perdidochas
-
Content Count
2906 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
12
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Articles
Store
Posts posted by perdidochas
-
-
2 hours ago, shortridge said:
For general consideration: Can we use the modern term “safety circle” to put the emphasis on the desired outcome, rather than “blood circle,” which focuses on the negative potential outcome?
I disagree totally, on pedagogical reasoning. A Cub Scout is much more likely to remember "blood circle" than "safety circle." The language is much more vivid, and will stay in their brains longer. We don't need to make Scouting sterile and boring.
-
1
-
-
On 10/2/2018 at 11:21 AM, malraux said:
https://filestore.scouting.org/filestore/training/pdf/510-033(17)baloo.pdf page 72
“ There is no such thing as “cutting a corner off” for infractions. The rules are followed at all times. The Whittling Chip card stays as a complete unit.”
They are taking away some of the fun and tradition for no good reason. That said, having been a Cub/Boy Scout leader for almost ten years, I never personally saw anything worth taking off Whittlin'/Totin' chip corners--the threat of it (which is now gone) was enough. There was a major incident in the Troop the year before my sons joined it, so that may have been part of it.
-
18 hours ago, malraux said:
I’ll be teaching my bear den (and some new arrival webelos) the whittling chip next week. As preparation for that I wanted to give a brief summary for the adult leaders about best practice for handling a perceived infraction. Looking online, the main guidance appears to be 1: can’t cut corners off anymore. and 2: for serious infractions you require a scout to retake the course. Are there any rules about how a leader should handle the immediate situation of a scout being unsafe? My proposed rule is a leader should take the knife and scout to a parent, den leader, cubmaster and explain what you saw so the direct chain leader can take action, but I can’t find documentation. Is there an official policy or do packs have free reign here?
It's up to the pack to decide about cutting corners off the Whitlin' chip, per the Link to Scouting magazine. I think it's a good practice.
-
5 hours ago, Vintage1 said:
The current scoutmaster is in agreement that the summer can count but this is a rule by an old regime where one parent who was a former scoutmaster is still active in the troop even though his son has long left. It doesn’t come up all the time but it has where several kids over the years we’re a couple days or weeks shy of advancement because they weren’t counting two summer months as time for advancement. We voted on it last night and the only one who voted against it was a parent who went through the same thing and whose son has made Eagle Scout as well. I do not believe their intentions are bad but it seems like a ridiculous rule that should have never been placed.
Get the SM to sign off on the requirement in November. The committee cannot vote to force the SM to do things that aren't according to BSA National.
-
1
-
1
-
-
14 hours ago, Vintage1 said:
So after having my son in a troop for four years i just came to learn that they do not count the summer as time for advancement. So him receiving the rank of star scout in May he is not allowed advancement until February. It doesn’t seem right that they would not count the summer even though he was active with the troop with summer camp and other activities. Just curious if any other troops do this.
I think that's not fair at all. That, and the troop is pretty pathetic if they don't meet in the summer. IMHO, summer is the best time for Scouting. The Scouts have time to work on merit badges, etc., without homework or athletics interfering.
-
1
-
-
On 9/14/2018 at 12:57 PM, Sentinel947 said:
I agree, but that's not what the situation is. This is the parent doing all the talking for their son. Possibly the son isn't involved at all. All for talking to the son and his dad together. Parents have a right to be involved if they choose, but the broader point is, by doing it for their son, they are doing him no favors as life as a real adult looms.
Exactly.
-
On 9/14/2018 at 11:26 AM, Sentinel947 said:
I'd love an opportunity to hit that pitch.
"I am a Scouting purist. Your son taking responsibility for his own needs and communicating with adult authority figures will be critical when he enters college or the workforce. I'm a purist because I want him to learn these skills now."
Maybe this is why I'm not a SM or CC. My smart mouth would offend some parent and they'd pull their son out. "How dare you tell me how to raise my son!"
I would amend what you said to: "I am a Scouting purist. Following the program is the best thing for the boys. Your son needs to learn to communicate with authority figures on his own. College professors will simply laugh at a parent who tries to intervene for their kids."
-
On 9/14/2018 at 9:29 AM, gblotter said:
A dad of a 17 year-old Scout reached out to me for guidance about the Cooking merit badge (which meals count, which meals do not, etc). I'd prefer to deal with the boy - not the parent - for such questions. I'd also prefer the boy receive that guidance from the merit badge counselor - not me, the Scoutmaster. This is a lawnmower parent, so I don't respond to his initial email.
