Is it Once and Done?

[Tampa Turtle 1011]

In retrospect I think it is wise to allow a WDL who crosses over to take a 6 month break or at least go on "light duties" before doing a lot of ASM stuff. You need the adjustment time. However the pressing needs of providing enough ASM's preclude this.

 

We have been having our 1st year ASM's who go to Summer camp get SM training. All come back with new eyes. Even if we disagree with BSA national policy at least we are on the same page and usually doing something better.

 

As a guy with some health issues I realize that I have a vested interest in the boys really knowing their stuff in case something happens.

[Eagle92 110]

I know some folks complain, heck I heard complaints from two CS leaders whose sons will cross over next year, but I like it when parents are either discouraged from going on camp outs, or if the do come, are asked to stay in certain areas away from the Scouts, until they are completely trained. I do not know if my troop had that policy or not, but I do know that the adults had their own set of activities to do in camp, some of it similar to what the boys were doing, and we didn't see parents, and rarely other adults, except in passing and at campfires.

 

To paraphrase Master Yoda, Cub Scout leaders have much to unlearn.

[Tampa Turtle 1011]

DL's who have attended a good Brownsea with their Webelos tend to start figuring it out. It can be hard. I have had to physically turn my chair around so I cannot see my son abuse --I mean erect-- his tent.

[fred8033 1599]

Why does everyone assume you have no experience, no training or your a hovering cub scout parent if you assert a different position? I guess it's natural. My natural reaction to different scouting opinions is that I'm dealing with a cumodgeon using fuzzy bifocals to remember their youth and creatively interpreting BSA published documents to justify recreating their 1960s experience. But that's my bias. No offense intended.

 

...

 

Eagle92: You asked about my scouting history? Sort of funny you ask. There's a local troop that requires scouts to show up with an updated printed scouting resume before they will start a BOR. That's their "standard". It's not really a bad idea and there's plenty of good to justify it ... except it's not in the BSA program. But it's their troop and they can do what they want and still call it scouting because it's their standard.

 

...

 

My scouting resume... No scouting as a youth though I tried to join it several times. Mom was sick and Dad traveled. I had many other youth activities and was busy with school. Lettered five times in high school. BA and MS degrees.

 

Started scouting with my 1st son in Sept 2000. Cubs scouts: Registered as CC and COR from 2002 to current. Served as WDL in 2003-2005. Boy Scouts: Registered as MC Mar 2005-2009 and CC 2009-current though I was essentially a CC for years earlier as our CC lost his wife. I'm trained for all pack and troop positions and my first boy scout class was SM/ASM specific leadership in Apr/May 2005. As for training, MyScouting.org lists me as having 85 training courses. That's light as I never used my BSA ID or even signed in for several years until I learned the word ScoutNet. MyScouting.org does list WB, Trainers Edge, IOLS, OWLS, BALOO, WFA, archery instructor and others. First YP was back in 2002. Been attending roundtable consistently since 2002. District committee staff for three years. This was my first year teaching at Univ of Scouting.

 

I have four sons. My oldest son now has 150+ nights camping with the troop, 15+ nights with jamoboree, multiple high adventures and probably another 120+ nights over three years as camp staff. I only know this because I was reviewing his records as he prepared his Eagle Scout paperwork. My second son has similar history but he's 13 years old.

 

Our scoutmaster's on his 21st year in the troop and 14th year as scoutmaster. We effectively have two ASMs. One was the former SM and has been in scouting for sixty years. Now he runs the high adventure. The other supports the troop guide and likes to teach skills. I joke with our troop leaders that as they work with the scouts, I work with the adults. It's the same stuff just different size. Accountability. Behavior. Attitude. Focus. I also teach skills such as putting your hands in your pockets and playing cribbage, hearts, .... Most importantly, my job is to keep adults away from the scouts. I've been told I'm pretty good at that though a bit too obvious at times.

 

...

 

Yep, I've watched "Follow Me Boys" many times. Good movie though a bit mechanical. My sons enjoyed it. I always wondered how the unemployed drunk father could afford all that ice cream and what a waste that it melted. And I remember the Whitey scene. Wasn't he with a bunch of other scouts who had been in scouts longer than him? Many were probably also equal rank and they were clueless. That's life. In emergencies and on demand, people often can't perform. Under pressure performance is learned thru repetition. i.e. program.

