Notes on the following Scouts-L Posts: My e-mail software stripped the headers off when I saved these messages to a file, so the source has been lost on those without signatures in the message body. If you recognize one of them let me know and I will give proper credit.
Scott Drown indicated that in his Troop the Board of Review was signing off requirements. This posting addresses that issue, provides the text of BSA's guidance on BORs and moves on to Jim Sleezer's query.
Scott, I would ask whether your SM and Committee Chair have been to training, sounds like it or a refresher is in order. The Board of Review has a specific place in the methods of Scouting, but it isn't to sign off Scouts on their requirements. I can't think of a more intimidating way to have to get a requirement passed than to have a formal board to pass. This is not what Scouting is about - it is about developing character, citizenship and fitness. The advancement program is a tool. We want it to motivate boys to grow not intimidate them. Please share the following taken directly from the 1992 Troop Committee Guidebook with your committee and BOR members:
BOARDS OF REVIEW (EXCEPT FOR EAGLE SCOUT)
"When a Scout has completed all of the requirements for a rank, he appears before a board of review composed of at least three and not more than six committee members.
"The review has three purposes:
"The board of review is not a time to retest the Scout, but to determine the Scout's attitude and his acceptance of Scouting ideals. It is also important to review those Scouts who are not advancing. The guidance and care shown could motivate these Scouts to further achievement.
"The review should be conducted at a convenient time and location, such as a troop meeting, summer camp, or the home of a member of the troop committee, Scoutmasters and assistant Scoutmasters do not participate in the board of review.
"The board of review members should feel free to refer to the Boy Scout Handbook, Scoutmaster Handbook, or any other references during the review.
"Because many boys are ill at ease when talking to adults, it is important that the board of review be held in a relaxed atmosphere. A certain amount of formality and meaningful questioning should be used during the review. Use questions that requirrre a narrative answer.
"Examples of the kinds of questions that might be asked are:
"These types of questions will help the boy to see the value and practical application of his efforts.
"At the conclusion of the review, the board should know whether a boy is qualified for the rank or palm. The Scout is asked to leave the room whle the board members discuss his achievements. The decision of the board of review is arrived a through discussion and must be unanimous. If members are satisfied that the Scout is ready to advance, he is called in, congratulated, notified as to when he will receive his recognition, and encouraged to continue his advancement or earn the next palm.
"Scouts who are not advancing should also come before the board of review. The board should show interest in these Scouts' rank progress.
Ask the kind of questions that may reveal why they are not advancing:
"Let the Scout know that he has the support of the board of review members and that there is no doubt that he can achieve the next rank. The board's concern and supportive manner will both help the Scout's confidence and impress upon him the importance of advancement in his Scouting experience.
"At the conclusion of every board of review, it is the the committee's responsibility to prepare and turn in to the local council office a copy of the Advancement Report, and ensure that the badges earned by the boys are obtained and awarded in a timely fashion."
There is a lot of good grist in the above for a Troop Board of Review. I think it makes it fairly clear that the board is not there to retest or test in the first instance. If the Scoutmaster has signed the requirement, it is signed and passed. The board does not then retest.
Now if the board learns that a requirement was never completed as in Jim's query, I think a lot depends on circumstances. As in Alan Houser's example, the SM may have decided that the boy learned the same things in the flag designing process as in making the flag. The SM has made a judgment call for which the boy should not be penalized. In such a case it would be approriate for the committee and SM to reflect and evaluate that course of action for future consideration. We all learn from these things.
If on the other hand the SM signed off on the requirement and no work was done, the board could vote that the requirement was not met and that the Scout is not yet ready. There isn't any guidance in the book on that one, because boards aren't there to be in the business of failing scouts. But when it happens, I like the suggestion of counseling instead of a pronouncement of failure. Reason: the Scout lived up to the Scout Law and demonstrated his trustworthiness by being honest. Let's encourage this by asking futher questions about what he thinks should be done about the obvious problem. Encourage him that he has completed all of the other requirements and is ready to advance and ask what help is needed? Give the Scout ownership of the solution through guided discussion. Most Scouts will decide that their honor requires them to go back and work on it a little more and they'll be the prouder when they do wear the badge later. This is an area where the board needs to really be aware of its purpose and ask plenty of questions to make sure the Scout is getting the program - delivering the promise! Here a board that is familiar with the situation is best placed to really answer the question. In some cases it may be appropriate to grant the rank, in others to counsel. The key is to keep the Scout motivated to continue to participate in the program and work towards the basic goals of scouting - character, citizenship and fitness.
