The Latin Scot

I would like too, but it's still too early to tell.

@Thunderbird Amen to that. What goes on with the Webelos sets a precedent for all the younger Scouts in a Pack. Technically, the Den Leader guides recommend that no Scout should ever wait more than TWO WEEKS to be recognized for an award he has earned. I take it that includes ranks, like the Arrow of Light. There is solid pedagogical reasoning behind it, and as a Child Development specialist, I fully grasp why - kids lose interest in awards systems quickly if the awards never come. Making a child wait longer than two weeks is basically a guarantee that they will lose interest in the system, and eventually, the program. 

I always try to use friendly questions to encourage the person to reflect a little on what they are doing and representing in these kind of situations. A sample of a conversation I had recently:

Me: "Hey Mr. Wilikers, (name has been changed) I didn't know you were registered as a new Scout leader!"

Him: "Oh I'm not actually yet."

Me: "But you have a new uniform on! Aren't you only supposed to wear the uniform if you are officially registered with the BSA?" (asked sincerely, and with a big smile)

Him: "Oh, I just thought it would be fun to wear one I guess."

Me: "Is that why you have all those goofy patches in the wrong places? The boys in my den were confused about them, and I didn't know what to tell them. How would you explain them to my boys? I gotta tell them something." (sincerely inquisitive and slightly concerned face)

Him: "Well ....." (insert lame excuse here)

Funny enough, while it seems trite, a conversation like this never actually accuses him of anything, and technically, I am never actually telling him he is doing something wrong. But the questions allow him to consider both his actions and the ramifications of the example he is setting, all while avoiding any actual criticisms. This line of conversation always works for me; give it a try and see if you have any more success!

Incidentally, if you have a Scout who has completed his requirements and is ready to move on, talk with your leadership and see if they can award him his rank sooner rather than waiting around for the others. It's false to believe that boys have to wait to earn it all together at the end of the School year, and as a parent, you have the right to a say in your son's advancement.

In my Pack, boys advance by birthday, and we go year-round - there's no summer break, and we ignore the School year calendar. So, if a boy turns 10 in March, he becomes a Webelos Scout, and when he turns 11 he advances to the Troop chartered by our same congregation. 

As the Webelos Den Leader, I make sure that when a boy earns his Arrow of Light, he receives it at the very next monthly Pack Meeting - I don't wait around for other boys to earn it. So, if the boy who turned 10 in March competes the requirements in November, then that's when I award him his AofL. That means his bridging ceremony is done separately from the AofL in February or March. Almost all of my boys finish the AofL a few months before they turn 11 and cross over, so we have AofL ceremonies and bridging ceremonies happening year-round. Families tend to be much happier, there's no waiting around for Scouts who are taking longer, and the boys get a constant stream of exciting ceremonies to look forward to. I think it works far better than the School-year model which seems to cause so many people so much grief.

I don't believe culture is something that can be "owned." It's a dangerous path, claiming that something as broad and esoteric as culture can be owned and dictated by one group of people. That's one of the primary issues challenging society today - the idea that cultural ideas, artistic expression, or symbolic representation can "belong" to somebody, or even more challenging, to a group - and who, pray tell, determines who can or cannot belong to that group? 

I am not talking about race, mind you - although some have trouble distinguishing between the two. But my parents come from two very distinct and different cultures, and I know first-hand what kind of problems can arise when people try to take possession of cultural elements in an attempt to preserve or protect cultural identity. It's possible to share in elements of a people's culture without doing so offensively, and if people do take offense, that is their choice - but that should not give them the right to legislate the first group's freedom to include those elements in their activities if that is their wish. To claim that a group "owns" such things is both unwise and unjust - and sets a dangerous precedent that can be turned against them in unexpected ways.

Admittedly, they have announced many times that there won't be any official information on the girls' program (including its name) until 2019 - they still have the better part of a year to figure it out. But even if this article had never come out, the fact is that there is still a lot of uncertainty as to what's going to happen with it. A year is still not a lot of time to create a whole new program that is at once tailored towards girl's development and yet meets the same criteria required to earn them their Eagles in a manner that's legitimately "equal but different.' They haven't given themselves enough time for trial and error, and I foresee that coming back to bite them hard.

I have watched all of Surbaugh's web presentations and "town hall" meeting clips that I could find, and they have acted almost entirely on what they assume people want based on surveys and samples - it's extremely sketchy reasoning, from both a statistical and a logical point of view. I can't say I fully support him, as I have most of our past leaders. Just because he's a volunteer doesn't mean I have to hold him up to some lesser standard. In his elevated position, I actually expect much better.

