Measuring "active in your troop or patrol" requirement

[Bob White]

Relax Ed,

I wasn't making any assumptions, I was developing conclusions based on your posts. However none of that matters if mk9750 got it right (as you say he has) when he suggested that you have been playing the devil's advocate and that you really follow more of the program then you let on. "But I'm guessing you really do more things the "right way" then you let on, don't you?"

 

So if the impressions you gave us in the past were merely for provoking dicussion and you really don't do those things, that's great. You might consider a change in tactics and post what how you actually follow the real scouting program. I personally think it would be more beneficial to the inexperienced leaders on the board looking for support and an understanding of how to make the training come alive.

 

I'm relieved to know you were just playing the devil's advocate (mk9750, Bingo! Right on the money!)

 

Bob White

 

 

[Scoutmaster Ron]

Bob,

Ok now I think were on the same page as long as a scout is active with the patrol and or the troop..then all is good

 

mk

 

How can you consider a boy active if he cant make op and or patrol outings or troop and or patrol meetings..the boy flat out can't come how can you consider active...PLEASE I'm only offering this up for debate not to critize the way your troop does it. I'm intrested in learning the hows and why of how troops differ and how I can take those ideas back to the troop I serve in to better it

[evmori]

Ron,

If a Scout doesn't show up for Patrol/Troop meeetings of outings or rarely shows up then I wouldn't consider this active. He either has a very busy schedule & Scouts is being left out or he just doesn't care to come to Scouts. You might want to have a sit down with this Scout & find out his situation. You might find he is just too busy now but does plan on being active in the near future.

 

Bob,

Nah. It seems my tactics have provoked good discussions PLUS evoked some very useful information. Besides, I love a good debate!

 

Ed Mori

Scoutmaster

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[Bob White]

Ed

I agree that the methods you have pretended to practice have helped spur debate and conversation. But think of the readers who may confuse your devil's advocacy with actual scouting beliefs and methods. Don't forget one of the lessons of our Wood Badge training "Setting the Example". It taught us to always set the right example. It would be unfortunate if even one scout did not recieve the best scouting experience they could have, simply because a leader followed one of your bad examples thinking you were being serious.

 

You would do far more to 'help other people' if you answered their questions accurately and directly rather than confusing the issue and stirring the pot simply because you love a good debate.

 

just a thought,

 

Bob White

[mk9750]

Ron,

 

In rereading my posts, I now see that an ommission could be causing you not to see what seems obvious to me. Let me add it here.

 

If during a SM conference, the Scout sets a goal of making his next rank in six months, but says he won't be at hardly any of the meetings or events during that six months, the SM would steer him toward changing his goals (OK, he'd actually say that wouldn't fly, and make him change his goals). In this case, for instance, if there is legitimate reasons why the Scout won't be able to attend for six months like football, the SM would probably get the Scout to set his goal at more like 10 months or a year. There's hardly no way that a boy who doesn't come to meetings and go on outings during the entire time he works on his next rank would advance in our Troop.

 

But in reality, it wouldn't be the attendence issue that would stop him. It would be his lack of leadership (if he isn't there, it becomes very difficult to lead), and his lack of exposure to the program. I've yet to see a boy ask for a SM conference who even had these questions arise. They know when they have met the requirements. They know when the SM is likely to say the Scout has not been active enough. Our guys just don't even ask until they are pretty certain they are ready.

 

We have one guy who transfered from another Troop that was significantly easier on advancement procedures than are we. He tranfered as a Star 3 years ago. He was one MB away from Life, and needed 2 more months in position of leadership. The SPL at the time asked him to pick up where a Scout who had gone off to college left the web page. He was named a Troop Scribe for taking this position. He did almost nothing. Spent his two months, asked for a SM confernece, and was told he didn't satisfy the requirement for leadership, as he had done nothing in the position. He was quite bummed out. He spoke to his buddy, who had convinced him to join the Troop, who proceeded to explain to the new guy how we operate. He told him that a patch on his sleeve was never going to satisfy the leadership requirement in or Troop.

 

This boy spent the next couple years either being elected or appointed to positions of responsiblity, and then doing very little to follow through. But he knew he didn't meet the requirement, so he never asked for a conference. About 8 months ago, the light must have finally come on. The SM was doing a rapelling training class for adults, and the boy asked if he could take the class, then lead the instruction for the new guys in our Troop who hadn't been through our yearly climbing cylce. He grabbed on to this like a shark grabs onto chum. Busted his butt to do this job as well as it could be done, and came through with flying colors. After about 2 1/2 months of work, culminating in our 4 day rapelling trip, in which every boy he taught had a great time climbing and rapelling safely and correctly, he asked again for his SM conference. He's now about a third of the way through Eagle, and now has an understanding of the requirement for leadership.

 

I know that this example is geared toward the requirement for leadership, but my point is that our guys know when they've met the requirements, and until they think they have, they don't even ask for a conference. But the reason they know is because they set the standard for themself. This guy didn't understand that at first, because this wasn't discussed with him at his conference for Star, because that was done elsewhere. And we learned form this too. Now, every boy that transfers to our Troop has a full blown Scoutmaster Conference and BOR for the rank he has at the time. Obviously, we wouldn't take away what he has earned. But we want him to understand our philosophy before he is ready to be reviewed for his next rank.

 

Mark

[Scoutmaster Ron]

Tks, Mark

 

You really hit somehting with me that just wearing the patch doesn't mean you pass the requirement it's what you do in that position. We have a situation where the father of one scout is pushing his son to make eagle within the next 6 motnhs, he currently is a star scout with only one merit badge to go before life, he also turns 18 in 6 months and 6 days never attends outings and rearely attends meetings. He also has demonstrated zero leadership skills (my opinion only) I'm watching this closely to see how our committee reacts to the deadline of the next 6 days if he makes his next rank by then.

