Response to Jim Sleezer
J. Hugh Sullivan (sullijh@NDLC.OCC.UKY.EDU)
Fri, 28 Jul 1995 11:51:19 -0500
About the question you posed yeaterday, I have seen a number of opinions
in response but, since no references were cited, I will do so here.
Page 15 of the Advancement Guidelines (1992) under Boards of Review
and their objectives states "....to make sure the Scout has done what he
was supposed to do for the rank..". In the following paragraph the manual
states "the review is not an examination; the Board does not test the
candidate". In my view it is not difficult to ascertain whether a Scout
has passed the requirements, without testing him, and Boards are obviously
required to do so. I think this is also a statement about blind
acceptance of a candidates qualifications.
I will also mention that Eagle Boards are under a separate heading with
slightly different requirements. If the book treats the Boards differently,
why shouldn't we? On Eagle Boards I assure you that every candidate in this
district will address the issue of what he considers his duty to God,
Country, others and self.
Now to your question, the first thing to do is read the book! The
second thing to do is reread the book! I would, without hesitation,
refer the Scout back to the people/Board that passed him. To do
otherwise, in my opinion, is to ignore the rules. Having read a number of
your posts, I suspect you did it "by the book". Further, the laxity
should be discussed with the troop leaders and corrected. The Scout
should be made to understand that he was not the one who failed.
As I am sure you have discovered by now, I am not for teaching youngsters
that they can do anything - or nothing - and the world will pass them as
if they were qualified. However, this post is not offered as criticism of
any person or methods; I just thought we should know what the book says
and, for what it is worth, I said what I would do - which certainly
doesn't govern others.
Hugh
Eagle, Class of '43
Terry Howerton Sakima Group, Inc. SCOUTER Magazine Kansas City |
