Ask the Expert: The BSA’s ‘active’ requirement

[BadenP]

Its too bad that the rest of scouting doesn't follow the sea scouts definition of active, it would make the SM job a lot easier.

[OldGreyEagle]

Just for fun, what about a Devil Advocates thought?

 

perhaps the Active = Registered thing is there because BSA didn't want a Troop to have a "regular" guest who comes along on Troop activities, never registers and then claims to be a First Class Scout, or to have all the requirments for Eagle, all requirements completed except of course being registered as a scout.

 

OK, its a reach, but given what BSA sometomes does, is it?

 

Then again, how does a scout advance if he is not "active"? If we are talking about the youth who makes Life scout at 13 and then lays off until the middle of his 16th year and wants to make Eagle, there is always the charter drop. And to say the Professionals won't allow it rings hollow. Yeah, they may squirm and fidget and outright bellow. But if the CO says that boy is not part of my troop, what can they do ?

[evmori]

Nah OGE. To be a member of the BSA, one has to be registered. But registered = active is just the easy way out.

[Oak Tree]

I am going to guess that the primary thing that National is trying to avoid are constant divisive appeals from Scouts/parents who didn't meet some particular troop's definition of active. I would just guess that this is where the rule came from originally.

 

With different troops all defining active differently, I can see lots of complaints of unequal treatment. Or arguments about why the standard was unreasonable for their particular Scout. I'm imagining that this could get especially testy during the final six months for Eagle, when a Scout may be approaching 18 and have tons of other stuff going on, and not be all that excited about camping out with a bunch of 11 year-olds.

 

Unless Boy Scouts did something like Sea Scouts, and defined a specific national standard, I think the unequal treatment argument has some merit.

[BrentAllen]

"I'm imagining that this could get especially testy during the final six months for Eagle, when a Scout may be approaching 18 and have tons of other stuff going on, and not be all that excited about camping out with a bunch of 11 year-olds."

 

So, if he isn't participating with the Troop, why is he a Scout? As a Scout who is about to earn Eagle, shouldn't he be setting a good example by being very active? Instead, he is setting a terrible example - when you are one of the older boys, you don't have to participate, or "be active" to earn Eagle.

 

If he doesn't have time to be a Scout, how does he have time to be Eagle?

 

It appears many Troops have adopted the idea that you can actually earn Eagle while not actually being a Scout. Amazing.

[Oak Tree]

Well, I'm not trying to defend the current standard, nor advocate for another one right now. I'm just postulating a reason why National may have come up with the current definition.

 

In the situation I'm imagining, let's say a Scout has been active all along. He wasn't all that interested in getting ranks until he realized his 18th birthday was approaching. Say the troop has a standard that to be active you have to attend 50% of the campouts. But this young man is on the high school football team, and has conflicts in August, September, October, November. The troop down the street doesn't have the same standard for active, so he'd be Eagle in their troop. I can imagine how the discussions could get nasty.

[Eagle92]

As someone who spent 4 years as a Life Scout, I have a few comments.

 

1) I do like to have a specific definition like the Sea Scouts do, and 75% seems reasonable.

2)I would word it to state "for a continuous _#__ month period since turning ___rank_____ you must have attended 75% of unit functions.

 

I know that once I got job, I missed almost all of the campouts and didn't got to summer camp; I had to work to support myself and help out. BUT i did attend almost every meeting and did take what I learned and passed it along. So expectign older scouts to work with youth isn't unreasonable.

 

I do admit another reason, besides the money I was earning working, for not going to summer camp was that I already took the one HA program at the camp at 14 and there was nothing challenging left. Yes I could have taken BSA Lifeguard, which I would recommend prior to the new changes this past year, but I was already a YMCA lifeguard when they still taught the 'hand to hand combat" and didn't see the need.

[artjrk]

As I stated in the other similar thread.

 

The time frame for being active for rank advancement is the same as the time frame for the POR for advancement. If a scout fulfills the requirement for the POR he most likely had to be "active" in the troop (aside from Den Chief).

[emb021]

"The time frame for being active for rank advancement is the same as the time frame for the POR for advancement. If a scout fulfills the requirement for the POR he most likely had to be "active" in the troop (aside from Den Chief). "

 

No.

 

Then the problem becomes 'did he do his job in the POR', or just hold the POR for X months.

 

Too often you see postings where the youth didn't do their job, and then the scoutmaster wouldn't sign off on the position when it came up for review/signoff. Its like no one thought about making sure the kid was doing the job, and if not, remove him from office before hand.

