Den Chief for Star, Life & Eagle?

[KCM75 10]

Den Chief is listed as POR for all three upper ranks, so it appears possible a scout could advance all the way to Eagle without ever holding another position in the troop.

 

This seems like a very bad idea. I have heard Scoutmasters say they will only approve Den Chief for one rank advancement so the scout will get more experience, but I'm not sure if this would stand up under appeal.

 

Is there anything a Scoutmaster can do to prevent it?

 

KCM

[epalmer84 10]

The senior patrol leader and the Scoutmaster appoint junior leaders such as the den chief. If the SPL and SM have kept a Scout in any position, then the issue is not with the Scout.

 

Ed

[CalicoPenn 729]

Den Chief is listed as a POR for every rank where a POR is required for advancement. It is a POR that is just as important to a Troops operations as PL and SPL - Den Chief's are responsible for more recruitment into the BSA, and into Troops, than any other position.

 

If a lad is a duly appointed Den Chief, then his time in service counts - if a rank is denied because Den Chief isn't good enough, it will be reversed on appeal - and likely with some very hard questions directed at the "leaders" who denied the rank for this reason.

 

Could a Scoutmaster prevent it? Sure, by not appointing a lad as a Den Chief for more than one term. Is this a wise thing for a Scoutmaster to do? No - in fact, it would be pretty dang stupid of a Scoutmaster to do - and I'd question the judgment and temperment of any Scoutmaster who did so.

 

Frankly, any Scoutmaster that makes those kind of ignorant statements don't deserve to be Scoutmasters and shouldn't be allowed within 10 feet of any BSA leadership postionb since it's obvious they are much more interested in wielding power and being an obstacel, then being a mentor and guide.

 

Calico

[Stosh 3452]

My first reaction would be WHY? Position of Responsibility means just that. It does not mean Position of Responsibility only to the troop. As far as I can tell, this DC might in fact be the most important position for the troop. It definitely signifies the future of the Troop! What better way to inspire and motivate Cub Scouts to move on into YOUR troop than to have an Star/Life/Eagle scout Den Chief?!!! You too can be an Eagle! What a totally awesome PR, inspiration, leadership example can one give to a young Webelo scout?

 

A SM would be a total fool to withhold DC responsibilities for his troop by limiting it only to inexperienced scouts on a six-month rotation.

 

Every DC I have had over the past 15 years has earned the National Den Chief Award (one year commitment) and many of them stayed on for 2-3 YEARS working with the Cub dens! Keep it in mind that those "useless POR" DC's will make excellent TG's as well when they decide to finally move with their boys through the cross-over into NSP's.

 

Sorry for the rant, but I did my WB ticket on this process and if it wasn't for highly skilled, dedicated DC's a lot of Cubs would never have continued on into Boy Scouting. As a matter of fact out of the 8 Webelos cross-over's I had when I was doing my WB ticket, 7 of them Eagled and a lot of that had to do with my DC at the time!!!!

 

Of the 14 Webelos boys that were eligible for Scouting a couple of years ago, 7 of them crossed over and 7 walked away. This den had no DC.

 

 

Stosh

[Horizon 97]

Den Chief is not only a POR, I consider it a leadership position as well. I would be more concerned about a boy advancing to Eagle who had never held anything other than Librarian and Bugler if I were to question the POR list.

 

However, BSA requires a POR, not a leadership role. In truth, not all boys are made to be Patrol Leader, Senior Patrol Leader or Assistant Patrol Leader. The Troop needs boys at several positions, and Den Chief is a crucial one.

 

 

[theysawyoucomin' 10]

I think DCs are wonderful. I had one for two years as a DL. One of my WB ticket items was the focus of DC activity manual.

 

I feel the BSA used to think that a DC was quite important as for the first six years of "cubbing" from '30 to '36 all there was was a DC, no den Mother-no adult. Norman Rockwell painted two paintings of DC and only one of the SM so he or the folks that paid him thought it was important.

