Eligibility to be Elected

[Stosh 3452]

If the scout was not living up to the law or oath AND he'd been given notice he was on the bubble b

 

And why would he be putting his name in for balloting and why would anyone vote for him?  Sometimes one has to trust the boys to do the right thing.  I kinda do it all the time.

[Stosh 3452]

If the project does not fully answer wha the workbook requires, then no signature.

 

Then the approval committee will catch it and send it back to the boy to re-work.  It's the boy's responsibility to make sure it is done correctly, not mine.  I'm thinking the workbook explains it very clearly and the boy should be able to read or he's got more problems than getting his project approved.

[Stosh 3452]

I don't "rubber stamp" my signature on anything.

 

So then what is the purpose of your signature?

[Sentinel947 1205]

So then what is the purpose of your signature?

Isn't a signature an expression of consent and carrying out of a function? 

 

IE: Parent putting signature on a permission slip means they have granted permission. 

 

When I put my signature on a check and give it to the bank, I'm approving the transaction. 

 

Maybe I'm missing something. 

[Stosh 3452]

The part that was missed is the rubber stamp signature.  It only acknowledges I am aware of the situation, it does not require any authorization on my part, such as I authorize this scout to turn in his eagle rank workbook, or I have to authorize a scout taking a MB or authorize whether or not he's eligible for OA elections.  If the adults are part of the program that is the Gate Keepers of opportunity for boys, they can't do an Eagle Project, take a MB or run for OA, then I think the signature requirement is not in keeping with the boy led program and falls more in the adult controlled program.  I "rubber stamp" my signatures on these processes to let everyone know I am aware of what's going on, that's all that is necessary.  The opportunity is for the scout to take and doesn't need my approval.

[Krampus 696]

Then the approval committee will catch it and send it back to the boy to re-work.  It's the boy's responsibility to make sure it is done correctly, not mine.  I'm thinking the workbook explains it very clearly and the boy should be able to read or he's got more problems than getting his project approved.

 

But that's not the process, @@Stosh. BSA has laid down what the requirements are.

• Requirement #5 actually says "A project proposal must be approved by the organization benefiting from the effort, your unit leader and unit committee, and the council or district before you start. You must use the Eagle Scout Service Project Workbook, No. 512-927, in meeting this requirement". That's pretty clear that adults MUST be involved; specifically the SM and the CC.

   

• The proposal itself states that "Your proposal must be prepared first. It is an overview, but also the beginnings of planning. It must show your unit leader, unit committee, and council or district that your project can meet the following tests." Again, the SM *must* review the proposal and project concept to ensure 5 guiding criteria are covered. This protects the Scout against adults coming around after the fact and saying the project does not qualify...or where a beneficiary engages in "scope creep" by wanting more than what was specified.

   

• Most important is the signature line. The SM is being asked to essentially certify that he has "reviewed this proposal and discussed it with the candidate. I believe it provides impact worthy of an Eagle Scout service project, and will involve planning, development, and leadership. I am comfortable the Scout understands what to do, and how to lead the effort. I will see that the project is monitored, and that adults or others present will not overshadow him."

This is not rubber stamping anything. This is flat out being engaged, working with the Scout, providing advice and direction and counseling him on how to manage his way. Make no mistake, the Scout *is* responsible for everything, but just like any teacher, the SM's role is to guide and teach, then to sign off. Those who take this role seriously will be DEEPLY engaged and not just sign without reading, thinking and counseling. 

 

 

The part that was missed is the rubber stamp signature.  It only acknowledges I am aware of the situation, it does not require any authorization on my part, such as I authorize this scout to turn in his eagle rank workbook, or I have to authorize a scout taking a MB or authorize whether or not he's eligible for OA elections.  If the adults are part of the program that is the Gate Keepers of opportunity for boys, they can't do an Eagle Project, take a MB or run for OA, then I think the signature requirement is not in keeping with the boy led program and falls more in the adult controlled program.  I "rubber stamp" my signatures on these processes to let everyone know I am aware of what's going on, that's all that is necessary.  The opportunity is for the scout to take and doesn't need my approval.

 

I disagree. The because the Eagle project is like any other unit activity, the SM needs to make sure that trained leaders are present, YPT is in force, Sweet 16 and Age Appropriate Tools guidelines are followed, etc. While we have Scouts plan camp outs, and we do ask them to consider and plan for all of these things, it is ultimately the SM's role to make sure everything is ticked and tied. That's what the signature does.

