Venividi

Fuzzy Bear,

I like your logic. But I see a parallel to the "under god" words in the pledge of allegience. Even though at one time it wasn't there, many people would have a strong sense of "losing something" if it was removed.

A good vent, like a primal scream, can help blow off steam. Then one can go back into his/her own tempest in a teapot, and be the tactful, friendly, courteous person he/she is.

uz2bnowl - now that you let yours out, get back in there and help some boys grow to be men!

No, perhaps not ready for JASM, which is why I said "JASM like" role. Something that speaks loudly that he is not being considered the same as the typical new scout, but rather as a maturing young man. Perhaps an informal position, but one where he is treated like an adult, and not like a boy.

I recall 30 some years ago joining FFA (Future Farmers of America) my sophomore year of high school. Everyone else my age had joined the year before as freshmen. FFA had "ranks" starting with "greenhorn". Even though I was only one year older than the other new freshman "greenhorns", I had to stand up and be recognized with them, but I did not want to be classified with them. I had thought the activities needed to get to the next rank were silly - I had already had had somewhat similar experiences on my own, (probably more, since I was an active worker on our family farm. I didn't want to be made to stand up and be recognized for "accomplishing" things that I thought were easy and trivial. So my personal experience in FFA was that recognition of advancement itself as an older member was embarrassing, because it made me feel inferior.

If the young man has been active in the outdoors, or tries it and finds it fun, he will be able to quickly catch up with his peers in ability to camp, backpack, canoe, etc.

I do agree with Gonzo1 that teaming him with an ASM and another scout his age as mentors to help him integrate into his age group, and become an important part of shaping the troop. But I wouldn't push or promote TF through 1st class. Let him decide to do that, or not. My bet is that he would not.

I see a lot of comments about advancement issues with joining at 16 1/2. I will offer that to a 16 1/2 year old, advancement would not be one of the methods that will be useful with a 16 1/2 year old. I would downplay that method. Rather, I would look instead towards a strong use of the patrol method (look for a troop with other scouts his age), the outdoors method (try to build interest in outdoors with age appropriate activities on outings, teach outdoor skills without regard to the TF-2nd-1st class requirements), and the adult association method (an adult or two that takes personal interest in him that supports and encourages him as a person. At 16 1/2, his interests will be more common with others his age than with 11 - 14 year olds. Depending on his personality, look for a troop that will help him move into a JASM type role with a stron adult mentor. He will pick up outdoor skills quickly if he finds camping interesting.

Lisabob,

Lots of input here, with good reasons and rational both for and against sitting on the BOR.

Some have proposed that the SM is closer to the situation and to the scouts than you, and therefore has information with respect to scout spirit that you do not. That is very well true. I will toss out that it is also possible that the SM is not comfortable saying "I'm sorry, you are not yet ready to advance. Here are the things you need to work on to fulfill the scout spirit requirement".

I know that the first couple of conferences that I had with scouts that I had doubts about were hard, and I approved them, but did not feel good about it. As a new SM, the advice that I received from the troop's Advancement Chair was on the order of "sometimes you just have to grit your teeth and advance scouts that you don't think deserve it." And so I did. I found that doing so did not help the scout. In fact, it hurt him, because there was no motivation for him to modify his behaviour - his goal was to advance, and he got what he wanted.

So as others have recommended, consult with SM to discuss your concerns and find out if the SM knows something that you are not aware of.

I agree with others that people with axes to grind or cannot be impartial should not serve on a BOR. Based on reading your posts, I don't see that with you. If you elect not to sit on the BOR, provide your concerns to those that do, so they can make a knowledgeable decision.

Good Luck

It happens in professionally run programs as well. My neighbor, a teacher, tells me he had to stay late one night at the bginning of this school year in order to demonstrate to one pair of parents that there was a problem with the school's computer system that prevented him from posting homework assignments on the class web site. Parents had called the principal. They didn't believe the reason, so principal invited them in and asked the teacher to stay late to demonstrate the problem. After demonstrating to the parents, they said they just wanted to verify that there really was a problem. Not what I would consider a good use of teacher time. I told my neighbor that I thought his principal should have denied the request as unreasonable, as there were alternative ways for their child to get the assignment - such as taking home notes, or calling a classmate.

Message I am trying to convey is the importance of the CC to handle such issues as often as possible so that the SM/ASM's can focus on the scouts/training/program.