Then the merit badge counselor chimes in and also asks for my guidance (he is trying to punt a difficult parent situation to me). I then respond and give my opinions, but I direct my response to the boy (who is copied on the email thread). The dad keeps sending me more emails trying to negotiate an easier outcome for his son. I finally told the dad that I'd prefer to talk to his son because that is a way to ensure the Scout is engaged in the process. Then the dad gets huffy and accuses me of being a Scouting purist who is concerned only with the program and not the boys. I don't understand the reality of busy teens (even though I have three teenage children myself).
I apologized for offending him and I told him I was withdrawing from the conversation because the merit badge counselor should provide that guidance anyway. Finally an email response comes from the son's email address, but the writing style looked suspiciously like the dad was the actual author. There is no winning with some parents.
Wow, having the scout talk to you about it is about concern for the boy. Part of the process is getting the Scouts to do their own jobs and stand up and do for themselves.
-
Any more word from EagleMomnDad2be?
-
On 9/12/2018 at 7:01 AM, WisconsinMomma said:
I've got a Bear den that is struggling for leadership. A mom was the den leader but something happened with her family, new baby, move, etc. They are not participating. Then a dad was den leader, but he is struggling and wants to step back to assistant den leader this fall. We have like nine scouts and no adult to step up at the moment. Our secretary has a son in bears and complains about the guy saying he wasn't doing enough. But to be fair, he'd try to organize an event and no one would get back to him with replies, and that's not easy.
So, how would you invigorate this bear den? I need to defuse the secretary who really has a strong dislike for the assistant den leader, like, I think she hates his guts right now. We want to keep him as an assistant den leader because we'll take what we can get, also, his wife is our new advancement chair, so they're committed, and I think good people, it's just a little wobbly. Another dad is a candidate that we may be able to recruit as den leader but he travels a LOT so maybe we can get the two guys teamed up and working together. The other parents, in the secretary's estimation, are not people who will step up.
Any other suggestions or experience to add? Thanks!
IMHO, anybody who thinks another volunteer isn't working hard enough, should be willing to take their place, or help them in their position.
-
2
-
-
3 hours ago, Hawkwin said:
I would want to know, and would ask the scout why they refuse?
The BOR is not a "test." As such, I am not sure what the Board really learns by asking the scout, in a situation of extreme nervousness, to recite the oath from memory. If they get it wrong, does that reveal something about their character?
So, perhaps more importantly, what does the BOR accomplish by asking memorization questions? I think instead of asking a scout to recite something, ask the scout how they lived something.
Well, IMHO, in our troop, it's sort of comforting. We always begin meetings with the Oath and Law, and yes, it's from memory (albeit assisted by the crowd). Nothing about their character if they can't do it. Does give us a hint on their nervousness.
-
1
-
-
On 9/5/2018 at 4:45 PM, Jameson76 said:
Interesting you add Oath and Law at BOR and EBOR as an added requirement. We always have the Scouts start the BOR (and EBOR) with the Oath and Law, not as a pass/fail but as a way to set the tone. Same for uniform, not required but encouraged. Same for the handbook, though while not specifically required at the BOR it is needed.
Never a test, but they should be prepared to discuss their accomplishment and what they have gained from the advancment
We do the same. It's just part of the custom of the BORs (which we extend to the EBOR). The Oath and Law, as you say, aren't pass/fail, but part of how we do things. We also do it at the beginning of every meeting. It's part of our culture. We also do the Pledge of Allegience at BORs and meetings. At one of the first EBORs I helped with, we had an Eagle Candidate who couldn't say the Pledge for the life of him. Yes, he still became an Eagle. It was just interesting to see what nerves can do.
-
22 hours ago, scotteg83 said:
YPT yes, but pay the $33 registration fee to National (plus whatever your local council adds for insurance) doesn't seem feasible.
Just talking about YPT.
-
I don't see the big deal. IMHO, all parents who go on campouts (even under 72 hrs) should take YPT for their own protection, and more importantly, so they know what's going on. It doesn't take that long.
-
19 hours ago, Horizon said:
Damn, I wish this campfire was real and not digital.
First, when I say "we" I mean American society, and at some points also some Scouting activities I have observed.
Second, I have observed situations in Scouting and school were rewards / accomplishment were given based on criteria that could only be achieved with a significant level of parental / adult control - well beyond just input or mentoring.
