mrjohns2 582 Posted February 21 Share Posted February 21 1 hour ago, DuctTape said: What is not ok? It aapears the GTA is not being violated. Is it a requirement to have a youth sign off before the adult does? If so, then you are clearly adding requirements. Cut and dry. Plain and simple. In this can, plain and added complexity. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
InquisitiveScouter 1656 Posted February 21 Share Posted February 21 (edited) 25 minutes ago, mrjohns2 said: Is it a requirement to have a youth sign off before the adult does? If so, then you are clearly adding requirements. Cut and dry. Plain and simple. In this can, plain and added complexity. The youth is not "signing off" the requirement. The youth (or, we should call them the Instructor) is simply using a column already printed in the Scout Handbook to indicate instruction is complete, and the Scout is ready to be tested. (The check mark column on left side of requirements lists.) However... if the Troop is "requiring" that this column be used, and is holding up a Scout from being tested or advanced because of it, then that would be adding requirements. I did not interpret the explanation as saying this "must" be done... just that this was a way to communicate it had been done, and that the Scout was ready to be tested. So, @KublaiKen, do you "require" that this left check column be "signed off", Or can a Scout simply present himself to a Scoutmaster-approved evaluator and say "Jimmy just finished instructing me, and I am ready to be tested!"?? If the Evaluator says, "No, your instructor did not sign in your book.", then you are violating advancement protocols. I can see the utility in the method if there is some time/space between instruction and testing. Say, Scout gets instruction at a Monday Troop meeting, but there is not time built into the meeting plan for testing. So, Scout gets the instructor check in the book (or checks it himself and maybe writes in instructor info), and then on Saturday, during the camping trip, he grabs an SM-approved evaluator and gets tested. Edited February 21 by InquisitiveScouter Link to post Share on other sites
fred8033 1593 Posted February 21 Share Posted February 21 50 minutes ago, InquisitiveScouter said: The youth is not "signing off" the requirement. The youth (or, we should call them the Instructor) is simply using a column already printed in the Scout Handbook to indicate instruction is complete, and the Scout is ready to be tested. (The check mark column on left side of requirements lists.) However... if the Troop is "requiring" that this column be used, and is holding up a Scout from being tested or advanced because of it, then that would be adding requirements. 100% agree. BSA requirement is for the scout to have the skill to advance. There is no requirement for the scout to be instructed. Heck, an ideal scout owns their own skill development by reading or learning thru any method they can. Is your process egregious? No. Will it be a huge red flag? No. ... It escalates as an issue when scout / troop conflict exists. I saw this every year. Scouts would escalate advancement issues to the Council Advancement Committee requesting approval to pursue Eagle beyond age 18 because the troop delayed the scout with extra hoops that added weeks / months of delay. ... I don't know if it would happen to your troop, but it does happen to other troops. ... A good CAC would can find in favor of the scout giving the scout a few months to six months because the troop did not do right by the scout. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
OaklandAndy 70 Posted February 21 Share Posted February 21 KIS(S) 2 Link to post Share on other sites
InquisitiveScouter 1656 Posted February 21 Share Posted February 21 34 minutes ago, fred8033 said: 100% agree. BSA requirement is for the scout to have the skill to advance. There is no requirement for the scout to be instructed. Heck, an ideal scout owns their own skill development by reading or learning thru any method they can. Is your process egregious? No. Will it be a huge red flag? No. ... It escalates as an issue when scout / troop conflict exists. I saw this every year. Scouts would escalate advancement issues to the Council Advancement Committee requesting approval to pursue Eagle beyond age 18 because the troop delayed the scout with extra hoops that added weeks / months of delay. ... I don't know if it would happen to your troop, but it does happen to other troops. ... A good CAC would can find in favor of the scout giving the scout a few months to six months because the troop did not do right by the scout. Concur... the only pertinent step in the advancement process is that a Scout "learns". And that can happen in many different ways... A Scout can learn the Seven Principles of Leave No Trace on his own. When he feels he is ready to be tested to "Recite the Leave No Trace Seven Principles from memory." , he asks. If he passes the test, great... sign him off. If he does not pass the test, he goes back to learning, until he feels he is ready again. You can offer instruction, but not require it. 2 Link to post Share on other sites
mrjohns2 582 Posted February 27 Share Posted February 27 On 2/21/2024 at 10:07 AM, InquisitiveScouter said: If he passes the test, great... sign him off. If he does not pass the test, he goes back to learning, until he feels he is ready again. You can offer instruction, but not require it. Agreed. I hope the other troop isn’t requiring him to pass the youth instructor sign off and the adult sign off. 2 Link to post Share on other sites
Mrjeff 248 Posted March 3 Share Posted March 3 No, the SM should be responsible for this. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now