moosetracker

Obviously like our troop, he is registered to one, but does both. In which case, he should be registered to the committee position in order to sit on the board.

2000!!! Yes you are outdated.. Here is the link to the 2011 edition. http://www.scouting.org/filestore/pdf/33088.pdf All the stuff about the "must" "shall" "may" "can" etc. were cut and pasted out of this pdf document.

Not saying I disagree with Nationals logic or yours (except I like the occasional outsider to sit in on the board).. But, I don't argue why it is not a good idea for the SM, ASM, or parents to sit in.. But, some troops may see it different then you or I.. All I am saying is if they do, and they make that decision logically, rationally and have good reason to do different then you or I.. The Guide doesn't say they can not.. It just says we would prefer that you did not, here are our reasons. Introducing the Guide to Advancement or a Guide to Safe Scouting in a training as a Rule book and not a Guide book, with some rules sprinkled in with "Must" & "Shall" statements.. Is just as bad as telling people during a Training that the Tour Permit was required, and you were not insured unless you filled it out and processed it 2 weeks in advance. Also if you feel strongly that something should be a rule, they do state that a Council may make those labeled "should", "may" or "can" into rules.. So you can always request that your Council make things you think should be rules into Council rules..

then it should read "MUST NOT" or "Shall NOT" ..not .. "MAY Not".. Personnally I prefer their old way.. the mandates were I believe bolded.. Rather then this subjective terms within what is already difficult to interpret words.. If I bring up Guide to advancement, I will point out it is a guide except for this blurb where if stated as Must or Shall it is a mandate.. But, I don't sit there reading word for word from the Guide, and interpreting it for them.. Now they can go home and interpret from it what they want to.. To be honest, I don't know of a troop that would state why a parent of a scout would make the best board member.. But, I guess you will have troops with ASMs serving on occasion.. Now the million dollar question.. Is it stupidity, or a well thought out reason why they wish not to follow Nationals advice..(This message has been edited by moosetracker)

As bnelon44 - shows.. I am simply following what is outlined in writing in the Guide.. Now mind you.. I am a big one on first being educated as to WHAT National thinks is good practice and WHY.. Rather then just going off and making un-informed rules based on stupidity.. If what National suggests sounds reasonable and sound advice, don't fix what's not broken! As far as the rule that you can not add or subtract from the requirements for each rank, or merit badge.. Well that is a mandated rule. Still we can argue as to whether signoff is at the first sloppy attempt, or when they show proficiency. And each unit will hold the bar at a different height and still we will not get a cookie cutter operation.

But again, it is just guidelines, and why National thinks thier guidelines are the best. They are not mandated rules.. So a unit definately SHOULD read the guidelines, The unit definately SHOULD either follow them, or have an open discussion on why the guidelines do not meet their vision for their troop.. The unit then SHOULD do it the way it works best for them.. Due to it being an important measuring tool for a committee, I don't see why after reading through the guidelines and reasons for them, a unit would choose to have NO committee members simply SM, ASMs, parents and outsiders... But, maybe this works for someone strange vision. But, I don't see the reason so many people started out in this thread with .. Committee members only..!! No outsiders, unless in dire need, and if that happens shame on them !!! So what in these guidelines state that it is not reasonable for there to be 3 committee members and one outsider? Or two committee members and one outsider? Or that that it can't be held outdoors on a beach in a bathing suit, eating ice cream and hanging upside down on a monkey bridge?.. Not because of dire needs that force the issue, but because the committee has said thank you National for the advice, but it doesn't meet our needs, we think it best to go this way.. Some people feel they can no longer have an SPL sit in on a board.. OK, I see that this may be similar to a SM, and the scout may not talk about the poor program with the SPL in the room.. But some people liked it.. The SPL could not be one of the 3 signatures from the Board. But, really what hard & fast rule prevents him from being the 4th or 5th observer? I agree SM, ASM, parents would be a distraction.. But, if the troop up the street thinks it's ok. Well, their vision is different then mine.. No one will yank their charter because they do it differently then I think they should be doing it. I voice my opinion a lot, and some people agree and others say Pthhhhhhhhhh.... We get good guidelines, a few rules, but the rest is local.

