Beavah

Well it heartening to see that dah Beavah is coming around to the BSA way of thinking The Beavah's been describing the BSA way from the very beginning, FScouter. Sorry yeh haven't recognized the BSA program, but there's training and printed materials yeh can take to fix that . Acco40, I hear yeh on the tangles of dealing with da helicopter parent. Sometimes yeh do what yeh have to do to make it work with the personalities yeh get dealt. It's an interesting tradeoff, since if yeh hold the line on the earlier ranks and junior becomes successful, yeh save yourself even worse grief come Eagle time. Plus, it's a public service to teachers and coaches and band directors in the rest of the lad's life to help him cut the apron strings and ground da helicopter. Beavah

Yah, knots are often a poor example, because they're so easy, and for some troops they aren't that important, eh? But I think we should care about whether the lads learn skills, like first aid and cooking and buddy system and all that. Those are important things to learn. Education and learning are the prime purposes of scouting according to the Rules & Regulations. A First Class scout who might be leading a patrol has to really know those things in order to be safe without direct adult supervision. Dat's why a BoR is supposed to look at those things, eh? So let's try cooking... 1) A Scout Learns. In his patrol, he should get a lot of practice cooking and cleaning, eh? Breakfast, dinner, first as an assistant and then as a cook and then planning single meals. Then buying, then planning a whole weekend. By the time he's ready for the "test" for First Class cooking requirements, he's had practice planning and cooking meals for several weekends in different conditions and different times of year. He's really learned how to plan and buy meals on his own. 2) A Scout is Tested. His PL gives him the job of planning, buying, and serving has head chef for this month's Klondike. He does it all on his own, ASM Beaver checks out the menu for nutrition and it's solid, the food is safely stored, the cooking is excellent. The lad gets signed off. 3) A Scout is Reviewed. At the BOR several months later, the board asks the lad what he would plan for a spring car campin' trip. Because he really learned all this stuff, he immediately whips off some suggestions, explains about nutrition and how he would store the stuff. Even makes some suggestions about da best way to use the Dutch Oven in the rain... even though he hasn't been on an outing for three months because of hockey season. The Board is impressed, and moves on to asking him about his experiences and encouragin' him to find a POR to start workin' toward Star. 4) A Scout is Recognized. He gets his badge that night, and called out at da next BOR. That's da way it should be, eh? But sometimes, a lad falls through the cracks, so here's how it plays: 1) A Scout Learns. Billy has helped with cooking once or twice, but has missed some campouts. His PL assigns him to do food for da Klondike, but mom helps with the shopping. Even so, breakfast is just pop tarts. Still, nobody starves. 2) A Scout is Tested. Billy comes to ASM Beaver at the meeting a few weeks later askin' for a sign off on the FC cooking requirements. He tells ASM that he did da meals for the Klondike. ASM takes him at his word and signs off. 3) A Scout is Reviewed. The BOR asks da same question about planning a weekend's meals. The lad fumbles and stumbles. He doesn't offer a nutritious breakfast, he doesn't have any idea about shopping, he's not clear about food storage. BOR concludes that despite the sign off, he really hasn't learned. They ask him about his experiences, and he talks about how his patrol mates were mad at him for poptarts on da Klondike, and he wishes he would have done better. Because learning is da prime purpose of Scouting, and because they want the lad to be proficient so that his patrol will be safe on patrol outings with him as an up and coming leader, and because they want to see him be proud of his accomplishments, they congratulate him on what he's done so far and tell him that they want him to practice cooking and meal planning some more. They offer encouragement and support, and set up a time for a new BoR after a few months. 4) A Scout is Recognized. Billy works hard over a few months, and his cookin' improves markedly. He goes shopping with ASM Beaver, and becomes confident shopping on his own. He goes to da next BOR and knocks their socks off, and the Board awards him his badge. Billy learns what it really means to work hard and be successful, and carries that in to his POR work for Star. That's da BSA program. The BoR is not retesting, but the Board is asking questions about the learning of skills to make sure they have been learned, and doin' it in a way that encourages the boy. The board feels just like a regular, non-advancement BOR, which the boy would have experience with. Now, maybe, if da board is seein' a lot of lads who are weak in cooking, they come back at the SM and let him or her know that they're seeing a spot where the program needs some attention. Until then, it's all about the boy. Beavah

