Mere Good Presentation versus Requirement?

[SSScout]

I have just been "led to believe" by a Scout in my circle, that in his Troop, any Eagle project proposal to be considered by the Troop Committee should be (?must be?) done with a Power Point Presentation. 

Now, I have no argument that such  a thing is wonderful and a sign of our times.  I have sat in on many Eagle Project discussions that had detailed pictures and photos and diagrams and charts, but never, up til now, a Power Point. Seen 'em at work, in other venues, but in a preliminary Eagle Proposal?  

It sounds like the Troop is requiring this,  but as a Commisher of the District, I have not approached anyone else as of yet. 

Thoughts?  

[fred8033]

Always refer to the G2A ... Guide To Advancement.

In my view  ... The Eagle Project is about service and leadership in doing that service.  The workbook is well laid out and explicitly describes the steps.  The project is enough in and of itself.  Adding troop unique expectations makes the Eagle Project more about jumping hoops and than giving service.  IMHO, we teach bad lessons when we make advancement about jumping hoops.

• Not required and can't be required ... but troops still do it.  
• Is it harmful?  Mostly no.
• Is this a hill to die on either direction?  No. 
• Is it a good idea?  No, but I flip flop and can see both sides. 
  • Does it help the scout?  Maybe a few scouts, but mostly no.  The scout MUST fill out the Eagle Project Workbook in detail.  That is the scout's commitment.  A PowerPoint is extra and just decorative.  
  • Committees ... chair or designee(s) ... must review the workbook.  That is what is being signed and is effectively a contract.  A PowerPoint presentation is NOT what is being signed off.  I've had scouts show me their PowerPoint presentation required by their troop.  I sat nicely and listened.  ... THEN, we went section by section thru the workbook write-up because that is the commitment.
  • Bad ... Could be the unrequired extra hoop to jump thru that causes a scout to give up on Eagle.
  • Good ... Might give some scouts presentation practice that helps scouts later in the process ... IMHO this is a big stretch.
• Why do troops do it?
  • Biggest reason I've seen is the worst because it does not match Guide To Advancement.  Troops justify it as it gives scouts experience presenting to groups and talking in front of groups.  IMHO, that's what the Communications MB is about.  That's what the rest of the scouting program is about.  Eagle project is about service and leading that service.  IMHO, it smells more of committee self-importance.   

If a troop wants to do it, it's not a hill to die on.  Smile nicely.  Listen.  Don't promote the practice and point out the scout requirements are in the Eagle project workbook and the Guide To Advancement.   

... Sorry if I am long winded.   This was a hot button topic for me as I've been involved in many Eagle project proposal reviews.

Edited yesterday at 03:30 PM by fred8033

[RememberSchiff]

Then again, suppose the Scout's Eagle Mentor stood up and grabbed a Commissioner to jointly educate the Troop Committee?

My $0.02,

[Jameson76]

7 hours ago, fred8033 said:

Always refer to the G2A ... Guide To Advancement.

In my view  ... The Eagle Project is about service and leadership in doing that service.  The workbook is well laid out and explicitly describes the steps.  The project is enough in and of itself.  Adding troop unique expectations makes the Eagle Project more about jumping hoops and than giving service.  IMHO, we teach bad lessons when we make advancement about jumping hoops.

• Not required and can't be required ... but troops still do it.  
• Is it harmful?  Mostly no.
• Is this a hill to die on either direction?  No. 
• Is it a good idea?  No, but I flip flop and can see both sides. 
  • Does it help the scout?  Maybe a few scouts, but mostly no.  The scout MUST fill out the Eagle Project Workbook in detail.  That is the scout's commitment.  A PowerPoint is extra and just decorative.  
  • Committees ... chair or designee(s) ... must review the workbook.  That is what is being signed and is effectively a contract.  A PowerPoint presentation is NOT what is being signed off.  I've had scouts show me their PowerPoint presentation required by their troop.  I sat nicely and listened.  ... THEN, we went section by section thru the workbook write-up because that is the commitment.
  • Bad ... Could be the unrequired extra hoop to jump thru that causes a scout to give up on Eagle.
  • Good ... Might give some scouts presentation practice that helps scouts later in the process ... IMHO this is a big stretch.
• Why do troops do it?
  • Biggest reason I've seen is the worst because it does not match Guide To Advancement.  Troops justify it as it gives scouts experience presenting to groups and talking in front of groups.  IMHO, that's what the Communications MB is about.  That's what the rest of the scouting program is about.  Eagle project is about service and leading that service.  IMHO, it smells more of committee self-importance.   

If a troop wants to do it, it's not a hill to die on.  Smile nicely.  Listen.  Don't promote the practice and point out the scout requirements are in the Eagle project workbook and the Guide To Advancement.   

... Sorry if I am long winded.   This was a hot button topic for me as I've been involved in many Eagle project proposal reviews.

No more and no less, use the tools and requirements

Sadly there are units that feel the need to put "their" spin on projects.  Must have CAD drawings, Must build something, Must put in XX hours, Must have XX Scouts work on the project, Must, Must, Must.  While the intentions may be good, as has been noted, these local add-ons do not adhere to G2A.  How to politely navigate that deviation can be a challenge

 

 

[Tron]

Yet another discussion that is proof that we should scrap the eagle project.

[DuctTape]

IMO the workbook is awful in so many ways. Filling it out almost becomes the project itself. Adding another layer to it makes it even worse.

[fred8033]

2 hours ago, DuctTape said:

IMO the workbook is awful in so many ways. Filling it out almost becomes the project itself. Adding another layer to it makes it even worse.

Because of the sins of the past, I am a strong defender of the project workbook.

