Eagle Board of Review (Appeal)

[FireStone 423]

13 minutes ago, perdidochas said:

While I wish we could do this at regular BORs, I understand why it's not allowed.  That said, I've been pleasantly surprised at the Eagle candidates I've worked with. Most have been pretty proficient at their knots, even the ones I thought didn't know them well.  

I think the intent of re-testing is all fine and good, but it's just not consistent with the current BSA advancement model. We're not a proficiency program anymore, although as I understand it we were, once. But that was also back before there were so many merit badges, and the idea of proficiency testing was more feasible.

[Treflienne 270]

5 minutes ago, FireStone said:

but it's just not consistent with the current BSA advancement model. We're not a proficiency program anymore, although as I understand it we were, once. But that was also back before there were so many merit badges, and the idea of proficiency testing was more feasible.

Some interesting bits from Baden-Powell's Aids to Scoutmastership, the section on "Proficiency Badge (Merit Badges)".   Of course this is badges not advancement.   And Baden-Powell founded scouting in the U.K., not the B.S.A. which itself had some significant innovations.
 

Quote

 

The Badges are merely intended as an encouragement to a boy to take up a hobby or occupation and to make some sort of progress in it; they are a sign to an outsider that he has done so; they are, not intended to signify that he is a master in the craft he is tested in . . . .

But the object of the Badge System in Scouting is also to give the Scoutmaster an instrument by which he can stimulate keenness on the part of every and any boy to take up hobbies that can be helpful in forming his character or developing his skill. . . .

Our standard for Badge earning is not the attainment of a certain level or quality of knowledge or skill, but the amount of effort the boy has put into the acquiring such knowledge or skill. . . . .

 

 

[Clstlg 9]

Just for clarification.  

It was council members plus volunteers who conducted the EBoR.

The gentleman who brought the paper to be signed was one of the members on my son's board, and there was an apology made for causing him anxiety and stress.

[Eagledad 2777]

5 minutes ago, Treflienne said:

Some interesting bits from Baden-Powell's Aids to Scoutmastership, the section on "Proficiency Badge (Merit Badges)".   Of course this is badges not advancement.   And Baden-Powell founded scouting in the U.K., not the B.S.A. which itself had some significant innovations.
 

 

Yes, but as you pointed out, that is not the same as the proficiency of first class skills. Merit badges were introduced for a very different purpose than first class skills. First class skills are required for safe camping in the wilderness. You want the scouts to be proficient because their lives may depend on it. 

By the way, when did the BSA quit being a proficiency program? I have not heard that.

Barry

[Eagledad 2777]

6 minutes ago, Clstlg said:

Just for clarification.  

It was council members plus volunteers who conducted the EBoR.

The gentleman who brought the paper to be signed was one of the members on my son's board, and there was an apology made for causing him anxiety and stress.

Since I'm just used to how our district performs EBORs, explain to me the difference between council members and volunteers? All our EBOR members are volunteers, but they are trained and that is their responsibility. Is that the same?

Barry

[PACAN 220]

Curious..what was the paper they wanted your son to sign?

[acco40 95]

Folks, go back and see what the responsibilities are of the BoR members.  One is to make sure all of the requirements are met.  How do they do that?   They look to see if the requirements are properly signed off.   If the Scoutmaster has signed off on requirement 5 (While a Life Scout, plan, develop, and give leadership to others in a service project helpful to any religious institution, any school, or your community.), then by definition the requirement has been met.  Also, before a Life Scout begins his project ... Your Scoutmaster, troop Advancement Chairman, and a representative of your District  Advancement Committee, as well as the benefiting organization, must approve your project before you begin carrying it out.  So, to then go back at a BoR and say the project or Scout didn't show leadership if unfair.  Forget appealing, the adults need an education.

[acco40 95]

On ‎11‎/‎19‎/‎2018 at 11:39 AM, FireStone said:

I think the intent of re-testing is all fine and good, but it's just not consistent with the current BSA advancement model. We're not a proficiency program anymore, although as I understand it we were, once. But that was also back before there were so many merit badges, and the idea of proficiency testing was more feasible.

Keep in mind the folks that say you can't "retest" are sometimes misleading.  If a Scout rank has a requirement to tie a clove hitch, a BoR can and probably should ask the Scout to tie a clove hitch.   That's perfectly allowable.  The key is why?  They should do it not to test the Scout, he has already demonstrated proficiency to his "leader" if the requirement has been signed off.  The purpose is to test the Scoutmaster, who is in charge of the advancement program within the troop and see if he (or she) is doing a good job.   Heck, I don't remember if I can still tie a clove hitch knot anymore (it's been a few years) so a single Scout's success or failure to do so should be the end all or be all of the program but if the boys never seem to be able to tie knots or answer first aid questions properly during the BoR - that's a warning sign.  

Of course, that requiremes BoR members to be knowledgeable about the requirements too - a topic for another thread.

Edited November 21, 2018 by acco40

[acco40 95]

On ‎11‎/‎19‎/‎2018 at 12:11 PM, Eagledad said:

Since I'm just used to how our district performs EBORs, explain to me the difference between council members and volunteers? All our EBOR members are volunteers, but they are trained and that is their responsibility. Is that the same?

