Stosh

Count me in for a 52 week program! Stosh

"Pick the one that is best for you." Or maybe the one that is best for your son." Sorry Buffalo, couldn't resist! I know what you really meant. Stosh

"The BOR is a review of the Scout's performance." No, it is much more a review of the Scout's experience, than of his performance. It IS a review of the SM's performance, as he is in charge of the program, and advancement. If Scouts aren't doing the requirements, but are getting them signed off, there is a problem with the program. >> No, there's a problem with the process and the next time the Instructor and PL have a BOR it will be a review of those scouts' performance. They were given leadership POR and they haven't functioned well in those areas. It is the philosophy of our troop that the boy-led program means they are responsible for the program. We, as adults, assist them develop their program within the guidelines of the BSA. If the Scouts aren't planning campouts, there is a problem with the program. >> No, there's a problem with the process and a review with the leadership of the PLC and the boys involved will need to be addressed. The job of adults concerned with advancement (mainly, the SM) is to provide the right environment. >> Yep, but if the boys are not functioning within those environments, then a review of the processes are in order. The review has three purposes - to make sure the work has been learned and completed, >> That's the leadership job of the PL. He's supposed to be taking care of his patrol members. to see how good an experience the Scout is having, >> This will be fed back to the PL, SPL, and PLC for review. to encourage the Scout to advance to the next rank. >> Everyone needs a cheerleader, the adults, the troop officers, and especially the boy's PL. The first two items fall directly on the SM, as a measure of his performance as the leader responsible for the program. >> The program is made up of processes in which different individuals are given leadership opportunities. If the SM is going to take over those leadership opportunities to guarantee a "successful" program, then what's left for the boys to lead? Instead of looking for whose fault these issues are, it isn't solving any problems nor giving opportunities for learning for the boys. It would be a lot easier for the SM to take over all the responsibility for every aspect of the "program", but it does nothing for the development of the boys. So, why have a SM? Sure, s/he's there to seek out how to best develop the leadership of the boys. S/he will adapt the various aspects of the "program" so that the boys will have the best opportunity for success if THEY decide to actually do it. Instead of asking the question: "Whose fault is it?" which solves no problem ever, the question should be: "How are we going to adapt an opportunity for the boy to succeed?" "Is he best served where he is? "Should we give him another chance in a different POR more suitable to his skill set?" These are far more productive questions in IMHO. The "program" is the goal, the "processes" are those means by which the goal is attained. Stosh

Shutting down the troop for the summer would drive me nuts! 75% of our planning in the cold winter months is what are we going to be doing once it gets warm! Shutting down for the summer is knocking 25% of the best scout time of the year! Obviously I've never had the concern of summertime POR credit. A scout pays a program registration for 12 months, that's the program I give him! Stosh

My approach to the parents in my troop is: Have their boy go off with the other boys "while the adults talk". Then I take the first half hour of the visit with the parents having them watch their boy interact with the boys of the troop. THEN, we sit down and I field questions. This observation of how their son is reacting is vital to any and all questions they may have. I find that having watched, the parents don't spend a lot of time talking generalities, but specifics about, why are the boys all in little groups? Why are some doing one thing and others doing something else? etc. This will then lead to how the parents perceive how a troop is run and whether their son would be a good fit into the program. If on the other hand all the boys hung out together and cliqued up into their friend groups, and the new boys kinda hung out around the fringes, that would tell you something as well. Who's talking to your kid? What's he telling him? Is he genuine in his conversation? etc. This observation approach allows each parent a picture of a thousand words that will speak more for your troop than any planned presentation or question/answer session the parents may be involved in. I also take my top scouts aside and do this very same thing for their input and observations whenever I need to take the "pulse" of the program. Sometimes when one is involved, they don't see as much as and "outside observer". This is what parents are and need to be. You can always snag them up later if you need adult leaders for the troop. Stosh

