DuctTape

What is not ok? It aapears the GTA is not being violated. The scout is not being re-tested on requirements. The PLC is just initialing in the handbook that they provided the instruction and the scout is ready to be tested by the ASM/SM in accordance with the GTA.

@InquisitiveScouterfor National Commissioner!

This is a neat idea. The left hand column initials by the PL as an indicator that the scout is ready to be be tested by the ASM (the person authorized to do sign-offs). I can see the scout having an increased motivation to ask to be tested and have confidence in their success. This also keeps the older scouts sharp, and provides leadership and peer mentorship. Even if the PLC decides (with authorization by the SM) to have SPL or PL do official testing and sign-offs, I really like the idea of another older scout put their initials on the left side as an indicator of "readiness to be tested". For example, the PL might become authorized to sign-off on requirements and the APL helps the scouts be ready and uses their initials on the left to communicate said readiness.

If trying to convert a car camping troop into a backpacking troop (or just trying to get them to plan ahead better), try this: -Always pack a backpack for the trip. Patrol gear & food split up among patrol and packed in backpack. -Trailer is used to transport packed gear only. (We never brought the trailer as it was only a storage shed). -Park cars some distance from campsite, cars get locked and not visited during trip. (If at public campground, this is still possible using main lot). -Patrols hike (even if only a quarter mile) to their campsite as a patrol. Starting with the above as a baseline for ALL camping trips, one can see how the transition to longer backpacking trips is a gentler step.

One major drawback to text based communication is the lack of tone and body language which provides A LOT of information. There have been studies that showed most people will read positive text as neutral, and neutral text as negative. This bias towards the less positive is likely from a place of safety/defense inherent to the evolution of our species. I often listen to people discuss emails from others and it is amazing how much "tone" and malice is projected onto the writer. Understanding this, I know I must consciously ADD +++ in my reading of other's text in absence of other specific evidence to the contrary.

There are no restrictions on the number of positions one person may hold as long as the individual serves in only one position per unit with the exception of the chartered organization representative (CR), who is the only individual that can be registered in more than one position within the same unit. The CR may also serve in a multiple capacity as the committee chair (CC) or as a member of the committee (MC, NM, or PT) within that unit. From: Registration Guidebook rev 2019 (page 14) https://www.scouting.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/Registration-Guidebook.pdf

I agree with Fred and the others. My only additions would be: 1. Start slow, give the PLC authority for signing off on one of those non-skill based requirements, and perhaps only for tenderfoot rank. Then build from there. 2. the SM should meet with the PLC before implementation to generate protocols, establish norms and expectations. 3. (initially) after every sign-off the SM discuss the process, etc... with the PLC to ensure protocols etc are being met and adhered to. This can diminish in regularity after the SM is confident in the PLC with their new authority. As an aside--- 4. SM conferences should occur regularly with scouts not just "as the final requirement". I would say the SM should conference with each scout at least every 4 months (that might not even be enough). The SM conference is a major aspect of the Adult Association Method within the troop. These conferences can be invaluable for the youth development and for the SM to understand the perspectives of each scout re: troop, patrol, and their individual life. Imagine if one looks at SM conferences also as a way for the SM to improve. Powerful!

You are correct that the Requirement as written is unambiguous. The activities in 9b must be done on the trips in 9a. As far as being held to the mercy of the troop, I would say the Scouts should plan the outings as a patrol not the troop. The scout can and should motivate the patrol to do preferred activities with their patrol. If the patrol members want different things, then perhaps the makeup of the patrols is an issue. This is separate from the mB requirement question. And welcome to the virtual campfire!

For how long have we here at Scouter.com advocated for required mBs to be in groups/categories of which the scout could choose?

When an organization's focus is on Quantity; Quality suffers. When the focus is on Quality; Quantity will also improve. Just summarizing our esteemed colleagues' aforementioned experiences.

