New Life Requirement for our Troop.

[evmori]

Barry,

I like your line of thinking.

 

 

This is sort of like the SM Conference requirement where all a Scout needs to do is

 

Take part in a Scoutmaster conference.

 

This requirement reads

 

While a Star Scout, take part in service projects totaling at least six hours of work. These projects must be approved by your Scoutmaster.

 

and is further defined

 

For Star and Life ranks, a Scout must perform six hours of service to others. This may be done as an individual project or as a member of a patrol or troop project. Star and Life service projects may be approved for Scouts assisting on Eagle service projects. The Scoutmaster approves the project before it is started.

 

There are 3 key words - take part in - which means the Scout participates but leadership isn't required. Requiring leadership in a service project from a Scout for any rank except Eagle is adding to the requirements and is forbidden.

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[EagleInKY]

Barry gives some great advice. It's not an altogether bad idea (except for making it a mandatory part of making Life). It's a great idea to integrate into your program and get guys without the formal leadership experience to lead in some other ways. We've been trying to do this in our troop, and running into some challenges. It takes time and effort, for sure.

 

Try submitting the idea to National as a potential requirements change. The likelihood of acceptance is probably pretty small, but you would at least get your idea in play.

[LongHaul]

Ed, again leadership is not exspressly excluded. Take part in does not exclude the leaders. Is the scout getting credit for an Eagle project participating in that project? How can you complete an Eagle project you didn;t participate in?

[Beavah]

Yah, once again on da Scouter.Com forums, someone posts a question. Without askin' for more information and with no understandin' of the circumstances, we "wind the person up" with all kinds of "your troop is awful, you should report them, you should quit" nonsense, and think we're providin' a service.

 

Shame.

 

Gilski, you state quite clearly that this troop practice was created to help the boys, and that it succeeds in building strong character. I think you have your answer. If it helps the boys and succeeds in our aims, it should be supported. Parent complainers should be re-taught the mission of Scouting, or ultimately invited to go join a weaker program.

 

LongHaul also has an excellent point, for all da technical squabblers out there who take great pride in findin' fault with others' programs. If the troop generally does Patrol service projects, then a Star scout as part of the patrol leadership/POR will naturally be helpin' lead the service project, eh? And if he isn't, a good SM would be askin' why not?

(This message has been edited by Beavah)

[evmori]

Ed, again leadership is not exspressly excluded. Take part in does not exclude the leaders.

 

No it doesn't exclude leadership or leaders. What it does exclude is the necessity to provide leadership to complete the requirement.

 

Is the scout getting credit for an Eagle project participating in that project?

 

No. The Scout would be getting credit for service hours for rank.

 

 

How can you complete an Eagle project you didn;t participate in?

 

LongHaul, you're getting things confused. For ranks below Eagle, all a Scout needs to do is participate in a service project that has been approved by his SM. This might be an Eagle project or it might not be an Eagle project. For the rank of Eagle, a Life Scout needs to show leadership in his Eagle project.

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10(This message has been edited by evmori)

[LongHaul]

Ed, first I am guilty of not communicating properly. I was referring to the Eagle Scout applicant, the scout who is doing his Eagle project when I used the Eagle project reference. Is the Life Scout going for Eagle and presently "doing" his Eagle project participating in that project? Secondly where does the requirement for service projects for Star and Life "exclude" leadership? If we are to use the same blind interpretation which includes zero budgets, a point which I respect your position on even though I disagree with it,then we must not say the SM is expressly forbidden from excluding a given project for approval. The requirement as written does not address leadership which leaves it open the the SM's interpretation. If a scout had a lawn mowing buisness and said that his 6 hours of service was the service he provided to his customers would that qualify? He provided a service and worked 6 hours. Does the fact that he got paid to do it disqualify his efforts when we use the strict interprtation of the words used in the requirement? Payment for services is not addressed in the requirements either. It is clearly addressed at the Eagle project level so does that mean that the fact that it is not addressed at the Star and Life levels that it automatically means it's acceptable? If I can't require him to lead because it is not stated I can't deny him from being paid because it is also not specifically excluded.

LongHaul(This message has been edited by LongHaul)

[gilski]

Thank you all for your sound advice. I too think building leadership skills are essential to success for every young man (thats why we all love Scouting). I wanted to pose this question as a neutral party at first. My son had been met with this request; he has logged 25 to 30 service hours as Star, and was acting SPL. Twenty two of his hours were with a team of missionaries in Mexico serving the poor. He could not lead other Scouts there; he did comply with the CC and SMs request concerning this issue which will postpone his advancement several weeks are more. We thought it best for him as a leader to comply first then take up the issue with those parents both for and against (no whining). I would like our troop to continue striving for these skills but implement them within the stated guidelines. Not reading something into them for justification, a troop could weaken requirements using that logic. The boys, not to mention in this "Boy Led" organization were never brought into the discussion.

 

Our troop has a substantial number of active parents. The Scouts, SM, ASM's, and CC are incredible we have a high percentage of Eagle's and new Eagle candidates all of which happened before this recently added requirement, but due to the forward thinking and striving for excellence which motivated it.

 

This will be one of the topics in our next committee meeting and it is so helpful to get third party opinions from this forum. Again thank you all, whether for or against your insight and wisdom is invaluable.

 

Longhaul although I still dont agree youve shed greater light on the thought process behind the decision.

