Life Scout - is he ready?

[Lynda J 10]

It is not the job of the board to make the decission as to whether a scout is a good leader or not. If he served in a leadership position for the required amount of time that is what the requirements. No more no less. the Board can not require more or less than that. The deal it to "DO YOUR BEST"

There are great leaders that are not great people and great people that are not great leaders. If the scout served the position for the required time and is living by scout spirit to the best of his ability it is not up to the board to denie him his rank advancement.

 

Remember these are kids. Don't judge them by adult standards.

[Hunt 11]

I'm troubled by two extremes in this "actively serve" in a POR issue. First, I'm a little troubled by detailed mathematical attendance requirements--if they keep you from taking circumstances into account. On the other hand, I can't accept the idea that holding the position is all that is required. I think an appropriate middle position is one in which the Scout and the SM discuss what the POR is, and then the SM signs if off if the Scout has made a reasonable effort to achieve the goals they set together. That is a bit subjective, but I think it's better than either extreme (albeit more objective) alternative.

I think the terms of the rank requirement suggest that it should only be signed off if some level of activity is achieved. For example, if the POR is a leadership project assigned by the SM, the requirement calls for the Scout to "carry out" the project. Obviously, if he doesn't do it, he can't be signed off. I think he also has to "carry out" the POR in some real sense.

[evmori 11]

I'm in the same camp as Hunt on this one. If a Scout has a POR & does nothing but has the POR for the required time for rank, I don't think that is serving actively.

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[SR540Beaver 116]

Active to me means more than just showing up for the specified period of time. It also means to actively attempt to do the job. As I said earlier, no qualifier of "success" is included in the requirement. Each boy will bring certain raw talents and abilities to the position and hopefully will be trained and guided by adults. If he is in the position for the specified time and even shows up for meetings and outings but does absolutley nothing to perform the job, he shouldn't get credit. We have a PL in that position right now. He makes most meetings and outings, but he resists us at every turn in actually fulfilling the duties of the position. I'm not sure why he ran, he had complete knowledge of what the job was. To be "fair", he has lost interest in scouting and is counting the days until Jambo is over and he will be leaving the troop. That has a lot to do with his attitude towards doing the job.

[ljnrsu 10]

"serve actively" in a POR the "grey" area of Scouting.

 

Is it the SM,SPL,ASPL or some combination of them?

 

To me it is some combination of the above.

 

A PL is responsible to the SPL who in turn is responsible to the SM. So if a PL in "not" doing his job then it is a problem for the SPL and SM in that order. If the SPL doesn't have a problem with a PL but the SM does,the SM has a bigger problem. Besides having a PL "not" doing his job he also has a SPL "not" doing his.

 

If you look at a "troop junior leader organization" chart you will find that in most cases for POR there is another POR above the one in question. Therefore in some cases you don't have one boy who "fails" but two.

 

It all comes back to training,guidance,coaching and specific feedback for everybody involved. This is something that has to be done from first day to the last day of their tenure in office.

 

I always remember what I was told at NCO School. If I want to look good. I have to make sure the people under me look good, as they are a direct reflection to(on) me.

 

 

[Lynda J 10]

The key word here is "weak leadership skills" No where in the post was anything said that the scout did not attend meeting. That he did not complete the remainder of the requirements. Just in the opinion of a board member he had weak leadership skills.

 

Like I said before. Not all great people are great leaders, and no all great leaders are great people.

 

We can only expect a boy to do his BEST. If he is not naturally a good leader but he did the best he could do and he served his complete term for the POR then he has completed the requirement and the rank. The quality of his leadership is between him, his SM,and his other troop mates. It isn't up to the Board to decide if he was a quality leader.

[SR540Beaver 116]

Lynda,

 

Amen sister! Look at some of the stinkers we elect.

[DugNevius 10]

im curious on how/why this scout is "weak on leadership" and also what relation Rour is, SM, parent or spiteful peer.

[Vicki 11]

Good question, Dug! Especially since rour hasn't posted again.

 

Vicki