Eagle and the Minimums

[evmori]

What would you do if you had a Life Scout that did not attend a meeting or camping trip for 2 years show up with 21 merit badges signed off and a completed Eagle project?

 

Are all the MB's signed by valid MB counselors? Who signed off on his Eagle project plan and completion?

[sherminator505]

"How do we solve the conundrum of a boy meeting all the requirements but still not being Eagle material in the eye of a beholder?"

 

Perhaps the reason you are having such a hard time with this question is because the question as it is posed is flawed. If the Scout has, for a six month period between earning Life and now, been active in his troop and patrol, has he has, for a similar six month period, served actively in a POR, and he has shown Scout spirit, and has properly completed his service project and his merit badge requirements, then he is, by definition, Eagle material. If any of the above is not true, then he is not Eagle material yet.

 

I find it very difficult to believe that a Scout would disappear for two years and show up on one's doorstep with a ready-to-sign Eagle application. Something would have had to happen to make the Scout leave, and something else must have happened to bring that Scout back. Further, the Scout would have had to have been very close right before he left to make this scenario even feasible. In that instance, we should be asking what allowed this scenario to develop and fester rather than simply levelling the microscope squarely on the Eagle candidate.

[CalicoPenn]

There are no minimum requirements for Eagle. Minimum's suggest that their could be things required beyond what's written - but we all know that we can't add to the requirements. There are just THE requirements. If a Scout meets those requirements, he's Eagle material.

 

How do you solve the conundrum of a Scout meeting the requirements but still not being "Eagle material" in the "eye of the beholder"? You sit down with the "beholder" over a cup of coffee and ask him/her why they feel their judgement is more important than the BSA requirements. You ask point blank if they can work with the requirements, as written - and if the answer is no, you suggest politely (or not, depending on your mood) that perhaps they should find something else to do. If you're an SM trying to reign in a rogue committee, you advocate for the Scout. If your a committee trying to reign in a rogue SM, you advocate for the Scout. If, at the end of the day, you can't advocate for the Scout, then why are you involved at all?

 

 

[packsaddle]

Calico, I agree. I'll repeat the challenge I made a while back:

I'd like for someone to present to this forum the wording of the criteria that he would apply to all boys in order to make sure no boy created this conundrum in the future. Really, if someone out there can write a clear, unambiguous requirement that all boys can read and understand, a requirement that all boys would understand that they have to meet in order to gain approval, I'd really like to read it.

 

Still waiting

[eghiglie]

The requirements in the book are what they are and so long as the boys meets them then they should get the rank they are trying to earn.

 

Scout spirit aside there is little that can be accomplished to state that the minimums are not good enough. We as adults can't say only the superb boys make Eagle.

 

I have however learned that the boys themselves determine what they are. I've seen boys zoom to Life Scout but there are 4 MB's that knock them for a loop. Personal Mgmt, Communications, Cit in Comm and Family Life. They seem to be great if they get past those.

 

 

 

 

[Crossramwedge]

BrentAllen,

 

Yesterday as I was reading these post I turned to my son and asked him what he thought of a scout who does the very minimum to achieve his Eagle rank. He was sitting in front of the computer going over his Eagle Project write up which he should turn in today. Basically to make a long story short he said that if the scout had given it his best and his best was meeting the minimum requirements then he should get his Eagle rank. But again if a scout who on purpose just does enough to get by then he would have a problem with that. He said it really comes down to Scout Spirit. A scout like that (to him) is not living up to the Scout Oath and Law. He believes a scout should try to give his all all the time and any scout that does not do so (when he could) is not living up to the Scout Oath and law and therefore is not qualified to recieve his Eagle rank. A 16 year olds Life Scouts opinion.

[BrentAllen]

I'd say he has summed up my thoughts on the issue very well. If units wait until Eagle to really judge Scout Spirit, then they get the mess they deserve.

 

pack - there is your answer, from a 16 year old Life Scout.

[packsaddle]

I agree. That does not add to the requirements and it is good guidance to leaders who need to know each boy and be conscientious about advancement each step of the way. It addresses the problem for the future.

 

I have to ask though, doesn't training and other resources address this already?

