BOR unable to fail an unqualified Scout

[vrooman 10]

We have an interesting situation, and I am sure that this is not that uncommon. We are running Boards of Reviews (BORs) in accordance with the Advancement Committee Policies and Procedures where we are only asking questions relating to how the ranks objectives were learned, and not re-testing the scouts.

 

It is evident that one of the boys has not actually done what he was required to do to get the requirement signed off, and he did end up receiving his Second Class as that Board passed him(somewhat reluctantly). His First Class BOR is now about to take place, and I an sitting on this board knowing full well that we will probably find out that he didnt do all of the requirements despite having them signed off.

 

Our Committee is rather complacent, and feels that they would be stepping on the Scoutmasters toes if we failed a boy who he provided a Scoutmasters conference for. The boy in question has all of his requirements signed off by his mother who is one of our ASMs, and his family donates quite a bit to the troop so this makes many MCs look the other way.

 

The troop is suffering from this situation, and the boy himself is being taught that he can get ahead in life if he just has someone cover(lie) for him. Any suggestions as to how to handle this situation? I dont believe that there is a scouting resource that has the answer for troop and BoR dynamic like the one described here?

 

Thanks,

 

Vrooman

 

[Vicki 11]

Vrooman, I guess if it was obvious to me that the scout had not completed the requirements the absolute minimum action I could take would be to recommend against awarding him the rank. Then, if the majority on the board passes him, decide how much of a fuss to make. While I appreciate that there is grey area in this world, this seems to me to be a fairly black and white situation. I also understand that this could be a difficult and uncomfortable position to take - so you just need to decide which is more important, comfort or self-respect? When I've been put in similar situations, usually I've discovered that others were just waiting for someone to say something.

 

But I think you already knew the answer...

 

Vicki

[evmori 11]

Simple! Don't pass him! Explain why he isn't being passed. Then set a time for him to come back for another BOR!

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[Prairie_Scouter 10]

Hi vrooman,

 

Although I haven't seen much of this, I've seen this problem more in Cub Scouts than in Boy Scouts, but I suppose it does exist. There are troops that don't allow a parent ASM to sign off their own Scout's requirements. In our troop, we ask the parent ASMs to encourage their Scouts to work with senior scouts and ASMs, but we don't prohibit them from signing off. I'd get a little worried if they're signing off EVERYTHING, tho. Personally, I think that if a parent is signing off their son's work and they don't really meet the requirement (and the parent knows this), they are doing a disservice to the Scout, the troop, and themselves.

 

You're right; the BOR isn't really there to quiz the Scout on whether they completed the requirements. They shouldn't be in the BOR if they haven't got the requirements signed off, and the assumption is that if they've got it signed off, they've done it.

 

For your situation, I think that this is really a job for the SM. According to the Troop structure chart in the SM handbook, the ASMs "report" to the SM. One approach might be for the SM to suggest to the ASM that they try to get the Scout to work with the other ASMs and the senior Scouts on these requirements so that they get exposed to other members of the troop better. If it's really obvious that the Scout doesn't know the requirements, it's within the "power" of the SM to discuss this with the ASM from the perspective of how the requirements are being done, because it seems that the Scout doesn't really know the requirements. Now, this can be a tricky situation. Some of these are safety issues. I'd hate think what would happen if the Scout got signed off for his Fireman Chit and had no clue how to use the tools, for example. If it's clear that there's a lack of knowledge, the SM really should be addressing it. If he doesn't want to, then it should go to the Committee, I think.

[CA_Scouter 11]

Although there is no BSA policy that prevents an ASM from signing off for his/her own son, our troop has an unofficial policy that ASM's do not do so. This eliminates any question of impropriety on the ASM's part.

 

And unfortunately, your leadership is supporting this boy's perception that he can buy/lie through his advancement.

 

Someone has to stop this runaway train right away, or advancement and the integrity of your program will become a joke. I'm sure your scouts can see what's going on, so this is being taught to them also.

 

 

 

 

 

[Bob White 20]

Forget who signed and who gives money, that is not the concern for the bor.

 

Your role is to determine if the scout did the reqirements according to the handbook. You cannot retest. Allow me to explain the difference.

 

Not allowed- show us how to tie a square lashing.

 

Allowed. The lashing requirement requires that you build a useful camp item using the lashings you have learned. What did you build and what lashings did you use.