Barry

Who may sit on a BoR (for a troop)?  A board of three and no more than six troop committee members, all of whom must be at least 21 years of age. Unit leaders (Scoutmasters for a troop) and assistants shall not serve on a board of review for a Scout in their own unit. Parents, guardians, or relatives shall not serve on a board for their son. The candidate or his parent(s) or guardian(s) shall have no part in selecting any board of review members. 

For an EBoR (Eagle Board of Review), the Council may make additional rules - via their advancement committee.  At the troop level, at least one district or council representative, who is not affiliated with the unit, must serve as a member (kind of a quality control person).  The EBoR is unique in that the board members (some) may be non-Scouters.

We are all volunteers (we don't get paid).  But only some are Scouters (registered in the BSA as adults).  Usually, the term "Volunteer" is not used.  There are Scouters, non-Scouters and Scouters that are council representatives (silver shoulder loops represent district and council). 

[SSScout 1615]

In our very active, urban District,  we hold EBoR  twice a month in two sites.  Our District has at least (last time I checked)  three or four long time serving Eagle Coordinators, who organize and check these EBoRs  . Each Eagle Candidate is expected to schedule their EBoR (after his Troop's BoR)  with one of the EBCoordinators, on one of the evenings. Sometimes, if there are truly extenuating circumstances, I have heard of the EBoR being scheduled another night, but not often. 

Each Eagle candidate is expected to be accompanied by his parent/guardian(s), his SM (or designee) and anyone else interested.  His records have already been checked and vetted by the Council and  all the pertinent records are available there and then.  There are always more than one Eagle Candidate at the evening event, therefore the EBoR(s) are easily made up.  The EBoR for each Eagle Candidate is made up on the spot with the Eagle Coordinators, the "other " Scoutmasters and available parents. On the evening of my son's EBoR, I sat in on three other EBoRs. There is usually a short intro for folks who are new at this, before they are assigned to a Board.  There is always at least one experienced Eagle Coordinator on each Board.  There are printed guidelines for the board members and check sheets for each candidate.  The adult Board members review the Candidates paperwork and read thru his recommendation letters. 

As the EBoRs for the evening are assigned their rooms,  the Eagle Candidates sit and fidget in the hallway .  The appropriate SM leads the ECandidate into the EBoR room, introduces the Candidate to the EBoR (most if not all of whom the Scout has never met) and then leaves.  The Candidate the evening I served is asked to repeat the Scout Promise and Law, then sit down and a conversation ensues about the Scouts life, history in Scouting and memories and perhaps his life goals and desires.  It is not as tough (so my son reported)  as he expected, and was even enjoyable. I hope my Boards did the same for our Scouts.  

One of my Boards that evening had one glitch with one Merit Badge whose date we noticed did not exactly tally with the Scout's other dates (dang Council !)  . We decided it was a mere penmanship problem , it was not a "required" MB, and so could not affect his candidacy.  "Passed"    .

The adults excuse the Scout, he waits in the hall, we hem and haw a bit, sign his paperwork, call him into the room again,  congratulate him (?Scout left hand handshake?) and on to the next Scout.... 

[The Latin Scot 961]

Wow ... @SSScout, you just described in perfect detail the EXACT procedure we follow in our district. You sure you don't live in South OC, CA? 

[T2Eagle 902]

1 hour ago, SSScout said:

 Each Eagle Candidate is expected to schedule their EBoR (after his Troop's BoR) 

Curious, does this mean the scout has two EBORs?  I've never heard of that.

[The Latin Scot 961]

Ah, that would be the difference between @SSScout's district and ours. Our district advancement chair just issued a VERY strongly worded mandate to our units specifying that "under no circumstances are units or committees to conduct preliminary or 'practice' Boards of Review. The final Board of Review is the ONLY Board of Review, as stated in the Boy Scout Handbook and in accordance with the Guide to Advancement, and this is to be conducted only after all other requirements have been met. This does NOT include a 'trial run.' with another group of leaders. There is no need nor authorization for units, chartered organizations, or unit committees to schedule or demand a precursory Board of Review with an Eagle Scout Candidate."

Edited November 24, 2018 by The Latin Scot

[Oldscout448 697]

8 minutes ago, The Latin Scot said:

Ah, that would be the difference between @SSScout's district and ours. Our district advancement chair just issued a VERY strongly worded mandate to our units specifying that "under no circumstances are units or committees to conduct preliminary or 'practice' Boards of Review. The final Board of Review is the ONLY Board of Review, as stated in the Boy Scout Handbook and in accordance with the Guide to Advancement, and this is to be conducted only after all other requirements have been met. This does NOT include a 'trial run.' with another group of leaders. There is no need nor authorization for units, chartered organizations, or unit committees to schedule or demand a precursory Board of Review with an Eagle Scout Candidate."

Hereabouts such a " mandate" would be used to light the next campfire.

[SSScout 1615]

Oldscout and Latinscot: Points well taken.   

It has been a while since the last BoR , either Troop or District Ebor I sat in on.  My home Troop always held that the Troop had the right to pass their judgment on the Scout's progress before passing on to the District BoR.  Might save some more serious embarrassment/trouble later.   In any event , the Troop Adv Chair always helped review the Scout's records before Council was asked to vet them.  

Our Troop always sat the Scout down with the Troop Committee to ask about their Project Proposal. Being a small Troop, the Committee were the defacto advisors and old timers. Seemed to work. Same idea with the Troop BoR. It was not meant as a "practice" District EBoR, only our own congratulatory review.