Camp Fire USA
Nanci Kuykendall (Ingah)
I have heard both good and bad things about Camp Fire USA. I decided
to do a little first hand research of my own and find out what they
were all about. So I have been in touch with the Executive Director
of our local Council, to get more information. In the course of our
correspondence, he sent me some pages from the Leader Guide. Most of
it looked pretty good, but I was given pause by certain parts of it.
I thought I would share about my concerns here and get some feedback
from all of you, and also ask for experiences of those who have been
involved with Camp Fire, before I discuss this with my Camp Fire
contact.
The Section that gave me pause is titled: Camp Fire USA Builds
Developmental Assets
It begins by talking about the results and findings of a study done
by the Search Institute, in the 1990s, which identified asset
building as a focus for youth development instead of problem
solving. OK, I can get with that, being as I see prevention as
better than bandages in general. They go on to say that they have
identified 14 assets in the Camp Fire program that they believe help
youth to develop. OK, so they are earmarking positives in their
program, that's ok.
But the next part starts to get creepy, and reads like a recipe for
cooking up wonderful adults, as though it's a fool proof plan. Here
are the 14 assets:
-Young Person has empathy, sensitivity and friendship
-Young person has knowledge of and comfort with people of different
cultural/racial/ethnic backgrounds
(ok, so far so good)
-Young person serves the community 1 or more hours per week
(whoa, what does this mean? What counts as community service? Is
the age of the child considered? I think community service is a
great thing and I encourage it, but I don't like being involved in a
program where my child is REQUIRED to do it to meet some objective
set by the group.)
-Young person receives support from 3 or more non-parent adults
(ok, that sounds good)
-Young person spends 3 or more hours per week in lessons or practice
in music, theater or other arts
(whoa again, mandatory minimum time duration on arts? What counts
according to them? What if my child is not classically artistic, or
goes through a phase where they are not?)
-Young person spends 3 or more hours per week in sports, clubs, and
organizations at school or in the community
(whoa again! Mandatory involvement in hobbies and recreational
sports? If they said, young person is encouraged to do this or that,
ok. If they said they feel it is important, ok. But just saying
that they spend X amount of hours per week is so arbitrary and
controlling to me.)
-Young person is out with friends with "nothing special to do" two or
fewer nights per week.
(What?? Does that mean they think all their time should be planned
and scheduled, even for teenagers? Does that mean we are not
supposed to trust our children's judgement in general about how they
spend their time?)
The rest sounds good
-Young person can resist negative peer pressure and dangerous
situations
-Young person seeks to resolve conflict nonviolently
-Young person knows how to plan ahead and make choices
-Young person feels that he or she "has control over things that
happen to me."
-Young person reports having high self esteem.
-Young person reports that "my life has a purpose."
-Young person is optimistic about his or her personal future
But then this "All of the Camp Fire USA's curricula are outcome
based. Forty Camp Fire outcomes were identified to develop these
assets. These outcomes guide all projects, programs and
recognitions. The outcomes are in the appendix and referenced
throughout the grade level program books. This makes it easy to know
if you are using the Camp Fire activities and projects as designed,
the children will be experiencing the outcomes that will make them
caring, confident youth and future leaders."
As a passionate Unschooler/Natural Learner how many ways can I say
ick? Curricula? Grade levels? Outcome based? Am I just looking at
this the wrong way or not understanding what they are trying to say?
Elsewhere in the pages I received, it says "When children and youth
join Camp Fire, they start at the level appropriate to their grade."
Is this program totally geared toward the institutional schooling
system, and would we be totally out of place? I don't really want to
separate my children out into narrow band age groups. I don't think
it is socially good for them. I am one of those who is of the
opinion that institutional schooling is intrinsically bad for the
human mind and spirit, and that the institutional educational model
can never be made healthy enough to be effective or positive.
After I read the pages to my husband, he said "Well I have heard
enough. YUCK!"
I have Unschooling friends with a teenager who refer to their
experiences with "the Cult of Camp Fire" with a shudder. Perhaps
that was just their local group or council, or is that indicative of
the general atmosphere?
Thoughts?
Nanci K.
to do a little first hand research of my own and find out what they
were all about. So I have been in touch with the Executive Director
of our local Council, to get more information. In the course of our
correspondence, he sent me some pages from the Leader Guide. Most of
it looked pretty good, but I was given pause by certain parts of it.
I thought I would share about my concerns here and get some feedback
from all of you, and also ask for experiences of those who have been
involved with Camp Fire, before I discuss this with my Camp Fire
contact.
