Graduation

[koholintscout]

kwildman

Venturing is just more scouting and actually enhances the troop if done correctly. What do you do with your older scouts now? What keeps them in after eagle? Venturing is the perfect tool to deliver the "promise" of high adventure that we keep dangling in front of scouts. You need to learn more about the program. Sign up for Venturing Leader basic training and see what the program is about.

So how exactly does it enhance the troop? If Venturing is as great for older scouts and it meets during a different time than the troop, that’s another time commitment by older scouts and I know I’d rather go to whatever activity is better suited for me rather than go hang out with younger scouts, if given the option (of course, assuming, I had no leadership obligation or whatnot to the troop). Back when I was in Scouts, older scouts stuck around and served as JASMs and then ASMs before heading off for college. How is Venturing especially suited for high adventure? How is uniquely better than Boy Scout troops? My old troop did one week-long “high adventure” sort of campout every summer in addition to summer camp, and we’d also go on more strenuous hikes up some mountains. We got around the issue of younger kids not being able to keep up by sending them out several hours earlier. I guess this means dangling is a more relative experience. Unfortunately, my current situation means I won’t be able to sign up for anything like Venturing Leader basic training for a couple of years.

---

biglou

I am going to have to get on a soap box here before wagionvigil does.

I am going to respectfully disagree with koholintscout's comments about Venturing. The Venturing program is the most underused program that the BSA has. Venturing can be a wonderful thing if the program is used correctly.

1) Pulling older boys away from the Boy Scouting program can hurt local troops If anything, the Venturing program can help strengthen the Boy Scout and Cub Scout program. Most of the requirements in Venturing require the Venturers to teach their newly acquired skills. This also gives older Scouts a new opportunity as Venturers to do things that they could not do because they were Boy Scouts. Venturers can also finish their Eagle Scout Badge as long as they complete their First Class Rank. They have different leadership requirements that can be met. As for my crew, it has strengthened my Troop. We have boys sticking around because there is a new challenge for them. The younger boys are also impressed that there are GIRLS in the program and yes they are a good example for the younger boys too.

I concede I don’t know enough about the requirements for the Bronze, Gold and Silver Awards to be making judgement calls on how those awards’ requirements could benefit other units. However, what opportunities does Venturing give Boy Scouts that they couldn’t do since they were in Boy Scouts? I understand that Venturers that are also Boy Scouts can continue to work on Star, Life and Eagle requirements, but how does Venturing open up new opportunities for leadership that are uniquely better than those available in Boy Scouts (especially considering the age issues I brought up in my earlier post)? That’s fine that younger boys are impressed that there are girls there-I’m not really sure what that means but I imagine it’s a good thing. What I think you’re missing is that I’ve acknowledged already that girls can be good role models for boys and that my main point is that there’s a real need for boys to learn to step up and lead other boys.

2) Kids go to college away from where they live. I agree with that. However, a Venture Crew can meet as often as they like. The Venturers can plan there activities well in advance of college breaks and schedules.

I really don’t think this is realistic. Beyond my own situation which would make that sort of thing close to impossible, I really don’t see where Venturing fits in to the modern college student’s life and I don't see how you make it part of their lives, either. This might just be me, but the magnitude of other activities that are out there in college, the level of money that is poured into some of them and the lessons that can only be learned through those organizations, in those settings, makes me think that those are just more valuable organizations to former Scouters anyway. Plus, Scouters can do their part and help these organizations grow and show people that were not in Scouts in high school and earlier what they missed.

3) The way Scouts fits into most people's lives is that it is just one of several activities. Ok. I have Scouts that are active in just about everything. If they want to participate in Venturing, they will make time. My boys and girls do that. They have jobs and are involved in cheerleading, sports, band, and the school musical to name a few. I do not see what the problem is.

My problem is that time is a finite resource and this sort of club is designed to extend the timeline of Scouting awards and activities in a way that keeps young adults involved in a manner very similar to Boy Scouts (awards, ranks, leadership positions, etc.) which means that their time is being taken that much more away from other activities. I guess my philosophy or whatnot on this is that it is sometimes a good thing that boys get involved in other activities, learn more leadership lessons in different environments, have good impacts on people and show the community how valuable scouting is. This is all provided they don’t drop off the face of the earth from the troop, of course!