Stosh, IMO, what you have is a recipe for disaster, and that is what you are getting. >> Everyone's entitled to their own opinions. But no one seems to think we have a disaster here. The Scoutmaster is in charge of advancement. The buck stops with him. >> Advancement is the responsiblity of every Scout with the SM's assistance. Buck may stop with the SM, but advancement stops with the Scout. I am not responsible for boys not advancing or every SM would be blamed for everyone that dropped out of the program. Just can't see the logic in that From the ACP&P: The Scoutmaster maintains a list of those qualified to give tests and to pass candidates. >> Instruction and giving tests and passing a Scout is not the same as signing off in the book. The Instructor is not signing off, the PL is. The PL is kinda like a pre-SMC/BOR. He CAN re-test the boy, whereas the adults can't. The SM can give PLs or others the authority to sign off on rank advancement, but the SM maintains the responsibility to make sure the advancement program is run correctly. >> This is what I've been saying all along, but from the opening remark, it sounds as if it's a recipe for disaster... Since the SM is in charge of advancement, the BOR is certainly a review of his performance. If the boys aren't learning anything but are having requirements signed off, whose fault is that? The person in charge of advancement - the SM. >> The BOR is a review of the Scout's performance. If the boys aren't learning anything at school whose fault is that? The teacher's? Sorry, but the responsibility to learn is the learners. The responsibility to teach is the teachers. Maybe that's why they use those terms to describe the individual's responsibility. If we adopted the philosophy of teacher/learner that is being advocated in your posts, in the school system, we wouldn't have any teachers for the schools. Sorry, I don't buy that program. Like school, 95% of the Scouts do just fine with the PL signing off system, but like school there's always going to be those who "fail" along the way. It's not a disaster, it's a learning opportunity and if the scout picks himself up, dusts himself off, and avoids that pitfall in the future, it's a good thing. I seriously think this particular scout will some day be a great SPL and Eagle Scout. He's just "not there quite yet". Stosh

(This message has been edited by jblake47)

(This message has been edited by jblake47)

When my son got involved in scouting, I renewed my involvement in scouting. It was natural for me because he was a Tiger. Well, my younger brother thought that getting back into scouting would be good too, but his son was an infant. I told him to go down to the Council office, and tell the SE that you want to volunteer. Geesh! He didn't have to worry about finding something useful to do! He did a lot of necessary jobs for many years before finally settling down to Tiger Cub Coach when his boy finally got old enough to join. He was a UC, he reorganized a troop and started yet another. He had a blast! Go down there today! Tell them you're willing to do anything that is useful for promoting scouting in your area. When you move, do the same thing at the new council office! Scouting will always have a place for you! Stosh

Why would it make any difference where the boy is registered if it's where he attends that is important? Den Chiefs are not dual registered, yet spend a lot of time with a Cub Pack. Look at this process as the boy is registered as a Scout, where he happens to be at any given time is not relevant. If he wishes to register with the new troop to help their numbers and help them get on their feet, so be it, that doesn't mean he can't hang out with his buddies at the other troop. If your son wishes to put some time in on the new unit, great! If he wants to put in time with his buddies in the old unit, great too! Sounds like you have a son that really knows what that Eagle means! Don't worry about the paperwork, it's the activity which is important. And what's to say your son isn't going to be the new unit's first Eagle? Some new fun "rivalries" might happen if the old troop sees it's work of not just your son, but the whole troop in general as they spin off a "sister" troop. Like an older "brother" they do what they can do to help out the other troop get on it's feet. Being 30 miles away, it should not cause any recruiting competition, but might bode well for the old troop to take some honest credit for getting this new troop going. A number of years back my old troop "adopted" another troop from another council who had not ever gone on any high adventure outings. They lined up neckers, t-shirts, and patches to "unite" the expedition, and hosted them on a trip to the BWCA. Our boys had a blast, but the other troop was so appreciative that they talked for many years after about how those Cheese Heads took the time to help the Flatlanders have a great time! Not all troop interaction has to be competitive! Cooperative efforts are often more rewarding. Stosh

One has to be careful with the use of individual scout accounts. If the fundraiser states that the donation these people are making is for the troop and the money is then split up into individual's personal accounts to purchase personal equipment it constitutes money laundring. One has taken money under one pretense and dispersed it under another. If the scout is funraising for the purpose of going to summer camp, then the donor knows he is donating to that specific scout for the purpose of his participation in that specific program and the money can be put into an account for him to spend on summer camp. "I'm going to summer camp and need some money, want to buy some popcorn?" Now if the boy takes that money and buys a tent, it constitutes money laundring. This process can happen, but it needs to be made clear to the donor just exactly what it is he/she is donating to, the troop?, a trip?, a scout? While this might sound like a lot of technicalities, such honesty on behalf of the scouts must be maintained above board. With a society attuned to misconduct and corruption in every aspect of programs in their area, it would be a shame if BSA got caught up in it especially after promoting honesty as one of it's biggest tennats. Stosh

