Stosh

I find that the MB's that are not really completed, but signed off on just take away the value of the Eagle rank. It is this kind of activity sponsored by councils that contribute to the problem. MB's at summer camp, MB's at MB Day, Troops doing internal MB's instead of scouting, all add up to a well pencil-whipped Paper Eagles. I find the "work" done after FC is pretty much a waste of valuable scouting time. Instead of being out camping they are sitting in Citizenship classrooms. Instead of cooking on an open fire on a weekend, they are cooing at the MB counselor's patio for Saturday lunch. Instead of a 3 day bike trip with camping they are doing a requisite 5 miler for some MB credit, not necessarily for fun. The boys do service projects during this time. Well they are nothing more than Good Turns that they get advancement credit hours for. The Eagle project tends to be a grandiose service project with a ton of paperwork and political posturing and a convenient excuse to rack up service project hours for the younger scout's advancement.. POR's? Don't even get me started with these. The threads here attest to the problems with those. So all in all. What beyond FC is of real value other than ego building and political posturing? Star rank - Camp for at least 20 days, Summer camp can be counted since earning FC Organize and lead a camping troop/patrol event, emphasizing the patrol-method that lasts at least 2 full days. Friday @ 5:00 pm through Sunday @ 5:00 pm. Organize and lead a service project that benefits an organization not affiliated with BSA. Provide advancement instruction for FC advancement on 5 different topics. Earn at least 7 MB's at the basic level Life rank Camp for at least 20 days, Summer camp can be counted since earning Star Organize and lead two camping troop/patrol events, emphasizing the patrol-method that lasts at least 2 full days. Friday @ 5:00 pm through Sunday @ 5:00 pm. Organize and lead two service projects that benefits an organization not affiliated with BSA. Provide advancement instruction for FC advancement on 5 different topics. Earn at least 7 MB's at the intermediate level Eagle rank Camp for at least 20 days, Summer camp can be counted since earning Life Organize and lead three camping troop/patrol events, emphasizing the patrol-method that lasts at least 2 full days. Friday @ 5:00 pm through Sunday @ 5:00 pm. Organize and lead three service projects that benefits an organization not affiliated with BSA. Provide advancement instruction for FC advancement on 5 different topics. Earn at least 7 MB's at the advanced level. In order to actually accomplish this, the boys would need to complete their T-FC within 12-18 months, but with all the older boys teaching 5 different topics on a regular basis, that shouldn't be that difficult to do. That leaves 5-6 years to complete the other three ranks even if they dawdle. Half the camping credit could be the 10 days of summer camp. That leaves 5 outings over two years. Not a stretch at all. The organizing of troop/patrol camping events, well, there are 24 opportunities at each 2 year cycle time. Could knock that requirement off in 2-3 months. Service projects? Same as the camping events Teaching the younger boys shouldn't take much longer. Those lessons could be taught at meetings and if there are a lot of boys needing to teach the sessions could be broken down into patrols, The MB's will take longer, but 7 in 2 years is not difficult I'm thinking a system like this is meant to be stretched out, develop leadership and management skills, provide routine and keep the boys from taking a 2-3 hiatus after getting Life and before they come rushing back at age 17 to get their books pencil-whipped for Eagle. So, what about those POR's???? Well, I'm thinking that will all occur naturally because in order to accomplish Eagle, everyone is going to need everyone else's help to make it happen. It's called teamwork and leadership.... If one has boys that don't pay attention in the instructional part of their duties, or no one shows up for your service project or camping outing, maybe one ought to focus a bit on their leadership skills because management alone isn't going to be enough.

That is correct. It just depends on one's agenda as to what it means when the PL is responsible for the welfare of his patrol members. Does that mean that because one's medications are not a patrol or troop activity the PL doesn't have to worry about his new boy getting down to the camp nurse for his meds? No, when I tell my PL's they are responsible for the welfare of their patrol members I mean it for real. If I were running a troop of 80 boys I couldn't keep track of everything and I really don't need 10 ASM's when I already have 10 PL's. Does that mean I abdicate my responsibility as an adult leader, no I keep an eye on things, but I don't interfere unless it's an issue of safety. And I definitely don't do it for them. Because we don't have an SPL, the PL comes directly to me with any concerns he has about his members. I pencil whip my signature on the Blue Cards because my PL has already done all the prep work. He could sign just as easily as I do, but to make it "Official" it gets my John Hancock. This Boy-led, patrol-method, with little to no adult involvement works just like it's supposed to. One ought to try it out for themselves.

