Is it Once and Done?

[Eagle92]

Fred,

 

You're right, someone that has expertise does conduct the swim test. Once upon a time, I was one of them too. And I knew who the weak swimmers were, despite passing the swim test, and encouraged to work on their abilities.

 

As I mentioned, up to 2009 when the current BSHB came out, scouts were expected to master skills per the BSHB of their period. Passing the swim test one time may not be mastery of the skill depending upon the scout. Again MASTERY OF THE SKILL (caps for emphasis) was the expectation not only of me as a PL, ASPL, or ASM, but also of the Boy Scouts of America Handbook up until 2009. Today the G2A says that they must be able to do the skill. In fact the GTA doesn't even say do the skill one time and get the badge, rather the badge represents what he is able to do. To me that is a clear statement against "one and done."

 

 

Now as to why I would not change the tag. 1) It is a sense of achievement to pass that test, and encourages the scout to master the skill of swimming, per BSHBs pre 2009, or to use the 2011 GTA wording, encourages the scout to be able to do the skill, in this case swimming. I was one those who did not pass the swim test the first go around, instead having to take instructional. Was I able to pass the swim test by mid week, yes. Did I master swimming by passing the test, no. Did I continue working on that skill the rest of the week, even after passing the swim test, darn tootin I did.

 

2)Peers are sometimes the best motivators and teachers, and by having someone work with him in the swimmers area may help him gain proficiency. Yes my friends helped me out. Did I limit myself to the shallower areas of the swimmers area in the lake, yes when I was tired. But I was encouraged to practice, gain endurance, and become proficient because of my friends.

 

3) As you noted, trained personnel are around the aquatics area, and using BSA rules and regs, a BSA aquatics area has more certified folks, and a more secure area than public pools. HECK in some instance the folks working on Lifesaving MB are better trained and prepared than certified lifeguards from ARC and YMCA. As a former YMCA Lifeguard Instructor, I was extemely disappointed when YMCA followed ARC in doing away with nonequipment rescues. Unfortunately BSA Lifeguard is now ARC with BSA terminology and also no longer works on nonequipment rescues. Fortunately Lifesaving MB does require them still. So I feel more comfortable in a BSA setting than a public pool.

 

Now to the side discussions

 

As for unsigning something signed off, who said anything about that? I agree with you, you find out who signed it and mentor them on how it's suppose to be, in this case according to the GTA and the scout being able to do the requirement, not just one one time and be recognized. As for the scout in question, yes you work with him so that he can do the skill. part of the learning process, according to the GTA,is being able to teach the skill to others. I've found that those who are a little week in a skill will work extra hard when they are tasked to teach the skill.

 

As for programming and ensuring the scouts have the skills, once upon a time you didn't need to worry about that. If they had the badge, you expected them to have the KSAs to go with it. But you still practiced those skills with the group. You through in unexpected scenarios, not only to keep them on their toes and make it more fun and challenging, but also so that they can be prepared in case something happens.

 

As for scouts signing off on T-2-1, yes once it's signed off, it is done. HOWEVER you need to counsel, mentor, and train your scouts on expectations and what it means to have the skill signed off, i.e. the scout is really able to do the skill and not just "one and done." If you find problems with a particular scout just signing off and not ensuring that that those he teaches can really do it, you may need to counsel and mentor him again, or worse, take his ability to sign off requirements away. But more importantly you need to work with the scouts signed off to insure that they truly know the skills and can do it.

 

Again a badge represents what a scout is able to do, and is not a reward for what he has done.

 

 

[fred8033]

For scouts signing off on T21, I mentioned it because I've seen 1st hand and also got from this thread SMs who will delay advancement for skills that were tested and signed off by an authorized person (ASM, senior scout, troop guide). It always raises the question of what did the original sign off mean and how will the scout know if he'll advance other than at the whim of a SM.

 

 

[Eagle92]

Fred,

 

Back up one, did you say that the SM doesn't trust those he approved to sign off requirements to verify that the scout actually have the skills ?!?!?!?!?!?

 

Ok I think I understand where you are coming from now, and if the above is the case, why we have been going round after round on this topic, when we both agree on those side discussions, which essentially would negate the entire topic IMHO.