) Making Venturing the "next step" means that girls will probably have to be allowed to join Cub Scouts and Boy Scouts, which I have to oppose because in my experience and sort of how I see society: I do not have a problem with girls being in the Venturing program. However, I still think that the girls need a place where the girls can be girls and the boys can be boys in the younger age groups. With the Venturing Program, the girls and the boys learn how to compromise and "sink or swim". I went to the Area IV Venture quest at Camp Bucoco last April. The kids planned the event and I thought it was very well run event. There were no problems. My boys that went still found time to do their thing. It was not a problem at all.
Well I’m glad we agree that boys need to be with boys and girls need to be with girls. I have nothing to disagree about here!

Venturing is the most underused program that the BSA has. Partly because of attitudes of people who are afraid of what might happen. I was in the Exploring program before the name change to Venturing in the early 90s. I had a blast then. The only problems was the lack of a structured program that Venturing has now. We went camping and hiking together and some of the girls outperformed the guys in our post. We had fun. Venturing can be a wonderful thing if you use it. There are plenty of resources out there. This program has to be promoted, period.

It’s underused because I think people are confused at its goals and where it fits. I don’t think making it a mandatory progression will help anything because I think some of the issues inherent in both the program and the age group it aims for cannot be resolved. Of course it’s going to be underused if people’s attitudes are negative, but I would not say it’s out of fear. I’m not “afraid” of a program, I just don’t think making it mandatory is the right way for Scouting to go, I think it suffers from some systemic problems that ought to be addressed and I think it steals some thunder from Boy Scouting. That’s great that some girls outperform some guys-the same thing happens here at West Point. I have a pretty limited education with Scouting compared to all of you, but I really think issues with Venturing stem from lack of specific purposes and a generally confusing layout of the program (both itself and in the context of the greater Scouting program). You shouldn’t have to promote a program that is featured at the end of every Boy Scout Handbook, it should be something people want to do.

Wagionvigil can definitely do a better job than what I have with commenting on Venturing. I had to add my two cents worth.

---
wagionvigil

No you did quite well. Scouters are afraid of Venturing because they know in their heart that they are not meeting the needs of the older scout. Their ideas are to holdup advancement to keep them in the troop longer. That Only older Boys can be the SPL etc. But Older is relative maybe it is time to think of the 13/14 year old as older and let them lead.

Like I said above, I am not “afraid” of a program. This is just my experience but the older Scouts can be kept in a troop if given the proper motivation and direction. I’m (obviously) a pretty big skeptic of Venturing but I was never one to hold up advancement. My ideas for advancement were that every single new Scout was to hit 1st Class rank no later than the one-year mark of them crossing over from their Packs. When I was SPL we worked on merit badge requirements at meetings for the older boys (as some other older scouts would work with the younger ones, getting them to speed on the requirements, etc.) In my experience, older boys are incredibly more effective leaders than younger boys. 13/14 year olds DO lead in the kind of troops I was in-they were patrol leaders and a variety of the other PORs. They weren’t the SPL or ASPL because frankly boys at that age tend to not be mature enough to realize what impact they can have on organizations and therefore a lot of leadership lessons are lost.

I’m out of time-I have to run to practice, but I think my disagreements with ya’ll stem from differing expectations and experiences with Scouting and perhaps a difference in philosophy regarding Scouting in general (including its place in people’s lives and in relation to other activities) and expectations of life and other people (like age and gender). For the record I do not mean to offend anyone on a personal level with any of my disagreements and I am very thankful for the opportunity to discuss these issues in a civil manner with all of you. All of you have contributed more to Scouting than I probably ever will have the chance to and for that I’m thankful. There’s not much that’s more valuable than volunteers who are dedicated to an organization as valuable as Scouting.

[wagionvigil]

Most boys once they get in a crew and see how it does operate which is more Like the OA than a Troop do little with the troop. A January Skiing at 7 Springs, February SKiing at Snowshoe,March Hiking Weekend on the Laurel Highland Trail, April Fly Fishing Seminar with Trout Unlimited and then Fly Fishing on the Yough or some other Fly fishing area,May Kayak Training, June Kayak the Middle Yough once a week plus lower Yough Rafting when Possible. July Planning Seminar at Laurel Caverns weekend, Included Climbing /rappelling and Caving. Get the idea Fun High Adventure activities.

