packsaddle 753 Posted February 27, 2003 Share Posted February 27, 2003 Ed, it meant that I was beginning to think you were describing a real situation. Sorry. Frankj, I liked the prodigal son analogy as well. Regarding your 'vanishing scout', I have seen a couple of those as well. I try to keep my judgements to myself. If they meet the requirements they deserve the award. Once they get the award, it is their choice and their loss if they do nothing more. I might think badly of them but I wouldn't deny them the award just because I question their motives. This assumes, of course, that they really did meet the stated requirements. But consider this as well, one of the scouts I have in mind made statements similar to the one you mention, and then during the final year or so of working to Eagle, he turned around and 'got religion' so-to-speak. He is now one of our dependable ASMs. My advice, give them a good example and good leadership and let them decide. Most of the time, they'll make a good decision. Link to post Share on other sites
mk9750 11 Posted February 27, 2003 Share Posted February 27, 2003 Ed, Can I take from your continued discussion of this that you feel those of us who believe this hypothetical Scout should be given the chance to explain his adherence the the Oath and Law while he was away are wrong? Are you saying this boy should not be allowed to earn Eagle? If so, do you have any reference from literature that says that attendance IS a criteria for rank advancement? Mark Link to post Share on other sites
evmori 11 Posted February 28, 2003 Author Share Posted February 28, 2003 mk9750, The point I am trying to make is that not everything in Scouting fits in a nice little box like some people on this board think. This situation is outside the box. I would not immediatly sign off on Scout Spirit for this hypothetical Scout. I would talk to him & observe him for awhile until I am satisfied he is living by the Scout Oath & Law. From Star on up it is required to "Be active ...." and if this hypothetical Scout's only reason for not coming to Troop meeting was "I didn't want to" then that's not active & that's not Scout Spirit! Ed Mori Scoutmaster Troop 1 1 Peter 4:10 Link to post Share on other sites
Bob White 20 Posted February 28, 2003 Share Posted February 28, 2003 Wait a minute Ed, Not wanting to beat the hypothetical dead horse, but did you not say the scout had completed all his requirements except for his project and scout spirit? Are you now adding the requirement 1) Be active in your troop and patrol for 6 months since becoming a Life scout. Because that is not what you said at the beginning. If so, then we are not talking about requirement 2 at all and this whole string has been pointless. Bob White Link to post Share on other sites
evmori 11 Posted February 28, 2003 Author Share Posted February 28, 2003 Bob, You're correct. My mistake. That requirement would have already been signed off. My bad! All your "If" in your post in you perfect Troop would never happen but they could in even a Troop run as well as yours. Things fall through the cracks. And since attendance is not supposed to be an issue and this is a boy run organization it is possible that no one ever told you as SM this Scout wasn't at meetings and it is possible for a SM to not notice. But I know this would never happen in your Troop. "Scouts don't do everything up to Eagle and leave for no reason." And you have proof this is a fact? How about they now have a girlfriend & want to spend all their waking hours together? Oh, and by the way, you never answered why you thought this sounded too real? Ed Mori Scoutmaster Troop 1 1 Peter 4:10(This message has been edited by evmori) Link to post Share on other sites
Bob White 20 Posted February 28, 2003 Share Posted February 28, 2003 So our scout was active for since months after earning Life while taking the final steps to the Eagle rank and in those 6 months the Scoutmaster never determined if this scout incorporated the Oath and Law into his every day Life? What does our Hypothetical SM do during meetings and outings? How could he let a scout about to get Eagle walk away with out noticing, without being concerned about what might be happening to a boy this close to Eagle who suddenly up and left. Where was the SM (hypothetically of course) when this scout returned? Why would the scoutmaster automatically decide that the scout has no spirit without ever talking to him? Has our SM attended hypothetical training? Is he aware or the rules of advancement? Does he understand his role is to nurture advancement not to inject his personal hypothetical bias into the program in order to block his advancement. It appears in this scenario that the problem is not that the scout hasn't met all the requirements. The problem is that we don't know if he has met them and the SM would rather hold the scout to his standards than those of the BSA. It would appear that the scout may not be the only one with an attitude problem. But it's so hard to tell in a hypothetical situation. Bob White (This message has been edited by Bob White) Link to post Share on other sites
evmori 11 Posted February 28, 2003 Author Share Posted February 28, 2003 Bob, Can't you give an answer without asking a million questions? It's obvious you feel Scouting is a cookie cutter organization. Everything works the same for every unit. Well it doesn't. If all you require in your Troop is the Scouts show up and they complete their advancement & do the minimum to earn Eagle then you are doing the program and the boy a large diservice. I would never deny a Scout the opportunity to earn his Eagle. Oh, by the way, you still haven't answered my question about why you think this hypothetical situation is real? Ed Mori Scoutmaster Troop 1 1 Peter 4:10 Link to post Share on other sites
Bob White 20 Posted February 28, 2003 Share Posted February 28, 2003 It's obvious you feel Scouting is a cookie cutter organization. Not at all. Quite the opposite infact. It is your SM who treats it that way. I and many other posters are saying you..sorry I meant HE..cannot make a blanket decision based soley on attendance. We are saying his decision has to be based on the life of each scout. He needs to talk to the scout. That is not a cookie cutter that is a scouting program that recognizes that the needs and characteristics of each boy is unique. I have questions because you said it was hypothetical so I was offering elements that could have affected the actions of both the scout and the scoutmaster. I think the reason your posts sound less than hypothetical is that you respond to our points with such as if you were intimate with the every little detail. It is very curious, hypothetically speaking. Bob White Link to post Share on other sites