The Section that gave me pause is titled: Camp Fire USA Builds
Developmental Assets
It begins by talking about the results and findings of a study done
by the Search Institute, in the 1990s, which identified asset
building as a focus for youth development instead of problem
solving. OK, I can get with that, being as I see prevention as
better than bandages in general. They go on to say that they have
identified 14 assets in the Camp Fire program that they believe help
youth to develop. OK, so they are earmarking positives in their
program, that's ok.
But the next part starts to get creepy, and reads like a recipe for
cooking up wonderful adults, as though it's a fool proof plan. Here
are the 14 assets:
-Young Person has empathy, sensitivity and friendship
-Young person has knowledge of and comfort with people of different
cultural/racial/ethnic backgrounds
(ok, so far so good)
-Young person serves the community 1 or more hours per week
(whoa, what does this mean? What counts as community service? Is
the age of the child considered? I think community service is a
great thing and I encourage it, but I don't like being involved in a
program where my child is REQUIRED to do it to meet some objective
set by the group.)
-Young person receives support from 3 or more non-parent adults
(ok, that sounds good)
-Young person spends 3 or more hours per week in lessons or practice
in music, theater or other arts
(whoa again, mandatory minimum time duration on arts? What counts
according to them? What if my child is not classically artistic, or
goes through a phase where they are not?)
-Young person spends 3 or more hours per week in sports, clubs, and
organizations at school or in the community
(whoa again! Mandatory involvement in hobbies and recreational
sports? If they said, young person is encouraged to do this or that,
ok. If they said they feel it is important, ok. But just saying
that they spend X amount of hours per week is so arbitrary and
controlling to me.)
-Young person is out with friends with "nothing special to do" two or
fewer nights per week.
(What?? Does that mean they think all their time should be planned
and scheduled, even for teenagers? Does that mean we are not
supposed to trust our children's judgement in general about how they
spend their time?)
The rest sounds good
-Young person can resist negative peer pressure and dangerous
situations
-Young person seeks to resolve conflict nonviolently
-Young person knows how to plan ahead and make choices
-Young person feels that he or she "has control over things that
happen to me."
-Young person reports having high self esteem.
-Young person reports that "my life has a purpose."
-Young person is optimistic about his or her personal future
But then this "All of the Camp Fire USA's curricula are outcome
based. Forty Camp Fire outcomes were identified to develop these
assets. These outcomes guide all projects, programs and
recognitions. The outcomes are in the appendix and referenced
throughout the grade level program books. This makes it easy to know
if you are using the Camp Fire activities and projects as designed,
the children will be experiencing the outcomes that will make them
caring, confident youth and future leaders."
As a passionate Unschooler/Natural Learner how many ways can I say
ick? Curricula? Grade levels? Outcome based? Am I just looking at
this the wrong way or not understanding what they are trying to say?
Elsewhere in the pages I received, it says "When children and youth
join Camp Fire, they start at the level appropriate to their grade."
Is this program totally geared toward the institutional schooling
system, and would we be totally out of place? I don't really want to
separate my children out into narrow band age groups. I don't think
it is socially good for them. I am one of those who is of the
opinion that institutional schooling is intrinsically bad for the
human mind and spirit, and that the institutional educational model
can never be made healthy enough to be effective or positive.
After I read the pages to my husband, he said "Well I have heard
enough. YUCK!"
I have Unschooling friends with a teenager who refer to their
experiences with "the Cult of Camp Fire" with a shudder. Perhaps
that was just their local group or council, or is that indicative of
the general atmosphere?
Thoughts?
Nanci K.
[email protected]
In a message dated 10/21/02 3:20:56 PM Central Daylight Time,
aisliin@... writes:
Spiral Scouts) Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, Campfire.. they all have a curriculum
based outcome. I am currently going through Boy Scout Leader training and it
is all curriculum this and outcome that. Big on the morally straight and
religious stuff. I'm not too big on that. In fact it makes me kinda nervous,
and that is why I volunteered to be a leader. I wanted to be able to have
some control. One of the things said the other night in training really made
me pause. One guy was saying that if they can get a boy into scouts and keep
him there for three years, then they could mold the child for life. I don't
like that at all, but Jack wants to be a scout right now. So I guess my
feelings are that if he wants to do this, then I am going to be there to see
that things don't get too military and religious. I would prefer that he not
be in it at all, but I recognize the need to be a part of a group at his age.
