Peer Review for advancement

[Venture34 10]

Our troop has instituted a peer review process to test scouts after they have completed all requirements for advancement but before he attends the scoutmaster conference and BOR. I am concerned that this adds another "hoop" for the boys to jump thru that is not required in the scout manual.

 

I was wondering if anyone else had experience with this process.

 

Thanks

[NWScouter 9]

I would say it violates the advancement rules by adding to the rules no more no less.

 

In the seventies and eighties the requirements had a PLC run board of review for up to First Class. It was changed to adult run when the last major change in 1989 went into effect. One of the reasons given for that change and the new scout patrol was that surveys had shown that boys left scouting because of hazing and bullying by older scouts .

 

[NeilLup 13]

This is not an official (or an approved) part of the advancement process. I believe that if a Scout were to appeal failure to advance because of this procedure, his appeal would be upheld and the unit would be directed to give him a Scoutmaster's Conference and Board of Review.

 

As an informal part of the process, that's a very different matter. If the Scoutmaster would ask that the youth leaders of the unit review the skill levels of the Scout before the SM conference, that might be OK. But if, for example, the Scout were to go before the peer review board with a skill requirement approved and have the review board check his skills, determine that he didn't have enough knowledge and refuse him advancement, that is strictly forbidden and any appeal would be upheld. Once a requirement is met, there is no rechecking as a condition of advancement.

 

Having said that, you likely will get away with it. Most Scouts don't know enough to appeal and wouldn't do so even if they did know enough.(This message has been edited by NeilLup)

[FScouter 24]

What problem is your troop trying to solve, or what good do they hope to accomplish, by instituting a "peer review process"?

[Venture34 10]

Thanks for your replies. Our troop BOR had always did some testing of the boys, particulary their knot skills. We learned that the BOR should not test, but just verify that the boy had accomplished the skill. There was a feeling that the skills needed to be retested hence the peer review.

 

Thanks for your replies.

[LPC_Thumper 10]

I was interested to see your concerns about the Scout not having adequate skills. It's my understanding that the Scoutmaster should be doing that as part of the Scoutmaster conference. Is that other's understand as well. I'd love to hear from other leaders on this topic.

[NeilLup 13]

I believe that skills review is NOT part of the SM Conference. Rightly or wrongly, once a requirement is passed, then it is passed and cannot be taken away or rechecked.

 

The SM can, of course, at any time ask a Scout to demonstrate a skill, etc. but it cannot be in the context of an advancement recheck. The SM can designate who can approve requirements or can delegate this authority to others or to the PLC. But one a person with the authority says that the Scout has passed the skill, that is the end of the matter as I understand it.

 

Rightly or wrongly.

[Venture34 10]

LPC_Thumper

As a troop committee member who has been conducting BOR for two years, I was less concerned with the skills than the SM who instituted this program.

 

I always tried to encourage the boys to talk about themselves and their achievements as they progress thru the ranks. I hope the scouts will learn interviewing skills they can use when looking for a job.

 

Rather than spending our time on peer reviews, I would like to see more time spent in helping the advancment of the "Quiet Kids" that seem to be left behind and do not progress. I feel that we have added an additional hinderence for these kids' progression.

 

Thanks for your replies.

[Proud Eagle 13]

I can't see any way that you can require a peer review. You could strongly encourage it, but I can think of no way to force someone to go through a peer review after all requirements are signed off. It might (or might not) be a good policy to include a peer review, but it isn't the BSA policy.

 

Now on the other hand, I guess you could require that all requirements be deomonstrated to a peer review group to have them signed off. That would be a bit unusual, but I think it would be within the rules.

[SR540Beaver 116]

They should not be doing peer reviews and the time would be much better spent teaching NEW skills.

[Bob White 20]

"It's my understanding that the Scoutmaster should be doing that as part of the Scoutmaster conference."

 

I am not aware of any instruction to do that in any BSA resource or training syllabus.

[FScouter 24]

Sounds like somebody wants to reinvent the wheel. Experience has demonstrated time and again that troops that meddle with the proven methods fail in their attempts. The methods outlined in the Scoutmaster handbook work. Why tinker with success?

[Venture34 10]

Thank you all for your help. I will bring this information up at our next meeting.

 

Ernie

[Eamonn 61]

As it seems that everybody is in agreement that Re-testing is a definite no. It would seem that we would also agree that we would follow the Four Steps to Advancement.

1/ A Scout is Taught (Trained)

2/ A Scout is Tested.

3/ A Scout is Reviewed

4/ A Scout is Recognized.

If the Scoutmaster feels that there is a problem with steps one and two, he might do well to take the time to look at the program.

How are we training the Scouts? Sure a Lad can sit in the church hall with a couple of old frayed bits of rope and learn how to tie a knot. Once mastered he can show the fruits of his labor to the designated knot tester. Who we hope knows one knot from another and bingo, that's done and the Lad moves on to the next requirement.

Surely we do better a better job when we make learning any skill fun and exciting and where possible challenging. Learning to tie a knot that is going to be used as part of a pioneering project, brings the learning to life.

It also makes BOR's a lot more interesting.

The skills that a Scout masters on the way to First Class do lay the ground work for bigger and better activities to come. I have seen older Scouts hang back and not join in because they never mastered these skills. That is such a shame.

It is also very important that the person who signs off knows what he or she is doing and has the confidence to know what is acceptable. The requirements are very clear.So there isn't room for argument. If the Patrol Leader or SPL is signing off he really does need to know what the standard is and how to do whatever the skill is.

We also need to make a much bigger deal of recognizing the Scout. Recognition should be given when ever possible. Not just for the big steps but for the small ones as well.

The young Lad who has came from the Webelos Scout den, is used to being recognized at nearly every pack meeting with a pin of some sort. We need to give him a pat on the back as often as we can. Even if it's only mentioning his name at the troop meeting for passing one requirement. Or one line in the troop newsletter.

Eamonn

 

[Fat Old Guy 11]

" I have seen older Scouts hang back and not join in because they never mastered these skills. That is such a shame."

 

It seems to me that they have no desire to master the skills.

 

As part of the ongoing inter-patrol competition we have a knot tying relay. The week before the actual event, we did a practice event but before the practice event, knot gurus went around and worked with any Scout who fessed up that he didn't know a particular knot. Then the practice relay took place. The older Scouts had not asked for help but just stood there and whined that they only knot that they knew was the square knot.

 

They had a week to practice and review their knots but they didn't even do any frantic practicing before the troop meeting started. At the relay, they just stood there and whined that the only knot that they knew was the square knot. Then they whined about coming in last, the unfair competition (the younger Scouts knew their knots so it was unfair), and the silliness of knot tying in general.