First Class Requirements Quagmire.

[ScoutDaddy21]

We have a 13 year old second class scout, who has finished all his requirements for first class. He is eagerly working being a first class by next board of review (in 3 weeks). He is a great kid, been a scout now for 5 years. His only pending requirement was 4a,b,c and e. He has already got 4d signed off.

 

He recently went to a camp out. He helped plan the menu, made a list, got prices, cooked,cleaned and his patrol leader vouches for it. He came to me for requirement sign off and we realized he had everything but he had not secured the provision. Many of us believe all requirements should be signed off except 4b as he has not met it. However, the ASM believes that requirement 4 of first class is all or none, so none of the requirements should be signed off. Some of the other first classes have not been held to same standard many of think this is not logical nor fair. Just wondering if any of you faced similar situation and what is the right thing to do? Is it right and fair to hold back all 4a,b,c and e requirements?(This message has been edited by Scoutdaddy21)

[perdidochas]

It's not all or nothing. There are separate places to sign off for each in the Handbook. Also, it does not require the boy to secure the provisions. Here is the exact text:

 

4b.Using the menu planned in requirement 4a, make a list showing the cost and food amounts needed to feed three or more boys and secure the ingredients.

 

 

[ScoutDaddy21]

Perdidochas,

 

Thanks for your response. Thats exactly many of us in the troop believe. Yes, the requirements are inter dependent but not all or none. btw, I did not get your comment "It does not require the boy to secure the provisions". 4b says ...secure ingredients. So are you saying we can sign off 4b?

[Tampa Turtle]

We have had boys do parts of that one at more than one trip. So it is not all or nothing.

[NJCubScouter]

"Using the menu planned in requirement 4a, make a list showing the cost and food amounts needed to feed three or more boys and secure the ingredients."

 

Hmm. I think we have always assumed in our troop that "secure the ingredients" means the Scout has to go shopping for them. (Generally this has meant that two Scouts go together, with their parents, since nowhere does it say that the "securing" must be a solitary experience. I think the point is that a boy experiences the joy of turning a shopping list into items in a cart, within budget, something they will no doubt repeat many times in later life at the behest of their spouse. ("Honey, on your way home, please...))

 

But I digress.

 

I don't really think the goal of the requirement is met if you can "secure the ingredients" merely by asking some other person for the items that they shopped for.

 

On the other hand, would we allow requirements 4a, b, c and e to be done piecemeal, on different camping trips? Yeah, probably. I don't think it is subtracting from the requirements.

 

 

[lrsap]

Hey there, ScoutDaddy, welcome! Let me be the first one to say it on this thread because you can find it in many, many threads on these forums:

 

"Ask him to show you where it is written."

 

or more technically,

 

"Get a copy of the current Guide to Advancement and ask him to show you where it s written."

 

I do have a few questions for you though:

 

*What does the Scoutmaster think? It's ultimately his call.

*Does this ASM require it for every Scout for every requirement that has an a,b,s, etc?

*Ask him how a Tenderfoot can do 10a and 10b all at once or nothing. That would be a neat trick.

*What position do you hold within the troop? Not a negative, and don't dare say "Just a parent." There is no such thing as "Just a parent". Without parents we have no Scouts. But if you hold certain positions within the troop your recourse could be different. If you do not have a position, it could be trickier or at least requiring more diplomacy.

 

And just for fun, how would everyone define "Securing the ingredients" anyway? Does the boys have to do the actual hands on shopping, or can he organize and delegate his patrol in a "You bring this, you bring that" method. Seems to me the goal of that requirement is to make sure what you need gets to camp.

[qwazse]

The closest definition of "secure" seems to be Webster's 3a : to get usually lasting possession or control of

 

So, purchasing is not necessarily implied. If he "plants the seed, grows the wheat, harvests the grain, grinds the flour" like Little Red Hen, that would count too. So would raiding the cupboards (with mom's permission). So would coordinated raids of each patrol member's cupboard (with respective mom's permisison).

 

(Remember most grocery stores are a good clip away from home these days.)

 

In other words, sign if the boy shows up with all the ingredients and isn't scrounging the floor of the troop trailer at the last minute.(This message has been edited by qwazse)

[NJCubScouter]

...or can he organize and delegate his patrol in a "You bring this, you bring that" method.

 

If the Scout actually did that, I would say yes, that is "securing the ingredients" and meets the requirement.

[dg98adams]

Not to weigh in on the overall topic, but "secure ingredients" would mean IMHO going to the store, using the Meal-Plan ingredient list and picking out items that fit the budget.... this is where sometimes the name-brand is outside of the budget, where a cheaper generic would be fine, or scratch ingredients over a packaged item is almost always is cheaper. It's also an opportunity to scrimp on some items and splurge on others and still meet the budget/food list.