 

...

 

You mentioned that scouts allowed to camp in the past. ... with permission of scoutmaster and parents. Sort of an important check and balance, eh? Perhaps the reason it's been removed is because scouts were never really automatically ready to camp on their own if they were first class. Perhaps they were only ready after being in the program for years and years.

 

...

 

Eagle92, I'm okay with the document quotes you list. So if the requirement is "demonstrate a taut line", then I'm fully fine with "must pass, to the satisfaction of the recognized local scout authorities." and troops maintaining healthy standards. But it means your troop having a good standard for "demonstrate a taut line". Not and setting up dining flies on two camp outs. Not and creating your own rope. Not and properly coiling and storing a rope. Not and blindfolded and behind your back. It means demonstrate a taut line. If there's hesitation or not a clean knot, then they need to develop their skill. The standard is about what's required and not about what's not mentioned.

 

It also means passing the test (singular, no retest). That's explicit in the program. Once a requirement is complete it's complete. Heck, how many times have I heard people say "once an Eagle, always an Eagle." Sounds like selective emphasis.

 

...

 

It's interesting that you quoted the 1965 2nd class hiking requirements. I really think that is what's going on. People are remembering the past different than it really existed. It's a different era and we need to present the scouting program as BSA documents it. Fifty years ago, scouts skinny dipped. Adults had a whiskey or beer for around their camp fire. And yes even physical intimidation at times. But that was 50 years ago.

 

...

 

The 1965 requirement you quoted was "2(a) Take three hikes, each on a different day, of not less than 5 miles each with your troop, your patrol, an adult, or another Scout ( all emphasis mine) who is at least Second class (b)Before each hike submit a hike plan for approval...." Nothing mentions mastery except getting a hike plan approved. It's just three hikes. And that requirement doesn't exist anymore.

 

It's interesting we're discussing "mastery" for the lower ranks and the high ranks emphasize merit badges. Merit badges are just "introductions" to the topics. Interesting.

 

...

 

I agree that we need to teach scouts skills they can use anytime. That's what the whole scouting program is for. All parts of it. Advancement is just one part.

 

Eagle92 wrote: - "BUT what is a SM suppose to do if a Scout cannot do the skills that he is suppose to be abel to do?"

 

Teach him! Don't penalize him! If the COH was the day before, would you take away the rank? Or if he passed a BOR the day before but had yet to get the badge and then you saw the missing skill, would you undo the paperwork? If he participated in a SMC (not a pass/fail event) and then saw the missing skill, would you bounce him back?

 

If he passed the skills test, the requirement is done. Focus on teaching the skill and correcting your troop. Don't penalize the scout.

 

 

[Eagle92 110]

Thanks for the info, it helps me see where you are coming from. Now you are right that I am an old crumodgeon, then again everyone 21 and over is according to the BSA. Luckily I dont have the bifocals yet, but that may be cause my scouting days are a wee bit later than the 60s. But I do have gray hair, although blame that on 3 boys.

 

As for the bio before a BOR, I do hope you are joking right? Me personally I think a Good evening ladies and gentlemen, my name is___________ I am a _____________ Scout and I am requesting a BOR for ___________________ rank is in order. It introduces yourself to folks, and lets them know what you want.

 

As for your responsibilities with the other adults, you are not joking one bit about the importance teaching adults to put their hands in their pockets or playing cribbage. Biggest challenge I see with new leaders is having them unlearn. Please keep up the good work.

 

In regards to the Whitey scene, Yep a few of the scouts were in the troop a little longer, movie doesnt say how long but I guess a few months tops. But if you recall, Whitey is the first one to get to First Class, and he was leading new, Tenderfoots, remember back then Tenderfoot was the first rank almost equivalent to Scout today and you needed that to buy your uniform. But as you point out repetition, repetition, repetition is the key to keeping those skills sharp. Did I mention repetition is the key to keeping skills sharp?

