Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
CarlosD

What can SM do for son's advancement?

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

Thanks all. Am inclined to not allow Adult Leaders to check off their kid's requirements except for perhaps service hours. Will get feedback from Troop Committee and put into bylaws. I think its important to have this sort of policy in the troop bylaws, but I suppose that is another topic.

Edited by CarlosD
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, CarlosD said:

Thanks all. Am inclined to not allow Adult Leaders to check off their kid's requirements except for perhaps service hours. Will get feedback from Troop Committee and put into bylaws. I think its important to have this sort of policy in the troop bylaws, but I suppose that is another topic.

I would not put into by-laws anything about advancement except that  you all will comply with BSA's Guide to Advancement and maximize the opportunities for youth leaders to sign off on requirements under the direction of the Scoutmaster.

You could add that any counselor failing to teach the entire content of an MB's requirements and review each scouts completion of those requirements on an individual basis will be black-listed from the troop and never again recommended to counsel any other scouts in the troop, district, or counsel.

Don't worry about the 'semblance of evil when what matters is evil personified.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, CarlosD said:

Thanks all. Am inclined to not allow Adult Leaders to check off their kid's requirements except for perhaps service hours. Will get feedback from Troop Committee and put into bylaws. I think its important to have this sort of policy in the troop bylaws, but I suppose that is another topic.

Why would you propose adding something to troop bylaws that is in direct contradiction to the Guide to Advancement?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, CarlosD said:

Thanks all. Am inclined to not allow Adult Leaders to check off their kid's requirements except for perhaps service hours. Will get feedback from Troop Committee and put into bylaws. I think its important to have this sort of policy in the troop bylaws, but I suppose that is another topic.

No disrespect intended, Carlos, but you would benefit greatly from reading and embracing the "Guide to Advancement".  Any time you create a policy of any kind, type, or form, you make things harder on your scouts and create unnecessary problems for your scouters.

Take qwayze's suggestions to heart and you'll be a wiser leader who enables his scouts to succeed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎5‎/‎17‎/‎2019 at 10:02 AM, TMSM said:

This is what I do as SM. My son is now a Life Scout and I do plan on doing his Scout Master Conference for Eagle although with one of my ASMs.

I think when it is all done, you will be glad you did.  You also get to experience those campouts and events all over again.  I know I would have regretted not doing it.  Just enjoy the moment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In our Troop we allow First Class and above Scouts to sign off on First Class and below Scouts Rank Advancement.  We feel it helps with Leadership.  We do have a discussion with all new First Class Scouts to ensure they follow the "Describe", "Show", "Demonstrate" instructions for making certain the Scouts completed the requirement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would not put it into the by-laws. I would, as the GTA states, designate persons who you know are trained and understand advancement as a method and have embraced your vision of the troop. In other words, no blanket "prohibitions" instead use specific designations. Utilize your ASM corps, and PLC as the field to which you designate. A brand new scout parent who is a first year ASM is likely not to be designated by me as someone who could sign off any scout requirement. It is vital the adult understands the advancement method and knows the expectations of it.

IMO, to be designated by the SM :

1. the adult learns,

2. the adult is tested,

3. the adult is designated

4. the adults may sign off.

 

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not saying it's right or wrong, but in the Troop my older kids were a part of, we had no rules about this but we made a conscious effort to minimize the number of merit badges, especially the Eagle required ones, that were taught and signed off on by a Scout's own parent. Every committee member was a merit badge counselor for as many Eagle required merit badges as we could attest to (or gain) competence in, so although some of the Scouts might have had one or two non-required badges counseled by his own parent, the vast majority were not. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/16/2019 at 8:55 PM, Thunderbird said:

8.0.0.3 Composition of the Board of Review
Unit leaders [Scoumasters] and assistants [Assistant Scoutmasters] shall not serve on a board of review for a Scout in their own unit. Parents, guardians, or relatives shall not serve on a board for their child. The candidate or the candidate’s parent(s) or guardian(s), or relative(s) shall have no part in selecting any board of review members.

Is this a recent change?  Last I remember reading this I would have sworn that while the Scoutmaster was specifically not permitted to be on the Board of Review, the participation of ASMs was only discouraged and could be permitted if no other option was available.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, elitts said:

Is this a recent change?  Last I remember reading this I would have sworn that while the Scoutmaster was specifically not permitted to be on the Board of Review, the participation of ASMs was only discouraged and could be permitted if no other option was available.

As long as I can remember (admittedly not that long, 2011 or so.) ASM's were not permitted to be on Board of Reviews. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, elitts said:

Is this a recent change?  Last I remember reading this I would have sworn that while the Scoutmaster was specifically not permitted to be on the Board of Review, the participation of ASMs was only discouraged and could be permitted if no other option was available.

Certainly when I was a scout, the SMs and ASMs were nowhere to be found on my BoRs. My dad was on the committee, and they would be held after the troop meetings. The SM would go upstairs to give his report,  and any boys waited downstairs, he would come back down and then the boys "went up" for their BoRs, one at a time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, I must be remembering what I was told at a University of Scouting then, rather than it being something I read because I know for sure that's what the instructor there was telling people.

Well, that's good, I never liked the whole idea of "You should try not to, but can if you must", because it always made me feel like I was being an ass when I would tell a scout they should ask someone else.

(Yes, our troop generally makes the scouts track adults down for a BOR)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/20/2019 at 7:13 PM, elitts said:

Is this a recent change?  Last I remember reading this I would have sworn that while the Scoutmaster was specifically not permitted to be on the Board of Review, the participation of ASMs was only discouraged and could be permitted if no other option was available.

As Sentinel says below,  Unless they changed it in the late 2010s, it has been the rule for ASMs not to be allowed on a Board of Review.  

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  

×