No Reference Letters – No EBOR

[packsaddle 753]

As painful and as biologically impossible as the image is, I understood the duck thing. The cow is beyond comprehension.

THAT is quite a set of requirements! Thing is, somewhere back in time, someone thought this was a good idea and EVERYONE either went along with it or else they were ineffective in their resistance. As much as I sympathize with your situation, you're confronted with either meeting these requirements or planning for an appeal to the very top. This is 'local option' in practice.

[Stosh 3452]

John:

 

The parents of the boy are aware of the wait.

My CC is aware of the wait.

My Committee is aware of the wait.

My UC is aware of the wait.

My DE is aware of the wait.

The Committee Chair for Eagle Review is aware of the wait.

 

The suggestion for waiting came from both the UC and Council's Committee Chair on Eagle Reviews.

 

There is no way that the action I've taken can in anyway be perceived as vindictive against the boy.

 

The only person as of yet that doesn't know about this is the boy himself. He has arranged a sit-down meeting with me to discuss this whole issue and I didn't want to go into that meeting unsure of my options in dealing with him and I surely didn't want to go into that meeting without the advice and insight of all those listed above. The universal consensus of everyone is that the boy needs time to develop a bit more and all are hoping this will catch his attention and wake him up a bit.

 

A flat out "NO" requires no time limit, a second chance for the boy does. Everyone, including me, wants this boy to be successful and have the Eagle, this is why everyone is going the extra mile to make it a possible option for the boy.

 

Stosh

 

[packsaddle 753]

If "Everyone, including me, wants this boy to be successful and have the Eagle..." then why place the additional obstacles in the first place? Why not just use the official requirements?

 

I understand your position in this so the question is largely rhetorical. The steadfast insistence on these added requirements could be viewed as evidence that "Everyone, including me," DO NOT "want this boy to be successful and have the Eagle..."

Either way, I hope that in the future this kind of thing doesn't infect the process around here.

[Vicki 11]

John, Lisa - mind-reading is so fundamental to most large organizations that you don't even NEED to put it in a training module. The BSA is better at requiring it than most what with troop, district, and council habits/norms/policies that not only contradict national's but are sometimes even internally contradictory. Putting it in training would, I think, defeat the purpose of weeding out those who either don't possess that particular skill or are so thin-skinned they take it personally.

 

That said, to CNY - in your son's shoes, I would apply what I call my Chinese water torture technique. Very nicely call the references at an increasing frequency until they acknowledge they've sent them in and kept a dated copy in case the letter gets lost.

 

Hi, Pack!

Vicki(This message has been edited by Vicki)

[John-in-KC 311]

Communicate, communicate, communicate, Stosh...

 

All it takes is your COR or one of the Advancement volunteers having a bad day, and no matter how honorable your reasons are, their value will be -nil- .

 

Having these folks as allies will forestall a challenge.

[Stosh 3452]

John: Everyone is on board with this issue and a lot of communication is floating around from first-hand sources...me. I, of course, believe that the boy has in fact gone through all the motions to get by and earn his Eagle. Not the problem.

 

The problem is: the Eagle Committee is expecting me to sign a letter of reference that states "I heartily recommend this boy for the rank of Eagle." Well, I can't. I can assure everyone that he has gone through all the motions and met all the requirements, but then don't ask me to "heartily recommend" him. That's adding to the requirements.

 

However, if I don't "heartily recommend" him he won't get an EBOR.

 

I know that during the EBOR the interviewers excuse the boy and then visit with the SM and ask for his recommendation. I was going to simply state that the boy has gone through all the motions and met all the requirements for the rank of Eagle. From the records as they have been recorded, I can honestly make that statement. But at that point the EBOR has already convened and the decision would be at their discretion. However, the issue has been dropped in my lap prior to convening the EBOR and won't give him an opportunity without my recommendation and I become the fall-guy.

 

1) If I toss the letter, no EBOR.... Problem solved for me but screws over the boy.

 

2) Lie and sign it... Good example of honest leadership?

 

3) Postpone signing it until the issues that are bothering me get resolved.

 

4) Convene the EBOR without SM's hearty recommendation.

 

#1 isn't fair to the boy. #2 isn't fair to me. #3 is a valid compromise. #4 Eagle committee can take responsibility for the award they are considering giving, and leave the SM off the hook.

 

Maybe this is why National doesn't want councils/troops adding to the requirements.

 

Stosh

 

 

[John-in-KC 311]

Stosh, looking at your last, I think it's time to have that friendly cup of coffee with your District Advancement Chair or Council Advancement Chair. We can advise, but only from afar. You're at the point where talking with your locals and asking why is this so? questions is the right thing to do.

 

The Eagle app has been republished about once a year for the past several years. At one point, the Scoutmaster was an automatic reference. It's not on the current printing. I know that in my Council, the EBOR will either get hardcopy from the Scoutmaster, or he will be called into the room.

 

Is it right? Dunno. 98% of all youth who go to Eagle are no-brainers. The other 2%, for whatever the reason, are not.

 

One thing which you can do: You can notify parties concerned that you no can no longer in good faith endorse his application for Eagle. If you do that, you have created an appealable event for him. The responsibility is lifted from your shoulders.

 

My personal thought is have that cup of coffee with the advancement folks and discuss the matter of the Scoutmaster reference with them. They're on your local ground; we are not.

 

Good luck.

 

 

[packsaddle 753]

If the boy has not met ALL the requirements, then the SM should tell the boy he is not ready for the final SM conference and no date of such conference should be entered onto the application. If the SM does give him the conferenece, however, and the date is entered properly on the application, that should be sufficient for the EBOR and there should be no need for further interrogation of the SM on that subject. In our council, the SM or another leader is allowed to be present, but not participate in, the EBOR.

This is not a matter of percentage. Either the boy has met the requirements or he has not. If he has just barely met the requirements and I have serious doubts about something about him, he has still met the requirements. My doubts are my problem.

[Stosh 3452]

This situation is not unique to BSA and the Eagle process.

 

Imagine for a moment a high school principal is faced with providing a recommendation for two students. Student 1 has a 4.0 GPA and has involved himself in a ton of extra-cirricular activities/sports and is a shining example of what anyone would want from a high school career. Student 2 has a 1.0 GPA, done all the work, did no extra-cirricular activities and for the most part everyone is in agreement that he at least did the minimum work to pass.

 

They are both high school graduates with diplomas in hand. Would you "heartedly recommend" Student 1 for any college? Would you "heartedly recommend" Student 2 for the same?

 

I'm sure that in 99.9% of the cases, the principal would hesitate and have reservations about Student 2.

 

Yes, this boy has a 1.0 GPA in scouting. The EBOR has a responsibility to make the call, but they won't even consider it without a SM recommendation.

 

By asking for an extention of time, does it help the boy and keep his options open? It is not the responsibility of the SM to "make the call". But in our Council the "rules" are not fair to the boy or the SM in this situation.

 

Stosh

 

 

[packsaddle 753]

That is not similar.

In the case of the principal, the students have their diplomas (i.e. they have been awarded Eagle). The principal's decision is with regard to ENTRY into another program, not with regard to whether they get the diploma or not.

I get requests for letters all the time for students seeking graduate school. If I cannot write a good supportive letter for the student, I tell them so. The principal in your example is in the same situation. My refusal has no effect whatsoever on their current degree program.

But to expand on the difference: regardless of whether I or the principal write that letter, that student is still free to SEEK admission to a program and quite possibly might succeed. This is quite different from what you described for the situation with your scout.

I also have to note that when a student has a GPA designated with a certain number, it is based on objective grades assigned to a large number of milestones and objectives for each of which he must receive numerical grades. I'd like you to show me the equivalent for the milestones and objectives in the requirements for advancement to Eagle. THEN I might be persuaded by your subjective opinion that the boy has a 1.0.

 

Hi to you too, Vicki!

[NealOnWheels 73]

Stosh,

 

The references are used by the Board of Review to evaluate requirement #2.

 

So the question is did this Scout "Demonstrate that you live by the principles of the Scout Oath and Law in your daily life"?

 

If the answer is YES then write a recomendation to the affirmative. It need not be a glowing review.

 

If the anwer is NO then talk to the Scout and let him know what you feel. The Scout then has two options. He could agree to your terms or he could insist on having his Board of Review now.

 

If he insists on having his Board of Review now you would then write a letter listing why he has not met the requirement. The fate of his Eagle will be in the hands of the Board of Review.