Speaking only for myself in the Scouting Spirit, Michael F.
Bowman
DDC-Training, GW Dist. Nat Capital Area Council
mfbowman@CAPACCESS.ORG
Mike Bowman,
Sounds like I touched a nerve with you!
I have been through basic leader as have most of the adult leaders in our troop. I am familiar with the process and intent of the Board as I have had to look it up more than once to remind the Scouts to follow it, especially when thet wanted to fail the one Scout that ended up writing a contract.
To date, no Scout in our Troop has been failed by a Board. However, I do disagree with your contention that there is essentially no time when a Scout could fail - Sounds like we will have to agree to disagree.
In the matter of the Board signing off requirements. They only make a suggestion to the Scoutmaster who signs off in that one area - Scout Spirit - and I think the Scouts themselves may be the best measure of whether a Scout shows it or not. The Scoutmaster has the ability to overrule the Board if he likes but this has never happened just as no Scout has ever failed.
I am not sure exactly when this started in our Troop as it predates me. Probably from the same era when the Scouts themselves started to do Boards for Tenderfoot, Second and First Class. I don't recall that in the rules either but it works well, has educated the Scouts in the process, given it meaning to them, and given them thought as to what Scouting is about and the qualities they want in their Troop - i.e. Leadership.
Thanks for all the time and effort you put into your posting. Do you have the entire Scoutmaster Handbook keyed into your computer?
Scott Drown
ASM Troop 39
Mt. Baker Council, Wa.
The recent postings on Boards of Review, Purpose and Eagles indicates to me that the members of this list are a wonderful group of fine Scouters who are doing their best to see that each Scout they come into contact with is getting the best Scouting program that they can offer. And the healthy interest and exchange of ideas that we have seen only confirms that opinion. We all are always learning in this Scouting business and the testing of ideas and sharing of concerns helps us all.
Sometimes the sharing can become somewhat spirited! :-) And Scott is right that he hit a nerve with me. My concern was with the Scouts and a desire to see that they were being the best program possible. Hence a long posting on the orientation of BORs towards being more in the business of evaluating the quality of the program offered to the Scouts than acting as a retester of requirements and related comments about failing.
I for one would rather not see the word "failure" associated with Scouting because of its negative connotations for the individual and the implied danger that a leader might be discouraging rather than encouraging a Scout to his full potential. In trying to address this, I suggested two alternatives for a board; e.g., pass or counsel the Scout through guided discussion into a realization of the additional effort necessary to meet the requirements, giving encouragement for what has been done and his honesty before the board. This was not meant to say that a BOR can't find that a Scout has not met the requirements. Far from it. What was meant was that the BOR should be looking not to brand the Scout as a failure, but ways to help him be motivated and to succeed. Yep. Definitely a nerve for me. :-)
Part of learning is also keeping up to date with changes that can have an affect on Scouts. As Bruce indicated, the rules for a BOR have changed and the membership now must be adult committee members. Likewise a BOR is required for each rank starting with Tenderfoot. For a Scout, it will help avert potential problems later with an Eagle BOR, if the Scout has been through all of his rank BORs and their membership was properly constituted. For example, consider what would happen if an evaluating Eagle BOR member's questions elicited a comment from the Scout that indicated a lack of previous BORs or ones conducted by Scouts. Technically, he would not have completed a requirement for a previous rank. Most likely this would result in a delay while the problem was rectified and a good deal of anxiety on the part of the Scout, parents, leaders, etc.
All of this discussion eventually gets back to the fact that BORs are a part of one of the methods of Scouting - Advancement and that their execution should always be in furtherance of Scouting's purposes or aims:
These are all positive directions and hence the emphasis on encouragement and motivation in BOR settings.