[Bob White]

Remember the requirement is not to hold office, it says you must actively serve.

 

Bob

[mk9750]

Ron,

 

Ditto Bob.

 

Situations are almost never as black and white as can be described in a few sentences on a forum, but for the sake of discussion, let's assume all of the facts you have to work with are the whole story. I'd say that the likelihood of this boy making Eagle are pretty slim.

 

First, he'd have to convince the SM and BOR that he met his established goals for activity and leadership. Sounds like that's not likely right off the top. so he would most likely need to spend some additional time as a Star to meet that (or those) requirement(s). But let's say he does satisfy everyone and earns Life immediately (maybe he completed the tenure and leadership requirment before becoming inactive). If he has developed the habit of skipping meetings and activities for no apparent or valid reason, he isn't likely to get back on track with 6 days left to spare.

 

But, just to reinforce my previous post, let's throw into the mix that he has six months, but he knows about a month remains in a sports season that precludes him from being at meetings and events. If I were the SM (and I am not one), my conversation with him at his SM conference for Life would inlcude a discussion about how he could fulfill 6 months worth of leadership and attendence in the five months he would have left once he can start back to Scouts. There are many ways (in my mind) that he could do this. The most likely is to assume a Position of Responsiblity for the five months, and do an additional SM assigned leadership project. As far as the attendence goes, if I believed that the absences he plans to have are legit, and he attends everything he can once he is able, I would allow him to set that as an acceptable goal. I might do the same if it were 2 months and 4 months. I'd probably have a hard time if it were 3 months and 3 months. Almost definately wouldn't allow it if it were 4 months away and 2 months active. But what I wouldn't do is predetermine what is acceptable. Each Scout's situation is different. If these things aren't discussed and a consesus betweeen the boy and his SM isn't reached, I'd think the boy was cheated.

 

These aren't easy situations. As my dad said either twice or 4 billion times, "if it was easy, everyone would do it". What I find hardest sometimes is treating boys like men. Would I want to take a guy like this and hold him up by his ears and make him understand how his actions and inactions have and will continue to effect him negetively? Oh man, for sure. But I see my job, and that of the SM, to guide these guys to there own good decision, not make it for him. I've had to bite my tongue plenty of times while watching guys make bad choices. Luckily, none have been life altering. but you should see the teeth marks on my lingual muscle.

 

Mark

[Twocubdad]

Since Ed has come clean on his role as Devil's Advocate, let me pick up the charge....

 

What I'm hearing as the concensus here is that "active in your patrol or troop" is relative to the attendance goals the boy sets for himself and the legitimacy of his reasons for not attending Scout functions.

 

Does this relativity apply to other requirements? Maybe I can't swim 100 yards, but relative to my swimming ability and the goals I set for myself, is 75 yards okay? I've been in detention at school twice this semester, but relative to my prior arrests, I'm living by the Scout Oath and Promise?

 

How can you justify the flexibility with one requirement but not the others?

 

Just stokin' the fire.....

[Scoutmaster Ron]

Mark,

I agree it's not always balck and white and some things need to be flexible as long as I can see a legitimate attempt...One reason why he does not attend more meetings that he does is that if his Dad is not at home to bring him he wont come..his mom wont drive on the freeway and has declined offers from other leaders and or other adults to drive hime. I'm just glad I'm not the S.M....yet...that's a different thread to start

 

TwoCubDad

 

you stoked it pretty good...ha ha

[Bob White]

twocubdad

The requirement you sight has a specific measurable task that every scout needs to perform, as do nearly all advancement requirements. There are only three that do not. Those three require the SM to actually talk to and learn about the scout, and they require the scout to set and meet goals and expectations that he helps to set.

 

It is not about flexible requirements. it is about personalized expectations.

 

Bob White

[Twocubdad]

Actually, I cited two requirements, one of which I included specifically because it does not include a measureable standard.

[Bob White]

Actually not Twocubdad, you said relative to the Oath and Law you are OK. Specifically you have taken an oath to your country, and when, as your SM I show you that (along with a scout is obedient)being a good scout and good citizen requires you to obey the laws of your community. Had you done that, you would not have been arrested. So that is indeed a measuarable requirement that you did not meet.

 

It simply takes the scout to reflect on his actions and to share that reflect with the SM for evaluation.

 

"I am sorry to to say that you have not met the requirement for scout sprit at this time. However that does not mean it cannot be met. Let's agree on a reasonable length of time during which you can show that you are capable of living according to the Oath and Law. At the end of that period I would be able to approve your advancement."

 

"But let's not do that right now. I'd like to first learn more about why you got in trouble and see how we can help you to live a life that you, and those who care about, can be proud of."

 

See it just takes a little time, and an understanding of the advancement program. (Available from your local district/council Training Team. Operators are waiting to take your call.)

 

Bob White

[Scoutmaster Ron]

Bob,

 

Would you pass a scout on a S.M. conference if he had lied to you about why he couldn't go on an outing?

Maybe I need to explain more I had asked a scout why he couldn't attend an outing he claimed "I'm going to Tahoe with my parents" When I asked the parents in casual converstaion "so you going to Tahoe" they had replied "no" I then explained what had transpired between their son and I they began to shake their heads and made their son apologize for lying.

[Scoutmaster Ron]

I'm sorry.. I would like to get comments and input from anyone on my lst post of signing off out the requirement on scout spirit and living by the scout law in a scout's everyday life if he lied to you...maybe I'm a bit off the original subject and should start a new thread?