 

My First Class Scout son is getting rained on at his second Cub camp with his den as I type this. He has grown up a lot during his year as a DC. Now the boy wants to be a PL. Last year the kid never would have ventured out of his "safe" zone.

 

I too would agree that the boy should vary his leadership experience and be encouraged to do so.

My DC went on to be the SPL and did a fine job.

A boy should know how to lead those younger than him and also his peers.

I don't think it is stupid to vary a Scouts POR. I would be mad if my son's SM made sure he was only the historian for his time in Scouting. If you are a good DC you are liable to do well at other things. Is it important for a young man to accomplish varied tasks in a safe environment?

 

My opinion is that a boy should not be an Eagle unless he has served as at least a PL.

 

I would think DC, then quartermaster, then PL or SPL would be ideal.

 

Being a DC with the same DL and the same den would be limiting to a Scout's experience. Sure it would pass an appeal but what's best for the boy?

 

Alas I think the BSA cheats a boy by saying you can be an Eagle if you have been a librarian as a FC, a Scribe as a Star and a bugler as a Life Scout.

 

I agree with Calico on importance but not the Scout's "well round experience"(my quote)

 

An Eagle can soar on sunny days and cloudy days.

 

Would you want your son to look back and say "I had a couple different jobs in Scouts. I worked with Cubs, accounted for Troop gear, did paperwork for the SPL, kept a scrapbook of the Troops history and led my own group of 8 boys on a camping trip all by myself".

 

or

 

For three years I planned meetings with Mr Kircher and led the boys up from Bear to Weebs 1 and 2. We did crafts and played games. I taught them to use a pocket knife. I taught them to fish. they really grew up as I did during that time. I helped the boys transition into the Troop and it was fun.

 

I agree with KCM. But I don't make the rules.

 

KCM do you have a boy that only wants to do that or are you just asking?

[NeilLup 13]

There is nothing saying that a Scout can hold only one position of resonsibility. Normally the time of a pack/den meeting is different from that of a Troop meeting. So a Scout can be a Den Chief and also be PL, SPL, ASPL or any other job if the Scout and the Troop leadership so desire.

 

Den Chief and particularly Webelos Den Chief can be great leadership opportunities. As was very correctly pointed out, a Scout can meet the position of responsibility requirement by serving as Librarian or Historian. I believe that Den Chief represents much more leadership than Historian or Librarian.

 

Plus there's tha matter of the Scoutmaster's Conference from the previous rank. The SM can counsel with the Scout and pretty strongly suggest that the Scout take some other job rather than Den Chief or in addition to Den Chief if the SM thinks that's most appropriate.

[scoutmaster52 10]

Star Scouts, Life scouts and Eagle Scouts acting as Den Chiefs? What a great concept. Who better to show what Boy Scouts is all about. What a great billboard to continue Scouting.

 

Besides being a Den Chief can be demanding. Have you ever tried to herd cats?

[scottteng 11]

It til now has never been a problem because the boys who are den chief's have also had other POR's with the troop along the way. Some of the boys do much better with the cubs they succumb to peer pressure to goof around when with their peers then the most amazing transition takes place. The very things the lad has been scolded about will come out of his mouth at the den meetings. If there was someone who wanted to just do Den Chief I would try to find out why and closely monitor his performance. Their are plenty of troop POR's that really do not require much leadership just some work and dedication. Den chief requires leadership just at a different age level and don't forget it also means interacting with a den leader as well.

[shortridge 184]

Not every boy is cut out to be a den chief. Not every den is cut out to have a den chief. If your Scout's experience falls into one of those two categories, then suggest he move into a different position or take a gig with a different den.

 

If the job is executed properly, a den chief should be running much of the meeting, IMHO. I served as a den chief with two different dens for about five years total, and herding cats is the understatement of the year! The job - again, properly done - involves program planning, adult relationships, discipline, skills instruction and training ... the whole kit 'n' kaboodle that we supposely look for.