 

I will tell you this, the SM review is more for the *Scout's* protection than anything else. I have seen a great many projects get declined or added to after the fact because someone (usually an adult, and usually wearing a BSA uniform) either thought it was not enough or changed requirements AFTER the project plan was done.

 

I wouldn't let a young man alone to navigate that territory alone. We do it together. It is the same with any SM intervention whether it be OA candidates, MBs or Eagle projects. Adults owe it to the youth to provide constant feedback. Only then can the boys truly know where they stand.

Edited March 28, 2016 by Krampus

[Stosh 3452]

But that's not the process, @@Stosh. BSA has laid down what the requirements are.

• Requirement #5 actually says "A project proposal must be approved by the organization benefiting from the effort, your unit leader and unit committee, and the council or district before you start. You must use the Eagle Scout Service Project Workbook, No. 512-927, in meeting this requirement". That's pretty clear that adults MUST be involved; specifically the SM and the CC.

Yep, 4 signatures of which any can deny the opportunity for the scout to continue.  My signature is never one that will deny a boy an opportunity.  If the benefiting organization and council approve it, it's fine with me.  CC can do what he/she wishes. 

• The proposal itself states that "Your proposal must be prepared first. It is an overview, but also the beginnings of planning. It must show your unit leader, unit committee, and council or district that your project can meet the following tests." Again, the SM *must* review the proposal and project concept to ensure 5 guiding criteria are covered. This protects the Scout against adults coming around after the fact and saying the project does not qualify...or where a beneficiary engages in "scope creep" by wanting more than what was specified.

I can and do that long before a signature is required.

• Most important is the signature line. The SM is being asked to essentially certify that he has "reviewed this proposal and discussed it with the candidate. I believe it provides impact worthy of an Eagle Scout service project, and will involve planning, development, and leadership. I am comfortable the Scout understands what to do, and how to lead the effort. I will see that the project is monitored, and that adults or others present will not overshadow him."

He talks to me about his projects, he figures out what he wants to do, he tells me about it and the signature is a formality on a page in his workbook.  and he would get the same attention from me on his project whether I needed to sign or not.  The signature is a rubber stamp formality.

 

This is not rubber stamping anything. This is flat out being engaged, working with the Scout, providing advice and direction and counseling him on how to manage his way. Make no mistake, the Scout *is* responsible for everything, but just like any teacher, the SM's role is to guide and teach, then to sign off. Those who take this role seriously will be DEEPLY engaged and not just sign without reading, thinking and counseling. 

 

And yet one can do that with or without a signature from me as SM.

 

 

I disagree. The because the Eagle project is like any other unit activity, the SM needs to make sure that trained leaders are present, YPT is in force, Sweet 16 and Age Appropriate Tools guidelines are followed, etc. While we have Scouts plan camp outs, and we do ask them to consider and plan for all of these things, it is ultimately the SM's role to make sure everything is ticked and tied. That's what the signature does.

 

No it doesn't.  A signature doesn't guarantee any of that will happen.  If it's going to happen it will happen with or without a signature.  Just depends on the SM.  For legal purposes if the SM signs and a boy gets hurt, the signature makes no difference.  The SM should be there whether he signed or not and the boy is hurt makes no difference, the SM is still responsible.

 

I will tell you this, the SM review is more for the *Scout's* protection than anything else. I have seen a great many projects get declined or added to after the fact because someone (usually an adult, and usually wearing a BSA uniform) either thought it was not enough or changed requirements AFTER the project plan was done.

 

And a SM signature guarantees none of this will happen?  I doubt it, it will happen whether the SM signs or not.

 

I wouldn't let a young man alone to navigate that territory alone. We do it together. It is the same with any SM intervention whether it be OA candidates, MBs or Eagle projects. Adults owe it to the youth to provide constant feedback. Only then can the boys truly know where they stand.

 

The adults owe it to the youth to trust them with fulfilling their responsibility.  If the boy needs help and support, I'm there for them, I'm not there hovering over their shoulder providing them with constant feedback.  I'm not one for being a helicopter SM.  I would think it would be extremely difficult for the scout to show any sort of leadership if the adults are in there guiding, mentoring, directing, providing feedback, and basically making sure the boy can't make a mistake.

 

My Eagles do not put out a press release with their picture showing their uniform and Eagle certificate.  Instead, my boys have the newspaper reporters show up at the project and take pictures and do their own reporting of what the boy is doing.  Big difference.