In our district before 2011, the district advancement chair (and his team) were from the troops that felt it was their job to require formal presentations and require the XXX hours and require large project proposal binders submitted in advance.  I truly believe they perceived their job as adding steps so that the scout could appreciate earning Eagle.  I also believe if they did not think the scout's experience was enough or the scout was not "worthy", then they would add even more hoops.  Worst, they were effectively using their own troop's extra expectations for the rest of the district even though it was nowhere described in the requirements for earning Eagle or any of the BSA published guides. 

Our troop's scouts often had to go thru multiple months of project proposal review.    In 2010, one of our scouts had four plus months of district reviews and was always was sent away with requests for more information.  The last month was the district asking for the project proposal to include a map to the hospital just in case something happened.  The project was painting rooms at his church and installing shelving.  ... THEN ... THEN ... They lost the his three ring binder of the project workbook.  

The project workbook does NOT exist to make the scout's job harder.  It exists to reign in the adults and to set level expectations across all units, districts and councils.  IMHO, the workbook and the G2A have been a true gift. 

[swilliams]

21 minutes ago, fred8033 said:

Because of the sins of the past, I am a strong defender of the project workbook.

In our district before 2011, the district advancement chair (and his team) were from the troops that felt it was their job to require formal presentations and require the XXX hours and require large project proposal binders submitted in advance.  I truly believe they perceived their job as adding steps so that the scout could appreciate earning Eagle.  I also believe if they did not think the scout's experience was enough or the scout was not "worthy", then they would add even more hoops.  Worst, they were effectively using their own troop's extra expectations for the rest of the district even though it was nowhere described in the requirements for earning Eagle or any of the BSA published guides. 

Our troop's scouts often had to go thru multiple months of project proposal review.    In 2010, one of our scouts had four plus months of district reviews and was always was sent away with requests for more information.  The last month was the district asking for the project proposal to include a map to the hospital just in case something happened.  The project was painting rooms at his church and installing shelving.  ... THEN ... THEN ... They lost the his three ring binder of the project workbook.  

The project workbook does NOT exist to make the scout's job harder.  It exists to reign in the adults and to set level expectations across all units, districts and councils.  IMHO, the workbook and the G2A have been a true gift. 

I'm a defender of the project workbook in that it helps a scout understand the scope of the project better, makes the plan more realistic, helps reduce unforeseen issues, etc.  But... 

In looking over my son's workbook there was a lot of redundancy that I'm not sure was helpful.  He was getting advice from the Eagle Coach on how to write things out and what to include to increase the chances of approval by Council.  That should, IMHO, be something spelled out in the workbook itself, not be information that a scout needs to get from someone else, lest his proposal be rejected or have the workbook come back for revision.  From a technology standpoint, having to get physical signatures on a page then scan that and add it back into the workbook is something that could easily be improved.  Being able to insert pictures, would be helpful.

[fred8033]

7 minutes ago, swilliams said:

I'm a defender of the project workbook in that it helps a scout understand the scope of the project better, makes the plan more realistic, helps reduce unforeseen issues, etc.  But... 

In looking over my son's workbook there was a lot of redundancy that I'm not sure was helpful.  He was getting advice from the Eagle Coach on how to write things out and what to include to increase the chances of approval by Council.  That should, IMHO, be something spelled out in the workbook itself, not be information that a scout needs to get from someone else, lest his proposal be rejected or have the workbook come back for revision.  From a technology standpoint, having to get physical signatures on a page then scan that and add it back into the workbook is something that could easily be improved.  Being able to insert pictures, would be helpful.

It does support pictures.

Physical signatures are an issue.  At times, we've used printed emails from the reviewers as evidence of their approval in lieu of signature.

Redundancy ... yep ... most if it is because things are written three times ... once as a concept / proposal ... once while doing the work ... once in hindsight after everything is done.  

I agree it can keep improving and evolving.  It will never be perfect.  

I'm just very glad we have it.  I really hope the project is more about the service than about the paperwork.

Edited 2 hours ago by fred8033

[swilliams]

Just now, fred8033 said:

It does support pictures.

Physical signatures are an issue.  At times, we've used printed emails from the reviewers as evidence of their approval in lieu of signature.

Redundancy ... yep ... most if it is because things are written three times ... once as a concept / proposal ... once while doing the work ... once in hindsight after everything is done.  

I agree it can keep improving and evolving.  It will never be perfect.  

I'm just very glad we have it.

Pictures... good to know.  Son said he couldn't attach them to the actual workbook and I just took his word for it.  Second son still has his workbook to start, so I'll let him know in case he tells me the same thing.

[fred8033]

Just now, swilliams said:

Pictures... good to know.  Son said he couldn't attach them to the actual workbook and I just took his word for it.  Second son still has his workbook to start, so I'll let him know in case he tells me the same thing.

It can be wonky though.  

[Eagle94-A1]

4 hours ago, DuctTape said:

IMO the workbook is awful in so many ways. Filling it out almost becomes the project itself. Adding another layer to it makes it even worse.

An Eagle in my neck of the woods, when asked what he learned from doing his project, responded, "Paperwork will suck the joy out of anything you love."

 

As for PowerPoint Presentations, not for the project approval or for the EBOR, but  other things related to the project could require them. One Eagle I had went to a foundation for a grant to do his project. They wanted him to do a PPT to the board in order to get approval for it. He submitted the PPT to the foundation director, and presented his case for his project. He got the funding.

52 minutes ago, fred8033 said:

It does support pictures.

49 minutes ago, fred8033 said:

It can be wonky though.  

THAT IS AN UNDERSTATEMENT!!!!!!! (emphasis, not shouting at you) My tech savy son, who is now a computer science major, told me the program completely whacked when it come to photos. Whenever we talk to Life Scouts about project workbooks, we tell them do not worry about the photos in the workbook, add them to the end of it as individual photos.

Edited 1 hour ago by Eagle94-A1