If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Watching it now and had to pause because about 3mins in and I already see problems with the BORs of which I have been a part.
I knew Scoutmasters were not allowed to be on the Board but I didn't know ASMs were also not allowed. Both troops in which my son has participated have allowed ASMs to sit on BORs.
As a learning tool to conduct BORs, I felt it was pretty decent. It clarified some points with which I had negative experiences.
I could have done without some of the banter (esp at the end)(This message has been edited by Eaglemom2b)
from the Guide to Advancement:" In units with fewer than three registered committee members available to serve, it is permissible to use knowledgeable parents (not those of the candidate) or other adults (registered or not) who understand Boy Scouting's aims."
Would like to have had this reflected in the training.
The banter between Clark & Lisa is a waste of time. They are obviously reading a script as their delivery is so stilted as to be a distraction. Did they just grab a couple folks out of the break room to do the audio?
Content wise, the video unfortunately seems to fairly present Boards of Review as laid out in BSA policy. When you hear the entirety of the BOR procedure laid out this compactly, my reaction is to end the charade and do away with BORs completely.
When you have to dig this hard to explain the purpose of BORs, maybe there is no purpose.
Just one of the contradictions is that so much emphasis is given to BORs not being retest -- if the requirements are signed on in the handbook, that's it. But then we learn that even if a Scout doesn't have his handbook, the board should still proceed. Requiring the Scout to present his handbook to the Board is an "administrative roadblock" and we can't have that.
If Boards of Review no longer really review the Scout, I suppose we should not be surprised that the motto excludes preparing for anything which may be considered "administrative."
High-speed/low-drag advancement in policy in action.
I always thought the Board of Review was an opportunity for the Unit Committee to talk to a youth and see how the youth feels about the program and what aspects they like and which ones they think can be improved. The reason Scoutmasters and Assistant Scoutmasters are not supposed to be on the Board is because we want the youth to evaluate the program being presented
And to see how the scout feels about his experience
Why tie that to advancement OGE? Wouldn't that be a better fit with something like Journey to Excellence?
By tying program evaluation to advancement are you not skewing your inputs toward active Scouts who are advancing? Wouldn't the committee receive better information if all Scouts were "reviewed" on a regular basis?
And shouldn't the BOR members have primary responsibilities for program evaluation, like the CC or COR? Or at least have the same folks conduct EVERY BOR so they can more readily spot trends and issues?
If the purpose of the BOR is to allow the youth to evaluate the unit's program, it is really poorly designed for that purpose.
#2 What this about a scout coming directly from a baseball game not needing a uniform at 3:46? Why don't he just bring the uniform on a hanger and change at the meeting in the bathroom. that's what we did in my troop. Heck one COH I had to make 2 changes in the bathroom: out of coat and tie from school function into uniform before ECOH, then change out of the uniform and back into coat and tie to go to the school function.
HORSEHOCKEY TO THAT ONE.
Being new, outgrown, in the process of buying a uniform, or one I heard, just finished with MANHUNT on a campout and being called over for a "chat" with some committee members, I'm OK without a full uniform.
But coming to a meeting from a game, please.
#3 While I agree that parents should NOT be in on BORs, I am glad that if they insist, they can be allowed to sit in. Don't want to violate YP.
#4 Glad that they say that a BOR can be contingent upon verification of the records in a Scout's handbook.
Overall does a nice job of going over policy.
I do disagree with just making sure signatures have been signed in the book though. I know of one incidence where signatures were forged.
And while I heard this example second hand, after meeting the scout in question I cannot believe he got Eagle. Family ran a troop with gradnpa as SM, Mommy as CC and daddy as an ASM. Scout uses mostly family members as MBCs and for sign offs in the book. Comes time to the Eagle board, they decide there was no way he did all the requirements and followed the process of writing what needed to be done. Family is upset, appeals, and wins. Entire district advancement committee resigns in protest over national's decision.
When I met the scout a few months later, I tried to strike up a conversation about one particular MB he was wearing, and got a deer in the headlights look. When I was asking about others he was wearing, again no response. No way he could have gotten the MBs.
Why tie it to advancement? So that it does happen periodically throughout the scouts career. Remember, A Board of Review may be done for any number of reasons, non-advancement of a long time scout being one