What is an active Scout?

[John-in-KC 311]

B,

 

Wait'll Nusplash finds he has even less leeway with "Scout Spirit" than he does with "Active". Scout Spirit has been consistent, edition to edition of the BS Handbook (and other documents back to the source) for many years! Live the Oath and Law, Motto and Slogan in your everyday life!!!

 

May I suggest, Nusplash, you buy your District Advancement Chairman a breakfast and visit over "what right looks like" inside your own district and Council.

 

 

[FScouter 24]

The first paragraph on page 169 of the Boy Scout Handbook has a fairly concise definition of active.

If one is looking for the rule of law; a hard and fast definition of active, it is not to be found. However, if one reads the publications listed, it becomes clear what active means and how it applies to advancement.

 

A troop that writes up a hard definition is missing the point. It is the understanding of what active means that is key to how it applies to advancement. Understanding comes from reading the publications and working with the program. A Scouting program cant be run from a book of rules. It requires knowledge and wisdom. One gets the knowledge from the publications and the wisdom from applying the knowledge to the program.

[nusplash 10]

I would like to describe someone who I am sure we have all met at some time or another. We have a boy in the troop who has been a Life Scout for 2 years. He filled his POR in the first year, but has only gone on 1 campout this past year. He comes to meetings once every 4 to 8 weeks, he would rather talk to his friends including the current SPL then participate when he is attending a meeting. He paid his registration fee, and is paid up on dues. In his mind he is active, in my mind he is not. Who is right? When we try to engage him at meetings he is full of excuses, and can't seem to give more than lip service to trying to organise an Eagle project. We haven't given up on him, and now that he is 17-1/2 yrs old I think he is finally starting to get it. The problem I see is with the negative influence on the younger boys. I think the Adult leadership in the Troop needs some tools and guidlines to encourage these boys and others who might think this behavior is OK to improve.

[John-in-KC 311]

Thanks for the additional information. Given what we've seen/heard in the past few months, here is the reality check:

 

If, based on your Troops or your personal definition of active:

 

Deny this young man permission to begin an ELSP, you can reasonably expect the District Advancement Committee, or the Council Advancement Committee to override you.

 

Deny the Scout his Eagle SM conference, or refuse to sign his Eagle app, you can reasionably expect he will win an appeal at Council, if not National.

 

The EBOR denies the Scout elevation to Eagle, you can reasonably expect he will win an appeal at Council, if not National.

 

If there are other, legitimate, documentable reasons to hold him on the trail short of Eagle, you need to bring your UC and the District Advancement Chairman into the loop posthaste.

 

You need to visit with your District Advancement Chairman on Monday.

 

I'm sorry to be forthright, but preserving your credibility as Scoutmaster is important. Being over-ridden by District and Council does not serve your credibility as SM.

 

Visit with your DAC. Monday. Please!!!(This message has been edited by John-in-KC)

[Beavah 205]

We have a boy in the troop who has been a Life Scout for 2 years. He filled his POR in the first year, but has only gone on 1 campout this past year. He comes to meetings once every 4 to 8 weeks, he would rather talk to his friends including the current SPL then participate when he is attending a meeting.... The problem I see is with the negative influence on the younger boys.

 

Yah, this is where FScouter's "wisdom" comes in, eh?

 

Some would say it's the unit's/SM's fault. They have not succeeded in "engaging" the boy. Therefore, since we shouldn't penalize a boy for adult failings, the boy should get Eagle regardless of whether or not he's showing good scout spirit, or responsibility, or being active. This is National's current "thing." At its core, it believes adults are responsible for advancement.

 

That may be a piece of what's goin' on, eh? I think we gotta be reflective and look at ourselves and say "can we do better at programmin' for boys like this? More high adventure perhaps? Better job buildin' mentoring relationships?

 

The other side of the coin is that it's a boy's (and family's) choice. He may like his Scouting friends, but his real interest lies in sports, or band, or hangin' out at the mall, or for any of a number of reasons he's not willing or able to put in the level of commitment it takes to grow and advance in the program. This view, that it's the boy's choice and responsibility, is really at the core of my view of Scoutin'. But to work, boys need to experience genuine results and consequences from their choices. If he doesn't cook dinner, nobody else comes along and does it for 'im, he just doesn't eat. If he doesn't participate regularly, he's still a friend and welcome guest but he's no longer a member, or at least not eligible for awards. The results of different choices have to be readily apparent to all the boys in the troop, so that each boy learns how to make his own good choices.

 

By that measure, lettin' a boy be a "hanger on" and a poor example, and then get our highest award, does immeasurable damage to all da boys in the program. Poor examples aren't somethin' we want to have a lot of in a youth program.

 

So which are yeh? Do you believe adults or youth are responsible for advancement?

 

The former calls for lettin' the boy by, and maybe workin' better in the future. The latter calls for upholdin' "natural consequences of choices", while still buildin' mentoring relationships that help kids succeed at those real challenges they choose to engage with. And recognizin' them when they succeed.

 

Beavah

 

[OldGreyEagle 5]

So he was good enough to register, but he is not good enough to keep?

[evmori 11]

I would say, nusplash, he is not active. He only participates when he wants to & even then he really isn't there.

 

Ed Mori

1 Peter 4:10

[John-in-KC 311]

Unfortunately, Ed, our opinions will not survive if the young man appeals to National. They probably will not survive at District, should he be turned down at unit level to begin a ELSP.

 

We have to be smarter than the program experts at the Boy Scout Division.