Similarly, while we can debate the merits of a particular badge or set of requirements for use in advancement, it is useful to remember that advancement, outdoors program, uniforms, etc. are methods towards the three aims and that they are not ends in themselves. It is for that reason that some aspects of these methods have changed with time to help our Scouts prepare for new challenges.
Sure, those of us who were Scouts as youths can recall back to how hard or easy a particular rank or badge was way back when and try to decided whether it was easier or not. We may or not agree with all of the changes, but I think the key thing is to look at what it means to the Scout today. Is he being challenged, motivated and as a result growing in citizenship, character, and fitness? Are the methods we are using resulting in the Scouts improving in these areas? And as they approach Eagle, are they being similarly challenged, though some of the merit badges are different?
In answering these questions for myself, I tend to look at what it was like for me as a Scout reaching Eagle in 1967 and my son's progress toward Eagle now. He is 14 and probably won't be an Eagle until he's 15, although he has earned Life and has 22 merit badges so far. In completing the requirements of some of those badges he has learned many things I didn't learn until much later in life. Some of the requirements are different and some of the learning areas are different, but as I watch, I'm amazed at how hard he has worked at it and his self-motivation (in my case the motivation was external - mother on my back constantly). For him the Scouting program is delivering a lot more than what I had including a healthy dose of self-motivation. And as he prepares for his Eagle project he'll be learning a lot more about leadership than I did when I simply performed services under the requirements extant nearly 30 years ago. For him as a Scout I think that the Eagle rank will have every bit as much importance and value as it did for me, if not more. From this perspective it is hard for me to try to compare which time period's requirement were harder, better, etc., because I can see in my own son and other Scouts here tremendous growth on the Eagle trail.
Speaking only for myself in the Scouting Spirit, Michael
F. Bowman
DDC-Training, GW Dist. Nat Capital Area Council
mfbowman@CAPACCESS.ORG
I would like to add to this discussion from a different perspective.
First, no scout *should* get to the BOR and fail, but this has to be a real possibility to make the review meanignful. There may be technical problems discovered (not right merit badge mix, not enought time-in-rank, etc.) that need to be addressed, but is more of a postponed decision.
Second, think of the BOR not as a pass/fail test, but rather as an opportunity for the board members and the scout to get to know each other better and to learn how to improve the scouting experience.
We ask many questions that don't have right or wrong answers, but get to know the scout better - like "What does the Scout Oath mean to you?" or "What do you think this point of the Scout Law means and how does it impact your life?" We also explore the scout's interest and activities outside scouting and his plans for the future (insode and outside scouting). We ask what he enjoys most about scouting and what he would change. This helps us improve the troop operations.
If you approach the BOR as focused, but open ended conversation, then there are opportunities for learning and growth on both sides.
Bob Haar (email: rhaar@gmr.com )
Asst. Scoutmaster, BSA Troop 188, Clinton Valley Council,
Michigan
Chippewa Lodge #29, WWW
The topic of "testing" at board of reviews has been resurrected again; and again, I find myself disagreeing with parts of the discussion to date.
According to the Troop Committee Guidebook, the Board of Review should "Question him to satisfy yourself that he knows what the requirements demand. How would you orient a map? What would you do if you met a man bleeding profusely? How do you pitch a tent properly?
The purpose is not to re-examine a scout on every point of the requirements, but to determine that he has a >> practical working knowledge << of the required material." The Scout Handbook, says "The Board of Review. . .want(s) to make sure you really have completed the requirements for a rank."
I disagree strongly with the contention that the Board can not insure basic grwoth has taken place. The excerpt from the Committee Guidebook above seems to indicate that the board is being NEGLIGENT if it does not insure that "practical working knowledge" has been absorbed by the candidate.
It seems as if another semantic debate is occurring. What, exactly constitutes "testing"?
If a Scout has earned aquatics MB's, is it wrong to ask "What would we need to do to plan a troop swim?"-I think not. The often asked question "What are the points in the Safe Swim Defense", would be improper IMHO.
Asking carefully worded questions can draw from the Scout what he is getting out of the program, how well the program is functioning, etc, plus serve as a double-check on the effectiveness of the troop program.
YIS, Mike Derleth
T32, Monroe LA.
