This topic contains 2 replies, has 1 voice, and was last updated by John Zeller Sr. 1 year, 2 months ago.
August 16, 2018 at 8:29 am #137305
John Zeller Sr.
The recent article where a Scout in Greenburgh lost a bid for Eagle based on the 6 months troop leadership requirement (he had 4 since earning Life) https://www.lohud.com/story/news/local/westchester/greenburgh/2018/08/15/boy-scouts-no-eagle-rank-greenburghs-hari-channagiri/996348002/
has much to do with lack of adult leadership in counseling the Scout. There should not be a public outcry nor an appeal to National. Who said requirements are soft and can be tailored. Isn’t leadership and character development based on learning and teaching skills, setting example, and following program requirements. These ranks are not an entitlement, must be earned through effort and understanding by the Scout.
The public needs to wake up and stop demeaning the program. Same goes for our leadership as the parents and Scouts depend upon our understanding and guidance. Kudos tot he review board for standing up and holding firm on the program requirements. The troop leaders and committee persons responsible need to be re-educated.
August 21, 2018 at 6:19 pm #137829
There is PROCESS in place. for these kinds of things. Scoutmaster Conferences and Boards of Review not only apply to advancement, but to LACK of advancement. Patrol Leaders, SM, ASMs, and the Committee all have a role to play in inspiring advancement, as well as reacting to a LACK thereof.
But… the rules are the rules. He had the Scout Handbook in his possession since he was 11 years old. Knowing the requirements for the next rank is on the Scout. I was happy to read that the Scout in this article KNEW he may not get advancement but worked hard anyway. But you missed the time line. Sorry.
September 6, 2018 at 8:10 am #143533
I consider any Life scout who ages out of the program to be a resounding scouting success. I’m glad he went forward with his Eagle project knowing that most likely rank advancement would not be conferred do to the ageist policy that National codified in the late 1960s. Follow-up stories on this scout showed that he was proud of what he and his buddies could accomplished, and although his appeal to National was rightly denied, he was sure he would look back on his time as a youth in scouting fondly. In my book, that’s a win.
As you can guess, I am in favor of a scout like this getting trained as an assistant scoutmaster and completing their trail to Eagle as an adult in service to a troop. I believe this would rid us of about half of our “last-minute” rank advancement — the half who would never advance at all if they knew there was no deadline, and allow us to focus on first-class skills mastery — something that gets glossed over in many troops. But, the rule book has been closed to such a strategy for 5 decades now, so we endure with the deadline and consequent “some bookwork required” merit badges.
December 12, 2018 at 7:38 am #174491
I have a similar question about Scouts being active. I have stepped down as Scoutmaster and was notorious for holding all Scouts accountable to the same rules, you need to participate in meetings, events, etc… which is a major part of your 2nd to last requirement for each rank advancement on living the Scout Oath, Scout Law and so on. I understand MANY things take on that meaning, it could be doing things with a youth group, your church etc…… HOWEVER, when you COMPLETELY stop coming to meetings, are only doing the last few merit badges you need for Eagle Required Badges, DO NOT go on ANY TRIPS, do not help plan those trips. One of these aforementioned Scouts even did not bother to show up for elections because THEY DID NOT want to do ANYTHING as they have already held a position. I’m missing where the Scout Spirit is there….. I’m at a loss on how people can pass these Scouts for a Board of Review? Am I misunderstanding something? If so, please correct me and help me understand what I am not understanding….