Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
robert12

EBOR question

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, robert12 said:

Actually Eagle projects are considered troop activities, this changed either with the initial release of the Guide to Advancement in 2011 or with one of its revisions.  

This is from the 2017 revision:

 

Well, how about that.  Yet another change snuck in by National without adequately informing we who toil in the fields.

Not only was I wrong, but the three people who green-arrowed my post were wrong as well.  :D

I always thought that the Eagle candidate was supposed to be in charge of his (or her) own project.  I guess not.  I agree with the idea that projects should follow YP guidelines, but beyond that it kinds of takes away from the idea that the Scout is in charge of the project.

Edited by NJCubScouter
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, NJCubScouter said:

Well, how about that.  Yet another change snuck in by National without adequately informing we who toil in the fields.

Not only was I wrong, but the three people who green-arrowed my post were wrong as well.  :D

I always thought that the Eagle candidate was supposed to be in charge of his (or her) own project.  I guess not.  I agree with the idea that projects should follow YP guidelines, but beyond that it kinds of takes away from the idea that the Scout is in charge of the project.

Mea culpa. :o

What happens if there are no scouts helping with the Eagle project?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I always thought the change was to ensure youth protection guidelines were still followed; no more, no less. Still the Life Scout's responsibility for the project. But an adult cannot allow scouts to use chainsaws and just say, "it isn't a troop activity".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, RememberSchiff said:

Mea culpa. :o

What happens if there are no scouts helping with the Eagle project?

 

With the exception of his brother and 2 others, one of my Eagles didn't use any Scouts in the troop. He wanted to do something for his church, and got members of his youth group there involved since their families would benefit.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, NJCubScouter said:

I always thought that the Eagle candidate was supposed to be in charge of his (or her) own project.  I guess not.  I agree with the idea that projects should follow YP guidelines, but beyond that it kinds of takes away from the idea that the Scout is in charge of the project.

This issue (with the Eagle project) is no different than any other Boy Scout event or activity. They are planned and executed by the Scouts, but the adult leaders are responsible for health and safety. PLs and SPLs are still "in charge" of the events, but the adults are responsible for safety.

If anything, this just aligns completely with what has been our mission as Scouters all along. You are confusing being in charge with who is responsible. Eagle projects are no different than any other Scouting event where the boys plan, are in charge, but the adult leaders responsible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Col. Flagg said:

This issue (with the Eagle project) is no different than any other Boy Scout event or activity. They are planned and executed by the Scouts, but the adult leaders are responsible for health and safety. PLs and SPLs are still "in charge" of the events, but the adults are responsible for safety.

If anything, this just aligns completely with what has been our mission as Scouters all along. You are confusing being in charge with who is responsible. Eagle projects are no different than any other Scouting event where the boys plan, are in charge, but the adult leaders responsible.

The point is, an Eagle project has not been considered a "unit activity" for very long.  I recall some lengthy knock-down-drag-out debates in this forum, say 10-15 years ago, over the relationship between the troop and the Eagle project.

Things have changed in the area of leadership/YP, and fairly recently.  It has probably been about 10 years since the BSA decided that the YP guidelines applied to merit badge counseling.  Before about 15 years ago, there were no nationally mandated criminal background checks, and you didn't have to give National your Social Security Number.  On this business of an Eagle project being a "unit activity," the change was made so recently and/or quietly that I didn't know about it, and I am a troop Advancement Chairman, so I should have known about it.

Which still leaves the fact that (as far as I know), nowhere in the Eagle project requirement does it say that the Scout must involve his troop, or any of its members or leaders, in his Eagle project (other than the SM's and committee's signatures in the workbook.)  In the vast majority of projects that is not an issue, but I strongly suspect it has been an issue occasionally.  In those cases, I am not exactly sure how it becomes a "unit activity."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, NJCubScouter said:

Which still leaves the fact that (as far as I know), nowhere in the Eagle project requirement does it say that the Scout must involve his troop, or any of its members or leaders, in his Eagle project (other than the SM's and committee's signatures in the workbook.)  In the vast majority of projects that is not an issue, but I strongly suspect it has been an issue occasionally.  In those cases, I am not exactly sure how it becomes a "unit activity."