[kwildman]

It enhances the troop as Big Lou indicated by providing trainers for your troop and for scouts to have another goal besides being a JASM. Want to take your troop hunting? Sorry cant do that ... but a crew can. Want to do competitive pistol shooting with your troop? Sorry cant do that but a crew can. There are a lot of other things crews can do that a troops cant. Sea Scouts is an example of another great program that is part of Venturing. I know scouts that are part of a troop, crew, and ship and are also in football, track, and wrestling. If a scout wants to do it they will find time.

k-scout, For someone that doesn't know or understand the Venturing program you seem to have very strong feelings against it. As you grow from scout to scouter, i would encourage you to keep an open mind and take the training and see how the program works in other units in your district/council.

[Cowboy]

So far my only experience with Venturing has been this: A mother in our community wants a crew so that her daughter can participate "in Boy Scouts". Our county has a population of 45,000 with over 27 units (Packs, Troops, Crews, etc). This does not even touch on Boys/Girls club, Brownies, Girl Scouts etc. In our town we have a Pack, Troop, Brownies, Girls Scouts and of course the obligatory 1000 school activities. We only have a population of 1500. Adding another "organization" to the mix is actually damaging to the Troop. It creates one more group that will be fund raising (more later) and asking for time from the boys. It can (has not yet) draw the older boys that we need to teach the younger Scouts away from the Troop. We have one big opportunity to raise funds each year for the Troop. This is where we (the boys) earn about 75% of the operating funds for the year. We have now been asked to share this time/opportunity with the new Crew. Great, a Troop is suppose to help the community, but if we have to give up even 1/3 of the income, many of the activities that the Troop does will have to be dropped. Do I think that having a Crew is worth giving up the High Adventure trip that my son is going on this year? Nope. I know the argument is there that my son could do the same trip with a crew. However, HE likes Scouts. He does not want to leave the Troop. He also wants to continue wrestling, baseball, and football. He wants to be a Jr. Councilor at camp and have a job. He should not be forced to leave the Troop to join a Crew, he should not have to choose one or the other, and he should not have to give up other interests to make time for another "group" that can really offer him nothing more than he can get in the Troop. Hunting? Target Shooting? He already does these things with me and his friends. Some of those friends are in Scouts with him, some are not. I am not bashing Venturing. More power to those people who enjoy it, and I do believe that it is a valuable asset to many communities and boys. But making it mandatory is wrong. Just like anything else that is good, there is a time and place. For inner city folks the hunting may be a unique opportunity, but for us country folk, we do this all year long.
Off the soap box.

[VenturingL]

Note on what can be learned from Venturing - Venturing is not designed to run on the patrol method hierachy that a troop uses. It's more like a board of directors (crew officers) & share holders (rest of the crew). We put planning activities in the hands of committees that don't have to include an officer. American business has had a learning curve on how to get employees to work as teams, instead of everything coming "from the top down". Our scouts are putting these things into action as teenagers.
Venturing & a Troop don't have to be exclusive. Yes, it's a time commitment, but Venturing may not meet as often, as has been previously stated. The skills a scout learns in one unit will benefit the other.
College: If you're able & it's important to you, you will make it work. My daughter went out of town for college (2 hour drive), but still made it home for the campouts. That level of commitment spoke volumes to the younger Venturers.
If you're in a troop that continues to challenge the older boys or a GS troop that wants to do more than arts & crafts in a comfy living room, I offer genuine congratulations, but far too often that is not the case.

[koholintscout]

Wagionvigil: Not having a very live OA lodge where I live (or lived…for all I know, they could be a lot more active now), I’m not really sure how OA functions. I’ll be the first to admit I don’t know how it is supposed to operate, but I have heard of Venturing Crews meeting once a week and twice a month so that’s been the assumption I’ve been operating on (in terms of how often “normal” Venturing Crews function). I’m not sure how any of those activities are uniquely Venturing-oriented or how they exclude Boy Scout Troops (I’ve done half of those activities with my troop).

kwildman: How does Venturing especially enhance the education/quality of “trainers” for the Troop? I acknowledge that Venturing provides a “next step” for older boys wanting more to do after they hit Eagle and they do their term(s) as SPL, but at least in my experience, that meant staying on as JASM and mentoring boys that replaced them as the primary leaders of the troop, helping plan “high adventure” sort of activities for the troop, and pursuing other leadership roles outside of Scouting.