While that is not unusual, it is not appropriate to critize the Council or the individuals for their lack of availability at your convenince. The solution is for you or other adults from your large Troop to acquire the requisite training Nah, of course it's appropriate to criticize the council, Terry. If we council folks aren't providing the service that the units want or need, then we should be criticized, eh? And we should listen carefully to that feedback. Now you're right, of course, that we have regulated camp climbing activities to death, eh? And maybe da criticism will get us to rethink that. And you're right that shovin' people off on private outfitters reduces our liability exposure.... but it also reduces da quality of support we're providing for the units, perhaps their quality of experience with a guide service not familiar with kids/scouting, and certainly the level of loyalty and FOS donations we're able to generate from grateful units . Like TwoCubDad, I worry about da underutilization of our properties. If yeh compare our camps to another organization like YMCA, yeh find that the YMCA camps are almost always more highly utilized year-round, with staff available to run da sorts of things TwoCub is talking about. And as a result, there's more revenue, the camps are often better maintained, and there's a bigger pool of donors for capital campaigns to support da camp property. That's a lot to give up for pages of regulations and a put-it-on-the-units approach to council service. Beavah

Yah, interestin' question. I was tryin' to think up "beavah's rules"... Meaning how I actually decide. I think it's somethin' like... 1) wear the uniform if it's necessary for the role you're performing (i.e. To identify you to strangers or serving as a color guard or whatnot). 2) wear the uniform when it's a sign of scouting brotherhood and companionship. 3) when in Rome.... 4) don't wear the uniform when yeh do it to "make a statement" or when it's otherwise about yourself. So, for example, I don't wear the uniform to council exec board meetings. There, my role is as a representative of the community, so I wear civilian attire. To wear da uniform would only make me stand out as different from da other members (and when in Rome). When I visit units, I wear the uniform. If I know the unit well, I try to set my uniform up to match their standard. If they don't do neckers, I won't. If they're shirts-only, maybe I'll go that way in a more mild way. Da purpose is to show brotherhood, not to make myself stand out. Most adult leader/committee meetings are done in civvies in my experience. It's da rare unit where all of the MCs buy a uniform. So sometimes I'll visit in civvies. Camping, it just depends, eh? If I'm serving in a role at camp, I'll wear da uniform while I'm serving in that role, unless it would be silly (like at da upcoming Klondike...). Other times, it's all about brotherhood. Yeh can often find me in a unit T-shirt someone has given me Beavah

And I post still to wish yeh a Merry Christmas, and a blessed Feast of Stephen. Joyous Noel! B

Yah, FScouter, I see once again that your first and only post to da thread is solely to take a public pot shot at another forum member, rather than comment on scoutin' (or calling attention to what yeh felt was a personal error in private). At least you're consistent, eh? Still, as I sit here waitin' to pick up family members at the airport, I wish you and all of your family a very healthy and happy Christmas. People debate how to do scouting well because we're all passionate about it, and being passionate about doin' right by kids is a good thing. Enjoy the young ones in your life this week. We'll no doubt return to debatin' da various ways to use BOR at a later date! Beavah

