Questionable Eagle Project

[mk9750 11]

nldscout,

 

Your facts are pretty much correct. However, you come to a couple of conclusions that aren't quite on target.

 

1st, I am not challenging anything. If this boy's desire is to become an Eagle Scout, it is MY responsibility, as the Advancement Chairman, to guide a Scout along the way so that he encounters only the bumbs in the road that the program intends. There are some aspects to his project that, through sources other than the boy, have me worried that he might encounter a serious bumb in the road. I am trying to do my job. And just to head you off at the pass, I know that there is no official position of Advancement Chair at the Troop level. Our Committee developed the position and issued the job description. I serve at the pleasure of the CC, and until she asks me to change my responsiblities, I will do my best to fulfill my obligations. What I am doing is very much consistent with these obligations. Your position is very similiar to the stereotypical SM who feels all aspects of the Troop are within his jurisdiction. Program is within a SM's jurisduction, and we as Committee Members should do a much better job to stay out of the SM's responsibility unless he asks us to help. SMs should understand that their responsiblity for advancement includes designing a program that provides opurtunities to advance, and reviewing each Scout at every rank to assure that they have met the requirements. I am charged with making sure policies are followed. Please don't ask me to abdicate that responsibilty.

 

2nd, you seem to assume that I am stepping on our SM's toes with this. In addition to the explaination above, this is not the case. The SM and I have the same concerns, and he is asking me to help resolve a problem, if one exists. This SM signed the project plan off with the understanding that one pretty major, and one minor addition would be included. Neither were done. In addition, the signature was given without knowledge of the plans to sell the end product. I still do not know if they are for sale, and if they are, I don't know if that sale will or will not contradict policy.

 

I am certain your thoughts are well meant, and I don't mean anything here to be a personal attack on you. But in this situation, I would be irresponsible if I didn't review this. I certainly wouldn't be doing the Scout a favor by ignoring it, and I don't believe I would be doing Scouting in general, or current and future Eagle Scouts, any favor either. I was looking for the best way to handle this, not why I shouldn't handle it.

 

Mark

[acco40 95]

Unfortunately, the youth of today may find bumps in the road, bums on the road and even bombs in the road but bumbs?

[mk9750 11]

acco40,

 

Man, Oh Man alive!

 

I proofread that post 3 times before I hit send, and you still caught me!

 

That would be "bumps".

 

Mea Culpa

 

Mark

[rlculver415 10]

I am currently looking at my son's Eagle Scout Leadership Service Project Workbook. On page 2, under limitations, it states that a project may not be performed for a business or be of a commercial nature. I should think that is his bird house kits are being sold, or are even for some commercial enterprise, it would nullify the lad's project.

 

Length of hours to complete the project, level of difficulty, who does the work are not really an issue. (Although within our troop committee, we suggest it be at least a total of 50 man-hours.) Demonstration of leadership is.

 

My main questions would be: who benefits from the project, and how did he demonstrate leadership during this project?

[RuddBaron 10]

My old troop had (and, as far as I know, still has) a requirement for a minimum of 200 man-hours of work on an Eagle project. This was due mainly to the large size of the troop. Most of the better ones were around 700 man-hours. The required length of the project was to ensure the boy demonstrated a sufficient level of leadership and planning ability.

[OldGreyEagle 5]

Rudd, you realize of course that this policy of your old troop is in direct opposition with BSA policy. There is no set number of hours for an Eagle project and for your troop to establish a minimum, no matter how well intentioned, is adding requirments to eatablished BSA criteria.

[RuddBaron 10]

Not another requirement, but a minimum standard established by the committee before they would consider approving a project. The committee must, after all, approve the project. To my knowledge, National backed up the troop's policy. The standard required in that troop to fulfill the requirement was well-known, and anyone who didn't want to do a 200 man-hour project was free to pursue the Eagle rank in another troop. With 40+ people in the troop, it would be easy for each person to work 1 hour each and accomplish almost nothing...which would hardly fulfill the purpose of the Eagle projeect.

