observed an EBoR, part 2

[bnelon44 17]

>However, if the requirement has been signed off by the SM who's to say it has not been met.

 

It is the Board of Review's responsibility to make sure rank requirements have been accomplished by the Scout. The Scout is not required to retain any knowledge once he has met the requirement and the requirement is signed off of for rank advancement (one does hope he remembers and it is the Scoutmaster's responsibility to make sure the program enforces retention, but it isn't part of the rank advancement.)

 

If a board discovers that a Scout didn't do a requirement (for example, didn't make a camp gadget) it is the boards responsibility to hold off advancing the Scout until that requirement is done properly and signed off on. It is pretty well explained in section 8.0.0.0 of the new GTA.

[desertrat77 1144]

The board can and should ask tough questions to see if the candidate really accomplished his MBs, etc., or if he strolled thru the program and got things pencil whipped by mom/dad/SM/Uncle Joe.

 

The board isn't going to revoke the badges. Or ask him to tie a sheepshank. But they can find out thru general questioning if the candidate did things fair and square. Eagle92's example is spot on.

 

As mentioned previously by others, if the board is supposed to be a mere formality chaired by a guy in a purple dinosaur suit, with a bunch of puff ball questions, or to just see if he did his project (he has his workbook to prove that), then skip the board altogether. Or do it by skype. Or text.

 

Okay, I'm being a smart alec, but my point is you don't have to question him on Dog Care MB requirement 6a(4)(a) to see if he really did it. The board can pick up on a committed effort, or a pencil whip. This may not ultimately affect the board outcome, but it will sure make the scout think for a long time after the board is over. I know I still think about the tough questioning I got from my board over 30 years ago. Because there was alot of wisdom behind their questioning, and it showed me what they expect of an Eagle. I passed but I was exhausted afterwards. I've got alot of respect for those gents, wish I could let them know that.

[Twocubdad 665]

Gary wrote: "Since a BoR can't retest how you going to determine the requirement was met except that its signed off in the book."

 

You ask more questions.

 

For a First Class candidate, "So did you enjoy cooking for your patrol?"

Scout: "I guess."

BOR: "Well, what was on the menu?"

Scout: "Don't remember."

BOR: "What campout did you cook on?"

Scout: "Maybe last year sometime."

BOR: "Can you tell us about some of the other times you've cooked for your patrol?"

Scout: "I don't really like to cook."

BOR: "It really doesn't sound like you completed this requirement. Are you sure?"

 

Actually, I probably wouldn't ask that last question. Instead, I'd be looking for the Scoutmaster to see if he can illuminate the situation. As SM, I've been invited in to a couple BoRs like this. In the situation I can recall, the Scout was really, really shy to the point of not being unable to answer the questions properly. I confirmed the requirement had been met. I've also had my advancement chairman catch me on some mistakes, usually dates and stuff like that, which I've mistakenly signed off, but couldn't have been completed. And I had one kid request a BoR after a Scoutmaster conference in which we agreed he wasn't ready to advance. (Since we had conferred, I signed the SMC requirement, but not the others. The AC assumed a SMC signature was a green light for a BoR.)

 

While there are lots of way a board may properly determine a Scout has not completed a requirement, even in situations where the board doesn't have the authority to recind completed requirement (such as with merit badges), it's their responsibility to let the unit committee and unit leaders know where the boys and the program are defficient. It's not about the individual Scout, but rather how to fix programatic problems going forward. I would sure have wanted to know about E92's kid with Indian Lore MB. There's a problem there somewhere. When I first joined the troop, the practice was for all the first year scouts to be signed up for First Aid MB at summer camp which was then taken as defacto completion of all the T-2-1 first aid requirements. I tried to solve it from my end, but it wasn't until the advancement chairman showed up at a committee meeting and reported that none of our Scouts seemed to know any first aid that I got any help recruiting folks to teach FA in house.

 

 

[Eagle92 110]

This is how I came about my opinion of the scout. As you know, I'm big on Native American cultures. So I am always interested in learning more. Seeing his MB sash, I approached him to talk to him, being a friendly scouter that I am (ok I was a DE at the time, but I have since returned to the light side ) on the topic. So I asked which tribe he studied and what did he learn about them. This was not to quiz himor test him as it was a conversation. I was interested in local tribes as I had just moved to the area and wanted to learn. I got the deer in the headlights look. I asked about games he learned and taught, not because it is requirement 3A, but #1 games are always cool to play and am always looking to learn more #2 as a Den Chief games are a must to know, and #3 most scouts I've counseled in I Lore use this as it is the easiest one to meet of the 3 options. Again deer in the headlights. We move on to other MBs that he is wearing, and again it as if I'm talking another language.

 

Now here is the problem I am seeing. You have the section 11.5.0.0 of the new advancement guide that states that there is no BOR process and that MBCs are the ones that "qualify" the scout for the MB. Ok See that and understand

 

But then you have several sections that state that the BOR is suppose to see if the scout actually did what he was suppose to. And for Star, Life, and Eagle that means earning MBs.