The problem OGE was writing about, I thought, was when the above guidance has lapsed or been ignored and it is 'the mess' that you mentioned.

[Crossramwedge]

BrentAllen,

 

He summed up those thoughts with out reading your post. That was straight out of his mouth and from his heart. I asked that one question and that was the reply he gave off the cuff.

[Beavah]

I agree. That does not add to the requirements and it is good guidance to leaders.

 

Yah, but it does add to da requirements in some folks' eyes, eh? What the lad is saying is that kids who can do more must be held to a higher standard.

 

CrossRamWedge's son is suggesting that by and large lads who just do the minimum to get Eagle he has a problem with. The minimum is the minimum, eh? For someone who is only capable of da minimum, it's fine. We'd all be proud of a lad strugglin' with a severe handicap or some really difficult issues who managed to get Eagle doin' the minimum. We'd celebrate it!

 

But da high school athlete and salutatorian who does only what he barely needs to to get by, or to manipulate naive adults who get all twisted up over "don't add to the requirements?" Not Eagle Scout material in da eyes of his peers like CrossRamWedge's son. Cheapens da rank and weakens the scoutin' program for everybody. And if we let it happen, that's our fault and our weak program.

 

Beavah

[nolesrule]

The person who only does barely what he needs to get by still gets by.

 

You ONLY earned 21 merit badges?

You ONLY were active for 6 months since earning Life?

You ONLY served in a POR for 6 months since turning Life?

You were ONLY Historian/Scribe/Librarian and not a PL/ASPL/PL?

Your project ONLY had X man hours? (not strictly a requirement but something we hear from advancement committees all the time for some reason)

You ONLY provided 5/6 references to attest you live the Scout Oath & Law in your daily life?

 

I said it before, advancement is but one of the methods. And when someone only does the "minimums" in advancement, it's a failure of the program to utilize the other methods.

 

But that's what happens in our "teach to the test" mentality.

 

But really, the only way you CAN'T meet requirement #2 is if you NEVER do anything that lives up to the Scout Oath an Law and as a result can't find anyone willing to be used as a reference.

[BrentAllen]

I'm beginning to change my mind on the whole subject. Let's start with changing the Scout Oath. No more "I will do my best;" let's change it to "I will do the minimum."

 

And let's not make it so exclusive. Stick around for a year, and get your Eagle. Hand it out just like all those Last Place trophies that all the kids' sports teams get now. That way we can all go home at the end of the day and feel great.

[nolesrule]

Doing your best and never making a poor decision are not synonymous. Otherwise, even the most minor of "boys will be boys" excuses would disqualify anyone.

[OldGreyEagle]

I look forward to the publication of the methodology concerning how one determines who is to be held to a higher standard then the published requirements.

 

I hope to be able to take 10 cross overs and after applyiong the metric "know" which ones I should expect more from and which ones I may allow to merely meet the requirements.

 

Its really quite interesting, I have never been prescient before, I love trying out new skills.

 

Then again, maybe all of this would go away if we trusted each other to have our scouts meet the stated requirements,

 

 

Nahhhhh!

[Beavah]

I look forward to the publication of the methodology concerning how one determines who is to be held to a higher standard then the published requirements.

 

I don't.

 

Da point when we can publish a nice, neat, simple set of rules or methodology for helpin' kids grow is the point when it can be programmed into a computer and automated online.

 

We have adult association in Scoutin' for a reason, eh? It's because raisin' kids can't be automated. And if as a scout leader yeh don't know which one of your kids is strugglin' and which needs to be pushed or pulled to higher levels of achievement, then I reckon yeh shouldn't be a volunteer in this business. Scoutin' means knowing your boys, and helpin' 'em each grow in character, fitness, and citizenship.

 

CrossRamWedge's son seems to have no trouble makin' the distinction between cases, eh? Seems like trained and experienced adults should do at least as well as a 16 year old.

 

The stated requirement, BTW, is to live da Oath and Law in your everyday life, including Scouting. Doin' the minimum when that is less than your best doesn't fulfill da requirement, eh? Not in CRW's son's eyes, and not in da eyes of the community that feels Eagle Scout actually means something of value.

 

 

Beavah(This message has been edited by Beavah)