Beavah

And the choice could be to let the child live instead of the mother. Yah, right. Sorry, Ed. In an ectopic pregnancy, the child will not survive. The only choice is whether or not to save the mother. Packsaddle, in law we make distinctions based upon intent, and this is a good illustration. Killing someone where the intent is to protect oneself or the life of another we do not punish. Killing someone accidentally but while doing something wrong/foolish/harmful we call manslaughter and punish, but not as severely as intentional killing or (worst) premeditated killing. In the

Hi Hikoholic. A Scout Salute to you for stayin' involved in your troop and comin' back to help 'em on a regular basis. In addition to the other great ideas, I'd suggest you look around at what other things in your area attract a lot of sixth/seventh graders, or attract kids who have an individual sports/outdoors interest more than "organized" sports. There can be a lot of benefits to cross-marketing, eh? Think: *Poster/fliers at the local outdoor shop, local bike shops, local climbing gym, etc. *Presentation to local "kids" martial arts school (and let them present to your bo

Yah, I'll add: Weight: *Cut off/remove unnecessary parts (ex. half of toothbrush handle). *Take only what you will need - repackage or squeeze out extra toothpaste, minimal or no soap, just enough sunscreen/bug repellent to get by, minimize excess fuel, etc. *No food with water content - dehydrate. *Plastic pop bottles instead of Nalgene. *Tent fly only instead of full tent if in no-bug area. *Clothing layers, but no "changes" of clothing other than socks, 1 pair shorts/undies. Rinse/wash on trip if needed. *Iodine, not filter. *Repackage all food. *Substitute something

I certainly saw that the scouts who dropped out were below 2nd Class as the letter indicated was typical. Yah, I'm sure this is true, but it's a red herring, eh? Lookin' at the stats I posted above for our boys' troop, most of the drops were below 2nd class, but that's not the reason for the drops. It's just that most of the reasons for the drops (conflicts with sports, don't like camping, conflicts with meeting night & behavior) are discovered very early on in a boy's time in a troop, before they get through much advancement. The other reasons are randomly distributed, with s

Thanks, OGE and FScouter. I think it's pretty clear that OGE agrees with me and many of us, and that even FScouter does some direct retesting, though only about ideals and values, not about skills. Let's look at some questions from your lists: How do you fulfill your duty to country? To God? What does 'loyal' mean to you? How do you honor the 12th point of the Scout Law? What does it mean to a Tenderfoot Scout to "Be Prepared"? What does it mean for a Scout to be "Kind"? What does it mean to say, "A Scout is Trustworthy"? (this retested a Tenderfoot requirement at 2nd clas

I'll try to duplicate OneHour's informative data for our last three years: 12 (34%) Aged out (all our Eagles stay around until age 18+). 7 (21%) Conflicts with sports (6)/other activities (1) 4 (11%) Not interested in camping/outdoors 2 ( 6%) Parents pulled to work on school/grades 2 ( 6%) Medical reasons 2 ( 6%) Family moves 2 ( 6%) Looking for faster advancement/advancement mill 2 ( 6%) Divorce issues 1 ( 3%) Conflicts with troop meeting night 1 ( 3%) Behavior issue

1. Is your troop boy led? I'd say "yes,", eh? But it depends what you mean. The boys determine the calendar, events, and budget. The boys do most of the plans for campouts and meetings, but with some adult oversight or "checks." Da boys do most of the up-front leadership, but not all. I'd say they do about 50% of da "behavior management." Boys and adults share instruction roles as well, but under the boys' direction usually ("Mr. Jones, can you teach XXX at the next meeting?"). Ya need the right adults for this, eh? It tends to be much more last minute/on-the-fly than normal in th

For example, the number of boys age 5-17 declined by 0.03% from 2002 to 2003, but the BSA's membership declined by 3.16% in the same time period, so very little of that decline is due to fewer boys available. Yah, yah. But you have to remember that while the age 5-17 numbers nationally haven't declined appreciably overall, the demographic has shifted (and continues to shift) significantly. There are fewer suburban/rural/caucasian kids. There are more low-income immigrant children. There is a baby boom echo now moving through high school, so numbers in elementary schools in a lot of pl

