Bob White

The bottom line is that you cannot refuse advancement unless there is a requirement that he did not complete. At this point LisaBob has not mentioned a sigle problem with any requirement. Nor has she mentioned if the board followed through on their requirements to inform the scout as to what requirement is not done or how to appeal. Who is more negligent the adults or the youth? If I were in Lisa Bobs place I think the board need to contact the scout and say "we all made mistakes at the bor. We need to give you more informastion and we need you to be ready to talk about yourself and the troop and do so openly. Lets try this again. This time lets all come better prpared to do our roles correctly." (This message has been edited by Bob White)

Gunny I believed I covered that. If the IH does not have the policy that the SM said they have then as the commissioner I would ask him to get that correction made with the SM as soon as possible so that the youth could return to join. Lets remember that the Scoutmaster works for the CO and not the other way around. It is not the SM role to determine membership policies. That authority is given to the BSA and the IH of the charter organization.

using old materials when they have been replaced for quite some time is not realy a good example of "effecting change". While dicussing it at the coh was not good timing , the ones who pointed out that the troop was using outdated and replaced training were correct in what they said. Perhaps you are not the only one frutrated with individuals in the unit. Perhaps there is some frustration with your leadership "style" as well?

the participant roster lists 45. One person was unable to get through the snow storm and a couple folks there had already been through the course before. But the roster lists 45. Not a big deal.

Unless specifically stated in the requirement there is nothing that says the same work cannot be used for differt recognitions as long as the work satisfies the requirement.

Joni I simply asked for clarification becasue you wrote "my husband, the scoutmaster and the assistant scoutmaster". I was unable to tell if you were referring to two or three people, so I asked. So we still have the fact that you don't get along well with the unit leaders you have worked with, and for 5 long years are unable to decide whether to quit or to continue your anguish. My recommendation is to take action od smoe kind rather than to continue to be unhappy and to share that unhappiness with others while you threaten to quit. Agian you could have chosen 5 years of doing things you enjoy, rather than choosing 5 years of being miserable and thinking about taking action without making a decision.

using polysyllabic words is not a BSA advancement requirement. It is also possible the bor asked really poor questions or failed to make the scout at ease. So in the written letter to the scout and his parents what requirement did you say the scout did not complete and what appeal process was he informed of in accordance with the BSA Advancement Policies?

Joni, In May of 2003 on this forum you started a thread titled "I am so fed up and disgusted I am ready to quit SCOUTS! It was about the cubmaster in the pack where you were on the committee. That Cubmaster went to the troop and you chose to follow him there. And now after 5 years of constantly complaining about him through numerous threads you start another thread titled ....Ready to Quit! How long does it take you to figure out that you do not like this man and you do not work well together??? For your own sanity someone should quit. Since over 5 years of you complaining about him hasn't made him quit, maybe for your own good you should be the one to step out of the picture. Certainly the bickering between the two of cannot be good for the others who must put up with it in the troop? Think of all the things you could be doing with your time that you actually could enjoy rather than continue this unhealthy relationship. Ready to quit? Well, perhaps it's time?

As the Unit Commissioner I would contact the Instituitonal Head (IH) of the charter organization (CO) and verify that this is his (or her) wish for the unit to support this policy, or if perhaps this was a misunderstanding or a policy that someone else established which the IH was unaware of. If the IH did not support this policy, then I would ask if it could be corrected quickly in house so that the youth could return to join as soon as possible. If the IH was aware of the policy, I would explain that he has the ability to do that, and ask if he (or she) sees any benefits to opening the membership to youth outside their faith. If the IH wishes to maintain the policy, then I would contact the youth's parents and offer to help him find another scouting program available in the area where he might also know some of the members. Is this religious discrimination? Yes, but keep in mind that the like the BSA the church is a private organization and has the right to determine its membership. While it may be discriminatory you must remember that it is not illegal discrimination. BW(This message has been edited by Bob White)(This message has been edited by Bob White)

While those things give you a good idea of things to help the scout work on in the future, the only reason you can refuse the scout advancement is if he did not complete a BSA requirement. You are required by BSA advancement policies to explain in writing to the scout which requirements he did not complete or did not due according the the stated BSA requirement procedure. You are also required to explain and place in writing for the Scout and his parent the appeal process available to him through the District, Council, and National advancement committees. In the letter you gave the scout which requirement did he not complete and what must he do to complete them? Since we have no idea who you are or who the scout is it would seem that there should be no concern for confidentiality as far as published BSA requirements.

What was the reason? Which requirement(s) had not been completed according to the handbook? When he recieves the written explanation from the board, what is he being instructed to do in order to complete the requirement? (This message has been edited by Bob White)

THANK GOD! Finally! We now have a plan which according to Kudu will not just solve this problem but 99% of ALL the BSA's problem. Who knew that by merely camping patrols 300 yards apart we could stop people from taking legal action against a private organization for choosing their own values? If Patrols camped 300 yards apart all leaders would attend training and retain and use the information they received. If Patrols camped 300 yards apart volunteers would quit whining about the uniform and wear it completely and correctly. If Patrols camped 300 yards apart no council would ever be without the funding it needed, and no camps would ever be sold. If Patrols camped 300 yards apart then thousands of parks and campgrounds with campsites 300 yards apart would suddenly spring up all over the country. They would have to because there aren't any in my State that I know of. If Patrols camped 300 yards apart then Webelos would not drop out prior to crossing over into Boy Scouts. Think of all that the BSA could do if 99% of their problems were solved simply by having patrols camp 300 yards apart. I guess the 1% of problems left would just be dealing with folks who can't seem to stop living in the past by nearly a Century. And even that would be bearable if they had to always camp at least 300 yards away.

