Our Space: The Outdoors and the

Future of the Boy Scouts of America

Jason A. Cruse, District DirectorSioux Council, BSA

Written in partial completion of the Fellowship Honor

August 2015

1

Five years into its second century, the Boy Scouts of America faces an identity crisis. Despite the loudness of the cries concerning membership policies and the future of national chartered partners, membership has faced a steady decline since the 1970s. The days when a boy goes to school and invites his friends to his house for Cub Scouts right after school are gone. BSA now competes with other non-profit entities, as well as sports. Some of these entities claim to handle the outdoors as well—if not better—than the Boy Scouts. If the Boy Scouts of America is remain relevant—to say nothing of retaining our expertise in the outdoors—we must regain our space. Our space is the outdoors. And to return to the outdoors, both Cub Scout packs and Boy Scout troops must be engaged. This engagement includes consistent camping (even in the face of declining attendance) and the recruitment and use of an outdoors chair. As we regain our space, we will find that not only will our membership increase, but also we will gain educators as new partners for our growth.

2

As the Boy Scouts of America enters its second century, it faces what can only be termed an

“identity crisis.” In the face of mounting social pressures, declining membership and increasing

competition, to say nothing of demographic changes, the Boy Scouts of America has been

forced to consider, and then reconsider, its future. Opening BSA membership to all males,

regardless of sexual orientation, is only the latest change that BSA has made. BSA has also

added new programs (Venturing), increased educational visibility (Learning for Life, Career

Exploring) and changed advancement (Venturing, Cub Scouts). In addition, attempts to expand

membership in the BSA have been made at several levels, including pilot programs for

kindergarten students and “STEM Scouts.”

These changes, however, appear not to have greatly affected membership in the BSA. While

the hope was that changes would allow for greater retention—and future recruiting—of new

scouts and families into BSA, this hope has not yet materialized. The downward membership

trend appeared to stabilize at the end of 2014, but real growth has not yet occurred.

Recognizing that some changes will take longer to realize their full potential, BSA must begin

ask itself if these changes and updates will truly lead to a return to long-term growth, or even

stability.

One common theme of updates to BSA has been that “parents are changing.” Families in 2015

have greater competition for their time than in 1965. Parents have more resources at their

disposal and more choices for events and activities. These societal changes do not mean that

BSA needs to move away from its core, the outdoors. On the contrary, if the first 100 years of

3

the Boy Scouts of America have taught us anything, it should be that the message and methods

of the Boy Scouts of America are indeed “timeless.”

This paper, and the research it presents, does not suggest major changes to the program,

content, or leadership of the Boy Scouts of America. Rather, this paper considers one aspect of

Scouting—camping and outdoors. Scouting units that create and maintain strong outdoors

programs also recruit and retain scouts. Yet, as an outdoors organization faced with declining

membership, BSA must ask itself if its core strength remains relevant.

This study will examine the relevancy of the outdoors in several steps. First, there will be a

consideration of the current role of the outdoors in society. Second, a statistical examination of

the outdoors, particularly camping, in scouting units will be presented. This examination will

include a review of packs and troops, the make-up of their units, and the frequency with which

they camp. Finally, conclusions will be drawn as to the potential for improving camping and the

role that scout units can—and should—be playing as part of their communities, as camping

improves.

The Need to Be Outside

A saying from ancient China applies to this study: “ ‘What I hear I forget, what I see I

remember, what I do I understand.’ In other words, the physical experience is fundamental to

learning that is truly implementable and transferable.”1 It is common practice that doing 1 Eric Howden. “Outdoor Experiential Education: Learning Through the Body.” New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education. No. 134, Summer 2012. P. 43.

4

begets greater understanding, just as teaching a skill solidifies the ability. This is nowhere more

the case than in the outdoors.

Proponents of getting youth outside and of outdoors education are not solely environmentalists

who see a lack of understanding and care for the world that characterizes today’s young

people. Outdoors provides a natural classroom for learning leadership skills, for participation in

science, technology, engineering and math (STEM), and for understanding symbioses and

relationships. However, some researchers are now finding a “nature deficit disorder” among

today’s youth. In fact, “with few exceptions, even in rural areas, parents say the same thing:

most children aren’t playing outside anymore, not in the woods or fields or canyons.”2 The lack

of outdoors time in youth is leading to a myriad of new health problems, including a dramatic

rise in vitamin D deficiency, myopia3, and childhood obesity and diabetes.4 Further, studies are

now beginning to show that children show a reduction in ADD/ADHD symptoms when they

spend more time outside.5

In addition to the aforementioned health reasons behind outdoors education, there are also

other physical and social reasons. The outdoors strengthens the immune systems,6 generally

2 Richard Louv. “Leave No Child Inside.” Sierra, July/August 2006. P 54.3 Richard Louv. “Do Our Kids Have Nature-Deficit Disorder?” Educational Leadership. December 2009/January 2010. P.264 Louv, “Leave No Child…” p. 54.5 Ibid.6 Michael Edlund, MD. “Why Your Kids Should Play Outside.” http://www.huffingtonpost.com/matthew-edlund-md/why-you-want-your-kids-to_b_698529.html. Accessed Sept 1, 2014.

5

better air quality outdoors over indoors,7 and playing/being outdoors engages multiple senses.8

Playing outdoors is also open-ended, allowing for negotiation, as well as creative formal and

informal activities.9 Outdoor STEM activities do not require a program plan; they just happen!10

Finally, being outdoors requires youth to use their bodies.

Outdoors activities also provide a context for balancing social and socio-economic differences.

According to one study, for example, providing single gender environments for women and girls

(such as through Venturing programs) to learn enhances both their interest and ability to learn

in an outdoors environment.11 Additionally, economically disadvantaged groups, or minorities,

improve their understanding and participation in outdoors education when placed in learning

groups similar in background and experience to their own.12

Finally, being outside provides an environment for learning “soft” skills, including leadership

(discussed previously), as well as enhancing group management abilities. Paul Tough argues,

for example, that “what matters more for a successful future…is for young people to have well-

developed non-cognitive skills, or rather character skills, such as social acuity, self-confidence,

perseverance, resilience, and stress-management.”13 The outdoors, as argued by Amy

7 “7 Reasons Your Children Should Be Outside Right Now.” http://www.eydcp.com/games-and-activities-7-reasons-your-children-should-be-outside-right-now/. Accessed Sept 1, 2014.8 “Why Playing Outdoors Makes Children Smarter.” http://www.portlandfamily.com/posts/20-reasons-why-playing-outdoors-makes-children-smarter/. Accessed Sept 1, 2014.9 Ibid. 10 “7 Reasons…”.11 Karen Warren, Nina S. Roberts, Mary Breunig and M. Antonia (Tony) G. Alvarez. “Social Justice in Outdoor Experiential Education: A State of Knowledge Review.” Journal of Experiential Education. Vol 37 (1). 2014. P. 92.12 Ibid.13 Amy Shellman, “Empowerment and Experiential Education: A State of Knowledge Paper.” Journal of Experiential Education. Vol 37(1). 2014. P. 19.

6

Shellman, “in particular can be a very effective means through which these and other skills

important to being effective in life can be developed.”14

In a very different sense, researchers have also found that outdoors education helps to

overcome sociological development issues, such as those put forth by Foucault. In the mid-

1970s, French sociologist Michel Foucault studied prisoners to attempt to determine which

behaviors they exhibited that landed them in their current position—as convicts. In brief,

Foucault found that socialization plays a major, if not definitive, role in creating criminal activity

and those who perpetrate crime. Two Canadian educators took Foucault’s theories and applied

them to the outdoors. This is not to say that students should be compared to prisoners; rather,

that education can serve to limit the development of antisocial behavior before it starts. For

Bowdridge and Blenkinsop, the outdoors provides a ready environment for creating “docile

bodies”, for creating natural hierarchy, and for normalizing judgments.15 Each of these reduces

disciplinary issues in the normal classroom, and increases learning and participation in the

outdoors classroom. The natural environment creates a “docile body” by taking a student out

of his or her comfortable surroundings and placing the student into something unfamiliar.