I do have strong feelings about it because I don’t like the idea of my troop that I put so much time into will be unraveled because older boys will opt to do Venturing and rob troops of good role models and solid leadership and it will rob the boys who opt for Venturing of leadership experiences that forge what kind of leader that boy will be for life. My time as SPL is still some of the best leadership time I’ve ever had and I think that’s one of the reasons why I’m where I’m at today. I look forward to the day that I can be an active adult in Scouting, but for me that’s at least a decade off, so for now, here I am, posting on message boards and trying to stay involved in this small way.

Cowboy: I totally agree with you. You seem to be having the experience that I dread people having.
VenturingL: That’s an interesting way of organizing a unit-again, I have little exposure to how Venturing crews function. I just have to say that Boy Scouting has more than its fair share of boys planning and executing their own plans. As for college, my main point was that a lot of college students might not be able to make it work because they go far away for college. Kudos to your daughter on her level of commitment-I would do the same for my Scout troop I wasn’t here nine hours away. (and unable to leave)

I think VenturingL hits the mark just right with his comment that he feels it is not too often that troops for both genders keep their older members involved. I think the majority of everyone’s arguments are (logically) stemming from our experiences with Scouting and some of the problems we have faced. Older Scouts spending less time with the troop does seem to be a widespread problem, for sure. However, I believe a lot of the arguments made for and against Venturing both as just another program and as a possible mandatory “solution” stem from how we view this problem and what we believe Scouting’s place is in the lives of boys. I think once this sort of difference in perceptions is bridged, perhaps greater understanding about how best to meet the needs of older boys can be addressed. I think at this point, we’re all talking past each other, and I think this sort of thing has been going on for years now. I don’t know everything about Venturing, I don’t have the time or the opportunity to join a Crew of any of that. However, the more I read the more it has become clear to me that there’s just a lot of assumptions being made about what ought to be done about a problem that I’m not even sure has a national or district-level solution. Good troops will retain older boys, provided those boys want to stay involved. Some boys can be great Scouts but they realize that other mountains are out there to climb.
Last thing I have to say (for now): Maybe Venturing would benefit long-term if it went through a period of “benign neglect” from National? Boy Scouting did not become a hallmark of the American identity over night, perhaps through trial-and-error at the Crew level and after a few more decades of interplay between troops and crews across the country, Venturing can find its place. Just a thought.

[biglou]

My Troop may be an exception to the activity of the older boys involved in a Troop and Crew. Being in both units has not affected their activities both after school and Scouting wise. To be quite honest, being in both units has kept them focused. I have two girls that have completed their Gold Awards in the GSUSA. My Scouts are all working on becoming Eagle Scouts. I just don't see why people are so upset about Venturing.

Looking at the requirements, completing one of the Venturing Bronze awards is quite harder than doing a merit badge. Each Venturer has specific tasks they have to complete. I am pasting the link to the Venturing Advancement Requirements so you can read them easily. http://meritbadge.org/wiki/index.php/Ve ... onze_Award

One example for each of the elective requirements for the Outdoor Bronze award is what my first crew called "THE SHOW AND TELL" requirements. If a Venturer wants to complete an elective and earn the Outdoor Bronze Award, he or she must demonstrate the skill to another crew, a Cub or Boy Scout group, or another youth group. I believe that the other Bronze awards have a "Show and Tell" requirement. I have personally seen a Venturer get in front of her crew and do a "Show and Tell" requirement for her Arts and Hobbies Bronze Award. The Venturer I am directly referencing to was very shy and unsure of herself. After some encouragement from her friends, she was able to get in front of larger groups and teach. This helped this person become a better speaker and have more self-confidence in front of groups.

The thing I am starting to see is what I shall call closed minds. If you do not like the program that is fine. You do not have to. Stay active in the program area that you are in, but do not discourage a kid from going to Venturing. Here is a scary thought, the kid might like Venturing. The only thing I will ask is to read about the program, go to a Venture Super Activity, Area/Regional/National Event, and take the training. Then make your decision. I have been completely surprised by what the Venturers have come up with, ie, Edinboro Crew 1 Gettysburg trip and the 2008 Area IV Venture Quest at Camp Bucoco, PA.

