Alternate Leadership Requirements

[Fat Old Guy 11]

The requirements for Star and Life say ". . . serve actively for [four or six] months in one or more of the following positions of responsibility (or carry out a Scoutmaster-assigned leadership project to help the troop)"

 

The troop whose number I wear on my sleeve has long given "service projects" out and couted these for leadership. Examples have been making a "knot board" for the troop and marking troop equipment. No other Scouts have been involved.

 

I don't see this as leadership but I'm being shouted down with "That's the way that we've always done it."

 

Comments?

 

[OldGreyEagle 5]

Lets see now, be the Senior Patrol Leader for six months, chair all the PLC meetings and be the point man for 6 campouts (one a month)

 

versus

 

Making a knot board that has 30 knots on it, completed in less than a week, (OK, I'll give it 2 weeks and no other scout helps)

 

Be a Troop Guide to the New Scout Patrol, teach the required knots, help 8 11 year old boys through their first campout, then second and third etc. Show them how to pitch tents, cook and buy food and try to keep them in order at weekly meetings for six months

 

Versus

 

A weekend in the troop storage room, marking the equipment with troop name

 

If a POR takes six months to complete, I would think, just a guess now, that a troop leadership project should take almost as long, or at least involve a number of people over an extended period of time, like at least 3 months. These are all guesses as I have never seen criteria for the Scoutmaster approved leadership project and our troop has not done it, it should be fun to see how others do it.

 

I agree the Knot Board and equipment thing sure doesnt measure up to SPL, PL, or any other PLC type position a scout is in for 6 months

 

 

BTW: I do confess I am having a hard time visualizing FOG getting shouted down anywhere, leastwise at Boy Scouts

(This message has been edited by OldGreyEagle)

[Fat Old Guy 11]

"BTW: I do confess I am having a hard time visualizing FOG getting shouted down anywhere, leastwise at Boy Scouts"

 

It is difficult but has happened. Usually, it is like the talk shows where the Conservative guest lets the liberal have his say, politely keeping quiet, but every time the Conservative attempts to say something, the Liberal interrupts and shouts at him.

 

 

[evmori 11]

And there in lies the rub. The alternative requirement cna be whatever the SM decides! I feel this should be eliminated & just go with the POR requirement. BTW, my (yes my) Troop doesn't use the alternate rerquirement, either.

 

Ed Mori

Scoutmaster

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10(This message has been edited by evmori)

[Fat Old Guy 11]

However, it does say "Leadership" not "service"

 

This is coming to a head because a father thinks that it is grossly unfair that his 12 year old son may have to wait until March for a POR when the positions are scheduled for turnover.

 

This is the guy who served as PL over the summer. He could have stayed as PL but Daddy discouraged it which is too bad. So far, the kid has had less opportunity than my Lab to show leadership.

 

 

[Laurie 10]

"...(or carry out a Scoutmaster-assigned leadership project to help the troop)..."

 

I took this to mean that the leadership project would be a 6-month project NOT that the time requirement would be waived in favor of one project that could be of shorter...far shorter...duration.

 

For instance, it isn't necessarily a title given to the boy, but instead is, using the knot board idea, creating a knot board and then teaching the knots during that time frame. Leadership implies far more than just making something, and regardless of whether it is service or leadership, I just don't read this requirement as waiving the 6-month time frame. I read it as choose one of those, leadership or service, and do that for 6 months. The SM would approve those things not already falling within a job description. But then, I'm new, so you can just ignore me

[scoutldr 732]

There's no limit to the number of Den Chiefs you can have. Why does he have to wait 6 months? Surely there's a Den in your Council looking for a DC!

[OldGreyEagle 5]

scoutldr, Den Chief is a wonderful idea, another possibility is Insructor, the SM can appoint them, right? (I hope). All it takes is for the scout to be proficient in an area, or for that matter willing to study to put on presentations on a subject,

 

Den Chief, Instructor, no problem

[Eagledad 2781]

>>but instead is, using the knot board idea, creating a knot board and then teaching the knots during that time frame.

[hops_scout 9]

"However, it does say "Leadership" not "service"

 

This is coming to a head because a father thinks that it is grossly unfair that his 12 year old son may have to wait until March for a POR when the positions are scheduled for turnover.

 

This is the guy who served as PL over the summer. He could have stayed as PL but Daddy discouraged it which is too bad. So far, the kid has had less opportunity than my Lab to show leadership."

 

Then it is his fault he has to wait. Make him wait. Unless he does something that would be a not good enough Eagle project, etc then I dont think a service project should count.

[dsteele 20]

I agree with the other replies -- the Scoutmaster assigned Leadership role is most probably (which means it's my theory and I don't have a document to point to,) a way for a troop to help a Scout to have the ability to show leadership (of other people, not leadership of a project) when the other positions are filled, special circumstances, etc.

 

Service projects can be done alone (except for the Eagle Service project which calls for demonstrating leadership in a service project) leadership involves reliance on other people and them on the leader.

 

DS

[LauraT7 13]

leadership positions can be difficult to get if you are in a troop that has alot of boys that need them.

 

we are at that point now - over half our boys NEED POR's to advance to the next rank, and there aren't that many available.

 

sure, you can make them all Instructors or Den cheifs (and in the case of Den Cheifs and working parents, somehow they've got to GET TO the Den meetings, too!) But some are just not cut out to guide or teach younger boys.

 

I think that is why it is left to SM discretion to 'create' PORS in some cases.

 

We've always elected all positions except assistants - SPL picks his assistant, and in patrols, the runner-up is assistant. but since APL is not a POR - no one really wants it anyway.

 

My son wanted to be PL last time around - and ended up being APL, because his buddies didn't show up to vote for him on election night. (in a patrol of 5 - 2 no-shows are drastic!) He's now spent 6 months as 1st class, had all his requirements done the first month for Star - except the POR. He asked to be an instructor - but we have never had instuctors before - so there is no one in the troop to show him what to do, and the one campout the NSP had - was done last minute and no one bothered to tell him about it.

 

this time around, I hear our new SM is going to assign troop positions - SPL and PL's will be elected, but the other troop positions will be appointed.

 

this time, Jon is being a little smarter - he has asked to be Librarian,(which he really doesn't particularly want) and will also run for PL of his patrol. Hopefully, his friends will show up and vote for him this time!

 

but since so many of these elections ARE affected by popularity, rather than by need or ability - I think it's a shame a kid can be held back in advancement simply because he's not popular or because there aren't enough positions to go around.

 

[evmori 11]

Is this the only sticking point in this Scout's advancement to his next rank? Sounds like there might be more! Fat Old Guy, could you answer this for us?

 

Thanks

 

Ed Mori

Scoutmaster

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[Eagledad 2781]

>>but since so many of these elections ARE affected by popularity, rather than by need or ability - I think it's a shame a kid can be held back in advancement simply because he's not popular or because there aren't enough positions to go around.

[fboisseau 10]

LauraT7

Someone please correct me if I am wrong, but I believe APL is a POR.