While some youth act out in this situation, Bowdridge and Blenkinsop argue that generally this

has a calming effect—a student is more likely to listen, to observe and to show some caution,

especially when compared to a traditional classroom setting.16 Similarly, students learn to

14 Ibid. Emphasis in original.15 Michael Bowdridge and Sean Blenkinsop. “Michel Foucault Goes Outside: Discipline and Control in the Practice of Outdoor Education.” Journal of Experiential Education. Vol 34, No. 2. Pp. 150 – 156. 16 Ibid, p. 151.

7

follow a more hierarchical structure in the outdoors, where the level of knowledge of the

environment serves to create respectful relationships that had previously not existed for these

students. This structure can include a leader, a teacher, older student, or peer who has

demonstrated knowledge of the surroundings and needed skills in the outdoors. 17 Finally, the

normalization of judgment allows students to have their say and to create input before, during

and after an outdoors event. During a debriefing session, which is common in outdoors

activities, all input is welcome and appreciated,18 and students who have been “othered”

become empowered.19

Growth of Camping/Outdoors in Society

Boy Scouts is lauded by outside sources as a leader in outdoors knowledge and skills20 yet finds

itself in the unenviable position of facing declining membership in an era of growth in interest

in the outdoors. Some of this decrease is due to internal audits and external social pressure.

Public perception of the outdoor skills of Scouting does not match local knowledge of the actual

skills and outings of scouts. Competition to BSA continues to grow and even thrive.

Commercial Growth

We have discussed already the need to be outdoors for children. Americans are responding to

this call. While we, as a society, concern ourselves with how much time and energy is spent on

17 Ibid, p. 153.18 Ibid, p. 156.19 Warren, p. 91.20 http://www.backpacker.com/survival/are-you-smarter-than-a-boy-scout/9/#bp=0/img1, accessed June 28, 2015. http://www.backpacker.com/skills/beginner/scouts-honor-teaching-leave-no-trace-ethics/, accessed June 28, 2015; http://www.sfgate.com/outdoors/article/Knowledge-of-the-outdoors-is-vital-for-youngsters-5680308.php, accessed June 28, 2015, just to name a few.

8

electronic devices and diversions for children, Americans are also spending more time, and

money, in the outdoors. A study released in 2012, commissioned by the Outdoor Industry

Association, found that nearly 50% of Americans participate in non-motorized outdoor

recreation,21 resulting in over 2 billion recreational trips annually.22 Further, Americans spend

over $8.6 billion annually on camping alone.23 The same study found that over 6 million people

are employed in the outdoors industry in the United States.24 This accounts for more people

than the oil and gas and education sectors of the American economy combined.25

Commercially, the growth of the outdoors industry is undeniable. First, Bass Pro Shops began

in 1973, as a bait shop in the back of a liquor store. In 2013, Bass Pro grossed over $1.2 billion

in sales.26 In a similar vein, Cabela’s has grown from one to sixty-four locations, to say nothing

of its catalog and other services, in less than 15 years.27

During this same time period, non-profit competitors for the outdoor space have grown,

serving the same population that is served by BSA. 4-H, for example, is only a few years older

than BSA, yet boasts a membership exceeding 6 million youth.28 While 4-H can claim

advantages that are not enjoyed by the Boy Scouts, the values and mission of 4-H and BSA are

21 Southwick and Associates. “The Outdoor Recreation Economy: Technical Report on Methods and Findings.” P. 10.22 Ibid, p. 11.23 Ibid, p. 14.24 Ibid, p. 22.25 http://equipped.outdoors.org/2012/10/how-much-do-americans-spend-on-outdoor.html, Accessed June 28, 2015. 26 http://hamptonroads.com/2011/01/money-hasn%E2%80%99t-changed-humble-bass-pro-founder. Accessed June 28, 2015. 27 http://www.reuters.com/finance/stocks/companyProfile?symbol=CAB, accessed June 28, 201528 http://www.4-h.org/about/, accessed June 28, 2015

9

nearly identical.29 The methods of carrying out the mission and values are similar in significant

ways, including outdoors activities, camps, and training opportunities, all of which occur in the

outdoors.

Another program, Outward Bound, claims to be “the world’s foremost experiential learning

program…”30 Like 4-H, Outward Bound also has a study to show how much more leadership

their alumni have, how much more success, and how much more satisfaction they have in life,

having completed their Outward Bound experience.31 Nearly every organization that competes

for the same demographic group (America’s youth), teaching leadership skills, and using the

outdoors as a classroom, has studies to verify its effectiveness (including BSA with the Gallup

and Harris Interactive surveys).

Not every youth can, or probably even should, belong to the Boy Scouts of America; such claims

resist reality. In its beginning, 4-H was not a competitor to the Boy Scouts, but can (and should)

be considered competition currently. Outward Bound is certainly competition for the same

demographic. Other groups, including Boys and Girls Clubs, Big Brothers/Big Sisters, are

competing for the same demographic. The outdoors should separate BSA from its competitors;

the outdoors is our space. Consider: 4-H has been using the outdoors for less time than BSA;

other organizations that claim the outdoors as “their” space have existed for less time than

BSA. No other organization can claim to teach leadership, decision-making, skills, or anything

29 http://www.4-h.org/youth-development-programs/citizenship-youth-engagement/leadership-personal-development/. Accessed June 28, 2015.30 http://www.prweb.com/releases/2011/04/prweb5276594.htm . Accessed June 28, 201531 http://www.prweb.com/releases/2011/04/prweb5276594.htm . Accessed June 28, 2015.

10

else in the outdoors as long as the BSA. And no other organization—commercial or non-profit

—can claim to have emphasized the outdoors as much as the BSA.

The answer does not lie in the BSA philosophy, but in how it is using the outdoors. Boy Scouts

of America has allowed other organizations to do what it has always done. Some may now

even do those things better. BSA must search within to determine how to make best use of

societal trends and still reclaim its space. Marketing and program changes are not the answer.

Rather, to reclaim “our space” BSA needs to do just that—reclaim what it has done longer,

more often, and better than anyone else. It needs to more fully implement what it already has

and be fully engaged in the outdoors space. BSA has been thus engaged previously; it must

return to it, or risk losing this space altogether.

Competing programs form the crux of the matter. Boy Scouts of America competes with many

other youth serving organizations, in nearly every part of the organization. Inner city scouting?

Boys and Girls Club and Big Brothers/Big Sisters (just to name two) serve inner city youth. Rural

youth? 4-H serves rural youth. Youth leadership opportunities? 4-H has many leadership

programs for their youth, to say nothing of Hugh O’Brien programs, or the large number of

summer and local programs designed to identify and educate future leaders. LEGO Leagues

and Destination Imagination have been involved in STEM activities much longer than BSA, both

with a global reach.

11

These examples are not to say that the Boy Scouts of America has no reason to be in these

areas. On the contrary, their success within BSA suggests that there is room in the youth

program marketplace for BSA to continue to grow and thrive. However, in these areas, it is also

likely that BSA has failed to distinguish itself, because of a failed reliance on the one corner of

the marketplace that is clearly ours, that was defined by the Boy Scouts, and which has been

left behind: camping and the outdoors. The effect of this departure could have long-lasting

negative consequences for the BSA. As will be shown later in this paper, educational entities

are returning to the outdoors as a classroom, and BSA is not a partner in these endeavors.

Boy Scouts and Camping

Camping has been an integral part of the Boy Scout experience since the beginning. The

founders of Scouting envisioned a lifestyle, not just a program, where outdoors becomes an

integral part of the scout’s life. Ernest Thompson Seton, for example, is quoted in Camping for

Boys as saying that camping provides “something to do, something to think about, something

to enjoy in the woods, with a view always to character-building."32 The American Boys Handy

Book lauded camping in this way:

The next best thing to really living in the woods is talking over such an experience. A thousand little incidents, scarcely thought of at the time, crown upon my mind, and bring back with them the feeling of freedom and adventure so dear to the heart of every boy. Shall I ever enjoy any flavor earth can afford as we did our coffee’s aroma? The flapjacks—how good and appetizing! the fish—how delicate and sweet! And the

32 Henry William Gibson. Camping for Boys. 1911. International Committee of the Young Men’s Christian Associations. P. 8. Accessed through Google Books, 14 October 2014.