 

My "signature" on any of this process means absolutely nothing other than a courtesy contact for the paperwork to be turned in.  I have seen SM's, ASM's, and CC's totally re-write Eagle projects for the boys so that they will sail smoothly through the red-tape.  What they sign is what THEY have written about the project.  In that case they should sign their work.  I only sign because the red tape would be an obstacle to the boy's opportunity if I didn't.

 

Just because I rubber stamp my signature on these things doesn't mean I'm not involved in the process.  I've been known to take a shovel or two in my hands over the years.  And most importantly of all, my boys know they can come to me for help anytime 24/7 and they don't need my signature to do so.

[fred johnson 936]

Lots of chat here ... but the OA election process is the ultimate let the scouts do it.  Scouts are told "friend to all" ... "helpful with a smile" ... etc.   They know who is good and who should be voted in.  NO is much more meaningful when it comes from your peers.

 

Let the scouts vote as they will.  Anything else uses part of your relationship of the scouts up.  

Edited March 28, 2016 by fred johnson

[Krampus 696]

@@Stosh, just to reply:

• The beneficiary signs first, the SM second, the CC third, the district rep last, so the SM must review and approve the project in the middle of the process. If the Scout does not have a trained Scouter present to be at his project, how can you approve the project? That's the SM's job to make sure the Scout knows the rules and that they are followed.
• I agree that the SM's input comes before the signature, HOWEVER, it is also required during the signature phase as part of the SM's role. That's a very different role from the signature of the CC or district rep.
• Totally disagree that the signature is a rubber stamp. BSA does not see it as such. Everyone see the SM's signature that the project will be run according to BSA policies and processes. It even says in the workbook that the SM signature is THE validation that all aspects of safety and such will be followed. 
• I agree that the signature itself does not mean adherence to the rules will happen. BUT, what it does say is that YOU as SM will make sure it DOES happen. That's your name on the signature block and your butt on the line to make sure it happens.

My point is that the SM signature is your guarantee to the Scout and BSA that you will be there to make sure the Scout implements these things. As I said, BSA considers this just like a camp out or any other unit event. The SM is on the hook for those to make sure policies are followed. The Eagle project is no different.

[sst3rd 129]

stosh,

 

 

You're working it SO hard. It's your way only, and other folks don't know what they're doing. This is so much fun.

 

 

sst3rd

[Eagledad 2777]

When a scoutmaster signature is required, I don't rubberstamp anything, I use my power responsibily. I'm a mature smart adult who uses unbiased reasoning for  judging such things.

 

Demonizing adult responsibilities under the cover of "adult run" is a simplistic hostel way of trying to intimidate the conversation in one direction. The discussion is a lot more productive for everyone when discussing how to use the responsibility of the signature properly.

 

Barry

[Krampus 696]

Getting this back to OA elections, I *do* think the adult intervention issue is MUCH different in that scenario versus during something more formal, like Eagle project approval.

 

During the Eagle project approval there are specific guidelines and requirements guiding the adult input. In that instance I disagree with @@Stosh about the adult's role.

 

During the OA candidate "approval" there are no established guidelines...it is left up to the SM. If the feedback to the Scout who may be denied his chance at election is given without notice to correct any problems, that's not fair. This would be the same with denying POR credit. I would agree with @@Stosh that in such cases adult intervention is ill-advised if not flat out wrong UNLESS the feedback is given with sufficient time to address and correct it by the Scout.

Edited March 28, 2016 by Krampus

[Stosh 3452]

@@Stosh, just to reply:

• The beneficiary signs first, the SM second, the CC third, the district rep last, so the SM must review and approve the project in the middle of the process. If the Scout does not have a trained Scouter present to be at his project, how can you approve the project? That's the SM's job to make sure the Scout knows the rules and that they are followed.

All my boys are literate and are expected to read the booklet so they know what's going on with the project.  If the boy has a learning problem, I have been known to work with him on his project with the reading parts.  Yes, I have had special needs scouts that have worked on Eagle projects with me.

• I agree that the SM's input comes before the signature, HOWEVER, it is also required during the signature phase as part of the SM's role. That's a very different role from the signature of the CC or district rep.

* see below

• Totally disagree that the signature is a rubber stamp. BSA does not see it as such. Everyone see the SM's signature that the project will be run according to BSA policies and processes. It even says in the workbook that the SM signature is THE validation that all aspects of safety and such will be followed. 

* see below

• I agree that the signature itself does not mean adherence to the rules will happen. BUT, what it does say is that YOU as SM will make sure it DOES happen. That's your name on the signature block and your butt on the line to make sure it happens.