 

If the scout cannot tell you what he built and what lashings then you can determine that he did not complete the requirement. You may then explain the requirement again and explain that once he has completed this according to the handbook that he can meet with the bor again to consider his advancment.

 

I would also suggest to him that if there are other requirements he knows of which were not completed according to his handbooks instructions that he can redo those on his own prior to meeting with the board again. Put this information in writing and give it to the scout, give a copy to the advancement chair to keep.

 

Then the Committee chair and advancemet chair need to meet with the scoutmaster and explain that only those people who he trusts to do a legitimate job of testing scouts are to be allowed to do so and that it is his responsibility to determine who those people are and to keep a list of their names. Make sure the SM knows that any scout who has not passed a requirement according to the handbook will be returned without advancment to be retested.

 

 

[EagleInKY 14]

Ditto Ed & Bob. The SM will get the message.

[Trevorum 24]

The serious leadership ind internal troop politics issues aside ...

 

... in my experience, Scouts do not "fail" Boards of Review. However, if the BoR sees a problem, it can vote to adjourn without passing the Scout at that time. He is given a clear explanation of what the problem is, clear instructions on how to remedy the problem, and a clear statement that when the problem is fixed, the board will reconvene.

 

The "problem" may be something in the troop's "by-laws" (eg., not wearing his complete uniform to the BoR), or something in the BSA advancement requirements that was not caught by the SM (eg., assuming that APL is OK as a position of responsibility). In the first case, the problem can be rectified the following week. In the latter example, the BoR might need to wait for six months or more before reconvening.

[OldGreyEagle 5]

Actually, according to the BSA publication Advancement Committee POlicies and Procedures, it says "the decision of all boards of review is arrived at through discussion and must be unanimous." SO, if you sit on the Board and say no, he can't pass, he doesn't pass. This isnt a majority rules kind of vote.

 

Rhetorical Question: When is enough enough? He passes second class, he is up for First, where is the line drawn, at First? Star? Life? Eagle? Where and when ? As commented, he and the troop, and possible the Distirct/Council are watching, when is enough enough?

[SemperParatus 1]

"It is evident that one of the boys has not actually done what he was required to do to get the requirement signed off..."

 

Just out of curiosity, which requirements did he not do and what was the evidence that proved he had not done them?

[vrooman 10]

To answer SemperParatus:

 

We wont know what he missed for his First Class until we have the BOR, I do know that he has not made a camp gadget or served as the patrols cook on any of the campouts, so there is already some question. As far as the Second Class, he never built a fire or cooked his meal for himself, but he received that rank. The other concern there, that supports this, is the fact that he has never received his Firen Chit. Shouldnt he have that before he can continue using fire for more requirements?

 

I always want the boys to do their best as it says in the oath. I realize that some boys are more talented than others and will have beautiful lashings while some may struggle but complete the task even though the lashings may not be the strongest. I never compare any scout to another, but this young man can do the work, he just chooses the easy way out.

 

Thanks for all the information,

 

Vrooman

 

[evmori 11]

OGE,

Enough is enough at the 1st BOR. Nip it in the bud!

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[vrooman 10]

I forgot to provide an example of evidence anyway, the young man has never been on an outing that I or one of the other ASMs, that I have discussed this issue with, have NOT been on. His old Patrol Leader(now since moved to another troop). Told me that one of the reasons for his leaving the troop is the special treatment of certain scouts and how the requirements were never met on the outings. He mentioned specific campouts and patrol activities in detail along with who did what.

 

Now, to get on with things as evmori mentions - I will ask the questions just after I discuss what Trustworthy means to the young man, and ask him how he feels about the requirements in question. I want him to know that if he says he did it and can site an example or the trip activity etc. I will support him. I do want to keep the trend from continuing.

 

Again,

 

Vrooman

(This message has been edited by vrooman)

[Lynda J 10]

It always astounds me when parents think they are helping their kids by makeing things easy for them.

No BOR is not a retest of his skills. But you can quiz him on things. Ask what the responsibility of the patrol cook is.

Have you expressed your concerns to the SM. What about his Scout Master Conference? It is really up to the SM to sign off. But it will catch up with him. Especially if he ever goes for an Eagle BOR.

 

As have an agreement in our troop. I don't sign off an any of Kevin's rank requirements and the SM and other ASMs don't sign of on their sons. It just makes it easier that way.

 

[OldGreyEagle 5]

It occured to me as I was reading this thread, all the comments are what do we do about the scout, what is to be done with the ASM who is creating the problem?