[Bob White 20]

OGE is correct RuddBaron. To say it is not adding a requirement is whitewash. You are adding TO a requirement and that is forbidden by BSA advancement policies. The only requirement a scout is required to fulfill are those written in his handbook and the official BSA Eagle kit. No More, No Less. Your unit cannot add any minimums to those requirements. (See the Advancement Committee Policies and Procedures manual)

 

Bob White

 

 

 

[OldGreyEagle 5]

Sorry if this is rude, Rudd, but I highly doubt National ever supported your troops position on this in any way.

 

As far as your troops attitude of Our way or the highway, all I can say is "my, what a fine scoutlike attitude" ?

[RuddBaron 10]

Again, the requirement stated that Eagle candidate's project must be approved by the Committee. They would not entertain any projects that would not take over 200 man-hours. They also would not entertain projects that, in their opinion, would not involve sufficient leadership. In other words, the Committee demanded that the cadidate carry out a project that fulfilled the letter and spirit of the requirement.

 

As for the so-called "my way or the highway" attitude, it is VERY Scout-like to demand a high standard. One impetus for B-P's founding of Scouting was lack of high standards among the British youth, particularly with respect to military preparedness. Some troops demand the wearing of full uniform, other demand a certain hat, etc. When I went to the Jamboree awhile ago I had to wear a certain uniform, neckerchief, patches, hat, etc., or I didn't go. If one doesn't like these policies, one can and should find or form a new unit.

 

Just to provide another example, we had a strong sailing program as well. To get Small Boat Sailing MB one has to right a capsize boat. Scouts were required to do it multiple times until they got it completely right, even if they eventually righted the boat the first time after a great struggle. The reason? Simple safety. The point of the requirement is to ensure that they can safely handle themselves while sailing a small boat. If they wanted to have a easy time at it, they could go to summer camp where they tried to get the instructor to have "team answered oral exams" to satisfy sailing requirements.

 

As to the response of National, if they don't like the concept of a high standard, tough.

[OldGreyEagle 5]

Bob help me out here, I keep hearing different numbers flung around and you know I want to be accurate and not spread untruths. Near as I can remember, the amount of scouts who make Eagle are between 3-5 percent of all scouts, with 5 percent being on the high side. It would be tough to imagine what the Eagle rate would be if National instituted "high standards"...

 

Rudd, I know you are a new poster here and evidently have great passion for scouting and I applaud your intense scouting spirit, but also know part of this forum is engaging in disagreements. You may think there is nothing wrong with having a set criteria of hours, the BSA policy does not. To set a criteria is against BSA policy. The troop, however well intentioned, is not offering the BSA program to its members as it promised.

 

On page 2 of the Eagle Scout Leadership Service Project Workbook (BSA publication 18-927B)it says this under the requirement of Size:

 

" How big a project is required? There are no specific requirements, as long as the project is helpful

to a religious institution, school, or community. The amount of time spent by you in planning your

project and the actual working time spent in carrying out the project should be as much as is necessary

for you to demonstrate your leadership of others. "

 

How does this troop explain to the scout that while the national publication that guides him along the path to Eagle says there is no size requirement, but the troop has one?

 

[RuddBaron 10]

No offense taken at all.

 

"The amount of time spent by you in planning your

project and the actual working time spent in carrying out the project should be as much as is necessary

for you to demonstrate your leadership of others."

 

Exactly. The advancement in the troop is controlled by the committee. The boy had to demonstrate his leadership to the committee, and the committee was not satisfied, due to the size of the troop, unless they effectively led a sizable group over a reasonable period of time...which they defined as 200 man-hours.

 

This policy was never, to my knowledge, a problem, considering the average project was 700 hours. We never had to explain anything to any of the boys. They knew what they had to do and they did it.

 

If you take what you copied to me literally, then organizing a group to walk door to door and tell them kids should stay in school could be an Eagle project. To me that type of thing hardly is a suitable Eagle project.

 

Now...when it cames to Scoutmasters trying to add Eagle requirements like serving as SPL, the Committee quite correctly put the kibosh on that. But, when a Scout served in any leadership role, they actually had to SERVE, not just hold the office. There was a required standard for it to count.

[mk9750 11]

Rudd,

 

I applaud the spirit in which your old Troop set this minimum. However, I too have a problem with it, and let me try to give an example that explains why.