Yah, SR540. I agree with yeh. With one caveat. The emphasis should be on the first step, eh? On the boy learning (and doing, and having fun). I think too often the way troops run they functionally put da emphasis on the second step - testing. So yeh get the lad who has only practiced for 10 minutes coming up to "test" based on his short-term memory, not on proficiency. That's the only way I can figure a boy having trouble with retaining a skill, and why I can't understand OGE . If a boy has really learned how to set up a tent, then he can go a whole year without setting up a tent and still do it just fine, eh? But if a program allowed the boy to just cram for a tent test and then signed off when he got through it, that's when yeh get problems with retention. Then yeh need the troop program to keep reinforcing it in order to build proficiency. That reinforcing and practice are a part of learning, eh? Which is why I think OGE has it backwards. They're part of the step before testing and review. Let's consider cooking. Without lookin' at any "requirements", how long would yeh say it would take to teach a boy to become reasonably proficient at planning, purchasing, and cooking a weekend's meals? How much practice? Quite a bit, eh? Practice cooking, practice planning a few meals and lookin' at nutrition, practice shopping in a grocery store and learning how to buy thrifty. Problem is, if yeh run an 8-person NSP and are doin' FCFY, each boy gets one shot at it... and his only shot is the "test", eh? That's da point where a lot of troops sign off. I don't care if the lad is any of our genius progeny, he can't possibly learn that set of skills with zero practice. Signing off like that (and then later discovering at a BOR that the boy can't even talk about planning and cooking a weekend's meals) is subtracting from the requirements. Even if the boy "passed the test" and got da signoff, he didn't learn. And the board should send him back to work harder so that his badge represents what he is able to do, not what he has done once. Because as a First Class scout who is operating in a youth-run, patrol-method program, the adults aren't goin' to be supervising him directly, and he needs to know. For comfort and for safety. And because an honorable scout would never wear a badge that didn't honestly represent his skills. Now, if it's happening a bunch, the committee should also sit with the SM and figure out why the boys aren't learning and encourage some program changes. But that's secondary, eh? The focus is on helpin' the boy grow. Because education is the chief function of the Scouting movement and the basis of the advancement program. Beavah (This message has been edited by Beavah)

Also, this is the 1st BOR this scout had gone through with this troop. He had transferred to our troop after a few years in another troop in our area. Ah, the lightbulb comes on! Nuthin' yeh can do about this, mikecummings157. If your troop is workin' fine for the rest of your boys, it's not worth your time. There's a very simple reality. A boy who transfers from a badge-mill program to one that is not a badge mill program at the upper (Star/Life/Eagle) ranks is guaranteed to have this happen. Same with a lad who transfers from an adult-led to a youth-led program. Even happens for a lad who transfers from a troop where some bullyin' goes on to one where bullyin' is treated as a capital offense. Lads who are S/L/E are pretty set in their ways and what they expect scouting to be, eh? That's why even within a troop it's hard to get the older fellows to change. When a troop is shifting back toward boy-led from adult-led, yeh often have to focus on the younger boys, and the older boys will resist the change. No different here. A lad who has learned scouting in a program where a BOR will rubber stamp him if he's breathing is goin' to feel his notion of scoutin' success has been betrayed when he comes across a BOR that cares enough about him and his growth to say "hey, you can do better." I've seen it over and over and over again. Transfers between troops for older boys are just hard. Yeh really have to take extra care to find a program that "fits" what they're familiar with, or it just doesn't work. So I wouldn't sweat it, beyond being more thoughtful and up-front about your program when talkin' to potential older scout transfers. Beavah (This message has been edited by Beavah)

