Thoughts on age limitations, particularly on the Outdoor activity

When I have taught a class that I was striving for impact (spiritual, mental, etc.) for knights of freedom, the longest (with activities) that I can generally get that--using all my Mary-ness to recognize different levels of engagement and personalities to try and manage the class as a whole to allow the Spirit to teach them without them becoming a distraction to each other--is about an hour--and that is more the exception than the rule, based a great deal on who is there, how they are feeling, and what kind of day they are having (and other mentors seem to think I work magic getting it that long--it can be a challenge, albeit a worthy one :)...).  And that is mixing in activities, personal feedback, attention using activities (object lessons) etc, and (it is normally in a book discussion), it has to kind of ebb and flow in it's depth.

In Vanguard, I could get about an hour of intellectual/spiritual engagement (for all the ages) and then start using the other more hands on/ "moment to stretch" tools, and then I could come back to more depth.  The ebbs and flows would be longer.

Adult settings, if I have the right group, we can go solid for hours (like at TJEd trainings).  We can probe, in depth, a spiritual concept, for at least a good hour, although, I think our Vanguard youth group is almost as attentive as my adult Sunday School class was :).

I also tried to look at it from the LDS church's perspective, and why they separate into classes, based upon ages.  Even in the smallest branch, the nursery is separated from the sunbeams, in recognition of different levels of attention span and ability to teach in depth.  Similar to the youth separated from the primary...even if it is a youth group of one!  Why is that?  Could it be related to the emotional separation and distinction that an individual begins to feel as they transition to "youth-hood"?  How before they were more content to accept a parent's world-view, whereas during that transition they begin to see themselves for their individuality and try to figure out where they stand?  It is a different viewpoint on life, from my understanding and in my experience in discussion the same issue with different ages.

On the other hand, there is much to be learned as a family, as King Benjamin (from the Book of Mormon) invited all to attend his final conference, as we do for our LDS General Conference, knowing that our little ones benefit from the Spirit---and all are invited at the sacrament table...vision, vision, vision! :)

It made me also think about why we don't have Vanguard open to all ages?  What are those reasons that we have?  Attention span, depth...?  Because, as I have tried to capture the vision in writing, it has made me really think...what is it that I am envisioning when I have limited Vanguard (and the outdoor adventure) to 12 and older?

I think what I am envisioning for the Outdoor Adventure is Vanguard, ...for three days in a powerhouse of nature, free from distraction, and transformational in nature.  The depth of really exploring what the youth have learned, how they have changed, where they are at now spiritually, emotionally, mentally, can be powerful questions as they reflect back on those moments in the year when they experienced the joy of deep, spiritual thinking and understand it is somewhere they can be.  And then challenging them to something higher!  (Yes, I'm an idealist :)!)  I have been with youth and had these type of experiences, where we can make connections, build upon lesson after lesson, and arrive at a higher place at the end.

This is similar to the differences I see in the level of engagement that are possible with people on the apprentice level, journeyman level, and master level.  I envision the master level class as a a powerhouse of connections as they use their ability to really look at questions, seek for truth, apply different lenses, and apply those truths in a world changing way as they get to that third level of intelligence you mentioned from Elder Bednar's book,  creating over-seas organizations, organizing humanitarian missions, petitioning the local and national government with concerns, submitting articles to political leaders and newspapers as they see the issues they have learned about and see how they need to be changed in society.  (Read "Do Hard Things"!)  To have that kind of discussion with a 12 year old generally would be boring to them, or at least incomprehensible, as our Eureka discussions were to our younger participants.  They thought the discussions were cool, but felt like  outsiders, looking in.  I could tell they weren't really understanding it.

I know it all depends upon vision of the particular group--their goal with each activity and class--, and that something can be lost in the beauty of diversity if we make it too limiting.  These are just some thoughts I have had that have led me, personally, to make some of those hard decisions in maintaining a certain standard of admission to preserve that vision.

Really, because I am more an exception kind of girl (and feel that the spirit of the law should always prevail over the letter of it), I feel that there are always exceptions that should be allowed when the principle is honored and the Spirit dictates.  Hence, the caveat in my proposed bylaws (subject to the discretion of the mentors, or something like that) for such cases.