Troop Policy: >50% Attendance Req'd. for Advancement?

[Eagle5]

Bob,

I agree with both you and Hunt, but I'm looking for something tangible.

Please share what the stndard is in your Troop. I absolutely agreed with you when you say there is a huge difference, but where have you established your cut line, or line in the sand [smile].

 

Also, talk to me about how you view the interaction and lines of responsibility, as far as advancement is concerned, between the ASMs/SM and the troop committee.

 

Would appreciate your viewpoint AND/OR any others, for that matter.

Yours in Scouting, Eagle5

[Bob White]

As a scoutleader if The only way I can achieve the goals of the program is to draw lines in the sand for advancement then I was a poor chice for the position.

 

The role of the Committee is to see that the program leaders follow the methods, policies and programs of the BSA and to do regular and frequent boards of review.

 

The role of the SM and ASM are nearly identical with each other except that the SM should be doing the SM conferences and merit badge process. Their role is described in the Scoutmaster handbook and in Scoutmaster Leader Specific Training.

[Eagle5]

Bob,

Nuts!

You answered neither of my questions.

I understood you're reply, and again agree with what you offer, but you still have not shared:

 

1. either how you do it in your troop (line in the sand or whatever your method is, OK [smile]), &

 

2. what you think the relationship should be between ASM/SM & Troop Committee. dluders is having a problem between himself and troop committee members that want to impose a non-BSA standard on dluders to enforce with his scouts as the SM.

I feel for dluders, because I'm challenged with similar friction in my troop--just on a different matter. What/How would you suggest as the best relationshipapproach between the SM and the troop committee on this advancement topic?

 

I welcome anyone else's thoughts on how to create a win-win scenario for both troop entities to maintain troop harmony. Two or more heads are usually better than one. Any suggestions??

 

Yours in Scouting, Eagle5

[Eamonn]

What Physical measurement do we have to measure Scout Spirit?

None!!

We rely on our knowledge of the Scout as an individual. We of course in most cases can't be with the Scout 24/7. However if we go back to the methods of Scouting we find Adult Association, we can only view the Scout as we see him. The bottom line is how does he view his Scout Spirit? How does he think he is doing dealing with the Ideals of Scouting. Our role as leaders is to get him to challenge himself to do his best. We can look at Personal Growth, again how does he think he is doing. As he becomes older he has more freedom and is allowed to make more and bigger decisions and take on more responsibility how is he managing this and what goals has he set for himself.

We do hold the Scout accountable for keeping his word. Making a real effort to reach his goals and his behavior.

This really makes the Scoutmaster conference a very important part of the advancement process.

Eagle5

Have to admit to having a hard time understanding your posting -It has been a long week.

As I see it you are asking what to do when the Scoutmaster and the troop committee don't see eye to eye on advancement? (The ASM's don't count they are there to assist SM)

The Troop Committee can not should not change the policies of the BSA. If I were the Scoutmaster I would explain my dilemma to the Unit Commissioner and see if he could persuade the Committee to see the light. If that didn't work the District Advancement Chair. Should get involved.From what you have posted it sounds as if the relationship that you have with your Troop Committee needs more then a little help. It should be our troop not them and us.

As for giving dluders a target. His aim has to be to deliver the program. Many of the postings here have said what is good for the troop. The focus ought to be on the Scout. Some have tried to compare Scouting to sports "Don't show up for practice and you don't play." Sports teams don't share the same mission as the Boy Scouts Of America.

We the adults are here to serve the Scouts in our units we have promised to deliver the program of the BSA. Working with the PLC we ought to do everything possible to ensure that no one wants to be inactive, that the activities we do are fun and we are offering adventure to the Lads in our charge. Having a rule that could be 50% might be 49% or could be cast aside is not the way to get anything done.

Challenging our Scouts to live up to the Scout Oath and Law and set goals for themselves is a lot more work for the troop leadership. Hopefully the end result is Scouts who can make good choices as opposed to Scouts who blindly follow rules.

Eamonn

 

[Twocubdad]

We seem to be bouncing backing back and forth between two different requirements. Let's focus on the requirement to be active in your troop and patrol. I agree 100% with the principle that we should look at the individual needs and abilities of the Scouts and that a blanket, one-size-fits-all quota is a bad idea. But when you sit down with an individual Scout, what are the limits?

