Lisabob 13 Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 Sigh. Just sat on a BOR tonight where we told the scout, "not yet." That's the first time for me. Not Fun. Link to post Share on other sites
Bob White 20 Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 What was the reason? Which requirement(s) had not been completed according to the handbook? When he recieves the written explanation from the board, what is he being instructed to do in order to complete the requirement? (This message has been edited by Bob White) Link to post Share on other sites
Lisabob 13 Posted March 12, 2008 Author Share Posted March 12, 2008 I'd really rather not go into great detail but suffice it to say that for Star, Life, and Eagle, it would be best if a scout could at least try to articulate an answer beyond a shrug and "dunno" when asked basic questions (and prompted for more complete answers). The few topics on which he did have something to say suggested a pretty poor attitude as his responses were mainly about the things he didn't want to do and ways he didn't want to help. He's a kid who has come a long way but attitude has often been an issue for him in the past as well. The procedures were followed and everything was done by the book. Not fun though. Link to post Share on other sites
Bob White 20 Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 While those things give you a good idea of things to help the scout work on in the future, the only reason you can refuse the scout advancement is if he did not complete a BSA requirement. You are required by BSA advancement policies to explain in writing to the scout which requirements he did not complete or did not due according the the stated BSA requirement procedure. You are also required to explain and place in writing for the Scout and his parent the appeal process available to him through the District, Council, and National advancement committees. In the letter you gave the scout which requirement did he not complete and what must he do to complete them? Since we have no idea who you are or who the scout is it would seem that there should be no concern for confidentiality as far as published BSA requirements. Link to post Share on other sites
Oak Tree 15 Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 Lisabob - Yes, I can imagine. And I'd guess his attitude didn't immediately improve, either. Or possibly his parent's, either - always a great thing to look forward to. Link to post Share on other sites
jmwalston 11 Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 While I am equally not privy to the details, it sounded like a lack of Scout Spirit. Was he this way with his Scoutmaster Conference? Link to post Share on other sites
John-in-KC 311 Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 Good morning, Lisa, Yeah, they're not fun days. You implied in your response to BW that you did the followup as required by Advancement Committee Policies and Procedures #33088. The young man deserves to know why he was deferred from advancement. I'd have your CC also contact the District Advancement Chair and have a cup of coffee, proactively. I'd also have a cup of coffee with the Scoutmaster. You're the one on the ground, maybe the adults in your Troop can find an approach which will engage this young man's mind and spirit. Thoughts and prayers, good lady John(This message has been edited by John-in-KC) Link to post Share on other sites
Kudu 186 Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 Scout Spirit is the first refuge of adult scoundrels. Kudu Link to post Share on other sites
evmori 11 Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 Sorta sounds like a Scout Spirit issue. And Bob is correct. The reason this Scout was denied advancement is to be given to him in written form. Not advancing a boy at his BOR is a tough decision but one I feel is not made often enough. It seems the BOR is sort of a done deal that just needs to be signed off. This can be the fault of the SM or the Scout or both. Ed Mori 1 Peter 4:10 Link to post Share on other sites
Eagledad 2777 Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 >>Since we have no idea who you are or who the scout is it would seem that there should be no concern for confidentiality as far as published BSA requirements. Link to post Share on other sites
Gunny2862 11 Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 No kidding, I find it really a killer when the kid can make all of the right noises during the SM Conference but wasn't showing it before hand. Then you wind up with three things two of which are the Catch-22 situation: 1) You give him benefit of the doubt and he goes on to the BOR passes and improves - good outcome Catch-22 below... 2) You give him benefit of the doubt and he goes on to the BOR passes and goes back to his grumpy,unscoutly ways - bad outcome 3) You don't give him benefit of the doubt, tell him his scout spirit needs work (best done giving specifics and examples)and some one either calls you a scoundrel for refusing him unearned advancement or people want to know what requirement he hasn't had checked off other than the SM Conference(and why you're being such a stickler about it) -bad outcome. Lisabob, I think you did the right thing, mostly because you were there and I think the Leader on the Ground needs to have peoples support. It is hard, just to tell the boy no. But also to realize that you may be putting the seed of discouragement out there and when they are told, "no" it is really easy for them to fertilize and water that seed instead of attending to all of the rest of the work they've already done and the little bit remaining that would get them through. Make an effort to buck that Scout up the next time you see them. Link to post Share on other sites
Guest OldGreyEagle Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 Perhaps it would be best to have issues of troop deportment handled at the time of the transgression rather than waiting until the scoutmaster conference or Board of review. Link to post Share on other sites
Gunny2862 11 Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 Who said they weren't. The issue for the SM Conference can become; you are working the attitudinal issues, they finish the rest of the requirements, ask for a SM Conference and you are thrown into the scenario I wrote about above. As it relates to Lisabobs initial post, if I'm (as SM) hearing the right noises and seeing the right looks I may give them benefit of the doubt and throw the ball to her putting her in the position to check my faith that the Scout meant it. Makes the BOR & Scout uncomfortable(if they find his skills or attitude wanting) and casts doubt on my running of the program - not something I want happening often either. (This message has been edited by Gunny2862) Link to post Share on other sites
evmori 11 Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 Let's not forget a SM Conference is not a pass/fail requirement. So if a SM Conference takes place, it is completed & should be signed off. Ed Mori 1 Peter 4:10 Link to post Share on other sites
Gunny2862 11 Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 Sorry for altering the thread a little Lisa! I still think you did the right thing I just want to find out how to keep my BOR folks from going thru what you are now... Okay, time for me to learn something. Ed or anyone, if the SM Conference isn't a pass fail requirement, then if the Scout has done the rest of the work are you saying I am then required to sign off, that they have had a SM Conference - and can then request a BOR, which (as I understand it)in theory cannot retest(as a pass/fail) the Scout on anything and so really is just another sign off? OR, if Scout spirit is lacking how do I address it w/o a SM Conference after they have completed the rest of the work for the next rank? I'm positing that I have been talking to them about it as we went along. Is Scout Spirit a requirement for advancement, and if so then where does it get checked off if not at the SM Conference or BOR? Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts