Should the BOR test a scout on skills?

[Knot Head 10]

Hello everyone. I've been reading the scouter.com site and recently stumbled across the forum section. I guess Ill jump right in.

 

I am the father of a scout that just finished his first year, so Im pretty new to how things are supposed to work in scouts. Although Ive been reading a lot please dont assume I know much about how things are supposed to work, but I am eager to learn how things should work.

 

Recently Ive been asked a few times to sit in on the BORs of lower ranked young scouts. While in the BOR Ive seen some experienced leaders ask scouts to demonstrate how to tie certain knots, how to orient a map, and proper first aid in addition to the recommended questions that can be found at macscouter. -> http://www.usscouts.org/macscouter/scoutmaster/BoR_Guide.asp#NATURE

 

Ive not seen a total retest of all requirements, but in all second class BORs the scout has been asked to orient a map, name the hurry cases and tie tenderfoot knots. In all the first class BORs the scout was asked to orient a map and take a bearing and also tie knots. At the time this seemed like a good idea since those are good things to know.

 

So is it appropriate to ask a scout to orient a map in the BOR as opposed to the macscouter form of the question which would be How are a map of the area and a compass useful on a campout?

 

In one case I was in on a BOR where a scout was denied advancement because he could not tie any of the knots nor orient a map. The guy running the BOR asked how do you think you did? and the scout said not very good. The leader encouraged him by saying take some time, get with an instructor and brush up on things and come back again ready to go. The scout apparently got some help because I saw him come back the next week and heard that he passed the BOR (I was not in the room for the second attempt BOR). So was flunking a scout like this a good thing or a bad thing?

 

Is this worth bringing up at a committee meeting, or as long as scouts have ample opportunity to return the next week to try again and the questions are not trick questions nor hard questions is this situation better off left alone.

 

I guess I am looking for some guidance from the wisdom of the board.

 

Thanks

 

[OldGreyEagle 5]

Try this

 

http://www.scouting.org/boyscouts/trainingmodules/board%20of%20review%20training.aspx

 

 

its BSA training on Boards of Review, my short take is it's not within the policies of the BSA to "fail" a scout because he can't tie a knot or orient a map but that doesnt mean it doesnt happen.

 

If a scout is denied a rank, the appeal process has to be explained to him and a future BOR date assigned along with a written letter explaining what needs to be done

[Knot Head 10]

Thanks a ton for the quick reply with a link. Can't beat that.

[Rooster7 11]

test

[Trevorum 24]

welcome back!

[evmori 11]

Rooster7! Hello! Welcome back!

 

Currently, a BOR is not to retest.

 

Ed Mori

1 Peter 4:10

[Beavah 205]

I am the father of a scout that just finished his first year, so Im pretty new to how things are supposed to work in scouts....Is this worth bringing up at a committee meeting

 

Just depends, eh?

 

Are you ready to step up and be Scoutmaster and Committee Chair if da other folks who've been doin' this successfully with kids for years get annoyed with you and leave?

 

BSA has had different views of BORs over da years, eh? Lots of units still run quite successfully on older materials which placed a greater emphasis on learnin' and skill development, rather than pro forma "social" promotion. For a few units it's the unit owner's conscious choice, for others, more like tradition.

 

If it's workin' for kids in your troop, which it sounds like it is, I think yeh spend your time more productively on helpin' out in other ways.

 

If yeh find there a fair number of lads who don't pass their first BOR, then the adults in the program should take a time out and look at how they're doin' skill instruction and whether the committee and SM are "on the same page" in terms of expectations. If yeh find that BORs are becoming the equivalent of Ph.D. orals, then it's also worth scalin' back.

 

Remember, though, a boy never "flunks" a skill test or BOR. Not bein' ready is just not bein' ready. It's never a failure unless da adults turn it into one.

 

Beavah

 

[Bob White 20]

The board can ask questions or discuss topics including talk ablout the skills. But as others have said the board is not allowed to retest the scout. They are however allowed to in sudre that the requirement was met by the scout.