Yah, Ed, I know... I deliberately selected the questions because I thought someone somewhere would call each "retesting." It's curious to me that you think 1, 2, 7 & 8 are "grey area." One and two ask the boy to exactly repeat what is necessary for the signoff in the first place... the same as 3, 4, and 5. Seven and eight both ask for a verbal description of a requirement that had to be demonstrated... the same as 6. How are you defining "grey area?" My guess is that most of us have a notion of what's appropriate for a BOR that has nothing to do with "retesting" at all, but in

when I think about starting to backpack again, but then I think nah, if I'm giving up a weekend at least I want to eat good and sleep comfortable. Time to go find a local troop or outfitter and learn some new tricks, '69! It isn't hard to eat great and sleep better while backpackin' these days. Especially since it's got some extra seasonin' from the scenery and the healthy hike in! I agree, though, that smaller kids and out-of-shape kids and adults are an issue when considerin' backpackin' trips. Takes more work gettin' gear straight just because the troop doesn't do it that ofte

In a previous episode, Venividi wrote: Where I do think there is difference is differing opinions on what constitutes "retesting" vs "reviewing understanding". I think he Came and Saw right on the money, eh? And there's a natural tension between making sure the boy has learned and not turning a BOR into an interrogation. Let's try to make this a bit more concrete. For the first 1/3 of a board of review (before getting to his experience in the troop and encouraging further advancement), how do these questions sit with folks? Sorry, this is a bit long 'cause I got carried away. No n

Yah, FScouter, I think you missed Lisabob's point entirely, eh? Her point was that younger boys (age 10-12) are not as comfortable or capable of abstract thought about ideals and values and leadership. So the age-appropriate way to ask them questions at a BOR is by asking them concrete skill questions. I can't tell you the number of times I've seen an 11 year old freeze up when a strange adult asks him some long abstract thing about "aims and ideals and how they apply to his life." By contrast, if you ask him about the safe hiking rules, he's on safe ground, and you get to hear in

Makeitfun, I'll add Venividi's "Thanks for contributing" as well, eh? It's good to hear fresh voices, and I'm sorry if your invitation to "rant" made my reply sound like a rant. I think He who Came and Saw is right; we're mostly in violent agreement. Would I defer a boy on a BOR because he forgot some detail about any one requirement? Of course not. I might ask him what he thinks is important to run a safe trip afloat, but I'm looking not for memorized 9 Safety Afloat points, but for an understanding of what the issues and principles are. When he becomes a Patrol Leader next year, wi

Let the ranting from the hardliners begin. Yah, OK (I'd put a little smillie face here but I don't know how). Makeitfun, as one of those pesky citizens who is payin' for you to teach our kids history, I think you're missin' the point. We want da kids to learn history. We want them to be able to use that knowledge years later when listenin' to tomfool politicians. That's why we're wastin' our time and money sending kids to school, eh? And so through No Child Left Behind and other accountability laws, we've started to do what you refuse to - test kids on what they know and ret

Nah, I think we've got it wrong if we view not receiving a public recognition or award as a "punishment." Someone who doesn't earn an Emmy or a Nobel Prize or an Eagle is not being punished; they just haven't yet met the standards for a public recognition of that type. Punishment is a consequence for negative or hurtful behavior. It is a necessary part of scouting and raising youth, but it has nothing to do with advancement. Advancement is recognition of special skill and positive behavior. That's why a boy doesn't "fail" a MB requirement or a BOR, but the counselor or board may say,

Yah,as a district committee member and commissioner, this annoys me, too. Sends me on a tirade even, in my best northern Wisconsin accent, eh? Service, the mission is Service. The only words out of any district person's mouth should be "Thank you" "Congratulations" and "How can we help?" I hope I'm not in your district, but on behalf of all districts everywhere: Thank you for your service to youth and the good Sea Scouting PR you've generated. Congratulations on the great job you're doing with your ship. How can we help you and Sea Scouting do even better in our area?