12

wonderful cottage of boughs, thatched with the tassels of the pine—was there ever a cottage out of a fairy tale that could compare with it?33

Closer to the present day, no less a resource than the Fieldbook proclaims:

GO! When it comes to adventure, there is no more important word. Want to explore the great outdoors? Eager to hike, backpack, paddle, and row? Wand to pedal, saddle up, camp out, and ski? Do you dream about wild places and challenging experiences? Then you must do one thing to start making those dreams come true. Go!34

When boys camp through BSA long-term camping experiences, their lives change for the better.

A study conducted by Harris Interactive showed that boys, after a week at summer camp, grew

in their personal values and character, self-worth, and relationships. Further, scouts were

found to have a greater use of their free time, a greater desire to learn, and a stronger

adeptness in their social lives.35 These six areas of growth match with critical areas of healthy

youth growth, as defined by the Search Institute and the Carnegie Council on Adolescent

Development.36

In addition to these vital areas, the outdoors and camping have been the laboratory in which

leaders are made in the Boy Scouts of America. The development of the six core skills listed

above are crucial to the development of strong leadership attributes. Leadership growth is not

limited to week-long camping, however. Leadership skills are honed through high-adventure

experiences. These experiences, such as the Philmont Scout Ranch, teach youth essential group

33 David R. Godine. The American Boy’s Handy Book. Boston: Scribner. 2001. P. 148.34 Boy Scouts of America. Fieldbook. Irving, TX: Boy Scouts of America. 2004. P. vii.35 Boy Scouts of America. “Boy Scouts of America Summer Camp Outcomes Study.” Irving, TX: Boy Scouts of America. 2001. Document 02-448(01). P. 3.36 Ibid.

13

dynamics and leadership.37 These ideals are exactly what is meant in the Fieldbook when by

“Outdoor adventures are better when they are shared.”38

The Current Status of Camping

We have already seen that the outdoors is crucial to the growth and education of youth, and

that many educators and researchers believe that youth have a deficiency in outdoors

knowledge. Yet an emphasis on camping and the outdoors is on the decline, both in anecdotal

perception, and also in recent BSA publications. For example:

Of the 91 goals listed in the “National Council Strategic Plan 2011-2015”, only 2 relate

to camping.39 Neither had been completed by the May 2014 update to the strategic

plan.40

“Visitors” to www.scouting.org learn nothing on outdoors activities or camping when

clicking on “why scouting”.41

While there is abundant information on camping at www.scouting.org, it is not easily

found.42

37 Robin D. Lizzo. Leadership and the Boy Scouts of America High Adventure Program. College Park, TX: Texas A&M University. P. 81. http://repository.tamu.edu/bitstream/handle/1969.1/149492/LIZZO-THESIS-2013.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y accessed 14 Oct 2014.38 Boy Scouts of America. Fieldbook. P. 3.39 Goal 2, Pillar IV: “Councils are aware of and utilize the resources available to help them understand which elements of their camping programs and facilities do not fuller deliver an excited experience for youth participants”Goal 423, Pillar VI: “The BSA has completed an inventory of leading youth-friendly conservation and environmental education programs and has provide instructions on how to incorporate the program for use in local summer camps, schools, and individual units.”40 “May 2014 Progress Report: National Council Strategic Plan 2011 – 2015.” http://digital.scouting.org/strategicplan/strategicplan.pdf access 13 October 2014.41 www.scouting.org/Visitor.aspx. Accessed 13 October 2014.42 For example, if someone clicks “youth”, then “boy scouts”, they get advancement, resources, uniforms, opportunities (which does not include camping), and Order of the Arrow (which does not include camping).

14

Camping is only addressed through the Paul R. Christen National High Adventure Base in

the 2013 Annual Report.43

A brief review of local council annual reports reveals varying emphases on camping,

from a great deal of mention to almost none at all.44

The first half of this paper has reviewed anecdotal evidence on the growth of the outdoors

industry. It has shown that while the outdoors industry continues to grow, along with

Americans’ interest in the outdoors, the outdoors appears to be taking a backseat in scouting.

Concurrent with a decline in BSA membership has been a growth in competitor programs. The

next section will consider why both Cub Scout and Boy Scout programs may be retreating from

the outdoors, and how this pattern can be reversed.

Research/Methodology

From August, 2014 through March 2015, I surveyed unit leaders in Mid-America and Sioux

Councils. Actual results can be found in Appendix B, with answers given for each question

asked. Results will be considered first on their own answers, second in relationship to each

other, and finally in complex relationships. A few of the most striking results include:

1. Most Cub Scout packs are not camping as a pack. Over three-fourths of the units surveyed camp two times per year or less.

2. Participation in pack campouts is low. It would seem to be a cycle—low attendance will suggest to a unit leader that the boys don’t want to camp. However, the more a pack camps, the higher the attendance will be.

43 Boy Scouts of America. 2013 Boy Scouts of America Annual Report. Irving, TX: Boy Scouts of America. 2014. P. 6.44 These are from reviews of the Mid-Iowa, Mid-America, Heart of America, Greater St. Louis Area and Pony Express Councils.

15

3. Most Cub Scout packs are not holding meetings outdoors. Eighty percent of packs reported holding no regular meetings outdoors.

4. Low attendance at day camp is common. Over fifty percent of units reported that less than half of their membership attends day camp, and a full one-third report that less than one quarter of their scouts attend day camp.

5. Fewer than one out of five troops camps every month.

6. Over half of troops do not have an outdoors chairman; over three-fourths of packs do not have an outdoors chair.

Relationship Findings

Several patterns emerge from the data that has been collected from both packs and troops.

The solutions, however, are not the same for both programs.

As stated previously, the less often a pack camps, the fewer boys camp (Pearson = -.33).

Cubmasters, particularly new Cubmasters, may feel discouraged the first time they plan a

campout, and attendance is low. However, this data suggests that the Cubmaster should plan

another campout and still yet another campout. The more the unit camps, the more boys will

want to attend.

Similarly, councils have a vested interest in Cub Scout pack camping. The data shows that the

less often a unit camps, the less often the units makes use of council owned facilities (Pearson =

-.34). This is fairly logical, as well. When units don’t camp, they won’t want to take advantage

of additional camping opportunities. They are less likely to engage in the outdoors. In the

same light, there is a weaker relationship (Pearson = -.18) showing that units that don’t camp

16

are also less likely to engage in additional outdoor events. District and council events are often

held at council-owned properties; council properties are often cheaper for units to use, and

have more activities that are age appropriate for scouts. However, when packs don’t camp,

and don’t engage in other outdoors activities, council properties go unused.

When considering the role of the outdoors chairman in the pack, it is not surprising that they

are more common in larger packs (Pearson = .33). This is clearly not the only factor in whether

a pack has an outdoors chair. Indeed, within Cub Scouting, the role of the outdoors chair seems

to a less direct impact on pack events and activities than in Boy Scout troops (which will be

shown later).

Finally, the size of the pack also has an impact on both additional outdoors activities (Pearson

= .23) as well as holding meetings outdoors (Pearson = -.21). It cannot be said that the size of a

pack matters in frequency of camping events (Pearson = -.04); however, larger packs are more

likely to hold additional outdoors events, and less likely to hold regular meetings outdoors.

Both are reasonable to assume, given the necessities of planning each type of event.

On the Boy Scout side, two separate very strong relationship models are seen. First, troops that

camp less often are also less likely to have an outdoors chair (Pearson = -.39). This is one of the

strongest relationships in this study. Boy Scout troops simply must devote the time, energy,

and resources to recruit an outdoors chair.

17

Second, and separately, how often a unit camps affects if the unit holds additional outdoors

events (less likely, Pearson = -.30), holding meetings outdoors (less likely, Pearson = -.28), and

how many youth attend long-term camps (fewer, Pearson = -.23). It is interesting here to note

that the presence of the outdoors chair does not directly affect these variable, but the outdoors

chair strongly affects camping. Camping in turn affects how strongly troops participate in other

outdoors events.