It is definitely a catch 22, kinda damned if you do, damned if you don't. The
only advice I can give is if your child really wants to be a scout (and there
are lots of good things about it) then, be sure that you are a leader if you
can.
Not really what you were looking for was it? <g>
~Nancy
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
aisliin@... writes:
> After I read the pages to my husband, he said "Well I have heardI guess my thoughts are that with any of the scouting (I don't know about
> enough. YUCK!"
>
> I have Unschooling friends with a teenager who refer to their
> experiences with "the Cult of Camp Fire" with a shudder. Perhaps
> that was just their local group or council, or is that indicative of
> the general atmosphere?
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Nanci K.
>
Spiral Scouts) Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, Campfire.. they all have a curriculum
based outcome. I am currently going through Boy Scout Leader training and it
is all curriculum this and outcome that. Big on the morally straight and
religious stuff. I'm not too big on that. In fact it makes me kinda nervous,
and that is why I volunteered to be a leader. I wanted to be able to have
some control. One of the things said the other night in training really made
me pause. One guy was saying that if they can get a boy into scouts and keep
him there for three years, then they could mold the child for life. I don't
like that at all, but Jack wants to be a scout right now. So I guess my
feelings are that if he wants to do this, then I am going to be there to see
that things don't get too military and religious. I would prefer that he not
be in it at all, but I recognize the need to be a part of a group at his age.
It is definitely a catch 22, kinda damned if you do, damned if you don't. The
only advice I can give is if your child really wants to be a scout (and there
are lots of good things about it) then, be sure that you are a leader if you
can.
Not really what you were looking for was it? <g>
~Nancy
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[email protected]
In a message dated 10/21/2002 3:23:17 PM Central Daylight Time,
aisliin@... writes:
differently and are more rigid--but I find Camp Fire extremely flexible at
the National and Council level. It's one of the things I like about it.
<<-Young person spends 3 or more hours per week in lessons or practice
in music, theater or other arts
(whoa again, mandatory minimum time duration on arts? What counts
according to them? What if my child is not classically artistic, or
goes through a phase where they are not?)>>
I've never seen anything like this in any Camp Fire literature. And I just
got through a weekend cleaning out the Council storage room and went through
a LOT of old literature.
<<-Young person spends 3 or more hours per week in sports, clubs, and
organizations at school or in the community
(whoa again! Mandatory involvement in hobbies and recreational
sports? If they said, young person is encouraged to do this or that,
ok. If they said they feel it is important, ok. But just saying
that they spend X amount of hours per week is so arbitrary and
controlling to me.)>>
I'm thinking what you're reading is more of a philosophical statement than a
list of requirements. For SURE I've never seen anything like it. Doesn't
mean it doesn't exist, though.
<<Elsewhere in the pages I received, it says "When children and youth
join Camp Fire, they start at the level appropriate to their grade."
Is this program totally geared toward the institutional schooling
system, and would we be totally out of place?
"curricula" is for the sole purpose of getting someone else to give money to
fund the programs. When you ask United Way or International Paper for money,
they want to know that you have a plan.
What the program looks like at the end is totally a product of the people
involved. And, built into all the Camp Fire curricula is "design your own"
type stuff to earn emblems and beads. As an unschooler, I use the
information in the books as a guide. I give emblems and beads freely, based
on what I know the kid has done and what we're doing together. I adapt it
and change to suit our needs. Even the councils change requirements, etc.,
for their own purposes. As an example, according to the nationally published
materials our club met the criteria to become a Blue Ribbon Club in our first
year. That wasn't really our goal, it just happened. At the last minute,
our council changed the criteria to allow another club to be awarded the
honor, as well. (Our council is in a starting-over mode right now.) Now
there are two Blue Ribbon Clubs in the council. That looks good to United
Way, see? We're meeting our standards.
I don't consider Camp Fire to be a top-down organization. I find it to be
very kid-centered. Perhaps that's my unschooling outlook. In my dealings
with other Camp Fire adults, I find if I can bring them back to what's best
for the kid in any given conflict, then they can see it, too.
Every council and every area is different, though. Councils have very wide
latitude in how the programs are administered. We only have 7 clubs and one
council in our whole state. Out west some cities have several councils. And
they usually have typical mainstream ideas about what youth programs should
look like. I find, however, that Camp Fire is the most flexible and
adaptable and that's why I use it. I'm a leader because I want to make any
scouting-type experience that he wants more unschooly for my son. Obviously,
I believe even the kids in my club who are in school are going to benefit
from that atmosphere.
