Religious Leader on the Eagle Application

[Sir_Scoutalot 10]

This year we've had several scouts earn their Eagle. We have several more Life scouts that I anticipate will be moving up, and last week we held a session discussing the Life to Eagle transition that included topics like the Eagle project, application process, etc.

 

After the meeting one of the dads came up to me with a question about the Eagle application. The scout is asked to provide several references, including a "religious" one. The scout involved has always participated in elements of the program that might involve prayer or took place in a church setting, but for whatever reason his family does not attend church. The scout or family has never made belief (or lack of belief) in God an issue.

 

Long story short, we're wondering how we might address the religious reference when this young man's ready to submit his application.

 

[scoutldr 732]

We recently had reason to scrutinize this requirement. We requested 6 letters of reference and by the date of the EBOR, only 2 had been received, one from a neighbor and one from his Dad. Rereading the requirement, the scout only needs to list the names. There is no requirement that letters of recommendation be received. The recommendation could be obtained with a phone call...or not at all. It's at the discretion of the EBOR chairman. As long as names have been listed, the Scout has met the requirement.

 

"List the names of people who know you personally and would be willing to provide a recommendation on your behalf."

 

Also, it does NOT say "Religious Leader". It just says "religious". Most of my scouts are "unchurched", so we interpret this to mean an individual who can attest to a scout's spirituality and can verify how he performs "duty to God". It doesn't need to be an ordained clergyperson.

[scottteng 11]

there are some fairly organized religions that will dispute the leader stuff too. They have no leaders all congregants being equal.

[scouter-mom 10]

The parent of the eagle candidate can be listed as his religious reference. This was pointed out at the BS Advancement Course at PTC that I attended this past summer. Hope that this helps.

[Beavah 205]

Should be any person who can attest to this boy's spirituality and belief/lived life in service of some goal/purpose/deity other than himself, eh?

 

I dislike seein' parent references for this; there's already a parent ref. Da purpose is to see how the boy has shown Scout Spirit in many different areas of his life, not just with family. I really like seein' a peer reference, or a rep. from an organization for whom the boy has done service work. Another (non-scouting) youth program leader, might be OK, too, or even the Troop Chaplain if it was a "real" position in the unit.

 

For boys who are members of a religious denomination, I'd expect to see a reference from a pastor or other elder/leader/member close to the boy in that denomination. That used to be an official rule, but I haven't seen the reference lately, so I expect it's faded. In a large church, it may not be possible for a pastor/elder to know a particular boy very well.

 

[packsaddle 753]

As I read the application, the requirement to list persons willing to act as references does not translate into a requirement for letters up front.

 

"REQUIREMENT 2. Demonstrate that you live by the principles of the Scout Oath and Law in your daily life. List the names of individuals who know you personally and would be willing to provide a recommendation on your behalf."

 

I believe it is up to the recipient of the completed application (the council) to request the letters if such are requested. So far, in all the eagles I've seen, no letter has been requested. In those cases where a letter was produced up front (by misunderstanding), the council told us not to send it.

 

I emphasize this by quoting the letter from the chief scout executive, "After completing your project and all the other requirements for the rank of Eagle Scout, complete the following steps:

1. Review the Eagle Scout Rank Application. Note that you will need to list references of people who will speak on your behalf. You will also need to prepare a statement about yourself."

You can read this yourself:

http://www.scouting.org/boyscouts/eagleproject/chief.html

 

Note the "...will speak..." part. He goes on later in the letter to say that the persons listed will be contacted, AFTER the application materials have been submitted. No mention of letters, only contact. So far, no reference I have known of has ever been contacted.

 

That said, the person to be listed as a religious leader is left to the choice of the applicant (the boy) and not subject to judgment by the board of review. He may have a question about what latitude he has for consideration of potential references but once he is informed, it is up to him. All the board needs to do is make sure such reference is listed. The council can follow up if they want.

[Beavah 205]

Yer right in general, packsaddle, but yeh might not be right in specific. Each council is allowed to determine how to handle the references. Many councils choose to request letters rather than do phonecalls or other follow-up. Most of da councils who use letters ask the boys to request the letters, rather than mailing them from council.

 

Good practice and learning opportunity for the boys, who will need to request reference letters and list references many times in their future "real" life.

 

I've generally found letters from references to be a lot of fun, and good fodder for an EBOR. They provide a lot more insight into how the boy's scoutin' has influenced his life, and lots of "starting points" for conversation.

 

[oldsm 10]

Our custom has been for the boy to list his references on the application. Then the EBOR chairman requests references from them. Sometimes it's a phone call; sometimes it's a letter requesting a written recommendation (in that case, a stamped envelope addressed to the EBOR chairman is included).

 

All recommendations are handled confidentially and made known only to the members of the EBOR. That is made clear to the people asked to provide references.

 

We don't have the scout provide any actual references - that makes it easier for people to be more candid in their responses, knowing that the scout won't see their comments.

 

It's worked well for us.