 

 

[Abel Magwitch]

Back in January of 2007, our council advancement committee gave a Scout an Eagle Board of Review on appeal for a Scout. The Scout had already been turned down by his initial EBOV. He appealed and was given a District level EBOV where again he was denied. The reason why this Scout failed his EBOVs was he was not active. The Scout had not been active for over a year. He did not show up for meetings; did not go on camps; did not show up for service projects or other activities. Why? The Scout was busy playing high school sports. He was required to be active by making all the practices and games. Consequently, he made his decision to be active in Sports instead of Scouting. But at the last minute, he finished the few remaining merit badges he needed (his project was already complete for some time). Every Eagle Board of Review this Scout had reached the same conclusions that the Scout was not an active participant in Scouting. And when the Scout was finally turned down by the Council Advancement Committees EBOV, he appealed to National.

 

On February 21, our Scout Executive forwarded to our council advancement committee this response from the national scout office:

 

Dear Mr. Scout Executive,

 

The National Advancement Committee met on Monday, February 5, at the DFW Marriot in Irving, Texas and considered the appeal for the Eagle Scout rank of Joe Scout

 

The committee voted to approve the Eagle Scout board of review for Mr. Joe Scout.

 

Sincerely,

 

Mr. National Advancement Professional

Boy Scout Division, Advancement

 

That was it the Scout was an Eagle. No explanations were given, just a message by the national advancement committee given to a professional at national and sent to the SE of our council to give to our committee. The national advancement committee remains anonymous.

 

As one of my councils advancement committee members, I replied to the gentleman who sent the response from the national advancement committee:

 

Dear Mr. National Advancement Professional,

 

I am in receipt of your letter our Scout Executive stating that the National Advancement Committees approval of badge of Eagle Scout for Joe Scout.

 

There was no explanation given by the National Advancement Committee on how they reached their decision. For training purposes, our council advancement committee needs an explanation in order to handle similar situations when they arise in the future in our council.

 

In order for our committee to better serve our council in the future, our council advancement committee also needs clarification and a definition of the word active from the policy writers in the national committee. For the rank of Eagle Scout, the word active is used in the 1st and 4th requirements. A clear understanding of the word active and how it is applied to the Eagle requirements would help prevent any further misunderstandings when our committee is confronted with similar situations in the future.

 

Thank you for your time.

 

Sincerely,

 

Abel Magwitch

 

 

Mr. National Advancement Professional did reply. This was his reply:

 

From the National Boy Scout Advancement Committee:

 

Suggested BSA definition of active as it applies to Requirement #1 of Star, Life and Eagle advancement requirements:

 

A Scout will be considered active in his unit if he is:

1) Registered in his unit (registration fees are current).

2) Has not been dismissed from his unit for disciplinary reasons.

3) Informs the Scout of unit activities and events. (Scoutmasters conference, participation in unit activities, through personal contact, etc).

 

(Comment: This definition could be added as a side bar or box on page(s) 24-25 of the Advancement Policies and Procedures book)

 

Adopted and approved 2/7/05

 

I found this explanation fascinating. The National AdvancementCommittee had conveniently thrown the problemof active back at the volunteer.

 

I also found it interesting that this policy was adopted two years prior yet never made official by the national advancement committee.

 

So our council advancement committee came up with this response for Mr. National Advancement Professional to pass on to the national advancement committee:

 

Dear Members of the National Committee,

 

It is the belief of our Council Advancement Committee that the National Advancement Committees suggested definition of active is in error. It is not a definition of active; rather it is nothing more than a definition for what it means to be a registered scout. It also goes without saying that it would only follow that the definition of inactive could be a non-registered youth with no fees paid - essentially a non-scout.

 

The National Advancement Committees definition of active as applied to Eagle requirements

1 & 4 devalues the requirements for Eagle Scout.

 

Webster defines active as: Characterized by action rather than by contemplation or speculation; productive of action or movement; marked by vigorous activity; disposed to action.

 

Requirement 2 for the Webelos badge is similar to requirement 1 for Eagle and has a more appropriate definition for active:

 

2. Be an active member of your Webelos den for three months. (Active means having good attendance, paying your den dues, and working on den projects.)

 

According to the National Advancement Committees definition for active, requirements 1 and 4 should be instead revised to read:

 

Requirement 1: Be a registered Boy Scout with all fees paid for a minimum of 6 months as a Life Scout.

 

Requirement 4: While being a registered Boy Scout with all fees paid, carry out a position of junior leadership, fulfilling the requirements of the position for a minimum of 6 months.

 

These revised requirements would better reflect nationals suggested definition of active that could be added as a side bar. Writing the requirements this way would help put to an end the many disputes between scouts, their parents, and their leaders concerning requirements 1 and 4 for Eagle Scout.

 

Our Council Advancement Committee is strongly requesting that these suggested policies be made official by publishing them in the Advancement Guidebook. This would be a responsible course of action by the National Advancement Committee that would help eliminate the confusion over these requirements.

 

In keeping with the spirit of the communications merit badge, the National Advancement Committee has an obligation and responsibility to ensure that these unpublished policies are more than just suggestions. They need to be included in the Advancement Guidebook, along with any other publication in the BSA where advancement is written.