If it was me, (my own personal opinion!): If I was expected to drive 3 hours to train one person, I'd make the trip. I would be disappointed if I drive 3 hours and no one showed. But whether I'm teaching 1 person or 100 people, they came to learn and I came to teach, and that means that there is one more person in the council equipped to lead his crew. Life example: (I used to be active as a minister) I had a funeral for a gentleman who died at the nursing home. I made the appropriate preparation including a mediation. No one showed. It was me and the funeral director. I omitted the meditation, but the gentleman still got the prayers, the readings and I went through the whole service for him. I doubt whether it made a bit of difference for him, but it was important for me. Stosh

I like the ideas presented so far but would like to emphasize the "flood them with information". Having too many good things to choose from isn't ever a problem. Kayaking, canoeing, rafting, hiking, museums, backpacking, winter camping, dogsledding, spelunking, climbing, biking, etc. etc. etc. The internet is packed with ideas. Drop a handful of ideas in their lap every week! Every time one gives these out, the boys receive a tacit approval that what they choose is going to be okay with the adults. What a lot of older boys feel the lack of what's acceptable and what's not. If it's something the adults found on the internet it's okay. If they find something they might be interested and there's nothing wrong with it, simply say, "That's a great idea" and put the adult stamp of approval right then and there. One can also take the tried and true ideas and improve on them. Okay, next camporee they're going to be doing the string burn for the umteenth time! Oh wow, how exciting? Suggest flint and steel with making their own charcloth, or drill and bow, or something that takes the hohum and turns it into a challenge that they can be proud of. How about getting out the old 1911 handbook reprint and challenge the boys to make tents, packs, or other gear the historic boys used to do. That might sell well in the centennial years. Their patrol shows up equipped with all this old hand-made equipment and does a seminar on each thing they did for the other modern boys to ooh and aah about. Maybe as a patrol, they take the Red Cross First Aid training and set up and man a first aid station at events. Nice publicity and gives the boys something worthwhile to do. Make everything they do even if it's stale and make it over the top. My boys made a whole winter campout themed on Morse Code and did the flashlight thingy at night and made flags for the daytime. They researched the internet and got all kinds of guides and lessons and had a great time. Be prepared to be up all night looking for batteries. Hint: the older flashlights have the signal button on them that work better than on/off switches. Otherwise, hand over the light works well too. Let them experiment and try out different things. Yep, they even tried the smoke signal thingy that didn't work out as well as they had hoped, but they had fun trying anyway. Oops, almost forgot, take two canoes and turn them into a catamaran sailboat..... We had a cub pack make fold-up kayaks one time. Maybe a contest to see who can come up with the best backpack kitchen for the patrol. The ideas are endless! Stosh(This message has been edited by jblake47)