I'm finding myself to be really enthusiastic about Camp Fire--more than I
thought I would be. I think it's because we are re-building, and I'm getting
to design and create what the council looks like. My husband is now on the
board and so we are becoming invested in it in a big way. Truth is if you
don't have enthusiasm for what you do, no one else will want to participate.
I think Camp Fire is a good program, and there is room for all types of
people. Like most things, it is what you make it.
Tuck
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
aisliin@... writes:
> -Young person serves the community 1 or more hours per weekNo such thing as a requirement in Camp Fire. Sure, some leaders do things
> (whoa, what does this mean? What counts as community service? Is
> the age of the child considered? I think community service is a
> great thing and I encourage it, but I don't like being involved in a
> program where my child is REQUIRED to do it to meet some objective
> set by the group.)
>
differently and are more rigid--but I find Camp Fire extremely flexible at
the National and Council level. It's one of the things I like about it.
<<-Young person spends 3 or more hours per week in lessons or practice
in music, theater or other arts
(whoa again, mandatory minimum time duration on arts? What counts
according to them? What if my child is not classically artistic, or
goes through a phase where they are not?)>>
I've never seen anything like this in any Camp Fire literature. And I just
got through a weekend cleaning out the Council storage room and went through
a LOT of old literature.
<<-Young person spends 3 or more hours per week in sports, clubs, and
organizations at school or in the community
(whoa again! Mandatory involvement in hobbies and recreational
sports? If they said, young person is encouraged to do this or that,
ok. If they said they feel it is important, ok. But just saying
that they spend X amount of hours per week is so arbitrary and
controlling to me.)>>
I'm thinking what you're reading is more of a philosophical statement than a
list of requirements. For SURE I've never seen anything like it. Doesn't
mean it doesn't exist, though.
<<Elsewhere in the pages I received, it says "When children and youth
join Camp Fire, they start at the level appropriate to their grade."
Is this program totally geared toward the institutional schooling
system, and would we be totally out of place?
>>You have to remember that much of what is written as program standards and
"curricula" is for the sole purpose of getting someone else to give money to
fund the programs. When you ask United Way or International Paper for money,
they want to know that you have a plan.
What the program looks like at the end is totally a product of the people
involved. And, built into all the Camp Fire curricula is "design your own"
type stuff to earn emblems and beads. As an unschooler, I use the
information in the books as a guide. I give emblems and beads freely, based
on what I know the kid has done and what we're doing together. I adapt it
and change to suit our needs. Even the councils change requirements, etc.,
for their own purposes. As an example, according to the nationally published
materials our club met the criteria to become a Blue Ribbon Club in our first
year. That wasn't really our goal, it just happened. At the last minute,
our council changed the criteria to allow another club to be awarded the
honor, as well. (Our council is in a starting-over mode right now.) Now
there are two Blue Ribbon Clubs in the council. That looks good to United
Way, see? We're meeting our standards.
I don't consider Camp Fire to be a top-down organization. I find it to be
very kid-centered. Perhaps that's my unschooling outlook. In my dealings
with other Camp Fire adults, I find if I can bring them back to what's best
for the kid in any given conflict, then they can see it, too.
Every council and every area is different, though. Councils have very wide
latitude in how the programs are administered. We only have 7 clubs and one
council in our whole state. Out west some cities have several councils. And
they usually have typical mainstream ideas about what youth programs should
look like. I find, however, that Camp Fire is the most flexible and
adaptable and that's why I use it. I'm a leader because I want to make any
scouting-type experience that he wants more unschooly for my son. Obviously,
I believe even the kids in my club who are in school are going to benefit
from that atmosphere.
I'm finding myself to be really enthusiastic about Camp Fire--more than I
thought I would be. I think it's because we are re-building, and I'm getting
to design and create what the council looks like. My husband is now on the
board and so we are becoming invested in it in a big way. Truth is if you
don't have enthusiasm for what you do, no one else will want to participate.
I think Camp Fire is a good program, and there is room for all types of
people. Like most things, it is what you make it.
Tuck
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[email protected]
In a message dated 10/21/2002 7:08:56 PM Central Daylight Time,
Dnowens@... writes:
that we can? Why wouldn't it change us? Why shouldn't it?
If you don't want to be changed by something (learn something from it), why
participate?
Take what you need, leave the rest.
And I get you totally about why you're becoming a leader. I wouldn't do Boy
Scouts, though. Too many fundies are using it as a safe-haven from gays.