Venturing has a myth about stealing boys from the Troops. Who cares if it does? At least the boys that go to Venturing are still part of the Scouting Movement. Here is some food for thought. What about the boy or girl that has never had an outdoor experience? What about the kid who was never in Cub Scouts, Girl Scouts, Campfire or Boy Scouts and decided he or she might give Venturing a try? Have you ever thought about that?

After thinking about this, I had to go and find the mission and vision statement of the Boy Scouts of America. I am going to repost them so you don't have to "google" them. They are as follows:

Mission & Vision

Mission Statement

The mission of the Boy Scouts of America is to prepare young people to make ethical and moral choices over their lifetimes by instilling in them the values of the Scout Oath and Law.

Scout Oath
On my honor I will do my best
To do my duty to God and my country
and to obey the Scout Law;
To help other people at all times;
To keep myself physically strong,
mentally awake, and morally straight.

Scout Law
A Scout is:
Trustworthy
Loyal
Helpful
Friendly
Courteous
Kind
Obedient
Cheerful
Thrifty
Brave
Clean
Reverent


Vision Statement

The Boy Scouts of America will prepare every eligible youth in America to become a responsible, participating citizen and leader who is guided by the Scout Oath and Law.

Notice in the mission statement it says young peopleand eliglible youth. Are we meeting the mission statement by completely ignoring the 14-20 year old age group? Just a thought.

Last thing before I go. koholintscout, I see that your signature line says USMA Class of 2010. I am guessing that you are a Cadet at West Point. I can appreciate that you folks are busy with academics and athletics and want to thank you for your service. One thing that has peaked my curiousity is that you folks at West Point do not have a Venture Crew (did not see one according to the website). That could be a blast for you. Think about it.

[AquilaNegra2]

Maybe, if a troop is 'completely ignoring the needs of the 14+ crowd', the troop isn't being run very well. There is an incredible amount of knowledge to be learned in Scouts, and it is rarely mastered by 14.

A mandatory move says, "We can't make the program attractive enough for you to join, so we'll force you." We all know how well forcing a teenaged boy works... What a Venturing crew needs is a few core individuals who make known to the troop what they do. If it's a good program, why wouldn't the boys JUMP at the chance to join?

Optional dual enrollment seems to be a better choice. Why does there have to be a choice between the two? Can't they be co-operative instead? Rather than 'stealing' boys from a troop, why not just be another outlet they can choose?

[biglou]

Ok, after my last post. I thought you might want to check out what actual Venturers have to say about the program. Here is a link to the National Youth Cabinet.

http://www.scouting.org/venturing/about ... binet.aspx

Just click on one of the names of the Venturing National Youth Cabinet officer and read the bio and watch their video. Also look at the two young men who are the Southern Region and Western Region Presidents. I think they have 6 "knots" alone as a youth member. That is not including any heroism awards. Pretty impressive.

[biglou]

A boy who wants to be in both the Boy Scout program and the Venturing Program are allowed to dual register. I have several boys that are dual registered in both the Troop and Crew. They just have to pick which unit will have their primary registration and the other unit will be a secondary registration. They are not charged double the fees. Someone correct me if I am wrong.

[wagionvigil]

You are correct BL.
AS to how the OA Operates. It is totally Youth Led with adult advisers that have no say. The youth plan everything for all activities. Each Chairman has an adult ADv. and the Chairmen recruit a committee. The committee which ever it may be take care oftheir responsibiliy. Banquet,Ordeal,Kitchen,Dining Hall, Dance team,Ceremonies etc.

[Mrw]

We have a couple older boys that are dual registered in the Crew in town. It does not seem to have taken away from the troop.

That being said, I get the impression that the Crew is at best limping along with few members and not much luck with recruiting. We had the same issue several years ago when we were pushed hard to start a Crew by our district staff. After about a year of little interest, it came around to recharter time and my son, who had been putting a lot of effort in with no real help from the other registered youth, decided he could stay with the troop and have something to show for his time or he could continue and exercise in frustration. So we let it die.

Venturing has a place, but it needs to be promoted and publicized by the BSA rather than solely at the struggling unit level if it is going to become a viable program.

[ThunderingWind]

Venturing has a place, but it needs to be promoted and publicized by the BSA rather than solely at the struggling unit level if it is going to become a viable program.

Hear! Hear!