 

So as an example, if the requirement was: 'While on a campout build a useful camp gadget using the lashings you have learned', he does not have to build one again for the bor. But he does need to be able to say what he built and explain how it was useful. If he said that he didn't actually do it on a campout but at a troop meeting, well then he really did not meet the reuirement as it was presented to him, and the board can require that he waits until he completes the requirement correctly before they approve the advancement.

 

(they should also meet with the scoutmaster and explain that requirements must be followed so that these kinds of errors do not happen again.)

 

So no retesting but you can examine the scout to insure that the requirements were done and done correctly.

 

 

 

[John-in-KC 311]

Rooster, welcome back!!!

 

KH, I have to agree with Beavah. Changing the culture of a Troop needs to be done with some care... unless you are prepared either to be asked to leave Troop leadership, to take over the Troop, or worst of all, to see your son take hits for your actions.

 

Yes, I want Scouts to experience BORs which are not retests. The question is how do you get there from where you are now? Hopefully, at some point, your friendly unit commissioner will see a BOR in action and quietly comment back to the SM/CC...

[FScouter 24]

In addition to the BSA link OGE provided, you can also take a look at the Troop Committee Guidebook, the Scoutmaster Handbook, and the Advancement Committee book. None support any notion of tossing a rope and saying "Here kid, prove you can tie a knot."

 

Should the board discover through their discussion with the boy that he has not met the requirements, it's more a reflection on the program the SM is administering than on the boy. Fix the SM and the program.

[Gold Winger 9]

Since nothing in BSA requires skills to be mastered, retesting would be silly.

 

In my simple mind, re-testing should be allowed or perhaps the BOR should be THE TEST. "Learn all of the skills and when you're ready, go to a BOR and demonstrate them." This would be far better than the "show me how that you can tie a half-baked square knot while being prompted" way things are often done today.

 

An Eagle BOR should be preceded by a test of all knots, first aid, fire building, knife work, etc. before he gets to sit down and talk to the actual board.

 

Of course, that will never happen :-(

 

[Kudu 186]

re-testing should be allowed or perhaps the BOR should be THE TEST

 

Before the BSA discovered the Patrol Method, Scoutmasters were not trusted to test their own Scouts. Candidates for advancement were typically subjected to a battery of written examinations at a central location in the morning of what was mistakenly called a "Court of Honor," with a series of hands-on practical tests in the afternoon.

 

An Eagle BOR should be preceded by a test of all knots, first aid, fire building, knife work, etc. before he gets to sit down and talk to the actual board.

 

Baden-Powell did not have BORs, but he required the regular retesting of the qualifying badges both before and after being awarded King's Scout (the equivalent to Eagle):

 

432.(2) He must be repassed in all his qualifying badges once between twelve and eighteen months from the date of his being awarded the badge, except in the case of those badges which are marked with an asterisk, i.e. Ambulance Man, Interpreter, Pathfinder and Signaller, which must be repassed annually in accordance with Rule 436. The re-examination is normally carried out by an independent examiner, but in the case of those badges in italics the re-examination may be made by the S.M. or any other warranted Scouter.

 

He must cease to wear the King's Scout badge should he fail in any of them.

 

Kudu

[acco40 95]

It is perfectly permissable to give the Scout a rope and ask him to tie a bowline. It is perfectly permissible to ask the Scout to demonstrate first aid for a choking victum. It is perfectly permissible to ask a Scout demonstrate how a compass works and to orient a map.

 

However the intent of these questions should be to evaluate the quality Scouting program being delivered to the Scout and should not be used as a pass fail criteria for the Scout's BOR. For example, it the Scout completely fumbles through in tieing a bowline but explains that he used to know how and the requirement is signed off in his handbook, he has passed that requirement. The BOR can then communicate to the Scoutmaster, Committee Chair or whomever the difficulty the Scout had at the BOR. If the board finds that repeatedly, Scouts appear before the board with very little knot tieing skills, well maybe it is time to re-evaluate the adult leaders.

[Eagledad 2779]

>>It is perfectly permissable to give the Scout a rope and ask him to tie a bowline. It is perfectly permissible to ask the Scout to demonstrate first aid for a choking victum. It is perfectly permissible to ask a Scout demonstrate how a compass works and to orient a map.

[Its Me 10]

 

Barry are you saying your district has a monopoly on confusion? How unfair! Our district seems to promote confusion.