 

God Bless you all,

 

Gilski

Troop Chaplin

 

[evmori]

LongHaul,

I understand your point. But by a SM or TC requiring leadership in a service project other than an Eagle Project is adding to the requirements. It's the same as requiring a full uniform for the BOR.

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[Beavah]

requiring leadership in a service project other than an Eagle Project is adding to the requirements

 

Possibly, yes.

 

But then a responsible and caring person has to ask a second question before they "go off" - Is this worth making an issue over?

 

The Scouts, SM, ASM's, and CC are incredible we have a high percentage of Eagle's and new Eagle candidates ... due to the forward thinking and striving for excellence which motivated it.

 

Gilski, I think you again answer your own question here, eh? The troop leaders are "incredible" "forward thinking" and "striving for excellence." They have experience helping lots of boys to Eagle, and have decided that this change will really help. Perhaps what he learns will save your son months on his Eagle project. Aren't these "incredible" volunteers worthy of your support?

 

In a volunteer organization, a man who lives by the Scout Oath only gets to complain and quote regulations at people when he is ready and willing to step up and do their job.

 

 

[LongHaul]

Ed, now your talking about something entirely different. uniforming is not a requirement but getting SM approval is a requirement. Which projects a SM approves is the SM's decision as long as the CO has not set limits or guidelines. We can debate this all day long but you have your interpretation and I have mine. You want to be letter of the law until letter of the law goes against what you want the case to be. Zero budgets are OK because it does not specifically disqualify them even though zero budgets do not accomplish the intended goal. You have a valid point, literally speaking a zero budget can be seen as fulfilling the letter of the requirement. Why not leadership? If it's not specifically restricted why is it adding to the requirement to narrow the scope of approved projects as a Scout progresses? Why do you only get technical when its in the boys favor? What about consistency and a level playing field?

LongHaul

 

[evmori]

Yep, LongHaul, we could go on and on about this. But the fact remains that there is no leadership requirement for service projects for rank other than Eagle. And a SM requiring leadership from a Scout on a service project for rank other than Eagle is adding to the requirements. Not an opinion. A fact. And if a Scout would appeal this, he would win 100% of the time.

 

Bevah,

 

Ya missed the before this recently added requirement. So adding this requirement accomplished nothing. And I have to wonder how boy-led this Troop is. It is starting to sound like an Eagle mill.

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[dan]

gilski

I think you should also be prepared to discuss requirement number 5 from the Life Scout Requirements at the committee meeting.

Which is the one that I think the adult leadership maybe basing this requirement on.

My sons troop also had all life scouts do a leadership project. The reason the scouts where given was that the POR leadership was not a strong enough leadership. Which is difficult position to discuss, it becomes a he said she said discussion. If you do a search you maybe able to find that thread which pretty much went the same as this one. I could not find the thread.

Good Luck

[red feather]

Gilski,

 

Welcome to the campfire, I asked a similar question back in March.06, please go to (and I hope I am doing this right)

 

http://www.scouter.com/forums/viewThread.asp?threadOD=127606

 

or do a search forums for red feather starting from march 1, 06. the responses I recieved gave chapter and verse on why requirements cannot be added.

 

Hope this helps and good luck

 

yis

[Eagle74]

gilsky; clarification please. You mention 25 to 30 service hours done (and sound to be quite worthwhile service hours), but did the SM approve the hours/service beforehand, as required?

 

If so, they're done. If not, it would be at the SM's discretion to accept or not. I do however fall on the side of "adding to the requirements" if "leadership" is required. Not that a leadership component can't be acceptable or desirable, but rather that it can't be required. In my world I like to see "advancement" in the type of service hours performed as the scout advances higher in rank - to me a Life Scout simply participating in the annual food/clothing drive leaves something to be desired in a seasoned scout. Usually handle something like that by suggesting that it's time for the (Star &) Life Scout to be taking on a little personal growth by raising the bar a little. They usually agree.

[FScouter]

As Gilski stated in his opening post, This was done in an effort to prepare Scouts for their Eagle Project. They are not able to have SMC or BOR until they accomplish this task. Although it builds strong character

 

The achievements the boys earn as they advance through the ranks ought to fully prepare them for the challenges they will encounter in completing an Eagle project. Unless the boys have limited capabilities, they ought to be well prepared to tackle an Eagle project without first doing a Life leadership service project imposed as an additional hurdle. Or perhaps the adult leadership has been skimping on the program in earlier ranks, resulting in boys not prepared enough to tackle the requirements for the Eagle rank.

 

If the purpose of the added requirement is to build character, one would have to ask why the troop program is not already building character. Using the methods of Scouting leads to growth in moral strength and character.

 

The Scout program is well rounded and there are plenty of opportunities to learn and demonstrate leadership within the program. One of the Life requirements is to serve actively for at least six months in a position of responsibility. Are the boys failing to demonstrate leadership in their positions as Star Scouts and First Class Scouts? If not, the solution would seem to be to spend more time developing their leadership skills as First Class and Star Scouts, rather than adding an additional requirement for Life.

 

Adding additional rank requirements is not necessary to build character in boys or to achieve the aims of Scouting. Correctly using the methods of Scouting results in achieving the aims of Scouting. Adding an additional requirement is almost an admission by the adult leaders that they are failing to build character and teach leadership and this is an attempt to fix that failure.