Just a quick note ....
A Board of Review (BOR) is a panel of adults (Committee Members) which review the Scout's progress since his last Board. A Board does NOT have to be for advancement only this is one of the least known facts ... BORs are not just for advancement reviews). They find out what the Scout likes or dislikes, what changes could be made to the program, what needs to made available, how can the Troop help the Scout, etc.
***** Also, the main focus is to REVIEW and it is NOT to RETEST. *****
It is up to the person(s) signing off the Scouts to make sure they are properly tested on a requirement before signing them off. If you are retesting a Scout during a BOR ... A MAJOR SHAME, SHAME ON YOU! <grin> If you read the SM handbook and/or Committee handbook, it gives a brief summary of what a BOR is ... try reading or summarizing this at the beginning of each BOR. This not only clarifies the point of the BOR in the Scout's mind (and puts them at ease), but it also clarifies the purpose in the minds of the Adults conducting the BOR.
I agree with Robert Morley who wrote:
< The troop is supposed to be boy-run, including planning, implemention, training, < and discilpine (to a point).
To quote my Scoutmaster, "Scouting is for boys, by boys, but supervised by adults!"
YiS,
David L. Scammell
ASM Troop 227 - Orlando, FL
West Orange District - Central Florida Council
Date: Sun, 10 Dec 1995 03:30:37 -0700
From: CHUCK BRAMLET <chuckb@AZTEC.ASU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Retesting by the BoR, Methods of Scouting, and Scout
Spirit.
There has been a great deal of discussion on the topic of the BoR lately, as well as the Methods of Scouting and Scout Spirit. All sorts of opinions have been voiced, but only one has gone back to the source on one topic.
The "Methods of Scouting" as set forth in all the literature, are the tools that we have in our "toolbox". One of the tools is "Advancement". Without that tool, the BoR would be unnecessary. But like _all_ tools, they can be used properly. Or improperly. You wouldn't (I hope) try use a screwdriver when you needed a chisel. Likewise, you wouldn't use and "advancement" when the job called for an "adult association". Or an "adult association" when you should have used a "personal growth". I don't believe it's exactly necessary that _all_ the tools be used at the same time. Just that they are _all_ used.
The BoR, BTW, is one of our ways of finding out how well our "tools" are working. They _might_ need sharpening, you know. ;)
As several of you know, I am in process on an Adult Orientation Program for the parents of boys who join our Troop. This training is being designed as a method of showing the parents what we are trying to do. For many of them, it will be the only training they will get, as they are not Troop leaders and will attend little other BSA training.
I have just finished looking at the Troop Committee Guidebook for it's interpretation of the purpose of the BoR. It says, "and I quote:"
"The review has three purposes:
It also says that the BoR is "not a time to retest the Scout", but I would draw a _wide_ distinction between asking the boy some relevent questions and retesting him. After all, you can find out quite a bit about his confidence and personality by watching him strugle to tie that bowline that he knew how to tie 3 months ago, and has since forgotten. Also, retesting can also be looked on as having the boy verify everything for the BoR, but a question of "What would you do if..." can give you a great deal of information.
I just sat a BoR for a Star Scout last Monday. "Junior" is a textbook example of the boy who is a Scout _only_ because Dad wants him to be a Scout. (Dad is very active in the Troop, and _has_ been trained.) As we asked him the first couple of questions, he strugled for words and answers, and seemed to be having some difficulty. I then explained to him that were we not looking for word for word repititions of what the official liturature says, but rather for _his_ feelings or perspective. After that, he stopped strugling, but got kind of a "smart aleck" smirk on his face. The remainder of the BoR seemed to me to be like a verbal sparing session. I believe we _both_ learned a great deal in it.
One of several things that we noticed was the fact that he _couldn't_ recite the Oath and Law, without stopping to think, or leaving out words. Now, before someone jumps on me for retesting, let me say that we _open_ all Bs-o-R by having the Scout lead the Board in the Oath and Law. We _did_ have him repeat them again at the end of the meeting, and he did much better. He passed, BTW.
