Re: Board of Review
Michael Bowman (mfbowman@USSCOUTS.ORG)
Mon, 11 Jan 1999 23:08:46 -0500
I've enjoyed reading Pam's thoughts on Boards of Review (BOR) along with
Kevin's analysis and would concur with both. I can't help but share a
little philosophy, but more importantly read on to the bottom and see how
you'd answer the questions that follow. The case given is not an easy one
and it will require the best of your mettle to come through. There are no
prizes other than the warmth glow of friendship for answering, but your
answer may help another leader in crisis.
Failure at a BOR should be a rare thing, if the Scoutmaster is doing a good
job with the Scoutmaster Conference - this is where a lot of problems can be
identified and corrected allowing the BOR to be a positive goal
identification and setting process and a wonderful time for the committee to
evaluate with the Scout's help the health of the Troop. Of course there
are times when a Scout is so obviously not ready for advancement that the
board may have to encourage the fellow to try harder and come back. In the
best of BORs this usually comes out as the Scout talks about what he has
done and the board can coach the Scout into recognition of areas where he
needs to try harder or finish something that was missed even though good
efforts were made all around. It doesn't have to be a negative thing in such
circumstances.
You may run into a tough case where you know that a Scout has not been doing
anything like trying to live the oath and law in his daily life or a
situation where there are other problems and in the course of the review it
may be clear after questions that the Scout needs more time to grow and to
reflect. But again these are rare.
One of the worst things in my opinion is for a BOR to convene itself as an
inquisition or as board of judgment. Instead I think the BOR needs to be as
the term suggests a panel of adults reviewing with the Scout where he has
been and where he is planning to go to help him along the way. The
alternative, from personal experience, is not pretty.
I witnessed one board grilling a Scout many years back down the trail. They
were trying to find an excuse not to pass him. The Scout had a very
arrogant personality and was not especially well liked. Like children the
board picked at him trying to find a flaw. Eventually they realized that he
was aware of what they were doing and becoming livid. So they goaded him
more. This young man lost his temper and knew it, so he turned to leave the
room instead of saying something he'd regret and even had his hand on the
door. The chairman not to miss an opportunity, muttered - see I told you
he'd never amount to anything. That was too much and this fellow without
saying a word dropped trow and shot the board a moon.
I guess you could say that the end-result was a lose-lose situation. The
BOR was clearly acting improperly, having let personality become the key
issue and instead of looking for a way to nudge growth along they sought to
deny any of the achievements the Scout had made along the way. In turn the
Scout realized his situation was fruitless and then lost it. His conduct
was not exactly excusable either, though it was provoked to a degree.
Suppose you were called upon to sit on the next board of review for this
Scout and he had in the last three months since the "high moon BOR"
continued to be arrogantly difficult of personality, but had tried (not
always successfully) to work with other Scouts and had also worked hard on a
service project to benefit the community unrelated to any advancement. What
questions would you ask this Scout? How would you use the scant information
you had to give him a growth opportunity? How would you deal with the past
conduct - of both the accusatory inquisitioners and the errant Scout? How
would you turn this BOR into a win-win proposition that would spur further
growth and success? Last, if he got up to leave before you thought the
review was concluded, would you:
A. Put on your sun glasses?
B. Let him know that this repeat performance was his own doom
C. Tell him that he'd better turn-to and sit down
D. Ask him to take a breather and come back in a few minutes
E. Thank him for attending and ask him to come back in a week
F. Ask the SM to have another conference and coaching session
G. Talk with the boy in a less formal situation to see what went wrong
H. Give up
I. Figure I don't know what to do, lets see how others react
J. Do something else
K. Some of the above
There are no completely right or wrong answers in many of these situations.
But take a moment to use this bad review and the hypothetical follow-up to
reflect on the purposes and process of a BOR. Please share your thoughts
and answers. Your ideas may help a second chance case somewhere along the
line.
Mike
Mike Bowman a/k/a Professor Beaver (mfbowman@usscouts.org)
Webmastering in the Scouting Spirit from Alexandria, VA
http://usscouts.org http://members.aol.com/netcommish/
http://members.tripod.com/colonialdistrict
