Eagle Scout= SPL?

[eisely 13]

Our troop is fairly large (60+ scouts most years)and in a typical year about half a dozen scouts make eagle. We are not an eagle mill.

 

Nevertheless, I don't think we have ever had a scout who had attained eagle run for or be elected to SPL. Appointing them as JASM honors them and allows the troop to make use of their talents and experience, while leaving the PORs open for those who need them.(This message has been edited by eisely)

[Basementdweller 608]

I would like to think that the Eagle would understand that he does not need a leadership position any longer and the JASM is the spot for him.....Far as being not included in the process any more.....that is up to the leadership dynamic of the troop.

[Tampa Turtle 1011]

I know a few Eagles I would not want to SPL's --they just lack the interpersonal skills. I think Eagles make very good Troop guides. It all depends on the boy.

[Eagledad 2779]

The only rank that is reqired for anything in our troop is 1st class to be on the PLC. Other than that, we found through the years that as soon as rank is held as a requirement for something, it will come back at you. Age is the same way, once age is used as a requirement, it will come back and bite you somewhere. So we quit using age and rank as reqirments unless they were required for activities like Philmont.

 

Our troop has been blessed by many good SPLs and I think its because it's hard work in our troop. A lazy scout knows better to even try, so generally only the ambitious hard working scouts run for the position. One of my best SPLs hated advancement, so Star was the highest rank he ever advanced. But he was such a good natural leader that I fully expect to see him in Washington DC one day with the title of senator.

 

Barry

[qwazse 4345]

acco4 had two questions the first one was rhetorical, but that never stopped us before ...

 

How did JASM get into the discussion of Eagle Scout = SPL?

Sorry for the tangent, but I was just saying that if our troop doesn't require rank for JASM, so we don't limit SPL to the lower ranks.

 

... should a Scout be able to become an Eagle without serving, or at least attempting, to hold the office of SPL?

Yes. And we should expect more from a librarian Life scout than a first-class scout. That's the rules, I didn't write them. (Although, I would prefer that 1st class scout spend a stint as a PL.)

 

 

To follow up on MT's most recent post -- just for the sake of contrast: our troop doesn't consider JASM to be a privelage (beyond the implied "we really trust you"). We just assign it if a guy really wants to take charge of some aspect of troop life. The purpose for us is to put a title on the kid that answers a question like "why is this high school junior talking to my little Johnny about a 5 mile hike in the middle of winter?"

[troop366eagle 10]

Sorry it took so long to reply to all your posts.

 

As a remark, thank you for the different ideas, suggestions, and questions raised with this question.

 

My question was can an Eagle Scout be an SPL? As an add-on, it was mainly geared toward Eagle Scouts who had NOT held SPL before.

 

In our troop, it has always been customary to 'award' the POR of JASM to any boy who achieved Eagle Scout. In retrospect, maybe we should keep it to 16y.o.+ as we currently have many younger boys (14-15) who are achieving Eagle.

 

The reason I brought up the topic of JASM's in my original post is because it has always been customary to award an Eagle with the POR of JASM. This would mean that they wouldn't need to run of SPL, as they already had a POR. That is why I brought up my question about an Eagle Scout being an SPL.

 

Thanks so much for all the suggestions!

[Stosh 3452]

I have often wondered why scouts needed to "hold a POR" in Scouting, unless it is an Eagle Mill looking to make sure all the boys walk through all the requirements. JASM is just another POR to hold a prestigeous/honorary POR in a troop as if they have retired from active Scouting. Like of like having a honorary, non-functional SPL.

 

It is important for the troop that the POR's actually function in those positions and quit having the POR patch-wearing scout goof off for 6 months to gain rank.

 

If an Eagle scout wants to be a TG and some FC scout misses out on an opportunity to rank advance, so be it, wait until a functional position opens up and volunteer for it. And who says one can't have 2 TG's in a larger troop? Eagle Mill, by virtue of it's own definition requires boys to hold POR at a young age, i.e. 14-15 year old Eagles, and no where in the requirements does it expect the boy to actually do the job. Idealistically he will, but functionally it always leaves lots of room for discussion and fodder for this forum.

 

If an Eagle Scout wishes to be an SPL, so be it, if some other scout has to wait 6 months to get his POR, so be it.