[packsaddle 753]

Beavah, Indeed that is up to the council's discretion if they so choose.

oldsm, I am curious. Where do you find the authority for the EBOR to effectively duplicate the council's responsibility? The custom must be based, sometime in the past, on some kind of authority for that practice. I would like to read it.

[evmori 11]

I have actually taken my DAC to task on the reference issue. The requirement is to list people who would be willing to give the Eagle candidate a reference. Nothing about the Eagle candidate or Troop supplying letters. It is up to the DAC to get the references or request them from the Eagle candidate or Troop.

 

When I was the SM, an Eagle candidate in my Troop showed up for his Eagle BOR & the DAC asked where his reference letters were. He said

 

"What letters?"

 

The DAC looked at me & I asked my Eagle Candidate

 

"Did anyone form the District Advancement Committee ask you to bring letters with you?"

 

He answered no. I told the DAC no one informed me they were required. The DAC said

 

"It's on the application."

 

I responded

 

"There is no requirement to supply the references, only the names of people who would be willing to give the Eagle candidate a reference if asked. The requirement was completed by the Eagle candidate. You didn't do your job."

 

My Scout had his Eagle BOR & passed with flying colors. Never supplied reference letters.

 

If the DAC had requested them from my Eagle candidate or myself, we would have supplied them.

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[Beavah 205]

Oldsm's method is the one in common use in our council. If a council does unit-level EBOR's, then the EBOR chair is typically a unit committee member, with a visitin' district or council representative on the board. So the council's procedure is to supply Life Scouts with reference letter requests to give to those who are listed as references, which are mailed (or these days, emailed) to the troop EBOR chair.

 

I've never figured' on why so many folks online get their rabbits in a briar patch over havin' an Eagle candidate ask references for letters. Seems like a pretty trivial show of responsibility on the part of the candidate, and in exchange he gets a higher-quality BOR than if a council secretary made cursory phonecalls.

 

Gettin' back to Sir Scoutalot's bit, I found da new version of the reference I was talkin' about:

 

"If a boy says he is a member of a religious body, the standards by which he should be evaluated are those of that group. This is why the application for the Eagle Scout Award requests a reference from his religious leader to indicate whether he has lived up to their expectations." (ACP&P #33088D, p. 45)

 

 

 

[packsaddle 753]

Ed, it seems clear to me as well.

Beavah, one source of the consternation that you question could be that different boys might not be held to the same requirements (such as those actually written on the application). However, between councils there evidently is a great deal of variation in the process - as shown in the reponses in this thread. Local option seems to be exercised. Therefore I would mostly be concerned if the process was not consistent, in that case, WITHIN the council.

You give one scenario in which the council delegates the authority to a local EBOR. Nevertheless, your scenario seems to go against the letter from the chief. Did you read it?

 

Don't get me wrong, I'm for local option all the way. If the process is consistent for all units within that council, I suppose that is fair within that council. Let's just make it clear that local option is now acceptable and that councils can make modifications to scouting that optimize the program for their council.

 

However, if there is unit-to-unit variability, the requirements may not be applied to all the boys in the same manner. EBORs at the unit level would seem to be more susceptible to that and that, to me, would be a problem. The simplest way to avoid it is for everyone, including the council, to adhere to the rather simple and clear requirements stated on the application, and emphasized by the chief. If the requirements are set at the national level, then there should be nationwide consistency in their application. There clearly isn't.

But, like I say, if local option is the way to go, someone needs to make that clear so that we (locally) can start to make some changes.

[Venividi 35]

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.

 

 

[Beavah 205]

What Venividi said.

 

Standardization in education and other human endeavors is a chimera. It uniformly results in lowered expectations and mediocrity.

 

 

 

[packsaddle 753]

You're kidding aren't you? Are you telling me that Illinois has a university?

 

I guess I'm trying to play the role of someone who used to post here very often, he was nicknamed after a type of quail. Anyway, what you suggest for unit-to-unit discretion regarding rank requirements may have the merit of allowing infinite 'tweaking' to accommodate local needs. It also has the weakness of supporting no actual standard for the BSA program. To carry the local option idea to its extreme, BSA should merely be a franchise operation that loosely requires a uniform (with local options allowed), a set of loose guidelines for the program (not to mention G2SS, etc.), and suggested ranks that could be added to or ignored locally. AND, by unit, the membership requirements can also be decided locally thus eliminating all the fuss over gays and atheists.

While I think this is an intriguing possibility, I suspect that most scouters (at least reading these forums) would lean toward the other end and expect (require?) rather rigid standards and regulations. Do you see my point?

 

Edited part: Aw heck, let's have some fun. Think of the current BSA structure as the former Soviet Union with its rigid authoritarian rule, no open dissent, strict control on trademark, etc. And think of local option in terms of the Confederacy, a loosely organized group of independent states, or perhaps the Balkan region where every little population decided to create a sovereign state, OR perhaps the Protestant churches where (it seems) groups are splitting off ad libitum. Structure and order on one hand, chaos on the other? Have a nice day.

Such fun.(This message has been edited by packsaddle)