Tuck
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Dnowens@... writes:
> One guy was saying that if they can get a boy into scouts and keepBut you know, isn't that why we join stuff? To get the experiences out of it
> him there for three years, then they could mold the child for life. I don't
>
> like that at all, but Jack wants to be a scout right now.
that we can? Why wouldn't it change us? Why shouldn't it?
If you don't want to be changed by something (learn something from it), why
participate?
Take what you need, leave the rest.
And I get you totally about why you're becoming a leader. I wouldn't do Boy
Scouts, though. Too many fundies are using it as a safe-haven from gays.
Tuck
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[email protected]
In a message dated 10/22/02 11:10:07 AM Central Daylight Time,
Tuckervill@... writes:
about getting and keeping boys for three years, it followed a diatribe on
being *Morally Straight and Religious* the molding he was referring too was
more like badly hidden antigay, anti-anthing not conservative Christian
rhetoric. We had also just discussed the issue of child safety, or rather,
the BSA stance on molestation. Now don't get me wrong, I am NOT pro
molestation, but, BUT this man angered me in his instance that the BSA does
its best to avoid anyone not morally straight becoming a leader, thus
decreasing the chances of boys being sexually abused or lured into a
lifestyle that isn't "right." He never once used the word homosexual or gay,
he was very cautious to avoid any comments that might be misconstrued, but he
made his point. So I made mine. I asked where the BSA got the information
that pedophiles are gay men wanting to convert little boys to that
"lifestyle." (Which I tried to explain it isn't a lifestyle, but didn't get
too far.) I explained that 98% of the time a pedophile is a white man in his
mid 20's and older. I made allowances for molesters of other races and of
women molesters, but explained that homosexual people were the least likely
to become Boy Scout leaders specifically for the propose of leading little
boys astray. Lets just say he didn't like me much. We then went into a
discussion of what religious means. He said Boy Scouts promotes a belief in a
higher spiritual being. So I asked if that included any spiritual being, or
just the Juedo/Christian god. (He didn't understand that question.) So I
asked if a child and parents with Buddhist beliefs or beliefs in American
Indian gods or Pagan gods would feel welcome. He chose to ignore me after
that.
doubt we will do this next year. I am sure I will be investigating other
opportunities! But I have committed myself (and so has Darin) to leading the
Tiger Cubs this year. And our socioeconomic area is such that if we didn't do
it, then there would be boys who wouldn't have anything at all. And Darin and
I are in this for them.
~Nancy sadder, but wiser.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Tuckervill@... writes:
> > One guy was saying that if they can get a boy into scouts and keepI guess I should have been more specific. <g> When the gentleman was talking
> > him there for three years, then they could mold the child for life. I
> don't
> >
> > like that at all, but Jack wants to be a scout right now.
>
> But you know, isn't that why we join stuff? To get the experiences out of
> it
> that we can? Why wouldn't it change us? Why shouldn't it?
about getting and keeping boys for three years, it followed a diatribe on
being *Morally Straight and Religious* the molding he was referring too was
more like badly hidden antigay, anti-anthing not conservative Christian
rhetoric. We had also just discussed the issue of child safety, or rather,
the BSA stance on molestation. Now don't get me wrong, I am NOT pro
molestation, but, BUT this man angered me in his instance that the BSA does
its best to avoid anyone not morally straight becoming a leader, thus
decreasing the chances of boys being sexually abused or lured into a
lifestyle that isn't "right." He never once used the word homosexual or gay,
he was very cautious to avoid any comments that might be misconstrued, but he
made his point. So I made mine. I asked where the BSA got the information
that pedophiles are gay men wanting to convert little boys to that
"lifestyle." (Which I tried to explain it isn't a lifestyle, but didn't get
too far.) I explained that 98% of the time a pedophile is a white man in his
mid 20's and older. I made allowances for molesters of other races and of
women molesters, but explained that homosexual people were the least likely
to become Boy Scout leaders specifically for the propose of leading little
boys astray. Lets just say he didn't like me much. We then went into a
discussion of what religious means. He said Boy Scouts promotes a belief in a
higher spiritual being. So I asked if that included any spiritual being, or
just the Juedo/Christian god. (He didn't understand that question.) So I
asked if a child and parents with Buddhist beliefs or beliefs in American
Indian gods or Pagan gods would feel welcome. He chose to ignore me after
that.
>I thought we could do that, I am finding that is harder said than done. I
> If you don't want to be changed by something (learn something from it), why
>
> participate?
