Sign Off's, What are your troop's Rules?

[Stosh 3452]

In our troop the scouts Patrol Leader's sign off everything, except scout spirit. If a Patrol Leader is not First Class they'll go to the SPL/ASPL/Troop Guide to get them to sign off.

 

Rank is no guarantee they know the material.  Being SPL/ASPL/Troop Guide isn't either.

 

A Tenderfoot patrol leader knows fully-well whether or not one of his boys in his patrol served as patrol cook for the weekend and whether or not he slept in a tent he himself put up.  If one is the PL, then it is assumed he is to be trusted with all the responsibilities associated with that POR, regardless of his rank.

 

It always amazes me the "message" we give to our boys when it comes to POR's.  We trust you, but only to a certain point.  Scout spirit?  Well, we don't trust you enough to sign off on that one.  If you're not FC, you can't be trusted with all the responsibilities given to the position of PL.

 

Sounds like adult created rules.....

 

Your mileage may vary....

[DuctTape 1230]

Often the boys will be more strict in evaluating than adults.

[blw2 433]

Once again, I'm in agreement with you @@Stosh.
I'd have to think it through a bit more....but if I were SM, I think i would make it simple.

 

A scout can sign off on anything he himself has been signed off on previously..... as long as he is comfortable in doing so.

With the exception that if the signer didn't feel himself proficient in a skill (as in he hasn't practiced in two years and feels fuzzy)

If he missed the camping trip he wouldn't know if that other scout slept in the tent he helped put up.... so he wouldn't sign off on that one.  BUT the one thing about this example that troubles me is that it should not really matter in this case if the signer had previously been signed off on sleeping in a tent....or if he outranked him.... It's not a skill really....more like just being a witness in that case.

 

Going back to what I posted originally, this seems a point of confusion, & I'll bet that a high number of scouts are not really overly clear on where these lines are drawn.  It's not really a hard concept really....one that should be clearly identified in the handbook for each point of the requirements (maybe by color code or some such thing)..... indicating who are the potential signers for this one!

Why leave it up to discussion???

[Stosh 3452]

Once again, I'm in agreement with you @@Stosh.

I'd have to think it through a bit more....but if I were SM, I think i would make it simple.

 

A scout can sign off on anything he himself has been signed off on previously..... as long as he is comfortable in doing so.

 

The position of PL is in my unit the highest level on the chain of support.  He is supposed to know what's going on.  If he doesn't he doesn't belong in the POR.  If he's new, he needs be requesting support from a number of supportive sources, i.e. SPL, TG, Instructors, etc.

 

With the exception that if the signer didn't feel himself proficient in a skill (as in he hasn't practiced in two years and feels fuzzy)

 

Who taught the boy the lesson?  If PL is unsure, he better find out, it's his job.  If he's unsure of teaching it, he needs to call in an Instructor, that's what they are supposed to be doing for their POR's.  The instructor should be able to teach and report back to the PL the scout knows his stuff and it gets checked off.

 

If he missed the camping trip he wouldn't know if that other scout slept in the tent he helped put up.... so he wouldn't sign off on that one.

 

But his APL should know, he's supposed to be the PL's right hand man.  If he doesn't know, then he's not doing his job.  If neither are there, who's leading the patrol that weekend?  By the time one gets down to that level of lack of leadership, it probably doesn't make much difference how well the boy did his advancement.  The leadership failed him and needs to be reevaluated.

 

BUT the one thing about this example that troubles me is that it should not really matter in this case if the signer had previously been signed off on sleeping in a tent....or if he outranked him.... It's not a skill really....more like just being a witness in that case.

 

Going back to what I posted originally, this seems a point of confusion, & I'll bet that a high number of scouts are not really overly clear on where these lines are drawn.  It's not really a hard concept really....one that should be clearly identified in the handbook for each point of the requirements (maybe by color code or some such thing)..... indicating who are the potential signers for this one!

Why leave it up to discussion???

 

Every PL needs to be trained in how to sign off on advancement.  If a PL is a Tenderfoot and his patrol member (Star Rank) comes with the evidence of having acquired a MB, there really isn't a whole lot for the Tenderfoot PL to really know.  The evidence is there, sign off on the advancement.  If troops aren't in the habit of training their leadership, then I would stick with the SM signing off on all advancement and keep with the adult led program until proper changes can be made.

[5yearscouter 52]

In our troop the sm "trains" the troop guides and they sign off on T2first class material.  The training is hit or miss, but most of the troop guides take it very seriously and make the scouts show that they really know the stuff.  There's always a TG that just signs everywhere someone points, but the SM usually catches that in SM conference when he reviews the stuff was really completed. The is a TG assigned to each patrol with scouts below first class.  Anything above first class the sm reviews for completion and signs those requirements in SM conference for the rank.

