Another advancement issue...too fast too soon

[airborneveteran]

"IMHO, the real question is how to celebrate this scout's achievement before he moves out of town."

 

This.

 

With a couple of adults unhappy but a decision that has been made, try to get the point across that the boat is moving. It's time for everyone else to help row or stay on the shore. Hopefully, the scout is acknowledged with *only* smiles and handshakes before he moves. Adults unable to be a good sport and smile need to quit *now*. Period. They don't stay for awhile and be a PITA only to leave later. It's not about them and it never was.

[Basementdweller]

More importantly, what did you learn from the experience??????

 

 

Last summer we did not just sign off on the first year trail.....we retested on the next campout.....None passed all, some passed none.......Participation does not equal sign off....but demonstration of skill does.....

 

I am going to bet ASM dad signed off because he participated.....(This message has been edited by Basementdweller)

[Beavah]

Scouting is program based. It's about doing. Getting outdoors. Learning. Exploring. Building friendships. The scout in question apparently has done this, has been a good member of the troop and has met BSA advancement expectations.

 

I think what evilleramsfan and his fellow scouters are tryin' to say is that the boy in question really hasn't done this, at least in terms of learning and meeting BSA advancement expectations.

 

He has been "signed off", perhaps for participation as Basementdweller suggests, but we all recognize that just participatin' doesn't mean learning and definitely doesn't mean meeting BSA advancement expectations.

 

So yeh have a case where some, perhaps many, of the sign-offs were improper, but the boy relied on 'em.

 

Da big issue there is to fix the quality control on the folks who are doin' the sign-offs. Then yeh have to worry about whether or not you are short-changing the boy. As fred8033 says, the point of scouting is goin' out and doin' stuff, and to give a boy a rank just because paperwork is complete when he doesn't yet have the skill puts him in harms way. First Class is a threshold for many "older scout" / high adventure activities and for OA, but a lad who has the badge but not First Class skills is put at a real disadvantage. So yeh also have to address the advancement issue with the boy. How yeh do that depends a bit on your style, your troop culture, and your relationship with the lad. Most boys, I would sit with, help 'em admit that they really didn't know how to do X, Y, and Z like a First Class scout should, and then promise to work with 'em over the next month(s) to brush up so they could wear the badge with honor. Others tend more toward givin' out the badge and then workin' with him to refresh the skill. Still others would choose other methods. The point is to help the boy have the skill to do all that great fun stuff well and safely, not to hand out patches.

 

When they're headin' off into the sunset, though, it's a hard question, because yeh can't do the sort of follow up yeh need to. On the one hand, I think yeh err on the side of givin' him the benefit of the doubt, sendin' him off with good feelings and all the rest. On the other hand, in his new troop a Star Scout may be expected to be able to do all kinds of things includin' steppin' right up into leadership roles, and it can be quite rough on him to be put in that position among new boys and not be ready to succeed. So yeh might have a word with the new SM and let him know that the lad blew through ranks awfully fast and could probably use some brush-up.

 

Beavah

 

[fred8033]

Beavah wrote: - "I think what evilleramsfan and his fellow scouters are tryin' to say is that the boy in question really hasn't done this, at least in terms of learning and meeting BSA advancement expectations.

 

Fair enough. I read evilleramsfan posts very differently. I saw where evilleramsfan wrote:" "This boy was one of the ones who got a bunch of items signed off because he went to two different summer camps. As a result, most of his First class was signed off and just needed time to happen. He did not earn First Class, but received it anyway."

 

But it really didn't connect with me in where he did not earn First Class. I was reading that the scout had reasonable knowledge on the topics the SM questioned him on and the scout was very involved. I interpretted that others in the troop were grumbling at how fast the scout advanced. Almost like complaining that such a young scout had an unfair advantage by getting two weeks of summer camp and was able to shoot past his similar aged scouts.

 

...

 

evilleramsfan - This might be moot now. But when you wrote "He did not earn First Class", what did you mean? Did he not pass a swimmers test (or equivalent with doctor's permission etc and BSA waver)? Did he not identify 10 different plants? Did he not help plan a patrol menu? Did he not do the map and compass requirement? How did the scout fail to meet the requirements?

 

[ScoutNut]

And when you explain how he did not earn First Class please keep in mind that NO WHERE in any BSA requirements is it required for a Scout to be tested more than ONCE, or to retain information for any specified period of time.

 

 

[Eagle92]

Nut,

 

That can be argued (classical definition of the word). In older BSA literature, mastery of the requirements was expected and expressed in the BSHBs. That does imply long term knowledge of the skill. Currently GTA states that the rank badge represents what the scout CAN do, not what he had done. So a scout wearing a Life badge SHOULD be able to do the skills for everything he has earned

 

For more details see the discussion Fred and I had a few months back on the topic.

[Beavah]

And when you explain how he did not earn First Class please keep in mind that NO WHERE in any BSA requirements is it required for a Scout to be tested more than ONCE, or to retain information for any specified period of time.

 

Except in the Rules and Regulations of the BSA that we all agreed to live by when we signed our application forms.

[evilleramsfan]

Beavah read it correctly. We are a very active troop with a strong outdoor program. The problem was that due to the quick growth and an influx of new ASM's, the boys were signed off on having "completed" the requirements at camp. In reality, the boys needed to be retested back at home after camp was completed. We are fortunate in that we have had enough activity and interest over the last 4 years to attend 2 summer camps each summer. Some of the boys have attended both (such as in this case).

