KoreaScouter

Barry;

I'd buy what you're selling about the adults determining the lad's opportunities, except for one thing: no Scout is an indentured servant. For a buck and a piece of paper, he can transfer to another unit. I've picked up a number of them that way.

You know, it's funny how some of us refer to how much more challenging and difficult it was to earn Eagle in the "good old days". Suspecting this might be an adaptation of the "I walked five miles to school, uphill, each way" admonition, I checked my 9th Edition Handbook (only back to '82, but it's the oldest one I have, so 23 years back will have to be far enough for now). Except for the mix of Eagle required MBs (Safety then, PF now, for example), and a few POR titles, the requirements were EXACTLY the same. From the way some of us describe it, I was expecting to see the labors of Hercules, but no slaying the Hydra, no cleaning the Aegean stables, and so on.

Shifting gears a bit, here's a spin on the prom/license/car carrot some parents dangle in front of their sons. When little KS was about to cross over into our first Troop, he asked me if I would buy him a notebook computer. I replied flippantly: "Sure, when you earn Eagle Scout." I smugly thought I'd put that discussion off for the better part of a decade. Not surprisingly, when he completed the requirements, he reminded me of my promise...which of course, I had to keep.

KS

(PS: 14 years, 8 months, 2 weeks at his COH, if anyone's wondering)

To answer Dug's earlier question, the POR credit part is perhaps the easiest non-dilemma we face...if, and it's a big if, the SM used his junior leadership training kit, explained and gave a copy of the job description to each youth leader, conducted JLT, and most importantly, gave regular feedback to the youth leaders. And especially, if one wasn't measuring up, where he wasn't measuring up, what he needed to do to improve, and what the implications are if he doesn't.

Only by doing so, can you avoid the "I did my four months and you didn't say anything" misunderstanding.

On numerous occasions, I have counseled Scouts in PORs who were "mailing it in", and most often, once we laid out plans of improvement, they served extra time in the POR to get position credit.

Shifting gears, if you're the SM, and the Life Scout is standing before you asking for an Eagle SM Conference, you need to remind himself that you signed the blue cards, approved the project that he completed, gave POR credit, consider him active, and determined that his Scout Spirit is satisfactory (unless you do that at the SM conference, as I do).

Here's more food for thought. When I conduct a SM conference for a Star Scout who's ready for Life, one thing we talk about is Eagle Requirements. We go over the list of requirements together, and I ask him to set a goal to earn his Eagle, including timing. If he's an older Scout, we talk about working requirements simultaneously out of necessity, for example. The important thing is, it's his goal, but he's told me what it is. If I think it's unrealistic, we'll talk about that, too. Bottom line, though, is that it's his trail to Eagle, not mine, and if he's met the requirements as written, it's up to the BOR.

KS

The SPL handbook says (Chapter 1, page 9): "Each Troop sets its own age, rank, and other qualification standards for its senior patrol leader, though these may be temporarily waived if a troop is newly organized." It goes on to say that: "The senior patrol leader of an established troop is often selected from among the most experienced Scouts of a certain age and rank."

So, your Troop (the PLC ideally) will determine what the SPL qualifications are for your unit, and you have the flexibility to make the qualifications fit your demographics.

KS

Bug;

You hit it on the head, my friend! Unless we're asserting there's widespread chicanery among parents, leaders, and District staffs, a completed Eagle application packet with the project workbook is prima facie evidence of sufficient maturity to get the lad an Eagle BOR. That august group will review the application, the references, the project, and interview the candidate to determine if he's worthy. If they have deemed he is, National agrees, and he's wearing the badge, then it's settled. If someone thinks he doesn't measure up, well, the BOR members disagreed with you, and it's their votes that count. It doesn't get any simpler than that.

I'm sure there are those among us who will still seek out, like a Diogenes in reverse, any Eagles who didn't meet their personal criteria of age, maturity/mentality, height, project hours, hair color, or merit badge choices. I would submit that it's a fool's errand, reminiscent of Don Quixote tilting at windmills -- makes a fuss, but doesn't accomplish anything.

