"Be active in your troop and patrol for at least"

[Hamish17]

For ranks of Star, Life and Eagle the requirements state "Be active in your troop and patrol for at least --- ". Our troop has several Scouts that only seem to show up for Scoutmaster conference and BOR when they want to advance. They attend less than 20% of meetings, activities and campouts. My question is there a generally accepted percentage for " Be active"?

[DPuck]

no.

[diamondbackAPL]

our troop doesn't have a set percentage, but hardly anybody misses meetings just because they want to so we don't have a problem with this. the majority of the time people are absent is because of vacation/ball game/band recital etc...

[Lynda J]

According to BSA standards a scout is active in his troop if he is registered. That being said. I don 't agree with it. And it does not cover the requirement of being active in a leadership role. For that you have to be there. An SPL that never shows up for meetings and PLC meetings is not showing leadership. IMHO.

[commish3]

Lynda, I know of no resource in the BSA that gives a leader that definition, and that is certainly not how the Boy Scout handbook explains the requirement on page 169. Can you direct me to a BSA written resource that has that instruction..

[Lynda J]

There was a discussion, either here or on another forum about his very subject. Someone contacted National. According to them if a boy is registered he is active. And that is all they say. But I feel that in order to be active in a position of leadership he has to be at meetings.

[ASM-142]

The point about being registered was made by wagionvigil under Troop Issues

[Woodbadgegirl]

And I contacted National and that's what they told me too. I think I was the one with the concern because the troop we use to be with had an attendance policy that I didn't agree with.

[commish3]

But who said and what was their source. There is nothing in the BSA training or program resources to support that. I have spoken with a person at national with Boy Scout Advancement and did not recieve the same explanation. But that too is hearsay. The Boy Scout Handbook explains to the Scout what being active is and isn't that is what we should know and support.

[ASM-142]

In my line of work if it is not written down or documented in some other form then it is not true.

[Woodbadgegirl]

They sited the excert in the Advancement Committee Handbook about adding to or taking away from Advancement. I talked to the gentlemen that is the head of National Advancement, because no one else could remember what the rule was. I think I was on hold for ever and talked to 4 different people that day I called.

I might add, that I don't agree with this explanation, but I don't agree that troops should put a set % on attendance either. National said to me, that a boy needs to have a healthy balance in his life...God, Family, School, Sports (If they want to play one) and Scouts. I totally agree!!

[ASM-142]

...
I might add, that I don't agree with this explanation, but I don't agree that troops should put a set % on attendance either. National said to me, that a boy needs to have a healthy balance in his life...God, Family, School, Sports (If they want to play one) and Scouts. I totally agree!!

I agree with this and this is what National should pt into writing. They should further clarify this by stating Troops can not set their own attendence policy. Being active does not mean just showing up for meetings. I have know scouts where their attendence is very low but were very active and at the same time where a scouts attendence was very high but he was not active at all.

[Woodbadgegirl]

I agree with this and this is what National should pt into writing. They should further clarify this by stating Troops can not set their own attendance policy. Being active does not mean just showing up for meetings. I have know scouts where their attendance is very low but were very active and at the same time where a scouts attendance was very high but he was not active at all.

You know that day that I called and then a day later my son called, we asked them to do that!!

National said that troops can't do this, but when we called the council, they said the troops could set their own policies if they wanted. Talk about contradiction of the BSA rules. I stand firm on the adding to and taking away from advancement rule. You should never add an attendance policy in order for a boy to advance.

[ASM-142]

Unless National puts this in writing and lets councils and troops know abouth this, troop will always set their own attendence requirement. This only results in a program that is not the same for all scouts.

[Woodbadgegirl]

Unless National puts this in writing and lets councils and troops know abouth this, troop will always set their own attendence requirement. This only results in a program that is not the same for all scouts.

I totally agree. I wish scouting could be consistant across the board!

[optimist]

Those of you who state that it's not in writing anywhere are correct. Those that state that it's not true because it's not in writing are not correct.

In the courts, there is what's known as case law. This means that courts base their decisions on the decisions made by previous judges even though no law is written that directly addresses the case and sometimes even though there is law that conflicts with the court's decision.

In cases where troops have declined a Scout's advancement because he was not participating in troop activities and the Scout appealed, the BSA has consistently ruled that if he was registered he was active.

I'm sorry that the BSA hasn't formalized what is a long standing policy but that doesn't mean that they are going to rule any differently just because you hope they will.

[commish3]

Even the record of those court cases that establish precedence exist in written form. This hearsay "policy" does not. It is one of a long line of accepted and often practiced yet usubstantiated folklore in scouting.

Like other requirements I do not think the goal is consistency "across the board" but develooment of the individual scout. What is active for one scout will not be the same for another depending on their individual interests, goals, resources and time demands, as well as the needs and characteristics of therir particular family.

What is active for a particular scout is a topic for the Scoutmaster conference and for counseling and mentoring opportunities with the individual scout.

The BSA gives use the goals and methods of the program. It is our ability to employ those methods in a variety of situations that determines our qualities as leaders.

[ASM-142]

In the courts, there is what's known as case law. This means that courts base their decisions on the decisions made by previous judges even though no law is written that directly addresses the case and sometimes even though there is law that conflicts with the court's

I understand case law. However, a judge does make a decision on his own that contradicts the decision of a previous judge(s). Just because previous judges rule one way on a issue in the past does not make it correct nor does it mean that judges in the future will rule that same way. This is why national needs to put its rule in writing.

[Scouting179]

Both of these topics are repeatedly coming up.

"if you're registered, you're active"??? HOGWASH I say. What does that teach Scouts about participation? What does mean they're getting from the program -- absolutely nothing. Why should we advance someone in such a case? I don't necessarily expect them to do a lot, but I do expect them to do something. So if he completes all but SMC and BOR for First Class and Star before his FC BOR, 4 months later he can get Star when he does NOTHING after the FC BOR? The Star 4-month requirement be active after his FC BOR. Not camping, not attending meetings, etc is NOT being active.

A similar arugument can be made for performing your troop job. BSA will say if he held the job, he performed it. HOGWASH I say again. If we pass him on that, what have we taught him? Nothing other than that it's okay to NOT do one's job - not a good life lesson. Some jobs do require a lot of work (SPL, etc), while some don't necessarily (Librarian, etc). So, there is no hard rule on how much needs done, but they do need to do SOMETHING.

I TOTALLY disagree with National on this one.

I do concur with those who said you should not set hard percentages on attendance and participation (other than it needs to be above 0%), you need to look at the job held and specific situation.

[Hamish17]

Thanks for all of your replies. Just to make sure I 'm understanding this correctly. The general feeling is, as long as a Scout is registered with the council he is considered active. Also as long as he has a position of responsiblity, even though he has very low attendance, he is considered to have served actively. Thanks again.