I do not see how it takes so long to re-Charter. IMO there should not be an annual Re-Charter. Chartering is a completely separate issue from individual memberships.. The Chartering Agreement between the Council and the CO does not need to be redone annually. The Agreeement can and should remain in force until one (or both) parties agree to sever the relationship. Any changes to personnel do not require a change in the Chartering Agreement. Name/title changes can be a separate document and can be modified whenever changes are necessary. As individuals join a Unit either as Scouts or Adult Scouters, their paperwork is submitted to Council for processing. This process should be expedititious for Scouts and the only time issue for Scouters is a background check. If one is on file, then no time needed. The entire system is antiquated, and it is ridiculous how long it seems to process . I bet 3 or 4 of us here could revamp the entire system in a single day. The way i see it, there are 3 separate parts (and before it is suggested that the Annual Re-Charter does all of these, IMO that is the problem.) 1. Chartering Agreement. The contract between Council and CO. This Agreement is done once and signed by the Council and IH on the date of Charter. The Charter continues to exist until one or both parties sever. Re-Charters are reserved for the rare occurence of a former Charter is being re instated. 2. Leadership Documents. Document which details names of IH, COR, SM, etc... this is updated continuously as changes are made not saved for an annual event. 3. Individual Membership Documents. These would include Application for joining. Change in Status/Unit form, etc... These must be processed immediately. For Scouts, membership should be considered conferred when the Unit signs the paperwork. For Adults, the only delay is for background check validation. I have rambled enough.

Grandma Gatewood is legendary!

Whatever system (digital or otherwise), counsel the scouts to reply to comms. If someone does not reply, then the PL (or whomever sent the comm) must then seek that person out. Lack of communication is based on the premise, "I sent it out via..." as the only step. Instruct them how to communicate effectively. Eg. From: Patrol Leader "At our next Patrol meeting we will be doing a gear inspection for the upcoming campout. Even if you are not going, please bring your pack with gear. If you are in need of anything please let me or the APL know. Reply to this message, 'YES' to let me know you understand. If I do not hear back from you by (insert time/date) I will be calling you directly."

Sadly you are correct. SilNylon and SilPoly are not that expensive now, and would be better options than the polyblue, etc...

Add School Board members to the list.

Those LitePac diy gear instructions were/are awesome.

One benefit you have, is that you can "start at zero" to rebuild. I have found this useful in the past: http://inquiry.net/patrol/green_bar/index.htm

The Chartering Organization can conduct a fundraiser and designate the proceeds to the unit. In fact any proceeds from a council fundraiser are owned by the CO anyway.

IH = Institutional Head. Basically the head honcho. If you have the support, have a sit down with the girls troop SM and do a full split. Then have an individual session with each ASM to get them on your page. Do not try to do this as a group. If the ASM is not on board, thank them for their service and let them know they are no longer needed as an ASM. Harsh? Yep. But their job is to support you. If they are not on board, they will undermine you every step of the way.

Yikes! You have your hands full. In order to enact change you will need (at least) one other adult on your side else change will be futile. You will also need the authority to make the hard (but correct) decisions. This requires the unequivocal support from the IH. With these two pieces, you have a chance. You then need to get all your ASMs trained in the Patrol Method.

Welcome. Pull up a stump to the virtual campfire and grab a cup of coffee.

There are sometimes religious reasons for a person to not recite oaths or pledges.

The only merit badge I received that I can say I probably did not truly earn was Basketry. The was done at summer camp. At the time I recall 2 requirements: 1. Make a basket. 2. Cane a chair seat. For #1, we used a kit with a wooden base. For #2, we weaved criss-cross strings over a square platform. Afterwards, as an older scout I learned how to make an actual basket without a kit... Significantly more complex. I also learned to cane a seat from my father as he would restore antique chairs as a hobby. Wow was that a complex process. I never completed an entire chair seat myself, only did a few of the diagonal weaves with the cane. I did make multiple baskets of different designs over the years.

I do not disagree, at least not much. A good commissioner can only do so much. If the unit wants to do a non-bsa program denying the scouts a real scouting opportunity they can and do. You hinted at this by admitting the leaders (sic) only do the basic required trainings. One might argue that if more is necessary, then more should be required. The major issue is even WITH the training, they ignore what they are supposed to do. Often with phrases, "this is how our troop operates", even when it contradicts the training and literature.

I am not sure they can do much more for the local units. IMO the entire BSA structure predicated on the authority of the IH of the CO is the major obstacle for any real reform. Problematic units do not utilize district/council trainings, trainers, etc... They do not see themselves as having a problem even though they are not delivering the BSA program. The district and council have no authority to step in and make real changes when a unit is operating in a way contradictory to the BSA program (eg. adult led & run eagle mills). Perhaps one place where the council & district CAN exercise some authority is true vetting and training of mB counselors. Also in ensuring district & council camps are run in a way to maximize the BSA program with fidelity and not enable the problematic units.