop is 1 or 2 boys.

 

Be modular and adaptable to the interests of the youth. Kids need to be exposed to new interests and experiences but if the nature of the program pushes some away, it's not helping at all. The system needs to be adaptable to the interests of individuals and engage them there in meaningful ways. Ideally it also needs to be equally relevant and engaging for an urban kid in a first world country and a rural kid in a third world country.

 

Not be based on a specific hobby (like outdoors lore/camping/hiking). Part of the problem with Scouts in the Church is that leaders are called to be in a position as opposed to a secular troop that has a volunteer leader who has an internal interest in it. In the Church troops you'll get some wards with dynamic leaders and great programs and others not so much. The same goes for the kids- some like sleeping in the rain and some don't. Those that don't are going to be very reluctant to come.

 

Incorporate an online, sophisticated, social component. This is the world that kids are immersed in and it's only going to become more so. This aspect should be a topnotch production. A practical reason for this is to enable kids in remote areas or wards with few youth to to participate in (online) social groups where they feel included and supported. This could include texting, chat, photos, etc. It's how most of them communicate now anyway.

 

Include gamification. Whether that's a badge or rank system or some other kind of reward, gamification is a legitimate motivator for achieving goals. I think the relevancy of the reward system could definitely be modernized and made to feel more relevant to kids. Trust me, they do a lot of sophisticated achievement and badge acquisition on Xbox One and PS4. This Church program could learn a few things from those game systems and modern game theory.

 

Not be the same for both genders. I really think males and females grow and develop differently. Generally, they are motivated by different things, especial as youth. Tailoring a program to one size fits all will leave one side grossly underserved. I think it is great to have some combined activities and budget equality seems appropriate too including primary organizations.

 

Have no uniforms. This is a hold over from sensibilities over 100 years old. I remember feeling uncomfortable and embarrassed being seen in my uniform as a teenager. I know my son feels the same. I don't see a reason to make the kids dread being involved in a program that is designed for their benefit. I totally get the idea of a uniform fostering a sense of unity among a group but I think in this situation it turns off a lot of the kids on the margins that really could benefit from taking part.

 

Other thoughts:

When I think of programs that are engaging and thriving, martial arts gyms, youth orchestras, sport leagues, and dance schools come to mind. Here's what is going to be tricky for the Church. All of these organizations are self selecting. If a special interest school or gym is not successful it closes down. People who are interested and motivated seek them out and make them function- from administers, to teachers, to students. This is how the Scout program runs in the secular world.  I don't know exactly how the Church can foster that kind of specific interest and passion in a youth program that is generic or universal and needs to appeal and serve all comers. But maybe that's the wrong goal? Maybe they don't need that at all. Maybe all that is needed is place for the youth to experience faithful peer interaction, leaders who are worthy role models, and the opportunity for spiritual growth and experience. 

[Scott Lloyd]

I find the idea of the Church revamping the YM program without Scouts as a basis to be very interesting and probably for the best.

 

I'll try to put some outside-the-box thinking into my response.

 

A new program should:

Be scaleable. I've been in wards where there is 1 active boy scout. The Scout program doesn't work well when the troop is 1 or 2 boys.

 

Be modular and adaptable to the interests of the youth. Kids need to be exposed to new interests and experiences but if the nature of the program pushes some away, it's not helping at all. The system needs to be adaptable to the interests of individuals and engage them there in meaningful ways. Ideally it also needs to be equally relevant and engaging for an urban kid in a first world country and a rural kid in a third world country.

 

Not be based on a specific hobby (like outdoors lore/camping/hiking). Part of the problem with Scouts in the Church is that leaders are called to be in a position as opposed to a secular troop that has a volunteer leader who has an internal interest in it. In the Church troops you'll get some wards with dynamic leaders and great programs and others not so much. The same goes for the kids- some like sleeping in the rain and some don't. Those that don't are going to be very reluctant to come.