SP.. Don't know if you were say "I agree with you".. Or if you didn't realize what you said agrees with my statements.. Guide to Advancement has a few mandated items, but most of it is a guide.. Best to know what is the BSA recommendation, then from there tweak the program to what works best for your unit, but keep an eye on what is really mandated, so you don't tweak that aspect of the program. Units are not the same as a McDonalds franchise. Don't expect to walk into each one, and see a carbon copy likeness.. Everyone has their own interpretation of how to acheive the vision & the mission. It is was keeps this forum in such a lively debate..

What AT&T Facebook patch?? Never heard of it, and sounds like a local one to me, not National level.. As stated not all patches are commissioned by National.. I would imagine the patch to be commissioned at a higher level then your CO.. Wouldn't be surprised if it was commissioned by whoever does oversee the LDS Scouting for the USA..

Sorry, I see both sides.. Probably more so though Beavah's & Spencer's.. I am happy to see that for his Eagle project, he got the help he deserved.. He wasn't there for his fellow scouts, except for personal friends, the troop saw no reason to be there for them. Actions have consequences, that in itself is a learning experiences.. I was thinking he might have done it using a group outside scouting for example a church group if the project was for a church.. Maybe Spencer would have felt differently had his troop molded him in his early years, but from what I see, they had nothing to do with his development, so did not feel comfortable signing off on it.. This kid was a stranger to them.. Sort of like awarding the Eagle to some kid not involved in Scouting but developing his character through ROTC.. Good kid, glad he developed a solid character, but if he wasn't a scout why award him the Eagle? The ROTC have their own awards.. But, I also see that normally if a scout is involved in the troop, and develops in the troop early on, leaves for a few years, comes back in the last year and completes things but doesn't have alot of time to spend on scouting. A troop may remember him in his younger years, know they had a hand in the development, and be just fine with it.. If they can state he has the character Scouting wants to see in their Eagles. Not so fine with it, if the kid does not have good character, just goes through the motions to advancement. Yes Advancement IS only 1/8th of the methods of scouting. But to get most of the other 7/8ths you need to be involved in the scouting program also. In the last 4 years advancment is ALL the scout did or got out of the scouting program. Maybe his old troop would have felt more at ease signing his papers, knowing they had a part in developing a great kid. This troop did not have that feeling. To them he was a stranger.

The patch could have been commissioned by the LDS not National. Anyone can do a patch, OA does patches, everyone does patches for their camporees, we have people creating special award patches etc.. Of course 25 years ago you could put anything on your red jacket, now there are only official patches that should go on it, either that or you have to except being chewed up by the uniform police.

Well the info about ASM's being on the board is highly recommended, but not a mandate per National, due to the wording in the Guide to Advancement which uses the words "may not" when you read it, you may think "may not" is pretty definate, but it really means it is not, just recommended, although your Council may set up it's own mandate if they so choose to. This publication clearly identifies mandated procedures with words such as must and shall. Where such language is used, no council, committee, district, unit, or individual has the authority to deviate from the procedures covered, without the written permission of the national Advancement Team. Recommended best practices are offered using words like should, while other options and guidelines are indicated with terms such as may or can. Refer questions on these to your local district or council advancement chairs or staff advisors. They, in turn, may request interpretations and assistance from the national Advancement Team. Our troop followed the rule to have the Advancement guy be a committee member, yet still allowed him to wear both hats.. He just always register as committee, then allow him to wear both hats.. Advancement guys are usually a cross between both worlds, they work more closely with the boys, even if it is in guiding the older boys in how they are signing off on requirements.. But, normally they are also well trained in scout craft.. You know the skills that make them valuable ASM's.. But looking at the Guide to Advancement, info SP & Info Scouter posted The ONLY thing mandated is 3 to 6 "members" on the board.. the info about ASM, SM & parents being on the board are recommendations, but not required (and the council may mandate them.).. But as for the board members being all committee members, their is nothing about "must", "shall", "may" or "can" so this is really low key guidence, something even the council can not mandate. Me, I think the no relatives and no SM are a good thing for a troop to follow.. ASM being used would be desperate measures. As stated I think using an outsider is a good thing (not the same one all the time.. But, I would say if you have 3 committee members use them, and make an outside visitor a 4th, 5th or 6th Board member.. But again, that is only my idea of a good mix.. No better or worse then what any other troop chooses to do in order to pull together the 3 to 6 members.. Just remember, the GUIDE to Advancement, like the GUIDE to Safe Scouting has some mandates.. But most of what is written is guidence and recomendations. Pay attention to the wording before you go whipping the information in it around like it is criminal to have a difference of opinion, and have your troop choose to do things differently.. It is good to KNOW what is in the GUIDE, to make informed decisions about the best way to take your troop, and make sure that which are mandates are followed.

