Real Rules vs Traditions

[Scoutfish]

ScoutmythBuster.

 

You originally asked what we would tink about a book on dispelling myths.

 

 

I think it's a great idea still. But leave it at that!

 

But the more I read of your posts, the more it sounds like you have a pre-disposed agenda against leadership or those who somehow are in charege.

 

The above scenario is not in any way, shape of form deceatful. The leader in question simply said" Let just wait a bit."

 

Now, I take that to mean: "Lets just wait." It does not tell me that there are any rules or requirements at issue here, nor does it say the Boy is not old enough, nor that there is a fee, that you have to wait an hour after eating, or anything else. Just that the leader wanted to wait.

 

Kinda like when a kid asks a parent if they can do a particular activity during the upcoming weekend. The parent says : "Maybe, we'll see."

 

 

The parent did not commit either way, but you know the kid...he heard:

"Yes! We will absolutely , positively do that as soon as the weekend starts!"

 

Why did he hear that? Because that is the answer he wanted or needed to hear.

 

Now back to that mom...Maybe she wasn't paying close attention. Maybe she misunderstood him. Maybe she needed to hear that the only reason her son couldn't have a POR was because there just absolutely , positively hade to be any reason other than her son...as to why her son couldn't have that POR.

 

But to even say the leader was deceitful, is creating a myth itself!

[acco40]

The responses to my post proves my point. Folks "hear" what they want to hear. Dealing with other folks "precious" children is frought with emotional baggage for some.

 

Mythbuster - please suggest the best way a Scoutmaster should convey to a parent that their son is not ready for a POR such as DC?

 

I had a pair of parents that were bound and determined that their son would earn Eagle before he turned 13. The Scout was an oldest child, had difficulty getting along with other Scouts and did very well in school. He needed a POR for a rank (Life I think) and ran for PL and lost. He ran for SPL and was not chosen by the Scouts. He arranges (via his mother's email so maybe it wasn't him ) a SM conference with me. I let him know that I'd be glad to meet with him but according to my records he had not met his POR requirement yet. Well he shows up at the SMC with his "lawyer" (mother) and emails from the district advancement chair. In her eyes, the Scout was the troop librarian (or was it historian?) and she asked the district advancement chair if a Scoutmaster could "deny" the POR requirement from a Scout if he had served in that position. The advancement chair responded correctly, no they may not. So here I am having a SMC for life with a 12 year old who is telling me I have to sign off on his advancement because the district said so. Forget the fact that the Scout was not appointed to any POC by either me or the SPL. Hell hath no fury like a mother whose son is scorned?

 

These kind of situations happen when pushy parents are in "attack" mode when it comes to their son's advancement. I realize that some SMs, Committee Chair's, etc. can be just as bad but the best way to deal with them is to sit down with them NOT AT TROOP MEETING, but at a convenient time for both and quietly inquire about certain decisions the SM may have made that you are interested in. Also, educate yourself with training. As a SM, I got fairly callous with parents who had absolutely no training, refused to take any, yet always were there willing to give "advice" about a program they knew nothing about.(This message has been edited by acco40)

[moosetracker]

acco40 - you left us hanging with a story with no ending!!! That is not very nice.. So, did you tell the scout and the mother, no because he had not served as a POR? Did you have to inform the Advancement chair of the true facts? Or, were you forced to cave in, and give him an undeserved POR?

 

[Gary_Miller]

acco40, "Mythbuster - please suggest the best way a Scoutmaster should convey to a parent that their son is not ready for a POR such as DC?"

 

While I'm not mythbuster I would like to offer my thoughts on the subject of PORs.

 

First, since when is it necessary for a boy to be ready for a POR?

 

I don't believe there is such thing as being ready for a POR, nor should there be. The purpose of a scout being in a POR is for his personal growth not because he is qualified for the job. Its the SM number one responsibility to train and help the young-men in their positions, so there is learning not just doing going on.

 

When it comes to DCs, as in this situation, the best person for the job is the one willing to do the job. In my previous position of WL, I found that using my own boy as the DC was much more effective than not having one at all, not to say how convent it was for both of us. How effective a DC is will be up to the DL and how they use the DC much more than the experience the DC may have in scouting.

 

acco40, "Forget the fact that the Scout was not appointed to any POC by either me or the SPL. Hell hath no fury like a mother whose son is scorned?"

 

As a District Advancement Chairman, my first questions would be.

 

Why does a Star Scout not have a POR within the troop?

 

There is no excuse for this. While I'm no fan of 13 yr old Eagle Scouts the fact is its possible for it to happen and the SM has not right doing anything that may hold a young-man back.

 

When it comes to advancement its the SM responsibility to ensure the advancement requirements are met as they are written, and to make sure every YM has the opportunity to advance at the scouts own pace.

