Is it time to just shoot FCFY in da head?

[Beavah 205]

I dont think we need to take the advancement method out of the program, we just need to remove FCFY and instead encourage a quality program where any scout could advance on his own as fast as he wanted.

 

Eagledad's comments in da parent thread were quite a contrast with the new Guide to Advancement, eh? The new Guide to Advancement says it's the unit's responsibility to "establish practices that will bring each new Boy Scout to First Class rank within a year of joining, and then to Star rank the following year."

 

Has this just gone so far off da rails that we should flood da program office with demands that the whole silly FCFY notion be abolished?

 

I have long maintained that given an average troop program, it is impossible to get to FCFY with every boy, even with most boys, without turning Scouting into advancement-focused school. Yeh can even see some 50-page curriculum documents out there, eh? I remember old BobWhite advocatin' somethin' that looked like it had been developed in the Department of Education.

 

Is it time to just say "enough"?

 

Beavah

(This message has been edited by Beavah)

[moosetracker 132]

Here! Here!.. I agree.. Also since there are other complaints, why not just create our own "Occupy National" protest.. Much more fun then a flood of email protests! Let National tell us their scouters can't camp out on their lawn!

 

Seriously, I never liked the FCFY..

[perdidochas 658]

I think FC18Mo is a more reasonable goal.

[shortridge 184]

Beavah, didn't you do the math at one point (or several points) showing just how logistically impossible it is to have an entire patrol do everything in a single year, focusing on cooking? I think that of itself should be evidence enough to end this ridiculous conceit.

[Eagle92 110]

Yes, belay that, HECK YEAH DO AWAY WITH FCFY

 

And yes that is me screaming at the top of my lungs. Can't you tell I just luv FCFY

 

 

I thought it was stupid when it first came out in 1989, and continue to find it stupid. The goal of the BSA is to grow our charges physically, mentally, and morally, not give out badges. I've seen leaders who beleive "one and done," and the kids are hopeless in the outdoors. I've seen candidates for the OA who cannot pack a backpack properly. I've read about an Eagle who gets lost. Shall I go on.

 

Put the "Outing in Scouting," focus on skills development, adventure, and keep the youth in charge. Create a program, and they will come.

 

(This message has been edited by eagle92)

[chaoman45 17]

I don't know why it hasn't died yet, tbh. This has gone from "mastery" to "good enough."

 

Star during the second year is stupid, too. What happened to allowing them to advance at their own pace?

[moosetracker 132]

We have to speed the process up guys.. Life/Eagle by the end of the third year!..

 

Next phase, Eagle needs to be done by 14th Birthday so they are free to move to a Venture Crew when 14.. That's because the crews can't sell the fact you can leave BS and go to a crew to earn Eagle, since they have no focus on advancement.. So boys / parents (whoever is driving the boat) who are working for an Eagle rank aren't moving on to Venturing quick enough.

 

Probably the reason of the new Eagle workbooks, that not only protected against abuses to the process, but went to the opposite extreme to dumb down the project.. Lead two people (like Mommy & Daddy) in a project that can be only 15 minutes long, if you wish.. This way the younger kids can whip out a project quickly..

 

[KC9DDI 11]

It was my understanding that FCFY was originally introduced to address two concerns:

 

First, it was supposed to be a rough gauge of the quality of a unit's program. In other words, a Scout in a unit with a quality program should be capable of earning the First Class rank in roughly a year. The unit should be doing enough hiking, camping, swimming, orienteering, etc for this to be a possibility. It also helps units gauge how much emphasis should be placed on the advancement method, versus other program areas (so it may be indicative of some problems if Scouts are routinely earning First Class well before or well after a year of active membership in the troop.) I agree that 12 months may not be an ideal time frame to use (14-18 months seems more reasonable to me), but I think that was one of the general goals of FCFY.

 

Now, I think the problem that developed was that certain units, Scouts and parents were looking at FCFY as the only important metric used to evaluate the advancement method, rather than one of several indicators of the quality of a unit's program. So rather than using FCFY as a goal of offering a strong, diverse yearly unit program, unit's started easing up on their interpretation of advancement requirements to make it easier for Scouts to hit First Class within 12 months.

 

The second goal of FCFY, to my understanding, was to provide fairly regular positive feedback and recognition for Scouts' achievements. I don't see a problem with that either, in theory: The T-2-1 requirements are quite numerous, and quite varied, and it's important to recognize and congratulate Scouts who master them. I believe that there was a concern that providing recognition too infrequently was hurting retention of Scouts during the first year. FCFY provides a goal that Scouts working on the requirements diligently should be able to be recognized with a rank advancement every few months for the first year or so. Again, in theory, I don't see anything wrong with this as a goal.

 

But what seems to have been forgotten is that we need to recognize Scouts for putting in the time and effort needed to really learn and master the skills behind each requirement, rather than just recognizing them for attendance, participation, or putting in sub-par effort.

 

So, getting back to whether we just need to do away with it entirely... yes, I think we do, but just because the "FCFY" name/idea has been so tarnished that it can no longer do us any good.

 

But I think that some of the concerns that FCFY tries to address are legitimate concerns. Is there a better way that those issues can be handled?

[Jay K 15]

No. If the Scout takes MORE than a year, so what?

[KC9DDI 11]

Jay - It's not a problem for one Scout or another. What I was trying to get at is that there may be some amount of validity to using FCFY as a metric to evaluate a troop's advancement program, and maybe even their overall program.