Sounds a bit like the honesty issue hasn't been raised here. I too don't think the ASM is to blame here. I'd hold off on Scout Spirit until the boys could prove to me otherwise. They could start by identifying what they did to prove to the new ASM they really did fulfill their POR's. If they can't then a discussion on the honesty of what they did would feed into the discussion on Scout Spirit. Am I to assume that you are the PL? If that be the case, there's nothing wrong with you have a SMC with both SM and ASM on their signing off on this requirement without consulting with you the PL might be the real reason for the boys getting away with their antics. In my troop I never signed off on any requirements unless I was authorized to do so by the PL. They are the ones responsible for their patrol members. As far as the PL's advancement, I don't sign off on their advancement unless they can show just cause for it.

Yes, I am, it's raining and I can't play in the garden..... Other than that things are great. Thanks for asking.

The SM is there to support the PL, provide a list of qualified MBC's, etc. share records of what the patrol members have and need for MB's, make suggestions on what might be appropriate for the members, BUT the final decision as to what's best for their members is in the hands of the PL. My PL sat down with his patrol, found out what each boy wanted to take, then went back and created a schedule so that guys could buddy up and if not have MB sessions close to each other so they could get back to the campsite with a buddy, etc. He did bring to me the fact that the new Webelos boy wanted to take 4 Eagle Path MB's the first year and asked me to talk with him about it. I did and he went back and worked out having at least one really fun MB to go with the 4 Eagle path ones. Neither of us said no because we both believe that what the members pick even after being warned is a respected decision. If something goes wrong, the PL or the PL and SM will work it though with the Scout. Everything is a learning opportunity.

And any and all of this could be done by the PL as well??? Kinda like keeping with the boy-led, patrol-method theme? Only SM"s are qualified to give out the council's MB list to the boys? I'm all for the SM pulling the plug on a poorly run MB, but I'm equally all for a PL doing the same thing. Devil's Advocate here: Which is better a Scout that takes a MB and then brags about how easy it was and that the counselor pencil whipped everything and he didn't really have to do anything but slightly pay attention? Or the Scout that complains to the Camp Director, his SM and everyone else he can find to listen that he didn't get what he paid for in his MB class? And also along the lines of boy-led, patrol-method, couldn't the PL be doing the prep work with the boy to make sure his patrol member gets the most out of his scouting experience? By the way, this is exactly what happens in my troop. All the MB's for summer camp were worked out with the PL and his patrol members. Devil's Advocate: Maybe only SM are qualified to be the real leaders and that the boys only given lip-service leadership? Maybe when the SM tells a boy to go talk to his PL, it's only a token crumb gesture to the PL position. After all everyone knows who the real leaders are and always go to them first. These kids know this and my kids don't come to me first, they always go to their PL first. My PL and I are in constant communication so I know what's going on and what I see is some fantastic stuff. I would be extremely happy to have the Blue Cards truly reflective of the methods of scouting. "Before starting this MB, discuss with your PL and have him sign." And then they wonder why adult-led seems to be so prevalent in the Boy Scout program. I give my boys the opportunity for learning real leadership. It's kinda surprising how well they do when the adults really do get out of the way.

What about the practice of MB Alley at Jamborees? - and I wonder how many of the scouts there have their Blue Cards signed by their unit leader? And this is how National promotes MB's...? The whole MB program could use a "do-over".

