Board of Review Problem

[Fat Old Guy 11]

Opinion, Bob White (motto: I put the "hippo" in hipocrite)?

 

 

[Bob White 20]

As presented by FOG "A BOR can do whatever they wish to do. They can ask the Scout to play the fiddle while they do Irish step dancing. They can play craps with the Scout. They can even make the Scout sit in a comfy chair."

 

Can anyone provide a scouting reference to support this statement?

 

Bob White

 

[Shell in WA- USA 10]

Can "Bob" and "FOG" go spar off somewhere else? This isn't helping with the scouting issues.

 

Repectfully requesting.........

[Fat Old Guy 11]

Well Bob White, it is obvious that you not only don't get Monty Python references but that you also don't understand that words have meanings and meanings are important (the scarey thing is that is frightfully close to something that Clinton said. Maybe I'm a closet Democrat.)

 

Sorry Shellinwa (is that a French name :-). I am attempting to es-plain to Bob White that Scouters can do whatever they want, regardless of what the rules say (Bob would say "irregardless"). The problem is that Bob White (motto: I quail at nothing) reflexively attacks whenever Ed Mori or I say anything. I could say that the Scout sign is the first three fingers of the right hand extended and Bob White would retort that it isn't, it is the hand the fingers extended except that the little finger is folded down to the palm wiht the tip of the thumb touching it.(This message has been edited by Fat Old Guy)

[Bob White 20]

Shell please see you private message.

 

Bob(This message has been edited by Bob White)

[Fat Old Guy 11]

Boy Shellinwa, you're lucky. You're getting a gen-u-wine Bob White private message. If he starts with his paranoid ravings, just try to calm him down and call for professional assistance. ;-)

[evmori 11]

Back to my question - And since the requirement was already signed off do we have to accept it was signed off when we know it wasn't completed?

 

Ed Mori

(This message has been edited by evmori)

[OldGreyEagle 5]

Interesting point Ed, according to the rules, once a item is signed off, its signed off, no retesting allowed, however, if you have conclusive proof the signing off was done without the scout demonstrating sufficient skill, well thats an issue.

 

Rather than erasing the sign-off, why not have the scout and the one who signed off the requirement put together a demonsration of the skill in question to be presented to the troop. In putting together the presentation and in giving it, the skill in question will be mastered. Now, how to accomplish this? If during the Board of Review process it comes to light that a signoff occurred without sufficient skills mastery, suspend the Board of Review until the skills demonstration as described above is complete. I may be out on a limb here as far as official BSA policy goes, but I dont know of any requirement that says once a BOR is started it has to be finished in one session. The BOR is not retesting the scout, but assuring the skill is mastered.

 

And if you think most of the above is merely semantics, you are right, I am trying to come up with a scenario that I could live with, I'd like to see others ideas as well. When we say a scout is trustworthy, I believe that extends to the BOR as well, at it wouldnot be trustworthy of the BOR to the scouts who have mastered their skills not to do "something" with those who don't know their stuff.

[evmori 11]

OGE,

Excellent suggestion. And maybe one other alternative - complete the BOR with the understanding it will reconvene when the Scout has completed what you posted.

 

Ed Mori

 

[Bob White 20]

The Advancement Committee Policies and Procedures manual gives the process for what to do. A BOR responsibility does not include determining whether the scout had sufficient skill, only if the requirement was met according to the handbook. For instance. If the book says to make a list and the scout did not, then the board can tell him he needs to make a list and present it to an appropriate leader to have the requirement aknowledeged as complete. The board can then certify that the rank has been completed once all requirements have been completed according to the handbook, no more, no less.

 

Bob White(This message has been edited by Bob White)

[OldGreyEagle 5]

AArrghhhhh Arrrghhhh and Double AAArrrrgghhhh,

 

I hate when I think I have the answer and I dont.

 

According to the Advancement Committee Polcies and Procedures book page 30

 

"... If the board decides that the scout is not ready to advance (for a reason such as improper requirement signing amoung others) the candidate should be informed and told what he has not done satisfactorily, Most scouts accept the responsiility for not completing the requirements properly. The members of the board of review should specify what must be done to rework the candidates weakness and schdeule another board of review for him. A follow-up letter must be sent to the scout who is turned down for rank advncement confirming the agreements reached on the actions necessary for advancement..."

 

So lets lose the suspended BOR thing, have the BOR and the scout work out a plan to have the scout do what he is supposed to do and a new BOR is then scheduled.

 

(Note to self: No posting before morning coffee, tea, or at least until awake)

[sst3rd 129]

Bob,

 

You are right on the money in your response to my posting. I have a revolving Committee and sometimes it's hard to have members for the BOR who are trained and experienced enough to review the book in that manner. I do it (SM), so they can concentrate on what I consider to be their main objective, getting to know the Scout, asking well rounded questions, and supporting the Scout through this process. It works for us. I will respond to this subject no more.

 

sst3rd