 

Signing off on requirements is a BIG deal, as it should be. Those who sign off need to be trained, counseled, and coached into whole entire process works, both youth and adults. Expectations need to be very clear. As you pointed out "mastering skills" is no longer in the current BSHB like it has been in previous ones, so it is incumbent that the SM uses his resources such as the GTA to relay what is expected. Also those signing off should know the 4 steps.

 

As Green Bar Bill wrote: "train 'em, trust 'em, and let 'em lead". let them do the signing off and do not go back behind them. Yes sure make sure those signing off are doign the job properly, that's done via the SMC, and if needed remediate both the signer and the signee.

 

 

 

 

 

[lrsap]

On a side note of this discussion, if I am reading between the lines of what is said correctly the good news is it seems everyone is on the same page as far as presenting a quality program is concerned. That if two boys of similar skills entered fred8033 and Eagle92's troops at the same time, both troops would run a quality program and 18 months later these boys would have a similar set of skills and great experiences. The difference would be the patch on the shirt,or how long he has had it. To me, big picture matters a lot, but I'm a common ground, non-confrontational type.

 

If you think about it, probably the biggest problem is philosophical prose instead of pure explanation in what we find ourselves using as reference. Take for example the well-used phrase,

 

"...a badge recognizes what a young man is able to do and how he has grown. It is not so much a reward for what he has done"

 

If you were asked to write a manual and answer the question "When should I mark this requirement as met?" would this really be the best answer you could give to thousands of volunteers across the country? I could be totally missing something here, but to me it makes no sense at all. How do I know if a boy can do something unless he as already done it? And how do I know after seeing him do it correctly and properly one time that he won't be able to do it the next time he is asked?

 

Now if the idea was to give out some not so clear guidelines so people could make units operate as they see fit, thereby offering diverse options to boys and parents, it works.

 

I guess if I had to nail down my philosophy, it's not "one and done" because if you are running a good program the skills learned during the first three ranks should never be "done". But in terms of signing the book, it is possible to receive the recognition after one attempt. The biggest thing is the quality of the "one". If new scout on a camping trip shows my this great tripod lashing camp gadget he was able to make BY HIMSELF, I'll tell him great job, you might want to go see your PL with a pen. If he shows me three wobbly sticks that a summer breeze would blow over, I'll tell him nice try, you might want to go see your PL to set up some more knot training.

 

 

[Eagle92]

Irsap,

 

I can't explain how you know when a scout really understands teh skill, can do the skill, and ready for sign off.

 

Closest I can come to describe it is to use the comparison of an objective test versus subjective test. An objective test wants just the facts, i.e. True/false, Multiple Choice, Fill In the Blank, etc. It's learning and testing, but not necessarily mastering the content as was described int he older BSHBs. Whereas a subjective test, i.e. short answer essay, essay, thesis, etc, allows the individual to not only answer the questions, make connections to other areas, and expand into some detail what he knows. It allows for the individual to show what exactly they know and can do. that's why I like scouts to practice on their own after learning the skill, and use the skill a bit before sign off. If they are having problems, of course help them out, coach them and encourage them.

 

I see "one and done" as an objective test, it's only good for the short term, not the long term. Whereas getting the scout to truly be able to do the skill is like the subjective test, allowing greater knowledge and better understanding in the long term.

 

In thinking back to all the times I've taught scout craft, as well as working with my cubs ( remember cubs do have a much different standard), some of the signs I look for not only include being able to do the skills, but such subtle signs as confidence while doing it, comfortableness of doing it, and when first learning a new skill, the light bulb that "Oh yeah I got it now." Sometimes the sign off may be at after the monthly camp out where they used the skill throughout the weekend. It might be at after a second month's camp out. Or might be the next week, when the scout uses some of the first aid you taught him the week prior in a real life situation, and responds automatically without realizing that someone is behind him watching him. One of the guys I taught the FA Skill Award to did just that.

 

But as we all agree on, we got to have a program that puts the 'outing into Scouting,' and allows these scouts to no only learn and use the skills, but teach them as well.

 

On a personal note, sometimes we read more into these conversations than is really there based upon what's going on in our neck of the woods. It seems as if Fred may have a challenge with a leader who allows folks to sign off on requirements, but then retests them before signing off on the SMC and getting them to a BOR. (please correct me if I'm wrong). While it's good for a SM to catch any problems before the BOR, an SMC is not a retest session.