 

Actually the reason why the BSA got rid of patrol camping without adults had to do with a summer camp in UT. That camp took about 30+ inexperienced scouts learning Wilderness Survival without any MBCs to supervise them while they were learning the skills. That was mistake 1, you do not let scouts alone without adults until they, or their PLs, know exactly what they are doing. Mistake two was the group built a bunch of fires during a fire ban, and those fires caused a forest fire that detroyed several thousand acres of land, and cost the BSA millions. The ban had nothing to with a properly trained PL taking his patrol on a camp out without adults with the SM and parents blessings. Heck there was no patrol that had worked together and were a team involved in the incident; it was a group of individual scouts. Also I believe the policy had to be changed because several states will equate allowing scouts to camp on their own without adults like it has been done since 1910, to child neglect or abuse, so the lawyers got involved. Unfortunately our society does not believe that folks under 25 can be responsible for themselves, unless they are in the military, But that is a different story.

 

Question is this, what is the best way for a scout do demonstrate a knot or any skill but to actually use it for the purpose. For example if you have a hiking and camping troop, you are in the outdoors every month. What is wrong with having a scout learn the knots at the meetings, which is where part of the learning takes place, then have him demonstrate his ability by actually setting up a tent using the knot, or a tarp using the knot?

 

As for whats not mentioned do you mean in the BSHB or do you mean in the BSA literature? You are correct there are no requirement for scouts to setting up dining flies on two camp outs. Not and creating your own rope. Not and properly coiling and storing a rope. Not and blindfolded and behind your back. etc.in the BSHB or in any of the BSA literature. BUT BSA literature does state that they need to be able to do the skills required for the badge. So if the requirement says demonstrate a knot, he needs to be able to do the knot.

 

Now this is where I think the misunderstanding between us comes in at. You state It also means passing the test (singular, no retest). That's explicit in the program. Once a requirement is complete it's complete.

 

My questions is this: when are you testing? Are you testing as soon as they do it right the first time, i.e. in a meeting or at the very first session, etc, or are you allowing them time to practice, do it on their own, feel comfortable with the skill, then allowing them to show you the skill for sign off, or in some instances with my troop, the Scout or adult, after seeing the skill used on a hike, campout, or used for real (remember when I taught first aid and the scout used it for real the next week? ) asks for the book to sign of the requirements.

 

See if you test right after the scout has the skills session, without him having the chance to practice it on his own and really know the skill, thats where the mistake is, and G2A even says that. A badge represents what a scout can do, not what he has done. Being able to do a skill just after being taught at a meeting is rarely, if ever, being able to do something. It takes practice. Kinda like riding a bike, or driving a car.You dont leave the kid alone on the bike the first few days without training wheels. You dont give a scout any type of license after the first driving school class. Unfortunately Ive seen that happen to many times and that is not learning. And I think you would agree with me on that too.

 

Now in regards to the question I asked about what a SM is suppose to do, we agree. We teach the scout the skill. We also agree that we do not take the rank away from the scout, whether hes been wearing the badge a year, or he hasnt gotten it yet b/c the scout office ran out of them and they are backordered. Once the BOR says he earned the rank, he has the rank. And we both agree a SMC is not Pass/Fail, once a SMC is held, whether the SM thinks the scout should go to the BOR or not, the SM must, stress MUST, sign of for the scout having a SMC. And the scout can proceed with the BOR if he still wants it, even over the concerns of the SM.

 

BUT the SMC is just that a conference. Its a chance for the SM to guide and mentor the scout. Can a SM suggest to the scout that he should not go before a BOR until XYZ issue is resolved, whether it is problems with a scout skill, behavior issue, problems while doing his POR etc, because the SM knows the BOR will look negatively on the issue, YES, in fact I think it would be negligence of the SMs part if he did not fully prepare the scout for the BOR, and that includes raising negative issues. BUT the scout can say thank you very much, please sign here as I want my BOR tonite. AND THAT IS THE SCOUTS RIGHT. Wouldnt you agree that part of an SMC is bringing up concerns a BOR may have, before the scout gets blindsided? Trust me being blindsided at a BOR is not fun, especially at your EBOR, been there, done that. I do know that I would have been extremely angry with my SM if he had known in advance that the DAC on the EBOR was not going to approve me for Eagle b/c the DAC didn't approve my project, and he didn't tell me when I had my SMC. He was surprised by that as well when I told him.

 

Now I mention the history of rank advancement because A) our current advancement policies are based upon them, and B) Those are the expectations of both old fogeys like myself, and the general public. There is an expectation, based upon the history of the scouting, that an Eagle Scout would have the skills to use a map and compass and not get lost, which has happened. There is an expectation that an Eagle Scout, heck any scout as I discovered, can do basic first aid. And the GTA says that some who wear a rank that has requirements for it should be able to do it.