"I can't be held accountable for what goes on in other peoples' minds." Sorry, but you are responsible if you're trying to proseletize them but I'm not trying to proselyte anyone. They have their opinion and that's fine. "If one isn't going to pay, they ain't gonna play. If you can't afford it, don't buy it." This white, middle-class attitude tells us that if you're too poor to have a uniform, then don't even think of joining the Scouts. It's not reserved for the white middle class, it's called Thrifty. Take what money you may have and make the best of it. If it's a choice between putting food on the table or joining Scouts, I'd suggest you get food on the table. "One doesn't need the best stuff right from the git go." agreed, which is why we suggest foregoing the uniform at first until the kid decides if Scouting is really for him. This decision is generally made half-way to Second Class. Start with the shirt,of course, and gradually add to it so that you're in full uniform by First Class. Kid will be older then, so can find more odd jobs, and has been exposed to work ethic and self-reliance catechism of Scouting Yep, another part of Thrifty. "Making it too expensive is just an excuse to justify not being able to participate in Scouts. It's a bogus argument." Not if your factory job went to China, and you haven't found a good, real job for over a year. We take in boys even if all they can afford is rags. Do what you can with what they have instead of what you'd like them to have. Build from there I just watch every penny and get my best bang for the buck. It's not that difficult if one plans and sets prioritizes. Personal Management MB does a fairly good job of showing this. I was a Scout in full uniform long before I got those things. If you are taking in everyone, then it is the troop's responsibility to help these boys get what they need to be successful in the program. The only difference between your emphasis and mine is that you think it's acceptable to have a sleeping bag and pack over a uniform. I'm thinking one can have the uniform and get by on a blanket from the closet and a rolled up tarp to haul it around in. It's just a difference in priorities. You have yours, I have mine. I have all my boys in full uniform and they are NOT all that well off financially, especially those with 2 boys in the program. As a troop we have very old tents, old stoves, and a lot of junk equipment. When we went to summer camp they didn't have stoves that worked so they cooked exclusively using wood. It was in-site patrol cooking, no mess hall. They didn't have any gas lamps to light up the camp at night and not all boys had flashlights, but they shared. One of the boys hauled his gear in using garbage bags slung over his shoulder. They had a great time at camp, but the best moment for some of the boys was when the Camp Staff gathered at the flag pole for flag retirement the first night, the program director looked at the boys and said, "Hey, everyone's in full uniform, that's great to see." How much did that comment cost us? I don't know, but the value gained was priceless. That sentiment was commented many times throughout that week because those boys wore full uniforms all the time except when they slept and when they were swimming. What amazed me was why were we such an exception? Why does it surprise everyone when a troop wears full uniforms? It used to be that in a glance one could recognize a policeman, a fireman, a soldier, a doctor, and the Scouts. Can't say that much anymore. Stosh

When the boy asked for the POR he was informed by me (SM) what the job would entail. He was asked numerous times throughout the 6 month time how's it going, he more often than not would say okay without any other comments. Eventually he informed me he had recruited one other person to take APL, his buddy from another patrol. When the Webelos crossed over no one came into the troop. I asked him if he had gotten the names of the Webelos at the Blue Gold, he said no. I suggested he contact the den leader to get those names. I gave him the name and phone number. He never made the call. At the second cross-over he repeated the same process of not getting names and didn't to do any follow-up calls. There were 37 boys in these two Webelos dens and he recruited none of them. Then he hung around until his time as PL was up and called for a SMC. He was advised that there might be a problem with the results of his inactivity. He went to the BOR anyway. When they asked him about his POR he had nothing to say and the BOR recessed until he was able to answer the question. The suggested he try a different POR and that maybe the SM could offer up something he would be more inclined to accomplish. After the Board recesssed he had a half hour to come and talk with me. He chose not to. Hopefully he'll say something next week. Mafaking: if the BOR was conviened 3-4 months earlier they could have been more proactive, but the boy chose to wait until the last minute. However the tradition is to wait until everything in the book is checked off. The PL checked off the POR at the last minute. There is no reason the BOR could not have been conviened before the requirements were finished. In this situation the boy and his PL chose to wait until the last minute, and the BOR put the brakes on. I'm not so sure a BOR of youth may have come to the same conclusion. He's a nice kid and they might have overlooked his total lack of effort on this issue. After all, he did serve as a PL for 4 months as the requirements stated even if he didn't do anything. They aren't going to be in any hurry to have anyone question their lack of leadership in a POR when their turn comes up for a scout-led board. Calling in "experts" from district/council isn't going to make one bit of difference. They will recognize immediately that the scout made no effort. This scout also chose to skip the TLT training offered as well as any other opportunities for training. He made FC in 7 months and is a smart kid, but is basically lazy. As for the adult training goes, the SM is WB trained, the CC is WB trained 2 others on the committee are WB trained and the ASM (the boy's father) is planning on WB training next summer but has many years of experience as a SM in his own right and is an Eagle Scout with Palms. The only decenting voice in the process was the father who said he should have been passed because he held the POR for 4 months like the requirement states and that expecting him to actually do something was expecting more than the requirement states. "5. While a First Class Scout, serve actively for four months in one or more of the following positions of responsibility (or carry out a Scoutmaster-assigned leadership project to help the troop): Boy Scout troop. Patrol leader, assistant senior patrol leader, senior patrol leader, troop guide, Order of the Arrow troop representative, den chief, scribe, librarian, historian, quartermaster, bugler, junior assistant Scoutmaster, chaplain aide, or instructor. Varsity Scout team. Captain, cocaptain, program manager, squad leader, team secretary, Order of the Arrow troop representative, librarian, historian, quartermaster, chaplain aide, instructor, or den chief. Venturing crew/ship. President, vice president, secretary, treasurer, boatswain, boatswain's mate, yeoman, purser, or storekeeper. " He wore the patch and showed up for the vast majority of meetings and activities and thus was active. Technically, his dad is correct. Stosh