 

These policies also need to be included in scoutmaster training and any other training concerning advancement. No volunteer leader at any level, unit district or council, can make an educated decision on whether a scout did the requirements, no more and no less, if the national committee fails to make official and publish their suggested policies used in granting appeals.

 

A scout in our council had recently been denied his Eagle at his initial Board of Review. The Scout had appealed and was also denied at a District and finally a Council lever Eagle Board of Review. In every case it was a tough decision to make for the members of each board of review. It was an unpopular decision, one that was not made lightly by the members of the various boards, but one made with much thought and consideration.

 

The scout did not have good participation in the program as a Life Scout and was in no way active in his troops program.

 

The district and council level boards of review based their conclusions using the only resources that were made available by the BSA to reach their unanimous decisions. One resource was the twelve steps to Eagle found in the Advancement Guidelines book. Number nine of the twelve steps states that the board should be assured of the candidates participation in the program.

 

Our Council Advancement Committee finds it unsatisfactory that these suggested national policies that are used to grant inactive scouts their appeals on the national level are not being published to the volunteer adult leaders of the Boy Scouts of America. Keeping these policies in the dark has been instrumental in hurting the reputations, character and good name of some dedicated leaders in our volunteer ranks at the unit, district and council level. No volunteer should have to endure the slander or libel that sometimes comes from an unpopular decision made with the only written resources made available by the National Advancement Committee.

 

Our Council Advancement Committee believes in the importance of the Eagle Badge and does not agree with the National Advancement Committees suggested definition of active, but will adhere to it until if ever, it is changed. Understand though that Our Council Advancement Committee will take the responsibility to ensure that these suggested policies are carried out by making them known to the unit leaders of our council and any other council our members come in contact with.

 

No dedicated volunteer adult leader at any level, unit, district or council, should have to waste their valuable time with emotional boards of review for questionable scouts only to have their decisions overturned by some ambiguous suggested policy that the National Advancement Committee chooses not to make known. Especially disturbing is the fact that the National Advancement Committee did not have the courtesy to explain how they reached their decision on granting this scout his appeal to our council advancement committee.

 

Lastly, concerning the other suggested national advancement committee policy that encourages a troop committee to dismiss an inactive scout, we object.

 

Our Council Advancement Committee would never encourage a troop committee to dismiss a scout from his troop because he is inactive. Even if the scout attends one meeting a month, he may still benefit from the program in a positive way.

 

Our Council Advancement Committee will though encourage a troop committee to have an inactive scout step down from his office as junior leader. This way the scout can still remain as a member, able to benefit from the program when he does show up, but ensures that the inactive scout does not get credit for being a junior leader when he has not done the job.

 

It can be concluded from the national advancement committees suggested policies that the word active must have two accepted definitions; one for the 99% of scouts who do the requirements by being an active participant in his troop, and the other for the 1% of scouts who wish to circumvent those inconvenient requirements 1 & 4 because of a sports or other obligations the scout chooses to be active in, sacrificing his scouting obligations.

 

We look forward to the National Advancement Committees reply to our request of publishing and adding to advancement training its definition of Active. Our Council Advancement Committee is willing to lend its insights and collective experiences to help the national committee better define its advancement terms and requirements.

 

Sincerely,

 

Our Council Advancement Committee

 

Our council advancement committee never received another response. But is sometime after this letter was sent, the Advancement Policies and Procedures book was revised to include Nationals definition of the word active.

[acco40]

To earn the Eagle rank, a Scout has to be active for six months while a Life scout. Not six consecutive months. Not the last six months. Not necessarily active when he works on his Eagle Leadership Service Project. Not necessarily while he earns his merit badges.

[BadenP]

Hey Abel

Good post, I think you have broken the record for the longest single post which has long held by Eamonn, lol.

 

It just goes to prove what I have been saying about the quality of most National personnel, half of them have their heads buried in the sand and the rest just make up the answers as they go along. Then they wonder why there is so much confusion in the field with their poorly thought out and poorly written publications. National is not the wealth of information or knowledge volunteers think it is, want proof go to Texas and talk to some of these primadonnas, you will leave shaking your head in disbelief. Just as long as you remember "Active=Registered", sad, sad, sad.

[gcnphkr]

To earn the Eagle rank, a Scout has to be active for six months while a Life scout. Not six consecutive months. Not the last six months. Not necessarily active when he works on his Eagle Leadership Service Project. Not necessarily while he earns his merit badges.

 

An argument can be made for six consecutive months. "While a Life Scout, serve actively for a period of 6 months in one or more of the following positions of responsibility". That is "a period of 6 months" not the "serve actively 6 months" like it is with life. Now I suspect that no scout would successfully be prevented form being awarded an Eagle because of it.

[evmori]

I don't think there is an argument for being active for six consecutive months. There is nothing that states that.

 

National doesn't want to be the bad guys which, in my opinion, is wrong.

[OldGreyEagle]

National should want to be bad guys?

 

Oh wait, they already are ...