 

In my neck of the woods, we have a troop that is adult driven and advancement oriented. Leaders want everything they do to have some advancement goal to it. Heck I was talking about our wonderful HA base and it's program for older scouts and ventureers, www.pamlicoseabase.org , and I was asked what MBs do they earn for the week. I've had some dealing with scouts from them, and with the exception of 3, they seem to be pencil whipped ranks. And they have an outdoor program, but for whatever reason the basics are not really emphasized. And once their scouts get Eagle they usually leave. Again there are exceptions: 2 of the 3 exceptions I mentioned Eagled and remained until college. 3rd is Life, working on Eagle, and plans to stay. But all three are/were active in the OA, and one works on summer camp staff.

 

 

So maybe I should say an active outdoor program that the scouts are in charge of is needed

[Beavah]

Och, this isn't that hard, eh? Kudu's been sayin' it for years.

 

Da swimming signoff is proper when you are OK with the lad swimming on his own in deep open water without direct supervision. The navigate-on-a-hike signoff is proper when you are comfortable with the boy hiking and navigating on his own without any adults or older scouts. The operate a stove requirement is complete when yeh trust the boy to do it on his own around the bend and 300 feet away where if something goes wrong you can't help. Just like da driving signoff happens when yeh hand your boy the keys and tell him to go pick up his little sister from gymnastics.

 

A boy is able to do when he is able to do without us. Anything else is just a distinguished presentation of cow pies.

 

If you are willing to hand your kid the keys to the car the first time he successfully backs out the drive without taking out the mailbox, well, then it's once-and-done. . For da rest of us, I reckon we expect some reasonable degree of proficiency.

 

Beavah(This message has been edited by Beavah)

[sailingpj]

"Yes, I'm fine with this. It's reasonable for the person signing off to have some standard for what an acceptable bandage is. But what if the bandage was perfect? The Scout learned it two minutes ago, did it perfectly. Will he remember it in a week? Probably not if he doesn't practice it again. But if he's done it correctly, would you then not sign off? Or is it once and done? "

 

Here is what I do.

 

I see that a scout in my ship has just learned a bowline, or perhaps I just taught it to them. They ask me to sign it off. I tell them to come back to me next week and I'll see if they still remember it. 8 times in 10 they come back and struggle a little, but eventually get a bowline. I give them some advice, maybe show them a different way of tying it, or a new use, then tell them to come back next week.

 

Now 8 time in 10 they can tie it on their first or second try. If so I sign them off and give them more opportunities to tie it practically. Like say something needs to get secured, I will ask that person to go do it.

 

If by the third week they still can't tie it in less than 4 tries (I use that as a baseline because even though I have been tying knots all my life I still spaz out and forget a knot once in a while), then I tell them to keep practicing and come back again. I may also suggest to another member of the crew that they help this person practice.

 

As the skills get more complicated the process takes longer, like navigation normally take 4-8 weeks for someone to learn well enough to be useful.

[SeattlePioneer]

During my last term as an AS, I remember having occasion to create exercises and games that used the bowline during troop meetings --- relay races that involved tieing a bowline to rescue a struggling Scout that need to be rescued in the "water" and such.

 

A year later, we were doing a snowshoe hike on a cold, windy day in the backcountry when the snow was blowing around pretty well. I happened to notice that we were missing a Scout (Thank God!), and started to look around for where he might be.

 

I finally saw him about fifty feet down a steep slope, struggling in powder snow deep enough that he couldn't get to his feet. (Had he slid down another ten feet he would have been hidden by bushes and we might have been in real trouble)

 

Well, this was a great opportunity for a real world rescue! I had to prevent a couple of adults from monopolizing all the action, and I gave the climbing rope I carried to a Life Scout and his buddy to retrieve the Scout from the snowbank. He managed to tie a bowline and toss it down to the Scout, pretty much as we had practiced in troop meetings.

 

The boy still wasn't able to pull himself up, so the second Scout tied a second bowline his buddy used as a backup while descending to aid the trapped Scout.

 

The was a pretty good demonstration of "why we learn to tie knots."

 

 

 

[qwazse]

I like the way Sail thinks. The advantage of this, by the way, is that a boy can be working on a number of requirements at once, mastering each.