Anyone who truly thinks their District Advancement committee is so broke that boys are scamming their way to Eagle should run, not walk, to their DE and/or District Chairman, and beg to be on the District Advancement Committee. By doing so, you'll get to know these boys personally, review their Scout history and their Eagle Scout project workbooks in minute detail, and get first-hand insight into why they're sitting in front of you. The BOR vote must be unanimous, so you'll be able to take the credit for turning away all those little con men who have skillfully and successfully bamboozled all those other adults for so long. Or, perhaps you'll find that the young men before you took paths of various lengths on the trail to Eagle for various reasons, but the important thing is that they are in fact in front of you, and not in front of a truant officer, a drug dealer, or a judge. Given all the distractions and negative influences on adolescent boys, to see a lad of any age sitting before an Eagle BOR should generate a collective sigh of relief and accomplishment for all involved -- here's a success story. Yet, for some of us, it doesn't.

I just don't get it...

KS

The DRMS operates DRMOs -- the terms are essentially interchangeable. Like others, I've been identifying excess for DRMO, doing removals from DRMO in my military capacity, and using state release to get surplus property for my Scout unit. My military access to our local DRMO may give me a bit of an advantage -- when I'm in there in my military uniform, I can spot property (although I can't screen it) while it's in the federal/DoD cycle, then ask the state DAGS screener to scoot back out there as soon as it enters the State cycle. If you have any military members affiliated with your unit, ask them -- they may already be on an authorizing document to do turn-ins or issues. That'll get them in the door at the DRMO, and if you're linked up with your State agency that can screen and get property issued, the rest is a piece of cake.

As I understand it, the only legal and correct way for any Scout unit to obtain this property is after it's been turned in to DRMS as excess, then DoD and other Fed users have their 21 days to "reutilize" it, then it's available to the States and in turn to us. I believe the State availability period is 30 days after the federal/DoD 21 day period, then the whole mess gets turned over to a contractor (Government Liquidators or GL for short) for auction to the general public. That's your last option, and it's not a very good one. It's internet bids, just like on e-Bay, and if the DRMO with the property is not near you, they refer you to a local shipper (more $$) if yours is the winning bid. That's not likely, because the property is mostly grouped in lots by GL, and military surplus businesses with deep pockets run all the bids up. Much better to tap into the State cycle, before it goes to GL.

KS

KS

The mentality? Forgive me for being dense, but I'm not sure to what extent we're supposed to be able to crawl into these kids' heads in order to assess their motives for earning Eagle. None of my training, including WB, prepared me for it. Now, I've got a teenage boy at home, work with 45 of them right now, have also volunteered in youth sports, and have spent the last 20+ years chasing others through back yards and down alleys wearing a badge. I certainly don't feel qualified to psyche them out. Do I need to go to Philmont all summer to be able to do it? Besides, as I scour my references, I don't see a "validate the Scout's motives" requirement for any rank...

Dug; the boxes checked on the paperwork is not just a self-licking ice cream cone -- it's how we document all that important stuff that happened: the leadership, the service, active participation, etc. In other words, it's not the checked box, it's what it represents. But, I'm sure you already know that.

It seems that our Scouts are becoming a lightning rod for what some of us think are requirements in need of change. If that's the case, how would you change the requirements? Various requirement weightings? Different MB configurations? A lifestyle polygraph? Longer POR tenure?

What am I missing here?

KS

The only absolute you can state about the "value of the rank" is the cost of the Eagle Presentation Kit (less than $20 if memory serves). The value in the context of the long term effect on the Scout and the people around him is something nobody will know until he achieves adulthood. Let's not measure the lad by a snapshot of what he did today. Either way, I will assert that the Scout who earns Eagle with a few years before he ages out has more opportunities to give something back to Scouting, immediately, than the lad who earns it right before his 18th and then goes off to college, then comes back later as a volunteer leader. Is either contribuiton inferior? Of course not. Have both lived up to their Eagle Charge? So far, yes.

Boys who go "inactive" after earning their Eagle are not unheard of, regardless of age. But, to my knowledge, there is absolutely no evidence that there's a relationship between age at Eagle BOR and retention. BSA National could probably data-mine it, but I hope they'd be doing more important things. If anything, what I've found is that many boys who join Scouting with earning Eagle as their ultimate goal, have in their minds no reason to stay after their Eagle COH. To the extent that's true, that's our fault, not theirs. In my conferences, I try to portray Eagle as an important individual accomplishment, but also an intermediate goal that should include Palms, OA, JASM duties, continued involvement in the unit as a "greybeard", and adult volunteer leadership. Those of us who frame the Eagle rank as a be-all/end-all should not be surprised if that's exactly what it turns out to be for the boys we mentor.