I read this article last night. Surbaugh is not the most eloquent speaker, and the writing sourced in the piece isn't that far out-of-step with his somewhat colloquial writing style, but I don't know how likely it is that Buzzfeed would be getting such an "inside scoop" while other, more credible sources remain oblivious.  I concur with the fact that there are some mighty worrisome things going on at National, but ... I can't say I feel "aghast," lol. 

When the OA comes to do our AofL crossovers, it's a very meaningful and impressive event.

The lights are dimmed, and a large, deep drum starts beating slowly as OA members walk in to the room in full Native American regalia. Then one begins to tell the legend of the Arrow of Light and the young brave who led his tribe out of darkness with his arrows (I can't remember enough of the details to retell it here), and then he calls out the names of the boys who have achieved the rank of AofL. The boys are charged to live the Oath and Law and the Outdoor Code, then their parents are called up so that the boys can award them their parents' pins - all of this by OA members in full costume, which the Cub Scouts always find impressive. There is then a special dance to celebrate.

If any of the boys are also bridging over to Boy Scouts, there is further story-telling, and the OA speaker/dancer guides them over our special "bridge" to their new leaders, who then have time to offer a few words, followed by their new patrol leaders welcoming them into their new patrols. Then more dancing and celebration, and even photo opportunities after the meeting.

Having their additional elements in our program has gone a long way towards encouraging my Webelos to advance in rank, and it gives purpose and meaning to what might otherwise just be another patch on their shirt. It's solemn, but also fun and exciting - the boys are usually riveted to what's going on, and the parents LOVE it. The big drum sounds mighty fine in our big multi-porpose room, and I can't thank my lodge enough whenever they pull off an especially good performance.

Welcome! Always a pleasure to welcome another Cub Scouter here!

Another New Yorker, hooray! I lived in Huntington Station for a while, and in Hempstead before that - but a born Queens boy here. Welcome to the forum!

It's times like these that make me grateful my CO is sticking to boy-only Cub Scouting, lol.

Oh no! That would be tragic; my boys LOVE when the OA comes all decked out in full regalia for their Arrow of Light ceremonies! 

I note however the use of the word rumor ... I hope that is just the case here. So many stories get bandied about here sometimes, one can only hope this is one of those times when the tale proves to be unfounded. Luckily the majority of my current crop o' boys will be getting their A'sofL before NOAC! 

Most of the above posts have been correct - LDS boys are in Webelos for just a year, so as the Webelos Den Leader, I work to get them their Webelos rank AND their Arrows of Light all in the same year. It's really not too difficult; I have been at it for two years now and have never had a boy fail to earn either. And I don't use the new simplified requirements either, lol.

Also, boys were indeed automatically registered into a Varsity unit at 14, then a Venturing crew at 16 - every U.S. congregation had a Church-sponsored chartered Pack, Troop, Team and Crew of its own up until the change. But because almost nobody understood nor used the Varsity/Venturing programs effectively, we now just stick to a Pack and Troop for each congregation, with boys sticking to the Troop as long as he likes until he turns 18. As for whether this has led to the discontinuing of the Varsity program, I cannot say, though I could see that being a potential result. 

As for the boy in question, I agree with what the Guide says - just because he is held back in school does not mean he has to be help back in Scouting. We are not beholden to what the schools do with their system of advancement. If the boy is current with his Scouting activities, and has no other issues holding him back, he should absolutely move on to the next level with the other boys his age, even if he has to repeat the same school grade a dozen times. ;-)

I wouldn't use the wording "only the knot," since the knot is still an honorable indication of rank. I think part of the problem here is that people seem to have disparaging views on the Eagle knot, as though only the actual rank patch was really good enough. Why is this? Is it because it's bigger and flashier? Is it the attention we are craving? The knot is just as honorable as the rank patch. And if one really is starved for attention, there are the neckerchiefs, the slides, the belt buckles - goodness knows a hundred other ways to advertise that you are an Eagle Scout if that's what you want. Why people get hung up over the rank patch is frankly pointless to me. 

And if you really do insist on wearing the darn thing, get your Eagle earlier so you have time to wear it longer. Although I got my Eagle at 14 and I couldn't have cared two figs about whether people noticed my patches or not. 

It's a bit easier in an LDS Pack like mine; as has been mentioned, we use a simple 3-year program. At 8 a boy is a wolf, at 9 he's a bear,  and at 10 he's a Webelos Scout. At 11 they move on to the Troop in a new Scout patrol. Easy to manage, very few complications. Their Primary Sunday School classes go by year as well, so they are always with the same boys from year to year. 

Huh. I have never been charged for training, except at our Council's yearly University of Scouting event. I am Council-approved to train new Den Leaders and Cubmasters, but I have never charged any kind of fee for doing so. Interesting.

Not that I am going to start charging now, lol.