Unfortunately, the multi-variate considerations do not lead to stronger conclusions. In the Cub

Scout setting, no combination of two or more variables led to stronger relationships than those

exhibited in the correlation testing, especially when considering error values. For Boy Scout

troops, the results were only slightly more promising.

In considering how often troops camp, statistically significant results were found when testing

the effect of an outdoors chair (p = .002), presence of additional outdoor activities (p = .046)

and holding meetings outdoors (p = .07).45 In this test, the relationship was found to be .26—

weaker than one would like to show a causal relationship.

In the second major area of testing, that of the effect of an outdoors chair and monthly

camping on additional outdoors activities (to include the outdoors activities, meetings, and

campout attendance variables), the multi-variate tests showed what was already known from

simple correlation: camping chair does not affect other outdoors activities than camping,

45 This last does not stand up to a standard error of p=.05.

18

whereas camping affects other outdoors activities. In one test, for example, the combination of

chair and monthly campouts produced both a low relationship (rsq = .09) and low strength (p

= .02 for monthly camping; p = .91 for outdoors chair). The remaining tests produced similar

results.

It would be appropriate to discuss, at this point, the findings of another large study regarding

Cub Scout camping, conducted in the Northern Star Council, in Minneapolis/St. Paul,

Minnesota. Over 2,000 individuals associated with Cub Camping were surveyed in February,

2014. Though the survey asked different specific items, several areas also fit into this study.

To begin, only one-third of respondents claimed to be very familiar with the Cub Scout

program, while only 20% claimed to be very familiar with the council weekend camping

program (and 28% stated they were completely unfamiliar with the same program).46 However,

over 80% of those surveyed found it important to camp with their family.47 An unfortunate

conclusion can be reached from both sets of data: families are camping, but are not looking to

Scouting for outdoors events and information

Whereas the study of this paper engaged leaders, in part, on the role of the outdoors chair,

Northern Star engaged leaders in similar questions, with similar findings. According to the

Northern Star survey, 78% of families received their Cub Scout camping information from a

46 Davis and Associates. “Northern Star Council Cub Scout Camping Survey.” Minneapolis: Northern Star Council. P. 2.47 Ibid.

19

“discussion at [their] local pack meeting.”48 With over one-fourth of respondents having no

information about Cub Scout camping, it can be safely concluded that these discussion are not

taking place in each pack. Similarly, respondents found information difficult to find on these

camps.49 This can be compared to the difficulties mentioned in finding outdoors information on

the national BSA website.

Finally, Northern Star took the extra step in asking why families did not participate in Cub

camping experiences. While the cost was listed by 69% as being least somewhat of a barrier,

two other prominent barriers include “my son will not know anyone there (57%)” and “the

den/pack is not going (58%)”.50 A lack of knowledge was also at least partially cited as a reason

for not attending (54%).51

The focus on Cub Scout camping illustrates a rising concern on the part of councils in recruiting

—and keeping—Cub Scouts. It also recognizes the strong role the camping has in retaining

families in scouting. The two studies combine to reinforce two points. First, information is

obviously key for families and second, information is not being disseminated.

Statistical Conclusions

Before moving to a day-to-day example of the significance of camping, a summary is required.

First, BSA has a long history of camping, outdoors excellence, and leadership. Second,

48 Ibid, p. 4.49 Ibid, p. 5.50 Ibid, p. 6.51 Ibid.

20

competitors have developed along BSA’s 100+ year history. While competition is good and

leads to evaluation and growth, BSA has not led in working with and competing against rivals,

but has been reactionary, creating new programs after competition grows and relying less on

known strengths.

Next, the outdoors industry continues to be a growth industry in the United States More and

more Americans are participating in outdoors events. Similarly, it has been shown that third

party groups—for profit and non-profit alike—laud and respect the Boy Scouts of America for

its outdoors actions and teachings.

Unfortunately, in local settings, outdoors and camping is failing. Cub Scout packs are not

camping; Boy Scout troops are not camping enough.52 Low Cub Scout camping numbers affect

Cub participation in district and council day and resident camping, whereas a lack of

organization and adult involvement affects low Boy Scout camping participation. These same

low numbers themselves affect unit participation in other camping and outdoors activities.

These results53 suggest something that is made clear from training in BSA: Scoutmasters cannot

perform all of their own duties as well as those of an outdoors chair. If there is a lack of an

outdoors chair, the program will suffer. Some may review these results and suggest that a unit

52 While some troops are not able to camp because of low commitment on the part of adults, it is also quite common, anecdotally, to see units stop camping in November until March, for example. 53 Venturing relationships cannot be examined, because of the low sample size. We must be content with only the raw data, and evaluate the lack of outdoors activities in crews. Given the strength, and commonality, of the relationships between packs and troops, we can surmise that the lack of an outdoors chair in crews is also responsible for the lack of outdoors programs.

21

that camps eight times per year, or even ten, is still fulfilling the outdoors program of the Boy

Scouts of America.

Consider a boy, “John” who joins a troop in September, at a community round-up. John is in 6 th

grade, likes to be outside, has a couple of friends in scouts, and hunts. His dad can’t take him

out as much as John would like, so scouting provides another opportunity.

John isn’t able to camp in September, when he first joins, because he also plays football. He

camps in October, but his troop doesn’t officially “camp” in November, because of

Thanksgiving, so they have a day activity. They don’t camp in December, because of holidays

and usually it’s bad weather. January camping is a bit iffy. The troop sometimes goes to the

district Freeze-o-ree, but that is really patrol by patrol. Most of the time, they just go out for

the day. They do camp again, though, in February. Will John go? The answer is, probably not.

John joined scouts to camp. By February, it has been four months since he camped. This troop

is not giving John what he wanted—an outdoor experience.

There are some who will breeze over this comparison and say that weather is a significant

factor, or that “the boys chose not to go.” If leaders are prepared, and excited, to camp in all

weather, the boys will emulate that feeling (refer to the discussion earlier about students

emulating the feelings of their teachers regarding being outside). If scouting leaders are

prepared to camp in less-than-perfect weather, their scouts will be as well.54

54 This is probably even truer for crews, where youth leaders have even more responsibility than in troops. Youth do not join Venturing to sit around; they join for high adventure. The lack of high adventure in our crews should be disturbing.

22

Let us carry this discussion one step further. The outdoors as a leadership academy does not

take place only in good weather, or only in warm weather climates. If scouting programs are

going to train leaders, let alone educators, or if the youth themselves are going to set an

example, then scouting programs must return to being all-weather programs. Though this

study did not ask questions about when units camps, it seems highly unlikely that troops, for

example, camp from September through April, and then choose not to camp May through

August.55

BSA and Outdoors Experiential Education

Just over 25 years after the founding of Boy Scouts, John Dewey proposed new theories of

education which would later serve as the basis for outdoors education in public schools. In

1938, Dewey proposed that “knowledge was a matter for human construction rather than

passive sensory reporting” and “deplored what he referred to as the ‘passive spectator’

epistemology.”56 In this “new” approach, students should not be asked to memorize, but to

discover.

Outdoor experiential education (OEE) is here to stay, and provides leadership and character

training as well as classroom instruction, including STEM. Educators who choose not to

participate in OEE do so often because of a lack of training or experience. Many organizations

55 One unit discussed how they are a “12+” unit, meaning that they camp more than 12 times per year. This unit, however, does not camp in January, but holds two campouts in March. December, February and one of the March campouts are in cabins. A future survey should perhaps look at the differences between cabin and tent camping.56 Pete Allison, David Carr and George Meldrum. “Potential for Excellence: Interdisciplinary Learning Outdoors as a Moral Enterprise.” The Curriculum Journal. Vol 23, no. 1. March 2012. P. 45

23

can provide such training and experiences, including BSA. BSA programs can both supplement

and partner with education for OEE opportunities. However, BSA at present is not a major

factor in providing training for OEE, especially when compared to Outward Bound, NOLS, and

other programs. Removing social and political considerations, a strong factor in the lack of

BSA’s role is a perceived lack of actual outdoor experiences. BSA units are, in fact, not outdoors

as often as believed.