How much leadership opportunity did a Scout get when he earns Eagle? That's easy: enough, as far as BSA National is concerned. You can certainly wish it were more, but it seems as if you're blaming the "player" when you should be blaming the "game".

There are enough internal controls built into the advancement process to prevent a boy from scamming his way to Eagle at any age, without significant adult collusion. Does that happen? Maybe, in isolated cases. But again, when you think it did, who more deserves judgment, the Scout or the adults involved?

KS

Yes, we are. Our council has an account with the State of Hawaii agency that deals with surplus property (DAGS), and all we need to do is visit the warehouse, tag what we want, and there's a little paperwork. There's a slight charge, council pulls it from our unit account up there, and the property is ours. If we need something that's not in the DAGS warehouse, we can meet the DAGS screener at our local DRMS (Defense Reuitilization and Marketing Service) office, and if the property is available for State issue (after DoD and GSA cycles), the DAGS screener can get it transferred to State for us, and then the rest of the process begins. The same opportunity is available to a wide range of qualifying organizations, including schools, community groups, and other non-profits.

If you want to know more about not just military surplus, but any federal government surplus property and its availability to your unit, visit the DRMS web site at www.drms.dla.mil. On that page, look at the middle of your screen, and there's a link called "R/T/D Customers". Click on that, and you'll be on the RTD Home page. Scroll down until you get to the "Donation" section, where they cover "State Agencies for Surplus Property". Do some reading in the links, and you'll find out who to contact from your state to get involved in this.

It can be a great source of supplies and equipment. A few caveats though. It's very rare to find state-of-the-art anything through DRMS. Remember, all this stuff has been turned in as excess by some federal agency. Some of it's in good shape, and some isn't. Also, most of that stuff is ruggedized for field use and designed for adult men to use -- it may or may not be suited for use by boys. Finally, when you're in these warehouses, keep your head screwed on straight -- avoid the temptation to buy the zodiac boat for $25 for safety afloat training! You know, the old "kid in the candy store" syndrome...

Happy hunting,

KS

To consider an Eagle Scout of any age questionable, we must also by extension question his unit leaders, his MB counselors, his Troop Committee, the organization that benefitted from his Project, the District Advancement Chair, and the members of his Eagle BOR. Sorry, but I'm not going to jump into that conspiracy-theory quicksand (with apologies to all of you Elvis-is-alive, 2nd-gunman-on-the-grassy-knoll, the-lunar-landing-was-shot-in-Hollywood types).

Do they have the leadership skills? By definition, they do, at least to the satisfaction of their BORs (but not, apparently, to the satisfaction of some of us).

In my experience, I've found that the quickest way to get in trouble and end up looking like a simian is to make broad sweeping absolute generalizations about any group of people. When the exceptions start cropping up (which they always do) the generalization collapses like a house of cards.

It's funny, all the Eagles I've talked to who made it just shy of their 18th tell me they'd have finished it sooner if they could go back and do it again. Also, in my experience, I've seen way more hanky-panky involving the so-called deathbed Eagles than I ever have with the 14 year-olds. Yet, nobody looks askance at them. Why is that?

For goodness' sake, why can't we celebrate the accomplishment of these lads, instead of using the occasion to question the integrity of everyone involved?

KS

The Eagle project workbook asks the Scout to list "Hours Spent by Scouts, Venturers, or Other Individuals Working on the Project". We can split hairs (again), but it seems to me that the "or" means that the "other individuals" are not Scouts or Venturers, and BSA National understands and endorses this practice.

For example, for his Eagle project, little KS enlisted the aid of several members of our CO who had a side business laying concrete. They built the forms, laid the re-bar, and helped screed and edge it when the truck showed up. All were adults, and not currently registered.

