Guide to Advancement - What Needs to Change?

[bnelon44]

Knot interested: Only one in five young Brits can tie a knot and half say they can't climb trees

 

http://www.npowermediacentre.com/Press-Releases/Knot-interested-Only-one-in-five-young-Brits-can-tie-a-knot-and-half-say-they-can-t-climb-trees-1129.aspx

[bnelon44]

Beavah said; "The whole point of Advancment Method is to give the boys a road map to how to be successful and competent and confident and recognized by their peers for their ability. It's meant to be a lesson in hard work and character and real learning. If yeh award the badges for less than that, for doin' things like only paddling 100 yards in a kayak, or only being able to tie a bowline from short term memory once, then Advancment is destructive to youth. Yeh have subtracted all the meaning and value out of da requirements."

 

Here is what the G2A says the whole point of advancement is:

"Advancement is simply a means to an end, not an end in itself. It is one of several methods designed to help unit leadership carry out the aims and mission of the Boy Scouts of America. "

 

"Everything done to advanceto earn ranks and other awards and recognitionis designed to educate or to otherwise expand horizons. Members learn and develop according to a standard. This is the case from the time a member joins and then moves through the programs of Cub Scouting, Boy Scouting, Varsity Scouting, and Venturing or Sea Scouts. Experiential learning is the key: Exciting and meaningful activities are offered, and education happens. Learning comes from doing. For example, youth may read about first aid, hear it discussed, and watch others administer it, but they will not learn it until they practice it."

 

"Scouting skillswhat a young person learns to doare important, but not as important as the growth achieved through participating in a unit program. The concern is for total, well-rounded development. Age-appropriate surmountable hurdles are placed before members, and as they face them they learn about themselves and gain confidence. Success is achieved when we fulfill the BSA Mission Statement and when we accomplish the aims of Scouting: character development, citizenship training, and mental and physical fitness. We know we are on the right track when we see youth accepting responsibility, demonstrating self-reliance, and caring for themselves and others; when they learn to weave Scouting ideals into their lives; and when we can see they will be positive contributors to our American society."

 

"Though certainly goal-oriented, advancement is not a competition. Rather, it is a joint effort involving the leaders, the members, other volunteers such as merit badge counselors or Venturing consultants, and the family. Though much is done individually at their own pace, youth often work together in groups to focus on achievements and electives at Cub Scout den meetings, for example, or participate in a Boy Scout campout or Sea Scout cruise. As they do this, we must recognize each young person's unique combination of strengths and weaknesses. As watchful leaders, either adult or youth, we lend assistance as called for and encouragemembers to help each other according to their abilities."

 

Different goals? Same goals?

 

(This message has been edited by bnelon44)

[Lisabob]

This whole thread is about what needs to change. People are telling you what they think needs to change, and your responses tend to be along the lines of "but that's not what the GtA says," or "but that's not how it has been in the past." Right, got it - and that's why some folks think it needs to change. Honestly, this sort of has the feel of attending the mid-week adult leader meetings at summer camp where the camp director asks for suggestions for improvement, and then shoots down every suggestion offered. I'm reasonably sure that's not your intent bnelon, but that is how it reads (to me, at least).

 

 

 

 

[bnelon44]

Lisabob

 

Your right the thread is about what shoud be changed. But all of us, me included, if we suggest changes we need to be able to defend them based upon the Aims of Scouting. That is the beauty of the Internet. It is a forum for discussion and hopefully for valuable input to those at national who read this forum.

 

Also, I think tradition has something to play as well, but that is only me.(This message has been edited by bnelon44)

[dkurtenbach]

bnelon44 wrote: "But all of us, me included, if we suggest changes we need to be able to defend them based upon the Aims of Scouting."

 

Well, unless we think the Aims of Scouting need to be changed.

 

Dan Kurtenbach

Fairfax, VA

[Beavah]

Different goals? Same goals?

 

Same goals.

 

Or at least I have no problem with da passage yeh quoted. I just figured that my postings here were long enough already, eh? Sometimes it's OK to be succinct.