I want to add to my previous post: be appreciative that the mom took her issue to the committee chair. She did that correctly. Too often parents will circumvent the committee and go straight to the SM with their complaints.

baden,

Taking a look from a different perspective, I think that what SHOULD have happened was for the committee chair to have explained to the complaining Mom that a)he heard her, b)it was appropriate for for the PLC to include a couple of hours to listen to the big game in their weekend campout, and c) the SM has the committee's support in having approved it. The CC should be the SM's best friend in running interference for the SM in situations such as these. (Unless I am misreading your post, which sounds like the CC brought the problem to the SM, rather than as a "for your information" courtesy message).

A couple of things to do here to help keep things like this from bubbling up too frequently:

- Request the CC to run this type of interference if he/she is presently not doing so. The CC may be new and/or not have experienced such situations before, and isn't currently comfortable running such information. Use this as an opportunity to help him/her learn how to support you.

- If you are not currently doing so, keep the committee informed at committee meetings with SM reports that include what the troop did on their most recent campouts, so they all are aware of the balanced activities that you described in your post.

- Periodic "all parent" meetings where SM and CC explain the aims, the methods, the troops program, and how the troops program fits in with the aims and methods.(annually just after new parents join is a good time).

Sounds like you have a good program for the campout.

As SM, dealing with difficult parents was more wearing than difficult scouts. Getting the committee to a point where they understand and support the program sufficiently to shield you from such issues will help stave off burnout.

fgoodwin,

gotta agree with your last post that it is good troop policy. Otherwise scouts don't want to repeat the training again. Been there, done that. And will have excuses why they are busy that weekend.

Perhaps an approach where anyone that has already taken it twice is asked to lead one of the sections. Or prepare and present a lesson on one of the leadership skills, and these presentations be used to supplement and expand the TLT. SM could even ask for presentations on areas where jr leadership is weak.

Now you get into the "can't add to the requirements" arguement. Serve actively as a POR is a requirement for advancement. As Eagle76 observed, jr leadership gets weaker when jr leaders do not get leadership training (whether by lack of SM scheduling a training night, or by choice of scouts that choose not to come.) Is it better to have mandatory training in order to hold a POR, even though that is indirectly adding a requirement for advancement, or let the troop (and the individual POR holder) suffer from having leaders that did not get trained? We will fall on two sides of that question.

Good question, and one I thought about how to address/manage when I was a SM.

So many factors to consider - gotta have different expectations for a scout with specific limitations than one without. Not all scouts will excel in fitness any more than all scouts will excel in character or in citizenship. No one joined to have their fitness improved anymore than anyone joined to have their character improved. A troops program can be put together to include a variety of physical activities, just like it can include opportunities for growth in character and citizenship. Fun things that require physical activity (in support of the fitness aim), much in the same manner of having fun activities that require teamwork to support the citizenship aim.

I promoted the PLC to include phyiscal activities on campouts - hikes, biking, canoeing, rock gym - as I suspect most of us do. And a lot is under local unit influence - plan a 5 mile hike once a year, or plan multiple weekend backpack trips, for example. There will be a market for both.

And to conclude, let me be the first to say that the expecting or promoting of any scout to participate in any fitness activity beyond what is embedded in the tenderfoot requirement and the personal fitness merit badge would be adding to the requirements, and therefore not allowed (tongue firmly in cheek).

Your CM story resonates with me. Back when I was a (new) CM, had a successful roundup with 10 or so tiger applications received. My eyes lit up when I reviewed the applications, and saw that half of the dads listed that they were either Eagle or Life scouts. Thought I was in luck in having so many parents that had so much scout experience, and expected to see an overwhelming show of scout spirit in leading the tiger program that year. Every one of them turned down the opportunity. Even after multiple requests. I couldn't help but be dissappointed.

evmori,

I have no problem with your and OGE's position. I am sure it works well for you. I just don't think it is the only legitimate interpretation of the two seemingly conflicting facts about uniforms that OGE presented.

For what its worth, I would have issue with a BOR that sumarily dismissed a scout in the referenced situation without commencing the review and asking questions about why. The responses to these questions can be one factor (of many) to be considered. As SM, I would talk to the BOR members to find out why they made the decision they did, and attempt to get everyone on the same page with respect to achieving the aims of scouting.