Yah, so many different threads here... I think we're all talkin' past each other. Let's try an example. Sometimes I go paddlin' with patrols or troops, sometimes just with a few lads who want to work on the badge. We go out and have a good time, I introduce some stuff, coach 'em on a few things, and we do a lot of practice. Usually, learnin' the J-stroke is the hardest part, eh? Once they learn it tandem, yeh put 'em in a boat solo where they really have to use it. They practice some more. They improve. In the end, yeh can see 'em using the J-stroke regularly and confidently on their own. They've become proficient. Then it's time for a fun, crazy test - jump out of the boat, get back in the boat, paddle solo, swamp another boat, rescue both boats, .... The point is that the practice happens before the test and signoff, eh? At the point where they've been signed off, they know it well. Yeh could put 'em in a canoe after a long 8-month winter and sports seasons out of the water and they'd still do fine. A Scout Learns. Then a Scout is tested. A Boy Scout badge represents what a boy is able to do, it is not a reward for what he has done. That's what Kudu means by 300 feet for T-2-1, eh? At the point when yeh sign off on a lad's skill, you're confident he's learned well enough that he can do it on his own without direct adult supervision. As a First Class Scout, he has all the skills needed to be with his patrol on their own. Navigate with map and compass means that he really can navigate with map and compass, not that he did it once on the easiest route possible. What I hear OGE sayin' (an I might be hearin' him wrong) is that at the point of being signed off the boy has demonstrated the skill once, in that easy controlled environment. Then he should get additional experience with it by practicin' it with the troop on campouts and such, until eventually he becomes proficient. At the point when he passes the "test" on canoeing, he really can't be trusted to canoe on his own, or to remember everything next summer. Sometimes summer camp MB's are like this, eh? Just because not enough time is spent on practice. Yeh lecture, then yeh flail about for a few minutes with coaching, then yeh test. There are a couple dozen skills required for the badge, and camp has only 4 hours, so that's only 10 minutes to teach and practice each skill, which is nuts. In a troop, maybe a lad got signed off for bringin' the right gear once (mom helped), but yeh can't expect him to not to forget the right gear for this month's Polar Bear without an adult/parent/PL "reminding" him. In other words, he hasn't really learned yet; yeh can't trust him to be on his own, 300 feet away. He still needs more practice. That's subtracting from the requirements. A boy scout badge recognizes what a boy is able to do. It is not an award for what he has done. Now, in a good program, as clemlaw says, the lads get all kinds of practice with some things (like settin' up tents), so hopefully when their PL tests 'em they really are proficient. Other things, as Eagledad suggests, aren't really used regularly, eh? Some troops are in areas under long-term burn bans, and can't do fires. First Aid for shock is somethin' that isn't practiced on every campout (hopefully!). Not every troop does float trips regularly. So yeh can't rely on troop program developing proficiency in everything on its own, eh? That's why we have requirements for things, eh? Just because for some stuff the daily life of a particular troop wouldn't get 'em there without it. The requirements are meant to push proficiency and real learning before yeh test. It's not OK for a boy to "forget" how to recognize and treat basic hypothermia if his patrol is on his own 300 feet away from adult support on the Polar Bear Campout. That Second Class badge has to mean that he knows it, eh? Of course, in a strong program, the PLs and Instructors and adults make sure the lads get a lot of practice, become proficient, and then test 'em. At that point, yeh can trust the lads to be able to use those skills on demand. But not everything is perfect, eh? Sometimes a PL might get a little lax. Or maybe as moose suggests, he'll sign off for a boy who is a friend just because he likes him. Or maybe an enterprising young rascal figures out that ASM Jones is the "soft touch" and bamboozles ASM Jones into some signoffs because Mr. Jones feels bad that a COH is coming up and the boy isn't "done." That's what Review is for, eh? Now, no BOR is goin' to take my Canoeing MB kids back out on a lake to "re-test". But if they were to ask a lad how he would plan a canoe trip, or what da hazards on local waterways are, or what he felt was the most important thing he learned was, the boy would be able to go on at length, eh? Even a shy boy after just a slight nudge, because it's stuff he really knows. It's immediately apparent that the lad has learned, so the BOR goes on to other stuff like how he feels his scouting is coming and encouraging him to further achievement. That's how it should work most of the time. But a lad who got the signoff from his PL buddy or ASM Jones, that boy is goin' to start stumbling and bumbling and givin' "I dunno" answers. And the BOR then has to decide "Has this boy really shown that he can do this on his own without direct adult supervision? (i.e. at 300 feet). If not, that's an issue for both the program and the boy, eh? They've caught that the program has subtracted from the requirements: A badge represents what a boy is able to do, not what he has done. And they've caught that the boy isn't ready to take on the responsibilities of a First Class (or whatever) scout without puttin' himself or others at risk. So the Board does not approve the rank, because that wouldn't be fair to the boy. Usually, when they talk to him about how he feels, he also admits that he feels like he hasn't done his best. And a good board will encourage him to further achievement, givin' him clear direction and a timeline. Maybe, if they find the Bobwhite Patrol Leader or ASM Jones are consistently weak, they talk to the SM about that, too. That's the Scoutin' advancement method, eh? A boy learns. A boy is tested (and to pass, he demonstrates proficiency). A boy is reviewed. Now, in some good programs, what yeh see is that the SM conference takes on da quality control role that really belongs to a BOR, eh? I think that started happening a lot after boys were removed from servin' on BORs, because the committee members often aren't as good at judgin' skills or talking with youth. So the SMs started takin' over that "review" role. That can work OK. The troop runs the SMC as the last requirement for each rank, and the SM makes sure the boy has learned, and checks on how he feels, and encourages him to more achievement. In essence, the SM has taken over the board's role, so the BOR really does become a sort of meaningless rubber stamp or "interview practice with strangers" as moose puts it. They aren't really as involved, and they really don't know the lad well enough to assess how he feels or encourage him. Not the best, but it works OK. Beavah

