Board of Review Problem

[Scoutman 10]

The Board of Reviewes in our troop usually turn into vicious retests of a canidate, unfortunatly. This is because the older scouts and the Patrol Leaders who work with the young ones do not throughly teach a skill before signing off a requirment. Therefore for some scouts the BOR usually knows he does not know all the requirments for the rank properly and the test begins! We have tried to get our Patrol Leaders to do better before they sign, but it doesn't happen.

 

How can we remedy this situation?

 

Thanks.

[Eamonn 61]

At the risk of sounding like a know it all!!

I think that you know what you need to do.

Still if you wanted a smug answer like that you would never have asked.

Please forgive me.

The Board Of Review is not the place for "Re-Testing"

We teach skills that need to be used or practiced. This is best done in a environment of fun and challenge.

Learning a lashing in the church hall is ok. Building a Lookout Tower, puts the skill to use.

Maybe the PLC needs to discuss ways of ensuring that every Scout is given the chance to put the "Tests?" Skills that he has been taught into practice.

Maybe the Patrol Leaders need to brush up on their skills?

I am not sure wha skills are being "Retested".

I do feel that some adult equipped with a rope or a map and compass is not going to pass on any real education at a board of review.

It is like trying to teach a pig to sing - You get no singing and it upsets the pig.

Every now and then all of us "Old People" need to try and see the world through the eyes of the people that we serve.

How does a young lad feel waiting for his board of review?

Isn't one of the reasons for having a board of review to spur the lad on?

While this is in most cases something that the Scoutmaster does, it might be worth while talking about it at a Troop Committee meeting.

It might be worth remembering that A Scout Is Kind.

Eamonn

[Fat Old Guy 11]

In a perfect world, there'd be no need for retesting. All the leaders would work hard to make sure that the Scouts new their stuff before they signed off.

 

Unfortunately, too many adults and maybe even some Scouts want to sign off on things that haven't been properly demonstrated. Why do they do this? Maybe to show that they are a "good friend." Maybe because they don't want the Scout to feel left behind when he doesn't advance.

 

If the system worked as designed, no one would feel like they needed to do any retesting because the Committee would KNOW that the leaders, both adult and youth, have done their jobs.

 

As much as we'd like to do testing at BORs, we shouldn't. It defeats the purpose of the BOR.

 

Instead of re-testing at a BOR ask questions about the Scouts experience. "Do you know your knots?" "Oh yeah!" "What's your favorite knot?" "That one where the bunny goes through the hole." Now if he says, "I dunno" ask more questions. "How did you learn your knots." If he says, "Bobby showed us how to tie them and then signed our books," you have a problem.

 

We actually had something like that happen a couple years back. The SPL was supposed to teach the new Scouts firebuilding on a campout but he wanted to go down to the lake with his buds. He showed the Scouts a couple fire lays and signed their books.

 

"I do feel that some adult equipped with a rope or a map and compass is not going to pass on any real education at a board of review."

 

I don't think they are trying to do any educating, they are trying to determine if skills have been learned.

[frank10 12]

If they feel the need to retest the boy then the next one in the review chair should be the scoutmaster.

[Bob White 20]

It all comes back to the Scoutmaster. No boy joins Boy Scouts knowing how to teach and test others. It must be taught to them. Devoloping these scouts, and evaluated their work is the job of the of the scoutmaster.

 

The SM is responsible for keeping a list of who is qualified to test for advancement. If the SM is not aware of the job these scouts or adults are doing then it is his problem. Anyone not using good testing techniques or abiding by the requirements of the handbook should be removed from the responsibility to test until he or she is ready to do so properly.

 

I recommend you go the the SM and say that he or she needs to see that there are people cabable of testing according to the scout handbook and policies. Let the SM know that you expect to see scouts at these boards who have earned the rank.

 

That being said the board does have the authority to ask how a requirement was met, but they cannot retest. If the book says that the scout ties the knot and the scout said he watched the SPL tie it and then sign the book, the board can require the scout to go back and pass the requirement correctly. What the board cannot do is say "here tie the knot for us".

 

Bob White

[LauraT7 13]

this is a two-part problem -

First, the scouts are not being sufficiently taught the skills, and two - the BOR should NOT be re-testing, that is not the purpose of a BOR.

 

Regarding the first problem, one way to is to start following the teaching method of

 

LEARN

DO

TEACH

 

Most people only want to do the first two. In cub scouts, they get into a habit of getting 'signed off' on a requirement by simply 'doing' it - they are not required to 'master' the skill.

 

Once they get into boy scouts, they should really KNOW the skill - well enough to use it without prompts or hints or peeking at the book first when being 'tested' by the instructor or SM.

 

instructors should not be signing off on a requirement the same night they teach it. they should give instruction, help and practice time, then have the boys who are learning, teach the next group the next week. Giving the boy the responsibility of 'teaching' the skill, causes him to put more effort into learning it, so that he can teach it to someone else. then your older boys can choose to sign off when the boy either exhibits teaching ability or enough skill to do the skill without prompts or aids.