 

Incorporate an online, sophisticated, social component. This is the world that kids are immersed in and it's only going to become more so. This aspect should be a topnotch production. A practical reason for this is to enable kids in remote areas or wards with few youth to to participate in (online) social groups where they feel included and supported. This could include texting, chat, photos, etc. It's how most of them communicate now anyway.

 

Include gamification. Whether that's a badge or rank system or some other kind of reward, gamification is a legitimate motivator for achieving goals. I think the relevancy of the reward system could definitely be modernized and made to feel more relevant to kids. Trust me, they do a lot of sophisticated achievement and badge acquisition on Xbox One and PS4. This Church program could learn a few things from those game systems and modern game theory.

 

Not be the same for both genders. I really think males and females grow and develop differently. Generally, they are motivated by different things, especial as youth. Tailoring a program to one size fits all will leave one side grossly underserved. I think it is great to have some combined activities and budget equality seems appropriate too including primary organizations.

 

Have no uniforms. This is a hold over from sensibilities over 100 years old. I remember feeling uncomfortable and embarrassed being seen in my uniform as a teenager. I know my son feels the same. I don't see a reason to make the kids dread being involved in a program that is designed for their benefit. I totally get the idea of a uniform fostering a sense of unity among a group but I think in this situation it turns off a lot of the kids on the margins that really could benefit from taking part.

 

Other thoughts:

When I think of programs that are engaging and thriving, martial arts gyms, youth orchestras, sport leagues, and dance schools come to mind. Here's what is going to be tricky for the Church. All of these organizations are self selecting. If a special interest school or gym is not successful it closes down. People who are interested and motivated seek them out and make them function- from administers, to teachers, to students. This is how the Scout program runs in the secular world.  I don't know exactly how the Church can foster that kind of specific interest and passion in a youth program that is generic or universal and needs to appeal and serve all comers. But maybe that's the wrong goal? Maybe they don't need that at all. Maybe all that is needed is place for the youth to experience faithful peer interaction, leaders who are worthy role models, and the opportunity for spiritual growth and experience. 

Not saying I endorse all these ideas, but this is the sort of outside-the-box thinking I was hoping to encourage when I started this thread.

Edited August 5, 2015 by Scott Lloyd

[thatjimguy]

It has been publicly confirmed that the Church of Jesus Christ is considering ending its century-old association with the Scouting movement and designing an international program to replace it.

 

While the decision is by no means settled yet, in the event that it does happen, this thread is an invitation for suggestions as to what such a program might look like.

 

I hesitated to use the expression "think outside the box" as that has become cliche, but I can't immediately think of any other imagery that adequately conveys the idea: Don't be bound by the idea that the replacement must resemble the Scouting movement in every -- or even in any -- respect. Let your imagination work. What core values need to be fostered? What elements of Scouting should be discarded as no longer relevant to today's needs (do youth still need to know how to tie various kinds of knots, for example)?

 

Above all, should the new program involve girls as well as boys, with comparable access to training, activities, funding, etc.?

 

To spark some ideas, I present this link to a blog post I found, emphasizing that I am not endorsing it in any respect, merely presenting it as grist for thought.

 

Thoughts? Suggestions? Considerations?

 

 

Wait a minute, if the church cuts it means everyone has to leave the scouting program?

 

I mean, I know a lot of people do not want gay leaders, but this does not mean all leaders must now be gay.

 

Who said anything about a mandate to have kids stop participating?

Edited August 5, 2015 by thatjimguy

[thatjimguy]

Also, maybe the church does not need to make it's own program. Maybe work with other church groups to form something new instead.

 

I say this because I really have disliked the idea of how forced the scouting program was on kids in the LDS community.

 

If there is going to be a new program, let it be created outside the church.