evmori 11 Posted February 28, 2003 Author Share Posted February 28, 2003 Bob, Well maybe the reason I am able to give such vivid details is I have can imagine these things happening where you seem to be incapable of doing so. I have never said I wouldn't talk to the boy about his situation. I would. What I am saying is if he refuse to give any reason other than " I didn't want to" I would not sign off on his Scout Spirit until I was sure it was there. And by the way, I sign my posts Scoutmaster because I am the Scoutmaster. Feel free to refer to me. I'm a big boy. I can take it. Ed Mori Scoutmaster - Really! Troop 1 1 Peter 4:10 Link to post Share on other sites
Bob White 20 Posted February 28, 2003 Share Posted February 28, 2003 Ed, Your scoutmaster continues to ask the WRONG question. It's not about why he didn't come! It's about how he used the ideals of the Oath and Law in the things he did while he was away. Tell the SM to get off his hangup about why the boy was gone and ask some questions that will tell him more about who the scout is. This guy really needs to go to training. Bob White Link to post Share on other sites
evmori 11 Posted February 28, 2003 Author Share Posted February 28, 2003 Bob, It is about both what he did while he was gone and the reason he was gone. And my Scoutmaster(me)has no hang-ups except the ones you seem to think I have. So since you think I have hang-ups, I must because you are always correct when it comes to Scouting! Ed Mori Scoutmaster (me) Troop 1 1 Peter 4:10 Link to post Share on other sites
Bob White 20 Posted February 28, 2003 Share Posted February 28, 2003 Now I'm really confused are we talking about you or a hypothetical situation? This isn't about me being right it's about the hypothetical scoutmaster not folowing the requirement in the handbook. He has confused requirement #1 and Requirement #2. He keeps avoiding to ask the scout about the Oath and Law. He asks him why he wasn't around and what he did, we have yet to hear that he was asked about how the Oath and Law helped him make decisions in his life. This isn't about a problem I or any other poster has. This is a scoutmaster, whether real or imagined, who just plain does not want to follow the requirements in the handbook. And the person with the problem is the unfortunate Boy Scout who has to deal with the SM in order to get his Eagle Rank he has worked to achieve. Thank goodness this is all hypothetical or no actual Boy Scouts were injured in this re-enactment. Bob White Link to post Share on other sites
OldGreyEagle 5 Posted February 28, 2003 Share Posted February 28, 2003 I will try this once more, First we have this statement: "The Advancement policies of the Boy Scouts of America are specific. No individual or unit has the authority to add to or subtract from any advancement requirement." This is from Bob White's post on the swimming issue and I dont know of anyone who disputes this. If so, let me know, I think this is one we all agree on, or at least are supposed to agree on. Then we have Ed's statement from this thread directed to Bob, "If all you require in your Troop is the Scouts show up and they complete their advancement & do the minimum to earn Eagle then you are doing the program and the boy a large diservice." If we all agree you cant add or take away requirements, how else does a scout advance? He meets the requirement. Its not a minumum, its not a maximum its the requirement. As Master Yoda says, there is no try, only do or do not. Its a pass/fail type of thing. You tie a square knot or not, you cant require the scout to tie it blindfolded, although that may be a good idea for a patrol game, but you cant decide to say the requirement is to tie a square knot and in my troop, that means a square knot while blindfolded, behind your back, in water over your head, etc. Requiring the boy to do more than the requirements (which I think Ed takes as the minimum) is against BSA policy. If I am wrong Ed, Sorry about that. Now, as the Scoutmaster, or other adult leader you may challenge the scout to strive for greater heights, to push himself beyond his comfort zone, to let him see he is able to accomplish more than he ever thought he could. Adults who challenge young people and dont accept anything less than excellence are often the adults the young person grows up remembering with the most respect and fondness. Yes, you can and should push the scout to acheive his highest potential. But as soon as you start to require more than the requirements, you are wrong, pure and simple. The Hiking merit badge requires 5 10 miles hikes and one 20 mile hike. You cant say in my troop, its 5 20 mile hikes and two 50 mile hikes because I want to be sure my boys can walk. And actually, whats wrong with being a Cookie Cutter organization? Its what made McDonalds famous, no matter where you go the food is consistent. No matter where you go an Eagle Scout is known to have certain traits, and its desirable to be able to say you are an Eagle. Why is it so desirable? Because an Eagle Scout has been shown to possess certain skills and abilities. People have come to expect certain things of Eagles because they know that all Eagles share common training. If you require more than the minimum, you are doing the program the dis-service. If you think the Eagle requirements are to soft, OK, I am with you, lets get together and start a drive to toughen up Eagle, but until then, if you meet the requirements, you're an Eagle. Maybe we could award Eagle to those who just do the minimum requirements, and then Eagle cum Laude if you do more and then Eagle Magna Cum Laude to those who go above and beyond, then of course we will have discussions on the difference between the 3 levels, oh well, debate and disagreement, its what makes us the country we love Link to post Share on other sites
evmori 11 Posted February 28, 2003 Author Share Posted February 28, 2003 OGE, I agree that if a Scout meets all the minimum requirements he is eligible to earn Eagle. The subjective part of the formula is how a Scout live the Scout Oath & Law in his everyday life. Troop meetings and Troop activities occur during everyday life and if the Scout is lacking in these areas, then there could be a question as to how well he is living his everyday life according to the Scout Oath & Law. I know attendance does not equal Scout Spirit but it is part of the equation. Ed Mori Scoutmaster Troop 1 1 Peter 4:10 Link to post Share on other sites
OldGreyEagle 5 Posted February 28, 2003 Share Posted February 28, 2003 Ok, so Ed, what you are saying is if you do the minimum requirements for Eagle then you deserve Eagle, so you have reversed your opinion stated previously: "If all you require in your Troop is the Scouts show up and they complete their advancement & do the minimum to earn Eagle then you are doing the program and the boy a large diservice." So now you dont believe the above statement? Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now