A Scout Learns A Scout is Tested A Scout is Reviewed A Scout is Recognized Scouting has one of the best youth education/training programs in the nation based on these simple principles. So one wonders, if we believe so strongly in this system, why we don't use it for adults. If anything, having knowledgeable adults is even more important than youth advancement. I'm with Newbie, eh? If we care about the aims for adult training, we must teach, and test individually, and review individually before we recognize. And any adult who isn't willing to make that commitment really

So what happens is, the BOR becomes a place for contending visions to pop up. Some committee members undoubtedly use this as a way to highlight their discontent with the SM's vision and to advocate their own vision instead; some SM's seem impervious to feedback from the BORs because they view it as criticism of their own vision and become defensive. Rare is the troop that seems to have a broad agreement on the vision, and how to achieve it. Dat's pretty scary there, eh? Differences in vision between parents and scout leaders can create all kinds of destructive energy. Differences i

1. If a scout comes to you wanting to work on a MB for which there is only one (or a small handful) of MBCs, whom you know to be of poor quality... It would be our job as a unit or district to find and train a high quality counselor for the boy. 2. If a district-endorsed event comes along (like a MB Fair) and it is a situation where you don't have any idea who the MBC will be... No. If we're not sure of the quality, we wouldn't allow it. Our duty to the boys is to provide a high-quality experience. 3. Can you/Would you (two separate questions I suppose) direct a scout awa

Lisabob, good analysis and breakdown, eh? I'm with LongHaul here. The answer to how a unit chooses between your various cases/responses should depend on what's in the best interest of the boy and the program for all da boys. Generally, I think one of our goals is to help boys learn things, and by really learning things to develop self-confidence and leadership. I don't think givin' any boy a badge when he, and the adults, and his peers all know that he doesn't yet understand something is Trustworthy, Loyal, or Kind. I not only think it doesn't achieve our aims, I think it subverts

Do you utilize troop guides in your program? Depends on the patrol structure. Vertical patrols where new scouts are admitted pretty directly into a patrol do not need a troop guide. I've seen troops where PLs or APLs from various patrols served as temporary troop guides for new scout orientation type campouts & events. For troops that have horizontal patrols, or that keep the new scouts together for a year before letting them join real patrols, the Troop Guide sort of acts like "big brother" and de facto patrol leader for most things. In this role, I agree with Eagledad, you n

Yah, my understanding is that this might vary by Catholic administrative region (state? bishopric?). Summer camps and MB fairs where the approved leaders take the boys and are supervising doesn't seem to be a problem. But traditional/ideal MB counseling where the boys make an appointment and go and meet semi-privately with an adult requires the adult to go through the Catholic screening/training requirements. We are being told "no exceptions" in our district.

had the candidate begin by shaking all our hands with the Scout Handshake, then leading us in the Pledge of Allegiance, the Scout Oath, and the Scout Law, I consider that to be valid and viable example for how my units should begin unit level BORs. Yah, I agree with you, John. But there's many that would say that expecting the scout to know the Oath and Law by heart is "retesting" the Tenderfoot requirement, and condemn you to some circle of hell where as soon as you arrive at any campsite it starts to sleet. OGE, it's important to remember that bold indicates policy only in the Gu

Yah, John-in-KC. I generally agree with you. It's funny, though, if you look carefully in the book, the section you quote applies only to BOR's for Tenderfoot through Life. There is no such "uniform guidance" for Eagle BOR's. And of course, guys can earn Star, Life, and Eagle in a Venturing Crew, and drop da uniform entirely, eh?

Seems like this should be a separate topic from BOR pass rates, eh? Mike F in dat thread talked about how a BOR in his troop acted as quality control, discovering that a kid hadn't really served in a Position of Responsibility, and how they used that to address quality control in their unit by helping both the boy and the adult leaders. Exactly. Da advancement method only works if it means somethin'. It's too easy for adults (and kids) signing off to get lax. BOR's to determine if a boy has really met the requirements are an important part of quality control. But to do that,