I too can see LDS celebrating after all at that point it is celebration of THEIR youth organization.. But I do not see it as a full out BSA celebration.. Sort of like a troop will personnally celebrate their centenial, or OA may celebrate, but it will only include all OA members with some sort of campout or special OA pin or pocket flap.. I think someone in our area is thinking of doing something, but has yet to decide if it will be big over a region or larger, or small just for their stake..

Before someone else calls me on it, there are alternatives that were listed afterward to #3.. The scout could show positive participation in something else of a worthy cause.. Sorry. I first saw the 3 tests in a link that talked about recent changes to Advancement and did not show the alternative, I then went to the Guide itself to verify & pulled it, Did not see this as it was in the next column. So possibly explanation of the work, play & chorus would count.. But before I counted it, I would ask him to explain to me how he thought it contribute to his growth in character, citizenship, or personal fitness.. But, the main point is, their is now a clause that does not give a scout a free pass, while he sits on the couch, watching TV and eating potato chips. (continuation) Alternative to the third test if expectations are not met: If a young man has fallen below his units activityoriented expectations, then it must be due to other positive endeavors in or out of Scoutingor to noteworthy circumstances that have prevented a higher level of participation (see below). In this case a Scout is considered active if a board of review can agree that Scouting values have already taken hold and been exhibited. This might be evidenced, for example, in how he lives his life and relates to others in his community, at school, in his religious life, or in Scouting. It is also acceptable to consider and count positive activities outside Scouting when they, too, contribute to his growth in character, citizenship, or personal fitness. Remember; it is not so much about what a Scout has done. It is about what he is able to do and how he has grown There may be, of course, registered youth who appear to have zero level of activity. Maybe they are out of the country on an exchange program, or away at school. Or maybe we just havent seen them and wonder if theyve quit. To pass the first test above, a Scout must be registered. But he must also have made it clear through outright participation or by communicating in some way that he still considers himself a member, even thoughfor nowhe may not meet full expectations. A conscientious leader might make a call and discover the boys intentions. If however, a Scout has been asked to leave his unit due to behavioral issues or the like, or if the council or the Boy Scouts of America has directedfor whatever reasonthat he may not participate, then according to the second test he is not considered active. In considering the third test, it is appropriate for units to set reasonable expectations for attendance and participation. Then it is simple: Those who meet them are active. But those who do not must be given the opportunity to qualify under the third-test alternative above. To do so, they must first offer an acceptable explanation. Certainly, there are medical, educational, family, and other issues that for practical purposes prevent higher levels of participation. These must be considered. Would the Scout have been more active if he could have been? If so, for purposes of advancement, he is deemed active.(This message has been edited by moosetracker)