 

True story:

 

A friend of mine and a mom of Scout in our troop approached me recently, concerned that her son would fall the other Scouts his age due to his heavy participation in sports. The boy is currently playing on TWO baseball teams. With games, practice and weekend tournaments, it's unlikely that he can attend any Scout meeting or activity before August, including summer camp. Football starts around the 20th of August and can run until mid December, depending on how deep they go in the playoffs. Practicing four nights a week and playing every Saturday, he's basically gone from the troop until the holidays. Of course baseball starts up again March 1 of next year.

 

The bottom line is barring rainouts or injury, the best we can expect from his is a couple troop meetings in August, an odd meeting or two around the holidays but his full attention only in January and February. Forget that at this rate the kid will be 26, maybe 27 years of age before getting the 10 outings required for First Class, but under what definition can this boy be considered active? In counseling the Scout does the SM not have the descretion to say, "I'm sorry, but the requirement says you must be active in your troop and patrol and I can't agree that the schedule you've outlined constitutes active."

 

The principle has been quoted several times in this thread that we can't add to the requirements. But what the policy says is that we can neither add NOR DELETE requirements. Can you really, in good conscience, say that this Scout is active in his troop and patrol?

 

By the way, I told the mom that she and her son should really have this conversation with the SM, that I was only an ASM, and a brand-new one at that. But that generally speaking, her son was more than welcome to participate in Scouting at whatever level he could. He needed to understand, however, that with the schedule she laid out, he needed to reconcile the fact that he was not going to advance in the program like the other boys, if at all.

 

(And by the way, NJ often reminds me that not everyone "gets" my sarcasm, so please don't focus on the fact that Scouts can't advance past age 18. I'm just kidding about the age 27 part.)

[Eagle5]

Twocubdad & Eamonn,

Thank You brothers.

Your replies are what I feel in my heart about the 'Spirit' of Scouting.

Your comments on providing quality program were also well-received.

Thanks for your thoughtful input.

 

I couldn't agree more.

The Committee needs to get a reality check.

Thanks for your coments and suggestions.

 

Yours in Scouting, Eagle5

[boleta]

In our troop, 100% attendance is asked. If a Scout cannot make a meeting, he is to call his Patrol leader and inform him of this. If he misses 4 meetings without a call, he becomes inactive and is not eligible for advancement. If he is on a sports team or will be otherwise unable to make meetings, he can ask to be on a leave of absence. This is spelled out clearly in the bylaws and all know the rules in advance of recognition. If you follow the rules, you are active. There is no absolute percentage required.

 

[boleta]

You can make the argument that if the 50% rule is spelled out, and all know the rule, and this is the definition of active that this unit chooses to use, then that is the rule. It would be difficult to argue with it. However, It must be applied uniformly and to all or accusations of favoritism and other irregularities will occur. But why do units want these punitive rules that are inflexible and discouraging to scouts? We are having a hard enough time keeping kids in scouting as it is.

 

[Bob White]

Eagle5,

I am sorry if I didn't make this clear. We talk with each scout as an individual with different needs and characteristics and help him to understand what "active". The scout sets the goal. It is always more than 50%, but it is his goal not "our rule".

 

The role of the troop committee is to support the troops program decisions. I am against any artificial rules other than the Scout Oath and Law, or those already provided by the BSA for their program.

 

The win/win comes with the fact making and administrating a bunch of extra rule (usually poorly structured and unenforcable) takes a lot of time and energy that the committee and leaders could be putting to better use in serving the boys.

[Hunt]

It's difficult and painful to tell a boy--no matter how you put it--that he didn't measure up. It makes it a little easier (for us, if not for him) if there is some objective standard that you can point to. On the other hand, if the standards are completely subjective, that makes it harder for the boy to accept criticism ("What do you mean I wasn't active? I came to all the meetings!") I guess my question for Bob is this--how specific do you get with a particular boy in determining in advance what will be considered "active" for him? Do you set an objectively measurable standard, or is it a subjective standard that you will judge at the end of the period? I'm not trying to be argumentative at all--we're facing the same issue in my son's troop with Eagle candidates who weren't all that active in their PORs--but were they active enough to get them over? What were they told in advance, etc.? It's very difficult.

[evmori]

What a great discussion!

 

I think we all agree we can't add or subtract from the requirements. But, since the BSA doesn't define active why can each individual unit? If Scout A makes it a point to get to all the Troop meetings and outings and Scout B shows up ONLY when he doesn't have football practice or something else to do which one is active?