To even a casual observer, the role that the Boy Scouts of America can play in OEE should seem

obvious. Scouting units (packs, troops, teams, crews) are encouraged to hold monthly activities

outdoors, including, but not limited to, camping. Scouting’s emphasis on fitness through

outdoors activities can help reduce obesity and risk of diabetes.57 Boy Scouts also helps to

combat common concerns about children in the outdoors: children spend half as much time

outside today as they did in the 1990s; only 6% of Webelos and New Scout age youth play

outside on their own; the most direct route to caring for the environment as an adult is

participating in “wild nature activities” before the age of 11.58

Scouting outdoors programs require youth to be multi-sensory. For example, scouts are

required to observe nature than to teach or write about it. Scouts preparing to cook need to

gather wood, then prepare a proper fire and cooking location, then prepare the food itself.

Each of these is a separate skill that cannot be acquired through indoor play.

57 http://www.scouting.org/scoutsource/outdoorprogram/boyscoutoutdoorprogram.aspx. Accessed Sept 7, 2014. 58 “Why Be Out there?” http://www.nwf.org/be-out-there/why-be-out-there.aspx. Accessed Sept 1, 2014.

24

Scouting programs prepare youth. Opponents of outdoors activity claim that the risk of

predatory behavior from others is too great. Scouting, however, teaches youth how to behave,

how to be safe, and how to keep others safe. First aid training does not deter risky nor

dangerous behaviors that may result in injury, nor does it reduce the effects nature can have.

However, scouting training in First Aid practices can limit injury; preparedness classes can limit

the danger of activities; proper training creates a safer environment.

Leadership experiences through OEE are “remarkably similar, whether the…experience consists

of a multi-week wilderness expedition or a single-day team-building and high-ropes course…”59

These same sorts of activities are accomplished in BSA, through day events, COPE training,

weekend campouts, week long camping or through high adventure activities.

The role of Boy Scouts in outdoor experiential education is not limited to being a provider of

OEE experiences that are crucial for educators. Indeed, there are many obstacles within

education itself to implementation of OEE. BSA can help educators overcome these obstacles.

Nanette Marcum-Dietrich and her fellow researchers identified two major obstacles to fully

implementing OEE in schools. First, they ask how to provide OEE experiences to youth who are

growing up indoors. Second, they pose an even more important obstacle: “how do we help

elementary teachers become comfortable creating and developing positive outdoor science

59 Howden, p. 47-48.

25

learning experiences for their students?”60 The comfort level of the teacher is vitally important,

since “children are often eager to please their teachers by emulating the teacher’s likes and

dislikes.”61 Consider a teacher in a school district that pushes for OEE. However, this teacher is

uncomfortable being outside, has a lack of knowledge of the natural environment, and has a

phobia of spiders. This teacher will not be excited to take students outdoors; neither will he or

she be interested in engaging. By contrast, consider a teacher in the same district who has a

great deal of outdoor experience. This teacher will be excited to teach in this environment and

will engage the students. This will provide a much better experience.

Consider the options for the teacher to grow and learn and become an outdoors educator.

Local BSA leaders are in a perfect position to assist in training, both personally and by providing

greater experiences for youth who will inevitably be in these classrooms. These leaders, and

youth, will be of very little value to educators if experience is only gleaned from fair weather

camping, at campsites just a few feet from a car. In these cases, this teacher will ask the school

district to turn to other source—competitors—to provide outdoors skills and training.

Julie Ernst, with the University of Minnesota-Duluth, conducted a further study, to determine

why schools do not participate in OEE. She found a marked difference between why

administrators choose not to have schools participate in OEE and why classroom teachers

choose not, or are not excited, about OEE.

60 Nanette Marcum-Dietrich, Lynn Marquez, Susan E. Gill and Christina Medved. “No Teacher Left Inside: Preparing a New Generation of Teachers.” Journal of Geoscience Education. Vol 59, 2011. P. 2 61 Ibid, p. 1.

26

On the administrative side, Ernst found that administrators are deeply concerned about safety

and liability issues.62 This is not entirely dissimilar to parental concerns with outdoors play.63

Just as strong an obstacle, however, for implementation of OEE is a teacher’s lack of knowledge

or training.64 Both of these are overcome, suggests Ernst, in the same fashion: increased

participating in environmental based training and activities. As administrators participate in

more activities, they will gain a sense of confidence regarding the safety of activities. As

teachers participate, their sense of enjoyment (which will be passed on the youth) will grow. In

addition, as teachers gain confidence and knowledge, the overall safety of OEE increases, which

will decrease the potential for legal issues. Further, as Dr. Edlund pointed out, predators and

bullies exist everywhere: school busses, churches, etc. Kids do get hurt outside. However,

being outside, through play and OEE, allow students opportunities to learn how to avoid bullies

and predators, allow immune systems to grow and develop, and reduce long-term health issues

that may develop from prolonged sitting (in front of video games, for example).65

It is important to understand that BSA has been a partner to education, though just not in the

realm of outdoors education. For example, in the 1990s, local BSA structures were part of a

grant funded by the Lilly Foundation called the “Middle Grades Improvement Program.” As

part of this effort, “[t]he Boy Scouts sponsored career awareness days in several of the schools,

and they collaborated on Project Cope, the outdoor physical activity program.” 66 The purpose

62 Julie Ernst. “Influences On and Obstacles to K-12 Administrators Support for Environment-Based Education.” The Journal of Environmental Education. Vol 43, number 2. 2012. P. 87.63 See, for instance, Edlund, and concerns of kids getting hurt, bullies, predators, etc.64 Ernst, p. 83.65 Edlund.66 Bruce Anthony Jones. “And Adolescent Focused Agenda: The Collaborative Role of School, Family and the Community.” The School Community Journal, vol 3, no. 1, spring/summer 1993. P. 20.

27

of the programs were build community support for education, by involving extra-educational

partnerships. While the concluding the additional work was clearly required, Jones also stated

that “several schools overcame their fear of the unknown associated with development

relationships with parents and community-based organizations.”67 More is needed from BSA to

assist schools in continuing to overcome this fear.

The potential role of scouting in partnering with OEE is clear and cannot be overstated.

However, there has been a distinct lack of partnering with education on OEE as entity from the

Boy Scouts. This is true at both the macro and micro level. At the micro level, this evidence is

seen from experience of scouting volunteers and professionals. At a macro level, the lack of

presence of BSA in studies of OEE is telling.

Many organizations have been studied in connection to OEE and their benefits. For example,

participants in National Outdoor learning School (NOLS) “who experienced greater personal

empowerment during their course also perceived greater gains in other course outcomes (e.g.,

leadership, communication and technical skills.”68 Similarly, Outward Bound has been found to

create a sense of psychological empowerment in its participants, greater than non-

participants.69 Seaman and Gass discussed other organizations, such as Youth Service America

and the Campus Outreach Opportunity League. In addition, the National Youth Leadership

Council participates in legislative efforts and programming for youth.70

67 Ibid, p. 21.68 Shellman, p. 25.69 Ibid.70 Jayson Seaman and Michael Gass. “Service-Learning and Outdoor Education: Promising Reform Movements or Future Relics?” Journal of Experiential Education. Vol 27, no. 1. 2004. P. 77.

28

Since the Boy Scouts were returning to be a partner in programs in early 1990s, it must be

asked why that reversed in the 21st century. It is too easy to say that social and political

pressures have created a rift between the two entities. If the social and political rift created by

BSA membership stances were insurmountable, they would, in fact, affect BSA and education at

all levels, and in all areas. Yet, Boy Scouts has continued to move forward in other areas of

education, promoting the BSA Adopt-A-School program for example. In addition, councils and

districts continue to have successful recruiting activities held at schools, in concert with

educators, even including traditional boy talks during the school day.

This paper suggests that the lack of partnership may stem from a lack of confidence in BSA on

the part of educators. Schools continue to develop outdoors programs and educational

opportunities, including outdoor classrooms and garden space. On an individual basis, schools

embrace BSA, particularly for the work that can be accomplished by Eagle Scout candidates.71

In order for educators (both teachers and administrators) to successfully implement OEE, they

must be able to increase their confidence in the outdoors. While BSA would seem to be

uniquely qualified to provide this training, in reality, it is not providing it.

