bsabrit

For clarification; I am British, living in the U.S. being asked to take on the role of SM for a BSA Troop. acco40, from what you have said, it would seem that I fall into the "as long as you agree with BSA policy" category. This I do, so I'm thinking there should be no problem. (At least from an official standpoint!) onehour, I'm glad someone else has faced the issue and been successful

Thanks for your replies...I am glad that this is the case (I figured it probably was). I am still considering the opportunity that has been presented. I want to be sure that I can give as much as possible to the role and am trying to consider the different ways in which this would be possible, especially given the travel required for my job. ( I spend about 2 1/2 weeks out of 4 out of town, but always home at the weekends). Perhaps I could ask a supplemental question... Do any of you have any experience of dealing with being a SM and helping to organize and run a reasonably active troop, whilst at the same time being out of town, but not out of contact, for several days a week?

I have been asked to consider becoming the Scoutmaster for our Troop upon the upcoming retirement of the current Scoutmaster. As part of the general discussions that have taken place within the group of ASM's, a question was raised as to my eligibility to become SM. I am British and do not hold US citizenship and therefore, according to one of the ASM's, I am ineligible to be SM. I have looked for some indication regarding whether or not this is a problem, but have found none. Does anyone know if there are any specific requirements, particularly as they relate to nationality?

Actually Bob, a Tour Permit was applied for and approved, and yes things could have gone wrong, but 2 deep leadership was a priority, to ensure that things would/could not go wrong. And you seem to imply that unless you are a BSA trained leader, you are incapable of looking after the interests of the youth involved in the Scouting program. I might say, who better than a parent to protect their child in such a circumstance? I would even go so far as to say that, just because you are "BSA trained" does not make you "safe". We are trying our best to make a viable crew, one that complies with the requirements of the BSA. Could we not have some leeway here? Especially since the youth in question had a parent with them? Perhaps you could give some advice about recruiting a female advisor, instead of deriding the efforts being made to start a crew and help our youth! I would be keen to hear from others also, reagrding female leadership recruitment.

Wow, this question seems to have generated some interesting discussion!! Thought I would give you an update...the crew went camping, female venturer included, but no female leader. Her father was chaperone. No problems encountered and everyone had a great time. During the camp, our female venturer was unanimously elected Crew President. She will be excellent in the role We still have not identified a female who will become an advisor with the crew, nor one that would be willing to come camping with us in March. We have however agreed (including the girl's father) that unless we do, our Crew President will be unable to attend that camping trip. Whilst I agree with the reasoning behind the rules, it does seem just a little unfair to the one female in the crew. I wonder how long we can keep her interested whilst she is not allowed to participate in our camping/overnight activities?

I see that as with the crew advisors, opinion is somewhat split regarding whether this is acceptable. :-)

Our crew is small with only one female Venturer at the moment. We are planning our first camping trip and, of course, our female venturer wants to go along. She is the daughter of one of the advisors who also intends to go on the camping trip. (2 days, 1 night). My question is this...Do we need a female leader to attend, or is the fact that the girls father will be there acceptable. We always maintain two-deep leadership at meetings and activities, but we currently have no female leadership in the crew, despite making requests of several people. Your input would be gratefully received.

Somewhat related to topic, since I want to avoid the "watching paint dry" meetings - Any tips on building the enthusiasm of the Venturers to plan for themselves. Our Crew is keen, they want to do activities, but I don't seem able to get them motivated to plan for themselves, or to take part in the planning. They seem happy waiting for the leaders to do it and we are struggling to make them see that they can and should do it for themselves. We don't want them bored and so stop coming to meetings, so the leaders do plan activities, but we want them to take on the role. BTW, our Crew is young, both in Venture age range (14-16)and in time active, just over 8 weeks. Any thoughts?

Thanks to each of you that have contributed. I will heed your advice as much as possible. I also look forward to reading more words of wisdom both here, and in other posts. This is a great resource. Thanks.

Can anyone advise me regarding what the relationship between a Venture Crew and a Troop is supposed to be? We have just set up a new Crew and are having "relationship" issues with the Troop Scoutmaster. Is there a hierarchy that exists when a Troop and Crew are sponsored by the same Chartering Org.? Does the Scoutmaster have the final say when it comes to the Crew? One problem we have...I know that several of the boys who are in the Crew want to carry on and earn their Eagle Rank, however the Scoutmaster has indicated that he may have a problem with regards to attendance at Troop meetings and has indicated a reluctance to "sign-off" on the paperwork. Can the Crew Advisor "sign-off" for the Rank Advancement?

I'll try to answer some of the questions that have been raised... I believe the dislike of the SM by most of the boys is genuine and I know that the ASM's are very careful to support him in front of the boys, trying not to color the boys opinion with their own. Up until about 2.5 yrs ago when the current SM took over, the troop was SM led. The previous SM was well liked because he did everything for the boys and they were allowed to do what they wanted. The current SM has determined that the troop will be boy led (as it should be), but I think the problem is that he has used the "big bang" approach - one meeting the troop was SM led, the next meeting and from then on everything is boy led. The boys were and are ill-prepared for this. The ASM's see this but the SM does not. The boys have had JLT, but get no support from the SM to follow-up - they have been on a mini-weekend camp so they must know what to do, when and how to do it. The SM has been a BS Leader for 20 years and been involved with BS for much of his life. I am not aware of any training that he has taken while I have been a leader with the troop, these last 5 years. (I have re-done my SM Training within the last 2 years). I agree that the SM should "train" not "lead" per se, but it seems that everything is very black and white to him, no shades of grey while the boys get confidence and become more comfortable. I think it a measure of the man that he blames the boys for the failures of the SM (and also the ASM's). It's true that the line the SM walks is very fine, but should it not become fine only when you know that the boys are able, when you know that you have taught them what they need so that they can go and learn the rest themselves? You are all giving great ideas and thoughts. I like the idea of the SM Award of Merit( why didn't I think of that?), I think that may help alot, and as DS said, it may show us that actually what is being done is right and we should stick to it. I also like the idea of a troop JLT and perhaps encouraging the SM to redo some training himself as things have most certainly changed since the last training that he took. With the prospect of losing almost half of the boys, mostly the older ones that are feeling the brunt of the lack of adult leadership, I worry that the younger boys will be even less equipped to deal with the way in which the SM continues to run the troop.

I guess the expectation of how the SM should act is what has people in the troop confused. Should not the role of the SM and ASM's be to help the boys "learn" how to lead? Is not providing that help, guidance and 'leadership' helpful? The SM has been SM for two years with no improvement in how things are done. The boys must attend JLT before taking a leadership role, but they do not get the support that many think that they need after that training. The ASM's have tried to work with the SM, but the SM is not for altering course. The SM says he will try anything to improve the way the Troop functions, but refuses to make alterations when they are suggested. Are there any ways in which the members of this forum can suggest that the SM be persuaded to change his view? We are now looking at the prospect of losing up to 10 of our regular 22 or so Scouts to other Troops, or from Scouting all together.

We have a SM that won't lead. What I mean is, that he wants us to have a boy led troop, which the ASM's and parents are in favor of, but he expects that everything will be done by the boys. All of the planning, except the annual plan, he expects the boys to do...with no help from anyone. And then when it fails, he blames the SPL! If an ASM tries to help, they are told that it is the SM that deals with that in the troop and asked not to continue. The problem is, now none of the boys like him because he is so unapproachable. Talking with the COR prompted a visit to a campout but during the time the COR was there, the SM has never been so helpful.Has anyone else had problems like this? How can we get passed this?