There is nothing prophetic about it. When people do good, good things happen, when people do bad, bad things happen. If I hit my thumb with a hammer, it's gonna hurt. Someone's moral code is defined either by an individual with an individual's agenda backing it up. Or it's defined by something else that that something else backs it up. If I decide it's in my moral best interest to kill someone, then I shouldn't be all that surprised when someone else decides it's in their best interest to kill me. To subscribe this all to some supreme being as the source of all great galactic wisdom is rather pointless. If I know that by doing bad to those around me, eventually they are going to retaliate and it's not going to go well for me. I don't need prophesy to tell me that. The 10 Commandments you refer to are nothing more than the minimum requirements for civilization. One doesn't need the 10 Commandments if they are a hermit. There are a number of moral codes out there and those that seem to work the best tend to fit well with the Judean/Christian code. King so-and-so walked in the ways of the Lord and his reign prospered. King so-and-so didn't walk in the ways of the Lord and he didn't so so hot. One needs to know the difference between prophesy and predicting the future. One of the is actually forbidden by Judean/Christian Scripture the other is not. I can understand why BSA leaves out the morality issue here. Morality is an issue of how one person treats another and has very little or nothing to do with God. Of course that doesn't stop people from preaching that all the good or all the bad in the world is a result of their god. Nope, it's a lot closer to home than their god.

And everything the SM does besides providing a signature could be construed as adding to the requirements. Maybe the SM doesn't like the MBC, but if that person is vetted, trained and registered with the council, what good is denying a signature? If the MBC isn't fulfilling his responsibility, what's that got to do with the SM's signature? Nothing! Don't talk to the scout, talk to the council personnel, camp director, MB activity chair, etc. and resolve the problem. That's not the fault of the scout and doesn't need a signature. PL knows the MBC, recommends him to his member that wants to take the MB class. PL has MB's of his own. He knows how to teach the boy to use the phone to contact the MBC and set up instruction. PL doesn't know of a MBC, then he goes and calls the scout office for a list of qualified MBC's. Council doesn't give out the list to the boy. He need support so he contacts SM who gets the list and gives it to him anyway. Boy shows up with a MBC signed Blue Card. SM or AC check out the name and it's not on the list. They further research and the MBC is not registered as such. Boy is told and he learns a valuable lesson in doing it right next time. If he learns this early in his Scouting career he won't be pulling this stunt two weeks before his 18th birthday with this being the last MB needed. It's called taking responsibility for oneself and no amount of SM signatures are going to make that any better.

But what if it rains? the NESA will be heroes! If it doesn't rain, most of the boys wouldn't even notice. If they weren't there for the MB's they'd be home in the room on the computer anyway. I like the way you think Mozart!

If a SM doesn't know what MB's his boys are taking, he's not doing his job! He doesn't need to sign anything to know what is going on. My PL gives me a list of MB's the boys signed up for for summer camp. If I have concerns about any of them, I can talk with the boy. I don't need to "give him permission" with my signature. My one Webelos cross-over this year signed up for 4 Eagle Path MB's for camp this summer. I visited with him that that would be a real challenge. He agreed, to take an additional fun MB to go along with the other four. Okay, we'll see how he does. Long before this boy finishes his 4 Eagle MB's we'll be talking about it while at camp. If he doesn't complete them, then the discussion will change to finding him a counselor back home that can help him finish up. Still no signature on my part needed. Worse case scenario? The boy signs up for a MB, does it, competes it and turns in his paperwork. It's a done deal. As SM, I ask him, "Good job on the MB, tell me about it." Never in the process is adult gate-keeping needed.

