Paper Eagles

[silver-shark 10]

Someone mentioned earlier that attaining the Eagle rank should be looked at as a marathon rather than a sprint. KS just gave us a good example of how to present that to the boys.

 

The other problem is the overly pushy parents of some boys. We have one with a former Eagle (at 17) that thought her youngest son should be First Class within 3 months of joining this spring.)This same message can be given at the New Scout/Parent Orientation Meeting that we have each year, just after Crossover.

Just as a reminder that it takes ALL of the Methods to acheive our Aims, and that advancement is the natural outcome of a well rounded program.

 

Additionally, I've seen 13/14 Eagles come from both sides of the issue. You can usually tell the self motivated boys by the amount of drive and leadership that they show. It's a personality trait of MANY successful people in general to show both, even at an early age.(This message has been edited by silver-shark)

[johnmbowen 10]

What, self doubt with the Eagle Factorys! Well, I never...

 

I am going to weigh in with Le Voyager, et al. on the value of early Eagles. Surely the Eagle rank is a fine accomplishment if it is done by the boy himself, even with help. But I agree that perhaps only about 5% of the Scout population has this drive to succeed on his own. Is it what all Scouts want, and is it the sum of Scouting?

 

Unfortunately, I have known many Eagles who as 'serving Scouts' that not only couldn't tie knots, they couldn't set up a tent or do most anything practical! On questioning, they couldn't remember first aid specifics, or practically anything in detail! Too bad. These are victims of parents or SMs or Troop committees who want another trophy boy and don't allow the kid to become a leader in his own way.

 

Though attaining the badge is worth while, leadership, a large Eagle goal, is not something that is taught by following a set of merit badges and rank requirements that can become litle more than 'fill in the blank' tests. Like other outdoor enthusiasts, I believe that a super way for leadership to bloom is thorugh outings and high adventure, where active practice, not BSA pamphlets, make leaders.

 

Like was said before, many Scouts receive full measure of Scouting becomming leaders, moral, caring, and better men without the badge.

 

Several older Scouts in my Troop have not advanced far, but stick with the program and the high adventure outings. One in particular, Scout rank, set up logistics for several long outings, including an international one involving airline flights from several directions, as well as leadership on these trips. Though only ranked 'Scout' he can tie all of the knots on demand, lead any trip, teach young Scouts how to build a one match fire in the wet, as well as knowing how to set bombproof reliable three point top rope anchors and run class III rapids. Badges just don't interest him. Well, I guess he will never attain Eagle, but I would put him against any Eagle in his Scouting, his leadership and his character. Go ahead, pillory me for not forcing rank down his throat. My impression is that he would quit in a minute. Is that what BSA wants???

 

So, are badges that important? I think not. The experience is the thing.

 

Eagle Rank is for those who have that interest and should be admired as such. It is after all an experience too. Remember, Scouting uses the ranks to keep boys interested until the ethos rubs off on them. In the end, it is the boy who gains that ethos no matter what way, that wins, rank or no, and the ranks, badges and pins in the end are only for the scrapbook. I hope that the Eagle rank is never he pinnacle of a life's performance for any young man, but only a step in the right direction. There are other worthy directions for that step equally as valuable.

 

(The Scout that I described, after being so denegrated by 'longbelt' Scouters has a very poor view of Scouting leadership, though he persists with our Troop).

[Fat Old Guy 11]

"(The Scout that I described, after being so denegrated by 'longbelt' Scouters has a very poor view of Scouting leadership, though he persists with our Troop). :

 

Pardon my ignorance but "longbelt Scouters" is a new term by me. Does it refer to the Scouters with overly ample waistlines?

 

BTW, it sounds as if this Scout should be at least a First Class. No need to advance beyond that but if he's done the work, he should receive the recognition.

 

 

[packsaddle 753]

Excellent discussion (Eagle at 15). I sympathize with the position championed by le Voyageur and later by Mike F and others. Situations that le Voyageur confronts are where the rubber meets the road and "Be Prepared" is not an idle admonition. In those situations anyone who is unprepared, regardless of rank, is a liability. If they happen to have Eagle rank, I see a boy who was cheated somehow. I also agree that boys can get all the benefits of scouting without ever making Eagle.

I see a parallel to education. There is information that is communicated by reading and conversing. We sometimes call this 'coursework'. There is also information that cannot be so communicated. I call this 'experience' and that takes time...and doing. le Voyageur's needs demand that experience and I see a deficiency if an Eagle (of any age) presents himself without it.

