Guide to Advancement - What Needs to Change?

[bnelon44]

Eagle92 provided a great link to a thread on All Out for Scouting. The Scouting Magazine article on it from Oct 1974 is here:

http://books.google.com/books?id=ieAVQ-VzpzMC&lpg=RA2-PA12-IA1&dq=scouting%20magazine%20october%201974&pg=RA2-PA29#v=onepage&q&f=false

 

I really appreciate the reference from Eagle92

 

I have some of the syllabus for Bownsea-22 here:

http://bsatroop14.com/history/games(This message has been edited by bnelon44)

[bnelon44]

moosetracker

 

You are correct there and a lot of boys try to find the easiest way to get the badge. That is human nature, and to some extent what they are taught at school.

[Lisabob]

"The advancement program is just one of 8 methods that go into making an Eagle Scout. Neglecting the other 7 methods and just looking at the requirements isn't going to make a good Eagle Scout. And I think that is what these boys are seeing. "

 

First: I've not seen anybody here argue that advancement is, or should be, the be-all, end-all of scouting to the detriment or exclusion of the other methods.

 

Second: If troops are not using (some/all of) the other methods well, the solution is not to weaken advancement, too.

 

Third: If you are correct that boys are particularly attuned to how a troop uses advancement (and I think you have a point there, as it is one of the most visible methods of scouting), then doing it well is vitally important to shaping a boy's view of the scouting program as a whole. Weakening advancement won't help here, either.

[Eagle92]

Bnelon,

 

I'm referring to the complete national bylawas and regulations,as well as the fill-in-the-blank copy of the council by-laws books. These two items are the ones all national and council policies are to follow. I have copies of them somewhere.

 

All,

 

Anyone wants a copy of the BROWNSEA 22 syllbaus, I have an annotated version.

[bnelon44]

Lisabob

 

No one is suggesting we weaken advancement requirement. And the advancement requirements are much better today than in the 1970s

 

All Out for Scouting was a training initiative that started around 1970, it lasted a couple of years. I think there is a lot we can do in training to assist units. Brownsea-22 was the NYLT of its day. It taught a lot more skills than we do today. Probably should revisit that. However it has been pretty consistant that Scouts graduating from Brownsea-22 and NYLT are eager to lead to their troops. Which is good.

 

I wonder how successful the "All out for Scouting" training initiative was. My impression is that most councils are lucky if they get 30% of their unit leaders trained if they don't mandate training.(This message has been edited by bnelon44)

[Lisabob]

bnelon, history lesson appreciated (though not news to me), but that's not the point. What you keep describing is, I believe, a weakening of the advancement method. I suppose we'll just have to agree to disagree.

 

 

[bnelon44]

Lisabob,

"What you keep describing is, I believe, a weakening of the advancement method. "

 

Uh? I haven't suggested any changes in the advancement method. What exactly led you to that conclusion?(This message has been edited by bnelon44)

[5yearscouter]

thanks for the advice for my oldest, again I'm not worried about him. Elections are coming up, not sure if he'll step up again for a big part, or if he's tired of beating his head against the wall about some of the issues the troop has.

 

OA is a huge part of his scouting, he's on the ceremonies team and does hundreds of hours of ceremonies a year, just got recognized as Vigil! Heck he already convinced his newly ordealed younger brother to join the ceremonies team in a pinch, so 2 weeks after doing his ordeal, he filled in as a part for the ordeal ceremony as well.

 

His OA advisor keeps reminding him to not let OA get in the way of his EAgle by taking up too much of his time.

 

He's not interested in the local Crews though they aren't his style.

 

[Lisabob]

bnelon, your interpretation of advancement, in my opinion, does represent a change. I believe that's been discussed plenty in the last 15 pages. If you aren't sure what I refer to, please feel free to re-read your ongoing exchanges with twocub, beavah, and numerous others here.

[fred8033]

bnelson44: - Yeah, it's interesting. I haven't heard you suggest any changes to advancement either or represent anything that lowers quality. I believe everyone on this discussion believes in holding scouts to high expectations, learn skills, grow as a person and develop a strong moral character.

