Follow
Our nationwide organization of some 2.8 million youth and 1.3 million adult participants is defined by written Scout rank requirements policies and procedures. Individual understanding, subject to an individual point of view, can lead to some misinterpretations if we do not read requirements, policies and procedures with an open mind.
As an example look at these Scout rank requirements:
Scout Badge
7. Understand and agree to live by the Scout Oath or Promise, Scout Law, motto, and slogan, and the Outdoor Code.
Tenderfoot Rank
7. Repeat from memory and explain in your own words the Scout Oath, Law, motto, and slogan.
A newly minted Scout needs to understand and agree to live by the basic tenets of Scouting while a Scout challenging the Tenderfoot Rank must repeat them from memory and explain them in his own words.
How many of us have required a new Scout to have the Scout Oath and Law memorized? I know that I used to before I carefully read the requirement. Comparing the two requirements reveals the simple progression from understand and agree to live by, to repeat from memory and explain.
Truth be told I thought the Scout Badge requirement should be more difficult and I read the Scout Badge requirement with this mindset. Any young man should be able to become a Scout without having to jump through too many hoops and then progress towards more challenging activities.
After this ‘discovery’ I started reading requirements and policies with renewed care. I was especially conscious of things that challenged my preconceptions. The next step was aligning our program to what was actually being said instead of what I imagined was correct.
We had a Troop ‘tradition’ of having boys memorize the Scout Oath and Law before we signed off on their Scout Badge. Now what is wrong with that? Why not have a higher standard? Is it that big a deal? If we were going to pick and choose what policies and requirements to adhere to and those we could alter what we would have is a program that would be built on suppositions and traditions rather than Scouting.
I suspect this is how many Scout Troops end up with a set of practices that have taken them off the rails. A couple of degrees deviation on a compass bearing accumulates into missing the target by miles over time and distance. Traditions become so ingrained (and beloved) that they take on the aura of official policy. Often they are simply dead wrong.
“Official BSA Policy” requires careful reading. These policies exist not as guidelines but as directions. There is something in the American spirit that suspects and resists policies, procedures and manuals. We tend to view them as limiting and restrictive, assaults on our own intelligence and judgment. We’d be better off viewing them as a map that directs us towards a goal. The most direct path with the fewest dangers and difficulties, the best roads with the finest views is inherently restrictive of all other paths.
Uniforming and the placement of insignia is a often misunderstood and provides a good example of the misapplication of ‘official policy’. I know that many Troops require a Scout appearing before a Board of Review to wear a ‘full class A uniform” and refuse him if he does not. Sounds Kosher, right? Nothing wrong with that, uniforms are a good thing and it is after all “official BSA policy”, right?
Nope.
First there is no language anywhere that requires a Scout even have a uniform. Uniforms are encouraged but not required. Go ahead and look, they aren’t required anywhere. Second there is no description of ‘classes’ of uniform to be found anywhere in official literature. Thirdly no Board of Review can refuse to advance a Scout because he is not in Uniform.
Now we encourage our Scouts to get and wear a Scout Uniform but it all happens with positive rather than negative reinforcement. We appeal to the youth leadership to inspect and reward good uniforming after we get them to buy into why this is a good idea. But we don’t demand and we don’t punish. The result is that almost all of our Scouts wear their uniform almost all of the time. When they don’t it is for a good reason.
Over time as we have become aware of traditions and practices that need alignment we bring them around to ‘true north’. Some die a quick painless death, others linger far too long screaming and kicking all the while. The end result is concentrating on the actual, rather than the perceived, goals and challenges of Scouting that have proven so effective over the past century.
I “discovered” this a couple of years ago, too.
The Arrow of Light requirements are almost identical to the Scout (joining) requirments, except that Arrow of Light does require “repeat from memory” and Scout doesn’t. Another chance for confusion. I used to say they were the same, but AoL is harder.
We try to get new Scouts through the joining requirements in the first meeting. There is no reason not to do that.
To practice careful reading of requirements, think about Scouts with special needs. A Scout can still “demonstrate you know how to tie the following knots” if they don’t have control of their hands. They talk someone else through the knot.
Also, you can’t “show first aid for the following” by talking about it. Somebody needs to get bandaged or squeeze their nose.
By now, I never assume that I know the requirement cold. I ask for their handbook and read it out loud.
Oddly, the training module for boards of review says, “A board can expect a Scout to be neat in appearance and properly uniformed.” It also says that a lack a preparedness reflects on the troop as well as the Scout. I agree with the latter, but I wish they clarified that “expect” is not the same as “require”.
Agreed – in so many endeavors a healthy dose of humility and flexibility is important. Conversely a stiff backbone is also important in keeping things on course.
An important piece in this is not getting bent out of shape if someone points out that there is room for improvement or even immediate change. Sometimes these criticisms will be off the mark themselves. The answer is to search the handbooks and guidelines and see what they really say.