Shortridge: At what point did the leadership say "Hey, why isn't this apparently qualified kid going on our campouts? Maybe we should ask him why the program doesn't interest him."... I'm guessing never, This may not be in the exact wording you want proof at but.. OP on initial post states As a final chance to make up for his lack of participation, his scoutmasters met with him several times in the year before his 18th birthday... Now asking the scout to do a project may have been wrong, but he clearly made know to the scout he had not met the troops expectation for involvement. Second Class: Show me the Requirement Definition of Active (per Guide to Advancement Page 21 from Scouting.org) http://www.scouting.org/filestore/pdf/33088.pdf The third test as to if the scout was active is based on the unit's reasonable expectations.. Now he can piece together times to qualify, doesn't have to be in the last year.. Maybe the SM of his old Troop will sign. 4.2.3.1 Active Participation The purpose of Star, Life, and Eagle Scout requirements calling for Scouts to be active for a period of months involves impact. Since we prepare young people to go forth, and essentially, make a positive difference in our American society, we judge that a member is active when his level of activity in Scouting, whether high or minimal, has had a sufficiently positive influence toward this end. Use the following three sequential tests to determine whether the requirement has been met. The first and second are required, along with either the third or its alternative. 1. The Scout is registered. The youth is registered in his unit for at least the time period indicated in the requirement, and he has indicated in some way, through word or action, that he considers himself a member. If a boy was supposed to have been registered, but for whatever reason was not, discuss with the local council registrar the possibility of back-registering him. 2. The Scout is in good standing. A Scout is considered in good standing with his unit as long as he has not been dismissed for disciplinary reasons. He must also be in good standing with the local council and the Boy Scouts of America. (In the rare case he is not, communications will have been delivered.) 3. The Scout meets the units reasonable expectations; or, if not, a lesser level of activity is explained. If, for the time period required, a Scout or qualifying Venturer or Sea Scout meets those aspects of his units pre-established expectations that refer to a level of activity, then he is considered active and the requirement is met. Time counted as active need not be consecutive. A boy may piece together any times he has been active and still qualify.

twocub - he has also been at the Life rank for four years, and the SM did address his uninvolvement a few times in the last year.. My guess is he really didn't looking interested in earning rank until the last year.. It is unsure if the Life POR was done in the other troop or this troop. If it was this troop and his non-presence meant he was not performing it, this would have been one other thing the SM could have removed him from before the 6 months was up. But, expecting the scout to show scout spirit in order to sign off on the scout spirit requirement, especially when he has been spoken to about it several times. I do not feel the SM should spell out a project for him to do in order to show scout spirit, but more an expectancy to see him at a certain percentage of troop meetings & events, --OR-- to do something like what was proposed in a large one time push.. Then it would be up to the scout to choose how they wanted to show their scout spirit.. But, if he does nothing, then it would not be signed off.. Just let the scout know he can still go to the EBOR without the signature, and if asked about the lack of signature explain it.. Maybe the district would deny it, but most likely they wont.. They would just make the scout go through some discomfort.. I do know our SM did deny a scout on scout spirit and refused to sign the application.. Many at District & council called him about it, and all he said was it was his integrety that due to the scouts actions he would feel he was dishonest to sign it.. This scout had the time to come back to the troop and show 6 months of scout spirit and he did so, because the district & council did back the SM.. Don't know what National would have done.. But, the SM.. Just stood his ground on his own integrety and allowed the district and council to choose a different path if they so were inclined.. If the scout was pushing 18 I would imagine the district may have gone ahead without the signatures of the SM. If the OP stated the SM said nothing right up to a week before his 18th birthday, then I would agree with all of you.. Too late, sign the papers.. But, he didn't.. You are teaching this boy nothing. I would not be surprised if he went off to college, didn't do term papers and expected a good grade anyway.. Or went off to work, didn't do his job and even with performance reviews that are less the favorable, and getting written up he will still be shocked to be fired. He should have consequences for his actions.. Guarenteed someone somewhere will still give him the Eagle award, but a) the SM can still look at himself in the mirror.. b) the scout can realize his path was not smooth due to his own choices.. What the troop & SM should NOT do though is stand in the way of someone else choosing a different course, or feeling it is a personal affront to their decision if someone gives him the Eagle without showing scout spirit.. So someone else saw it as a non-issue.. So what.. They are looking at things from a different angle.