[Adrianvs 10]

"The BOR does not make the Eagle...never has...never will...IF THE ADULTTROOP LEADERS ARE DOING WHAT THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO AND DOING IT WELL. It is the troop leadership that knows the boy well enough to know that he is, or is not qualified for and deserving of the Eagle."

 

We always talk about parents pushing a scout through the advancement program or more accurately dragging him along it, but we have to understand the position of the scoutmasters who sign off and advance these youth. In most cases I have seen, the scoutmaster receives the paperwork from troop Committee Chairman (Mom), signs it in the presence of Assistant Scoutmaster (Dad), and then forwards it. In almost every case, the Scoutmaster has a youth of his own and expects Committee Chairman to do the same for him.

Is it any wonder that the 12-13 year old Eagles are all the children of the active leadership. It's an obvious and exclusive club. This is not to discourage parental activism in a child's scouting career, but I think that parent scouters must not use their training and position as exclusive advantages to their own children. If Johnny needs to work on some merit badge requirements, make it a troop opportunity. If a scouter is continually thinking about their son's prospective eagle project and assisting in every matter and they don't know if other Life scouts have even considered a project, then there is a problem. That scouters who attempt to devote their energy equally to all youth in a troop will put their own sons at a disadvantage seems unlikely. The youth whose parents aren't scouters rarely receive directional guidance in meeting scouting goals. Their parents help them to meet those goals, but I think that most Eagle Scouts would agree that the most difficult part of an eagle project is the planning and leadership aspects. These are the most important parts of the project and the parts most likely to be handled by the "expert scouter" parent.

 

I have seen troops where EVERY 13-14 year old eagle is the son of a scouter and EVERY 17-18 year old eagle is the son of a non-scouter. I think the trend begins in cub scouts where the youth can bring their book home and the parent goes over the requirements and signs them off. That simply cannot be done with eagle requirements.

 

Sorry if I've oversimplified the situation, but I've just seen too many parent-scout teams blatantly state that their primary objective in scouting is something which "looks good on a resume." Because of this, I won't even put in on mine.

[OldGreyEagle 5]

Personally I am not surprised that the sons of active parents do well. The teachers amoung us will reinforce the best thing a kid can have going for him are involved parents. Now, you are correct that the troop controls advancement. But I see plenty of parent scouters who are harder on their kids then others. I am not sure what you want, a troop run by mediocrely interested adults?

[SMT376Richmond KY 10]

I'll lay in here from my own Scouting experience. I wish my parents or SM would have been a little more concerned with my making Eagle in 1975. Alas I did not. I attained life and the necessary merit badges for Eagle and Troop leadership at 17. All I lacked was my project. I became involved more with HS football and a part time job. Did not go on as many outings as previously was the Scout that left the Troop sort of say. By the time I realized that Eagle was what I wanted at (17 1/2) it was too late to get it all together. i had been away from the troop for about a year and no follow up contact.

 

Looking back at age 43 (close to 45) and having learned a thing or two that only comes with maturing. I heartly regret not developing a project or that either my parents or others prodded me a bit. If that had occurred I might have completed Eagle.

 

Now as SM and having a son that bridged at 10 1/2 with his AOL (he asked as he said he didn't want to build anymore bird houses)and a young troop of 11 year olds. I think the program will produce young Eagles as they are to obtian first class in the first year. Just by going to summer camp fro 3 years in a row they can easily make life by age 12 (they can't progress 1 rank in a year but they can progress 3 in a year?).

 

The Troop I serve isn't cranking out ranks but the boys are achieving requirements without knowing it (as the program is supposed to). I'll not push the boys nor my son nor will I do my son's work or if obvious during SM conferneces the boys have no idea of the requirements they say they have done I will not pass them from BOR.

 

Bottom line Eagle means something and I hope to instill int he boys to achieve this goal. If they don't want to that's fine. They progress or not at thier own pace. However, if at our SM conference for Scout rank and others when I ask them their goal in the Troop. if they tell me they want to make Eagle then I am certainly going to provide them all the prodding I can to help them attain the goal until they tell me they do not wish to make the goal.

[packsaddle 753]

I'll chime in with the view from the parent/leader side, I made my son aware that because of our relationship, he would be viewed as an example by the other boys. If I erred, it was in making his advancement much more difficult. But I give him credit, he really stuck with it and made Eagle...at age 17. I think he looks back with pride.

[Adrianvs 10]

What I want doesn't have to do with parent scouters being harder on their sons or being mediocrely interested. I think that scouters should be AS interested or at least as involved in the projects of scouts who are not their own progeny. When they wear the uniform, they must be scouters first and parents second. As I said, it is unlikely that parent scouters will ever be as concerned or involved with other's advancement, but they should try to narrow the gap, especially with those youth who do not have scouter parents.