[koholintscout]

Biglou: That’s amazing that the boys aren’t affected by being in both the Troop and Crew, but then again this is a case of proving a theoretical-perhaps we won’t know what they have gave up to have time to do both. I dunno how being in both keeps them focused, either. Then again, I don’t know what you mean by “focused” what exactly are they focused on? We’re upset about Venturing because again we feel that it is an unnecessary determent to existing Scouting organizations that does not uniquely contribute or strengthen anything in the Scouting movement that offsets what it takes away. I just think the costs outweigh the benefits. (that’s my reason, anyway)

I’ve been over the requirements for the different Venturing awards several times (trying to decipher what Venturing is all about-I try not to be ignorant) and I know there is a requirement to teach others. That is laudable and those sorts of activities are part of what making Scouting great. Your Venturer no doubt learned a lot about public speaking and about herself and it’s that getting out of the comfort zone that needs to be encouraged in young people.

I hardly think I or anyone else who is not entirely stoked about Venturing has a “closed mind.” We just don’t like the results and the implications of having a program that we have seen and felt to be detrimental to Troops. If kids want to do Venturing, I’m all in favor of letting them. That’s their call. Even if I was in any position to stop boys from a Troop from joining a Crew, I wouldn’t because that’s not my decision. I have read a lot about the program, I have interacted with my fair share of crews over the years and I just don’t like the program. Just because you dislike something doesn’t necessarily make you closed minded and just because you like something doesn’t make you open minded. Again, I think our experiences in Scouting have been so widely different, it’s going to be hard to come to any consensus here.

I think I read your post as a tacit acknowledgment that Crews at least risk “stealing” boys from Troops. I agree that “at least they are part of the Scouting movement” that is highly important, to be sure. However, I feel that this phenomenon hurts Boy Scouting, which I hold to be the center of the movement in general. The possibility that Venturing is the only program that appeals to some boys and girls that never have an outdoor experience before is something that I HAVE thought about. I’m not an unthinking critic here, biglou. I consider what I say and this issue is something that I’m taking seriously. In those cases that we have people that are only brought in because of Venturing, perhaps we need to figure out what makes Venturing appealing and encourage other organizations to take note. After all, its on the individual Crew and Troop level that recruiting really functions.

Thanks for posting the mission and vision statement. Not sure what point you’re trying to make about me and my arguments, but it’s always nice to remember what the purpose is here. I think our disagreements are hinging on the execution of these and what role Venturing plays, for sure.

You guess right. I am a Cadet at West Point. I and others have thought about Venturing and the huge majority of us have had very limited interactions with them (outside the Camporee in May). The Academy does not have a Venturing Crew and I think there would be a very low amount of interest in making one happens. I am not the only one here that views Scouting as a mountain that has been climbed and that other, more different challenges are with us now and lie before us still. Also, the appeal of Venturing-“High Adventure” activities-holds considerably less water with Cadets than it does normal college students. I’m not going to risk looking like an arrogant jerk by explaining how our semesters are structured and the opportunities that other clubs here present or what activities our summers consist of, but suffice to say, Venturing would have a hard time competing here. That is all beside the point that coordinating weekend outings would be fairly difficult considering our differing schedules and the amount of leadership responsibilities assigned to Cadets as they progress through the ranks. Additionally, there’s a fair amount of Cadets that already help out local Troops/Crews and the Scoutmaster’s Council club here does an amazing job at giving tours and accompanying Troops/Crews that come visit the Academy. It’s not that Cadets don’t want to be part of Scouting; it’s that our school and our lives aren’t conducive to Venturing.

I’ve watched all the videos and read the biographies of all the members of the National Youth Cabinet. I remember reading the bios a few years back and thinking that the idea of that kind of youth national leadership was an awesome idea and that I wished we could somehow replicate it in Boy Scouts. No doubt these people are qualified and impressive in their achievements.

AquilaNegra2: You’re totally right. If Venturing must stay, let it be an optional activity. I fully recognize that some Crews are going to be better run and more fun than Troops that operate in the same area, and if that’s the case, the boys have every right to head for that Crew.

What’s troubling here is that National has apparently forced all Councils to come up with “Troop to Crew” transition plans to force older boys into joining Crews. If Crews are supposed to supplement Troops, why is the idea being tossed around about making it a mandatory changeover? According to ya’ll, that would mean Venturing would fundamentally change in both its purpose and scope, am I wrong?