Mar 1 - Feb 28/29 One year I had to make special arrangements with the DE to leave the packet at the scout office instead of the trunk of his car so I could pick it up because it was Feb 1 and I still didn't have the packet in my sweaty little hands. Stosh

Right or wrong, regulations or not, all the boys attending from our council are required to have two complete uniforms for the event. No, I cannot cite chapter and verse of where this process is prohibited, but that's the "rules" for both contingents. Does that put a hardship on the parents who are already coughing up $1,750 just to go? Probably. Did any one challenge the issue? Nope. It would be interesting to know what would happen if a boy pays the fees and then doesn't show up with his two uniforms....... Like OGE says, everyone emphasizes different areas of the program some of which are not as visible as uniforming. Yet when all the dust settles, how does one "see" the effort a boy goes through to hunt all around the troop for a pair of uniform pants that fit that he can borrow so he can present himself in full uniform for his EBOR. They won't question him on it, they won't even know the pants are borrowed. It may mean nothing to most people, but the effort to look his best is something the scout is going to know and know how much it meant to him. Those personal priorities of leadership to oneself aren't visible even in full uniform. The affluent scout standing in front of his EBOR in a brand new perfectly outfitted uniform is not the same as the poor scout standing in front of his EBOR who had to beg and borrow every piece of uniform from a half dozen buddies to present himself in a fashion important to himself and those he wishes to influence. Not even the uniform is as "visible" as one might first assume. Stosh

I can't be held accountable for what goes on in other peoples' minds. Whether it be school or non-school activities, they are all optional. No one forces anyone to go out for the football team, or the basketball team any more than anyone is forced into karate or Scouts. If one isn't going to pay, they ain't gonna play. If you can't afford it, don't buy it. How do you tell the little 6 year old girl that she can have all the lessons she wants, but when it comes to the performance at the end of the year you can't pay for the $50 costume? Yeah, right, that's gonna sell at that household. It might be smug arrogance or simple hypocracy, but to say you don't need a uniform to be in Scouts and then when it comes to Jamborees and Eagle COH's you must have one to participate? Sounds like dance class to me. Either it's required in full or it isn't, these half-way measures only cause confusion and disappointment along the way. No one else does it, but BSA does. If the expectations were clear, this thread would never have occurred. Obviously something smells a bit foul. When I was in band, I bought a used instrument to play. I played it all the way through junior high, high school and college. I also paid for it's upkeep and repairs and a new case to carry it in. I paid for all my reeds (woodwind instrument) and specialty mouthpieces as needed for the different bands I participated in. If ya want in the game, ante up. I wanted to be in scouts, I paid for it. I wanted to be in band, I paid for it. I know for some it's a foreign concept, but it does work. I'm thinking I would look rather stupid showing up for the first band practice without a horn. And when it came to scouts, I slept many nights in a floorless, doorless canvas pup tent, with my dad's wool military blanket before I could afford something nicer. A melmac plate, plastic cup and silverware out of the drawer got me by until I could buy a mess kit too. One doesn't need the best stuff right from the git go. I may not have been equipped the best, but I had a full uniform with belt, socks and necker. I still weekend camp using the very same Yucca pack I purchased back in the early '60's. It carries just the right amount of gear for the weekend. I did buy a nice external frame when I needed a long-term camp pack, i.e. Philmont, but I was 50 years old then and had been working for a while. Yes, one can make a backpack out of an old pair of pants, it was in the Scout Handbook. They used to have patterns on making tents out of a tarp too. Those things still work today. Making it too expensive is just an excuse to justify not being able to participate in Scouts. It's a bogus argument. My Venturing crew uses open ended pup tents, but only if it rains. Otherwise, meadow crashing is the option they prefer. Stosh

