New First Class Requirements

[Hunt]

"Doing sales as an individual? Doesn't your troopp promote it, explain, distribute the order forms, order stock, plan the money distribution? don't proceeds go to the unit? Thats a unit activity."

 

Well, because quibbling is fun, I'll point out that if these things were done at a troop meeting, it wouldn't count as an "activity" for the purposes of the First Class requirement, any more than a game of catch at a meeting would be a separate "activity." And I'll quibble with ASM7 by saying that sales should be done with a buddy, and that, to me, this would make it an activity for the purposes of the rank requirements (but only one, no matter how many times they go out to sell).

 

I would agree that this recruiting requirement, if it's real, is fairly modest, but it's really something that every scout should be urged to do every year--or more often.

[evmori]

I would agree that fundraising if done properly is a Troop activity. But fundraising is a requirement for any rank.

 

Wonder what the logic of this NEW requirement is?

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[ASM7]

Hunt, I'm not saying he shouldn't have a buddy, but the buddy doesn't have to be a scout. It could be a sibling or friend, but should probably be his parent.

Bob,

This organization hasn't grown to the size it is by requireing boys to promote it. It seems harmless enough to us adults but probably not to the psycology of a boy. I know that boys should tell their friends about the great things their troop is doing, and most probably have, but why make it a requirement? I can see a boy going up to another and saying "I have to tell you about my troop because it's a requirement for my next rank". That kid will be real excited about learning more. No, this has to happen naturally. It's called word of mouth advertising and it's done by excited people liking what they promote. You can't require people to do it.

I think the Recruiter badge is enough. The "In the Scout Zone" DVD is also useful. But the best I've seen so far is our Council Summer Camp video.

[Bob White]

"I have to tell you about my troop because it's a requirement for my next rank"

 

Yeech! If that is how the scout is instructed to do it, then the problem is not the requirement but the skills of the leader teaching it.

[evmori]

I would agree that fundraising if done properly is a Troop activity. But fundraising is a requirement for any rank.

 

I made a typo in the above post. It should read

 

"I would agree that fundraising if done properly is a Troop activity. But fundraising is NOT a requirement for any rank."

 

Sorry for the confusion.

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

 

[Hunt]

Certainly the scout won't be instructed to recruit half-heartedly--but if it's just a check-off, I think that may well be what happens. Furthermore, once he's talked to one friend, he may think, "Well, that's it for recruting."

 

I do think there might be something to the idea of incentivizing recruiting more, but I don't think this would be a good way to accomplish it. Is this for real, anyway?

[Bob White]

What if what he discovers is "hey that was easier than I thought" and so he does it again?

 

If you want more incentives for recruiting...go ahead. You can do that in the unit yourself, you don't need the national office in order to motivate the scouts you serve.

 

I heard about this over a year ago but I have not seen anything official yet that is being put in place.

 

But so what if it is, it is not difficult to teach or do and what could possible be the downside of it?

 

(This message has been edited by Bob White)

[evmori]

Why is this being considered to be added as a requirement? What is the logic behind it? Does anyone know?

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[Venividi]

This one seems to have nothing to do with building character, citizenship, or developing fitness, but rather to promote the organization.

 

 

My view differs - I find it very much related to character and citizenship, even if it does serve as another way to promote the BSA.

As good citizens of their patrol, scouts should have enough concern with their patrol members that when one of them stops coming to meetings or activities, they call him to find out what is wrong and let him know that they want him to be active again because they have more fun when he is there. I have suggested to more than one PL that he should call "Mark" or "Andrew", or whomever has been missing; that this is an important part of being a patrol leader. More typically I find that they tend to be concerned mostly with themselves, and an attitude of if Joey doesn't come, So what? - its not their concern.

 

And it takes character to invite someone new to come visit. It does require them to ush through any fear of approaching friends to extend an invitation, and I view that as a positive skill.

[Bob White]

Not only that but what harm could be done if every scout asked at least one other person to join?

 

 

[seabear]

BW "Not only that but what harm could be done if every scout asked at least one other person to join?"

 

None what so ever, but is this a needed requirement for advancement to First Class?

Why is this being added to the First Class requirements? To what purpose is this requirement being used in the scouting program?

 

Yes ,SEA SCOUTS do have a requirement for Ordinary, under Active Membership 5: Recruit a new member for your ship and follow through until the new member is registered and formally admitted.( This requirement may be waived by the ship committee if additional membership is not possible at the time the Sea Scout applies).

 

What next for Star you must recruit two new scouts, for Life you must do a talk for FOS to your community.....

Will talking be it , or will the scout need to bring in body to a patrol meeting or troop meeting?

 

 

[NeilLup]

1) I believe that until about 1955, there was a requirement for First Class very similar to the current Ordinary Sea Scout requirements. The First Class candidate had to recruit a boy and the boy had to join. I have a handbook for 1945 and that requirement is there.