I was kinda doing a redundancy thingy with the redundancy thread... Maybe this should be a thread of it's own. It talks about the need for Eagle MB's, MB's in general, and Redundancy requirements all together. I'll just toss it out there and the moderators can decide what to do with it. Are MB's a separate, independent program? Could be, maybe should be. Is there redundancy between advancement requirements and MB's? Could be.... Just some thoughts As an outdoorsman, I have always thought of the T-FC requirements as the minimum level of skill to go out in the woods and be self-sufficient enough that everyone else around you doesn't need to babysit you. If an Eagle scout can't start a campfire, I seriously question his ability to be a genuine Eagle Scout. Do scouts get lost in the woods? Sure, but they also know the best way to get un-lost, too. After the scout has completed the T-FC, or even while doing the T-FC skill training, the opportunity for, "Hey, that was cool, what's next?" should be there for him and here is where I see the boy breaking away form the requirements to get a greater degree of training in areas that are of interest to him. Once a scout reaches FC, I'm satisfied he'll do well to enjoy his scouting career. However, if he has had his advancement to FC pencil whipped and is a burden on the members of his patrol because he doesn't know what he's doing, he's pretty much useless and will definitely not enjoy the scouting experience. This is how we get our Eagle scouts that can't start a simple campfire. They are along for the ride and the reward and aren't interested all that much on the experience or journey. If advancement quit at FC and the boys then had a smorgasbord of MB's to further their education, then I'm all for it. That furthering of education doesn't need to even be advancement. If people don't think that T-FC is not enough to make a well-rounded scout, then beef up the T-FC requirements to where they would be and then have everything else electives. Heck, even at that point, as long as the Scout is proficient in Scoutcraft, then they can add all the STEM MB's they want, even the classroom MB's are not a big deal then, if that's what the boys want, go for it If a boy loves the water, they should have an entire MB series on swimming, boating, fishing, etc. If the boy loves nature, then there's conservation, forestry, ecology, recycling, environmental science, etc. to satisfy his interests. I think the program can meet the interests of a wide variety of different personalities. I'm thinking T-FC can be seen as a high school diploma or GED. You are basically educated. MB's become the college level education and then there are the second tier MB's that would offer an indepth look at subjects and maybe then the "Eagle Path" are earned at the PhD level. A MB at the college level degree of difficulty, then that same MB at the Masters and then a PhD level where the boy really knows his stuff and could have some sort of valuable expertise in that area. Take cooking: T-FC - Skills for feeding oneself and a small group (patrol) Bachelor level - Dutch Oven, campfire cooking, developing and modifying recipes for the outdoors. Masters level - Backpacking foods, how to break down grocery store packaging into usable backpack treks, dehydrating one's own food, foraging in the wild, PhD level - Cooking for larger groups, Specialty cooking (gravies, sauces, baking breads, muffins, in DO, etc.) Making cheesecake in the DO instead of just cobblers. There could be a handful of PhD required MB's that had pre-requirement MB's. If PhD Cooking is required for "Eagle" then Bachelor and Master Cooking need to be done first. I can see the Swimming following the same parallel levels of difficulty with PhD Swimming culminating with BSA Life Saving certification or maybe SCUBA certification First Aid is another natural for the progressive levels of education If the old Ranger award needed 125 hours of First Aid training (EMT certification) why couldn't that be the PhD level of First Aid? I wouldn't even have a problem with STEM being a PhD level goal under these circumstances. With all this talk about how most of the MB's are STEM oriented in the first place, why not apply it to the Scouting journey? Science, Technology and Math all apply itself nicely to building catapults. Why not take to to the next level beyond Popsicle stick catapults of the Cub program? There's so much out there that is available and BSA is trending itself to FOLLOW what others are doing rather than taking the lead and setting the pace which they have 90% of the program skills already in place to do so. Is this going to produce redundancy in the program? No, it will produce a progressively more challenging adventure in the area of interest. There will be no question that what is being taught at the PhD level is not what was taught at the T-FC level. It also forces the BSA to categorize the curriculum to a progressively challenging path rather than willy-nilly wanderings it has in place now.