 

[fred8033 1599]

Eagle92 wrote: "As for the bio before a BOR, I do hope you are joking right?"

 

No. It's real. Requiring a resume is their standard. They are a very well respected troop in our area with very experienced leaders. I don't think it's that bad of an idea ... except it's not part of the BSA program.

 

...

 

Eagle92 wrote: "Now this is where I think the misunderstanding between us comes in at. You state It also means passing the test (singular, no retest). That's explicit in the program. Once a requirement is complete it's complete."

 

I agree that's where the issue is. I'm okay with what you said after this quote. It's important to have a quality teaching and testing program.

 

The problem I have is the original thread had scoutmasters talk about having scouts showing the skills during their SMC and then bouncing the scouts back until they could demonstrate the skill ... because the badge is about what the scout can do and the scout should be able to show the skills. So even if the scout passed the earlier skills test and was signed off, scoutmasters felt the duty to make sure the scout learned his skills. And not to award the badge until they knew the skill.

 

If scoutmasters really want that quality check ability, then they should explicitly say "only the scoutmaster can perform skills tests and all skills tests will be performed at the start of the SMC. I don't like the idea, but I think they have that right.

 

But if you give the requirement sign-off authority to ASMs, senior scouts or others ... or test skills earlier ..., then the requirement is done when signed off. There's no double jeopardy on requirements.

 

Separating the learning from the testing? Good idea. Our troop does it by having the scouts teach each other skills and then going to an ASM to test / sign off. We might even let the troop guide, ASPL or SPL sign off, but we haven't done that recently. We just like a separation between who teaches and who tests. If they don't pass, the failure is explained / demonstrated and the scouts are sent to work on it with another scout again.

 

...

 

As for BOR's, there's not much a BOR should be able to surprise a scout with. Maybe a meaningful philosophical question. But advancement wise, if the paperwork is signed off, it's signed off. I have seen BORs end because there is no signature at some of the requirements. Everyone always wonders how that happened. Easy to fix though and then to reconstitute the BOR when ready.

 

...

 

The key is that if the requirement is signed off, it's over and done. It's a great idea make sure the troop did a good job teaching and testing and to keep practicing the skills in the troop program. But, the scout requirement for advancement is done.

 

[Beavah 205]

I don't think it's that bad of an idea ... except it's not part of the BSA program.

 

Yah, and who cares?

 

At the unit level, scouting is a Chartered Organization program, not a BSA program. They're naturally goin' to use BSA materials, and probably materials from other sources from USSSP to American Red Cross to NRA and some home-grown stuff and then some. That's how the BSA program is designed to be used, eh? As a set of materials to assist da CO in designing and running its own program.

 

And when da locals come up with somethin' interesting that seems to work, sometimes that becomes the BSA program.

 

A SM can say that only he/she can approve requirements, and then still allow a PL to sign in the book signifying that the PL thinks the boy is ready for the SM to check the fellow out on the requirements. The book is just a record-keeping tool, eh? Not an official document. Troops can use those book lines in different ways, or not use 'em at all and just use Troopmaster. There's nothing "wrong" with that, so why would we get all in a twitter about it?

 

Heck, a troop could even decide that tests for all of the rank requirements only happen at designated Testing Weekends throughout the year, where the boy has to come out on an adventure race and perform all of the skills on his own during the course of the race. If he performs all of 'em flawlessly, then a BOR meets with him at the end to have a short conversation and approve. If not, then they meet with him at the end and help him figure out how he's goin' to work on the remaining things while keepin' da rest in trim.

 

There are all kinds of ways to use da BSA materials creatively and well. Yah, and all kinds of ways of usin' 'em poorly, like turning advancement into an administrative once-and-done paperwork exercise. So long as units are reachin' their goals for kids, while at the same time not diminishing the character and values associated with da BSA awards, life is good.

 

As to MB's being an "introduction" to a topic, that's true, in the big picture view. Law MB just gives yeh an introduction to the very complex field of jurisprudence. First Aid just gives yeh an introduction to the field of Emergency Medicine. But yeh still need to be proficient in introductory knowledge and skills in order to earn the MB. Yeh have to be able to properly and effectively splint fractures, on demand, when confronted with 'em. Anything else is cheatin' the boy and subtracting from the requirements.