As with much BSA does, they are never very clear or concise. This should be no surprise. Especially to those with decades of experience working with BSA. So we "triangulate" what BSA intends by reading multiple sources, as well as scouring the GTA (when a new one comes out) for the changes. They actually do a decent job of noting those changes each time they update the doc. 

So an experienced Scouter would apply the Eagle workbook, the GTA, the GTSS, the Sweet 16 and other such docs that have any reference to how any Scouting activity (whether an Eagle project or any other Scouting event) should be handled.

As for the Eagle workbook, page 26 says:

Supervision
To meet the requirement to “give leadership to others,” your Scout must be given every opportunity to succeed independently without direct supervision. The Scout's troop must provide adults to assist or keep an eye on things, and your organization should also have someone available. The Scout, however, must provide the leadership necessary for project completion without adult interference.

As a former SM I would interpret this to mean that: 1) The troop must provide two-deep, trained adult leaders on-site at all times for any Eagle project, and 2) "should" also provide Scouts from the unit (our "organization) to help. This section has been in the workbook as long as I have been SM and our unit has always provided both to any and all of our Eagle projects.

Edited by Col. Flagg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Col. Flagg said:

Supervision
To meet the requirement to “give leadership to others,” your Scout must be given every opportunity to succeed independently without direct supervision. The Scout's troop must provide adults to assist or keep an eye on things, and your organization should also have someone available. The Scout, however, must provide the leadership necessary for project completion without adult interference.

I see.  "Keep an eye on things" but don't directly supervise.  So... what?  INdirectly supervise?  And what would that look like, exactly?

Those are rhetorical questions, and I am mostly joking around at this point.  Laughing at yet another example of BSA-speak.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Organization" refers to beneficiary not unit, as apparent in the previous paragraphs.  An Eagle project does not require scouts be workers. The Eagle candidate, as demonstration of his leadership, recruits workers not his unit.

My $0.02

Edited by RememberSchiff
grammar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Glad that Scouters didn't need to be around when I did my project. Only adult there was my mom, and she took care of snacks and drinks. My buddies did all the work, and I did the supervising.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is all about legal exposure and liability. Without adult supervision at Eagle projects, the heads of BSA lawyers would explode. The tool usage matrix shows how BSA has painted itself into a corner. The boys are supposed to be in charge, but the boys are not allowed to operate the tools. Strange contortions happen to satisfy these conflicting requirements.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, gblotter said:

This is all about legal exposure and liability. Without adult supervision at Eagle projects, the heads of BSA lawyers would explode. The tool usage matrix shows how BSA has painted itself into a corner. The boys are supposed to be in charge, but the boys are not allowed to operate the tools. Strange contortions happen to satisfy these conflicting requirements.

This actually came up during an EBOR for another unit and the unit lead got in to hot water. The candidate was too young, as were his helpers, to use most of the tools on his project. There was only one adult from the unit present and he was not a trained leader. There were so many violations the district rep's head almost exploded.

They used it as a chance to counsel both the youth and the SM on proper procedure and rules.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Col. Flagg said:

They used it as a chance to counsel both the youth and the SM on proper procedure and rules.

It sounds like the EBOR handled it well. I have sympathy for Scouts and Scoutmasters trying to understand and comply. Coaching rather than censure seems like the right thing to do in that situation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, gblotter said:

It sounds like the EBOR handled it well. I have sympathy for Scouts and Scoutmasters trying to understand and comply. Coaching rather than censure seems like the right thing to do in that situation.

Well for the Scout I would agree. Who the heck could find all this BSA double-speak documentation on their own? I know adults who are challenged with it.

However, the SM has been in the role 18 years. He should be able to recite the GTA, Sweet 16 and other docs chapter and verse. He got caught mailing it in and the flogged him good...and rightly so IMHO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Col. Flagg said:

However, the SM has been in the role 18 years. He should be able to recite the GTA, Sweet 16 and other docs chapter and verse. He got caught mailing it in and the flogged him good...and rightly so IMHO.

I have done two terms as Scoutmaster (10+ years). I only became aware of the BSA tool usage matrix last year (and quite by chance). Flog me too, I guess.

Edited by gblotter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×