FScouter

"Ouch Eamonn, I think we all (unfortunately) know someone like that. If it were to happen to me I'd probably respond with a cheeky comment ..." It's not easy to let others know about uniform anomalies. I'm not sure why some take offense at being informed by another person. Long ago I learned one or two things from someone that pointed out an error on my own uniform. He also let me know that BSA published an Insignia Guide. Now I buy a new one every time its updated.

It's perfect the way it is. Well, maybe the cargo pockets are small, but come to think, I don't carry much in pockets anyway. On with the program.

Regarding "stacking the deck", would it be better to let the local council stumble around trying to find a new SE on their own?

Great idea Unc, but it won't work. Those that don't wear uniform pants (or any other part) aren't going to start simply because one of the myriad excuses has been eliminated. There are more excuses than there are solutions. If they don't care, no design change will fix that.

Your description is exactly how it was recently done in our council.

From the National website: The award is for those who "participate in an international activity or program as defined by a local council." http://www.scouting.org/international/22-324.html

Get a copy of the Advancement Committee Policies and Procedures book.

I'd have to agree that the BoR should be a big deal, more than something arranged on the spur of the moment. Having an ambassador or such sitting on the board is great. In our troop we like to bring in an outside person on occasion. If that can be arranged, great. If not, we proceed with a group of committee members. Some of the boys may know these committee members. But they rarely have conversations with them. They don't really "know" these adults. Outside strangers does not necessarily make for a quality BoR experience any more than using known committee members cheapens it. The quality is in how the people sitting on the board perform. More important I think is that the boy can complete his requirements and sit for a BoR shortly thereafter. More than 3-4 weeks seems like an unreasonable delay to expect the boy to endure.

MidwestMom points out that these are "positions of responsibility", which may or may not be the same as a position of leadership. A boy might experience more of what we traditionally call "leadership" by serving as a patrol leader rather than a historian or librarian. But is that better? Historian or librarian should have as much responsibility as any other position. The requirement for advancement to Star, Life, and even Eagle do not require a position of "leadership". Responsibility is what is required, not leadership. And do we not consider a responsible person to be demonstrating leadership by being responsible to his position? If a boy is coasting through his tenure as historian or librarian or whatever, is it because the position is weak, or is it because the Scoutmaster doesn't require much? The job descriptions found in the Scoutmaster's Junior Leader Training Kit are comprehensive. Any boy that follows those job descriptions is doing a lot. MidwestMom, you might take a look at them and maybe save your committee from re-inventing the wheel.

There's a new release of the Troop Program Resources? I thought my 2000 edition was the latest.

The specific changes since the previous eddition are listed either in the appendix, or on the last page.

As far as I'm concerned, the entire Guide to Safe Scouting is "rules". The discussions therein are not guidelines, not suggestions, not helpful tips. They are RULES. I make no distinction between bold and not bold. It confuses the issue.

Interesting. Who would have thunk it? I wonder how they select a COR? Or would they have two? Must both organizations approve the adult leaders? How many votes do they get at the annual meeting?

Eamonn gave a perfect description. The troop is more than the people that are its members. Troops don't move, but the people may move. If you were to work with another church down the road and complete a new unit application you would be forming a new unit. Boys and adults that join the new unit would be members of that new troop. The new unit would have no history. The old troop would have fewer members. The letter of agreement your council registration person talked about would tell the council that they were disbanding the unit and would no longer charter a troop. They would release the unit number, and maybe the funds and equipment too. The history of that troop would end. You would be then be able to re-use the same unit number. It would still be a new unit with no history.

Tell your new equipment guy, "That sounds like an idea we should look at. Would you please do some research on the cost and terms of insurance, including coverage, deductibles, etc. and the coverages of your personal auto policy, and report back to the committee at the next meeting."

It doesn't seem like the arguing amongst your pack leadership and parents is going to result in any agreement. Those in favor of admitting the girl simply don't understand that a pack cannot make that kind of decision. A petition or consensus means nothing. To pursue that gives the proponents the idea that the girl can be admitted if there is enough support. The fact is that even if the pack unanimously wanted this, it cannot happen. This is not a decision a pack is empowered to make. A pack has no juristiction at all. It might help to have a third party authority such as the district commissioner or the actual district executive address your committee meeting and explain the rules. Or perhaps the council registrar could write a letter on council letterhead explaining the rules.

From the Director of the National Supply Division, printed in the catalog: "If, for any reason, you are dissatisfied with any item purchased from the Boy Scouts of America, you can either exchange the item for a replacement or receive a full and complete refund. No questions asked."

We've done the cut method on occasion. It allows each boy to participate by laying their stripe on the fire individually.

Eagledad, I like your approach to posting your ideas on a topic. The thing about a discussion is that it gets the mind working. Lots of ideas get processed. I learn best when I understand why a particular methodology is used, what pitfalls are avoided, and what the benefits are. Its makes for a better learning experience than trust me, this is the way. The PLC and I concluded that the single monthly meeting doesnt get the job done. One problem with a single monthly meeting is that if one of the boys comes ill-prepared, we tend to get stalled. And its a whole month before we meet again. The SPL has learned that he needs to call the PLs before the meeting to remind them of what their part is. I agree with everything you said about agenda. The SPL works from an agenda of sorts, but feels free to add items to it as they pop into his head. That tends to prolong the meeting. All the boys should have a copy of the agenda. He and I are working on that. The thing about training boys is that they need to discover the proven methods on their own. They do a lot of discovering. The PLC and I meet briefly at the close of each troop meeting. I dont consider these to be formal PLC meetings as such, but rather a reflection of what worked and didnt work at the just completed meeting. Ive considered the idea of meeting before the troop meeting. But I dont want the PLC to think that they can wait until 30 minutes before the troop meeting to plan the troop meeting. A last minute review of what has already been planned would be good. Thanks for the thoughts.

After about 15 minutes checking the dozens of links offered by the search engine, I got lucky and hit the Boy Scout Fast Start Program. No luck finding the Cub Scout Fast Start. I don't believe they are intentionally hidden. The national site is incredibly complex. If a user can't find what he's looking for in under two minutes, most will give up. For all intents and purposes, there is no on-line fast start training.

"Seems like this info should be in the SM handbook." Chapter 10 (Advancement) of the Scoutmaster Handbook states that requirements may not be added to nor omitted. It also refers the reader to the Advancement Policies book for further information. Dan, you might mention to your SM that in reading the SM Handbook, you learned something ...

Our PLC is meeting once per month, and I have to say it doesn't work very well. There is just too much to get through in 90 minutes. They just have not developed far enough to be able to plan 4 meetings, discuss an outing, and cover everything else too. Either they need more meeting time, or adult intervention, and adults taking over doesn't teach leadership. Your approach sounds like something we might try.

See that your patrol leaders and the SPL all have a copy of the Patrol Leaders' Handbook. The book explains how to sucessfully do their jobs. Then ask your Scoutmaster to help you implement the guidelines in the book.

"... changing advancement requirements are against the BSA rules, and you said, adding requirements is a violation of BSA policy, where are these rules/polices?". The rules can be found in the "Advancement Committee Policies and Procedures" publication #33088. Every troop should have one.

ProudEagle is saying is that the the Fast Start trainings cannot be accessed by going to the national website. Since the redesign several months ago, the url's are hidden. They can be accessed only if you know what address to type in. There is no link on national website, and the search feature cannot find them. I will add that there are lots and lots of BSA resources that are "hidden", intentionally or otherwise. Unless you know the direct url, your'e out of luck. They cannot be found by going to scouting.org.