 

Section 8.0.0.1 which states decide whether he is qualified to advance and 8.0.1.1 states that Though one reason for a board of review is to ensure

the Scout did what he was supposed to do to meet the requirements, it shall become neither a retest or examination, nor a challenge of his knowledge.

 

8.0.1.2 states that A Scout may be asked where he learned his skills and

who taught him, and what he gained from fulfilling selected requirements. The answers will reveal what he did for his rank. It can be determined, then, if this was what he was supposed to do.

 

So what happens in a case like the one I described where it becomes obvious to the BOR that the scout did not meet the requirements for the rank, i.e. earn x number of merit badges, because it is obvious that the scout knows nothing on the topics of said MBs? 8.0.1.5 states If a board decides not to approve, the candidate must be so informed and told what he can do to improve. Most Scouts accept responsibility for their behavior or for not completing requirements properly. If it is thought that a Scout, before his 18th birthday, can benefit from an opportunity to properly complete the requirements, the board may adjourn and reconvene at a later date. If the candidate agrees to this, then if possible, the same members should reassemble. If he does not agree, then the board must make its decision at that point. In any case, a follow-up letter must be promptly sent to a Scout who is turned down. It must include actions advised that may lead to advancement, and also an explanation of appeal procedures. (See Appealing a Decision, 8.0.4.0....

 

And of course 8.0.4.0 has the process to be followed. Now research is suppose to be done on the matter, but do we really know how much is done? Also I have heard of appeals being denied at the council level, only to be overruled by national.

 

So my question is this what can a BOR do about this? The BOR can either deny, which will likely end up with the scout getting Eagle via the appeals process, and then fix the problem via the MBC list.

 

 

 

[BadenP 93]

 

 

If an eagle candidate can not answer some simple questions on his rank or merit badges such as what was the hardest thing you had to cook for your cooking badge, or what was your most difficult requirement for 1st Class, then that probably should send up some red flags to the EBOR that this kid was part of a troop that is a Eagle and MB mill. While the kid can't be penalized it would be appropriate for the DAC and the D. Comm. to do a followup to that troop leadership to express their concerns about the quality and readiness of their candidates.

[Beavah 205]

The problem is this: if a BOR is appealed b/c the BOR found that the requirements were not properly done, who do you think will win the appeal?

 

Da question is "Why would you care?"

 

We all have to act as we feel is in da best interest of the boy and the program, eh? That's our personal honor. Da fact that someone in Irving who doesn't know the boy or the local program might do something different is irrelevant. Yeh do what yeh think is right, regardless of what other people may think or do. And then don't let it bother yeh, or resign if it does.

 

A lad who is truly a young man of character will understand and agree if a BOR discovers he hasn't met all da requirements for a MB, and will be willing to work hard so that he can truly deserve the honor of wearing the patch. A good board will assist him in that, by calling it to his attention and helping him find a good counselor to work with. Of course they should also try to fix da problem, but just because they should fix the problem with the quality of da counselor doesn't absolve them of da responsibility to see to it that the lad gets the full benefit of a real MB experience that he was shorted.

 

A lad who hasn't yet learned our lessons about character and citizenship will try to skate by or appeal. That's a boy asking whether we're serious about our values. He might find out in the end that da BSA is not, but I hope along the way he at least gets to learn that some of us are.

 

Beavah

[Beavah 205]

The Scout is not required to retain any knowledge once he has met the requirement and the requirement is signed off of for rank advancement.

 

Yah, hmmm... I've read through da new G2A a couple of times now, and I haven't found that statement anywhere. Maybe yeh can point it out to us, bnellon44?

 

Da book I've got says "A Scout Learns", not a scout does once. Yeh haven't learned how to read if yeh can't still read 6 months later. Yeh haven't learned to ride a bike if yeh can't do it six months later.

 

Da notion that retention isn't required is just poppycock. How is that keeping oneself mentally awake?

 

Beavah

[Venividi 35]

> The Scout is not required to retain any knowledge once he has met the requirement and > the requirement is signed off of for rank advancement

 

Only in America - No wonder businesses have a hard time find qualified people to fill jobs. When the attitude is that scouts do not need to retain knowledge, and that being signed off is the equivalent of having learned. Does anyone believe that this actually helps a boy? Are people so wrapped up in checking off advancement requirements that they no longer care about learning?

 

If focus is on providing a challenging program instead of advancement requirements, and the skills needed to meet those challenges, the boys will learn AND retain. Make advancement secondary to program, not the other way around.

[BartHumphries 10]

For a First Class candidate, "So did you enjoy cooking for your patrol?"

Scout: "I guess."

BOR: "Well, what was on the menu?"

Scout: "Don't remember."

BOR: "What campout did you cook on?"

Scout: "Maybe last year sometime."

BOR: "Can you tell us about some of the other times you've cooked for your patrol?"