Conclusion

71 For instance, the author’s son worked with an elementary school in Council Bluffs, Iowa, to build 8 raised bed gardens. The gardens served partly as OEE for students, and partly as service, as the produce raised was donated to a local homeless shelter. In the same community, an outdoor classroom was completed at a different school by a different Eagle Scout candidate. In Sioux Falls, a Cub Scout pack has partnered directly with an elementary school, in a district where scouting has no access, to build and maintain a set of butterfly gardens.

29

This paper has focused on outdoor experiential education and the Boy Scouts of America. The

need for OEE in the schools, to teach STEM, leadership, character, and discipline, is undeniable.

The barriers to OEE are clear: lack of experience and fear on the part of educators. Boy Scouts

of America is one of several organizations that could fill the training gap that exists in schools.

However, other organizations have moved in to fill this void, leaving BSA on the outside.

Social and political constraints on BSA partnering with schools are not valid reasons for this

weak relationship. The lack of outdoors experience within the BSA, however, is a very real

weakness. Packs and troops are not camping as much they believe, they are not outside as

often, and their meetings are held almost exclusively indoors. In order for educators to want to

partner with BSA, local programs must improve their own outdoors experiences, so educators

will see that the skills presented by scouting youth and adults are of value to them as well.

To accomplish this, local BSA councils should consider several options. First, greater emphasis

and training on the need for an outdoors chair. This can be accomplished through specialized

training events (such as University of Scouting) as well as including unit camping/outdoors

chairs in council leadership summits. Second, a greater emphasis on camping itself for packs

and troops. Roundtables should place a greater emphasis on unit camping. Units should be

recognized at their district dinners for year-round camping. A variety of camping methods

should be used, without relying solely on “car camping” and unit trailers.72

72 In some versions of the survey, troops were asked how often they camp OTHER than car camping or with their unit trailer. Virtually no units replied in the affirmative.

30

Next, units must recruit. Boys want to be outside. Boy Scouts must regain its role as the

purveyor of outdoors activities. In many parts of the United States Boy Scouts must compete in

the outdoors realm with 4-H, YMCA, Boys and Girls Clubs, and local parks and recreation

departments, among others. Additionally, other programs, such as TeamMates, are

incorporating outdoors experiences. Local counties are recruiting national spokespeople,

including Ted Nugent, to present one day programs at county parks. Competition in the market

place suggests that BSA will never be the only youth outdoors programs. BSA has lost,

however, its preeminence in the outdoors.73

Finally, local councils can work with educators in creating OEE partnerships. For example, camp

properties can be opened to educators for COPE, for training, or for retreats, at reduced rates.

Educators should be invited to summer camps, day camps, weekend camps and other activities

to see what, and how, scouts learn. Educational institutions should be included in newsletters,

open houses, and other scouting events to see first-hand how scouting influences the youth in

their school, and to have a behind-the-scenes opportunity to participate and include BSA in

OEE.

The Boy Scouts of America, while moving forward into its second century, must also renew its

roots. As education moves forward with OEE projects, space has been created for partnerships

73 Anecdotally, the author attempted to create a Venturing program with the Pottawattamie County 4-H program in 2010. Local leaders were mildly interested. The county leaders, however, vehemently disagreed with the idea that “no organization can provide outdoor leaderships skills better than the BSA.” Their belief was that 4-H had surpassed BSA in providing these skills. We have lost our place.

31

and training. Through local unit and council partnerships, BSA must find its way back to school

and back to the outdoors to move forward again.

After Word

As I conclude this research, in summer 2015, I recently returned from a trek at the Philmont

Scout Ranch. During this trip, I had a couple of experiences which relate directly to this

research.

While travelling to Philmont, we stopped for an evening in La Junta, Colorado, at the Koshare

Indian Museum, roughly 150 northeast of Philmont Scout Ranch. Two other groups joined us

for the evening, from Kansas. In socializing with the leaders of the other groups, we discussed

our travelling plans. These units were headed to scout camp in southern Colorado. Of the 8

leaders present, only one had even heard of the Philmont Scout Ranch. Additionally, while

attending the opening leaders meeting, nearly 75% of the leaders in attendance had attended

Philmont previously.

These incidents pointed out two things to me. First, local units (and probably councils) are not

doing enough to publicize high adventure bases supported by the BSA. Second, though

experienced leaders are good for high adventure activities, the low percentage of first-time

attendees to Philmont (at least those arriving July 12) suggests a potential “niche market”. In

my own crew, we found that we were far in the minority of crews we came across, as none of

the 6 youth had attended Philmont previously. Long-term sustainability of camping and high

32

adventure programs requires new life and new blood. This is true at every level of scouting.

Troops will die if new boys do not attend local campouts. Council camps will die if new youth

do not choose to attend each year. High adventure bases will die if only experienced youth and

leaders attend.

33

Bibliography

“7 Reasons Your Children Should Be Outside Right Now.” http://www.eydcp.com/games-and-activities-7-reasons-your-children-should-be-outside-right-now/. Accessed Sept 1, 2014.

Allison, Pete, David Carr and George Meldrum. “Potential for Excellence: InterdisciplinaryLearning Outdoors as a Moral Enterprise.” The Curriculum Journal. 23:1 (2012)

Bowdridge, Michael and Sean Blenkinsop. “Michael Foucault Goes Outside: Discipline and Control in the Practice of Outdoor Education.” Journal of Experiential Education. 34:2.

Boy Scouts of America. “2013 Boy Scouts of America Annual Report.” (rving, TX: Boy Scouts ofAmerica, 2014.

Boy Scouts of America. “Boy Scouts of America Summer Camp Outcomes Study.” Irving, TX: Boy Scouts of America, 2001.

Boy Scouts of America. Fieldbook. Irving, TX: Boy Scouts of America, 2004.

Edlund, Michael, MD. “Why Your Kids Should Play Outside.” http://www.huffingtonpost.com/matthew-edlund-md/why-you-want-your-kids-to_b_698529.html. Accessed Sept 1, 2014.

Ernst, Julie. “Influences on and Obstacles to K-12 Administrators Support for Environment-Based Education.” The Journal of Environmental Education. 43:2 (2012)

Gibson, Henry William. Camping for Boys. International Committee of the Young Men’s Christian Association. 1911. Access through Google Books 14 October 2014.

Godine, David R. The American Boy’s Handy Book. Boston: Scribner, 2001.

http://www.4-h.org/about/, accessed June 28, 2015.

Http://4-h.org/youth-development-programs/citizenship-youth-engagement/leadership-personal-development, accessed June 28, 2015.

Http://www.backpacker.com/survival/are-you-smarter-than-a-boy-scout/9/#bp=0/img1m, accessed June 28, 2015.

http://www.backpacker.com/skills/beginner/scouts-honor-teaching-leave-no-trace-ethics/ accessed June 28, 2015.

34

http://equipped.outdoors.org/2012/10/how-much-do-americans-spend-on-outdoor.html, accessed June 28, 2015.

http://hamptonroads.com/2011/01/money-hasn%E2%80%99t-changed-humble-bass-pro-founder. Accessed June 28, 2015.

http://prweb.com/releases/2011/04/prweb5276594.htm, accessed June 28, 2015.

http://www.reuters.com/finance/stocks/companyProfile?symbol=CAB, accessed June 28, 2015.

http://sfgate.com/outdoors/article/Knowledge-of-the-outdoors-is-vital-for-youngsters-5680308.php, accessed June 28, 2015.

Howden, Eric. “Outdoor Experiential Education: Learning Through the Body.” New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education. 2012 (2012).

Jones, Bruce Anthony. “An Adolescent Focused Agenda: The Collaborative Role of School, Family and the Community.” The School Community Journal. 3:1 (1993)

Lizzo, Robin D. Leadership and the Boy Scouts of America High Adventure Program. MA Thesis, Texas A&M University, 2013. http://repository.tamu.edu/bitstream/handle/1969.1/149492/LIZZO-THESIS-2013.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y accessed 14 Oct 2014.

