Ask the Expert: The BSA’s ‘active’ requirement

[AlFansome]

 

I saw this on Scouting Magazine's Facebook page today and thought I would start what could be yet another long, drawn out discussion of "active"... :-)

 

It is interesting that they have reviewed "active" recently at National and made no changes.

 

 

From Scouting Magazine's blog at http://blog.scoutingmagazine.org/2009/12/ask-the-expert-1.html ...

 

-- beginning of snippet from Scouting Magazine's blog --

 

We at Cracker Barrel feel geographically blessed to be in the same building as most of the Boy Scouts of Americas major decision-makers.

 

So when one of you comes to us with a question about Scouting policy, we know how to find the answer. That was the case when Clarke Green had a question about advancement. Clarke writes:

 

Many troops have adopted a policy that interprets the active requirement as attending a specific minimum percentage of meetings and outings. This seems to be in contradiction to the BSA policy forbidding adding or subtracting from requirements. Are troops permitted to add these percentages to requirements?

 

The short answer: No. For the official reasoning, we went to Bill Evans, team leader of youth development for the BSA. Heres what Bill told us:

 

Good question. As the writer states, it is true and stated several times in the Advancement Policies and Procedures Guide that neither, councils, districts, nor units may add to, modify, or delete BSA advancement policies. This rule is highlighted, bold, and in a box so people wont miss it. If a unit does modify the active requirement as the writer suggests, it could come back to haunt them if the youth appeals a negative decision based on that modification. The national advancement taskforce just revisited the definition of active and, after great discussion, decided to leave it as it is. Units may not add a percentage of meetings to attend.

 

We hope that clears up your question, Clarke.

 

-- end of snippet from Scouting Magazine's blog ---

[evmori]

The definition of active as National defines it means if the boy is on your charter, he's active. Since that is what National wants, when a boy doesn't show for a period of time & never lets you know why, drop him like a bad habit! Problem solved!

[scoutldr]

That's fine until recharter time when the DE and/or DC take it upon themselves to personally call each "dropped" member and convince them to remain on the books, then bill your unit for the fee.

[Eagle92]

I actually posted a response over there. Since it's a moderated forum, don't know if the question or answer will be posted

 

 

Real quick question,if Registered = Active, then why is that not policy across the board for all BSA awards and recognitions?

 

One example is the Venturing Gold Award

Venturing Gold Award candidates must be active and registered [emphasisis added] Venturers for at least 12 months before final qualification.

taken from

http://www.scouting.org/scoutsource/Venturing/Awards/gold.aspx

 

Other examples include teh Sea Scout ranks that require, i.e from the QUARTEMASTER requirements Membership. Attend at least 75 percent [emphasis added] of ship meetings and activities for 18 months. Present a talk on Sea Scouting and complete a service project.

 

 

 

 

[Twocubdad]

While they are fortunate to share a building with the BSA "decision makers" apparently the folks who publish the handbook are somewhere off site. In the brand new, hot-off-the-press edition, requirement one for Star, Life and Eagle still says "BE ACTIVE...." If and when BSA changes the requirement to read "Be a registered member of the Boy Scouts of America..." or when the common, every-day English language meaning of the words "be active" changes, then I -- and many other leaders -- will accept the rediculous idea that active equals registered.

 

In reality, Mr. Evans's answer is another non-responsive response. It doesn't deal with the real issue that all a Scout need do to meet the requirement is mail in his registration fee once a year. Few people will disagree that a hard, inflexible percentage figure is inconsistent with the philosophies of Scouting. We need to consider each Scout's situation individually and consider what active should mean. But the idea that a Scout could fulfill the requirement and never attend a single meeting or activity is beyond inconsistent with the mission, aims, methods or purposes of the program.

 

Just for fun, let's look at some other requirements and apply the active=registered logic:

 

Second Class Requirement 3a. "Since joining, have participated in five separate troop/patrol activities...." The Scout registers to attend five separate activities, but doesn't actually show up for any of them. Of course his leaders have an obligation to contact him and let him know how the activities went.

 

Tenderfoot requirement 4a. "Demonstrate how to whip and fuse the ends of a rope." The scout sets up a DVD and plays the appropriate segment from the BSA basic skills DVD.

 

Eagle Requirement 3. "Earn a total of 21 merit badges." The Scout mows lawns and rakes leaves to earn money then buys the 21 merit badges on eBay.

 

Star Requirement 4. "While a Life Scout, take part in service projects totalling at least six hours of work." The Scout attends another Scout's Eagle project work day and stays for about 15 minutes. Overall the project totals more than 6 hours. Of course we have learned above that he really didn't need to show up for the 15 minutes, he could have simply registered to attend and done nothing.

 

Supply division better gear up to produce more rank patches and Eagle medals.(This message has been edited by Twocubdad)

[Twocubdad]

I just clicked on the blog and read it. Here's the very first response:

 

 

 

"It is nice to get some insight from National BSA on issues such as this. As a volunteer it's frustrating that we don't get more clear guidance on what should be simple policies.

 

"On this specific question, however, the policy seems to be there is no policy. If "active" means "registered", then change the requirement to "registered".

 

"Otherwise we'll continue to interpret "active" as, well, "active".

 

John Shepard

SM T25 Sioux Council

 

 

 

 

You tell 'em John!