[Stone holm]

We need to decide what we want from the program.  The YW program is primarily preaching with some activities thrown in, if that is what we want we can just drop Scouts without doing much of anything.  However, if we want to have a program where the kids actually do something which instills confidence, teamwork, and is interesting to teenagers that is a whole different thing.  Numbers are a problem, most Wards out here in the ecclesiastical hinterland only have enough boys for one patrol and a small one at that.  As a result LDS Troops and Packs out here and in the Midwest from my experience are some of the smallest and weakest in the Scouting community.  It is also true that people get called to be Scout Leaders who are not actually interested in Scouting.  Probably Scoutings greatest achievement is not building character, but getting kids outdoors doing things in nature, and secondly teamwork.  If we think those two things are important then we would need to recreate something like that.  In addition, we need to get over the sexism -- girls are interested in the same stuff as boys, its our culture that tries to teach them differently, and it would be helpful to have our boys learn to work as a team with girls because the most important "team" they are going to have to work within is marriage.  We are supposedly big on the heterosexual thing, so why keep the boys and girl segregated all the time like a bunch of Victorians.

[ALarson]

I think that the fazing in of any new program to replace scouting could take years.  

 

How about all of those boys who are close to earning their Eagle scout award or even those who have earned several merit badges?  Would the church allow all of those who have started the scouting program to continue with it and finish it?  And then maybe just start all 12 year old boys out in the new program?

 

That could really be a nightmare for the ward leaders and the scout leaders too.  But I guess it could be done. Maybe they'd run the programs simultaneously for the overlap years?

[Buckeye]

I think that the fazing in of any new program to replace scouting could take years.  

 

How about all of those boys who are close to earning their Eagle scout award or even those who have earned several merit badges?  Would the church allow all of those who have started the scouting program to continue with it and finish it?  And then maybe just start all 12 year old boys out in the new program?

 

That could really be a nightmare for the ward leaders and the scout leaders too.  But I guess it could be done. Maybe they'd run the programs simultaneously for the overlap years?

 

A phase out would be very difficult to work. Eagle requires that you have a leadership position in a troop (unless you do lone scout). A troop requires other boys. So the last boys grandfathered in would have difficulty fulfilling the required leadership roles if there is no one behind them. And you also have to consider the logistics of continuing to have scout nights, campouts, summer camp, etc. for the boys who were of age as of [DATE], but excluding all the other boys who entered YM after than date from the same activities. I couldn't pull this off in my ward. If there is a split, and if some of our YM want to continue in scouts, I would recommend they simply find another local troop. That's easy here in Ohio. Maybe less so in Utah, but probably still doable.

Edited August 5, 2015 by Buckeye

[mnn727]

I think it is a myth that being an Eagle necessarily or always helps with school or job prospects.  It doesn't hurt ... but given AP classes and all of the many many other things young people can be involved with, I don't think the Eagle has the same cache it may have once had.

 

I never reached Eagle and, like you Scott, don't think I have been hindered in any way.

Eagle means very little in the Business world at large today, ask anyone in HR in a large corporation.

As far as small companies it would only matter if the owner/manger had been an Eagle Scout.

Edited August 5, 2015 by mnn727

[california boy]

I worked in the scouting program for years. Mostly as teachers quorum advisor. I would say about only 20% of the boys were in to scouting. So I adapted. Most of the focus of our Wednesday night activities centered around what a merit badge was about. There are merit badges for everything. I combined the merit badges with exposing the boys to different professions. for example, I would arrange to go to a professional photographer's studio to talk about his profession. What it was like. Who his clients were. How to set up a shot. How to light a product. Then afterwards I would tell the boys what else they had to do on their own if they wanted to earn the badge. They were all interested in photography. Only a few cared about the badge. The next week we would expose them to another hobby or profession. What I felt was the most import thing they could get out of the program was exposure to all the possibilities of life. It seemed to work for both the boys who were in to scouting and those who were just interested in different life choices.

There was very little about what I was doing that had to do with BSA other than the list on merit badges. The BSA scout office never did anything to enhance the program. It would have been the same program, just without the badge. I never saw any benefit from all the money the ward sent them. If the church said they were no longer doing scouting it would not have made one bit of difference in the program

[Stargazer]

A few things should be done away with, and I believe one of them is calling levels of achievement "ranks".  Tenderfoot is not Private, Second Class is not Corporal.  They are Achievements.  The only thing vaguely analogous with "ranks" are the positions,  Patrol Leader.  Senior Patrol Leader.

 

It is a fact that Baden-Powell made Scouting militaristic for a reason: he thought the upcoming youth of Great Britain had too few outdoor skills that would be useful in military service, and that was his primary motivation in the beginning.  Military scouts have to learn to "read" the land, and live off the land, in order to function properly.  City boys whose only skills consist of knowing which bus to take and the location of the nearest pub must be trained far more than someone who is already familiar with land navigation, wilderness survival, and so on.

 

I only made it to 2nd Class Scout (I was not involved in LDS Church scouting), but because of Scouting my experience in US Army basic training was different from that of many of my peers who had not been in Scouting.  My BSA experience made dealing with land navigation with a map and compass, how to set up a tent, how to be stealthy in the forest, and I knew basic first aid.  All because of Scouting. 

 

But the Church needs to avoid militarism, in my opinion.  Not because there's anything wrong with it -- it's great in its place.  But the Church needs to teach outdoor skills because everyone needs to know something about the subject.  Simply said.  It isn't necessary to call a small group of boys a Patrol.  Or give them Rank. 

 

If the Church does its own Scouting program, it needs to be based around the Priesthood Quorum.  They actually tried to run the Scouting program around the quorum, but there were problems with that.  Especially when nonmembers were part of the scout troops.

Edited August 6, 2015 by Stargazer

[Stone holm]

A few things should be done away with, and I believe one of them is calling levels of achievement "ranks".  Tenderfoot is not Private, Second Class is not Corporal.  They are Achievements.  The only thing vaguely analogous with "ranks" are the positions,  Patrol Leader.  Senior Patrol Leader.

 

It is a fact that Baden-Powell made Scouting militaristic for a reason: he thought the upcoming youth of Great Britain had too few outdoor skills that would be useful in military service, and that was his primary motivation in the beginning.  Military scouts have to learn to "read" the land, and live off the land, in order to function properly.  City boys whose only skills consist of knowing which bus to take and the location of the nearest pub must be trained far more than someone who is already familiar with land navigation, wilderness survival, and so on.

 

I only made it to 2nd Class Scout (I was not involved in LDS Church scouting), but because of Scouting my experience in US Army basic training was different from that of many of my peers who had not been in Scouting.  My BSA experience made dealing with land navigation with a map and compass, how to set up a tent, how to be stealthy in the forest, and I knew basic first aid.  All because of Scouting. 

 

But the Church needs to avoid militarism, in my opinion.  Not because there's anything wrong with it -- it's great in its place.  But the Church needs to teach outdoor skills because everyone needs to know something about the subject.  Simply said.  It isn't necessary to call a small group of boys a Patrol.  Or give them Rank. 

 

If the Church does its own Scouting program, it needs to be based around the Priesthood Quorum.  They actually tried to run the Scouting program around the quorum, but there were problems with that.  Especially when nonmembers were part of the scout troops.

 

Baden-Powell was one of the few British heroes to come out of the Boer War where the Brits turned in a miserable experience, the embedded newspaper reporter who was with him was Rudyard Kipling.  Kipling helped Baden-Powell's rise to public importance.  So yes these two individuals emphasized military type skills of the day.  I was a little shocked that they dumped the Cub Scout oath and went to the more militaristic Boy Scout counterparts. Aside from the uniforms though, if the program is run properly it does not have to be militaristic since there are merit badges for nearly everything under the sun.  I still think the emphasis on nature and team-work is very important.

[Stone holm]

 

A few things should be done away with, and I believe one of them is calling levels of achievement "ranks".  Tenderfoot is not Private, Second Class is not Corporal.  They are Achievements.  The only thing vaguely analogous with "ranks" are the positions,  Patrol Leader.  Senior Patrol Leader.

 

It is a fact that Baden-Powell made Scouting militaristic for a reason: he thought the upcoming youth of Great Britain had too few outdoor skills that would be useful in military service, and that was his primary motivation in the beginning.  Military scouts have to learn to "read" the land, and live off the land, in order to function properly.  City boys whose only skills consist of knowing which bus to take and the location of the nearest pub must be trained far more than someone who is already familiar with land navigation, wilderness survival, and so on.