 

I have taken several such trips with Scouts and had that discussion... especially with Scouts from families with more economic freedom or have never experienced the need to make a choice based on the cash in-hand.

 

Personally, I say the Scout needs to go to the store and either get the items that fit the food list/budget for the outing, or go to the store and write down items/description/quantity/prices that fit the budget.

 

The latter would require going over it with finer comb, since nothing is ACTUALLY purchased. Seen that done when we had a 15-Scout New Scout Patrol.

 

I believe this is a something important to learn.(This message has been edited by dg98adams)

[Basementdweller]

I don't care who you are that's funny...

 

 

That is why it is broken apart and not a single sign off......

 

Did he do 4a....Yep sign it

4b....sign it

4c....sign it

4d...no then don't sign it.......just that simple.

 

I am guessing the SM's point is that, 3 weeks to BOR, no campouts so he can't actually shop for the food. No point in signing off the other three points...

[Oak Tree]

This is the Scoutmaster's call. Someone has to decide what the phrase "secure the ingredients" means and whether this Scout has done that. That is either the Scoutmaster or someone that he has delegated.

 

I would definitely sign off on 4a, c, and e.

 

It can be done piecemeal, but if he does part b on some other trip, that will mean that another Scout won't get credit for it on that trip. In general, I don't think we've ever signed these off for someone who wasn't the designated head cook for their patrol - so in our troop he'd have to find another opportunity to be head cook.

 

It's really a pain in the butt when a Scout does the great majority of some requirement but doesn't quite finish it. Sometimes you have to decide what type of judgment you can use to make things fair. That's also a good lesson for leaders involved to make sure that we're as clear as possible with the Scouts on what the requirements are.

[Scoutfish]

I'd say secure is not limited to buying. Securing means you "get" the ingredients.

 

A scout is also thrifty. If his dad has a big garden, and has corn, and one of the ingredients is corn on te cob, and the scout brings it..then he secured it for the requirement.

 

Likewise if dad is a butcher, or nighbor is a baker, etc.....

 

If the scout was supposed to "buy" the ingredients, it would say "buy" , not secure.

 

As for "All or nothing" , I say that the SC does not have the right to make this call. He would be changing the requirements or adding to them in that they all have to be done simultaneously.

 

Requirements 4-a through 4-b can be done at any time. The scout could go to the store when his mother or father do and check and compare prices. He could explain at any time, during any meeting, to or from a troop activity or campout - what utensils and gear to use to cook and serve.

 

It says "tell" not demonstrate.

 

4-e is pretty much waiting until your turn as cook ends up on the duty roster.

 

Besides, if it wasn'r obvious to teh SM in question, they are 5 seperate check off boxes and 5 seperate initial and date boxes for requirements 4-a through 4-e.

 

If they were all or none, they would be all in one check off box.

[perdidochas]

Lack of reading carefully on my part. It does say secure.

[CalicoPenn]

First, what does the SM say about these requirements? Does he agree with the ASM and if so, why the preceived change from how it's been handled before? I can find nothing to support the notion that these requirements are all or nothing. Check out requirement 8. Will they really tell you that a Scout who demonstrates how to tie a bowline won't get credit for it unless he also ties a bandage for a sprained ankle and lists the 5 most common signals of a heart attack at the same time? I read these "subrequirements" as individual requirements that happen to be grouped together (such as 4A, 4B etc.) because of commonality, not because they need to be done at the same time. Again, check out requirement 8. Tying a knot and first aid don't seem to be related but there is also demonstrating basic rescue transport - and bowlines are often used in more advanced rescue skills. I'm firmly in the subrequirements can be done separately camp.

 

Second, since I am in the subrequirements can be done separately, a reading of the requirements doesn't indicate that the "secured" food must then be usd to cook the meals (4E) so I don't see any reason (other than economics) that the lad couldn't go shopping this weekend and secure the ingredients needed for the menu and within his budget. If I were dad, I'd make sure it got done as part of the weekly grocery shopping (maybe as a separate charge so the reciept can be used as back-up - though I would make sure the Scout let the SM (ASM) know they were going to go shopping for the food) and just integrate the menu into the families meals for the week which would mitigate the economics I would think.

 

I started to think that delegating to the grubmaster the task would be sufficient but I've changed my mind - the requirement is to secure the food, not secure or cause the food to be secured. I'm reading that as being the grubmaster and doing the buying for that menu. Again, I read it as buying the food for the menu, not for the specific meals. If he's already cooked the meals, he's done that requirement, now he just has to buy the food so see above.

 

 

 

 

[ScoutNut]

Just wondering - if the Scout did not "secure the ingredients" (and I note it states secure - not purchase), than who did?

 

I am assuming, since the other parts were completed there was actual food there that he cooked. How did it get there?