What is "Active" in Troop vs. Crew for Eagle Requirement?

[BadenP 93]

Beav

 

I really do not get your need to continue to drive the main issue under a cloud of irrelevant quotes from your troop committee handbook of probably 20 plus years ago, that has no bearing on the issue at hand, and other legalistic sounding nonsense. You have probably driven poor daveinwa to run out and resign his position.

 

dave asked a simple question and instead of just giving a simple answer you have turned it into another Scopes Monkey Trial. The old bard was right when he wrote, "Let us begin by killing all the lawyers."

[Eagle92 110]

Here is form the Advancement Committee Policies and Procedures book, #33088 Page 24

 

A Scout will be considered active in his unit

if he is

1. Registered in his unit (registration fees are

current)

2. Not dismissed from his unit for disciplinary

reasons

3. Engaged by his unit leadership on a regular basis

(informed of unit activities through Scoutmaster

conference or personal contact, etc.)

 

So when it comes time for a BOR, these are the guidelines, whether we like them or not.

[FScouter 24]

I've always found it curious how a Scout can be "active" enough to earn merit badges, do service work, carry out a position of responsibility, and fulfill all the other requirements for a rank advancement, but be declared "not active" by some pompous adult that wants more. THAT is why the national council finally said NO, you can't make up a bunch or arbitrary and capricious "active" rules.

[Eamonn 61]

A couple of thoughts:

Had a nice Lad who was a Boy Scout, was very active. Met all the requirements for Eagle Scout rank other then the project.

Got involved with the local volunteer fire company and wanted to become a EMT.

The EMT classes were on th same night as his Troop night.

He completed his project, went before the ESBOR who deemed that wasn't active.

There was a big fuss. Lad's Dad was very upset, Council Advancement Committee felt that they needed to stand behind the members of the board and that not doing so would send the wrong message.

SE got involved. He contacted his bosses at National who more or less told him to sort this out ASAP.

He tasked me with it all.

It was clear that the Lad had met all the requirements and that the ESBOR had overstepped the mark.

Sure while he was going to the EMT classes he hadn't been attending Troop meetings, but he had met the Eagle Scout requirements..

He received the Eagle Scout Rank.

 

 

We have a few Sea Scouts who are also Boy Scouts.

The Ship has made it clear that it (The Ship.) Doesn't work on Boy Scout Advancement. If they want to complete their Eagle it needs to be done with the Troop.

When I was Skipper, I just didn't have the time to be over seeing two sets of advancement requirements and wrong as it might be? I felt it was unfair to the girls in the Ship to have Boy Scout awards that weren't available to the girls be awarded to the boys.

Ea.

[Abel Magwitch 10]

Active has two definitions as far as national is concerned. One is a definition that fits the word as most perceive the definition. The other allows national to wash their hands of getting involved with individual situations that may cause them to take a stand that may lead to a pr mess.

 

Here is how national defines active for being a Webelo:

 

Webelos Badge, Requirement 2:

 

"Be an active member of your Webelos den for 3 months (Active means having good attendance, paying den dues, working on den projects)."

 

Interesting isnt it? National actually defines active as having good attendance and participating with the den. Active is all about participation as far as the Webelos program is concerned.

 

The same definition of active has been implied for the requirements for Eagle.

 

But now, being active for the Eagle badge means to be simply registered with your dues paid. The word active becomes watered down in the Boy Scout program and no longer carries the typical webster's definition nor the definition of the Webelos program.

 

When boys become older and decide to get active in sports, the marching band, etc, it is their choice to do so. But the word active is truly defined. Sports coaches require a boy to be an active participant, requiring the boy making it to the practices and to the games. Band teachers require that the boy make it to the practices and to the games. In these cases, being active is a requirement. It follows the Webelos definition of active having good attendance and working with the group.