[gcnphkr]

Gary_Miller: "Why does a Star Scout not have a POR within the troop?"

 

In the example this is not a Star Scout, the scout is a Tenderfoot.

[BDPT00]

acco40, "Mythbuster - please suggest the best way a Scoutmaster should convey to a parent that their son is not ready for a POR such as DC?"

 

Have we considered that the Scoutmaster is being gracious, instead of saying, "Your son is s jerk, and I don't wnat him representing our troop or the BSA?" "Let's just wait" is far more polite. We don't know the reason he said that, and I agree that it's much like mom saying "We'll see." It's easier sometimes to put it off than to cause a fuss.

BDPT00

[ScoutMythBuster]

First, how about explaining that the correct proceedure is to ask the CM so the CM can make the request.

 

Now regarding the youth if the SM feels the scout is not ready. How about saying why he isn't ready? No need to be rude or mean. The position does not need somebody who talks back or is a distraction, many people said that and I agree. How about something like "I appreciate that you are interested in being a DC but you are not being selected. The reason why is that you have a hard following instructions and like to talk back. This is something you can work on and if you improve in these areas we can consider you the next time a DC is needed.". Something along this line will let the scout why he isn't being selected and gives the scout something to work on.

 

If the SM has reasons for not selecting the boy and falls back on the First Class thing what happens when he is First Class and the scout hasn't changed?

[Lisabob]

"Why does a Star Scout not have a POR within the troop? "

 

How about:

 

because he can't get elected to one by his peers, or appointed to one by his youth leaders (perhaps he has a history of not performing/being a jerk when in a POR)?

 

because he can't control his own behavior well enough right now to handle one? (12 and 13 year olds who were lovely 11 year olds, and will eventually be lovely 14-15 year olds, can sometimes be major pills for a little while)

 

because he was recently removed from his POR for gross violations of the scout oath or law?

 

because he hasn't been showing up (for whatever reason) and therefore isn't available to fulfill a POR right now?

 

because he didn't ask for one?

 

because he didn't want the ones that needed doing, only wanted one that someone else currently holds, and so declined to accept the ones that are available right now?

 

because he's tired of holding a POR and just wants to have fun for a while?

 

because he's too busy with school work to shoulder the added responsibility of a POR right now?

 

 

Gary, I have no idea if any of the above apply to the specific scout acco was referencing. I just want to point out that there can be all sorts of reasons - some better than others, but many/most/all legit, for why a boy might be a Star scout and yet, not be in a POR at a given moment. Let us not jump to conclusions.

 

 

[ScoutMythBuster]

I guess my point is that poitive guidenance and leadership will help guide the youth to succeed where a Internal Requirement may only cause the youth to strive for rank and maynot help correct personality problems. With the rank requirement, you now have a First Class that is still a problem and have to create another "not rude" reason. The important thing is not to be negative, ei: he's a jerk, nobody likes him ...

 

[acco40]

Moosetracker - during the SMC, the Scout kept wanting to show me his hard copy printouts from the district advancement chair. I said I wasn't interested in reviewing them with him. It ended up that he had not spent enough time in his previous rank (six months) so he was not eligible for advancement. I also had somewhat of a serious talk with him about my expectations for a POR. I also had a discussion with the Committee Chair on what he thought was the best way to handle this situation - he was a fan of no confrontation.

 

Fast forward about four month later. This Scout's father was invited to attend an EBOR for another Scout - something we do as a troop - invite parents of Life Scouts to sit on an EBOR. Well after the BOR (I actually was now a Committee Member after stepping down as SM and was fairly active during the EBOR) he came up to me and essentially said he totally underestimated the BSA program, what was expected of the boys, etc. He was still in Cub Scout mode where awards are handed out like candy almost. He then told me he didn't think his son was anywhere near ready to attempt an Eagle project and backed off on his pressure for his son to earn the rank so soon.

 

Gary Miller - Some of the boys are really savvy about finding the path of least resistance to advancement. Yes, as a Scoutmaster, I wanted the boys to be successful and did what I could to make them successful. But success is not to measured by advancement rate alone. I ask the boys to fill out a leadership application stating what position they were seeking (1st , 2nd and 3rd choice) and what their attendance record was, why they wanted the position and I had them and their parent(s) sign the agreement. I'll be blunt - I don't disagree with those who hold the blind "school comes first" mentality. If a Scout signs up to be the troop SPL, he should take that position seriously. We all know that boys at this age tend to procrastinate. So, lets say he has a test on Monday - and knows about it three weeks in advance. Does that mean he can't go camping - i.e. fulfill his duties as SPL the weekend before the test? No, it does not. It means that if he needs to study, he needs to do it well enough in advance so he can be successful in his position as SPL and as a student. So while I don't keel haul anyone, yes I express my disappointment to a Scout who shirks his responsibility because of the school "excuse." As the Scoutmaster, I didn't pull the "my job" excuse out of my hat. If there was a true problem, I took care of it in advance - either rescheduling work travel or making sure another capable individual was able to go in my place.