[OldGreyEagle 5]

"As I said, it is unlikely that parent scouters will ever be as concerned or involved with other's advancement"

 

Ad, Ad, Ad, Ad, Ad,

 

What color is my hair? (thats the easy one) What color are my eyes? Am I right handed or left handed? What kind of car do I drive? Coupe or 4 door? Domestic or import? Whats my favorite color? Tell me everything you know about me

[packsaddle 753]

Adrianvs, I can't speak for the others but I have never seen a parent who is not a parent first, regardless. But now that I have no children in the troop, I probably conform better to your standard, at least I try to.

[Adrianvs 10]

"Adrianvs, I can't speak for the others but I have never seen a parent who is not a parent first, regardless."

 

Granted. I agree with you. And I repeat:

"it is unlikely that parent scouters will ever be as concerned or involved with other's advancement, but they should try to narrow the gap, especially with those youth who do not have scouter parents."

 

I don't mean to assert that parents can ever really neutralize their parental affectations or should. I just wanted to emphasize that there may be boys who could use the often scouter-specific assistance as to "this is signed here and then this needs to be filled out this way, etc." that non-scouter parents can't give their difference. Most scouter-parents do an excellent job of fair expectaions and interaction with scouts. We just need to be sure that boys with nonscouter parents can have the same scouter "expertise" given with parental concern that scouter parent boys have. Scouter parents do an excellent job at giving youth the same program but there seems to be a qualitative difference in advancement, particularly Eagle Scout advancement.

 

BTW, am I mistaken or is OldGreyEagle mocking me (good naturedly) for presuming Proposition A , while packsaddle questions my suggestion of Not Proposition A? OldGreyEagle quotes my statement of A and questions my ability to know it, implying he believes ~A. Packsaddle then questions my ideal goal of ~A and states A. Shouldn't these two be debating themselves? I am trying to express the middle ground here.

[OldGreyEagle 5]

Ad, I dont appreciate people who presume to know how I act and how I think. You know nothing about me or how the troop operates and how much work all the scouters put in to allow the best possible opprotunities for every scout to advance. I object to your characterizations

[Adrianvs 10]

OldGreyEagle,

 

I'm surprised at the statement you objected to. It was, in my opinion, the least controversial of the statements I made. I threw it in because I thought people would consider my opposing sentiments too unrealistic. I didn't mean that parent scouters give conscious special treatment or noticably different treatment to scouts who are their own children. When emphasising that scouters should try to give every scout an equal experience, I meant that parents have a special bond with their children and cannot help but see them differently and think about them more often. I am saying that parents love their children. They love them in a way that is different from how they may love other children not their own. Does anyone consider this presumptious or false in any circumstance? Even if there were cases where a parent thinks of other kids the exact same way as others, I was referring to parent scouters and thus parents as a whole.

I really don't understand your opposition to my statements unless you thought that I was saying that parent scouters always or even tend to give special treatment to their own kids or consciously devote more energy to them. On the contrary, I said that "Most scouter-parents do an excellent job of fair expectaions and interaction with scouts." We just have to be careful that the scouting guidance that parent-scouters give as parents is also available and given to non-scouter parents.

 

My thesis is thus:

1. Scouter-parents have knowledge and skills that assist in advancement which non-scouter parents don't.

 

2. Scouters generally do a good job of giving the same program and guidance to all youth as scouters.

 

3. Parents love their children in a unique way and have a special bond with them that influences their involvement and cannot be duplicated.

 

Presumption? I don't think so. The specific statement you quoted boils down to the notion that parents think more about their own children than others. This is a clinically verifiable fact that has no direct control on how well scouters can deliver a fair program and assist all scouts.

[Adrianvs 10]

I guess I am saying that parental support given by scouter parents can tend to be more helpful (in a pragmatic sense) to advancement than parental support given by non-scouter parents. This boils down to the statement that scouters are more proficent at scouting than non-scouters. I apologize if I made it sound like a deliberate scheme. I realize that I did describe cases where scouter parents did give unproportionate assistance to their own, but I in no way meant that this is the norm or even common. I just used it as an example of, well, nepotism that I have personally witnessed. Most scouters are parent-scouters or former parent-scouters and I did not intend to insult or demean the thousands of devoted volunteers who assist thousands of boys not their own in meeting their goals. I was so focused on the tumor that I suppose I forgot to describe the health of rest of the patient. Again, my apologies OldGreyEagle. I am presumptious about you, but I presume that you are an experienced and effective scouter.

 

Adrianvs

(Who sometimes allows his words to paint the wrong picture)