[acutely stupid reading error made for very stupid response](This message has been edited by Beavah)

Once a scout learns a skill, the troops program should afford him so many opportunities to use that skill that there is no reason to doubt the skill is learned. I mostly agree, OGE, except that yeh have it backward. The troop program should afford him many opportunities to use the skill so that there's no doubt the skill is learned is the first step to advancement. Only after the lad has really learned the skill (not just done it once) should he be tested and signed off (Advancement step 2) Then, when he comes to a review (Advancement Step 3), since he's really got the skill down, it doesn't take more than a question or two to get the scout expounding to the board about how to run a safe trip afloat or how to handle first aid for shock. The lad feels confident, and the board with just a few questions about requirements is able to determine that he really learned the stuff. Da problem only comes when a boy gets signed off the first time he's done something without really learning, eh? Then when he hits a BOR he's not confident, and the board has to ask lots of questions to try to see if he learned anything at all (or just skip that step because it's too embarrassing and hard on the boys). That's where a good board realizes they have a problem to address with the troop program, eh? But they wouldn't ever recognize that if all they asked was how the boy felt. Beavah (This message has been edited by Beavah)

Yah, moosetracker, I think you're makin' my point, eh? Yep, there are those bits about not being an examination, and there are those bits about ensuring the scout has learned and achieved to an appropriate level. Then when yeh add in the other bits like "A Boy Scout Badge recognizes what a young man is able to do, it is not a reward for what he has done" and the Rules & Regulations bits like Education is the chief function of the Scouting movement and it shall be the basis of the advancement program. In Boy Scouting, recognition is gained through leadership in the troop, attending and participating in its activities, living the ideals of Scouting, and proficiency in activities related to outdoor life, useful skills, and career exploration. All advancement procedures shall be administered under conditions that harmonize with the aims and purposes of the Boy Scouts of America. yeh get the full picture. Those are the things that you left out in your selective quotes, eh? The point is that just grabbin' onto one quote or another isn't the point. Yeh have to read the whole thing, beginning with the Rules & Regulations. Then, even more important, yeh have to use the program to achieve the aims. The problem I see is da same one Eagledad sees. A few hovercraft parents have gone so hog-wild over da one paragraph about not retesting (and the half a sentence about not adding to requirements) that they've lost track of the mission. A BOR is first about making sure a boy has learned, because that is the basis of the advancement program in the Rules & Regulations. So to do a BOR well, and to respect the effort the boy has put in to learning, yeh have to ask substantive questions about what he is supposed to have learned. The lad spent 6 months or more of his life working hard to learn, eh? Shouldn't the BOR acknowledge that effort by lettin' him show his stuff? To let him know that that work was valuable? To have the lad show first aid by building a splint on the spot might be retesting, but to ask him how he would build a splint and evaluating his understanding is not. Otherwise, every time we asked a boy to recite the Oath or Law or explain it in his own words we would be illicitly "retesting" da Tenderfoot requirement, eh? But remember the Rules & Regs - our advancement procedures must harmonize with the aims. Since the Oath and Law help get us to the Aims, it's OK to "retest". By contrast, just askin' a lad how he feels about the program, or giving him credit because he did a task just once to get the signoff is subtracting from the requirements and expectations, and that's not supposed to happen. Honestly, in a strong scouting program, kids love to "show their stuff" at a BOR. It's a great builder of confidence to be an "expert" in front of a group of TC members, and it often breaks down the nervousness of the lad so that the rest of the board proceeds well. In my experience, where yeh get the most strident "you can only ask a boy how he feels" BORs is in units that