Re: Eagle Age (War and Peace)
Anthony Mako (ajmako@NLS.NET)
Thu, 10 Dec 1998 05:22:32 -0500
<Donald L. Mockensturm wrote>
I guess that my point is that if National in 88 years does not think that
there should be a minimum age for the Eagle Rank then why should we.
</Don>
<Cheryl Singhal replied>
I suspect that's because National has a specific view of what's happening
from Tenderfoot to Eagle and thinks everyone is going by that view, and
possibly doesn't even consider that anyone may not see it that way.
I suspect too that if National ever put together statistics on the exact
number of under 16s earning Eagle, things would change in a hurry.
</Cheryl>
There are two things about this discussion that have always irritated me.
First, many of those who believe their should be an age limit always seem to
blame the need for that limit on the Scouts. "He's only 13, he couldn't
possibly be mature enough to understand what it means to be an Eagle!" Of
course, they never bothered to ask the boy. Second, is the belief of many
that National simply has no idea what boys are like, what they need, or what
they want, and may not even care.
If one Scout in ten manages to complete the requirements for Eagle by the
age of 13, it's probably because he decided that's what he wanted to do.
Most likely he set a specific goal for himself and managed to realize that
goal without much prodding from adults. If that doesn't show an appropriate
level of maturity I don't know what does.
To think that National has no idea (or no inclination to know) what is
important to the youth they serve (and, more importantly, those they do not
serve) is to attribute to the BSA a philosophy that is best reserved for the
government. In fact, the First Class Emphasis program was developed as a
result of National paying very close attention to advancement and retention
statistics. They discovered that, on average, boys stay in the program three
years. If they earn First Class within those three years they are more
likely to stick with the program beyond those first three years. They also
learned that Scouts who earned First Class within the first year stayed with
the program an average of five years. The New Scout Patrol is an important
part of the First Class Emphasis program that was designed based on
advancement and retention statistics compiled by the BSA.
To my way of thinking, the discussion of Eagle age, Scout Spirit
requirements, leadership and responsibility requirements, merit badge
factories, and many of the heavily argued topics on Scouts-L over the past
year all have one thing in common. Every adult leader involved with Scouts
in a troop has many more opportunities to correct problems or focus a
Scout's attention than just before his BOR. If you wait until the Scout is
ready to advance to determine if he "actively participated" in his position
of responsibility, you CAN'T blame the Scout for doing very little with the
position. At least every seven days you have the chance to motivate a Scout
to do his best. If you don't use those opportunities you then have to ask
yourself "which one of us didn't do our job to the best of our ability?"
Chances are the Scout didn't know any better, or it wasn't clear to him what
was expected.
It's time we stopped blaming the Scouts for being "sub-standard" or "not
what we expected." If we, as Scouters, don't do our best we can't expect our
Scouts to be any better. If we do establish the standard, we can hardly
expect them to live up to it. It's also time we stopped immediately blaming
National when we think something doesn't work. It must have worked
somewhere, otherwise it wouldn't be in the program.
YIS
A. J. Mako, ajmako@nls.net , Scoutmaster Troop 381
Home of the Unofficial Win95 Boy Scout Desktop Theme,
http://members.aol.com/Scouts381/
Old Portage District, Great Trail Council, BSA
"I used to be an Eagle (C-7-97), but I'll always be an Eagle (1981)"