 

Better yet, instead of having a bunch of honorary JASM's sitting around doing not much of anything, why not have them patrol up, do high adventure, and instead of keeping their nose to the grindstone looking for Eagle rank, just have fun and enjoy the fruits of their labor?

 

In Scouting the rank requirements for any and all ranks are the MINIMUM expectations of what skills and knowledge a scout should have. There are no requirements that define the maximum. Why not let your Eagles go out and find what those may be.

 

In a patrol-method, boy-led program, the SM and ASM, theoretically, should have very little to do. By definition a JASM, except for the excuse of his age, are expected to do very little as well.

 

Reaching the highest rank/achievement in the military, business or whatever, means the expectations to function at the highest level BEGINS, in Scouting, somehow it means the END. In the long run, I don't see that definition as being very helpful to the program.

 

Your mileage may vary,

 

Stosh

 

 

 

 

[jrush 11]

jblake, to answer your question about PORs being required, IMO part of being an Eagle Scout isn't leadership, but responsibility. Hence, why a scout could conceivably become Eagle and never be a "leader" such as a PL, SPL, Troop Guide, Den Chief, etc...he can be a scribe, librarian, trainer or quartermaster and fulfill the requirement just as well. Hence, why the requirement is "position of responsibility", not "position of leadership".

 

The PORs are there for a Scout to learn the importance of responsibility to the organization. That's also why the requirement says "serve actively", not just "get elected/appointed to".

 

Anywhow, just my opinion.

[Stosh 3452]

jrush, you are correct in that it clearly states that a POR is not necessarily a leadership role, but one would think that somewhere along the way each scout needs to be sufficiently trained in leadership to be able to carry out a leadership project. That is stated explicitly in the requirement.

 

Given what the requirements state, and in reference to what is asked in the initial thread can an Eagle Scout serve as an SPL... The answer lies in whether or not the Eagle Scout can effectively carry out a leadership position without any real leadership training. Sure one can take on a leadership project and get a task done by directing his buddies in the project. However that does not show sufficient skill in interpersonal relationships, charisma, etc. necessary to lead a group of boys as SPL. Being an Eagle Scout does not hold any sway in actually accomplishing anything after receiving that rank. Once they have attained the rank, there is nothing according to any requirements that says he has to actually function in the position. If he gets the position and does nothing, it can't be held against any advancement. Once that happens it is a political/honorary position and can do extensive harm to the troop. Sure, a pre-Eagle can fall into this situation as well, but the SM has a bit of leverage and withhold advancement for not fulfilling the responsibility.

 

There is a thin vague line between responsibility and leadership. If the expectation of the position only requires me to accomplish a task, I do not need to demonstrate any leadership at all, i.e. taking notes at the PLC as a Scribe. As long as I take notes, I'm safe. However, being a Senior PL means I need to work with other scouts and be able to lead them effectively. If one has never been a PL, I would think it pretty much a useless opportunity to think he can lead them.

 

To have organizational skills (i.e. organize an Eagle project) and design a task that needs to be accomplished is one thing. If the plan is laid out and the others take on the actual directives of getting it done means the "followers" have had to take on real leadership to get it done.

 

An SPL that says PL-1 do this, and PL-2 do that, and PL-3 do something else, makes a good organizer, good planner, but a true leader will then motivate, inspire, and assist the PL's in doing what is expected, otherwise he has to sit back and let PL-1, PL-2 and PL-3 be the true leaders. I guess it is my opinion that a true SPL is as his title indicates a SENIOR patrol LEADER. Not all Eagles are qualified to be such, even if they have fulfilled all Eagle rank requirements along the way.

 

Your mileage may vary,

 

Stosh

[acco40 95]

Funny thing but at my place of employment, how much money I need to maintain my lifestyle (or improve it) does not effect my pay.

 

Similarly, the need for a POR should not effect who is elected to the position. For appointed position, the same should apply.

[troop366eagle 10]

I completely understand that not all Eagles should be SPL, but it concerns my Troop personally.

 

After a Scout achieved Eagle, he could not hold any other position in the Troop besides a JASM, as I believe I have stated before.

 

What I was looking for was if other troops allowed Eagles to run for SPL and have the chance to be elected to be SPL by his peers.

 

Thanks so much for all the great tips and discussions!

 

[Eagle_Scoutophile 10]

I think it depends on the troop, and it depends on the boy...