I believe that everything I stated was consistent with both "The Scout should be neat in his appearance and his uniform should be as correct as possible, with the badges worn properly. It should be the desire of the board to encourage the Scout to talk so that the review can be a learning experience for the candidate and the members of the board." and "A scout uniform is not required for membership..." If a scout does not have a uniform, it may very well be that is as correct a uniform as he can have. The BOR doesn't know unless they ask. If the scout could have had "a uniform that is as correct as possible", but chose not to, that could generate a good discussion where "the review can be a learning experience for the candidate and the members of the board".

I agree with you that if a decision is made solely on wearing or not wearing full uniform or not, that is likely appealable. I was trying to point out that discussing the reasons can help illuminate the larger picture. Sorry if that wasn't clear. Perhaps I am still not.

Cheers.

Ron,

Yes, sounds like you have your work cut out for you - but hopefully it will be able to be handled with a conversation or three. Need to understand why the BOR dismissed him to come back with a complete uniform. There may be a good reason, or maybe not.

Need to understand why the scout came to the BOR without the full uniform if he knew that was the expectation. There may be a good reason, or maybe not.

And with the small size of the troop, you don't have the luxury of pulling someone else in from the bench, so to speak. You have to work with what you have. If your committee members won't go to training or read the advancement guidelines, you will be unable to force them. But you CAN pull all the parents together to explain your vision, and how it will benefit their sons. And acceptance that everyone sees things differently, and conversations are the only way for the group to learn from past and agree on steps to improve in the future.

Put the two facts that OGE puts together, and the BOR gets to use their wisdom in determining a course of action. If a scout comes in without a uniform, the BOR members can ask questions to ascertain why. If they find that the scout is from a poor family that cannot afford a uniform, and that scout has a paper route, but those funds go towards lunch, they may compliment the scout for what he has done, and then take back to the troop committe that there is a needy scout, and the troop committee may choose to help the scout obtain a uniform.

If they find that the scout had the resources and opportunity to get a uniform, but chose not to get or wear one, then the BOR may choose to compliment the scout on all he has done, and then tell the scout that they will be willing to set up a follow-up BOR when he is wearing a uniform as correct as possible.

By no means am I advocating that not wearing the full uniform should be a pass-fail test at a BOR, but rather, for the BOR to use it as a factor to consider when determining if the scout has met the scout spirit requirement.

Before anyone jumps on "but the SM signed off on the scout spirit requirement so that is all the justification needed" I would add that everyone needs to be on the same page, and supporting each other in achieving the aims. If there is that much difference between what the BOR, the SM, the committee, and the CO are looking for, then they need to get together and discuss what their true aims are, and what is important in applying the methods to achieve them.

Please try to avoid legalistic, letter of the law interpretations of rules and regulations. We are trying to build men of high ethical character, and ethics is different than obeying laws.

Aren't hypothetical questions fun?

Packsaddle,

I see unit to unit variability as a strength rather than a weakness. Same with grade schools, high schools, and colleges. Variability is helpful because it supports allowances for local conditions and situations - the kids, the adults, the interests, the capabilities, the hurdles, the desire.

Sure, that means that an Eagle from troop xxx is different than an Eagle from troop yyy, just like a degree from University of Illinois is different (dare I say better?) than one from any other university. Each is shaped by different experiences, and each has the potential to build on what they learned in the school they attended. Certain colleges are more difficult, and held in higher regard than others. But 5 - 10 years after earning their degree, few employers care, because when it gets right down to it, it is not the institution that awarded the degree that matters, it is what the graduate can do.

If he has been active, using the scoutmaster minute to talk about the great example he has set for those that come after him would be appropriate, and then have some refreshments.

Fuzzy Bear,

I like your Q & A's. It brings back into focus that our aims are to develop character & citizenship in our scouts, and that means expecting our charges to live up to the scout oath and law, and reward them when they do so. Advancement can be a powerful motivator, and works best when positioned as a reward for growth in character and citizenship (i.e., scout spirit), rather than as a check mark on getting the right number of merit badges (by whatever means).

Have high expectations - scouts will strive to meet them. Have low expectations - they will meet those also.

Around here Ready, Fire, Aim is promoted. A job can be done "too good", and result in being "bad" because it resulted in higher cost and longer schedule than the customer wanted.

ASM59,

The problem with the BOR giving a "social promotion" and ignoring the lack of requirements sign-off is an indication to me that BOR has raised advancement to an Aim, or that they do not want to be seen as the "bad guy" by telling the scout that he is not ready for the BOR or the next rank.