Anger needs attention. Observation, friendly counseling (listening), informing parents of what you saw is fine. Help the scout learn how to deal with problems constructively. Misuse of the knife requires action. Take away the knife, revisit woods tools training. Swinging sticks among trees and bushes? Around here we call that golf.

Most councils would consider a planned activity involving more than one unit a district or council event. You pretty much want them to because your liabilty insurance does not extend past your own unit. I would recommend you talk to your local professional before you plan a multi-unit event.

It sounds to me like the problem in your community is simply that there are al lot of leaders, yourself included, who simply do not understand the Scouting program or their role in it. Your District committee chair is a member of the execuitive committee. He or she IS your connection to the council. Your unit has a concil committee member in it, why are they not attending meetings or represetning your needs? You are disconnected from National? I am sorry to hear that. Could I recommend that you buy a phone. They have lots of them and there are people at the other end happy to talk with you. National's solution is not summer camp. National does not have anything to do with summer camps. They are council entities, owned, operated, programmed and delivered by your local council. "Letter of the Code"? What code is that? I have never heard of a BSA code for Summer camps. Please share. First Class Emphasis is a unit program plan. You either choose to plan, or you do not. You recruit and retain members or you do not. You have a scouting program or you do not. This has nothing to do with the National office, this is about the unit selecting quality people with personal integrity...or not. The units do not belong to the BSA, they belong to the charter organizations. the program is the BSA's and your charter organization promised to follow it as a benefit to the youth they serve. You will either fulfill that responsibility or not. That is up to you and not the national office. (This message has been edited by Bob White)

more recent BSA materials have been steadily de-emphasizing Venture Patrols. I was not aware of that. Which specific materials would that be?

We have had a lot of boaters look at the book at it gets a w i d e variety of responses. Over all most are very positive. But power boater think it has too much sailing stuff, sail boaters think it should have MORE sailing stuff. Navigators like it a lot but it needs info on GPS and not so much on LORAN. etc etc. That is always a problem with any resource, even the Internet ones. We live in such a fast changing world as far as technology that no printed information will stay perfect for very long. But at least in the Sea Scout Handbook pretty much all of the boat terms, types, and parts are still accurate even today. (the advancemnt requirements are very clear also and there is no way that a hike at Philmont is acceptable as a "cruise on a boat or vessel" as suggested at the Seabadge training. The unit organization, youth and adult officer roles are still accurate. Activity plans are still good, etc. So as a program handbook, while voluminous in comparison to other BSA handbooks it is still very usable. Even if a new handbook did not come out in the next few years this one is still usable. BW (This message has been edited by Bob White)

From the looks of some of the Ship displays they were several there with reason to be proud of the program they are providing. My experience with those in the crew I was in was very positive, even though not all of them had direct Ship contact. All the people I talked to were happy to share ideas and resources about specific things I was interested in. Your comment on watered-down is important. This was supposed to be ADVANCED TRAINING. I do not think anyone goes to advanced training to get waterdowned information or outdated materials. As a Sea Scout unit leader I certainly did not go to advanced Sea Scout training to get an overview of Sea Scouting for Venturers. Thats not a knock at Venturing, I am just sure that at the advanced training for Crew leaders they do not spend a lot of time talking about Ships. I agree that there was not enough information there to make someone confident enough to go start a ship....but should there have been? I mean if you go through Sea Scout leader training from New Leader essentilas through Sea Badge, should you have enough confidence and information to be an effective ship leader, or at least to organize a unit? This just is not a good course syllabus for advanced Sea Scout leadership training. It also lacked pizzazz if you know what I mean, and that part the staff needs to take responsibility for. What little ceremony there was, was lackluster at best. The only Sea Scout flavor came fromm things the participants brought and not from anything the staff did. The "social" felt like a Quaker social, with everyone sitting around the edge of the room and no actual activity in the center. How about a Pledge of Allegiance and the Sea Scout Oath at least? That is not how you ring a Ship's Bell. A double salute boarding the ship would have been nice. Side boys? A Boatswain pipe maybe? And I am not trying to be a uniform police but it is advanced training, if you are going to just where the white or tan blouse at least look in the handbook at what goes on it. This is not a Cub Scout or Boy Scout shirt. It is a Naval Uniform, be respectful at what you put on it. Things like camporee patches, jambo patches, wood badge beads, do not go on the white blouse, and beads, knots, council strips, activity patches, jambo patches, OA flaps, etc., do not go on the work tans. There was nothing "advanced" about this course. I am through venting now I think, BW Did I mention that there were a lot of very nice people there?