The OP started this mentioning the "2am Saturday morning a group of dads were busy building the award winning pioneering project while the boys slept." If, instead, the Camporee disallowed that award based on who built it - it would be a better camporee. By giving the adults that award, however, that Camporee rewarded the lawnmower parenting that the article described.
The same occurs in the schools. It is not the assignment of the projects, it is when the ONLY way to get top marks is to have a parent take over that we enable and encourage lawnmower parenting.
I'm a former high/middle school science teacher. My sons always did miserably in science fair. Why? I did very little, and let them do it, while the other parents did the majority of their children's projects. That said, I'm happy that I did that, not because my sons lost, but but because they did it, not me. I have never liked Camporees, in general. Partly, it's because I hate watching how other Troops were not as Scout led as we are. One incident that really bothered me was a pumpkin chucking competition we had. The boys were supposed to build a pumpkin chucking catapult between 8 and noon, and then in the afternoon we would have the actual pumpking tossing competition using the catapults. Our boys managed to cobble together something that worked. Didn't toss the pumpkins far, but did toss them, and was built by the boys with no adult input (did have a couple older--17yr old scouts). They lost miserably in the competition, and it was to troops that pre-built their catapults carrying them on a trailer to the site, and with much adult input. No disqualification, nothing said to the cheating troops. Just turned me off more.
-
On 9/3/2018 at 5:12 PM, EagleMomnDad2Be said:
Our son is currently a Life ranked Scout. He is preparing for his Eagle, but we as parents are still so confused about his process on becoming an Eagle Scout, please help?
-Son advanced to Life rank in July Question: Does he have 6 months from July to plan and execute his Eagle Project? Follow-up Question: Is he eligible to receive his Eagle Scout Award in January if all Life rank requirements are met?
Thank you for reading and thanks in advance for any help!
How old is your son? The minimum time your son can be a Life Scout working on Eagle Scout is 6 months. The maximum time is one day before his 18th birthday. Unless your son is 17 1/2, he has more than 6 months to complete his Eagle. If he advanced to Life, he has already met all Life Requirements. Theoretically, he can earn his Eagle requirements before January, and become an Eagle then, but unless he was 17 1/2 or close in July, I wouldn't recommend that.
-
21 hours ago, Horizon said:
What I am saying, apparently not clear enough, is that when you force adult requirements on children - don't be surprised when they turn to adults to get it done.
The current requirements don't require adults to do. My two Eagle sons did it with minimal help from me (other than transportation, and doing things they were not allowed to do per the rules)
-
21 hours ago, Eagledad said:
What a strange post, Horizon. I understand you to say, "Don't do for your kids what they can do for themselves, but don't let them do to much for themselves because it may be to much"?
This texting generation is a challenge for me.
Barry
No, he's saying that we shouldn't add on unnecessary rules because of the parents that are doing things for their kids.
-
6 hours ago, Hawkwin said:
"The reason I only do SM Conferences on camp outs is to get the senior leadership on the camp out so that they should be on leading younger scouts. My expectation for Star and Life Scout should and is more rigorous since they are moving into Leadership roles."
Like I stated, I get the rationale behind his policy but the inflexibility of it is both disappointing and appears to violate the spirit of the rules (e.g. a different standard for higher ranks is adding requirements).
If that's the rationale, his troop is in trouble. I know with my boys at that level, they wouldn't have had a problem with it. They were camping frequently. However, a lot of our older Life Scouts who were gung ho (and had 6 months in a POR and a year as an active Life Scout), but then got into high school extracurriculars, it would have been hard.
-
On 8/28/2018 at 11:23 AM, gblotter said:
Adding requirements like that is obviously wrong, but I can sympathize with what this troop might be trying to do (encouraging activity by older Scouts). Right objective, wrong implementation.
We have a troop of 30 boys (about half are age 11-13 and half are age 14-17). All the older Scouts are grouped into one large patrol. The lives of these older teens get so busy, and we rarely see them on a troop campout or other Scouting activities. I remind those still working toward Eagle that real activity in the troop is requirement #1, and I challenge them to attend at least one campout a year (not setting a high bar). But that counsel never seems to translate to actual campout attendance. I have also urged their Patrol Leader to organize their own separate patrol campouts, to no avail.
This is a point of frustration (for more than just our troop).