 

Part of Scouting is to teach boys to be responsible, learning to live with your decisions, to show leadership, to do the requirements no more and no less. The same applies to school sports. But in school if you dont show up to practice, dont show up to the games, you wont be in the band or football team too long.

 

A Scout makes his choice to be active in sports (because it is required to be active) or to be active in Scouting if he wants to be an Eagle (because being an acitve participant is a requirement).

 

But national has decided to change the definition of active. National chooses to change definitions so they dont have to be active themselves in the program they are supposed to be managing.

 

Which brings us to the Eagle Board of Review. What is an Eagle board to do? One of their jobs is to make sure that the Scout did what was required of him to earn the badge. And being active is one of the first requirements of the Eagle badge. Being active must be a pretty important.

 

And if the board finds the Scout was not actively participating in the troop, and deny the Scout his Eagle, the Scout can exercise his appeals and in every case I have witnessed, the Scout will get his Eagle approved by national. And national will not provide the reasons on how they reached their decision.

 

During the past few years, the national advancement task force (aka the national advancement committee) was asked to define active and they finally produced a definition which many (including myself) disagree with.

 

There is another active requirement that a Scout must meet to earn Eagle - the position of leadership. If a Scout is acting in the capacity of let's say the Senior Patrol Leader, but he never shows up to meetings and activities to perform his leadership duties, the troop can relieve the Scout from his leadership position and give it to another Scout who does actively participate with the troop. Then the "inactive" Scout will not be eligible for Eagle as he was relieved of his leadership position. And should that Scout turn 18 without being a junior leader for 6 months as a Life Scout, the Scout cannot make Eagle. And it was the Scout's choice to make.

 

I am sure that a high school coach would relieve the football captain of his position if the boy never showed up to practices or games because he chose to be active with his Boy Scout troop instead.

 

It truly is up to the Scout to decide which priority is more important to him - whether he decides to perform his duties as a junior leader for 6 months, or chooses to practice football instead of participating with the troop. He really can't do both, but due to nationals new definition of active, he now can.

 

As I stated before, national needs to drop the "active" requirements from badges of rank.

 

So much to timeless values and strong character.

 

(I wonder how national defines timeless values and strong character?)

 

 

Abel

(This message has been edited by abel magwitch)

[Eagle92 110]

Abel,

 

Actually 3 sets of "active.' Not only the CS one, but check out the Sea Scout ones.

 

for Ordinary 2. Active Membership

a. Attend at least 75 percent of your ships meetings and activities for six months.

Note: Check with your ships yeoman.

 

 

For Able 2. Active Membership

a. Attend at least 75 percent of your ships meetings and special activities for one year. Note: Check with your ships yeoman.

 

For Quartermaster a. Attend at least 75 percent of your ships meetings and special activities for 18 months.

Note: Check with your ships yeoman.

 

 

 

[5yearscouter 52]

according to the guy on this thread

http://meritbadge.net/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=48&t=3752&st=0&sk=t&sd=a

 

the new ACPP should address the definition of active.

 

It was supposed to be unveiled at Philmont last week,

but I haven't found it posted anywhere yet.

 

[shortridge 184]

Wow, this discussion has wandered far afield. Getting back to the OP's question, here are some salient points. CalicoPenn hit it right on the nose. Actually reading the source material renders this whole issue moot. The OP is wrong.

 

>> daveinWA quotes the BSH as requiring that an Eagle candidate be active in the Troop. He probably is working from the 11th Edition, which says: Be active in your troop and patrol for at least six months as a Life Scout.

 

>> The 12th Edition requirements, which are now in effect, state: Be active in your troop, team, crew, or ship for a period of at least six months after you have achieved the rank of Life Scout.

 

>> Thus, if a Scout is registered in both a troop and a crew, he can earn Eagle in either. It's the Scout's choice, not the unit's or the COs.

 

>> As others have said, the troop is separate from the crew. A troop manual does not govern membership in the crew.