 

As to Basementdweller's question, yes we have learned a lesson here. We are not changing our program, but will require that boys learn the skill and then test over it at a later date. We have put a window of time in of two weeks minimum at this point to see how it goes. We plan to evaluate this policy and see how it works. This way, the boy has a chance to learn it, go home and practice it, come back at the next troop meeting to ask questions if need be, and come in at the two week time period to show his proficiency. If he isn't, we can correct the problems and ask him to come back in another time to see if they have worked themselves out.

 

As to my comments that he did not earn the First Class rank.... He was signed off as having done them by a staff member at the camp on a sheet which listed the individual rank requirements. This staff member was not an adult. I do not even know how adept the staff member was at doing the skills themselves, much less teaching them. Our ASM's who attended the camps received the sheets and in turn signed off in the scout's book without checking on the skills.

 

One other fallout on this is that we may not participate in the camp's T21 (or whatever they call it now) program. We have had good results with our older scouts teaching the younger ones the skills while at camp and us checking them once the older scout felt they were proficient.

 

As to the boy being sent off with a smile....I don't see that being an issue, but several of us feel railroaded over this and in particular I feel that I was painted into a corner and had no choice. I did what was right even though what led up to him receiving the rank was wrong. As I said, the boy is a pleasure to work with and signing off on scout spirit and being active were no-brainers. More of my disappointment is that I feel we have really let the boy down in not making sure he had an appropriate scouting education.

[Eagle92]

One of the things that may help is the following.

 

1) Have the PLs, ASPL, SPL, and other older Scouts responsible for the T-2-1 sign offs. Now you got to "Train them, Trust them, LET THEM LEAD" as Green Bar Bill would say, but in my experience if you instill a set of expectations in the older scouts, and also instill in them a sense of responsibility for the younger scouts, the SCOUTS will be your quality control. ASIDE: one reason why I don't like NSPs, there is only one older scout to serve as PL or Guide, and it's really better is it's one-on-one or two-to-one in regards to new scout to older scout.

 

2) I know of one troop that won't let you be an ASM right off the bat, you need to be an MC for a year so that you get trained and get an understanding of the troop culture.

[Basementdweller]

Good for you evil.........

 

 

When ever something like this crops up I ask that question of myself.....Where did I fail or how could this improve.

 

 

Somethings you can control or teach around others you can't, you solution seems reasonable enough.

 

[qwazse]

One other fallout on this is that we may not participate in the camp's T21 (or whatever they call it now) program. We have had good results with our older scouts teaching the younger ones the skills while at camp and us checking them once the older scout felt they were proficient.

 

Another convert! Your boys are the best T2FC instructors your crossovers will ever meet.

[SaintCad]

Not the boys fault so let him advance.

 

Let me explain. All of this is coming from evilramsfan not knowing the rules and regulations. I had to look them up as a new scoutmaster when a scout complained that Eagle Scouts were always allowed to sign off on advancement and I shouldn't overturn that policy. The rule from National is that the person who signs off on rank advancements is the Scoutmaster OR those he/she designates. End of discussion.

 

So the Scoutmaster needs to make it very clear who can sign off on what in a troop and if the Scoutmaster does not feel that it is appropriate for camp staff to sign off on advancements then they can make it a rule that advancements cannot be signed off at camp. But best practices would be to let every Scout going off to camp know what the rules are ahead of time and that they will need to show the skill to the satisfaction of the Scoutmaster/designee when they get back.

[Kudu]

Oops! I posted here rather than in the spun thead:

 

http://www.scouter.com/forums/viewThread.asp?threadID=340353&p=3

 

(This message has been edited by Kudu)

[evilleramsfan]

SaintCad, you are pretty quick to throw rocks without knowing the full extent of the story. As to your assumption of me not knowing the "rules and regulations" of the BSA, you couldn't be further from the truth. My exasperation in my original post was due to having this situation come up and knowing that I had several adult leaders who would insist on not allowing the boy to advance. The problem came about from a policy that this troop had been following long before my involvement. It was not the staff members at the camp who were signing off on the requirements in the book, but it was the ASM who attended camp with the boy. The troop received a progress sheet from the camp that stated what requirements were met and which were not. The old policy in place was to rubber-stamp what was signed. It was, as they say, "a perfect storm" that happened as result of several policies that did not have a series of checks and balances to insure quality. As a small troop, it never became a problem. However as the troop expanded, it became apparent over the last year to year and a half that it wasn't working. We are working to correct things so that further advancements have to meet the requirements as set forth.

 

For the record, I've been the SM of the troop for over 3 years now. I had been ASM for 3 years prior to that. I am one of the instructors for our council for Scoutmaster Training. My youth scouting experience spanned 15 years with an additional 2 years as an adult once I had turned 21. I went on hiatus from that point until my oldest son joined cubs.

 

BTW, you apparently missed it where I posted that I signed off on the boy. The BOR did the same. None of us liked it, but we wished him and his father well and closed the door. I am not bitter over it, but have learned a lesson....as have a number of the adult leaders in the troop. We have also put forth a policy that new adults may not serve as ASM's(who I have authorized to sign off on requirements) until they have completed training and have served at least 6 months on the troop committee.