Jump to content
Jodie

Misrepresentation During A Board Of Review

Recommended Posts

Correct. But one would think that if a district exec gets p.o.'d about a patrol going to play laser tag (on their own time and not in uniform) he'd be more upset about a unit-sponsored event where violent video games that are expressly created for killing human analogs are being played.

 

This is the same guy that did not like our archery range that had 3D animal targets on it...said it simulated hunting. Yet he has no problem with Billy taking out Tommy with a head shot playing GTA?

 

We are way off topic. My apologies.

Sounds like someone that is more interested in the letter of the rules, rather than the spirit of the rules.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@@eagle77 agree it's good feedback. Not grounds for a new SM.

 

I still maintain kids need to be held accountable too.

That's why, as a Scoutmaster, if I see a Life scout in our troop that can't tie a bowline - guess who I ask the SPL to assign to teach the Tenderfoots (Tenderfeet?)?  No one should be trying to play the accountable game - we should all be trying to help the boys learn.

 

One of the biggest beefs against me from the parents was their perceived notion that  didn't see "Scout skills" (in their eyes camping skills) as important.  I did seem them as important but not as an end to themselves.    The mission of scouting isn't to make skilled outdoorsmen.  The mission is to help them make moral and ethical decisions - the outdoors and the patrol method (and advancement) are methods (tools) to do so.  There are other ways to teach them moral and ethical decisions that are just as effective - but it isn't scouting which as leaders, we are suppose to be dispensing.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So one can be 5'4", 300 lbs, have high cholesterol and still be "personally fit" and get the MB? Last time I checked that MB requirements you had to show progress over a period of time. That requires effort and progress. It's the same with requiring guys to know their core skills.

 

The rest of my reply above still stands. ;)

Yes, if one was 5'4" and 330 lb when they started working on the MB and showed improvement when finished.  When is a boy in a troop - ages 12 to 17.  How many boys don't improve their strength during this time? 

Edited by acco40

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

In my unit we require scouts to know their core scout skills in order to be able to participate in their SMC and BOR, so we don't have this issue. I was wondering how others manage this problem.

How can you deny a Scout a SMC or BOR if they've completed all the other requirements for rank advancement?  That's just plain out wrong.

 

I had a case where a Life Scout completed all of the requirements for his Eagle rank/award except for the BOR.  One was scheduled and during the time after his SMC but before his BOR he got in trouble at school and was suspended.  The troop committee would not hold a BOR for him.  I told them they couldn't do that - they had to give him a BOR.   They didn't need to have him "pass" but they couldn't deny him a review (somebody tell the Republicans for me please).  Anyway, they refused to hold a BOR for him.  Well the Scout arranged a BOR with the district Advancement Chair and was awarded his Eagle.  To this day, I still think the troop committee was gutless.

Edited by acco40
Comprehension

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How can you deny a Scout a SMC or BOR if they've completed all the other requirements for rank advancement?  That's just plain out wrong.

 

I had a case where a Life Scout completed all of the requirements for his Eagle rank/award except for the BOR.  One was scheduled and during the time after his SMC but before his BOR he got in trouble at school and was suspended.  The troop committee would not hold a BOR for him.  I told them they couldn't do that - they had to give him a BOR.   They didn't need to have him "pass" but they couldn't deny him a review (somebody tell the Republicans for me please).  Anyway, they refused to hold a BOR for him.  Well the Scout arranged a BOR with the district Advancement Chair and was awarded his Eagle.  To this day, I still think the troop committee was gutless.

 

8.0.0.2 Boards of Review Must Be Granted When Requirements Are Met

Eagle Requirement 2: "Demonstrate that you live by the principles of the Scout Oath and Scout Law in your daily life...."

 

School suspensions can be BS or very serious. With the latter, I have seen Boards balk at holding a BOR as the scouts were seen as not living the Scout Oath and Law. The Boards did provide written reason(s).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yah, weird zombie thread resurrection, eh? :blink:  Nice to see yeh, @@acco40!   I thought all da old gang had disappeared.

 

I've never quite understood da precision scouting thing, eh?   Or why adults who probably gripe about lawyers all the livelong day turn around and become pink book lawyers when it comes to a children's program. 

 

Scoutin' ain't about precisely followin' da guidebooks.   As lots of us point out, ever since Green Bar Bill da guidebooks are put together by big committees without much continuity editing, eh?  That's why yeh have silly stuff like a group of committee members who don't know the lad that well and probably can't tie a bowline themselves certifyin' that a lad has actually met da requirements for skills and character... without bein' allowed to either test or examine character.

 

In workin' with kids, we just work with kids, eh?  No need to be precision programmed robots.  A lad who gets suspended from school for beatin' up a younger boy can have his SM say "yeh clearly haven't shown scout spirit in your everyday life, so your BOR is cancelled until yeh do X, Y, and Z and show me you can do better".   Or yeh can hold the board, and the board can say "we can't approve yeh for this rank yet because what yeh did doesn't represent good character for a scout, and in fact is an embarrassment.  Yeh let us down.   Come back for another BOR in 6 months after yeh have repaired your reputation and ours in da community."  

 

Either way, the result and lesson is da same, eh?  No need to argue about precision.  Personally, I like da SM approach better in most cases, because da SM knows the lad better and has a longer-term mentoring relationship.  Random MCs, not so much.

 

Beavah

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Assumption - you are a Committee Member.

 

Make sure the Scoutmaster is aware of how he represented himself.  Let the Scoutmaster & his ASMs deal with it.

 

I also agree with KenD500. This is a matter of "scout spirit" to be formally addressed at the next SM conference. I believe it should also be addressed informally right away.  It is the role of the SMs to deal directly with the scouts.

 

That having been said, in particularly egregious disciplinary situations we will institute a special group of both committee and SMs, including the Committee Chairman and the SM. But this doesn't even come close to that level.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eagle Requirement 2: "Demonstrate that you live by the principles of the Scout Oath and Scout Law in your daily life...."

 

Who signs off on that requirement? 

 

BSA Guide to Advancement

 

4.2.1.2 The Scout Is Tested

 

The unit leader authorizes those who may test and pass the Scout on rank requirements. They might include his patrol leader, senior patrol leader, an assistant unit leader, another Scout, or the unit leader himself.

 

 

"Unit leader" means Scoutmaster, in the context of Boy Scout advancement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Being a very subjective issue, more often than not the sign off on this one in my units gets passed off to me.  It's something that gets addressed in the SMC.  Normally a boy's PL signs off on advancement for all ranks except where designated otherwise.  The SPL signs off on the troop officers and a consensus of PL's sign off on the SPL.

 

During the SMC, the question is posed: "How well did you do on this Scout Spirit thing?"  The rest is up to the boy to answer.  Often times they are quite hard on themselves, but I generally go with what they tell me they have done and/or not done in this arena of their lives.  Technically then, I think the boys are signing themselves off on this one.  They know how it works and whether or not they are trying.

Edited by Stosh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem WAS that the scouts would pick whatever ASM they wanted to sign-off of that requirement and they would pick one that was not aware of any problems or issues. We have also since then adopted a Code of Conduct that we have communicated to the Scouts and are enforcing. During this process we discovered a lot of things that had been going on in the Troop that were definitely not in following Scout Spirit. Things are getting much better, but we still have a ways to go. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×