 

I only made it to 2nd Class Scout (I was not involved in LDS Church scouting), but because of Scouting my experience in US Army basic training was different from that of many of my peers who had not been in Scouting.  My BSA experience made dealing with land navigation with a map and compass, how to set up a tent, how to be stealthy in the forest, and I knew basic first aid.  All because of Scouting. 

 

But the Church needs to avoid militarism, in my opinion.  Not because there's anything wrong with it -- it's great in its place.  But the Church needs to teach outdoor skills because everyone needs to know something about the subject.  Simply said.  It isn't necessary to call a small group of boys a Patrol.  Or give them Rank. 

 

If the Church does its own Scouting program, it needs to be based around the Priesthood Quorum.  They actually tried to run the Scouting program around the quorum, but there were problems with that.  Especially when nonmembers were part of the scout troops.

 

Baden-Powell was one of the few British heroes to come out of the Boer War where the Brits turned in a miserable experience, the embedded newspaper reporter who was with him was Rudyard Kipling.  Kipling helped Baden-Powell's rise to public importance.  So yes these two individuals emphasized military type skills of the day.  I was a little shocked that they dumped the Cub Scout oath and went to the more militaristic Boy Scout counterparts. Aside from the uniforms though, if the program is run properly it does not have to be militaristic since there are merit badges for nearly everything under the sun.  I still think the emphasis on nature and team-work is very important.

 

My quote function is doing funky things -- only the last paragraph of the above is mine and the rest is the quote I was trying to refer to --sorry to anyone who might be offended

[rpn]

The best things that scouting now does for boys is to

 

a) introduce boys to lots of different areas that can help them decide on a career, and identify their own talents and interests

b) help the boys become personally competent at basic outdoor survival and outdoor care   (not so good at urban survival and care)

c) learn to lead, and to follow others when it is their turn to lead

d) learn to serve and to think of others

e) gives them experience setting and achieving goals.

f) keep them busy in good works.

 

I'd like to see all that continue.

[sheilauk]

 

 

a) introduce boys to lots of different areas that can help them decide on a career, and identify their own talents and interests

b) help the boys become personally competent at basic outdoor survival and outdoor care   (not so good at urban survival and care)

c) learn to lead, and to follow others when it is their turn to lead

d) learn to serve and to think of others

e) gives them experience setting and achieving goals.

f) keep them busy in good works.

 

 

 

 

Excellent goals/aims.

 

Just in case no one realises - in the UK and, quite possibly in Europe, the Church is not connected to the Scouts.  We have Scout troops, often associated with a non LDS church, but the Scouting program is not automatically a LDS Church activity.  I am not aware of any connection in my stake (though there are adults and children who are involved through their own choice).  Therefore, it is not the end if the US withdraws from the Scouts - the YM will survive.  The YM in my ward follow the Duty to God program and whatever else the leaders devise.  They meet on Tuesday nights and whenever else is considered appropriate and they do a lot of service and are generally very able and polite Young Men.

[Stone holm]

Am starting to see posts suggesting that it would be best if the Churches did disaffiliate from BSA so that the BSA was not trying to accommodate all the different faiths.  Been thinking about that, and back when I was in Cub Scouts the Packs were basically huge compared to todays standards and all the big ones were affiliated with the schools.  By the time I reached Boy Scout Age, the Scout Troop had disappeared, but my brother organized one so that I would have a chance to be in it long enough to get to the National Jamboree.  After that the troop folded.  But my older brothers were all in Boy Scout Troops and one was in an Explorer Post, I think both of those were chartered by the schools.  Perhaps Scouts would in fact be better without the Churches.  I have since being in the Church always thought of Scouts in terms of the Church youth programs and what it can do for the Church, perhaps we are not looking at that correctly.  Perhaps disaffiliation would be best for BSA -- then parents who wanted their kids to have the Scouting experience could do that instead of the YM programs which usually bore the heck out of the kids.  I think in our area we could pick up corporate sponsors fairly easily, and we have several troops which are sponsored by Churches which don't care about the culture war.  I guess the only thing I would regret is that I have one grandson whose parents want nothing to do with the Church, but have asked me to put him in the Ward Cub Scout Pack -- if we disaffiliate that will cut that one point of exposure to the Church.