 

So if a handful of Scouts take 2-3 years or so to reach 1st Class, I agree that it's not a problem. But if nearly every Scout can't reach First Class in less than 3 years, then I think that indicates a problem in the troop - maybe in that the troop isn't offering enough variety in their program, or that they're being too strict with their interpretation of the advancement requirements.

 

Likewise, if nearly every Scout, regardless of work ethic or motivation, earns First Class within 2-3 months, I think that also indicates a problem with that troop's advancement program.

 

I think FCFY originated from the idea that the T-2-1 requirements were developed in such a way that, on average, motivated Scouts in units with quality program could earn the rank within their first year, if they make that their goal. Sure, some will do it in more, and some will do it in less time - but one year was identified as an average.

 

Of course, that's something quite different from the passage of the newest Advancement Guide that Beavah quoted... but I think that there may still be some amount of validity to the FCFY theory, if not it's current practice.

[Jay K 15]

We do lots of campouts. Some are backpacking, some are canoe camping, and some are basically car camping, with a swim or a bike ride attached. I run a Scout Aquatics program, which is open to everyone in our and the surrounding Councils. We do Brownsea requirements on the campouts. First Class in 1 year is NO problem. The program should not be advancement driven, but if we camp and cook and do the edged tool stuff, hike with the compass/map, what's the huhu? Sometimes we get a Scout who won't come on many camp outs, so no FC1Y, but that's his problem. The events fulfill Brownsea advancement. Nobody's pushing anybody, except to participate in the events.

I don't understand, sometimes, why folks get so wound up about this stuff. I had a Scout, briefly, who would only come to Troop meetings. He quit and told others that Scouts is lame. Well, if you only come to Troop meeings, I'd expect you to think that. One thing that I actually do, is encorage the Scout to take Firt Aid Merit Badge early in their Scout Camp (week) career. I attend the class, and help out (I have a Wilderness Frirt Aid cert.) 2nd Class 1st Aid and 1st Class 1st Aid are covered in the class. A week long immersion in First Aid is good for them. This is kind rambling, but my point is: No, don't shoot FC1Y in the head. Frankly I think it's a silly notion. Let's shoot THAT idea in the head. Or, Boom ! Boom! Boom! Three rounds, center mass.

[OldGreyEagle 5]

Before we get much further, does somebody have a link to the BSA publications that describe First Class First Year? I always thought, and the way it was explained to me, was that the Troop should have a program that an Active scout (hate the word active dontcha know) could attain the rank of first class scout IF he availed himself of the opportunities. It means making meetings, going on events, camping, being ready and willing to learn skills and to teach and do those skills. I have never seen any encouragement in any BSA publication that requirements be glossed over or sloughed off or anything to allow the scout to get to be first class in a year. Now, I am not saying it doesnt exist, I just have not seen it. So, rather than rail agianst a myth of scouting I would like to see the documentation.

 

BTW, I would like to pledge that I would never allow a scout to pass a requirment just because he "wants" to, he either has the skill or he doesnt pass. Anyone want to join me with that?

[SeattlePioneer 144]

My theory is that the FC1Y goal came from a national finding that boys stayed with Scouting if they made First Class in a Year. Since Numbers Rule, I suggest this is membership based.

 

I recently completed training for district membership chairs given by the council Membership VP who is a woman with Cub Scouting experience but she's never mentioned any Boy Scout experience.

 

Her comment was that "we all know" that Boy Scouts is supposed to be boy led, but that important goals like FC1Y wont be met if leadership is left to boys, so of course adults have an important role in planning to achieve such goals.

 

I objected to that pretty strenuously, but it's pretty telling I think.

 

FC1Y, then similarly grease the skids so that the number of boys can get their Eagle a couple of years after that.

 

Adult leadership to organize that process. Adults are the ones who can analyze the advancement process and apply grease on any sticky wicket that might impair a boy from achieving Eagle if he has a parent clearing the way for him.

 

 

[Eagle92 110]

When FCFY came out in 1989, the rationale behind it was that research showed that those scouts who achieved FC within 1 year of becoming a Boy Scout tended to remain in scouting. If memory serves, no mention of troop program, or recognizing youth for that matter, was mentioned in the literature at that time. It focused soley on retaining membership. I'll try and do some research when I get home on this matter, and try to get the 1989 info if possible.

 

Also I think, you all know how old age affects us, that over the years FCFY shifted somewhat from retaining members, to creating Eagles. To be honest I tried to to avoid FCFY stuff because I have seen it in action and do not believe it works. At least if you are tryign to develop folks physically, mentally, and morally.

 

Now if I can find the info disk, FCFY was a session, and my computer can read it, I'll post info on FCFY that I got from the All Hands conference. Every info presentation there had an abstract listed on CD. I beleive FCFY was oneof the classes, but you know my opinion of FCFY, and I didn't attend it. I was more interested in the Venturing sessions.

 

SP,

 

Unfortunately that Cub Scouter's attitude is also the attitude of some Boy Scouters. Unfortunately I think the old school scouters are slowly getting outnumbered.

[Eagle92 110]

Jay,

 

I hear ya about program. Yes if you have an active program, "advancement comes as naturally as a suntan, somethingthat happens when in the outdoors" as BP once said.

 

Problem is you do have units with little to no outdoor program. 4 campouts and summer camp for JTE?!?!?!?!?!?!

 

Also some folks have become so focused on FCFY, that they forget everythign else. "One and done" I believe is the term some use.