 

Additionally, a Venturing Crew is NOT designed to provide high adventure opportunities to older Boy Scouts and keep them active in an associated troop. Venturing is an entirely separate program. daveinWA's CO and unit committees should take a very hard look at what they want to do, and start a Venture Patrol.

 

Chalk up another fundamental misunderstanding of Venturing vs. Venture Patrols from people who haven't bothered to read the book.

 

And why can't National change the blasted names and save us the headaches?

[Eagle92 110]

And why can't National change the blasted names and save us the headaches?

 

That's because the PTB at the time did not listen to us in the field, or pro's who are closer to the volunteers than most folks at national: DEs.

 

About 40 of us new DEs in my PDL-1 class said it was going to be a mess. And when it was told that the Silver Award was going to replace Eagle as the BSA's top award, the nat. dir. was lucky to get out of the room alive

 

[Beavah 205]

What is an Eagle board to do?

 

Act with courage and honor, and honestly assess "active" and scout spirit in the manner the organization that they represent expects.

 

If a unit level EBOR, the troop committee members should assess "active" and "scout spirit" in a manner consistent with the goals, mission, and character of da Chartered Organization.

 

If a district or council level EBOR, the board members should assess "active" and "scout spirit" in a manner consistent with the general goals, mission, and character of local scouting as described and expressed by the council member CORs and others.

 

If a national review, the national office should assess "active" and "scout spirit" according to the Rules and Regulations of the Boy Scouts of America, in a manner which harmonizes with the Aims and Mission of Scouting.

 

While it's a shame when someone else doesn't do their job and shortchanges kids or hurts da reputation of the program, that shouldn't change our willingness to do the right thing at whatever level of da program we serve.

 

So just do what's right, eh? Hope that others do the same. And let da chips fall where they may.

 

Of course if yeh want anything to change, I reckon sooner or later some enterprising young lad is goin' to publish a piece in a national media outlet with the title "How I got Eagle without really doing anything". Guaranteed that will be picked up by the wire services. Might even be an Oprah appearance. "Yeah, to be active I didn't have to do anything, just be registered." "Nope, never really did anything in a POR either, just made excuses about school and sports until I had the time in office done." "Just appeal it when your SM says No; National accepts anything."

 

I expect that's the only thing that will get folks' attention at HQ, eh? But just seein' 'em scramble about would be worth da price of admission. Yeh might even suggest it to one of your more intrepid fellows.

 

Beavah

(This message has been edited by Beavah)

[Eamonn 61]

Very often what seems to happen with these less than active??

Scouts is that they were active, did meet all the requirements needed for Eagle Scout rank, needing only to complete a couple of badges and the project.

During this time for whatever reason attendance falls off and a lot of times the enthusiasms they once had start to fade.

They then decide that having come /got so far that they might as well complete their Eagle.

Even though the requirements have been met, because they are no longer at each and every meeting someone decides that they are not active. - Which might well be the case? Still when it comes down to having met the requirements. They have been met.

In some cases a Lad cam meet all but a few of the Eagle requirements by the time he is 13 or 14 and then only needing the couple of badges and the project he falls off, only to return to complete everything when he is 17.

Not active?

As long as he remains a member, is on the charter and the requirements have been met. What's the big problem?

I'll take a stab at that.

The big problem is that most Troops don't offer a program that holds the interest for older Scouts and a good many Crews just never get off the ground, with too few members to get anything done.

More and more I'm starting to believe that the time to change the age grouping is now and that even though there are a few successful Venturing Crews, Venturing has been around long enough too no longer be new or the new program, it just doesn't work.

Ea.

[emb021 16]

"I've always found it curious how a Scout can be "active" enough to earn merit badges, do service work, carry out a position of responsibility, and fulfill all the other requirements for a rank advancement, but be declared "not active" by some pompous adult that wants more."

 

Well, as they say "Your mileage may vary", but this has NOT been my experience.