>
> Take what you need, leave the rest.
doubt we will do this next year. I am sure I will be investigating other
opportunities! But I have committed myself (and so has Darin) to leading the
Tiger Cubs this year. And our socioeconomic area is such that if we didn't do
it, then there would be boys who wouldn't have anything at all. And Darin and
I are in this for them.
>Unfortunately I have found this out the hard way.
> And I get you totally about why you're becoming a leader. I wouldn't do
> Boy
> Scouts, though. Too many fundies are using it as a safe-haven from gays.
>
> Tuck
~Nancy sadder, but wiser.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[email protected]
In a message dated 10/22/2002 3:04:18 PM Central Daylight Time,
Dnowens@... writes:
Now you know why I do Camp Fire. ;)
Good luck on hanging in there. You could always start a Camp Fire club!
Nudging Tuck
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Dnowens@... writes:
> I guess I should have been more specific. <g> When the gentleman was talkingI figured that's where the conversation was going.
>
> about getting and keeping boys for three years, it followed a diatribe on
> being *Morally Straight and Religious* the molding he was referring too was
>
> more like badly hidden antigay, anti-anthing not conservative Christian
> rhetoric. We had also just discussed the issue of child safety, or rather,
> the BSA stance on molestation. Now don't get me wrong, I am NOT pro
> molestation, but, BUT this man angered me in his instance that the BSA does
>
> its best to avoid anyone not morally straight becoming a leader, thus
> decreasing the chances of boys being sexually abused or lured into a
> lifestyle that isn't "right." He never once used the word homosexual or
> gay,
> he was very cautious to avoid any comments that might be misconstrued, but
> he
> made his point. So I made mine. I asked where the BSA got the information
> that pedophiles are gay men wanting to convert little boys to that
> "lifestyle." (Which I tried to explain it isn't a lifestyle, but didn't get
>
> too far.) I explained that 98% of the time a pedophile is a white man in
> his
> mid 20's and older. I made allowances for molesters of other races and of
> women molesters, but explained that homosexual people were the least likely
>
> to become Boy Scout leaders specifically for the propose of leading little
> boys astray. Lets just say he didn't like me much. We then went into a
> discussion of what religious means. He said Boy Scouts promotes a belief in
> a
> higher spiritual being. So I asked if that included any spiritual being, or
>
> just the Juedo/Christian god. (He didn't understand that question.) So I
> asked if a child and parents with Buddhist beliefs or beliefs in American
> Indian gods or Pagan gods would feel welcome. He chose to ignore me after
> that.
>
Now you know why I do Camp Fire. ;)
Good luck on hanging in there. You could always start a Camp Fire club!
Nudging Tuck
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Lisa Hardiman
Dear Nanci: We are involved in Camp Fire USA because it is inclusive.
We were able to start a Karen Land Iditarod Club which is to include all
ages. We start this Saturday. My son and daughter are in groups with
kids of their own age. They have been very supportive of us in our
Homeschooling and pretty nice all the way around. We are involved in 4H
too. Here there is a 4H all homeschool but of course they are all
religious but not exclusive. We go and have become friends with a woman
who has adopted kids. We were thinking of starting a homeschool Camp
Fire group and it would have been open to all ages because there are
just a few homeschoolers but neither the other homeschooler or I could
do it. To me it doesn't matter if a kid is homeschooled or not or even
religious, kids are kids. Lisa
-----Original Message-----
From: Nanci Kuykendall (Ingah) [mailto:aisliin@...]
Sent: Monday, October 21, 2002 2:18 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [AlwaysLearning] Camp Fire USA
I have heard both good and bad things about Camp Fire USA. I decided
to do a little first hand research of my own and find out what they
were all about. So I have been in touch with the Executive Director
of our local Council, to get more information. In the course of our
correspondence, he sent me some pages from the Leader Guide. Most of
it looked pretty good, but I was given pause by certain parts of it.
I thought I would share about my concerns here and get some feedback
from all of you, and also ask for experiences of those who have been
involved with Camp Fire, before I discuss this with my Camp Fire
contact.
The Section that gave me pause is titled: Camp Fire USA Builds
Developmental Assets
It begins by talking about the results and findings of a study done
by the Search Institute, in the 1990s, which identified asset
building as a focus for youth development instead of problem
solving. OK, I can get with that, being as I see prevention as
better than bandages in general. They go on to say that they have
identified 14 assets in the Camp Fire program that they believe help
youth to develop. OK, so they are earmarking positives in their
program, that's ok.
