I need some help with Requirement #1 for Star, Life, and Eagle. The requirement reads: Be active in your troop and patrol for at least (X) months as a (Previous Rank) Scout. The big question is what does "active" mean? Currently our troop has an attendance policy that mandates a particular attendance rate during campouts, troop activities, and camping trips if a scout wishes to complete requirement #1 for Star, Life, and Eagle (this would also apply for Eagle Palms Requirement #1). For discussion sake I think it is between 2/3s and 3/4s depending on whether it is a troop meeting, activity, or campout.
We have some that support the policy, while others (like myself) would like to have the policy removed. I would like to solicit opinions from the dedicated people on scouter.com on this policy matter.
My case for removing the policy involves several key points. First the camping merit badge has a requirement of 20 days and 20 nights of camping. This requirement is part of an eagle required badge because the national eagle board decided that a scout should have 20 days and 20 nights of camping. We do 33 days and nights of camping each year. Our policy would require boys to go to 25 days and night to complete the percentage requirement for those ranks (this does not include the necessity of camping trips for the first class requirement of 10 activities, which would take over 3 years without camping trips). This brings the required total number of camping trips to over 30. Isn't this an additional requirement on top of what the advancement requirements are to Eagle?
The next situation that is has occurred several times, is when a scout must attend a particular trip to meet the advancement requirement. If the scout fails to attend that activity they will "lose" credit for trips at the start of the period. If a boy became ill and couldn't attend a particular trip their advancement would be in jeopardy. This means it is possible for a scout to complete over 100 days and nights of camping while never meeting the attendance requirement. Does this seem right? What do you do with a scout that MUST work to help support his family. This scout might not be able to meet the attendance requirement. Should this underprivileged young man be held back from advancing even though he is taking a level of responsibility far greater than the majority of scouts in the program?
Another key ingedient to my position is information from the National Boy Scouts of America website. Under advancement I found the following quote: "The Boy Scout plans his advancement and progresses at his own pace as he meets each (advancement) challenge." Clearly if the scout MUST attend any trip for the sake of attending this runs against this statement. The boy is planning nothing which is a sign of too much adult participation in the program.
I also believe that advancement will show through attendance. The boys that attend more will be able to work on more requirements during meetings and trips. Thus if they don't attend they are naturally affecting other portions of their development.
Again, any opinions or references would be appreciated.
Thanks,
Robert