2) As far as why to make it a requirement

a) First Class Scout is supposted to be a fully qualified Scout. It is supposed to have some requirements which are tough and maybe a bit uncomfortable.

b) To some extent, this requirement is designed to address the boy who loudly says the Oath and Law at meetings, then takes off his uniform as soon as he gets outside so that none of his friends will know that he is in Scouting. If one is a proud Scout and a proud member of a Troop, then inviting friends should be something that he is proud to do. It may require a bit of embarrassment (You're a Scout???!!!) but this person is going to be a First Class Scout. If he's ashamed to admit that to his friends, then does he have real Scout Spirit?

c) As far as making it an advancement requirement, while there are 8 methods, most of us know that for many boys, advancement is right at the top. So if we really believe that sharing Scouting, Scouting spirit, the Oath and the Law as broadly as possible is a good thing, tying it into advancement it a good way to make it happen. Why is demonstrating one's pride in Scouting and one's Scout spirit through inviting a friend such a burden? We read many threads about early Eagles, slowing boys down, etc. Isn't this requirement a contribution to ensuring that boys have an important skill?

d) Is this asking a boy to do something that may be uncomfortable and that may be difficult for him? Yup. Is it a valuable skill to recruit and to "ask for the order?" I think so. Will this slow down some boys from making First Class? Possibly but that is something that the Troop can address by training the boys to meet this requirement.

e) To summarize, if a boy is too ashamed of being a Scout to ask one friend to come to one Troop meeting or campout, should he be a First Class Scout?

[ASM7]

I copied this from the CalCouncil website.

 

 

Beginning January 1, 2006 and additional requirement will be added to the requirements for first class rank in Boy Scouting. Scout beginning their First Class requirements work after this date must complete the new requirement. Scouts working on first class requirements prior to this date will have until June 30, 2006 to complete First Class rank with out completing the new requirements.

 

The new requirements test the candidates persuasive communications skills and can help make Scouting available to more boys. It reads as follows.

 

Tell someone who is eligible to join Boy Scouts, or an inactive Boy Scout, about your troops activities. Invite him to a troop outing, activity, service project, or meeting. Tell him how to join, or encourage the inactive Boy Scout to become active.

 

The Boy Scout Handbook and 2006 Requirements book will be updated with this new detail.

 

Now, as far as what harm can it do? Well I think most of you are thinking this is a younger scout and it might be cute, but what if an older boy joins, say 15 or 16. Now there is a problem due to ridicule that this kid may endure from others if he starts talking about scouts. I don't think we need to require these boys to do something like this. By the way, who could witness this requirement to sign it off? Is he going to take an older scout or his Scoutmaster with him. OK Sonny, there's one, go get him! IMHO, this was not well thought out and has nothing to do with increasing his scouting skills.

 

 

[NeilLup]

Hello ASM7,

 

With respect, it depends on what you think Scouting skills are. Personally, I believe they are a lot more than camping, cooking and hiking, One of the points of the Law is "A Scout is Brave." Here is a chance to demonstrate it.

 

As far as your 15 or 16 year old non First Class Scout, there are incredibly few of those. And the requirement can have been completed at any time while a member, so if he invited someone to join even while not even a Tenderfoot Scout, it would count. As far as how to police, that would only seem to be a problem if the Scout says "Well, I invited XXXXX to come but he didn't want to." Presumably if the invited boy shows up at a Troop meeting or activity, then the boy's patrol leader can sign the requirement just as with any other requirement. And that 15 or 16 year old does not need to invite one of his peers. He could go to a Cub Scout pack and participate in a meeting or two of working with Webelos Scouts and invite one to come to a meeting. It doesn't matter if other people are also inviting the Webelos Scouts.

 

As far as the requirement not being well thought out, each of us is entitled to their opinion. I do know that the requirement went through many drafts to ensure that boys would not be penalized for things that they could not control. For example, the original 1945 requirement mandated that the invited boy join. If he didn't join, then the inviter didn't make First Class rank. Similarly, the requirement, as written, does not even demand that the invited boy go to the meeting. The standard is that the inviter do his best. If he does, then the requirement is met.

 

In terms of policing completing the requirement, if I were a Scoutmaster, the starting place would be "A Scout is Trustworthy." If an otherwise trustworthy Scout would say that he met the requirement and gave me the name of the person invited, place, what the person said, etc., I would probably give the benefit of the doubt. How does one police whether a Scout is doing a good turn daily? Also, the Scout can ask his patrol leader to assist him in the recruiting or whatever. And, as I mentioned, if the invitee shows up for a meeting or campout, then there really isn't a problem.

 

I'm not surprised by the number of objections to this requirement. I see the same type of objections raised to Scout doing active selling as part of fund raising and I wonder if the objections aren't raised by adults who either are uncomfortable with selling or recruiting themselves or else don't believe that boy leadership and boy "ownership" of a Troop should extend to recruiting and sharing the magic of Scouting.

 

Studies suggest that the reasons most boys join Scouting is because some other boy invited them. This requirement is, I believe, just trying to extent that invitation process as much as possible.

[Hunt]

I found NeilLup's arguments to be pretty persuasive. I certainly do think boys can and should recruit personally--we urge the boys in my son's troop to do this each year, and it's hard to get them to try it. Most of our recent recruits have come from personal invitations. I guess my main qualm with this requirement is that it's stated as a one-time thing to be checked off. Maybe that's better than not doing it at all.