Louv, Richard. “Do Our Kids Have Nature-Deficit Disorder?” Educational Leadership. December 2009/January 2010.

Louv, Richard. “Leave No Child Inside.” Sierra. July/August 2006.

Marcum-Dietrich, Nanette, Lynn Marquez, Susan E. Gill, and Christina Medved. “No Teacher Left Inside: Preparing a New Generation of Teachers.” Journal of Geoscience Education. 59 (2011)

“May 2014 Progress Report: National Council Strategic Plan 2011 – 2015.” http://digital.scouting.org/strategicplan/strategicplan.pdf access 13 October 2014.

Northern Star Council. “Cub Scout Camping Survey.” Unpublished study completed February 5-19, 2014 by Daves and Associates. Received from Travis Sutten, Northern Star Council BSA March, 2014.

Seaman, Jayson and Michael Gass. “Service-Learning and Outdoor Education: Promising Reform Movements or Future Relics?” Journal of Experiential Education. 27:1 (2004)

35

Shellman, Amy. “Empowerment and Experiential Education: A State of Knowledge Paper.” Journal of Experiential Education. 37:1 (2014)

Southwick and Associates. “The Outdoor Recreation Economy: Technical Report on Methods and Findings.” August 2012. https://outdoorindustry.org/pdf/OIA-RecreationEconomyReport2012-TechnicalReport.pdf. Accessed June 28, 2015.

Warren, Karen, Nina S. Roberts, Mary Breunig, and M. Antonia (Tony) G. Alvarez. “Social Injustice in Outdoor Experiential Education: A State of Knowledge Review.” Journal of Experiential Education. 37:1 (2014)

www.scouting.org/scoutsource/outdoorprogram/boyscoutoutdoorprogram.aspx. Accessed Sept 7, 2014.

www.scouting.org/visitor.aspx accessed 13 October 2014.

“Why Be Out there?” http://www.nwf.org/be-out-there/why-be-out-there.aspx. Accessed Sept 1, 2014.

“Why Playing Outdoors Makes Children Smarter.” http://www.portlandfamily.com/posts/20-reasons-why-playing-outdoors-makes-children-smarter/. Accessed Sept 1, 2014.

36

Appendix A

Outdoor Activities and Events SurveyThank you for participating in this survey. Answers are completely anonymous. The purpose of this survey is to see the level of outdoor activities and events in the packs, troops, and crews in

parts of the council. Please answer each questions HONESTLY! I am using these results for a personal research project. Thank you! --Jason Cruse, Trailblazer District

1) In the past 12 months, how many separate camping events did your unit have?a. 0-2b. 3-5c. 6-8d. 9-11e. 12+

2) Did your unit have additional outdoor events in the past 12 months (hiking, aquatics, COPE, etc)?

a. Yesb. No

3) How often does your unit conduct its regular meetings outside?a. Oftenb. Occasionallyc. Rarelyd. Never

4) Does your unit have an outdoors/camping chairman?a. Yesb. No

5) When preparing meetings and advancement activities, do you encourage your unit to hold the event outside when possible?

a. Oftenb. Occasionallyc. Rarelyd. Never

6) What percentage of members of your unit attended long-term camp (including high adventure) in 2014?

a. 100%b. 75%-99%c. 50%-74%d. 25%-49%e. 0%-24%

37

Please turn over and complete on the back

7) What percentage of members of your unit generally attend unit campouts?a. 100%b. 75%-99%c. 50%-74%d. 25%-49%e. 0%-24%

8) How many times in the past 12 months did your unit camp at a council-owned facility?a. Oftenb. Sometimesc. Rarelyd. Never

9) Do you consider your unit to be from a a. Metro areab. Suburban areac. Rural area

10) How large is your troop?a. 5-10 boysb. 11-15 boysc. 16-20 boysd. 21-25 boyse. 26+ boys

38

Appendix B

Results

0-2 nights 3-5 nights 6-8 nights 9-11 nights 12+ nights0.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.40

0.50

0.60

Cub Scout Annual Camping Nights

Perc

enta

ge o

f Uni

ts

yes no0.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.40

0.50

0.60

0.70

0.80

0.90

Does Your Pack Have Additional Outdoor Events

Perc

enta

ge R

epor

ting

39

yes no0.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.40

0.50

0.60

0.70

0.80

0.90

1.00

Does Your Pack Have an Outdoors Chair?

Perc

enta

ge R

epor

ting

100% 75-99% 50-74% 25-49% 0-24%0.00

0.05

0.10

0.15

0.20

0.25

0.30

0.35

How Many Members of Your Pack Attended Day or Resident Camp?

Perc

enta

ge A

ttend

ing

40

100% 75-99% 50-74% 25-49% 0-24%0.00

0.05

0.10

0.15

0.20

0.25

0.30

0.35

What Percentage of Your Unit Attends Unit Campouts?

Perc

enta

ge R

epor

ted

41

0-2 Events 3-5 Events 6-8 Events 9-11 Events 12+ Events0.00

0.05

0.10

0.15

0.20

0.25

0.30

0.35

0.40

0.45

Boy Scout Annual Camping Events

Perc

entg

e Re

port

ed

Yes No0.44

0.45

0.46

0.47

0.48

0.49

0.50

0.51

0.52

0.53

0.54

Does Your Troop Have an Outdoors Chairman

Perc

enta

ge R

epor

ted

42

100% 75-99% 50-74% 25-49% 0-24%0.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.40

0.50

0.60

What Percentage of Your Troop Attended Long-Term Camp?

Perc

enta

ge R

epor

ted

100% 75-99% 50-74% 25-49% 0-24%0.00

0.05

0.10

0.15

0.20

0.25

0.30

0.35

0.40

0.45

What Percentage of Your Troop Normally Attends Monthly Campouts?

Perc

enta

ge R

epor

ted

43

Appendix C

Cub Scout Statistical Relationships

Correlation Between Monthly Camping Events and…

Correlation Between Outdoors Chair and…

Correlation Between Size of Pack and…

Monthly Camping -0.144

Additional events 0.030 Corr J:C 0.237

Meetings Held Outside -0.008

Meetings Held Outside -0.007

Meetings Held Outside -0.212

Attend camp -0.029 Attend camp 0.030

Attend camp -0.048

Attend campouts -0.332

Attend campouts 0.113

Attend campouts -0.143

Council facility -0.347

Council facility 0.225

Council facility -0.127

Town Make-up -0.117

Town Make-up 0.071

Town Make-up 0.445

Pack size -0.050 Pack size 0.339Outdoors Chair -0.180

44

SUMMARY OUTPUT

Regression StatisticsMultiple R 0.1438R Square 0.0207 Adjusted R Square 0.0046Standard Error 0.9809Observations 63

ANOVA

  df SS MS FSignifican

ce F

Regression 1 1.24011.240

081.288

7 0.26072

Residual 61 58.6960.962

24Total 62 59.937      

 Coefficie

nts

Standard

Error t StatP-

valueLower 95%

Upper

95%

Lower

95.0%

Upper

95.0%

Camping Events 2.589 0.753 3.439 0.001 1.0844.09

51.08

44.09

5

Camping Chair -0.446 0.393 -1.135 0.261 -1.2330.34

0

-1.23

30.34

0

45

SUMMARY OUTPUT

Regression StatisticsMultiple R 0.3579R Square 0.1281 Adjusted R Square 0.068Standard Error 0.9492Observations 63