It's funny how many people want to claim that "real" Star Wars fans hated the film, yet no matter how much they pout, the numbers clearly show that the VAST majority of people loved it. 

I can easily claim to be one of the biggest Star Wars fans on this forum; no far I haven't seen anybody here who can even approach the devotion and love I have for the films (look into my costume and memorabilia collection if you have any doubts). 

But I will say this - The Last Jedi is an artful, beautiful movie, powerful in its messages, heart-breaking in its action, and deeply moving in its implications and morality. I was floored by how much I loved it, even though it was both imperfect and disappointing in some of the directions it took. But why would I let a few directorial choices ruin a perfectly good movie for me? 

People just like to hate stuff because others don't do things they way they would have. But that's life - it doesn't always take the course we wish it would. But why should we let that spoil the fun for us while we're living it? 

11 hours ago, WisconsinMomma said:

I think this is an absolutely wonderful story.  A young person with an interest in teaching is volunteering and helping the BSA with guiding younger children, with mutual benefit.  Looking at the photo, she is not wearing a uniform, and so I'm taking this as a -- here's a teen who is helping out at meetings and at camp.  That is wonderful.  And I'm glad she is recognized for it.   Not being local, I guess I'll trust the locals to understand and follow BSA policies correctly.  

As for the title den leader, I'm assuming the reporter messed up.  

Yes, and here is the crucial problem. Is it a "wonderful story?" Maybe, to some eyes. But it's terrible journalism, and it ends up spreading untruths and misconceptions about the BSA under the auspices of that "wonderful story." People get distracted by the lovely idea of a young person volunteering and making a difference, and ignore the bigger problem - that "the reporter messed up." This child cannot legally be a den leader; it would not only violate basic BSA policy, but by violating the Young Protection model, it actually means that the children involved are at risk - if this girl really is acting as a den leader, that could mean there is no legal adults supervising the children, and it would take nothing to get a lawsuit slapped onto that unit, district, council, et cetera. People are so busy feeling how cute it is for this girl that they aren't thinking about the consequences of this kind of oversight. The recognition the girl is receiving is nothing more than empty praise; the attention the BSA is getting, however, could end up getting everybody involved into trouble. 

Should the girl be encouraged to continue volunteering? Sure. But this kind of publicity, filled with misinformation and saccharine attention-getting, serves nobody. It should not be encouraged, and somebody needs to get this reporter's story straight ASAP before the units involved start getting into trouble. This girl could face serious consequences even if she is acting as a den leader without legally meeting to qualifications to do so.

If the "journalist"  who wrote this article really wanted to get a good story, she would be asking more questions and getting to the real root of the problem here. Why are the parents in this unit okay with allowing a 16 year-old to run Cub Scout activities? Why is there no legal adult supervising their children? How did she get past National's strict age qualifications for Den Leader - did she lie on her application? Or did she even turn one in? Is she merely a Den Chief posing as a Den Leader? Does anybody in her unit even know the difference, or care? Is her council beding the rules simply to get this girl in the news? Do they understand the serious repercussions they could face by not following standard Youth Protection practices? This is a serious problem!

A real news writer would be getting to the bottom of this whole charade, not pushing the kind of pointless story which does absolutely nothing to promote community awareness. I don't give two figs for the "youngest Den Leader in history," but I am deeply concerned by a child masquerading as such. This kind of story should have people asking questions and taking action, because at the end of the day, something is amiss with this whole story, and somebody needs to get to the bottom of it ASAP.

You included two different files; I went over both carefully with my Obnoxious Editor's switch turned on. In the first, the official application, you really do have to read everything carefully. I note that on the official application, the "life statement" is an integral part of the section entitled "CERTIFICATION BY APPLICANT." It is a part of that certification, which is why they don't give it a distinct requirement number. It is also immediately followed by the space for his signature. For future reference, make sure he remembers - with ANY and ALL official applications, the statements immediately preceding a signature are always ESSENTIAL - never sign anything unless that section is absolutely understood. It is different than what a Scout would be used when compared to the style used in the Scout Manual, but it is nonetheless a very normal way to format such an expectation in a technical application. Hopefully this crucial information will help him in the future.

Admittedly, it might be easier for some readers if they made the statement a little more overt. But then that's exactly what they do in the second link you included - there is a BIG box at the top of page 23, in big bold letters, making extremely clear the need to include the statement, and what it should entail. It dominates that entire page; I would be very concerned if a Scout read that and didn't understand what was being asked of him, let alone include the statement described.