 

What I've heard though is scouters justifying practices that don't match ALL the specifics in the BSA publications (rules and reg, GTA, advancement team publications, etc). To be blunt and probably overstating it, going rogue. Justifying breaking BSA intent by dissing the advancement program, accusing others of lower standards and creating this mythical one-and-done accusation.

 

Essentially, it's about power. Who sets the requirements? BSA or the unit scouters.

 

IMHO, there's another power struggle that I care more about. A struggle for power between the scouts and the leaders. Are scouts empowered to control their own advancement by performing and earning advancement as BSA documents ... or ... do unit leaders get to pick and choose who advances by creating a moving target of hoops that scouts need to jump thru and that are not documented by BSA.

 

[BSA24]

This thread is one of the major reasons I stayed behind as a Cub leader after my boys went on to the Boy Scouts and continue to do so. I just can't see the "fun with a purpose" in all of this. I went through it as a Boy Scout to get my eagle award. It isn't fun when the leaders are trying to make you do things for a purpose that are not fun.

 

Filling out a project write up and having it rejected multiple times is not fun with a purpose. Even having a guide to advancement is not fun with a purpose.

 

Advancement in the Boy Scout program has become this dominating force of sea lawyering that isn't fun.

 

How is any of this arguing about advancement guides fun? How is being grilled in a BOR fun?

 

I told my sons to learn some stuff, go on trips, make friends, and have fun.

 

You guys really find this fun? I'll stick with the cub scouts, thanks.

 

[bnelon44]

BSA24

 

I have talked to some of the people who wrote the Guide to Advancement. And one of the major reasons why it was written was because Boards of Reviews were grilling Scouts and perfectly fine Eagle projects were being rejected by units or by district eagle boards. Scoutmasters would not accept signed off merit badges because they thought they could do the counseling better than the counselor, etc., etc., etc.

 

They said the intent of the guide was to lay down some simple to follow rules that gave an even playing field to all Scouts and unites in the US. So Scoutmasters, who have the best of intentions, don't go overboard and demand too much to advance, and give some help to units that are struggling to understand what they should do.

 

Someone on the thread quoted Baden-Powell who said advancement should come naturally with a good program. I think that is very true.

[dkurtenbach]

BSA24 wrote:

"Filling out a project write up and having it rejected multiple times is not fun with a purpose. Even having a guide to advancement is not fun with a purpose.

 

"Advancement in the Boy Scout program has become this dominating force of sea lawyering that isn't fun.

 

"How is any of this arguing about advancement guides fun? How is being grilled in a BOR fun?"

------------------

 

The most disheartening trend I've seen in Boy Scouting over the last 15 years is the ever-increasing emphasis on earning awards for their own sake -- including Eagle Scout. That is, the goal is the award, not what the award supposedly represents. Eagle Scout, in particular, is viewed as an important resume item. The result is an ever-increasing number of advancement "classes," merit badge "universities," merit badge worksheets and homework. Boy Scouting has become school, with the same emphasis on grades rather than the underlying subjects.

 

As I've stated previously, I think this is reflected in the Boy Scout rank requirements. I believe (and I know many disagree) that Advancement has become split off from Program, such that Advancement now has its own purposes and no longer reflects a goal of skill and knowledge proficiency, despite the language of the Rules and Regulations and the Guide to Advancement. The vast majority of Scouts, Scouters, and parents never see those interpretations, and go by what the requirements themselves actually say. And they -- and the unit practices that they develop -- cannot be faulted for strictly following the language of the requirements and interpreting "explain" as "explain," not "do," or for signing something off after it has been done correctly once, because that is all the requirement calls for.

 

And parents like Scouting to be school. They want to see something tangible that shows that their investment in time and money is worthwhile. Not much to see on a campout or hike; but badges -- now badges mean something. Badges are progress. And by and large, adult leaders are parents too, and they like badges. Cub Scouting has trained them to like lots and lots of badges, and lots of lots of sign-offs, and lots and lots of progress. They can't be faulted for this either.

 

I'm not sure how long the notion that Cub Scouting is more fun will actually last. The New Delivery Method seems to place more emphasis on getting through requirements and earning badges on a schedule.

 

Dan Kurtenbach

Fairfax, VA

[Lisabob]

Oops, wrong thread!

(This message has been edited by lisabob)

[bnelon44]

responded to post to wrong thread(This message has been edited by bnelon44)