fred8033

The BOR is NOT the place to correct for years of advancement failures. ... If a lower advancement standard has been used for years, then it's too generally too late. The BOR checks if the requirements were signed off ... and to encourage the scout ... and to collect feedback on how the troop advancement program is doing. My apologies if I sound harsh, but if we criticize the scout's advancement at the BOR, then we are really criticizing the troop advancement program for the last few years. Each rank had many requirements to be met and that the troop designated approver signed off on. The SM (and his team) should have been watching. Merit Badges are only one part of a larger more complex set of requirements. ... AND, sometimes a scout (and his parents) game the system beyond the controls of the troop leadership. It's ok to be sad for the scout, but not necessarily mad about.

100% agree. ... Could have some adjustments such as Dakotas could be one council to save cost. Or Dakotas + Nebraska. ... Or one per state to keep it simple.

Hard to pick a good term these days. "Family scouting" implies helicopter parents subverting the program even more. "Co-ed" scouting implies more societal change like the last twenty years. Terms ... I hope we can get beyond terms. Scouting is really not about gender. It's about getting outside, being active, being responsible and having adventures. All of which lead to personal growth. I pray we can focus on the basics of scouting someday.

Good analysis. Also, there has been the alignment with scouting as a reflection of this nation and the recent growing pains of the nation. Scouting got too caught up into too many current political debates. Dancing a fragile line between some faith emphasis / churches support and a secular government / outdoors focus. Scouting has had to survive all the changes ... and it's been painful. IMHO, the "family focus" is a good way to avoid saying "coed"; but it sounds like it's the same thing. I wish I was more active now to see the changes. I trust in 20 years, scouting will be better off.

LOL ... Yes. "always" is too extreme. ... So ... For the last 20 years or so... and my council definitely ... Your whole experience is why the BOR instructions include "review". If someone has already checked the dates, signatures, etc, then the BOR "review" part is mostly moot. With ScoutBook advancement reports, "review" is even more almost moot.

For Eagle ... that was always done at the council office by the person who confirms the scout is ready for an Eagle board of review. ... they check things like are there enough days between each rank ... did the scout get the eagle project proposal approved ... was the eagle project completed and signed off by SM and beneficiary ... were all the merit badges recorded. Is the scout currently registered in the troop? By the time the EBOR was scheduled (for our council), there no "requirements" to check. For lower ranks, the unit advancement chair should do the same thing. Are there enough days between ranks? Did the MBs get signed off by a registered MBC? Did the SMC happen? BOR checking "requirements" is about paperwork being right and not "quality" of how the scout fulfilled each individual requirement. If there is a question about quality, then the BOR separately addresses the quality issue with the SM / MBC after and outside of the BOR.

"Celebrating" as part of encouraging the scout to continue advancement. No one said confetti, play music and serve pizza. "not up to snuff?" ... that type of statement always scares me. It's a review if all the requirements were completed. It is not a review of whether completed requirements are "up to snuff". It's not show how to tie a square knot or show how to do a square lashing knot. Sending a scout back is a fall back option for when things have fallen apart such as the scout has a really bad attitude or the scout has been arrested by the police and a court date is pending.

Absolutely 100%. AND, it's not really "reviewing". A BOR is really celebrating the scout's progress and encouraging their involvement. It's a really bad bad bad message to encourage MBs and getting requirements done and then delaying the scout's BOR. In a way, it's a game. The scout should drive and be accountable for his own progress. If the scout is held up by not being able to get a SMC or BOR, that breeds a jaded attitude.

I'm a little jaded. I don't trust a council or a CO to hold cash for a future scouting unit that would be created years down the road. My gut feeling says the funds would be rolled into a general fund.

@Armymutt had a good solution. When we shut down a unit, we gave our equipment to a newer unit that was just starting. It was the best use.

"out of town" ... What does that mean? 20 minute drive? Or is it a short drive, but a different school district, etc? There is no clean answer. Finding the right troop is a mix of magic / luck of the draw / luck that you make. When the magic is right, scouting is great. I'd look at the whole picture ... drive time ... adventure ... effort to create / setup new troop ... desire of parents to be leaders and setup a new unit, etc. ... There is no right answer. Sadly, I do know the time in scouting goes quick. I greatly miss the 20 years in scouting with my boys. Note that the time in a troop is actually much shorter than you think. 7 possible years, but not all seven years are equal. Nine very active months to a year as a new scout. Two strong years as a younger scout. A good year as a senior scout. Then, the scout is turning 15 or 16 years old. Conflicts. Thinking of the future. Distractions of being a young adult. Those years are very special, but scouting may not be as important anymore. ... Time in scouting goes very fast.

It happens. Demographics change affecting where kids go. Sometimes you put in all the effort and it still does not work out. IMHO, focus most on giving the remaining scouts the best possible experience possible. Maybe a few last big adventures where they can grow and have good adventures. Maybe they will find a new troop, but that's up to them mostly. IMHO, focus on a great experience.

Clarification ... IMHO ... this is part of the death knell of scouting. .... Cub Scouting age range has been expanding and changing over the years. Started as 9-11. Then 8-10 ... Started as three years only. AND ... a much more simple program ... The age range continued to grow and expand starting in the mid 1980s. We are killing the older scout program where the big character growth happens with independence, responsibility and adventure. Scouting is propping up membership numbers with younger and younger youth where scouting just doesn't shine and the youth are just too young. The result is a poor impression of scouting and an ineffective program. Cub scouts should start in 3rd grade when kids begin to develop friendships independent of activities and independent of parents.

Yeah. The fairness of the legal process in cases like this is questionable from many, many view points.

A few things ... #1 The "enforcer" role? ... What are the roles of an adult leader? Is the adult leader an "enforcer"? A wise older friend? An advisor? A safety check? ... I fear the adult leader as "enforcing" rules as it creates a separation / barrier between the scout and the adult. It creates a grudge when the phone is taken and an incentive to hide the phone and hide the person from the adult leader. #2 Consistent expectations ... Will the adult leaders police themselves and secure their phones too? Key to scout is the example that the adults set. Scouts mimic the adults. Scouts quickly see the double standards setup by the adults as hypocrisy. Obviously ... IMHO ... The purpose of scouting is to teach skills, responsibility, etc. At some point, we meet the scouts where they are instead of dragging them into the past that no longer exists. Cell phones are part of their world and part of the adult world.