KS

You know, sometimes these hair-splitting discussions border on the ridiculous. When one of my Scouts asks me for a blue card, I look at the list of counselors, consider the Scout, any other Scouts who may be working on the same badge, my experience with the counselor(s), and then I discuss with the Scout which counselor I'd like to assign to him.

Why do this? Different counselors have different availability and preferences (days of the week, travel distance, older vs. younger Scouts, etc.). I know the Scout and how they'd match up with a particular counselor. I know which counselors are thorough, and which are less so. And so on.

Consider two scenarios.

One, I show the list of counselors to the Scout and let him pick. He picks from the list and calls, but can't arrange a mutually available time to meet. After several attempts, he gets frustrated and comes back to me for a different counselor. New blue card, back to square one, several weeks wasted.

Two, I consider the variables and tell the Scout who I'd like to match him up with (if "assign" is a sensitive word, we just won't use it). He calls, they meet, we're off to the races.

Either way's okay (in accordance with BSA guidance as written), I suppose, but which scenario better helps the Scout meet his advancement goals?

BTW, we permit parents to counsel their sons on MBs, as long as they're registered, unless the parent specifically would prefer not to. Haven't been burned yet.

KS

We are also "Old Goats", and model what we hope is planning, organization, campsite setup, menus, and teamwork worthy of emulation. We don't structure it as a competition, but more of a "static display". Also, we deliberately plan to cook more than we can eat, and after we've eaten (we include the SPL/ASPL/Guide on our menu plan), the SPL offers samples to the rest of the critters. That's caused some trickle-down, too.

KS

Personally, I think it's a little "overkill" for an MB counselor who has no other role in Scouting to be expected to maintain a current Requirements book. I do think, however, that it's reasonable to expect a counselor to use the current MB pamphlet for the badge or badges he counsels. At a minimum, he should be aware of what the Scouts are using as a primary reference, and if the state of the art has passed the reference, he'll know it and can point that out during meetings with his Scouts.

Now, should a counselor have to buy the pamphlet, or should it be provided to him? Reasonable people can have different opinions on both sides of that question...

KS

I had a situation like this in a previous unit, except the boy was a 17 year old Life Scout transfer. He and dad came to a Troop meeting. I got the impression he was there because his dad insisted -- in the next six months, two meetings and no outings -- and wasn't interested in even Instructor responsibilities to help with the NSP. I smelled a rat, and in our conferences -- frequent and well-documented -- I told him he wasn't cutting it on Scout Spirit, but he was non-responsive and very measured in our conversations (read: coached by dad on what to say to me). Long story short: dad was waiting me out, playing both ends against the middle between our council and his last one (started his project there, wanted to finish it there, but we sign it off; did his leadership time there, but wanted us to sign off on it, etc.). I held firm, but I left two months before he aged out, and learned after I moved that my successor rolled over, signed him off, and got him an Eagle BOR before his 18th. He's now got the card in his wallet, but is more of a turkey than an Eagle in my book.

Lessons learned:

- 17 year old transfers should set off alarm bells. The orchestra's warming up, and you're probably about to be played like a violin.

- Who's got the agenda? Occasionally it may be the boy, but it's usually the parent(s). Watch out especially if one or both want to register as leaders, and ESPECIALLY if it's dad as ASM, and mom as Advancement chair! Can you spell Machiavelli?

- Get the records as soon as you can from the last District Registrar and/or a ScoutNet product; don't rely on the handbook and the blue cards (good idea for any transfer). I'll bet you'll find discrepancies, and you'll need as much time as possible to clear it up. Put the burden on the family to straighten out the records if possible. If they're doing something nefarious, they'll want any paperwork-induced delay to be your fault -- it'll bolster their appeal later.

- If you can, talk to the last unit SM or CC. They may be able to help you map the minefield.

- Make sure your Committee and SM (ASMs too) are singing from the same sheet of music. I've found that in this situation, parents will shop around leaders until they get the answer they want, then that answer becomes a club they'll beat you with.

I don't intend to come across as overly cynical. But, all you need is to witness this just once, and you'll be reminded that not all people are inherently good. It reminds me of what columnist Ann Coulter said recently: "...the last time somebody tried to take advantage of me like that, at least I got a steak dinner and a bottle of wine first."

Turn on your radars, John...