 

In any of these cases you have fullfilled your obligation as Scoutmaster.

 

So first question for you is do you feel the Scout has met the requirement: "Demonstrate that you live by the principles of the Scout Oath and Law in your daily life"?

[Stosh 3452]

The point that this discussion all falls back to is whether or not the SM can block an EBOR. I think the EBOR has total responsibility for this process and all the boxes for the boy are checked. He has done just enough to fulfill all his requirements, so it should be a done deal regardless of what the SM says either pro or con, but they won't unless I give a positive recommendation which I can't.

 

All these requirements are sometimes vague. Demonstrate leadership... well he completed his project but I don't know if he did anything to really show leadership except delegating all the work off to others.

 

When he was PL is patrol didn't fall apart, so he must have been successful by default.

 

Everything he does in terms of leadership is either nothing or getting someone else to do it. That's kinda leadership by some people's definition.

 

So he got all the boxes checked. He didn't fail the requirements but he is well below average if one had to put a grade on it. I would grade him maybe a solid D or a D-. He's a A+ student in school.

 

On the other hand I have another boy that when his recommendation form comes through I can sign it with all capital letters and a couple of exclamation points to go along with it.

 

Am I playing favorites? Nope. These two boys are best of friends and the one boy can't figure it out either and has often commented about having to do the heavy lifting for this other boy to help get him through.

 

I'm not ready to write this boy off and yet how does one communicate all of this to the EBOR who is expecting more than the BSA requirements state?

 

It's not my call, don't ask me to make it.

 

Stosh

[packsaddle 753]

"I would grade him maybe a solid D or a D-."

That is still a passing grade. Your letter doesn't have to glorify the boy. It merely needs to reflect that you think he met the minimum requirements. It takes maybe two sentences.

If you refuse to write this letter, as I understand your predicament, you are effectively grading him with a failing grade...which you just did not do. Write the letter. Hold your nose if you have to, but write it.

[Stosh 3452]

If it was just a letter, I could possibly suck it up and write something, but what they sent me was a fill-in the blank questionnaire that has check off boxes. The last line indicates that "I heartily recommend this Scout for the rank of Eagle."

 

Now, if I start crossing off things, it's going to look a little suspicious. Or worse yet, if I send in a water downed letter instead, it's going to look a little suspicious. If I don't send anything in, it's going to look a little suspicious. After seeking advice from the parents, CC, UC, DE and Eagle Committee Chair, it's going to look a little suspicious. If the last line of the letter doesn't say "I heartily recommend this Scout for the rank of Eagle", it's going to look a little suspicious. Not many options here, is there?

 

In light of all this, the DE said I had grounds for kicking the boy out of scouts completely, but said that if the UC and Eagle Committee Chair will cut 6 months slack the Council will back that option.

 

Don't cha just love these cans of worms? Personally, I appreciate the option to give the boy yet another chance. Maybe this time something will sink in.

 

Stosh

[Beavah 205]

I would grade him maybe a solid D or a D-. He's a A+ student in school.

 

Yah, I'm a funny fellow, eh?

 

I think it's OK to expect people to live up to their God-given gifts and talents.

 

I am happy to celebrate da character and spirit of a lad who struggles with a disability and works his tail off to eek out an Eagle award at the bare minimums. He's achieved our goal of character.

 

I won't celebrate a fellow like Stosh describes who is given an Eagle award by virtue of checking off boxes. That boy hasn't yet learned real character. He's a sign that Scouting has failed.

 

So if yeh don't want scouting to be a failure, yeh have to say "no" and keep workin' with the lad. Because our goal is not to make Eagles. Our goal is to make men of character.

 

Stosh, da Scoutmaster's signature on the application and da Scoutmaster's recommendation are part of requirement two, eh? For an Eagle Scout, scouting has been a very big, important part of the boy's "everyday life", and the Scoutmaster more than most adults knows what living the Oath and Law should look like. The decision is ultimately the EBOR's if the lad chooses to appeal. It's still your role and your job to recommend (or not) the boy based on his Scout Spirit/character as you have seen and assessed it.

 

That is how the system is supposed to work. Because you're da fellow we entrusted to teach him character, eh?

 

Beavah

(This message has been edited by Beavah)