If a boy is working on Eagle, unless they already have their POR time, I don't see how they can avoid campouts. The busy lives of older teens is why, given my druthers, I would recommend boys work to get their Eagle at 15 or 16, instead of waiting to be 17.5. Both of my boys got their Eagle at 15. The oldest had the time of his life as an Eagle Scout. The younger got too busy in high school stuff.
-
On 8/15/2018 at 7:05 PM, qwazse said:
Yes, it is an Eagle project. The requirement does not specify "while a Life Scout who has made rank by age 17.51..."
Personally, I would not want to go through the hassle of the project workbook just to do a service project. However, for a scout with aspirations to be an engineer, it might be a worthwhile exercise. My kids (all chemical engineers -- not a creative bone in the lot of them) spend a lot of time filling out specs and tracking sheets and chasing approvals.
The article seems to indicate that the scout did the math. But, anybody who gives $ to a scout because they think he'll get a medal out of it should be flogged. Either the project is worthy, and we should contribute to it, or it's just for bling, in which case we should give the kid a shovel and tell him to dig for silver.
Actually, it does specify "while a Life Scout who has made rank by age 17.51." That's what 6 months as a Life Scout with a POR says.
-
13 minutes ago, Jameson76 said:
What some may call a Technicality, others will agree that the reason is not being able to fulfill the requirements..."Technically" 2 requirements of the 7
1 - Be active in your troop, team, crew, or ship for a period of at least six months after you have achieved the rank of Life Scout.
4 - While a Life Scout, serve actively in your unit for a period of six months in one or more of the following positions of responsibility. List only those positions served after your Life board of review date. ***
- Boy Scout troop. Patrol leader, assistant senior patrol leader, senior patrol leader, Venture patrol leader, troop guide, Order of the Arrow troop representative, den chief, scribe, librarian, historian, quartermaster, junior assistant Scoutmaster, chaplain aide, instructor, webmaster, or Leave No Trace trainer.
Details in the article
Rules are rules. He was too old when he became a Life Scout--didn't have six months left. They should have told him at that time, and not have him waste his time and money on an Eagle Project.
-
27 minutes ago, MattR said:
That makes sense. I've told older scouts they can have their own tent and none of them ever took me up on it. They will bring big tents and shove a bunch of scouts in, though. I just assume it's because they don't snore. These guys have been tenting with each other for 7 years and hanging out with each other is a great part of scouts so not being able to tent with each other after a birthday is an issue for them.
The problem is that technically this is a YPT violation, and if another Scouter found out about it, the 18 year old could be banned from Scouting for the rest of his life for this. Yes, you were comfortable with it, but technically speaking you are also violating YPT.
-
On 4/22/2018 at 12:40 PM, bearess said:
My son, 10, is a fairly new Boy Scout. He is a patrol leader of a group of new Scouts. Their Troop is transitioning to being more Boy-led— I know it’s important to the SM and ASM, and they are working hard on it. He just went on his first camping trip with Scouts, and he worked hard to make it a success— and I think it was!
The issue is his old Cubmaster, who has a son in his patrol. CM and his son are very close, almost enmeshed. CM grinds my son’s gears for various reasons, some of which are legit, some of which aren’t. So, on the trip, the boys tented together—except for CM and his son, who tented together. My son also made a “chore list” for his patrol, which had CM’s son and another boy doing dishes. My son’s chore (cooking) was done, and he was playing catch with another boy while dishes were being done. Apparently CM came over to him and said “Mr. Patrol Leader, you can’t play till all the chores are done. You need to go help with dishes.” My son felt annoyed, felt that CM wouldn’t have said anything if it hadn’t been his son doing dishes. CM does not currently have a role in the Troop, but I believe he will soon transition to ASM.
So... would you say anything to the SM or ASM? Was CM out of line? I wasn’t there, so I’m getting one biased perspective! My son feels frustrated, like CM’s son always gets special treatment— which maybe he does, but that’s life! OTOH, it seems absurd for a ten year old to eat/sleep with his dad, rather than his patrol.
If they have a rotation of duties, there's no reason that a scout who's not on duty should be working, unless there is a problem. The CM was out of line. Boy should be sleeping with his patrol.
Whittling chip policy - dealing with infractions
in Cub Scouts
Posted
My thoughts exactly. We don't need to make things boring. In fact, for teaching boys, we need to make it the opposite. We need to make it exciting and real, not sterile and safe.
IMHO, he needs to be allowed to use a small sheath knife (or a switchblade :-) )