As an outdoorsman, I have always thought of the T-FC requirements as the minimum level of skill to go out in the woods and be self-sufficient enough that everyone else around you doesn't need to babysit you. If an Eagle scout can't start a campfire, I seriously question his ability to be a genuine Eagle Scout. Do scouts get lost in the woods? Sure, but they also know the best way to get un-lost, too. After the scout has completed the T-FC, or even while doing the T-FC skill training, the opportunity for, "Hey, that was cool, what's next?" should be there for him and here is where I see the boy breaking away form the requirements to get a greater degree of training in areas that are of interest to him. Once a scout reaches FC, I'm satisfied he'll do well to enjoy his scouting career. However, if he has had his advancement to FC pencil whipped and is a burden on the members of his patrol because he doesn't know what he's doing, he's pretty much useless and will definitely not enjoy the scouting experience. This is how we get our Eagle scouts that can't start a simple campfire. They are along for the ride and the reward and aren't interested all that much on the experience or journey. If advancement quit at FC and the boys then had a smorgasbord of MB's to further their education, then I'm all for it. That furthering of education doesn't need to even be advancement. If people don't think that T-FC is not enough to make a well-rounded scout, then beef up the T-FC requirements to where they would be and then have everything else electives. Heck, even at that point, as long as the Scout is proficient in Scoutcraft, then they can add all the STEM MB's they want, even the classroom MB's are not a big deal then, if that's what the boys want, go for it If a boy loves the water, they should have an entire MB series on swimming, boating, fishing, etc. If the boy loves nature, then there's conservation, forestry, ecology, recycling, environmental science, etc. to satisfy his interests. I think the program can meet the interests of a wide variety of different personalities. I'm thinking T-FC can be seen as a high school diploma or GED. You are basically educated. MB's become the college level education and then there are the second tier MB's that would offer an indepth look at subjects and maybe then the "Eagle Path" are earned at the PhD level. A MB at the college level degree of difficulty, then that same MB at the Masters and then a PhD level where the boy really knows his stuff and could have some sort of valuable expertise in that area. Take cooking: T-FC - Skills for feeding oneself and a small group (patrol) Bachelor level - Dutch Oven, campfire cooking, developing and modifying recipes for the outdoors. Masters level - Backpacking foods, how to break down grocery store packaging into usable backpack treks, dehydrating one's own food, foraging in the wild, PhD level - Cooking for larger groups, Specialty cooking (gravies, sauces, baking breads, muffins, in DO, etc.) Making cheesecake in the DO instead of just cobblers. There could be a handful of PhD required MB's that had pre-requirement MB's. If PhD Cooking is required for "Eagle" then Bachelor and Master Cooking need to be done first. I can see the Swimming following the same parallel levels of difficulty with PhD Swimming culminating with BSA Life Saving certification or maybe SCUBA certification First Aid is another natural for the progressive levels of education If the old Ranger award needed 125 hours of First Aid training (EMT certification) why couldn't that be the PhD level of First Aid? I wouldn't even have a problem with STEM being a PhD level goal under these circumstances. With all this talk about how most of the MB's are STEM oriented in the first place, why not apply it to the Scouting journey? Science, Technology and Math all apply itself nicely to building catapults. Why not take to to the next level beyond Popsicle stick catapults of the Cub program? There's so much out there that is available and BSA is trending itself to FOLLOW what others are doing rather than taking the lead and setting the pace which they have 90% of the program skills already in place to do so. Is this going to produce redundancy in the program? No, it will produce a progressively more challenging adventure in the area of interest. There will be no question that what is being taught at the PhD level is not what was taught at the T-FC level. It also forces the BSA to categorize the curriculum to a progressively challenging path rather than willy-nilly wanderings it has in place now.

Seriously? Do you know my wife! LOL!!!!

Never said it did. Lutherans take on non-members all the time. My CO has no members in it's troop. They view it as a community outreach program. So the point being, the CO is irrelevant to this discussion.

It all fits under the same umbrella known as bureaucracy The smaller the group the more efficient the funds. Isn't that what we teach our boys when it comes to menu shopping? On the other hand with other people's money rolling into a large group, it's not THEIR money, so Thrifty is the first to go.

I have heard of MB counselors not signing off on cards because the boy didn't do the work. I have heard of SM's not signing at the beginning because their troop has inappropriate rules regarding who can and who can't take MB's. I have never heard of a SM not signing a Blue Card when the MB Counselor has signed off on it. Besides the personal attack, I don't understand the point being made.

No, the pizza place is in my local area and they just do the pizza thingy. As far as Scientology troops sponsoring troops where their members can't join? I don't question motives. As a Christian doing ministry, I don't stop and ask someone what their religion is before helping them out. Maybe these units are outreach programs for the Scientology community or maybe they are just doing community service. To try and infer a motive as to why others do things is an exercise in futility for me. I'm not curious enough to ask why. Maybe someone should. I dunno.