One incident that happened, though, illustrates my point. I asked Junior to show me how to tie a bowline. And watched him not tie a bowline several times. I also observed the following: realization that he hadn't done it right, and a more carefull attempt the next times, the realization the his theory was wrong to begin with, and the attempt to tie it using several different methods. Until I told him where he was going wrong, and how to solve it.
I learned: How well Junior copes with frustration, how well he accepts advice, whether he tries new things when the old don't work or keeps trying the old way hoping that something will magically happen, and things will suddenly work out right the next time.
All in all, the BoR should tell us 3 things: 1. If the boy is ready to advance; 2. If the program is working; 3. What adjustments we need to make if it isn't.
Several of you have stated that the BoR must accept the candidate, if he has met all the requirements. It comes to mind that, if that is the case, the BoR has no real purpose. Remember, one of the purposes of the BoR is "To make sure that the work has been learned and completed."
The BoR can also be used as a tool to find that elusive creature, "Scout Spirit". SS doesn't always show at unit meetings. Sometimes it out and out hides from you! ;) But at the unit meeting, you don't necessarily see that "Junior" (I love to pick on this kid, don't I) is trying hard to be a good Scout in his associations with his non-Scout friends. You also won't necessarily see that beneath the surface, he really _does_ know the oath, even though he may not be able to articulate it as well as we would like. And in the case of one boy that I know of, the BoR found that his lack of attending meetings had to do with the sudden death of a parent, and his trying to keep things from getting out of hand.
At the BoR, you also might find out that the reason that Junior missed the last six, or six months of, meetings was that he committed, maybe as part of a service project or religious award req, to helping at the Church prayer meeting (and the Troop meets on Prayer Meeting night) as one example.
Your unit BoR can also be conviened to ask Bobby why it's been six months, and he hasn't yet got Scout, or Tenderfoot.
That pretty much covers this topic. I see I've gotten a bit carried
away: It's 2:30 AM! {:O
YiS,
Chuck Bramlet, ASM Troop 323
Thunderbird District, Grand Canyon Council, Phoenix, Az.
I "used to be" an Antelope! (and a good ol' Antelope,
too...) WEM-10-95
Please E-mail any replies to: >> chuckb@aztec.asu.edu
<<
Date: Tue, 12 Dec 1995 02:45:28 -0500
From: "Michael F. Bowman"
<mfbowman@CAPACCESS.ORG>
Subject: Re: BOR Help -- to retest?
Rob,
The Board of Review doesn't retest skills, because its function is to assure that the aims of Scouting are being met; e.g, citizenship, character development and fitness. The skills are just one method of Scouting in achieving the end and nothing more. Sure the skills will come in handy and help the Scout better enjoy the outdoors activities that make the program work, but they are not an end-all. The only time to test the skill is when the Scout presents himself to pass the requirement and validation is in the SM Conference. After that it is a done deal. You share a concern that many leaders have about "lost" or "forgotten" skills. This is something that is going to happen and there are going to be some Scouts that are immature.
Our program is designed to help them grow. My question would be have they progressed from wherever they started? Are they showing signs of character development, better citizenship, etc. If so, then I'd say we have a success, even if they don't do well with a bowline.
Rob, I am proud to say that I am an Eagle Scout, but if you asked me to tie a bowline, I'd probably require a dozen tries to get it right, if I was asked. For some reason, I just had the devil's own time. Does that mean I should turn in my medal? Of course not, that is not what we are measuring. We are looking beyond the skill to what is happening in the Scout's personal growth.
In my own case, I was on the verge of going to reform school after setting voting precinct signs on fire at school, when my folks really got involved in getting me into Scouting. That changed everything. The kids I ran with at the time are now either dead or in prison. I've been more fortunate and it was because of the way of thinking that Scouting instilled.
Yeah, I'm one of those that didn't master every skill. But then again, I learned much more. And I can still open the Handbook or Fieldbook and relearn. For me it is easy to see some of these Scouts through my own experiences and know that more important developments are taking place, albiet sometimes slowly.
If my Scoutmaster had been running a failure factory instead of taking every opportunity to reward achievements, I probably would have quit and you can guess the result. We want to keep things positive because it brings positive results.