If/when what you described happens, a potential approach would be:

SM have conference with the scout for a heart to heart talk on why the scout went to a BOR without signoff by SM on SM-conference, Scout Spirit, etc., with an emphasis on the disappointment, and giving him an opportunity to "make it right" by not accepting the advancement until things are completed properly.

Since that didn't happen, the next thing would be to honor the advancement, but for this to be discussed with the SM, CC and advancement chairman to come up with an agreement and plan on how to prevent this from happening again.

Given what you have posted in other threads, I surmise that many on the committee don't care and/or dont want to know or be bothered, and don't see scouting for what it can be.

My take on the description that you have given of the SM is that he may be in the position only because no one else will take it, has prior experience with lack of support from the committee, and does not have the desire to continue to try and do things by the book, since he figures he wont get committee support anyway.

The more I read, the more I am with the others advising you to take your son out looking for another troop. Ask around at round table, or ask your district commissioner for recommendations on troops with great programs.

FireKat,

Try a "go out for coffee", or "stop at Baker's Square for a piece of pie after round table", and give the gung ho parent some personal time for a discussion to explain the boy scout aims and methods, how adult scouters fit into that, and specific roles and/or tasks that this parent can do to assist in a way consistent with the aims and methods.

Occasionally you also need a gathering of all parents to review the same with everyone, and for the SM to explain his/her vision for the troop and the CC to explain the committee role in supporting the troop.

F_scouter gives excellent advice. In many cases, you have to do what works. Though personally, I would not choose (as SM) to delegate sign-off of requirements to committee members. Think of it as the flip side of SM/ASM not being able to participate in BOR's. Its supposed to be a checks and balances kind of thing. If the scouts can't tell the difference between committee members and the ASM's, then the roles need better definition.

I have had committee members attend campouts. They were told that they were on a vacation, and while they participated in activities, they did not step in to work with boys unless there was mutual agreement with the SM for a specific function. Example: advancement chair who was an astronomy buff bringing a telescope and explaining planets and constellations. An ongoing exception would be that I would want the committee person responsible for equipment to serve as advisor to the quartermaster.

pargo,

It sounds like the Jr leaders are not thinking of themselves as leaders. You don't say how long the meeting was, or how old the scouts are. You could recommend that the SPL throw in a break like a MadLib every 45 minutes or so. A short conference with each scout individually may be called for, and how you were dissapointed in his lack of participation in the PLC, and ask each if he really thinks that he is fulfilling the duties of his position.

Or perhaps they may be having trouble getting back in the swing of things, and may be better at the next PLC.

For a scout that has a reputation for, and continues to be a distraction, you can help the rest of the PLC by asking that scout to call his parents and have them come and pick him up. I made that request once, and the scout understood I was serious, and managed to return his focus to the meeting.

gwd-scouter-

Congrats on explaining the quartermaster job in a way that makes coming over to the scoutmaster's house one of the benefits of the job. And on involving an older scout to help him learn the job (I am assuming he will be a JASM.)

There is a certain point of pride in having a house messy with scouting stuff. It is consistent with the "what matters" verse we all love, and is certainly a sign of commitment that we live "what matters". Though when it comes to having TROOP equipment laying around the house, it is at odds with "never do a job a boy can do". Be proud of what your pile of personal "scouting stuff" says about your priorities. We should all do our best to avoid taking care of the "stuff" that can provide a scout with a meaningful feeling of responsibility and a successful sense of accomplishment with his POR.

"Everyone thinks everyone else is out to get each other along with gossip and hard feelings. It is almost impossible to get cooperation out of anyone."

And this is the adults. What a poor example they are setting for the scouts. One of the things that I have noticed is that boys coming into a troop want to be the leader. Gradually, more of them want to avoid the leadership positions, because they want to avoid the responsibility of leadership. I have seen patrols that would not elect a patrol leader, because the patrol members wanted to sit back and hang out, and let someone else do the leading. Makes one wonder whether the parents understand the aims of scouting.

Good Luck, (and Go Illini!)

gwd-scouter,

I see opportunity! I see a call to your SPL in your immediate future, to ask him to set the wheels in motion for the ASPL to call the quartermaster to set a time when he and a couple of his buddies will be over to put away equipment from the last campout! It's nice to have such young visitors. Be sure to just happen to have some cookies and iced tea to share when they are done.