 

If a scout IS doing all you say about, then I doubt anyone would claim he was NOT active.

 

What usually happens is the scout who does all his stuff, then disappears for several months (ie no meeting, events), then returns to get his Eagle finished off and there are complains that he hasn't been active because he has been gone all that time.

 

Its these sorts that are usually the reason units want to define active. sort of saying to these youth that you truly MUST be active to be considered active.

 

 

"THAT is why the national council finally said NO, you can't make up a bunch or arbitrary and capricious "active" rules."

 

Depends again on what you mean by "arbitrary and capricious active rules". As I've said before, in most organizations, even one that are local 'chapters' of national groups, the local chapter has control on what THEY determine 'active'. These are usually along the lines of being current in your dues, attending a minimum (and reasonable number) of meetings and events. And usually, the national body will back up the local group's rules. Heck, in my Fraternity, we have a set of guidelines for pledge programs and requirements, but leave it to each chapter to define THEIR requirements for THEIR chapter. And so long as it is in-line with the guidelines, they are ok. Some may require 5 service hours, others 20, other 30s. And THAT'S OK.

 

I suspect that National wants to ensure that the SAME requirements for all ranks are the same for all youth. So allowing each unit to define their OWN requirements for active would in a sense be changing the requirements. If unit A says attendence at 50% of meetings is part of the active requirements, and unit B says its 75%, you now have requirements that AREN'T the same. So the only way to ensure this is to toss it all out and say being registred is the only proof of being active.

 

Personally, I would have preferred National follow what pretty much all other groups do: leave it up to each unit to clearly define what THEY consider active (prehaps in line with some national guideline), and stick with that. But I guess they just don't want to do that.

 

 

 

[ADCinNC 16]

From http://blog.scoutingmagazine.org/category/ask-the-expert/

 

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.

[Beavah 205]

I reckon that would only be meaningful if da National Advancement Task Force (is that what they're callin' themselves in the most recent re-organization?) operated transparently.

 

That is to say, if their names, councils, positions in scouting, contact information and deliberations were made available so that people who actually work with kids and families, or CORs and community representatives who actually sponsor units, or business and college folks who actually teach or want to employ people could have input into what "active" really means in terms of developing character, fitness, and citizenship in young folks.

 

From what I understand, it's a relatively small group that adheres to the make-believe definition of "active". Since that definition contradicts the official BSA policy and Rules & Regulations, to my mind the National Council should just remove their membership for failin' to live up to the BSA's charter and mission.

 

But then we remember that it's just kids' program materials, eh? Not worth gettin' in a lather about. Besides, donations are more important.

 

Beavah

 

[CalicoPenn 729]

Beavah,

 

I like you and all but I'm gonna have to call you out on your latest post here. You do a diservice to the folks that serve on those National task forces with your statement.

 

A quick search under BSA National Advancment Task Force brought me to a Central Region Venturing site congratulating a volunteer from the Great Sauk Trail Council who is also serving as a Regional Committee member on receiving the Silver Antelope.

 

On the National level, she has served on the National Shooting Sports Task Force, the National Youth Development Task Force, the National Advancement Task Force and served on the 2010 National Jamboree staff.

 

It's her local service that is most impressive: Webelos Den Leader, Cubmaster, MBC, Assistant Scoutmaster, Commitee Chair, Venturing Crew Advisor, District Training Committee, District Advancement Committee, Venturing Crew Advisor, District Eagle BOR member, Council Venturing Chair and Council Board Member. She's received the District Award of Merit, Silver Beaver and is a Vigil Honor member of the OA.

 

This is just one of the dedicated volunteers who have served on the National Advancement Task Force that you have just blithely denigrated as folks that don't work with CO's, parents, and don't understand the policy and you think National should take away their membership because they aren't following National policy as YOU interpret it.

 

These are the folks that National has chosen to interpret the policy so when they tell us what the definition of active is, that IS the policy of the National BSA.