 

The BOR is not supposed to 'test'. they are supposed to talk to the scout and find out about his experience with the troop, what he feels he is accomplishing and learning, how scouting affects him and how he affects the troop, what his goals are, etc. the COMMITTEE members that conduct the BOR usually are not involved in teaching skills or testing for them. Perhaps the name Board of REVIEW gives them the wrong impression - but they are supposed to review the 'experience' of the scout not test specific skills.

[Eamonn 61]

Advancement = Program.

Good Program = Good Advancement.

Show me the need for "Re-testing?

 

Have to admit to being a little taken back.

I have been in Scouting for 40 years and only today did I learn that we are not in the education (teaching) business.

There I was all this time thinking that everything we did was to help fulfill the aim of Scouting.

This leads me to ask. If we have stopped trying to educate and are now in the "Put the kid on the spot" business. Something which I abhor. What happened to Scouting?

Eamonn

 

[Fat Old Guy 11]

"I have been in Scouting for 40 years and only today did I learn that we are not in the education (teaching) business. "

 

I think that you misconstrue. Perhaps you are learning from Bob White. . . ooooo, that was low.

 

If someone is testing at a BOR, they are not teaching. The people that run the SATs aren't teaching they are testing. The PL who says, "Show me a square knot" isn't teaching at that point, he's testing.

 

"Put the kid on the spot"

 

All tests put the kid on the spot. The PL saying, "show me a square knot" puts the kid on the spot. Asking the kid "what merit badges did you earn this summer" puts the kid on the spot. Cooking dinner puts the kid on the spot. Telling the kid to call the Scoutmaster to schedule a conference puts the kid on the spot. Anytime we ask a kid to perform, we are putting him on the spot.

 

Scouting teaches kids to deal with being on the spot with aplomb.

 

[Bob White 20]

FOG you realy haven't a clue what this program is all about.

[Fat Old Guy 11]

Sure I do, Bob White (motto: Rudeness is an art). Scouting is about camping and hiking and peeing in the woods. In the meantime, Scouts are supposed to learn valuable life skills like answering questions, talking to adults, making decisions, accepting the consequences for their decisions and dealing with being on the spot.

 

If a Scout can't deal with being on the spot, he won't even get past the "Scout" stage. If he can't tie a square knot for his PL because he's petrified or he just sits in a BOR and stares into space, he won't go far. Part of the mission is to help Scouts get past that fear or performance anxiety.

 

Heck, that's part of Cub Scouts. That's why skits are an important part of Cub Scouting or so they told me in Cub Scout Leader Training.

 

 

[Bob White 20]

In other words...I was right.

[packsaddle 753]

Think guys, what are you teaching the original respondent right now? Decorum, decorum.

[OldGreyEagle 5]

The Probelem isnt one that can be solved by changing the Board of Review Process. The Board of Review is not the place for a restest Period, end of discussion.

 

Now, how do we fix things? Well, from the orginal post you said the problem was with patrol leaders signing off items the scout didnt really know. You can take a few different approaches. As FOG referred to in a post, part of the scouting program is accepting the consequences for their decisions, as it stands right now, those patrol leaders, or others who sign off requirements for a scout who doesnt know his stuff doesnt have to face any consequnces. So, now is the time.

 

Have a skills brush up day, look at a scout's book and have him teach a signed off skill to another scout. If the scout cant teach the skill, go back to the person who signed off the skill, and have that person reteach the skill so the retaught scout can now teach. (follow that? I hope so) If you find yourself going back to the same person to reteach skills he/she signed off, its time to discuss how to improve either educational methods or the ethics of signing off items for scouts who dont know the skills.

 

The answer is in going back to the people who are signing off items and changing their behavior. If someone continues to sign off items without regard to skill performance, suspend their ability to sign off items.

 

OOh OOh here's a radical approach, it must be evident to the troop that the BOR process is a bear, ask the PLC how to fix it, they are living with the process as well and have memories of it, have them suggest a solution and have them enact it. They may review my suggesitons or have one of their own. Let them solve the problem.

 

Its not the Board of Review's job to assure the scout "knows his stuff" its up to the program (Read PLC as assisted and supported by the Scoutmaster and Committee) to assure requirements are met.

[evmori 11]

Excellent post OGE!

[Shell in WA- USA 10]

Sounds to me like the Adults of the troop are falling down on thier jobs. Maybe the PL and SPL can sign the requirements off, but has anyone (adults) taught THEM how to do it properly? Have they held any training for the youth? JLT? You can't expect a boy to do a job right if he isn't shown how.

 

The BOR is not the place to "retest" or teach the skills. It should be done by the person signing off the requirement, adult or boy. And th eSM should be looking out for and preparing the boy to move on to the BOR.

 

Sounds like it's time for your troop to step back abit and do some training.