[Stargazer]

A few things should be done away with, and I believe one of them is calling levels of achievement "ranks".  Tenderfoot is not Private, Second Class is not Corporal.  They are Achievements.  The only thing vaguely analogous with "ranks" are the positions,  Patrol Leader.  Senior Patrol Leader.

 

It is a fact that Baden-Powell made Scouting militaristic for a reason: he thought the upcoming youth of Great Britain had too few outdoor skills that would be useful in military service, and that was his primary motivation in the beginning.  Military scouts have to learn to "read" the land, and live off the land, in order to function properly.  City boys whose only skills consist of knowing which bus to take and the location of the nearest pub must be trained far more than someone who is already familiar with land navigation, wilderness survival, and so on.

 

I only made it to 2nd Class Scout (I was not involved in LDS Church scouting), but because of Scouting my experience in US Army basic training was different from that of many of my peers who had not been in Scouting.  My BSA experience made dealing with land navigation with a map and compass, how to set up a tent, how to be stealthy in the forest, and I knew basic first aid.  All because of Scouting. 

 

But the Church needs to avoid militarism, in my opinion.  Not because there's anything wrong with it -- it's great in its place.  But the Church needs to teach outdoor skills because everyone needs to know something about the subject.  Simply said.  It isn't necessary to call a small group of boys a Patrol.  Or give them Rank. 

 

If the Church does its own Scouting program, it needs to be based around the Priesthood Quorum.  They actually tried to run the Scouting program around the quorum, but there were problems with that.  Especially when nonmembers were part of the scout troops.

Baden-Powell was one of the few British heroes to come out of the Boer War where the Brits turned in a miserable experience, the embedded newspaper reporter who was with him was Rudyard Kipling.  Kipling helped Baden-Powell's rise to public importance.  So yes these two individuals emphasized military type skills of the day.  I was a little shocked that they dumped the Cub Scout oath and went to the more militaristic Boy Scout counterparts. Aside from the uniforms though, if the program is run properly it does not have to be militaristic since there are merit badges for nearly everything under the sun.  I still think the emphasis on nature and team-work is very important.

I agree with you on the emphasis on nature and teamwork. Merit badges or "Honor Pins".

[Stargazer]

My quote function is doing funky things -- only the last paragraph of the above is mine and the rest is the quote I was trying to refer to --sorry to anyone who might be offended

Not offended, but when I first saw this I was wondering why you had just quoted my entire post without adding anything. And then I read the last paragraph and wondered why I couldn't remember writing that. As you see, I reposted our quotes above.

[Stone holm]

Not offended, but when I first saw this I was wondering why you had just quoted my entire post without adding anything. And then I read the last paragraph and wondered why I couldn't remember writing that. As you see, I reposted our quotes above.

 

Yeah my computer at the office does all sorts of funky things with this board, for a long time it didn't allow me to quote at all, then it started putting my comment inside the quote, and it won't let me cut and paste outside references so I can't easily respond to pertinent CFR's.  There have been complaints by various cultural historians over the years -- and no I won't provide the references -- to the fact that when there were several boy programs being presented in America at the time, Boy Scouts with its militaristic garb was selected. Its kind of like there were alternatives to Order of the Arrow which I think are better more inclusive programs.  But for all its flaws, I think that Boy Scouts is a really inspired program, although I would like to see it more co-educational and it is an important in that it really does teach teamwork.  So many of our so-called "team" sports no longer really teach teamwork, but getting a camp set up and lashing a tower together really does require teamwork -- we always emphasized that in our Cub and Scout units.  Also, it can really enhance a child's observation skills -- we had KIM game tournaments repeatedly, and then moved them outside.  There were so many things the kids could learn without getting bored and without feeling like they were being preached at continuously.