know they are doin' a poor job in helpin' the lads really learn and grow. At the same time, as my fellow Beaver points out, the "examination" thing comes up sometimes too, eh? It is possible for units to go hog-wild in the other direction. What we want, and the reason why when yeh read the guidebooks yeh can find these seemingly contradictory statements, is balance. Value learning, make sure the lad has learned, but also figure out how he's doin' in the program and encourage further achievement. Subjecting a TF to a six-hour conference does not encourage further achievement. Nor does rubber-stampin' advancement without a few questions to show that the time he spent learning was worthwhile. To use the program properly, yeh have to find the balance in the middle. Beavah (This message has been edited by Beavah)

Yah, Abel, that's nothing new, eh? The supplemental accident (health) insurance coverage from Health Special Risk (HSR) has always been optional. National negotiates the contract but it's up to individual councils or units to choose to participate. In some councils, the council pays for it for everyone out of council operating funds / Friends of Scouting. In some councils, the council more or less makes everyone pay for it at recharter. In some councils, the council leaves it up to the unit, and just includes a form to fill out and send your check into HSR if your unit wants to participate. National started pushin' councils to have it in place for Camporees and other outdoor council events some years ago (it can be purchased by councils on a per-event basis as well as yearly). That was when some councils started requiring it of units just so they didn't have to deal with it in event fees. At least that's my memory of it. Lots of units opt out when it's made optional at the unit level, eh? For suburban units, there's decent odds that families have health coverage for the kids through work (or in some other way), so da supplemental coverage really isn't worth it in those cases. I mostly recommend units spend the couple bucks a person for it, myself. If your unit wants it, Abel, you should look for the HSR form in your recharter packet and it'll have instructions on how to purchase the coverage. REMEMBER: All this applies only to the low-limits (i.e. cheap-and-cheesy) supplemental accident insurance. The high-limits primary liability insurance is completely unrelated. That's automatically provided with your $20 unit recharter fee. Beavah(This message has been edited by Beavah)

I agree with 2 and 3 of what you say Beavah, But we originally were in a troop that used the BOR to make sure the scout had learned by retesting and failing.. I have had it stamped out of me that the BOR is NOT "To make sure the boy has learned".. Yah, in that case whoever did the stamping out was wrong, eh? From da ACP&P The review has three purposes: 1. To make sure the work has been learned and completed. 2. To see how good an experience the scout is having in his unit. 3. To encourage the scout to advance to the next rank Da three things I listed are the three purposes of a board of review. Yeh can even look at more of the text where it says things like "The board should attempt to determine if a good standard of performance has been met." All things in balance, eh? We also don't want BOR's retesting, having lads plan a dinner for them, having a board member fake a heart attack on the scout to see what he does and all that. But just because there's one paragraph on not retesting doesn't mean yeh should ignore all of the other paragraphs about how advancement is used to help boys grow. It's meant to be an intelligent balance. Just like OGE's individual sentences, eh? The reason why we're asking a boy how he feels about the troop program is not to evaluate the troop program. It's to figure out how to help the boy. Should he be encouraged to run for PL? Should he be encouraged to try a particular MB? Should he be helped to have a meeting with his PL about duty rosters? Should the troop look into additional accommodation for his learning disability? All about the boy. Yah, sure, along the way yeh get a wee bit of information about the troop, and a good idea or two. But it's far from the best way of evaluatin' the unit program. For that yeh want the new Journey to Excellence stuff . Yah, sure, and yeh can get some notion, but only if yeh do regular non-advancement boards of review for everyone. Evaluatin' the program based just on the kids advancing makes no sense at all. Beavah