Scout: "I don't really like to cook."

BOR: "It really doesn't sound like you completed this requirement. Are you sure?"

If I was to do something that I don't like just so I could complete the requirement, I sure wouldn't mentally mark that event off and be able to remember the exact details and what was on the menu a year or so later. Shoot, I just got back from a LNT Master Educator weekend and a month from now I'd likely be hard pressed to remember exactly what we had for any meal (let alone trying to remember a year from now).

[Eagle92 110]

Veni,

 

Unfortunately I know of a unit or two like that. Sign off the requirements, get your Eagle, and bye bye.

 

This past weekend was my district's camporee. Normally they do a variety of scout skills, but this one was a MB weekend. I know, I know, but there were extenuating circumstances, and this was put together last minute. Their is already a camporee chief in place for next year and work has begun.

 

Anyway, I didn't go, but talked to some scouts who did. They were disappointed b/c there were no skills tests, and that's what their troop likes. Conversation reminded me of camporee 2 years ago when their patrol (they are a 1 patrol troop) was the only one that was able to start a fire, boil spaghetti, and tie it into a knot without any assistance (the only other patrol to do complete the event was a NSP, and they were shown and told what to do by the judges after they did absolutely nothing for 10-15 mintues). Their comment was that most scouts are focused on one thing, getting Eagle, that they really don't know what to do. Camporees were the closest that most get to basic scoutcraft.

 

Another example was I got a phone call about lighting for the campfire as some of the OA's supplies were thrown away. The chapter chief called me at home to try and figure out what to do, it was as if he couldn't think on his own.

[Papadaddy 121]

So, in the above scenario, when Eagle wannabee is asked "Are you sure" and he says, "Yes", then what? Other than raise a red flag to the Unit Commissioner that something needs attention (assuming they have a UC and he/she cares), I think you're done.

[bnelon44 17]

>So, in the above scenario, when Eagle wannabee is asked "Are you sure" and he says, "Yes", then what? Other than raise a red flag to the Unit Commissioner that something needs attention (assuming they have a UC and he/she cares), I think you're done.

 

Life Scouts are not required to cook to become Eagle Scouts as a rank requirement. So at EBORs you aren't checking for these types of skill requirements to have been completed.

[Eagle92 110]

Bnelon,

 

What about if you talk about a MB that they have listed as using for their Eagle, but they really didn't do the work thatthe MBC sign off?

 

According to the G2A, you don't question a MBC's approval of a scout's MB, BUT G2A also states a BOR makes sure the scouts "was supposed to do to meet the requirements...." through a series of questions in which "The answers will reveal what he did for his rank. It can be determined, then, if this was what he was supposed to do."

 

So the question is can a EBOR, which finds out that a Scout did not earn certain MBs for a specific rank that he said he earned and sued towards the rank deny him that rank?

 

I think that is the problem, and the frustration. National is giving contradictory information out. Wouldn't be the first time.

 

 

[Scoutfish 16]

Without having ever read anything about the cooking MB, I can point out alot wrong with the line of thought in the scenerio:

 

A Cooking MB is about learning to cook and plan meals right?

 

If the scout doesn't like to cook, that doesn't mean he doesn't know how. Just like I don't like being the one to plan the menu and oversee the purchasing of food and supplies before campingt. I don't like it, but I do it well.

 

Now, I do remember what out last menu was 6 months ago, but I don't remeber exactly how much of each thing we purchased of the date we purchased it or cooked it.

 

But we did plan, we did purchae, we did cook it.

 

I have cooked something at every campout since my son joins cub scouts, but I couldn't tell you what I cooked every single time.

 

My point is, the SM used a line of questioning that really didn't bring any info as to wether the scout learned anything or did anything.

 

It should have been like this:

 

For a First Class candidate, "So did you enjoy cooking for your patrol?"

Scout: "I was okay, but not the most enjoyable thing I did."

BOR: "Well, did you help plan or did you plan the menu?"

Scout: "Yes. "

BOR: "What campout did you cook on?"

Scout: "Maybe last year sometime."

BOR: But you did cook at campouts?"

Scout: "Yes, I cook at more than one, but it's been a while and we camp often, so I do not remember the exact campouts."

BOR: "Can you tell us some of the other times you've cooked for your patrol?"

Scout: "I don't really like to cook."

BOR: "It sounds like that, even though you completed this requirement, you found out it's not something you enjoy.. Can you tell us why it is still to your benefitfor having worked on this MB ?"

 

Point being, the scout may have hated this MB, but does not mean he didn't learn, complete and satisfy the requirementsof the cooking MB.

 

 

[bnelon44 17]

>What about if you talk about a MB that they have listed as using for their Eagle, but they really didn't do the work thatthe MBC sign off?

 

Once a merit badge is signed off by a merit badge counselor it is earned. Once it is done it is done. There is no merit badge review process in a Board of Review. See the new GTA, sections 7.0.0.0, 8.0.0.0 and the BSA Bylaws in the back.