The 2011 Guide to Advancement has been released:
The Guide to Advancement is the official source for administering advancement in all Boy Scouts of America programs: Cub Scouting, Boy Scouting, Varsity Scouting, Venturing, and Sea Scouts. It replaces the Advancement Committee Policies and Procedures and Advancement and Recognition Policies and Procedures, which are no longer valid.
I will do my best to revise former posts at ScoutmasterCG.com to alert readers to the changes in the new Advancement Guide. The guide also adds:
Be aware that statements or interpretations offered from unofficial websites and other such sources may be out of date or incorrect. They will not be considered in resolving advancement questions and issues. In situations not specifically covered in this guide, advancement chairs, coordinators, or other administrators should make decisions based on the aims and mission of the Boy Scouts of America, as well as the Scout Oath and Scout Law—and common sense.
Here’s the list of significant changes:
1. Council, district, and unit advancement committee responsibilities detailed and listed
2. Section on awards and recognitions eliminated for integration into a new publication, the Guide to Awards and Insignia, No. 33066 ( I haven’t seen this new guide yet)
3. Cub Scouting material updated
4. “Active participation” and “position of responsibility” requirements approached from unit’s established reasonable expectations.
NOTE: Units may establish ‘reasonable expectations’ to active participation and position of responsibility requirements. I have argued against metrics being applied to active participation in the past . This change does allow units to attach metrics to the requirement but it does not allow metrics alone to be the sole determination of ‘active’. Instead it describes a three step process and alternatives; but that’s for another post.
5. Venturing and Sea Scouts coverage added.
6. Merit badge section reorganized and expanded.
7. Board of review practices clarified, including wearing the uniform.
8. Rank advancement appeals limited to board of review rejections.
9. Eagle Scout rank application process clarified and updated.
10. Eagle Scout service project requirement changed, detailed, and clarified.
Eagle projects are now considered unit activities (I feel slightly vindicated that they were not actually unit activities before this change)
11. New process for requesting time extensions for earning Eagle Scout rank.
12. Advancement for special-needs youth clarified.
13. In applying for alternative requirements a qualifying disability need not be permanent.
I am very pleased the changes and clarifications in the new guide. Some of the more debatable questions have been put to bed with this publication and no doubt others will arise. What I suggest is that we all give the guide a complete, thoughtful read and make adjustments to our thinking and procedures as needed. As is true with any policy statements just take them at face value; don’t make many angels dance on the heads of pins.
There’s also a new Eagle project workbook. The most significant statement I have found so far:
Only the Official Workbook May Be Used
“Eagle Scout candidates must use the official Eagle Scout Service Project Workbook, No. 512-927, as produced by the Boy Scouts of America… Although it is acceptable to copy and distribute the workbook, it must maintain the same appearance with nothing changed, added, or deleted.No council, district, unit, or individual has the authority to produce or require additional forms, or to add or change requirements, or to make any additions, deletions, or changes in the text, outlines, links, graphics, or other layout or informational elements of the workbook. It is permissible, however, to print, copy, or send individual pages or forms within the workbook as long as they are not changed in the process.”
This finally and thankfully puts an end to all of the inflated unit, district and council specific workbooks!
I’ll be posting more about the specific changes soon; all I can say is I appreciate that the B.S.A. has sorted out some of the more difficult questions once and for all.
{ 8 comments… read them below or add one }
” it must maintain the same appearance with nothing changed, added, or deleted.”
If this means what I think that it says, then I don’t like it. If it means that councils, districts and units may not alter it, then that’s fine with me. What I don’t like is the assumption that the Life Scout may not create his own plan, while including all of the required sections in his plan.
I have copies of 30 to 40 Eagle Scout Project Plans and they are works of art. Just filling out a template will never create a work of art like these. If the Scout is restricted to filling out a template like filling out a form then this is dissapointing to me.
I am perfectly ok with template signature pages for instance. I think, however, that the rest of the project guidelines should be in outline form and not template form that ‘must maintain the same appearance with nothing changed, added, or deleted”. The “same appearance” thing is especially disappointing. Before long they will be requiring the project schedule in Microsoft Project using the MS Project Eagle Template
(Caveat: I have NOT yet read the aforementioned Guide, but this is the direction that my current district and council has been going since the Eagle Project Workbook came out.)
