Attendance

[Woodbadgegirl]

I have a question about troops and attendance policies.

In the the back of the scout book it states that a boy must be in a role of leadership and be active in his troop to advance in rank. My son has been a Den Chief since last September 2003. He earned the first class rank in May 2004. During that time he has only missed two den meetings, attended all pack meetings, and all pack activites. He also went to summer camp with the den. He is now ready to go for his Star BOR but they told him that he can't because he hasn't met the troop attendance guidelines. They have a guideline of 75% meeting attendance and 75% activity attendance. This is determined in a 4 month period, and my son attended 71% of the meetings during that time (He didn't attend 3 meetings due to one sick day, a school registration night and 1 soccer game) and only 25% of the activites. The reason he didn't attend the 3 activities in July, August & September is because they cost to much and we couldn't afford them. July had a canoe trip costing $80, August was a day to Indiana Beach $25, and September was going to shades park $35. We can hardly afford the $5 a month in dues and the $15 monthly camping trips.

My question is, does this sound fair? That he has to wait another 4 months to advance in rank and if he has 75% attendance during that time, he can earn his Star?

What does the BSA say about attendance?

[mang_kiko]

Requirement #1 for the Star Scout is (page 177 of the Scout Handbook):

Be active in your troop and patrol for at least 4 months as a First Class Scout

His service as Den Chief satisfies requirement #5, but it is my opinion that it didn't satisfy requirement #1. Based on your explanation, he attended all pack meetings, den meetings, pack activities, and even camp. But requirement 1 states that he should be active within the troop and patrol, not the pack and den.

Again it is my opinion.

[West]

Putting numbers on it is not allowed. If they had said something like we'd like to see you on more campouts that would be diffrent. I go with a genaral do I see them more often then not guideline.

[wagionvigil]

You must remember what the BSA definition of Active Is ' A registered Scout"

[mang_kiko]

There you go. If the BSA definition of active is being a registered Scout, then your son fully satisfies requirement # 1. No questions about it.

[commish3]

I HAve never found anything from the BSA saying that "active" when refering to advancement is simply being registered. IOn asking the question of the Director of Boy Scout Advancement, that is not the answer I got.

I know that thought has been around a long time but I think it more scouting lore than fact.

The Boy Scout Handbook explains each advancement requirement, including active, see page 169. The key phrase is "You have to be present when things are happening.

Here is my view. B-P made a very wise observation, no two kids are alike. Because of that he stressed that scouting is not delivered to a troop or a patrol, real scouting is delivered one boy at a time. For that reason a Scoutmaster needs to know and understand the needs and characteristics of each scout. That's why we have scoutmaster conferences.

The best way to determine "active" is to talk with each scout. What are their goals? What are their responsibilities in and out of scouting. What committment is that scout going to make to help his patrol and troop during the next 6 months? When the Scoutmaster and the Scout agree on what his activity goals are...write them down in his handbook. When you sit down again as he approaches his next rank (or when whenever the SM wants to help get the scout back on track) review the goals. You won't need to tell the scout if he has been active or not. If the gaols were made clear at the beginning he will already know. And so will the SM.

Don't force a Scout to meet your goals, help the scout to achieve his goals.

[mang_kiko]

It is my opinion that your son should be given the opportunity to advance to Star.

BSA policy clearly states that no person may add, omit, or alter the requirements for advancement. If the requirements simply wants an explanation, the Scout does nothing more than an explanation (and nothing less of course). Your troop guideline is clearly a violation of this policy. The only quantifiable information on the requirement is the 4 months of being active as a First Class Scout. Although the term "Be Active" is widely open for interpretation, you may not quantify it as 75%.

If he was able to earn 6 merit badges, participated in a service project for 6 hours, served tirelessly as a Den Chief 4 months at the minimum, and attends 1 camping trip each month, he is quite an active Scout to me.

In addition, telling him to wait another 4 months to be re-considered is not just unfair, it is simply not right.

You should appeal the decision with your Scoutmaster and then to your Unit Committee. Ultimately you should be able to log an appeal with your District Advancement Committee, but such an action might place you in a bad position in terms with your relationship to the troop. Also, I hate to say this, but there is no guarantee that the District Advancement Committee will act on your appeal/complaint.

I served as DE once and a parent complained that his son was not awarded a merit badge earned in summer camp because he missed a merit badge board of review. With my zealousness to help I showed the parent the BSA policy and got with our DD and Advancement Chair. Long story short, nothing happened because it was a very strong troop and some kind of troop tradition that they review even the merit badges. The district simply tries not to put its nose where it should be. Later, I found out that the Advancement Chairman once belonged to that troop.

[evmori]

I think the requirement reads "be active in your Troop". Now a DC will have responsibility to the Pack he is a DC for. He also has a responsibility to his Patrol & Troop. The key word here is responsibility. Taking on the position of DC means he isn't just a "Boy Scout' any more. He now has a greater responsibility than a Tenderfoot. He has a position of responsibility.

[jkrenn]

Remember, this is a boy led organization. Remember, the PLC runs the troop. As far as I know, the word ACTIVE is undefined anywhere. Since it's not a safety issue, doesn't violate any BSA requirements, why not allow the PLC to determine the "ACTIVE" guidelines?

One unit I know addressed this in a unique way. The PLC determined who was active. The troop was having a problem with participation, so the PLC determined to form a new patrol for INACTIVE members. Anybody who didn't meet the ACTIVE guidelines was placed into the INACTIVE patrol until they started attending and participating. This accomplished two things immeditately: It helped patrols know who they could count on, and have adults guidence on who were active members. One other thing also happened...several sporatic attenders didn't want to be pegged in the INACTIVE patrol and started making a point of showing up.

[ICanCanoeCanU]

Interesting idea but I would be afraid that some in the “Inactive” patrol would stop coming all together out of embarrassment. I wouldn’t want to take the risk of losing anyone?

Getting back to the original question – I think the definition of “active” is a tricky one but I don’t understand why he would have to wait 4 more months regardless of the active issue? I don’t like the fact that the troop only has BOR every 4 months. I can see where a SM might need a week or two notice for a conference but adults should always be available for reviews and scouts should be able to get these most anytime. Advancement should be ongoing.