 

I had the opposite experience of SP. We had a sprained (potentially broken) wrist while backpacking. And the boys had a hard time addressing it on their own, in spite of the 1st aid merit badge. They kind of had the concepts, and I bet they could repeat the skill with the materials laid out for them, but they didn't get so comfortable with the skill that the materials would be secondary. They couldn't rig a splint absent a triangular bandage.

 

Truth be told, it was a tough problem for us SMs to figure out. (Posted about it in a previous thread.) But I do wonder if we were a little bit victims of a "once and done" mentality.

[SeattlePioneer]

>

 

 

I know I need to review Scout skills if I'm to be able to use them when called upon. A good Scout program works that review process into the program and makes it an organic part of the program, is my experience. That way scout skills aren't foreign bodies stuck on the program, they are the heart of the program.

 

I usually looked to games and competitions for that kind of review, and often to learn the skills in the first place when practical.

 

 

 

Seattle Pioneer

 

 

[fred8033]

 

A lot of this is a fight for control. We say Boy Scouts is boy led. Simiarly we say scouts advance at their own pace and control their own advancement. In that respect, we have explicit rank requirements that are written and published so the scout will know what he needs to do to advance and does not depend on a scoutmaster telling them when their ready per some undocumented whim only in the scoutmaster's head.

 

- If it's pass a swim test, it's pass a swim test. Don't like the results. Talk to the person who gave the test.

 

- If it's take a five mile hike with a map and compass, it's done when the hike is done. There's no "when you are comfortable with the boy hiking and navigating on his own without any adults or older scouts." That's not in the documented requirements and there's much more to safe hiking then a map, compass and a few basic rules.

 

We as adult leaders guide the whole troop program so that after the scout's tenure in scouting he has the lifelong capabilities and skills.

 

...

 

Beavah wrote: "A boy is able to do when he is able to do without us. Anything else is just a distinguished presentation of cow pies. "

 

Scouts are accountable to specific BSA documented requirements; not vague altruistic fluff. Your description does not resemble the requirements. Your mentioned requirements are also not real rank requirements.

 

...

 

Beavah wrote: "If you are willing to hand your kid the keys to the car the first time he successfully backs out the drive without taking out the mailbox, well, then it's once-and-done. . For da rest of us, I reckon we expect some reasonable degree of proficiency. "

 

Your analogy is sloppy. Advancement is more like "drivers ed" and "behind the wheel" with an instructor and THEN getting your permit. With the permit, there's an expectation to get many hours behind the wheel with an experienced driver. The experienced driver doesn't grab the wheel and doesn't have his own break pedal. He's just there to provide advice if needed and keep things safe. That experienced driver is the whole scouting program.

 

Of course the driving analogy breaks down because driving (at least in our state) has three tests: Passing behind the wheel. Passing the written test. Passing a final driving test. Scouting explicitly only has one test.

 

...

 

The original intensity of the "one and done" debate also started because people were asserting even if the scout was signed off on a requirement requirement, advancement could be delayed if the scout could not demonstrate a requirement later during a SMC or BOR ... because rank advancement is about what a scout can do and not what he's done.

 

I'm all for boy led.

 

I'm all for youth taught skills.

 

I'm all for good troop programs.

 

I'm all for high expectations.

 

But I'm vehemently against undoing completed requirements. ... "Oh but if you can't display it on demand it wasn't really learned in the first place." ... That's the biggest smelliest cow pie. Watch out for those who's mouth it falls out of.

 

 

[Eagle92]

Fred,

 

With no disrespect intended, what's your history in Scouting? I know you've been a den leader in Cub Scouts, and are involved in rebuilding a troop now, but were you a scout as a youth? Have you had family that were in scouts? I ask becasue the comments you've been making appear that you've have not been involved in Scouting a long time as a whole, and are relatively new to the Boy Scout program.

 

See I was a Cub Scout, Boy Scout, Sea Scout, ASM, AA, OA chapter adviser, ad nauseum. Also I was a DE for awhile, so I've been around as you can see. Also I've had family members involved in scouting. One uncle was an Eagle and Silver Award recipient, a cousin was Eagle, and my older brothers were in Scouts for a spell. In addition to going through the program, I've also attended a bunch of training too, SM Fundamentals, Explorer Basic, CS Leader Basic, National Leaders Training(aka All Hands) Conference. And I have staffed a bunch of training too. In fact I have a sneaking suspicion that I'm about to get asked to be district training chair again.