Also just to clarify, always inviting the same outsider to become a regular on your board, is not the benifit of asking for the occasional ousider to sit in.. If you don't ask different outsiders to sit in, then there is no benefit to it. The scouts get use to them being on the board, the real committee members don't learn something new, he just becomes a regular, although not really a committee member. So I do see a point to makeing some outside person a regualer member of your board.. I just don't see an issue with inviting a guest board member who you have never had sit in before. I also don't see the harm when you do have a small committee, and may run into being short a committee member asking for a non-committee member to fill in, even if they have sat on the board in the past. At that point it is not to learn from one another, and breath new life into the same-old, same-old.. It is to help you out in a jam.

Just enjoy Scoutfish.. You earned it!

He is already at Life, what he needs done for Eagle rank are completed project & merit badges.. At almost 18 he is now going for Eagle. There is not board at the troop level for this, the advancement Board is now in the hands of a district panel.. Are you perhaps talking about the SM signing off on Scout spirit? Or signing of on his Eagle application? Even without the signatures he can go on to the district EBOR.. As SM since I did not hold out till his 18th birthday, but voiced my concern and gave him a chance to rectify his actions and met with him several times on the issue. I would probably not sign it.. But, not call the Board to attempt to talk them into rejecting him.. Just not sign the papers, let him explain the lack of the SM signatures to the board.. He will probably still make Eagle, but not without a little discomfort at his board.

Possibly.. and it might be my still trying to grasp what a UC does, but I still don't see it.. So it is a problem scout, that the committee is planning to fail? Would this be a board they would invite an outsider to sit on? If they did, would they do so without indicating to the unsuspecting UC that they were planning to fail the scout? They definately would not ask the guest board member to take the lead in the rejection! So the scout comes in, doesn't know scout oath, law, his troop number or his own name. A UC or really any outsider who is not rude and dominering is going to act like a guest and follow the lead of the true committee members. Do they stop the Board and request that the scout return the next week, or pass him anyway? A guest simply isn't going to be the one person insisting the scout not pass. Maybe at a later date, he might bring up the need to teach the scouts the scout oath & law, but from what I understand, all they can do is suggest. If the troop leaders don't want to listen so be it. So the board turns into a inquisition, with difficult questions.. The UC may not join in the torture.. So what would a UC do if visiting a Pack Meeting and the Cub Master is flipping Scouts upside down to pin their new badge on them? So what would happen if a UC visited a troop during a camporee and noticed the scouts fighting with no adult leader (SPL,ASPL,PL) interfering.. Truely I don't know what a UC would do, but thing is they could witness the unit doing something wrong with anything they visit, so what is different about a BOR? I know the UC is not to interfer, so I would imagine they do not have the right to stop the BOR, Pack meeting, or interfer in the way the troop handles the fight.. But, would raise concern later.. Again the Adult Leaders will decide if they want to pay attention or not. From what I know all a UC has over any outsider is to make mention of his concern about an action of the troops.. But the troop has the right to pay attention to the advise or not.. They may make mention of it to the Distict Commissioner, but from what I have seen they may make note that the troop may have future problems, but they will not get involved either. Well a committee Member who witnesses any of this and has concerns can themselves bring up those concerns at a committee meeting.. If they think it is serious enough and the troop is not dealling with it, believe me, many will make mention of it to the District Executive if they go to Round Table.. I know ours gets to hear alot of horror stories from concerned Adult leaders. One last thing. So what would happen if during the Board Meeting the scout states the SM came into his tent and fondled him?? Well what should each and every board member do?? What is every board members responsibility if this occurs?.. Seriously, should a UC never visit their units during anything, for fear that they might see something, they might need to give friendly advise on a change to the program?.. Because what the witness at a BOR would not be any more then what they might witness with whatever else they attend. In a BOR they should still remember they are a visitor and not an Adult Leader of the troop as with any other thing they visit or observe with the troop...

unregistered adult makes it sound like using people who don't understand the scouting program.. And the outsider is because you are desperate to wrangle up 3 people.. As far as I'm concerned if you can use 3 Committee members, and want to invite a fourth outsider who most likely will have some knowledge of scouting, even possibly from a different troop, or a District member.. Then I see no reason why this can't be something the troop says, thanks for the recommended procedures, but for our troop we think we improve our program doing our own thing..