 

You want to hold Scouts to a high standard. Great. I agree. You feel the high standard is 200 hours.

 

If I wanted to hold the Scouts in our Troop to our interpretation of a high standard, we could impose a 500 hour minimum for projects. that's two and a half time your standard.

 

And if OGE wanted to really be an SOB, his Troop could impose a 5,000 hour minimum. That would really be a high standard, right?

 

At some point along this continuum, setting a minimum number of hours became rediculous, wouldn't you say? Is it 200, or 500, or 5,000? Who knows?

 

What I do know is that what demopnstrates sufficient leadership for one boy is NOT the same as for another. This "high standard" has to be developed by the boy, with input from his Scoutmaster, Advancement Chair, and adult committee. I don't see our signatures on the Eagle Project Booklet being approvals as much as I see them a evidence that we helped the boy determine for himself what level satisfies the requirement. The District Advancement Chairman (the way we do it in our Council), and the Board of Review, are the ones that determine the adequacy of the plan, and then of the leadership demonstrated.

 

I am all for high standards, Rudd. I wish National would review were we are and ratchet them up a bit. But it isn't our place, nor do I think it ever will be our place, to implement artificial baselines.

 

Mark

[Bob White 20]

2002 had the highest percentage of scouts reaching eagle in the history of the BSA. A whopping 5%.

 

The core of the problem in my opinion is RuddBaron's perception that the unit committee controls advancement. National council of the BSA controls advancement, through the requirements it sets and the policies it establishes. The unit committee is responsible for reviewing and recognition of the scout.

 

The unit has no authority or right to add to or subtract from any requirement. In the example given of small boat sailing MB. Only the MB counselor can determine when the requirement has been satisfied. A unit committe ahs NO authority in this matter. A scout may use any MB counselor who is registered to do this MB.

 

Rudd's intect is admirable but the methods the unit is using is not appropriate to the rules and regulations set by the BSA.

 

There are appropriate ways to improve the quality of instruction, the degree of learning and the, skill s of scouts.Altering the reqirements is not the way to do it.

 

Respectfully,

Bob White

 

 

[RuddBaron 10]

The Troop Committee oversees all advancement within a troop. No, they can't add/subtract requirements. But, it is their role to determine if the advancement is carried out properly, by the rules, and up to standard. Of course the Troop Committee can refuse to recognize a Merit Badge if there is reason to believe it was not done properly. If I recall, there are places that troop leaders must sign on the blue card. One blanket policy was that our summer camp's First Aid MB course was never accepted. Why? Because you could half-do things and get signed-off, including passing off a ready-made first aid kit as one you made.

 

As for the hour requirement...yeah, you can take it to some extreme like 5000 hours. The 200 hour "guideline" (perhaps a better word) was a benchmark the troop committee and Scoutmasters, most of whom had significant leadership experience in business, government, military, etc., used to judge whether or not it was possible for a given project to fulfill the requirements (again, given the size of the troop).

 

Ok...forget the 200 hour guideline. Let's take it out completely. Let's say a boy wants to assign each of the 40 members of the troop one hour of lawn mowing while he "supervises" as an Eagle project. That won't get approved. Regardless of the numbers, it's hardly sufficient. Even if it was five hours per person (200 hours total), it wouldn't get approved. The point was that the committee demanded a demonstration of sufficient leadership, and while there may not be any WRITTEN requirements for this, a project must be of a certain scope in a troop like that in order to allow the boy to demonstrate sufficient leadership.

 

Why doesn't National set a requirement? Because a set man-hour requirement could easily be too much for small troops and too little for big troops. It would be near impossible to fit anything other than a bare minimum for all troops...like maybe 10 hours. But, I'm not a fan of setting a rock-bottom requirement. It is better to leave it up to the discretion of the local unit and Council to determine what is a sufficient demonstration of leadership. It does a great disservice to the boy to allow them to do less than they are capable of doing just because it technically fulfills the requirements. We are training boys to be men, not to earn Eagle rank.

 

It is obvious we will never agree on whether or not this action was adding a requirement or simply setting a standard. But, considering the District and Scout Executives had no problem with it, I'm not worried about this being done.