My point is that the SM signature is your guarantee to the Scout and BSA that you will be there to make sure the Scout implements these things.

 

Do as he's told?  Where's the leadership in that?  * See below

 

As I said, BSA considers this just like a camp out or any other unit event. The SM is on the hook for those to make sure policies are followed. The Eagle project is no different.  * See below

 

*  When I signed my registration application to be a SM, I agreed to all of this.  How many times do I need to sign before the Council believes it? 

 

There also comes a time when the boys know the policies and procedures of the BSA and don't need to be babysat.  If they aren't to that point yet, maybe they aren't ready to do an Eagle Leadership Project.  These boys have participated in a few service projects, eagle projects, etc. along the way that by the time they get to their eagle project, they pretty much know what they're doing and I trust them to do it correctly as part of their project.  No one has come anywhere near disappointing me after all these years.

 

The closest I ever came to being a Gate Keeper was with one Eagle candidate ask me for a recommendation for his Eagle.  I said I couldn't do that in light of his record in scouting.   He came back a few weeks later and said the committee wouldn't do a EBOR without my recommendation.  I suggested to him two options he might want to consider.  Appealing the Council's requirement which was NOT part of the National policy to National or get his act together in the troop.

 

The boy did get his act together turned out to be a pretty good Scout and instead of a recommendation from me, I went in and straightened the SE out on the process the Eagle Board was not following properly.  He got his Eagle without my written recommendation nor signature on their recommendation form.  All I got out of the whole fiasco was the boy's mentor pin and a hug of thanks for being his SM.

[Stosh 3452]

stosh,

 

 

You're working it SO hard. It's your way only, and other folks don't know what they're doing. This is so much fun.

 

 

sst3rd

  What make one think it's my way only?   I stated what I do, everyone else is entitled to do it any way they wish.  Units are like snowflakes, everyone has it's own unique personality.  I have the way I do it and others have their ways of doing things.  If what they're doing works, then they don't even need to read my posts.  But if others are struggling and are looking for alternatives to try, they can read my posts and see if there is anything in them that they might want to try to see if it works for them.  If not, move on and don't lose any sleep over it.  There are hundreds of ways to skin a cat, one might have to try 80 or 90 different ways before they find the one that works best for them.  The ways I use seem to produce the least amount of hassle for me and my people, your mileage may vary, buyer beware, etc. etc. Just get off the "Stosh's-way-is-the-only-way kick", it's getting old... just about as tiresome as hearing all the whining about it, too.

 

So let's make it official:  Stosh is happy with what works for him.  He's also happy with what works for you.  The two don't have to be the same thing, they only need to make people happy.  If things aren't working out for you, try some of the other options out there on the forum.  Stosh's option is but one of many.  Try them all and see what works for you and your situation.

[Krampus 696]

*  When I signed my registration application to be a SM, I agreed to all of this.  How many times do I need to sign before the Council believes it? 

 

There also comes a time when the boys know the policies and procedures of the BSA and don't need to be babysat.  If they aren't to that point yet, maybe they aren't ready to do an Eagle Leadership Project.  These boys have participated in a few service projects, eagle projects, etc. along the way that by the time they get to their eagle project, they pretty much know what they're doing and I trust them to do it correctly as part of their project.  No one has come anywhere near disappointing me after all these years.

 

The closest I ever came to being a Gate Keeper was with one Eagle candidate ask me for a recommendation for his Eagle.  I said I couldn't do that in light of his record in scouting.   He came back a few weeks later and said the committee wouldn't do a EBOR without my recommendation.  I suggested to him two options he might want to consider.  Appealing the Council's requirement which was NOT part of the National policy to National or get his act together in the troop.

 

The boy did get his act together turned out to be a pretty good Scout and instead of a recommendation from me, I went in and straightened the SE out on the process the Eagle Board was not following properly.  He got his Eagle without my written recommendation nor signature on their recommendation form.  All I got out of the whole fiasco was the boy's mentor pin and a hug of thanks for being his SM.

So you train your boys to know the Sweet 16, tools guidelines, your permit policy, GTA, GTSS and the multitiude of other docs BSA requires SMs to know and operationalize?

 

In my unit we discuss those things but it's not until they reach Eagle they need to concern themselves with those things because of their project. Still, BSA requires me to specifically certify on every project that I've done this. It's in addition to what's on the application. Yes it's legalese from lawyers...what isn't these days?