Re: Thoughts on Boards of Review (This Is Not A Test!)
Anthony Mako (ajmako@NLS.NET)
Fri, 22 Jan 1999 11:56:50 -0500
<Michael Derleth wrote>
An additional reason for the disconnect could be the way National insists
troop BORs are set up. SMs and ASMs need not apply. In many troops, this
sets up a situation where the true "one hour a month" parents who don't have
a clue are the ones passing judgement. Even with training on what they are
supposed to be doing, they lack the insight the SM/ASM have from continual
weekly observation.
</Michael>
Michael,
National insists BORs are set up without SMs and SAs for a very good reason.
It is that very same disconnection you speak of that is a very important
aspect of the BOR. As an SM or SA, we have direct contact with every Scout
week after week. After a short period of time we start making judgements
about individual Scouts that could get in the way during a BOR. Since the
members of the BOR generally do not have this weekly interaction with the
Scout, they are in a better frame of mind to be objective about the troop
program and how well it is working. With proper training and guidance, even
those adults who only give their "one hour a month" can ask effective
questions during a BOR.
<Michael continued>
This causes the questions to be lame at best. "what was your favorite badge"
versus "you seemed pretty stressed at the last camporee. Did you learn
anything new about motivating your patrol?" This also helps behavior
problems fester. Unless Tom Tenderfoot has committed arson, the committee
members are unlikely to have details on how he's interacting with the troop
and program.
</Michael>
The problem here is that you are giving the BOR a responsibility that
belongs to the SM and SAs. Behavior problems should be taken care of as
quickly as possible by the leadership of the troop. Allowing them to wait
until a BOR is convened defeats the purpose of both the BOR and the adult
leadership of the troop. Furthermore, if the troop is working properly, the
troop committee should have a very basic idea of how each Scout is
interacting with the troop and the program through the BORs and regular
committee meetings. It is the SM's responsibility to keep the committee
informed about these things.
<Michael continued>
The solution (IMO) is to allow at least -some- regular troop leadership on
the board. This gives a way to inject the benefits of the weekly observation
into the BOR process. Change the rules to read A majority of the Board must
be Committee Members. For the statistically minded, two thirds of the board
must be committee members.
</Michael>
Before a Scout can even think about participating in a BOR, he has to sit
down and talk to the Scoutmaster. That's where the weekly observation is
most useful. Remember, the SM has the responsibility of determining if a
Scout is ready to advance. He does this through regular observation, and the
Scoutmaster Conference. His observation, and the conclusions drawn during
the SM Conference decide the issue of Scout Spirit and put the Scout in a
reflective state of mind. The BOR then gets a chance to speak to the Scout,
but they aren't responsible for correcting behavior or evaluating skill
levels. The BOR has the responsibility of determining whether or not the
Scouting program is being effectively conducted in the troop, and that the
Scout is getting some benefit from it.
If you allow regular troop leaders (SM or SAs) to participate in the BOR,
you remove any possibility that the BOR can objectively evaluate the program
and the troop. It also cuts off several items that may be discussed such as
"do you think the troop is in good shape?" or "what kind of relationship do
you have with the Scoutmaster?". These are the types of questions that tend
to get to the heart of the matter. They are the kind of things I want my
troop committee to find out, but the answers would hardly be useful if I was
in the room.
It is important to understand that each part of the troop organization has a
specific purpose and function. Properly conducted and organized, the BOR can
uncover problems in the program I could only guess at. They can also be very
effective in preparing Scouts for future challenges. That is their purpose!
The review concerns an individual Scout, but it should reflect the whole
troop program. If the board finds that a Scout is not ready to advance, that
is a reflection on MY job preformance, not his. That's why it's important to
NOT include SMs and SAs on BORs.
YIS
A. J. Mako, ajmako@nls.net , Scoutmaster Troop 381
Home of the Unofficial Win95 Boy Scout Desktop Theme,
http://members.aol.com/Scouts381/
Old Portage District, Great Trail Council, BSA
"I used to be an Eagle (C-7-97), but I'll always be an Eagle (1981)"