KS

I'm sure it's been said before, but if the CO doesn't care, and the lad's parents condone it, we must do so too. Ultimately, it's a family decision, not a unit decision, and every family's different. I've tried to teach my son that tattoos are painful and regretted later, and that body piercings are something that girls do. But, I've told him that if he ever gets interested in either, he may have exactly as many tattoos and body piercings as I have.

I have Scouts with earrings; I think they're silly on a male, but I don't discriminate because of it. None of my lads have tattoos, but some of our adult leaders do (tattoos very common in Hawaii).

KS

Man goes to his local monastery's fish & chips fund raiser. The potatoes are so good, he wants seconds. He asks one of the residents: "Are you the...chip monk?" "Nope, sorry, I'm the fish friar".

KS

Putting aside the too-early/too-young arguments, I know many high schools expect community service; my son's is one of them. But to buy into the logic that says "wait until HS for your Eagle project" brings with it the assumption that the last community service hours a lad will perform is on his own Eagle project. In my experience, that's not the real world -- read the Eagle charge. Those boys are paying back the investment others made in them by jumping in on other Scouts' projects, and participating in unit level and/or OA projects, too. I suppose there are the Eagles out there who flat-line right after their COHs, but they have to be the exception rather than the rule.

One thing I'd ask the wait-until-high-school parents is if their vision of their son's post-Eagle Scouting "career" is early retirement? That's what their comments suggest.

KS

That's what I thought, too, at least, that's how it was when I was in Cubbing a few years back -- Webelos was either/or.

You said your Cubmaster doesn't want to get involved? Excuse me, but you don't have a Cubmaster, you just have someone wearing a shirt.

KS

Amen to EagleinKY!

I see many Scouts who have group signoffs through First Class, mainly through NSP leadership (we do it), or through FCFY programs at summer camp (we do that, too). That makes sense because they're tying the knots and learning the first aid as a group. However, alarm bells should go off if you're seeing group signoffs on Star, Life, and Eagle requirements.

I've also had transfer Scouts who I know came from "Eagle Mill" Troops (I love that term!). I know because they were experienced Scouts who had never seen a Troop Meeting Plan, had no idea what the Handbook said about how to earn a MB, shallow leadership experience, couldn't adapt and make decisions on the fly, and so on. They're flabbergasted when they see SPL-led PLC meetings, with Green Bar program planning, etc. Again, not their fault; that's all they knew.

My remaining question: how do you define "early"? Do you draw a continuum from 10 1/2 to 18 and put a vertical line down the middle, and anything before that is early? That's just shy of 14...

Maybe anyone who earns their Eagle a month or more before our own sons did made it early.

KS

I don't know if this will make the ASM job description thing clearer or more muddy, but here I go with my $.02:

The SM Handbook tells us that ASMs should be given specific program responsibilities (so they aren't just standing around, so SMs can delegate, and so that ASMs can be developed into SMs themselves if so inclined). There are two specific program responsibilities mentioned of course: NSP ASM and VP ASM. OK, that takes care of two ASMs. If you have more than that, it's time to get creative. At various times in my SM tenure, I've had a Program ASM, Patrol Advisors, Life-to-Eagle ASM, an Instructor Trainer, an Advancement ASM, and others I can't recall at the moment. In my opinion, it's a good problem to have.

Regarding DengarOne's concern, it would appear to be something my fighter pilot co-workers would call "all airspeed, no vector". In other words, he seems energetic, but needs direction (and perhaps a reminder that we all serve at the pleasure of our CO and committee -- while you're at it, have him look up the definition of "assistant" in Websters and commit it to memory. I love that "...where does it say that?..." retort. Where does it say that? Hey, I just said it, and I was speaking English, too -- let's do a patch check: yup, mine says Scoutmaster, yours says Assistant. Harsh? Maybe, but some guys, that's all they respond to, and you'll probably only have to do it once. He'll either get with the program or leave; either way, your problem's solved).

Time for a closed-door, I think. Hope your COR and CC have backbones.