 

Reason why I mention this is to give you an understanding of my background, and help let you know where I am coming from and how Boy Scouts is suppose to be. As I mentioned elsewhere, not all the info is in the BSHB. You got to use all of your sources in conducting a program, and that does include stuff not readily available to the youth.

 

Now you say that boys advance at their own pace using explicit requirements and that an SM doesn't need to tell them when they are ready to advance. That's partially true.

 

Yes the requirements are in the BSHB. But so has some form of the phrase "master the skills" in regards to scoutcraft and rank requirements since at least 1927's 3rd editions BSHB ( p98 Many of your Second Class skills can be mastered on actual outdoor hikes and then demonstrated (emphasis mine)in your Second Class Adventure ) So the expectation of mastery of scout craft skills has explicitly told to scouts up until the current edition.

 

Also since the founding of the BSA, someone with experience and training certifies that the scout knows the skills. 1st ed BSHB states scouts pass tests to show that skills have been learned. For example, To earn Second Class a tenderfoot (sic) must pass, to the satisfaction of the recognized local scout authorities.... pp 17. The 3rd ed BSHP states that you must ask your ...Scoutmaster just what is the way to meet these requirements.... p 98. It also states ...tests are given by the Scoutmaster of the Troop in all communities....This does not releive the Troop Committee or teh Local Council of the responsibility of maintaining standards in all requirements p 10. That book also states that advancement must follow "strict adheance to the standards as set forth in the official publications of the Boy Scouts of America (emphasis mine) pp105.

 

So since at least 1927, BSA has recognized that units and councils are responsible for adhering to standards in BSA publications, such as the G2A. So since 1927, BSA acknowledges that the BSHB does not contain all the answers to advancement. That is where leaders who go through training, read BSA publications like G2A, and set the expectations for the boys to meet the requirements.

 

As for the swims test and requirements, remember the term "mastery" has been used as the expectation in the BSHB. To paraphrase the G2A, the rank represents what the Scout is able to do, not a reward for what he has done. And I have met scouts, heck I was one, who passed the swim test by the skin of their teeth, but if asked to do it again may have some trouble. Because it was expected for me to "master" the swim test, or in today's terms do the swim test proficiently, there was no way I would ask for a sign off after doing it one time. It was only after I was comfortable doign the test did I ask for sign off.

 

As for the hike, you are correct in that there is more to safe hiking than map, compass, and a few rules. And the expectation has been that the scout knows everything that is involved in a safe hike. Since the 1st ed. BSHB, details on hiking have been given, and it was expected that they be applied in their hike. And the expectation that the scout can do it without adults has been around since the 1927 3rd edition. In fact one of the First Class requirements at the time was the following

 

Make a round trip alone(or with another Scout) (emphasis mine) to a point at least seven limes away ( fourteen miles in all), going on foot, or rowing a boat,and write a satisfactory account of trip and things observed and page 225 states Not more than two boys may make this hike together.

 

In the 1965 7th edition BSHB you have the following Second Class requirement in regards to hiking:

 

2(a) Take three hikes, each on a different day, of not less than 5 miles each with your troop, your patrol, an adult, or another Scout ( all emphasis mine) who is at least Second class (b)Before each hike submit a hike plan for approval....

 

Now one thing to remember up until the 2011 G2SS, Scouts were allowed, with the permission of the SM, to go camping on their own WITHOUT ADULTS. Don't believe, just look up that thread. Even today, according to the G2SS patrols can do things without adults, except overnite activities, with the permission of SM and parents (p 16)

 

So when patrols hiked and camp back then, they probably did it without adults around.

 

So again the expectation has been that the scout has mastered specific skills, and can use them with out adults around. To use today's terms, scouts have the ability to do the skills, and can do one day activities on their own, based upon official BSA publications like the G2A and G2SS. So being able to do thing without adults is implied and expected by the BSA

 

Beavah's analogy is actually spot on ( why didn't I think of it ) Just look at the historic literature to see that. Today's standards have been built up on the ones in the past.