But the next part starts to get creepy, and reads like a recipe for
cooking up wonderful adults, as though it's a fool proof plan. Here
are the 14 assets:
-Young Person has empathy, sensitivity and friendship
-Young person has knowledge of and comfort with people of different
cultural/racial/ethnic backgrounds
(ok, so far so good)
-Young person serves the community 1 or more hours per week
(whoa, what does this mean? What counts as community service? Is
the age of the child considered? I think community service is a
great thing and I encourage it, but I don't like being involved in a
program where my child is REQUIRED to do it to meet some objective
set by the group.)
-Young person receives support from 3 or more non-parent adults
(ok, that sounds good)
-Young person spends 3 or more hours per week in lessons or practice
in music, theater or other arts
(whoa again, mandatory minimum time duration on arts? What counts
according to them? What if my child is not classically artistic, or
goes through a phase where they are not?)
-Young person spends 3 or more hours per week in sports, clubs, and
organizations at school or in the community
(whoa again! Mandatory involvement in hobbies and recreational
sports? If they said, young person is encouraged to do this or that,
ok. If they said they feel it is important, ok. But just saying
that they spend X amount of hours per week is so arbitrary and
controlling to me.)
-Young person is out with friends with "nothing special to do" two or
fewer nights per week.
(What?? Does that mean they think all their time should be planned
and scheduled, even for teenagers? Does that mean we are not
supposed to trust our children's judgement in general about how they
spend their time?)
The rest sounds good
-Young person can resist negative peer pressure and dangerous
situations
-Young person seeks to resolve conflict nonviolently
-Young person knows how to plan ahead and make choices
-Young person feels that he or she "has control over things that
happen to me."
-Young person reports having high self esteem.
-Young person reports that "my life has a purpose."
-Young person is optimistic about his or her personal future
But then this "All of the Camp Fire USA's curricula are outcome
based. Forty Camp Fire outcomes were identified to develop these
assets. These outcomes guide all projects, programs and
recognitions. The outcomes are in the appendix and referenced
throughout the grade level program books. This makes it easy to know
if you are using the Camp Fire activities and projects as designed,
the children will be experiencing the outcomes that will make them
caring, confident youth and future leaders."
As a passionate Unschooler/Natural Learner how many ways can I say
ick? Curricula? Grade levels? Outcome based? Am I just looking at
this the wrong way or not understanding what they are trying to say?
Elsewhere in the pages I received, it says "When children and youth
join Camp Fire, they start at the level appropriate to their grade."
Is this program totally geared toward the institutional schooling
system, and would we be totally out of place? I don't really want to
separate my children out into narrow band age groups. I don't think
it is socially good for them. I am one of those who is of the
opinion that institutional schooling is intrinsically bad for the
human mind and spirit, and that the institutional educational model
can never be made healthy enough to be effective or positive.
After I read the pages to my husband, he said "Well I have heard
enough. YUCK!"
I have Unschooling friends with a teenager who refer to their
experiences with "the Cult of Camp Fire" with a shudder. Perhaps
that was just their local group or council, or is that indicative of
the general atmosphere?
Thoughts?
Nanci K.
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=212804.2460941.3878106.2273195/D=egroupweb/S=1705
542111:HM/A=810373/R=0/*http:/geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info?.refer=blrecs>
<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=212804.2460941.3878106.2273195/D=egroupweb/S=1705
542111:HM/A=810373/R=1/*http:/geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info?.refer=blrecs>
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=212804.2460941.3878106.2273195/D=egrou
pmail/S=:HM/A=810373/rand=341212118>
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[email protected]
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> Terms of Service.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
We were able to start a Karen Land Iditarod Club which is to include all
ages. We start this Saturday. My son and daughter are in groups with
kids of their own age. They have been very supportive of us in our
Homeschooling and pretty nice all the way around. We are involved in 4H
too. Here there is a 4H all homeschool but of course they are all
religious but not exclusive. We go and have become friends with a woman
who has adopted kids. We were thinking of starting a homeschool Camp
Fire group and it would have been open to all ages because there are
just a few homeschoolers but neither the other homeschooler or I could
do it. To me it doesn't matter if a kid is homeschooled or not or even
religious, kids are kids. Lisa
-----Original Message-----
From: Nanci Kuykendall (Ingah) [mailto:aisliin@...]