 

Beavah

 

[fred8033 1599]

Beavah wrote: "There are all kinds of ways to use da BSA materials creatively and well."

 

I guess it all comes down to creative interpretation. Hopefully, scoutmasters are up front about when requirements are complete (i.e. when reviewed by the scoutmaster right before the SMC). I've just seen too many troops brag about giving scouts authority to sign off on T21 requirements and later talk about scoutmasters reviewing the skills. Or even scoutmasters and ASMs signing off on skills to only later bounce a scout back for skills reasons.

 

It's an interesting tap dance that people do.

[Eagle92 110]

Beav,

 

Don't be too sure about the BSHB not being an offical document. I know when 1 council's records were messed up( if memory serves the registrar put the date SHE put the information into the council computer records and not when it was actually earned), they used copies of the scout's BSHB and the signatures from it to process the records.

[Eagle92 110]

 

 

A couple of things.

 

1)Yes the expectations need to be set out in advance and everyone is clear on the matter: youth and adults alike. If a SM doesn't think a scout is able to do the skill until he checks them off, then NO ONE BUT THE SM should do the signing (emphasis not shouting)I also think it says something about the SM's trust with his youth and other adult leaders, but that is a different story. As GBB said, "Train them, Trust them, Let them lead."

 

2)If adults are signing off on skills being learned, and then bouncing a scout back because the scout doesn't know it, then the problem lies with the adult, not the scout. The adult should not have signed of the requirement until the Scout is able to do it, using the GtA language ( or mastered the skill using previous BSHBs). FURTHER the adult should have guided the program so that the skills are used regularly.

 

 

[Beavah 205]

I know when 1 council's records were messed up( if memory serves the registrar put the date SHE put the information into the council computer records and not when it was actually earned), they used copies of the scout's BSHB and the signatures from it to process the records.

 

Just da BOR lines, eh? And they could just as easily have used a signed piece of paper that said the same thing.

 

If adults are signing off on skills being learned, and then bouncing a scout back because the scout doesn't know it, then the problem lies with the adult, not the scout.

 

Sure.

 

So then several things should happen.

 

1) The adult should be re-educated on expectations.

 

2) Some adult should apologize to the boy and promise to work with him so that he properly meets the expectations.

 

3) The boy should learn the skills to properly meet the expectations in order to be recognized.

 

All three are important. Da first shows the commitment of the leaders to the quality of the program. The second demonstrates to the youth how a man of honor behaves in such circumstances. The third allows the boy to develop and demonstrate his own honor.

 

Beavah

 

[OldGreyEagle 5]

"...meet the expectations in order to be recognized."

 

I thought it was defining the expectations is what prompted this thread in the first place, ...

[fred8033 1599]

Beavah wrote: "...meet the expectations in order to be recognized."

 

Old Grey Eagle wrote: "I thought it was defining the expectations is what prompted this thread in the first place, ... "

 

No, this is what originally started the previous thread and this thread.

 

"Is it once and done?" came from when the scout was tested, passed and then later, the scoutmaster judge the scout to not have the skill, usually at the SMC. Beavah says it's an scout honor thing and that to preserve the scout honor we don't let the scout advance until he can fulfill the requirement, independent of whether he did or did not fulfill it at a previous time. Others like me indicate that if tested previously and passed, he's done with that requirement. You can't hold him up at the SMC/BOR because he can't pass the test then. Instead focus on program to teach him and corrections to make the sign-offs better quality. That's the whole debate.

 

In my opinion, it's one test and done with a requirement. IMHO, completed requirements are truely completed and not "unofficial" until the BOR. Of course, it's up to the troop to make the testing process meaningful and to have a quality program to re-inforce new skills.

[Eagle92 110]

Beav,

 

Not only ranks, but MBs, and in one instance Skill Awards. Long story short, lots of folks had to turn in copies of their HBs to get the records straight as dates of BORs and MBs for the rank didn't match, or time between ranks didn't match.

 

One thing Fred reminded me is that if a BOR is finding a problem, saying a number of scouts not learning skills, part of their responsibility is to work with the SM to correct the problem.