You may also be surprised that these same Scouts years later will remember a great deal more than you'd think of things they have learned in the skills area. I can recall many times as an ASM in the 70's seeing boys that barely passed and then went on to do great things.
All that said, I don't mean to imply that we should give ranks away. Far from that we need to challenge and expect much. But once the Scout passes the test, we need to go on. If he forgets or has trouble, lets maximize what he has been good at.
The beauty of Scouting is what it does in developing a whole person with self-esteem enough to make good life decisions. But we are dealing with young people who are not perfect and that requires understanding on our part.
Speaking only for myself in the Scouting Spirit, Michael
F. Bowman
DDC-Training, GW Dist. Nat Capital Area Council
mfbowman@CAPACCESS.ORG
Date: Wed, 13 Dec 1995 06:50:05 -0800
From: Timothy J O'Leary <tjo@CPTCHR.AFIP.MIL>
Subject: Scout Spirit, BOR's, Eagle and Otherwise
The messages on these topics show, I think properly, that there is no single "right" approach for judging "scout spirit," using the BOR process, and using rank advancement as a tool.
To me, scout spirit is everything. I think that the newest way in which the requirements are written is about right. Something like "Show Scout Spirit by demonstrating that you have lived the Oath and Law in your everyday life."
To me, this means that the requirement is not about attending troop meetings and campouts, and that to deny either Eagle or Tenderfoot advancement on the basis of attendance misses the point. On the other hand, a scout who is beating up another scout for Monday night recreation is definitely not demonstrating Scout spirit. The BOR can decide not to advance a Scout based on its own observations, I suppose, but it may be a terrible mistake (see final paragraph); more importantly, the BOR gives the troop committee the opportunity and responsibility to contribute its collective experience to thoughts about how the troop program can contribute to the scout's development.
As committee chair, I go on every third or fourth campout with the troop; camping is a great way to see scout spirit in action, but so is after school, with friends, and at home. Some of the things I think of when I think about "Scout spirit:"
Trustworthy - if he's the waterman, does he keep it filled? If he's fireman, does he wonder away? If he was expected to provide a skit, is he ready?
Loyal - does he build the other boys up, or tear them down? Does he press the "hot buttons" of the boy with a temper, or keep others from pressing them?
Helpful - during after meal cleanup does he help out, or leave all the work for the others while he whittles a stick?
Friendly - is he pleasant? But don't penalize the "shy kid."
Courteous - does he treat everyone with dignity?
Kind - when someone's feeling are hurt, how does he react?
Obedient - when his parents come to pick him up at the end of the campout, does he get his act together, or does he stall?
Cheerful - does he sulk when it is his turn to hose down the summer camp latrine?
Thrifty - does he use the propane stove to warm himself on a cold morning, or does he reserve it for cooking?
Brave - does he have the courage of character to do the right thing, even when the folks around him are urging him in the wrong direction. This one is usually best assessed outside of scout activities!
Clean - clean hands, clean mouth?
Reverent - does he practice what he preaches. Is his "Great Spriit" moving his life?
The Tenderfoot Scout is showing Scout spirit when he pitches in some of the time. The Eagle candidate is showing Scout spirit when he realizes that he is setting an example which will help the other Scouts to be better people. Everyone - older scouts, SM, ASM, parents, teachers, committee members, needs to help build Scout spirit. Scouting adults need to remember that "Scout Spirit" is what the whole program is really about, and that cooking, pitching tents, building fires, map and compass, uniforms, being a patrol leader, etc. are ONLY TOOLS TO DEVELOP SCOUT SPIRIT.
Back to the BOR. When we conduct a BOR we need to be looking at the Scout, and not worrying too much about whether he can tie a sheet bend, but rather asking "Is our program helping this Scout learn to live the Oath and Law in his everyday life?" We should ask the scout to "wait a while" for rank advancement if this will help to meet this objective, but we need to be careful. If the BOR in your troop has not used this as a tool relatively frequently, he may be branded as "FAILURE," and leave the troop. Then we are the "FAILURES," because we lose the only tools we have....
Tim O'Leary, tjo@afip.mil
CC Troop 772, CM Pack 1072, Silver Spring, MD
I'm still trying to live up to the Eagle ideal.