Most Sea Scout leaders have not taken Seabadge so it would be imprudent to assume that the one training course is responsible.

I have spoken with Jeff and he and I are both great supporters of the regional officers many of whom were on staff. I would no sooner speak on his behalf then he would on mine. I can tell you that I share his feelings that they did a great job. Attendance was excellent, the location was great, food was very good, the people on staff outstanding. The course content is old. It is outdated. it does not coordinate with any other current leadeship program in the BSA and it is wholey controlled by the National Sea Scout executive committee and they have no current plans to alter it. If you wanted my honest opinion I would not recommend you attend unless it is for some excellent fellowship. But do not expect advanced Sea Scout Leader training. It is not in the program. I too congratulate the committee for an excellent attempt to make some very outdated materials palatable. It was fun, but it was not advanced leadership training.(This message has been edited by Bob White)(This message has been edited by Bob White)

Hinting isn't training. Using outdated terms and methods isn't good training. Using basic information isn't advanced training. Unfortunately this course includes all three. The purpose of the excercise was to demonstrate how the different styles of leadership and the differing stages of team development within the different crews helped or hindered their ability to get the excercise accomplished. The problem was that the instructor was not allowed to have an evaluation session after the excercise to bring this to light...because it was not in the syllabus. So a lot of folks thought it was about planning a cruise. As I said the best element of the weekend was the quality of the people in the course. We could have met at a hotel for a weekend and visted with each other the entrie time sharing ideas and resources and been better for the experience but the course kept interrupting us. (This message has been edited by Bob White)

I agree that EDGE was mentioned but it was not used or explained. When asked why I was told that they wanted to but were required to stay on the syllabus and the syllabus does not include EDGE. Storm, Form, Norm, and Perfom was mentioned and used, but it was not used the way the staff would have preferred because it was not in the syllabus. More on this in a bit. If you had limited Sea Scout experience I would agree you got a lot of Sea Scout exposure. But it was not "Advanced Sea Scout Leader Training". I can see how in a Commissoners position you left with more info on Sea Scouting. But how much came from the course content and how much came from the networking and the ship diplays you encountered? If you had spent the entire weekend socializing and exchanging resources with 44 sea scouters without the course topics would you have left with more Sea Scouting info or less? (This message has been edited by Bob White)

Because if you were a participant on a train wreck and you stand up and say "we are crashing!" you will not alter the course of the train, nor will it tell the conductor or engineer anything they do not already know. Even most the passengers who were able to stay awake knew this was a train wreck. We were just fortunate to have a room full of nice passengers to share it wth. Disrupting the event is not friendly, helpful, or courteous. I made my observations on the evaluation form (also an old style tool where the results are not measurable or subjective.) Otherwise I made the best of the situation by making new friends and sharing ideas with others during the social times we had. I participated with my crew to help us succeed in the few excercises we had, and I looked for the few tidbits of new info that might be gleaned. Unfortunately they only good nuggets came from the social exchanges not from the course content. It was not even being a matter of hearing the same good information over again, this was oudated and antiquated info that was left behind by Scouting an corporate America decades ago. How outdated was the info that was distributed on boat insurance? I will remind you..It expired 5 years ago. That was without a doubt the NEWEST information offered in the course and it was absolete in 2003. I would bet you have been to pack meetings that did a better ceremony than the opening Landship. This was not a good course. Good people, but not a good course. If you would like I will share another example regarding the crew excercise on the the Long Cruise planning. Can you tell me what the purpose of the excercise was?

I was, and having first taken Wood Badge in 1980 and staffed Wood Badge numerous times since then I can tell you with absolute certainty that the materials in the Seabadge syllabus were taken from Wood Badge cira mid 1970's and removed from Wood Badge by 1986. The Seabadge information was at least 25 years old or older. It is not in harmony with the leadership or teaching methods used today in Kodiak, NYLT, Wood Badge, or any other BSA training. This is OLD and outdated, and the staff knew it, but they had no choice because Charles was there to make sure they stuck to the syllabus. I congratulate the staff for their patience in doing the best they could with the syllabus they were given to work with. As far as networking it was great, as far as training content, it was way below par and largely unrelated to Ship operations. I talked with a number of participants with backgrounds in corporate and scout leader training who were in awe of how outdated the materials were. The course served more to introduce Venturing leaders to Sea Scouting then to provide advanced training or information to Sea Scout leaders. A Sea Scout officer would be better served at Wood Badge until the syllabus is upgraded, which will be my recommendation to the Ship's leaders and committee at our next meeting. emb021 There is New Leader Essentials, Venturing Leader Basic, and a Sea Scout modified version of Venturing Leader Basic, followed by SSOST, prior to Seabadge. Then there is the SALT course at Philmont.(This message has been edited by Bob White)

While the scouts do the actual requirements for the recognition of their particualr religion individually, there is nothing wrong with the Den Leader encouraging the den members to work on the award or even discussing the requirements at the Den meetings, as long as he or she stays respectfull of the beiefs of the individual members.(This message has been edited by Bob White)