Gee, when I was a kid in school, probably up until I was in High School, all the trees that didn't lose their "leaves" in the winter were called evergreen trees. So to name them Blue Spruce, etc. only adds to the confusion. My wife is a forester by degree so when I call a fir a pine tree, etc. I get in trouble. So now I call all pines, spruces, cedars, confers, junipers, etc. evergreen trees. But then the junipers are really bushes, but to me it's a bit like talking to a Navy sailor about boats and ships. The whole conversation is a little dinghy to me. The point being how much confusion can we throw out there before it's co confusing no one understands anything anymore.

Our council hasn't used Blue Cards for years. It's all done electronically now. At the end of camp I get a MB report from the camp director. That's it. It's been years since any of my boys have taken a MB outside of summer camp and/or MB university that I don't know what MB counselors do to record progress/mark as signed off. I don't do MB's myself. I haven't signed off on a blue card except what I pencil whip at summer camp prior to the MB sessions. I get notice from the MB University people what my boys got credit for. I usually notice where a boy is at with his advancement when I do a periodic review of his progress. Sometimes that's when I find out he even took a MB. I'm sure other councils handle things differently.

I can see where this could be a problem especially with taking up spots that others need. However, is the time when the boy shows up with a Blue Card the proper time to discuss this? I have periodic SMC's with my boys where I bring to light these kinds of issues.... you have X number of unfinished MB's, what's your plan for wrapping them up? Or like Eagledad said, maybe he was just taking the MB for fun. Is it the adult's responsibility to look out for his kids or everyone else's kids? Kind of a proper-time-for-everything, kind of approach. If one truly believes in a boy taking control over his own destiny, why would one try and stand in his way, just because some adult thought it advantageous to do so? If servant leadership is in place, I as a MB counselor have 10 openings in a class. I have 10 boys all signed up and then I get a desperate phone call from a boy needing the MB for Eagle and he's screwed around for 6+ years and faces the possibility of not getting Eagle.... (I know this would never happen in real life, but bear with me a bit) So I am going to do my Good Turn. I take on the boy, but I break it into two sessions, one with 5 boys and one with 6. After all I'm a nice guy and I am doing Scouting only for the boys. So I'm inconvenienced a bit. It's not the first time, nor is it going to be the last time. Who knows, maybe that 11th scout may go on to become a MB counselor himself and face the same situation. What's his experience with it? Only memories...

And what might be the qualifications that would not allow a boy to sign up for a MB that the SM has control over? Love the way you like to consistently distort the comments of other to support your point. At least you're consistent. A boy comes to me with a Blue Card and says he wants to take the class. SM pencil whips a signature because for all he knows he's already lined up to take it anyway and maybe even started.. Is that the adult controlling part? The boy does the MB and then says he needs the SM signature. SM pencil whips a signature because there's nothing he can do to stop it. Is that the adult controlling part? MB's are not a troop activity, they are not patrol activity, they are a personal choice by an individual scout. If the SM is in position to be controlling, all he/she has to do is refuse to sign. Where in my posts did I suggest a SM is to control the situation by refusing to sign. I'm saying the pencil whipped signatures really aren't necessary. But I'll contend that it makes a nice courtesy notification that a MB is going to be started or has started and then a second notification that the MB has been successfully completed. All of that could be done without a signature when a boy shows up with a MB counselor signed blue card. End of discussion. The troop, the patrol and the SM really have no real role to play other than to acknowledge the boy is taking a MB. I would concede that a SM could be adult controlling if they were to not sign, but what would be the rationale for not pencil whipping a signature? I wouldn't know of any. Last summer at summer camp my boys were not yet at the Scout rank, but they all took Wilderness Survival. 2 of the 4 passed. So one wonders how much the boys retained? Not an issue. MB counselor though it was enough.

Just because a troop is sponsored by a Lutheran church does not make it a Lutheran troop. I know of a Cub Scout pack that is sponsored by a pizza place. I don't think the pizza place promotes religion in any sense of the word, so they must be atheistic. They corporately they don't have a duty to god, unless maybe some pizza god someplace.

None of our boys indicated any interest. I'll plant a few trees and call it a day.

Gee, you guys sound as cynical as I am.