 

When I started working on summer camp staff - half the summer Boy Scouts, half the summer Cubs - my den chief experience gave me an instant edge. You could tell who the former den chiefs were on staff just by looking at how they interacted with the Cubs.

 

I've heard tell of some troops that encourage first-year Scouts to become den chiefs. Bad, bad decision, IMHO. You need maturity and experience to become a den chief - it's not simply a matter of being a few years older than the Cubs involved.

 

If you have concerns about your Scout's duties - does the den not do much? is the den leader overbearing? do you hear negative reports that he acts more like one of the Cubs than as a leader? - talk it over with the den leader and Cubmaster. Handle it on a case-by-case basis. But for gosh's sake, don't issue a ridiculous blanket ban.

 

Would you do the same for a Scout who was elected SPL for three terms in a row? Why or why not?

[John-in-KC 311]

I agree with those who question DC to Star, again DC to Life, and again DC to Eagle as their major POR. The Scout may not get a "well-rounded" experience in leadership.

 

Now, if I remember correctly, the Den Chiefs Cord requires a year of service to keep. If a Scout is trained and is doing his Den Chief the way it should be done, he may well use his spare Scouting time in that POR. Good time management may mean he doesn't go after a concurrent in-Troop POR.

 

That said, I've no problems with Den Chief as a warrant office or POR for Star, Life and Eagle. A good Den Chief helps bring home the bacon in terms of recruiting the next years' worth of kids from Cubs to Boys...

 

 

[Bob White 20]

How exactly does one measure a "well rounded expereience"? The requirement is to actively serve in any of the stated positions for a specified minimum time. The BSA does not require that the the scout hold different positions. Although the odds are that he will, it is important to remember the he is not required to.

 

It would be in the best interest of the scout to focus on what the requirement IS, rather than what some individuals would prefer it to be.

[Bob White 20]

How exactly does one measure a "well rounded expereience"? The requirement is to actively serve in any of the stated positions for a specified minimum time. The BSA does not require that the the scout hold different positions. Although the odds are that he will, it is important to remember the he is not required to.

 

It would be in the best interest of the scout to focus on what the requirement IS, rather than what some individuals would prefer it to be.

[shortridge 184]

John-in-KC wrote:

 

I agree with those who question DC to Star, again DC to Life, and again DC to Eagle as their major POR. The Scout may not get a "well-rounded" experience in leadership.

 

The same concern could be expressed about a Scout who serves in a single POR for 16 months - not unheard of in some units. Leadership of a single patrol is far different than leadership as a senior patrol leader, and does not necessarily result in a well rounded experience. (It should, but not always.)

 

PORs are not POLs. For better or for worse, the key word is "responsibility," not "leadership." If leadership experience were the objective, scribe, historian, bugler, librarian, etc., wouldn't be included except in large units. (Wouldn't a bugle corps be great?)

 

It seems the broader question is whether the POR requirements should be changed to require different positions for different ranks - one for Star, another for Life and a third for Eagle.

[John-in-KC 311]

Shortridge,

 

I'd have to retrieve my copy of my BS Handbook, but the list has been fairly stable for going on 40 years. As I recall, I used Scribe to get from Star to Life, but PL to get from 1C to Star. SPL was there, but I chose not to use it.

 

Yes, it is responsibility, not leadership. The Warrant Offices of my generation (instructor, bugler, Scribe, Den Chief) were that way as well.

 

To BW: This is a matter best worked through locally between SM and young man. I personally think a broader exposure of duties is better for a young man ... just as I took a year of auto mechanics in HS, though I never intended to enter the craft. I knew more about my car, and could save myself some money. The young man who has held an array of jobs learns more about how the whole thing fits together.

 

It's not a matter of what is right or what is wrong, it's a matter of how does a SM best assist a young man in his growth and development.