ANOVA

  df SS MS FSignifican

ce F

Regression 4 7.67761.9193

92.130

3 0.08852

Residual 58 52.2590.9010

2Total 62 59.937      

 Coefficien

tsStandard Error t Stat

P-value

Lower 95%

Upper

95%

Lower

95.0%

Upper

95.0%

Monthly Cub Camping 3.029 0.866 3.496 0.001 1.295

4.764

1.295

4.764

Camping Chair -0.331 0.383 -0.864 0.391 -1.0980.43

6

-1.09

80.43

6

Meetings Outside 0.046 0.150 0.307 0.760 -0.254

0.346

-0.25

40.34

6

Attend day camp 0.055 0.096 0.572 0.569 -0.137

0.247

-0.13

70.24

7

Attend campouts -0.272 0.102 -2.665 0.010 -0.477

-0.06

8

-0.47

7

-0.06

8

46

SUMMARY OUTPUT

Regression StatisticsMultiple R 0.3395

R Square 0.1153y=cub camping

Adjusted R Square 0.0858Standard Error 0.9401Observations 63

ANOVA

  df SS MS FSignifican

ce F

Regression 2 6.90823.4540

83.908

2 0.02538

Residual 60 53.0280.8838

1Total 62 59.937      

 Coefficien

tsStandard Error t Stat

P-value

Lower 95%

Upper

95%

Lower

95.0%

Upper

95.0%

Monthly Camping 2.527 0.425 5.946 0.000 1.677

3.377

1.677

3.377

Attend day camp 0.057 0.095 0.601 0.550 -0.133

0.247

-0.13

30.24

7

Attend monthly camp -0.278 0.100 -2.785 0.007 -0.477

-0.07

8

-0.47

7

-0.07

8

47

Appendix D

Boy Scout Statistical Relationships

Correlation Between Outdoors Chair and…

Correlation Between Monthly Camping Events and…

Correlation Between Troop Size and…

Monthly Campouts -0.39

Additional Outdoors Events -0.3035027

Additional Outdoors Events

0.15911978

Additional Outdoors Events 0.11

Outdoors Meetings

-0.2842461

25Outdoors Meetings

0.144425109

Outdoors Meetings 0.10

Encourage Outdoors Meetings

-0.2286701

76

Long-Term Camp Attendance

-0.1623005

34

Encourage Outdoors Meetings 0.07

Long-Term Camp Attendance

-0.1351547

06

Monthly Campout Attendance

-0.3343239

25

Long-Term Camp Attendance 0.03

Monthly Campout Attendance

-0.2382995

88

Camp at Council Facility

0.267051396

Monthly Campout Attendance 0.07

Camp at Council Facility

-0.3793749

46Town Make-up

0.524999487

Camp at Council Facility 0.19

Town Make-up

-0.4716398

65

Town Make-up 0.24 Troop Size

-0.1028253

55Troop Size 0.03

48

SUMMARY OUTPUT

Regression StatisticsMultiple R 0.3933R Square 0.1547Adjusted R Square 0.115Standard Error 0.473Observations 68

ANOVA

  df SS MS FSignifica

nce F

Regression 32.6201

40.87

343.90

31 0.01265

Residual 64 14.3210.22

38

Total 6716.941

2      

 Coefficie

nts

Standard

Errort

StatP-

valueLower 95%

Upper

95%

Lower

95.0%

Upper

95.0%

Intercept 2.220 0.3127.11

10.00

0 1.5962.84

41.59

62.84

4

Outdoors Chair -0.182 0.054

-3.37

00.00

1 -0.290

-0.07

4

-0.29

0

-0.07

4

Long Term Camp Attend -0.009 0.091

-0.09

50.92

5 -0.1910.17

3

-0.19

10.17

3

Monthly Camp Attend -0.012 0.096

-0.12

20.90

4 -0.2030.18

0

-0.20

30.18

0

49

SUMMARY OUTPUT

Regression StatisticsMultiple R 0.509R Square 0.259Adjusted R Square 0.199Standard Error 0.984Observations 68

ANOVA

  df SS MS FSignifica

nce F

Regression 5 20.9564.19

124.32

9 0.002

Residual 62 60.030.96

82Total 67 80.985      

 Coefficie

nts

Standard

Errort

Stat

P-valu

eLower 95%

Upper

95%

Lower

95.0%

Upper

95.0%

How Often Monthly Camping 6.364 0.684

9.302

0.000 4.996

7.732

4.996

7.732

Additional Events -0.668 0.370

-1.80

30.07

6 -1.4070.07

2

-1.40

70.07

2

Events Outside -0.171 0.208

-0.82

30.41

4 -0.5880.24

5

-0.58

80.24

5

Attend Monthly -0.157 0.162

-0.97

30.33

4 -0.4810.16

6

-0.48

10.16

6

Use Council Facility -0.242 0.171

-1.41

60.16

2 -0.5830.10

0

-0.58

30.10

0

Location of Unit -0.433 0.168

-2.57

90.01

2 -0.769

-0.09

7

-0.76

9

-0.09

7

50

SUMMARY OUTPUT

Regression StatisticsMultiple R 0.5007R Square 0.2507Adjusted R Square 0.2031Standard Error 0.9815Observations 68

ANOVA

  df SS MS FSignifican

ce F

Regression 4 20.35.07

495.26

84 0.001

Residual 63 60.6860.96

33Total 67 80.985      

 Coefficie

nts

Standard

Errort

Stat

P-valu

eLower 95%

Upper

95%

Lower

95.0%

Upper

95.0%

How Often Monthly Camping 6.263 0.671

9.329

0.000 4.921

7.604

4.921

7.604

Additional Events -0.719 0.364

-1.97

80.05

2 -1.4460.00

8

-1.44

60.00

8

Attend Monthly -0.184 0.158

-1.16

80.24

7 -0.5000.13

1

-0.50

00.13

1

Use Council Facility -0.290 0.160

-1.81

50.07

4 -0.6100.02

9

-0.61

00.02

9

Location of Unit -0.453 0.166

-2.73

70.00

8 -0.785

-0.12

2

-0.78

5

-0.12

2

51

SUMMARY OUTPUT

Regression StatisticsMultiple R 0.484182R Square 0.234432Adjusted R Square 0.198546Standard Error 0.984249Observations 68

ANOVA

  df SS MS FSignifica

nce F

Regression 318.985

536.3285

096.5326

79 0.000635

Residual 6461.999

770.9687

46

Total 6780.985

29      

 Coefficie

nts

Standard

Error t Stat P-valueLower 95%

Upper 95%

Lower 95.0

%

Upper 95.0

%How Often Monthly Camping 5.807 0.548 10.597 0.000 4.713 6.902 4.713 6.902Additional Events -0.779 0.361 -2.157 0.035 -1.501

-0.057

-1.501

-0.057

Use Council Facility -0.290 0.160 -1.810 0.075 -0.611 0.030

-0.611 0.030

Location of Unit -0.436 0.166 -2.637 0.010 -0.767

-0.106

-0.767

-0.106

52

SUMMARY OUTPUT

Regression StatisticsMultiple R 0.2301R Square 0.053Adjusted R Square 0.0238Standard Error 0.8117Observations 68

ANOVA

  df SS MS FSignifica

nce F

Regression 2 2.39491.19

741.81

7 0.1706

Residual 65 42.8260.65

89Total 67 45.221      

 Coefficie

nts

Standard

Errort

Stat

P-valu

eLower 95%

Upper

95%

Lower

95.0%

Upper

95.0%

Long Term Attendance 3.038 0.570

5.332

0.000 1.900

4.176

1.900

4.176

Outdoors Chair -0.046 0.214

-0.21

40.83

1 -0.4740.38

2

-0.47

40.38

2Number of Monthly Campouts -0.179 0.098

-1.82

70.07

2 -0.3750.01

7

-0.37

50.01

7

53

SUMMARY OUTPUT

Regression StatisticsMultiple R 0.2501R Square 0.0625Adjusted R Square 0.0337Standard Error 0.4943Observations 68

ANOVA

  df SS MS FSignifican

ce F

Regression 21.0595

80.52

982.16

83 0.1226

Residual 6515.881

60.24

43

Total 6716.941

2      

 Coefficie

nts

Standard

Errort

StatP-

valueLower 95%

Upper

95%

Lower

95.0%

Upper

95.0%

Outdoors Chair 1.243 0.174

7.129

0.000 0.895

1.591

0.895

1.591

Troop Location 0.066 0.094

0.696

0.489 -0.123

0.254

-0.12

30.25

4

Troop Size 0.061 0.0471.30

50.19

7 -0.0320.15

5

-0.03

20.15

5

54