Nah, BS-87, I think it's because there are active efforts to legalize MJ, but not X. Some of us in states with medical MJ laws have watched as "clinics" spring up like mushrooms around college campuses and high schools. Vol_scouter as a physician is an expert. Da rest of us are just ordinary citizens, with different views and perspectives. Some of us have experience in related areas like law enforcement or public policy or youth addiction treatment or whatnot. But for da most part we're just citizens, eh? Hopefully as scouters we're informed citizens, but not always. I reckon that's one of da reasons we come here to discuss and argue, so that we can see different perspectives and be told when we're wrong! Beavah

Now there's TwoCubDad, gettin' us into the spiked egg nog a wee bit early... Yah, of course the scouts are comfortable treatin' it like school, eh? Most Boy Scouts know how to manipulate school. Just like we always say when it comes to plannin' outings, boys are a conservative bunch. They tend to do only the things they're familiar with that they know they can succeed at. New stuff is scary. I reckon that's why it's so important for MBC's do do a real job of it, eh? Because we want boys to become confident at engaging with a new discipline and really learning. To get good at engaging with new people and really doing stuff. It's not for us to just reinforce their old skill of "getting by" on a school worksheet or wheedling adults for what they want. OK, off to the egg nog! Beavah (This message has been edited by Beavah)

The purpose is to find out what they like and dislike about the program and to find ways to improve the program... It is a checks and balance, you need people to come in from time to time to run an audit on your buisness and figure out how to improve it. The BOR is sort of like an audit.. Moosetracker made the above quote in the parent thread, and I figured I spin it off just so the purposes of a board of review discussion don't distract too much from that thread. It's interestin' to me how I hear what moose is sayin' from adults a lot more than I used to. This is sort of a newfangled notion, eh? It's not really listed as any of the BSA's purposes for a Board of Review. Those are: 1) To make sure the boy has learned. 2) To find out how he's doing in the troop. and 3) To encourage him to future achievement. Nuthin' about evaluating the troop program. This notion all seems to come out of one sentence in one of da ACP&P versions. Quite honestly, a Board of Review seems to me to be both an odd and a poor way to evaluate the troop program. To evaluate the troop program, we have the new Quality Unit bronze/silver/gold stuff, we've got rafts of material from da commissioner program, and most of all yeh have the committee's observed experience of meetings and outings. Committees out there, yeh are watching aren't yeh? The BOR in scouting is a part of Advancement Method and is traditionally all about the boy, or at least I think it's supposed to be. It's not about da program. That's why the BSA's 3 purposes for a board are all about the boy. Has he learned & grown? Is he doing well or are there things he/we should be doing differently? How can we help him with further growth? Boy, boy, boy. It's all about the boy. For an "outside audit" on unit program, yeh have unit commissioners. That's not what a BOR is for. Leastways, not for the last 100 years in Scouting, IMNSHO. What do da rest of you think? Beavah (This message has been edited by Beavah)