 

I actually disagree. I think the "one and Done" attitude comes from several areas. A) is national's emphasis on FCFY since 1989. Leaders with little to no scouting background see that, and feel pressured to meet up to that program. B) Well meaning CS leaders still cannot get out of the CS mode of having scouts "do your best" to achieve rank. Again CS's have different standards b/c the CS program is designed for scouts to learn and do new things, not master specific skills. I have seen many a CS l;eader move up to BS and continue the CS model, and I pray that it doesn't happen to me when all 34 of my boys finally become BSs.

 

Now I agree with you that the boys should be doing the teaching and signing off. BUT have they been coached, trained, mentored, whatever you want to call it, to do it right> have the expectations that they are expected to not only learn the skill now, but be able to do it whenever needed relayed to them? Signing off is a big responsibility for a new PL, I remember how nervous I was b/c my name was going in the HB, and I wanted to make sure that I did my job of teaching them and keeping the expectation.

 

BUT what is a SM suppose to do if a Scout cannot do the skills that he is suppose to be abel to do? What if a SM see's that Tommy Tenderfoot is having problems using an ax when he passes the axe yard?, and Tommy wants a SMC that nite for Second Class? What if something happens on a trip, and a scout gets a sprained ankle, and Sammy Secondclass has no idea of what to do despite having the requirement signed off, and then wants an SMC for First Class at the next meeting? yes the SM can advise the Scout that he thinks some work is in order still and advise the scout to keep working on the skills before going to a BOR. BUT as we know if the scout wants a BOR, he gets one. Now whether the BOR agrees with the Scout or the SM is a different matter, But I hope that a socut would listen to the SM and wait.

 

May I make a recommendation? If you haven't already, watch Follow Me Boys. Yep it's fiction, but I think the scene where Whitey is on the hike with his patrol and makes the rescue is the best example of what a First class scout should be able to do, back then and today, and all without an adult being present.(This message has been edited by Eagle92)(This message has been edited by Eagle92)

[Eagle92]

Just reread my post. One sentence should read

 

I have seen many a CS l;eader move up to BS and continue the CS model, and I pray that it doesn't happen to me when all 3 of my boys finally become BSs.

 

 

I don't think I'd have the time for scouting if I had 34 kids.

[Tampa Turtle]

Eagle92,

 

That was a great post on the evolution of requirements. I cut and pasted it. I understands Fred's position in that "unsigning" would seem unjust to a boy (though some boys "shop around" for an easy mark sign-off). I see the former DL who was never a scout (of which I am one) as a real problem in quality control of sign offs. They really need to get out of the "do your best" mode. It is hard. I am not sure you can deal with the problem of the boy-led quality control until you get the adults done. I am sure others might argue otherwise. I honestly dont know. On the one hand boys can be pretty tough on each other. On the other hand if they were bred on the "easy do your best" advancement track they may be easy graders as well.

 

In our Troop we are gradually shifting to more boy sign-offs, or at least reports by PL's, Troop Guides, and Instructors will final sign off by Adults.

[Eagle92]

Tampa,

 

When I was first told to do sign offs as a 11 or 12 year old Second Class Scout, I had to teach and sign off on First Aid Skill Award, I asked how would I know when to sign off. I was told when I felt comfortable with the scout doing the skills on me in an emergency situation. I was given a what if situation: what if "Owl" was the only person with you and had to do first aid, would you trust him to do it right and save your life? That stressed the importance of me signing off, and reinforced the expecation in the BSHB that when I signed off on something, the scout needed to have mastered the skill.

 

A few years later when I was up in Canada, I got hypothermia. We were a "district" contingent or troop, i.e. we had scouts from every single troop go, but it was one of the scouts from my troop that recognized that I had hypothermia with my shivering, slurred speach, couldn't speak properly, and faint blue ting. If memory serves, it was one of the scouts that Owl taught FA SA to that recognized it, but I could be mistaken. So I must have done something right

 

Do not get me wrong, I am not knocking former CS leaders, heck I am currently one myself. But after 4-5 years of training to do things fro your den and being a leader, it is hard to step back. And the opposite is true; I sometimes have to remember that I'm working with CSs and cannot expect them to do things like a Boy Scout. Heck one of the dad commented he couldn't be a DL, because he still rememebrs all the stuff his troop did, and soemtimes cannot adjust. Although he does plan on being an ASM when the time comes.