Maybe the BOR should have conviened long before everyone thought the requirements were done. There's nothing wrong with conviening the BOR half way through the rank (yes, even before the SMC) and then recess until the boy has finished up. The BOR that jumps in at the last minute and then strikes a pass/fail pose isn't doing their job. Just because the BOR is the last requirement doesn't mean it is advantageous to be the last step before advancement. The requirement states: Complete a BOR. It doesn't mandate that this is a one-time deal with a pass/fail result. I have one BOR in recess at the present time and will complete their work when the boy is ready for his rank advancement. Until then it is a work-in-progress. Stosh

However, Scouts is not part of public school any more than youth hockey, soccer, karate, summer baseball, Civil Air Patrol, dance, etc. ALL of which require the parents to purchase uniforms and equipment. I had a daughter in dance that was required to have a brand-new different costume for every performance she was involved in!!!! Add to that I had to pay for the lessons besides! Tossing school uniform activities and non-school uniform activities in together is apples and oranges. If a kid wants to get involved in activities outside of school, they are expected often to make purchases for participation. Sorry, I still don't think having a partial uniform is acceptable, none of these other organizations do, only Scouts have unfortunately cut corners. Stosh

Scouts may no longer be allowed to sit on the BOR's but there's nothing in the book that says the PL can't sit IN ON the BOR. While there is no BOR required for the Scout "Rank", all our new boys go through one. The PL sits in with the boy to assist him in dealing with a BOR and how to improve his interviewing skills to better communicate with the BOR. The new boys get through this scary process before it becomes a requirement and learn that the CC and Committee members are there to help them, not judge them. All subsequent BOR's the PL is available upon request to sit in on their patrol members' BOR. I as SM sit IN ON the EBOR, so why wouldn't a PL sit in on his member's BOR's? PL is the highest ranking officer of the troop and functions in that spot. It is their responsibility that their members are progressing through the ranks and showing improvement in their skills and responsibilities. Why would it be necessary for the SM to micro-manage that process? The SM trains the PL's, he doesn't do their job for them and then call that leadership. PL: "Mr. B, Johnny feels he has finished all the requirements for Star. I checked his records with him and everything looks to be in order. Have you had a chance to visit with him on his progress?" SM: "Yep" PL then signs off on SMC and lets Johnny know that everything is in order and he should make arrangements for closing out his BOR that was started six months ago when the SM suggested one to the PL to arrange because Johnny was sluffing off and not doing his POR work and it might be a problem at the BOR if left unattended. Never do anything a Scout is capable of doing. Stosh

The basic understanding of the BOR is for a seperate group of adults who do not work directly with scouts to judge the performance of the SM. In this situation, what do you think the BOR Chair should suggest to the SM? >> Beats me, I'm not the CC. And I find it strange that the BOR of a scout is the means by which the performance of the SM is judged. The BOR is for the boy, not the SM. The boys decide when they think they are ready, the SM supports them in THEIR decision. It's a means by which maturity is measured. If the CC has a concern, he simply talks to me directly. A SM may have a dozen confrences with a scout about his performance between rank advancements, which one is the PATROL LEADER is signing off? >> The requirement doesn't specify. Sometime during the rank advancement process the SM has a conference with him. If it's near the end of the requirements it may be a bit more helpful, but not manditory. In your situation, how does the SM check the skills performance of the scout who signs off the requirements of other scouts? >> Boy-led, patrol-method... PL is responsible for the patrol members. The SM isn't devoid of the process, he/she should know what's going on in his troop and deal with it as issues come up and supports the work of the PL's. These PL's don't learn in a vacuum, they make mistakes, they are corrected and life goes on. Have you asked your Council if they accept Patrol Leaders signitures in the SM confrence box? I mean before you send a scout up for Eagle, have you asked? >> My Council doesn't micro-manage the troops. I don't "send a scout up for Eagle". When the boy is ready he makes an application and goes himself. I go along for moral support, but in the end this is HIS Eagle and HIS responsibility. Just as the Council doesn't micro-manage the troops, I don't micro-manage the boy-led process, the boys do. NE-IV-88-Beaver: Unfortunately what you believe and what the requirement says are two different things. That's the point I am making. How many personal beliefs interfere, interpret, reinterpret the requirements until they are eventually a whole new requirement? Nowhere in the requirements does it say who is to sign off, other than a "leader". Is that an adult leader?, youth leader?, SM?, CC? The requirements are vague and what one person understands them to mean may not be what others "believe". We may be boy-led, but they all know that sooner or later they are going to have to deal with people outside the troop. The expectations these others have will have an impact on the decisions of the boy-led leaders. This is a good thing. The PL who signed off on the SS and SMC for this boy is now in discussion with the CC and the two of them are working out the details. I was called in as SM to advise on the issue. My CC is 100% into the boy-led program. They know things like this will be coming up in front of them and they take the responsibility to be the "sounding board" for other boards these boys will face outside the troop. They are part of the training process as much as the SM. Stosh(This message has been edited by jblake47)

