Re: Policy Changes
Jon Dixon (dixonj@ROCOCO.COLORADO.EDU)
Wed, 11 Feb 1998 19:38:38 -0500
One thing to remember in this whole discussion is that the positions in
question are actually termed "positions of responsibility". The focus
is on the responsibility needed for the position, not the amount of
leadership. As an example, Quartermaster doesn't generally require much
leadership (there usually aren't others who serve under you), but it can
be a huge responsibility. So the appropriateness of positions for Eagle
(and other ranks) should be judged based on what level of responsibility
The place where leadership truly comes in for Eagle is in the project.
It is explicitly mentioned here, and this is what the troop and BOR
should be evaluating the project based on.
I really don't see the BSA homogenizing things. The people who want to
put impediments in front of the go-getters (like raising the minimum age
for Eagle) are, to my mind, more guilty of doing so. The BSA is trying
to continue to make the program relevant to modern society while
allowing for individual freedom and initiative.
I don't see what "pass/fail" grades have to do with this -- remember
that Mother Nature grades pass/fail (and she doesn't curve the grade
either). Actually, all of Scouting has always been pass/fail; you
either complete the requirement or you don't. It would be quite silly
to grade such things on a percentage which is accumulated across ranks.
Personally, I'm of the opinion that grades are overrated (I can say
this, having above a 4.0/4.0 for high school due to AP courses and above
a 3.8/4.0 for both undergraduate and graduate work). Too often grades
simply reflect an ability to remember things for a short while and keep
from getting rattled on a test. The real world is a lot different.
Terry Howerton Sakima Group, Inc. SCOUTER Magazine Kansas City