Me personally, I think that every Eagle Project Plan should look different from all the others based on the Scout’s project details, writing and design experience, and the Scout’s personality. My first son is an engineer. My second son is an architect. Their Eagle Scout Project Plans looked very different. That was a very good thing. ALL of the required elements were thoroughly covered in both plans. YMMV!
A Scout can certainly create a ‘work of art’ plan and then fill out the template and include the work of art with the materials he submits.
What the new workbook and policy does is keeps folks from meddling and requiring things that are not required. My Council inflated the existing (now old) workbook by many pages and added thousands of words of advice like counting the number of nuts and bolts needed before submitting the plan for approval. It was a mess and I never showed it to our Scouts, we used a clean copy.
The new workbook has elaborated the template somewhat – and it all helps protect the Scout from interference.
For instance there are now two distinct stages – a proposal and a final plan. I applaud this because the proposal is the only part that needs approval before the project is started and the final plan section is intended for the Scout to show his planning process to the Board of Review.
If we could do away with Life to Eagle seminars and the rest of the cottage industry of form making and advice that has accreted around the service project our Scouts would be much better off.
As pertaining to Varsity Teams, I love the change for Boards of Review up to Life Scout. The Advancement Manager (a boy position), the Scout Committee Advancement member chair and the Team Coach (me) serves on the Board. The including of a boy on a Board of Review is a great idea since they should already be signing off on advancement for a boy. Boy led taking a step to a further boy led program. I wonder if the Troop will every do this.
After briefly looking through the Eagle Project Workbook I have to say that I really like it. The young men I have helped with projects could have really benefited from this new format. Some youths may not need this level of detail and find it distracting, but for most, I believe, this will only help them improve their planning and will make their projects and leadership better.
As for the guide to advancement, my only complaint is as a Venturing leader the cover gives the impression that the Quartermaster award and Venturing Silver are somehow lower than Eagle. As separate programs it would be better to show them on the same plane as Eagle, not leading up to it. But that’s just me.
I’ll say again that the template in the project workbook has not been majorly expanded – it contains most of the same things as the previous version it just provides a more specific way of recording things to report to the board of review.
I really like the new Guide to Advancement. It is great to have everything in one place, no more hunting down the Board of Review or Scoutmaster conference training materials or checking the back page of the Eagle project workbook for the exact details.
It is a big document, but when I look at a single section, it is just long enough for clarity.
The Board of Review chapter is great, some nice clarifications and an excellent section on uniforming for the board. Our BoR chair is an attorney in HR and compensation law and he also thought it was excellent. He knows a little bit about rules for fair evaluation.
The Merit Badge chapter is also welcome, and very specific about a lot of frequent questions: time limits, being a counselor for your son, and so on.
As a Scoutmaster or ASM, you should read sections 4.2.3.0 through 4.2.3.5, about three and a half pages. That covers the requirements that Scoutmasters sign: active participation, Scout spirit, service projects, positions of responsibility, and Scoutmaster conferences. I’m a little nervous that the new definition of “active” reopens the doors for attendance quotas, but we’ll see how that works in practice. The clarifications for position of responsibility are wonderful. About time.
Finally, there are rules throughout for going forward when an obstructive Scoutmaster refuses to sign off a requirement. It is sad that this is so pervasive that we need to have rules about it, but I guess we do.
My read on “reasonable expectations” isn’t metrics (x meetings/outings means must attend y to be active), as I read further the guidance is right there… the use of the word “impact”. Unfortunately I feel that many units will fall into the simple math trap. Why? Because it’s easy to measure and easy to justify, especially to the parent who’s son isn’t getting credit for time served. But our job isn’t to check off requirements, it is to help young people be better than we are ourselves.
In the section on Positions of Responsibility the guide discusses time served, positions that qualify, and the role of adults in ensuring the expectations are met. The Scout Handbook directs scouts to the online handboook for position descriptions, but the basics are found in the PL Handbook, SPL Handbook and the position cards issued during Troop Leadership Training.
Should there be any more “reasonable expectation” of acitvely serving in a postion than to simply do the job the scout agreed to do according to the basic standards set forth by the BSA? Beyond that I see no reason why an adult needs to add more to or take anything away from the description. The scout need not attend outings if it conflicts with a sport as long as he does his job and sets up the Troop for success before they leave… Measure the scout’s success against the description and his impact, nothing else.
Your’s in Scouting.
We’re on the same page here Bob. I do hear from folks who don’t understand these things on a pretty regular basis though; hopefully the new guide will clear some of that up.