[qwazse 4342]

... There's always a TG that just signs everywhere someone points, but the SM usually catches that in SM conference when he reviews the stuff was really completed. ....

I've seen the same kind of incompetence in ASMs and the occasional SM. I find, however, that folks are less upset about a youth who needs correction vs. an adult who needs correction. So saddle your lead youth with sign-off responsibility, uniform inspection, etc... When they screw up, you'll have to put up with less jaw-jerking from your adult leaders.

[Eagle94-A1 2685]

I would think summer camp, a backpacking trip, and a canoeing trip would be fantastic adventures to be using the basic scout skills everyday.

 

Summer camp was more individual than patrol or even troop. Everything is scheduled, even the nite time activities

 

Backpacking trip was for the older Scouts and not a troop wide event.

 

As for the canoe trip, let just say it was "interesting"

[fred johnson 936]

Who can sign off on a Scout's advancement requirements?

Earlier answers were good and references to the GTA were the best.

 

 

Who can sign off on things like his camping log, his volunteer log, etc... in the back of his book?

IMHO, the real question is why is there a sign-off on the log? What's the purpose? The rank needs to be signed off, but the log is for the scout to use to benefit himself and be organized. There is no approval needed on a log. IMHO, that just promotes bureaucratic process oriented scouting. No signatures should be needed on the log. Just a "Wow, that's great."

 

I know some troops promote such a process. I just don't care for it at all.

Edited November 7, 2016 by fred johnson

[Eagle94-A1 2685]

I agree regarding adults signing off in logs. Only reason I can see it was that enough folks demanded one from national, especially to recordcamping for Camping MB, that they put one in.

 

Now my troop growing up did have a process. We had a troop totem we wore, and we earned beads for camping, service projects, etc to wear on the totem. Nothing formal.

[5yearscouter 52]

I've seen the same kind of incompetence in ASMs and the occasional SM. I find, however, that folks are less upset about a youth who needs correction vs. an adult who needs correction. So saddle your lead youth with sign-off responsibility, uniform inspection, etc... When they screw up, you'll have to put up with less jaw-jerking from your adult leaders.

yah prior two scoutmasters were spot on.  We could tell when a scout was wishy washy on scout skills as the scoutmaster would be in there going thru stuff fast but thoroughly, discovering a missing piece of the scout's abilities, then finding an instructor to fix the issue or teaching the kid himself what he was missing.  Then sending him home to practice, to teach his patrol next week and then come back and try again for a sm conference. 

 

Current scoutmaster Is our problem child who looks over that stuff was signed in the book and doesn't catch the errors and omissions and holes in their scout skills. sigh.

[fred johnson 936]

yah prior two scoutmasters were spot on.  We could tell when a scout was wishy washy on scout skills as the scoutmaster would be in there going thru stuff fast but thoroughly, discovering a missing piece of the scout's abilities, then finding an instructor to fix the issue or teaching the kid himself what he was missing.  Then sending him home to practice, to teach his patrol next week and then come back and try again for a sm conference.

Interesting... Each unit is different and BSA does have direction on this. The BSA statement is that the scoutmaster conference is a conversation. The requirement is complete when it occurs.   IMHO, by the scout talking to the scoutmaster about his skills, the scoutmaster conference requirement is done.  Now it's just about getting someone to acknowledge it and sign his advancement.  

 

It's always okay to revisit and re-enforce skills.  It's just not part of the advancement path once someone signs off on the skill.

 

Essentially what you describe as good by the former two scoutmasters, I'd describe as creating their own program different than what BSA documents.  ... And that's said nicely.  

Edited November 9, 2016 by fred johnson

[qwazse 4342]

Okay, so you discover a youth who should have a skill, but does not. (Honestly, I'm not so bothered about some knot as I would be about say a 1st class scout who is afraid of the water, or can't pick out the log that would be long enough to cross a ravine, but that's just me.) This may be at an SMC or on some other occasion. What do you do? Who do you talk to?

Edited November 9, 2016 by qwazse

[fred johnson 936]

Okay, so you discover a youth who should have a skill, but does not. (Honestly, I'm not so bothered about some knot as I would be about say a 1st class scout who is afraid of the water, or can't pick out the log that would be long enough to cross a ravine, but that's just me.) This may be at an SMC or on some other occasion. What do you do? Who do you talk to?

 

Revisit the troop program such that there will be times and opportunities to work on those skills and to use those skills.  Repeating and using the skills is what ingrains knowledge.  I'd assert that if you send the scout home from an SMC because he does not know a knot and then he comes back later and is able to show the knot is just as much hit and miss.  I'd bet that scout would again not know the knot in six months if he does not have a time to use it.  

 

Plus are we really focused on the scout knowing a specific knot ?  Or, we using the advancement program to teach the scout to have a goal and and to work to achieve his goal.  IMHO, we want to develop the learning attitude so that the scout wants to explore and try new things.