Well it is great if you do allow DE's to work from home. I know some of our DE's have to travel a distance to go to the home office, and they hold like 3 meetings manditory meetings a week.. Me thinks someone at council making sure his own job had lots of fluff.. DE's want to spend time out in the fields, yet spend alot of time in the office at meetings being asked why they are not out in the field more..

I agree SP... Go and offer "friendly" service.. Barring if it is a UC or someone else outside of the committee.. I don't see the uproar over this issue.. I see the boards as being twofold.. 1) To allow the committee to view the health of the program. So by all means, a board should have committee on it.. 2) To get the boy scout comfortable with an interview process and/or being able to represent himself well under a board or panel.. Both of which he will face in life for job interviews, college interviews, possibly his job may require him to work with other corprate boards looking to buy his companies product. Or his job may have him have to present himself at a internal board to review either his planned proposal, or defend his chosen path after the fact.. Definatly don't hold a board without committee members present.. The Committee should never feel obligated or forced to put an "outsider" on the board, if they don't want him. But, if a Committee chooses to welcome a few outsiders into their boards.. I don't see this as a serious violation to the policy of conducting a BOR. Can you argue the boy wont open up with the outsider.. Sure.. But, it is more likely that he is not opening up because of the people he knows on the board, the wife of the ASM who is always barking at them and on their case, or the father of the boy that is either a poor SPL or bully, or the CC who you know will report everything said in the BOR back to the SM, so it is just like complaining about the troop program directly with the SM sitting on the Board himself. I agree with the fact people should follow the recommendation as to the tone of the BOR and not make it a harsh re-test of all the scout should know.. But, the fear of an outsider sitting on the board seems either like you are over-protecting the scout from having to deal with strangers, or that you fear an outsider may get a negative impression of your troop program by something the scout may say. Yet, if the scout makes it to an EBOR this is exactly what he or the troop will face.. Strangers not from the troop asking him about his time in scouts and what he enjoyed or did not enjoy from his scouting history.

I doubt anyone would walk in and shake up the membership controversy as the first order of buisness.. Even if you were wishing to do so, that would take several years being in the seat, and several successes in other fields before tackling. I think most are hopeing for a first shake up to be putting the outing back into scouting, type of changes.. Possibly redirecting or even throwing some of the worry wart bean counters out of the temple with their fears that if the scouts do anything but sit in chairs, they may break a fingernail and sue the BSA for it. Stop the watering down and practically giving out of rank advancements, for just showing up and breathing. Now after building the program up to be more robust then, maybe then he can tackle some of the harder issues. Maybe he will be Catholic but a "liberal" Catholic.. They have been starting to speak out lately, they were a fairly quiet bunch, but lately are getting braver and more outspoken.(This message has been edited by moosetracker)

Well since I am on District and not in a unit, my answer will be a little different. For District training it is always the plants & animal guy. We want someone with more the average scout knowledge, simply because most times we have a participant with more then scout knowledge who if so chooses could run circles around someone with basic scout knowledge.. We have this long list of people who can do it, but everytime we go through this list of 20 to find no one is available.. I am hopeful though, we just got a great knowledgable guy in our district who is very dependable.. He was running our Council Camp, now has a Environmental position at the State with Sat. & Sundays off.. So, hopefully we will be able to ask before he commits his weekend elsewhere, and not be starting to climb the walls in a frantic search after asking for 5 months and still having no one one week from the training date. When I was in the unit, I guess it would have been the financial guy. We had someone excellent, and if given the choice would keep him forever. Problem was after 20+ years as the financial guy he had wanted out for about 5 years, we had no one to replace him so he stayed probably out of a sense of guilt if he left us without a replacement person.

What is suggested here are the Right ways to do a meritbadge. The process if you as a parent want to see your boy grow into an independent fine young man, who preps and plan in order to be awsome now during Meritbadges, later at college interviews or job interviews etc. In reality a merit Badge Councilor is going to simply be human, they will all want things done differently and some will push your child to excel while others will pass him for breathing.. There is no way to plan on what a Councilor wants unless he has been a past councelor for a different MB. It's like asking for a checklist of what all college professors want..