bnelon44

Beavah, I think it is a matter of degree. For example. 1st Class requirement 8a: Demonstrate tying the bowline knot and describe several ways it can be used. One could argue that to master this skill, a Scout should be able to perform it in a number of different situations. Say when two hands are available or when only one hand is available (like when you are stuck on a ledge and someone throws you a rope. Others may say, that is well and good, but he should also be able to do it in the dark since he may need rescuing in the dark and to truely master the skill, he should be able

A number of the BSA requriements are also subjective. However there seems to be some preconcieve notions of what "master the skills" means that go way beyond what is intended in the requirements. That is what I am personally having difficulty with.

So Scouts Canada uses the term "master the skills" in their rank requirements? Can you give us some examples?

Eagle92 Do you have some recent BSA literature that you can point to that discusses that to pass a requirement a Scout has to "master a skill"?

NEPAScouter No, I have not asked him how popular the program is

The problem with the term "master the skills" is that it is so subjective.

May I suggest you send an email to: Program.Content@scouting.org Let us know what they say

I don't like adults in a troop strutting around with woodbadge neckers either ;-) If the troop has a neckerchief, everyone should be wearing the troop neckerchief. (and I said I was done with this....)

Eaglemom2b sounds fine to me

jblake47, The requirements are specific (always have been.) They use words like "demonstrate", "show", "Since joining, have participated in", "Tell", "On one campout, serve", etc. If the Scout does what the requirement says he must do, no more, no less, he has passed the requirement as far as the rank requirement is concerned. If you want to add something else, that is fine, you just can't make it a requirement for achieving rank. That has been the way it has been since the beginning. No one can add or subtract from the requirements. It gives everyone an even playing fie

Eagle69 Call BSA Customer service: (972) 580-2267 See if they can't fix your problem.

Well, Beavah, then blame Green Bar Bill, he was the one who replaced the Court of Honor with the Board of Review. Anyway, one of the functions of a BOR is to interview the Scout to see how the program is doing in his eyes and feed that information back to the committee and the Scoutmaster. If a younger Scout thinks the older Scouts are creating program that only they like and not listening to the younger Scouts, the BOR is an opportunity for the younger Scout to be honest about it (of course that is really only true if an older Scout isn't sitting in judgement of him on the BOR.)

NEPAScouter The important time to wear the troop neckerchief is when they are in front of Scouts from other troops. I'll get off my hobby horse on this subject now...

I asked the same question a bit ago to the man who created the award. He said it is meant to recognize what Scout has done in Scouting, so the activities need to be Scouting activities. That is what "under the auspices of the Boy Scouts of America" means. Also note, all Boy Scout awards usually require that the Scout do it as a registered Boy Scout, Cub Scout activities don't count.

A correction in the 1st paragraph above. Originally the board of men examining the Scout was called the Court of Honor not Board of Review. The term Board of Review (to emphasise that they were only reviewing what has already happened) was introduced around 1936 by William Hillcourt.

The troop neckerchief is suppose to be the uniform symbol representing the troop. Everyone in the troop is suppose to be wearing the same neckerchief. I have always had problems with it being used as a device to show personal achievement (for going on long hikes, going on high adventure camps, or gaining rank)

I did some research Early History of Rank Advancement Examinations and Boards of Review At the Beginning When the BSA started, there were three class of Scouts: Tenderfoot, Second Class and First Class. The "joining rank," in the early days of Scouting was Tenderfoot (there was no 'Scout Badge') and the Scout really wasn't considered a Scout until he learned the Tenderfoot requirements and was satisfactorily tested. Originally he was taught by the Scoutmaster or a Scout and then when the Scoutmaster felt he was ready went before a Council Board of Review to be examined. This

Did Green Bar Bill ever advocate that Scouts sit on BORs? Personally, I see it as defeating one of the major jobs of the BOR which is to gather information on how well the Scout is doing and the program is doing in an objective and non-confrontational environment. We don't live in a perfect world.

Call BSA Customer service: (972) 580-2267

OK so a troop has a weak SPL... how do you go about developing him into a strong SPL?

My guess as to why Scouts no longer sit on BORs is that they took advantage of their position to bully the other Scouts and prevent some Scouts from advancing and others to advance without accomplishing all the requirements. In a perfect world, Jr. High School boys don't do these things, especially in Scouting. In the real world, it happens. A Scout who is bullied need a mechanism to express dissatisfaction with the program to the committee even if he doesn't voluntarily step forward. The BOR is such a mechanism, at least it allows the committee to ask how the Scout is doing and if he

You are correct, most of the rank skills now only require that the Scouts demonstrate or show. They do not require mastery. I stand corrected. Since the BOR is not an examination board nor a retest nor a board to sit in judgement of other Scouts, why have the Scouts sit on boards of review?(This message has been edited by bnelon44)

JMHawkins, "The real Patrol Leader will have his boys go through the Tenderfoot, Second Class and First Class stages as fast as is consistent with thoroughness. He will have them move along all the time. That natually means that he himself must advance too. " I'm not sure how many 13 year old boys would read that and say "well, I have over a year to complete this task. My guess is none. Instead they would probably set a goal of a few months or weeks to get it accomplished. A year is a lifetime to a 13 year old boy. " Today the G2A states that the adult Committee Advanceme

Talking about 1st Class emphasis, I found this in the 1928 Handbook for Patrol Leaders written by Green Bar Bill: "One of the most important functions of a Patrol Leader is to help his boys to advance in Scoutcraft. It isn't Scoutlike to stand still. Scouting is "Forward." If a goal has been reached, immediately another is beckoning in the distance. The real Patrol Leader will have his boys go through the Tenderfoot, Second Class and First Class stages as fast as is consistent with thoroughness. He will have them move along all the time. That natually means that he himself m

I posted this on the G2A thread but it properly belongs here: Doing some research on if the BOR ever was allowed to retest. Keep in mind that in the early days of Scouting it was taught that the examination and sign off of the Scout from T21 should be done by the Scout's own Patrol Leader, as long as the Patrol Leader has made it to that rank. From the Handbook for Scoutmasters 1947 (Author is listed as William Hillcourt): The members of the Board should keep in mind that the review is not a re-examination and does not require that the boy again demonstrate the skills in which he