Sent: Monday, October 21, 2002 2:18 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [AlwaysLearning] Camp Fire USA
I have heard both good and bad things about Camp Fire USA. I decided
to do a little first hand research of my own and find out what they
were all about. So I have been in touch with the Executive Director
of our local Council, to get more information. In the course of our
correspondence, he sent me some pages from the Leader Guide. Most of
it looked pretty good, but I was given pause by certain parts of it.
I thought I would share about my concerns here and get some feedback
from all of you, and also ask for experiences of those who have been
involved with Camp Fire, before I discuss this with my Camp Fire
contact.
The Section that gave me pause is titled: Camp Fire USA Builds
Developmental Assets
It begins by talking about the results and findings of a study done
by the Search Institute, in the 1990s, which identified asset
building as a focus for youth development instead of problem
solving. OK, I can get with that, being as I see prevention as
better than bandages in general. They go on to say that they have
identified 14 assets in the Camp Fire program that they believe help
youth to develop. OK, so they are earmarking positives in their
program, that's ok.
But the next part starts to get creepy, and reads like a recipe for
cooking up wonderful adults, as though it's a fool proof plan. Here
are the 14 assets:
-Young Person has empathy, sensitivity and friendship
-Young person has knowledge of and comfort with people of different
cultural/racial/ethnic backgrounds
(ok, so far so good)
-Young person serves the community 1 or more hours per week
(whoa, what does this mean? What counts as community service? Is
the age of the child considered? I think community service is a
great thing and I encourage it, but I don't like being involved in a
program where my child is REQUIRED to do it to meet some objective
set by the group.)
-Young person receives support from 3 or more non-parent adults
(ok, that sounds good)
-Young person spends 3 or more hours per week in lessons or practice
in music, theater or other arts
(whoa again, mandatory minimum time duration on arts? What counts
according to them? What if my child is not classically artistic, or
goes through a phase where they are not?)
-Young person spends 3 or more hours per week in sports, clubs, and
organizations at school or in the community
(whoa again! Mandatory involvement in hobbies and recreational
sports? If they said, young person is encouraged to do this or that,
ok. If they said they feel it is important, ok. But just saying
that they spend X amount of hours per week is so arbitrary and
controlling to me.)
-Young person is out with friends with "nothing special to do" two or
fewer nights per week.
(What?? Does that mean they think all their time should be planned
and scheduled, even for teenagers? Does that mean we are not
supposed to trust our children's judgement in general about how they
spend their time?)
The rest sounds good
-Young person can resist negative peer pressure and dangerous
situations
-Young person seeks to resolve conflict nonviolently
-Young person knows how to plan ahead and make choices
-Young person feels that he or she "has control over things that
happen to me."
-Young person reports having high self esteem.
-Young person reports that "my life has a purpose."
-Young person is optimistic about his or her personal future
But then this "All of the Camp Fire USA's curricula are outcome
based. Forty Camp Fire outcomes were identified to develop these
assets. These outcomes guide all projects, programs and
recognitions. The outcomes are in the appendix and referenced
throughout the grade level program books. This makes it easy to know
if you are using the Camp Fire activities and projects as designed,
the children will be experiencing the outcomes that will make them
caring, confident youth and future leaders."
As a passionate Unschooler/Natural Learner how many ways can I say
ick? Curricula? Grade levels? Outcome based? Am I just looking at
this the wrong way or not understanding what they are trying to say?
Elsewhere in the pages I received, it says "When children and youth
join Camp Fire, they start at the level appropriate to their grade."
Is this program totally geared toward the institutional schooling
system, and would we be totally out of place? I don't really want to
separate my children out into narrow band age groups. I don't think
it is socially good for them. I am one of those who is of the
opinion that institutional schooling is intrinsically bad for the
human mind and spirit, and that the institutional educational model
can never be made healthy enough to be effective or positive.
After I read the pages to my husband, he said "Well I have heard
enough. YUCK!"
I have Unschooling friends with a teenager who refer to their
experiences with "the Cult of Camp Fire" with a shudder. Perhaps
that was just their local group or council, or is that indicative of
the general atmosphere?
Thoughts?
Nanci K.
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=212804.2460941.3878106.2273195/D=egroupweb/S=1705
542111:HM/A=810373/R=0/*http:/geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info?.refer=blrecs>
<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=212804.2460941.3878106.2273195/D=egroupweb/S=1705
542111:HM/A=810373/R=1/*http:/geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info?.refer=blrecs>
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=212804.2460941.3878106.2273195/D=egrou
pmail/S=:HM/A=810373/rand=341212118>
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[email protected]
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> Terms of Service.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]