 

If you're working with a new troop, it can make sense. An organized, mature Eagle, who has experience, can really help get the "boy lead" model running. PLCs are more productive when there is someone with experience as SPL. Not a long term solution, but works well when there is a big gap between older scouts and a surge of new recruits. If troop is growing rapidly, but there are only a few older Scouts, it works.

 

If you're a big troop, it may not be the best solution. High-speed Life scouts, who have not yet been drawn into dozens of other things (church, school, and/or sports) maybe a better fit if they need a POR for Eagle.

 

Don't you love the "it depends" answer!

 

 

 

 

[jrush 11]

jblake, keep in mind my opinion (and that's all it is) is coming from military leadership training, but there isn't a thin line between leadership and responsibility. It's like noting the difference between leadership and management. The closer comparison is responsibility = management, because the PORs have a common thread of requiring good management skills. There's a reason only 4 POR patches actually have the word "leader".

 

Again, that's why there is virtually no leadership requirement. Even the Eagle project, what says "give leadership to others"; the potential Eagle doesn't even have to be leading other Scouts, and he doesn't have to be THE leader, but rather, "give leadership to".

 

Back to the OP...should an Eagle be able to be a SPL? Honestly? I would say no. There's nothing in his trail to Eagle that prepares him to lead the troop. He doesn't need to be a APL, PL or ASPL. He doesn't need to lead his fellow Scouts to complete his Eagle Project.

 

Personally, I think that's a recognition that not everybody is a leader. Leadership isn't all taught or learned...in many ways it is innate. You can improve it, but no amount of instruction, mentorship or experience can "make" a leader.

 

Troop336eagle, my suggestion is that the troop should elect their SPL as they see fit. If they want one of these 15 year old Eagles to be the SPL and he wants to be the SPL, great. If not, also great. The other 15 year old Eagles, gather them up and ask them what they want to do. Maybe they want to be Troop Guides or Instructors or Den Chiefs. If so, the SM can make those appointments. If not, and they just want to hang out, camp, do OA events or high adventure activities, that's fine as well. I wouldn't call your troop's situation an "issue". They also aren't "denying" anything to a younger Scout if they are SPL...as has been said, SPL isn't a requirement, and many of the PORs can be appointed.

 

Remember, a POR isn't even a requirement for Star and Life. We always seem to forget that...the requirement is "serve actively x months in one or more of the following positions of responsibility (or carry out a Scoutmaster-assigned leadership project to help the troop)" The SM can assign a leadership project to that Scout who can't seem to get elected to anything. By the time a Scout is a Life, there's no reason the SM couldn't appoint him to an appropriate POR.

 

 

Anyhow, just coral up your wad of Eagles and ask them what they want to do. Appoint them to appropriate PORs, let them run for elected position, or let them "just be Scouts".

[Stosh 3452]

jrush, we're pretty much on the same page. Maybe it's just semantics, but I do see a major difference between management and leadership, even within the military structure. To me most in the military do both, but separately. A sergeant is tasked to accomplish a mission with his squad. He knows the object and what is necessary to accomplish/manage it. However, at the same time he has to lead others or he isn't going anywhere with it unless he just wants to do it himself. Managers manage tasks, but Leaders lead people.

 

A scout can accomplish a project (task) without ever doing any real leadership. Directing others, telling them what they need to do to accomplish the task isn't really leadership, it's just a form of using people to manage a task. On the other hand when an Life Scout announces that he's going to be doing a project and everyone wants in to help out and will self direct towards different aspects of the task just so the potential Eagle for sure get's his rank, somewhere along the line that boy has shown some real leadership.

 

Officers who take care of their men and demonstrate such leadership, will find their men will follow them into Hell if necessary to do what's necessary and even die trying.

 

Real leadership has a very small component of it we know as management. He knows what needs to be done, but who will follow is what leadership is all about.

 

Your mileage may vary,

 

Stosh

[SR540Beaver 116]

troop366eagle,

 

I would never just give a boy JASM because he reached Eagle. Our JASM's are guys who obviously are 16 which is a requirement of JASM and have served as SPL. Even then, it isn't an automatic thing. It is a decision of the SM on each individual. While most of our Eagles are great guys, we've had a few stinkers who met the letter of the law on Eagle requirements. A good JASM, they would not make. JASM isn't a reward, it's a job.