Re: Eagle Age
Robert F. Reeder (rfreeder@QWKSILVR.COM)
Wed, 9 Dec 1998 19:57:04 -0800
Last week I wrote that I saw nothing wrong with young Eagles.
Obviously, there are some who agree with me and some who disagree. For
those who disagree, unless I am wrong, there seems to be a feeling that
there should be a minimum age for Eagle Scout. If so, I would be
interested in hearing what that minimum age should be, and why that age
(i.e. why 16 and not 15, or 17).
In order to accomidate this "new requirement" I ask a few questions.
1) Should there be longer time in rank requirements or age requirements
for the earlier ranks, and if so what should they be? Or, should the
age that a boy can become a scout be changed so that a boy can still
earn Eagle in 2 years or so but still make the minimum age requirement?
2) If we change the time in rank requirement, (requiring, for example
4 or 5 years at a minimum to make Eagle) what impact will that have on
retention, advancement, or recruitment of older boys?
3) If we change the entry age in Boy Scouts (say 14, so that after 2
years, the boy can get his Eagle at age 16), what do we do for the boy?
Will he want to stay in a program that has "stalled" his progression
because he has not made a specific age?
Just saying that a boy must be ________ (you fill in the blank) years
old to get Eagle has consequences. The obvious intended one is that a
boy getting his Eagle *should* be more mature and better understanding
of the significance. However, what might be the unintended consequences
of such a new requirement.
I think that National (contrary to what someone wrote earlier) does have
a good idea of whats best for the *whole* organization. Otherwise we
would see some very dismal effects of implementing a minimum age
requirement.
Bob Reeder
Eagle Class of 74 (at age 13, 5 months)