 

Do I owe the boys a POR? No. Do I work with them to find a solution? Yes. I had another Scout who was very quiet, and introvert. He was stuck on 1st Class or Star for quite some time. He ran for PL and was not elected. After the boys made their selections for PLs, SPL I took those boys in a back room (shades of Chicago politics) and laid out the boys who asked to be selected (not elected mind you) for ASPL, Scribe, Quartermaster, Historian, Librarian, etc. I "guided" them to do some swapping of roles so all could end up with a POR. A few went from their 1st choice to 2nd choice so this particular scout had an opportunity. I've also given "Scoutmaster assigned leadership project" to boys who have asked. But when a Scout doesn't want to be SPL or QM or Scribe because that's too much work and then just takes it upon himself to "stealthily" be the historian or such - no I don't feel I owe him a POR.

 

In my previous position of WL, I found that using my own boy as the DC was much more effective than not having one at all .. Effective for whom? I admit it, I don't like the practice of having DC den chief for his younger brothers den especially when the parent of the DC is the DL. Why not have your son serve as den chief for another den?

[gcnphkr]

Gary_Miller,

I'm sorry, I missed the second example.

[Scoutfish]

"The mother of a Tenderfoot, who just crossed over in March, comes to the Scoutmaster in August and states, "I"m the den leader for Johnny's brother's den and would like for him to be the den chief."

 

Does the boy even know that his mom asked? Does he want to, or is the possibility there that maybe he didn't even want the POR?

 

Maybe the boy talked to the SM and told him so. Now, it's the mom who is being decietful by having her own personal agenda ...right Mythbuster?

 

Well,of course we don't know that from the info. But we also know that the Sm did not lie in any shape way or from to the mom. He did not say the boy HAD to be anything...he just said..."lets just wait.."

 

Sound like the ScoutMaster was using grace, tact and defusing a situation before it even happened!

[ScoutMythBuster]

Scoutfish, I agree with that maybe the boy did not know or even want it. The mother was wrong, no doubt. She did not follow procedure for obtaining a DC.

 

Misinterpretation causes conflicts, and we all wish to avoid conflicts. Sometimes falling back on blanket "rules" or the easy answer is a way to avoid conflict. But when we can say, in this instance, to the DL mom that the CM must request and then the SPL and SM selects and the Committee and CM approves and can show this in text she never would have misinterpreted what was said and propagated her misunderstanding as fact, which in turn the other parent took as the SM being deceitful.

 

Could it go the other way? Yes, she could take insult to being quoted rules and a confrontation could have followed. Either example has the possibility of confrontation; this way cannot be misinterpreted.

[Beavah]

First, since when is it necessary for a boy to be ready for a POR? I don't believe there is such thing as being ready for a POR, nor should there be.

 

Nah, I gotta disagree with this.

 

I get Gary_Miller's point, that the boys grow into and through holding a position. But I think that's only true if the position is a reasonable stretch for the lad.

 

There are all kinds of positions and all kinds of boys where the "stretch" is too great for a boy to reasonably tackle. A first year scout being SPL of a large, well established troop. A young ADHD lad being Quartermaster. A tenderfoot who hasn't ever planned a weekend's worth of meals as Patrol Leader. The gruff, insecure fellow with little patience being Troop Guide.

 

Appointing a boy to a position that he doesn't have the skill for is just setting a boy up for failure. It's like appointing a non-swimmer as lifeguard - it's not good for either the boy or those who are relying on him.

 

Naturally, most of da time the boys recognize this, and don't elect/appoint such a lad. When that happens, I don't think it's the SM's role to try to "find the boy a position" so that he can advance on a schedule. I think it's the SM's role to help the boy become a good team member and follower, to improve his skills and his disposition, to be more active - so that his peers will eventually recognize him as being ready to be trusted with a position of responsibility.

 

Beavah

[ScoutMythBuster]

Beavah

 

This I agree with completely. Sometimes, the boys need the chance for that stretch to grow. You never want to see a boy set up to fail and even not being selected can be turned into something positive with good leadership. Using the example of the non-swimmer being selected life guard, I wouldn't say you can't be life guard because you can't swim but maybe something like you should work on your swimming skills to better prepare yourself.

 

The only thing that needs to be monitored is that the boys are electing or appointing positions by ability and not by popularity. I think that when its a popularity contest is the only time a SM should step in and make sure the scouts understand the consequences of their decision.