I concur that there is a lot of paperwork included in the application process, and I am sure that in many way it could be streamlined. But there is also a lot of thought, preparation, reading and editing that is expected of the Scout, and learning to do so carefully is absolutely critical in life. This won't be the last form he has to fill out as he gets older, and by learning to read more carefully now, it will help him tremendously in the future with tax forms, college applications, et cetera. It was good of you to help the Scout with this application, but he should have gone over every part of it himself too just to be sure he had everything he needed. It is after all bolded in both forms and not too difficult to find nor understand. 

I empathize with you and your Scout - filling out so many forms and applications and being delayed is always frustrating, and it is only fair that you should feel enervated by the whole process. But I hope you are consoled by the fact that the grueling process of the moment is building a stronger character for the future, and that is certainly worth whatever hoops and hurdles through which one may have to jump for now. 

14 minutes ago, Tampa Turtle said:

See if you talk about this stuff long enough the Fun Police come out. Next you are gonna tell me that there is no Klingon Interpreter Strip. 

Hey now, pointing out the official policies in the interest of educating the public has nothing to do with having fun; I simply wanted to express the official stance so that those who legitimately want to know can get an answer. Would I walk up to a kid with excess patches and shout AWAY SINNER! while tearing off his patches? Of course not. But will I try to encourage correct uniforming while teaching the principles behind it? Obviously. And it can be just as fun as if I were to allow clown shoes and sequins on the uniforms; it's all in how you teach it to the kids. 

As far as leaders go, however, I just expect better. I am in no position to tell others what to do, but if people have questions, then they deserve answers. Sorry if I stepped on anybody's toes in doing so!

The NYLT strip is an official uniform item; it goes in the same location as the Trained strip would go, as detailed on official materials. I even posted a link to Scoutstuff.org so you all can see.

http://www.scoutstuff.org/bsa/uniforms-insignia/insignia-cloth/earned/emb-nylt-trained-strip.html

Any other cords, patches, or whatever are unofficial, and are not to be worn on the official uniform (along with anything else not officially sanctioned by the Guide to Awards and Insignia). You could put an extra patch centered on the right pocket as a temporary insignia, but that is the only exception. Adding cords, strips, or whatnot seems excessive to me, but beyond that, it's specifically not approved. From page 8 of the Guide to Awards and Insignia:

"Clause 10. No alteration of, or additions to,
the official badges and insignia or in the rules and
regulations governing their use or their location
upon the uniform may be authorized by any
Scouting official, local council, local executive
board, or committee except the National
Executive Board of the Boy Scouts of America
and committees specifically authorized thereof.
Proprietary backing is to be used on all official
BSA patches and emblems. Products without
appropriate backing are considered illegal."

And from page 14 of the Guide:

"Custom loops or other colors are not authorized for wear with the BSA uniform."

Sorry to all those wanting to embellish your uniforms. Finally, my favorite clause from the Guide:

"Excess Insignia: With the exception of the Cub Scout badges of rank, members wear only the insignia that show their present status in the movement. Members should make every effort to keep their uniforms neat and uncluttered. Previously earned badges and insignia—not representing present status—make a fine display on a BSA red patch vest, on a trophy hide or blanket, exhibited in the home of the recipient, or at functions where such a display is invited. Boy Scouts may wear only temporary patches (no badges of rank) on the back of the merit badge sash."

7 hours ago, numbersnerd said:

Also, I fail to see how Latin Scot's post was directed at anyone specifically as nobody was quoted, named, or otherwise singled out. More of a blanket statement, similar to others that have been issued.

I appreciate this comment. I apologize, @WisconsinMomma, if you felt my words were unkind. They were not meant to be, and if a general statement I made was erroneously taken personally, I am sorry. But they were meant to be honest, which I cannot apologize for. I do believe that making too big an issue over a small thing is unwise, and a distraction - it takes our attention from the things that matter by focusing our energies on actions and behaviors instead of on people and individuals. We can focus all we want on whether handshakes or upside-down boys are right or wrong - but by so doing, we divert our attention from the boys themselves. Never let a problem to be solved become more important than a person to be loved. 

Now, I will not bring up the matter again, as it would be ungentlemanly of me to do so, and I apologize if you mistakenly thought my comments were directed towards you, or were rude or insulting. But when others disagree about the issues with which you yourself take umbrage, I ask that you will treat them with the same respect that you have requested of me. To suggest that my words were inappropriately intoned, while at the same time manifesting an open hostility towards the comments of others who are in disagreement over the issue of Cub Scout ceremony traditions, is equally unfair. I hope we can proceed with this topic in a more civil manner, holding myself as first offender, for which I offer my most sincere apologies.

What is this "snow" of which you people speak? 

LOL nah I went to college in the Rocky Mountains and had to endure years of that awful stuff. Thank goodness I escaped back home to Orange County! It is currently 2:24 pm, and outside it is a balmy 83 degrees.