Here's a twist from a personal perspective that may seem unusual, but here goes. Anyone who wants to question my abilities as an SM can go right ahead. I don't have a monopoly on brains, and never claimed to. I'm an imperfect human, and will stipulate right up front that I make as many if not more mistakes than any other adult who's on the unit charter. If there's a better guy out there, they don't have to petition the committee to replace me; I'll do that myself. Because...it ain't about me. It's about getting the best program for the Scouts. If someone else would be better because of time, training, experience, or personality, I'll humbly step aside. I'm committed to doing my best at this, but I don't have an ounce of my ego invested in this job -- you'd be amazed at how that enables me to not take things personally. I may not have this job five minutes from now, but for the next five minutes anyway, I expect the loyalty and support of my assistants. And when I'm an assistant six minutes from now, the new SM will have my loyalty and support. If I can't provide it for whatever reason, I'll go away rather than stick around and be a thorn in his saddle.

KS

Yep, after a few iterations, we got tired of hanging and removing temporary patches, dunking them in the soup, and having the wind blow them around our chests like pastie tassels. We'd both earned the International Activity Patch, and simplified our lives by just sewing them on and leaving them there.

KS

I don't think we should be acting as "human restrictor plates", trying to slow Scouts' advancement because of parental agendas. Many Scouts age-out due to procrastination and other factors, but what's too early? Every boy is different, with different interests, opportunities, and motivations. Some have many extracurriculars, extra family responsibilities, or have to work harder at school to get decent grades...or what have you. On the other hand, some boys and their families make Scouting a family activity, at the exclusion of other discretionary activities. Guess which ones are likely to advance faster and farther? We all set goals and make decisions -- even not deciding is a decision, too.

This topic in various forms has come up before, and I just don't understand it. Everything I've ever been taught about Scouting advancement refers to the notion that "...the trail to Eagle can take one of many paths...", or "...in Scouting, a boy is only competing with himself...". Yet, there seem to be many adults who think this should take place on some sort of timetable; sort of like boot camp: everybody enters the pipeline at one end, and squirts out the other end after a prescribed period of time.

Besides, unless some adults are cooking the books, no Scout will earn his Eagle before he's ready for it. The leadership, service, and MB requirements virtually guarantee that. If adults have cooked the books, don't blame the Scout for that, look at the leaders.

It's funny, we encourage the boys to learn about and understand what made America great; in part, personal liberties, freedoms, rewards based on how hard you work, pulling yourself up by your bootstraps, etc. Our advancement program ties right in with those values. Yet, in this context, many of us seem to want to apply an Eastern, sort of Confucian philosophy: "...the nail that sticks up gets hammered down...". I saw that repeatedly in my years living in Asia, and while you get a more compliant, homogenous society that way, you also lose a lot of innovation and creativity.

Let's apply that logic to another situation. In a copy of the Eagletter my son just received, all the NESA scholarship recipients were highlighted inside. The $48,000 scholarship recipient (forgive me, I don't recall his name) had listed in his biography that he has earned every Merit Badge that BSA offers. You don't do that by accident; you set a goal and work your tail off. Would anyone tell him he earned too many Merit Badges? We all get just 24 hours in a day; certainly, he had to forego other personal interests to reach his goal. Does he deserve criticism or scrutiny because of how he set his priorities? If not, then why critique the Scout who sets a goal to earn his Eagle, focuses on it, and achieves it, regardless of his age when he does so?

KS

Let's not create any false dilemmas here. This doesn't come down to a choice between a "no parents rule" and the modern equivalent of an Old West shoot-em-up with more parents than Scouts, and the parents are brandishing weapons in one hand and bottles of whiskey in the other. As I see it, the intent of the BSA policy on parental observation is to underscore BSA's YP guidelines, to "put our money where our mouth is", if you will.

I welcome parents who want to join us on outings. If they're staying overnight, I want to make sure they're prepared to do so, properly equipped, and we have them on our tour permits, menus/rosters, and so on, but that's as far as I go with the social engineering. In most cases, they come away from the outing with more confidence in their son's abilities, the organization and effectiveness of the youth leadership, and in BSA's aims/methods. If any make a well-intentioned mistake and get out of their lane, stepping on a Green Bar's toes or something, we'll talk at an opportune time, but not as if it's an emergency...

KS

You can also put it on a patch vest, backpack, or blanket

KS

Ditto to FScouter; revisons are once each year, in January, and they're all published in the Requirements book...

KS