 

My question for yeh would be this. Yeh mentioned words to the effect that expecting a boy to still be able to perform a skill 2 months later was "adding the requirement" of retention and (presumably) not allowed. How do yeh see that as being consistent with all of those fine words about goals in the G2A? Do yeh think that educates or expands horizons? Do yeh think someone who has learned and practiced a skill by doing it would forget how in two months? Do yeh think that a lad who did such a shallow job of learning has demonstrated responsibility, self-reliance, or caring for themselves or others (especially considering examples like first aid)? Do yeh think that a lad who doesn't engage deeply enough to learn a skill so that he can perform it later on will be a positive contributor to American Society (especially considering examples like Citizenship badges)? How, for example, would such a citizen cast a ballot, if they never learned about the issues well enough to be able to evaluate a candidate's position on an issue two months after they last had a chance to study it?

 

Da fundamental problem with all of the Advancement Method guidance over the past 10 years or so is that it has been two-faced, eh? On the one hand, it makes lofty statements about Goals, and we all go on about the characteristics of an Eagle Scout and all the rest. Then it turns around and says, well, yeh can't expect a lad to have "retained" anything, and yeh can't really expect him to be active and loyal to his patrol, etc.

 

The focus on goals and outcomes for kids makes Advancement meaningful and worthwhile. The boys who hold awards are the fellows that folks like Lisabob's son look up to and want to be like, ones that took care of 'em as young fellows and inspired 'em as older fellows. Boys who were there, and involved, and knew their stuff.

 

The focus on "da requirements" makes Advancement a sham of signatures and paperwork and bureaucracy that any intelligent lad can see through after a year or two.

 

To fix the G2A and "da requirements", both should be rewritten to emphasize practical mastery of the skills, and that should be clear and unambiguous. It should be the one single most important takeaway from the G2A, instead of "don't add to the requirements".

 

Yep, that will mean there will be differences between units, but we all know that those exist already. Yep, that will mean trustin' the boys and unit leaders, but we all know that's the case already. What it will do is place the emphasis back on the Goals, instead of on the Requirements.

 

And that's where da emphasis belongs, eh?

 

Beavah

 

[Eagle92]

Actually teh GTA states that the bade represents what the scout is capable of doing, not what he has done.

 

So in essences an Eagle Scout should be capable of doing the T-2-1-S-L-E requirements since in order to wear the Eagle badge, he had to do the entire progression. And as I see it, depending upon the situation, asking a S-L-E to do a T-2-1 skill would not be a retesting, but an expectation per the GTA.

[bnelon44]

Your referencing section 8.0.1.1

 

8.0.1.1 Not a Retest or Examination

Though one reason for a board of review is to ensure the Scout did what he was supposed to do to meet the requirements, it shall become neither a retest or examination, nor a challenge of his knowledge.

In most cases it should, instead, be a celebration of accomplishment. Remember, it is more about the journey. 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. See Mechanics of Advancement: In Boy Scouting and Varsity Scouting, 4.2.0.0.

 

Here is the full quote from section 4.2.0.0:

 

Advancement at this level is subtle.

It presents a Scout with a series of

challenges in a fun and educational

manner. As he completes the requirements

he achieves the three aims of Scouting: to develop

character, to train in the responsibilities of participating

citizenship, and to develop physical and mental fi tness.

It is important thus, to remember that in the end, 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. It is instead, more about the journey: As a Scout

advances, he is measured and he grows in confidence and self-reliance. The badge signifies a young manthrough participation in a series of educational activitieshas provided service to others, practiced personal responsibility, and set the examples critical to the development of leadership; all the while working to live by the Scout Oath and Scout Law.

 

4.2.0.0 Mechanics of Advancement:

In Boy Scouting and Varsity Scouting

 

 

So you are using the section that specifically tells you to not retest to justify retesting?? :-/

 

It must not be that clear then.(This message has been edited by bnelon44)

[Lisabob]

See this is the thing. People tell you they want the GtA to better reflect an idea of skill mastery, and that they think boys at higher ranks ought to be able to use the skills they acquire at lower ranks, and you simply quote the GtA back at them as if their problem is that they don't know what it says now. That's not conducive to discussion of "what needs to change."