Boomerscout: Yes, it is doable, my Venturing crew does exactly that process to uniform our boys. Instead of buying the kit, however, they replace pieces with their own purchases as the money comes in for them. They then turn the loaner piece back into the crew to be lent out to the next kid. Stosh As far as the entrepreneur spirit is concerned, that is a skill many of our boys would do well to develop. Maybe if the parents didn't have money to hand out the kids would figure it out, but with the big $$'s that parents lavish on their children, maybe other lessons should be taught. Not all paper routes are done by adults in vans. The person that delivers my paper pulls a coaster wagon with papers in them, sled in the winter. Routes are advertised all the time in our local paper (City of pop. 55,000) It just depends on how hard one wants to work and how much money they want to make. I haven't been able to make much money sitting at my computer posting on forums, but I do have a day job. Stosh(This message has been edited by jblake47)

"6. Take part in a Scoutmaster conference." (Star Requirement, cut-and-paste from www.Scouting.org) Nowhere in the requirement does it say that any approval or disapproval be involved in the process. He had a conference, he was advised against continuing on to the BOR but he did it anyway, and they caught what was aired in the SM conference. Yes, he took part in a SMC and the PL signed off on it. If I am not to add to the requirement, then if the boy comes to me and we talk about his advancement status and he's intending to make a presentation to the BOR for rank, then what the SM says is totally irrelevant. He had a conference and the requirement was fulfilled and whether the SM or PL signs it makes no difference. In this very same situation, the scout comes for a conference at the end of our discussion I sign regardless of what advice I give, the requirement is fulfilled. "7. Complete your board of review." (Star Requirement, cut-and-paste from www.Scouting.org) The boy did not "fail" the BOR, they only postponed their decision to give the boy more time to work throught his POR. Had they "completed" the BOR, even if he "failed", they would still have to award the rank. My CC and Committee know that just because the SMC is signed off it does not mean that his advancement is recommended by the SM. There is a reason why the SM isn't in on the BOR's. If they find something awry, they can ask the SM what he recommends on the situation before making their decision. The SM has his part in the process and the CC/Comm have their part and because there are two different requirements, there's two different obligations and responsibilities occuring here. Remember, these requirements are only by TRADITION in this order. There's no requirement that says the SM Conference must preceed a BOR. After all a BOR's can be held at any time! Stosh

"Take part in a Scoutmaster conference." is all the requirement says. And, yes, the SM can and I have said, I don't advise you proceeding under these circumstances. When they do and have trouble and the BOR comes back to the me and questions it, I tell them what I advised the boy and yes, he doesn't pass the BOR. Just because one has a SMC doesn't mean the SM has dotted all the i's and crossed all the t's. It's not his responsibility to review the boy's progress, only give a conference. The BOR is to review the boy's progress, (thus the title) and if they find the boy lacking they have the responsibility to act on it. "Complete your board of review." The members of the board can postpone their decision, thus the review is not complete until they say so. There is no such thing as failing a BOR. If they say he's failed the BOR, he has in fact completed it. The requirement does not say successfully complete your BOR, just complete it. Technicality? Sure, but there are a lot of assumptions floating around Scout Spirit, SMC's and BOR's that aren't spelled out in the requirements. 1) the PL marks off his buddy's Scout Spirit requirement. 2) SM has a conference and says nope, not acceptable. Yep, but the boy did - "Take part in a Scoutmaster conference." 3) BOR says nope, you don't pass this board's recommendation for rank, we're done here. Yep, but the boy did - "Complete your board of review." However, when all is said and done, the boy has in fact at this point met all the requirements for rank and should get it if one sticks to the letter of the law in the requirements. Stosh