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[Eamonn]

This is a real situation that came up in our District this year. An Eagle BOR reviewed a Scout and said that he wasn't active and turned him down. The boys father who has two other sons that reached the rank of Eagle Scout was none too happy. In fact he was so unhappy that he arrived at the Council Service Center, without an appointment and waited for half a day to talk with the Scout Exec. The Scout Exec gave him my phone number. I of course hadn't been involved with the BOR, but I put on my best Sherlock Holmes hat and went to work.

The BOR had turned him down because he said that he hadn't made a lot of the troop meetings. When I pointed out that the Scoutmaster had signed off that the Lad had held the position of Chaplain Aide for six months since become a life Scout, some members of the board changed their story and said that as the Lad hadn't attended troop meetings on a regular basis that he wasn't demonstrating Scout spirit.

I met with the Lad after checking that all the paper work was in order which it was.

He was / is a really nice Lad maybe a little shy but a nice Lad. When I asked him why he hadn't been attending troop meetings. He explained to me that the troop met on Tuesdays and as well as being a Scout he was also a Jr. Fireman and he had been taking classes to become an EMT. The classes were also on Tuesday.

Much as it pained me to have to deal with the Council Advancement Committee (I have posted some of the details) I requested that they meet with him. Which they did and the Lad is now an Eagle Scout.

No he would never had met the 50% requirement. When I asked him why he hadn't informed the first BOR about the classes? He said that they never asked!!

I'm fed up racing up and down this page trying to remember what the questions were and what Scout A and Scout B were doing.If I remember right Scout B was at every meeting but was a real little toad and Scout A was near to sainthood but not making every meeting. There could be all sorts of reasons why the Toad was at every meeting maybe troop night was the night that his parents went to Bingo?

We deal with each Scout as an individual, we do everything we can to find out as much as we can about the Scout, gathering information from his Patrol Leader, the other Scouts in his patrol and of course from him.

Even when dealing with the little toad, we might see that he is starting to really try to get things right and work with him on setting goals and him doing his best to reach them.How often have we seen the Lad who starts out as a little toad turn out to be a real prince.

How often have we seen the good Lad fall in with the wrong crowd and not turn out as we thought he would?

Cookie Cutter standards don't work. Rules that become meaningless don't work. True Leadership with a flexible outlook, and knowing each Scout is the only way to play this game and ensure that the purpose is reaching each and every player.

Eamonn

[Fat Old Guy]

I don't see how being a Jr. Fireman applies here. Maybe it does for the "Scout Spirit" part but not the "active" part. The requirement says, "Be active in your troop." If you're off being a fireman then you aren't being active in your troop. Why is this so difficult to understand?

 

I'll tell you why? Because we are afraid to say "No" to kids because they might quit. Baseball coaches, drama coaches, debate coaches, and band directors don't have any problems saying "No, if you don't come, you don't get the rewards." Heck, they say, "if you can't give me 110%, you can't even participate."

 

We try to rationalize it by saying, "A Scout needs other interests." That may be true but if he puts Scouting on the back burner, why should he be rewarded? If a Scout is giving his time to being a Jr. Fireman and not to the troop, teaching and leading younger Scouts, why should he receive an award that states that he is active in his troop?

 

 

[Twocubdad]

I thought I was understanding this but Eamonn you just blew me out of the water.

 

I understand that the Eagle BOR did a number of things wrong, most notably denying the boy's application without taking the time or effort to find out what was going on. BUT, at any BOR (or more appropriately SM conference) if you ask a boy "have you been active in the troop and patrol?", "do you feel that you adequately performed you position of responsibility?", or "did you complete your service project?" and the Scout answers "no" what is the BOR to do?

 

I've said before I accept the principle that we are to treat each Scout as an individual and allow them the flexibility to "do their best." (Althouth I've still not hear an answer to my earlier question as to what you should do if the plan a Scout lays out for himself is below the mark.) But are you now saying that even if a Scout tells you he hasn't met his own self-defined standard that's still okay?

 

Why does it matter what the reason was? The requirement says be active for six months, not be active for six months unless you are involved in some other valuable activity.

 

I don't understand.

[Twocubdad]

And while you're working on that, I've also been wanting to ask BW about the mechanics of how he handles this.

 

When you meet with a Scout and he explains to you what his limitations are going to be in the coming months and lays out a personal plan that he feels he can meet, how specific do you get? Is "I'll come to as many meetings as I can" good enough, or does the Scout detail the meeting and activities he can attend? If the Scout suggest a percentage will you go with that? Does all this get rendered to writing somewhere? If not, six months from now how do you and the Scout evaluate whether or not he has lived up to his earlier plan? Bottom line is how do you hold the Scout accountable for meeting the requirement.