I think Venturing would be helped if there was a more clear articulation of where it fits in and why it's important enough to join. Venturing will always have an uphill battle, as its targeted demographic tends to already be committed to other organizations. Boys have little reason to join beacuse they have Boy Scouts and girls have little reason to join because there hasn't been any good explanation by National on why Venturing is worth their time. For girls with no background in Scouting, I imagine the case is harder to sell because they've never heard the pitch before regarding why even doing the outdoors stuff and Scouting skills are important.

I conclude with a question: What kind of support from the National and Council levels are pro-Venturing people looking for? If this is what Venturing needs to be successful, what kind of push needs to happen by the higher-ups is necessary?

[wagionvigil]

I conclude with a question: What kind of support from the National and Council levels are pro-Venturing people looking for? If this is what Venturing needs to be successful, what kind of push needs to happen by the higher-ups is necessary?

Right Now Not Much and it is very discouraging.
Venturing is in limbo at this time and something must be done to make it succeed or drop it. But if we drop it we will no longer be permitted to attend the World Scout Jamboree. Venturing is what allows us to attend. ANyone Know WHy?

Get Ready
Here it comes
Ready or Not
COED

That is the only reason we still can take part.

[koholintscout]

Yeah, I knew World had that policy. Tolerant Europeans strike once again. As a guy who probably will never go to the World Jamboree, I have a hard time caring, here. That's just me though...

[kwildman]

I think it is getting better attention these days. Venturing is only 10years old so it is still relatively new. Venturing units need to be more visible at the youth level. Venturing leaders have stepped up recently and I see it being promoted through training, news, etc. so they are getting the adults interested. According to the numbers Venturing is the fastest growing portion of the Boy Scouts and based on the financial implications of getting new $$ into the program you are starting to see better marketing efforts.

I am not in favor of the mandatory move to Venturing but I feel strongly enough about the BSA and all its programs to fully support them. As previously stated, no program fits all youth but our goal is to provide for all. All of the concern about venturing crews is "what will happen to my troop"? That is very self serving and puts the interest of a Troop in front of the needs of the kids. There is nothing to say that another troop wont get chartered in your town either. What would that do to your current Troop?

Competing for funds is also a poor argument for the same reason. Should other youth groups not do fund raisers because they might cut into your pocket book? For Troops and Crews it is up to the youths to come up with funds to support their programs. These kids can be very creative in financing. Further there is nothing that limits your fund raising to just your small town.

Quit worrying about it and let the kids decide what they want to do.

[biglou]

I just thought about this. I am starting to think that there are a siginificant majority of local councils and the National Council have failed at educating everyone what Venturing is about and supporting the Venturing Program. It is not about stealing youth from one program to put them in another. It is possibly providing a different set of opportunities for the 14-20 age group. Like I said, Who cares if a boy makes the leap to Venturing? He is still a part of the Scouting movement and can do the Boy Scout advancement as long as he has earned First Class.

As for the Venturing advancement, it is not mandatory. A youth who is involved does not have to work on advancement. It is completely up to them. I will come up with a better answer later today on this one, unless someone else wants to. I am going to have to do my research on this one for you. I am thinking this is where some of the confusion and misconceptions about Venturing are happening. I am not going to go into the other part where people have misconceptions.

koholintscout, I can only imagine what your daily schedule as a Cadet would be like. I know what my college schedule was like. I bounced from being a volunteer firefighter/EMT to playing college student. I only suggested about starting a Crew to provide different advancement opportunities for the Cadets that are still under 21. I also thought that it might help your understanding of the Venturing program. Plus, you can get the William D. Boyce New unit organizer award for that. Your clubs at West Point are definitely something to compete against. I just thought that it would be a neat idea to see a West Point Crew started.

I almost forgot about answering your focused question. Being in both units have kept the boys and girls focused on their Scouting experience. They want to complete their Eagle Scout or Gold Awards. After the complete their Eagles/Gold Awards, they are looking at the Venturing advancement program as a new challenge.

[AquilaNegra2]

Yeah, I knew World had that policy. Tolerant Europeans strike once again. As a guy who probably will never go to the World Jamboree, I have a hard time caring, here. That's just me though...

What's the matter? Not looking forward to 'cooking' your vegetarian meals over a smudge pot and singing Kumbaya?

[koholintscout]

lulz