 

Since it is clear to me that what you want to do is defend the existing GtA, rather than entertain ideas about change, I think I'll be done with this thread now. I do appreciate reading people's thoughts on this, though.

[bnelon44]

Lisabob,

 

It may not seem like it but I am listening to you all. What are your ideas?

 

For those advocating retesting:

Are you advocating that we retest the Scouts at the SM and BOR? And if so, do we retest merit badges as well? If they can't remember then what?

 

What is the limit as to how far back you go?

 

Do you include what they learned in merit badges?(This message has been edited by bnelon44)

[dkurtenbach]

"Advancement at this level is subtle."

 

No it isn't. There is nothing subtle about a checklist of things to do followed by the award of a badge.

[dkurtenbach]

"Advancement at this level is subtle."

 

No it isn't. There is nothing subtle about a checklist of things to do followed by the award of a badge.

[bnelon44]

dkurtenbach

 

Gotta agree with you there

[Twocubdad]

Bnelon@ "Advancement is simply a means to an end...."

 

Excellent post, Bnelon. The quote is right on the money describing what the advancement method should be. Unfortunately, the road national is headed down with advancement policy -- defining and redefining simple requirements, creating loopholes where none need exist, lowering the bar to the lowest common level and all but begging Scouts and parents to appeal decisions by leaders who only want boys to give Scouting their best efforts -- is absolutely counter to the ideals expressed in this that section.

 

The phrases "experiential learn" and "growth acheived through participation in a unit program" jump out at me and are similar to the line I use with new parents, "Scouting is to be experienced, not completed. Experience takes time." I don't care how mature or intelligent a Scout is, he is not going to gather the same experiential learning in six months he would have over four years. This is the heart of "active participation" (English definition, not BSA). When BSA allows boys to move on with only six months experience or allows them to stitch together six months over years of minimal participation, AND they hamstring the efforts of unit leaders who want their Scouts to experience more of the program, BSA policy is working 180 degrees to the goals stated in your quote.

 

My goal is to give my Scouts as much experential learning as possible by keeping them engaged in the program from 11 to 18. Advancement policies which undermine that need to change.

 

I am also in agreement with LisaBob regarding the direction of the thread. And your looking for real changes to the program, or are you just honing you argument against change?

[Eagle92]

B,

Please note what I said

 

"And as I see it, depending upon the situation, (emphasis asdded) asking a S-L-E to do a T-2-1 skill would not be a retesting, but an expectation per the GTA."

 

Now obviously you cannot ask a scout to tie a bowline at a BOR b/c that would be retesting.

 

But having a S-L-E Scout teach bowlines to new scouts would be an expectation, not retesting. It would also show mastery since he is teaching the skill, which GTA does give as a method of learning skills.

 

Or Having that S-L-E Scout taking the painter of his canoe and tying a bowline so that you can dock would be an expectation, not a retesting.

 

Or having the S-L-E Scout tie a bowline in order to use for a 2 person swimming recue would be an expectation, not a retesting.

 

Mastery of the skill is being able to use it, and use it whenever needed. Not "one and done."

 

Now in regards to GBB and BORs, remember the BSA corrupted BP's vision of what a CoH was. BP stated it was the troop's PLs who ran things and reviewed Scouts, while the BSA said it was adults adults doing testing. As I see it, GBB created the term "BoR" to rectify the improper use of the term CoH the BSA was using.

 

Now in regards to "master skills" in current BSA literature, my copy of the 11th ed, 9th printing BSHB, printed while William Cronk was President and Mazzucca was CSE so iw was released in the past 5 years, (EDITED, MAzzuca became CSE in Sept. 2007, so the book at the earliest would have been printed in 2008., so my copy is no older than 4 years.) states on page 14 "Of greater value is what badge represents. The skills you master, the wisdom you gain, and the experiences you enjoy are what really count."

 

And I may be wrong about the current BSHB not emphasizing 'mastery of skills." I decided to do a quick review of the 12 ed. BSHB and found this on page 43.

 

"Mastering first-aid (sic) skills of Scoutcraft will help you manage risk and act effectively during an emergency."

 

Ok gotta go, more later.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(This message has been edited by Eagle92)