[evmori]

I really wonder why National doesn't want to deal with this. Wait! I know. $$$$$$$$$$$$

[BadenP]

It could also mean that National, via Evans, feels it just is not an important enough requirement to worry about since just being registered meets the "active" requirement in their eyes. So IMHO give that requirement the same importance as National does, ZERO.

[scoutldr]

That's it in a nutshell...$$$ and numbers. When recalcitrant Scouters such as us start dropping inactive names from the rolls, it directly affects the only metrics they know...money and membership.

[John-in-KC]

Since I'm a UC in one of my hats, I've made some of the "lost boy" phone calls. Trust me, the Scoutmasters, CCs and CORs in my district would kill our DE team if they signed kids back up without paying unit fees as well as national fees...

[emb021]

Sorry, but to me "Active == registered" is a nonsense idea.

 

Most organizations have the concept that "active" means you are ACTIVE with the organization: you attend meetings/events, etc. Not just that you'd paid your dues.

 

Heck, most organizations have membership classes, the most common ones being "Active" and "Associate", where to be "Active" you must met a minimum number of requirements (attending meetings, coming to events, etc), which means you get to vote/hold office. If you can't met the requirements for active, you are associate.

 

So, to me, to be active in scouting must mean more then just registered.

 

Further, most state/national orgs that have local chapters (whatever they may be called), usually leave it up to each of these local groups to set THEIR active requirements. For whatever reason, BSA National doesn't seem to want to allow its units to do this.

 

Sea Scouting avoids this problems by working into their requirements active requirements like attending a set percentage of events.

[Twocubdad]

You bettcha, John. Let's not forget a membership application still requires the unit leader's signature.

 

In addition to basic M&M concerns, active=registered is a bureaucratic response to a problem the bureauracy can't handle: appeals of subjective requirements.

 

Can you imagine national trying to subjectively decide appeals of scout spirit, "Be active" and "Serve actively"? How can national apply standards to subjective requirements which ultimately come down to both individual units' intrepretation and expectations for the requirements AND the individual situation of each Scout? The options are limited:

 

1) Lawyer it to death. Be prepared for explainations of the requirement running into tens of thousands of words with regular updates based on recent appeals and exceptions. Scoutmasters and advancement chairmen will need annual training on the changes.

 

2)Trust the local units and councils to apply reasonable standards. For this to work, national would have to give up control over these requirements and who wants to hold their breath until that happens?. I believe our unit has reasonable expectations for these requirements which comply with equally reasonable instructions from our coucil advancement committee. Unfortunatly, those instructions come with the caveat that we're unlikely to prevail on appeal even if we follow the instructions.

 

3) Change or delete these requirements. They could do this one of two ways, either by actually changing or dropping them, which they seem unwilling to do. Or they can gut the requirements by making them meaningless, which is what they've done.

 

My personal speculation is that national is between a rock and a hard place in how to deal with this. On the one hand, these requirements -- to participate in activities, to show leadership/responsibility and to live by the Scout Oath and Law -- cut to the very core of the program. To eliminate them would evicerate the basics of Scouting. On the other hand, administering these requirments on the national level is difficult.

 

The compromise? A faustian deal on the model of "don't ask, don't tell." Units and councils are free to implement reasonable expectations for how Scouts meet these requirement. (Has anyone failed their advancement audit over this?) Reasonable expectations are okay, firm percentages are out. As long as no one complains, everyone is happy. Government by consent of the governed, so to speak. But when the metal hits the meat, and someone complains or appeals, national throws up its hands defaults to their easy, one-policy-fits-all, least common denominator interpretations.

[BadenP]

emb 021

According to Bill Evans what you Sea Scouts are doing is adding to the requirement which he says you are specifically not allowed to do. How many scout leaders among us have told a scout that since he has not been active in the troop he couldn't be promoted in rank at this time, who knew we were all in violation of National policy. Really makes you wonder just what if any scouting expertise there really is at National anymore, lol.

[Eagle92]

BP,

Sorry I forgot to post the link that shows the requirements for QUARTERMASTER. It is the following

http://www.scouting.org/scoutsource/Venturing/Awards/quarter.aspx

 

Also for ABLE it is found here http://seascout.org/about/program/advancement/able.html

 

#

Active Membership

3 Attend at least 75 percent of your ship meetings and special activities for one year.

Note: Check with your ship's yeoman.

 

4 Serve effectively either as an elected petty officer of your ship or as the chair of a major ship activity.

References: See "Election of Petty Officers" on page 5 and "Conducting the Activities" on page 61.

Web Reference: Ethics: Scouting is a game with a purpose

 

For ORDINARY here http://seascout.org/about/program/advancement/ordinary.html

 

#

Active Membership

3 Attend at least 75 percent of your ship's meetings and special activities for six months. Note: Check with your ship's yeoman.

 

4 Complete quarterdeck training, either as a petty officer or as a prospective petty officer, as provided and required by your ship and council. Web Reference: Quarterdeck Seminar

 

Only APPRENTICE has no percetnage, only insure that your dues are paid, and you have a uniform under membership

 

http://seascout.org/about/program/advancement/apprentice.html

[emb021]

Thanks Eagle92.

 

That was my point about Sea Scouts. The active requirements are built into the advancement requirements, so there are no such issues. Its been that way since Commander Keane developed the original requirements back in the 1920s.