Yah, OK, you're all probably goin' to laugh at me. I had never realized what da Meritbadge.com worksheets were (not MB.com, BTW, which gets yeh to Mercedes Benz ). I always just assumed that they were just a printout of the requirements like yeh can get off of scouting.org or the USSSP site. So now I'm lookin' at one of these things, and by gum, it actually is a school worksheet. Makes me want to crumple a bunch of 'em into a round disk and get my shotgun. Pull! BLAM!!! Da first thing I notice is that for the requirement "SHOW first aid for the following" each injury/illness has two lines under it to fill in. Someone's goin' to have to explain to me how a lad shows first aid for hypothermia by writing two lines. Then there's a line and a quarter after the requirement to pass the swim test. Hmmm.... Then, as several folks have mentioned, for "discuss" requirements we now have writing lines. Blech. Like clemlaw says, the whole point of merit badge counseling is for an adult expert and enthusiast to share his/her enthusiasm and knowledge with a boy or two. To have a real dentist spend time talking and working with a boy interested in dentistry. To have an expert paddler who builds his own canoes go out paddling with some boys in different canoes, having fun, learning, sharing the joy of da discipline. Not sittin' on a couch being made to write a paragraph on how the length and shape of a canoe affect its performance. Tryin' it, feelin' it, talking about it, playin' with canoe trim and a crosswind. There's all the difference in the world between a real expert sharing his/her time with a boy and some tom-fool school marm making him sit and do worksheets then pass a test. Real MB counselors inspire lads to a real career or lifelong hobby, eh? That's how powerful a good MB counseling relationship can be - it can change a boy's life. Don't settle for a worksheet off some random website when yeh can do so much better. Beavah

I agree, scouts can control every step of the troop program "Except" the BOR. It makes no sense to me that we are tasked to develop character, but then show our distrust of that character by not allowing scouts review their peers for rank. The quote above was from Eagledad in the parent thread. Seems like a good thing to discuss. Particularly seeing as how in many troops Advancement Method becomes a major focus, eh? So if da major focus is adult-led and run (on a troop rather than patrol basis), then isn't it undermining everything we're tryin' to do with the other Methods? Beavah

Yah, hmmmm... Too hard to trouble-shoot these things by remote, mikecummings157. From what yeh describe, you and your other volunteers did the job that you were supposed to. Kids always have the option not to live up to our expectations and to go look for a unit or activity that's "easier". Generally speakin', when that happens, one of two things is goin' on. Either the boy is just butting heads and needs to be told "no" and then go find a new place to start over (and do the hard work of building new friendships based on what he "learned"), or the troop was too focused on advancement. So if you're lookin' for something to reflect on with your committee, I'd ask yourself that question, eh? Is your troop too focused on advancement? Most of the time when boys leave because of an advancement thing, that's the reason, eh? There's no other reason for them to stay around. No deep sense of Patrol Spirit. No real commitment to leading younger boys. Not enough fun and outdoor adventure. No special relationships with older scout and adult friends. No sense of personal accomplishment outside of getting badges. If yeh think this lad was a "bad loss" - a boy who shouldn't have gone rather than one for whom going was the lesson he needed to learn - then yeh need to look carefully at how well you're usin' the other 7 Methods in your program. Advancement shouldn't be the reason a boy stays or goes, eh? It's just a small feature of the program. Don't make the mistake of thinkin' it was the BOR that caused it. It's never da real reason. Beavah (This message has been edited by Beavah)

Yah, shortridge, whatever doesn't kill us make us characters. Or somethin' like that...

Yah, Adv77C, welcome again! There's no "rule", but doin' a scoutmaster conference on the same day as a BOR would be relatively unusual for most troops. Most frequently, troops use a SMC as a "last" requirement, and then the boy or the SM contacts the committee member responsible to set up the BOR. That takes a week or two, because you're askin' for other adults to contribute their time like a courteous scout, not demanding it like a spoiled lad. Some troops might schedule monthly BOR times just to control the demand on adults, and in that case I'd say it's also unusual for a boy to do a SMC on the same day, but it can happen. Maybe the lad meets the SM for ice cream after dinner and before the meeting where the BOR is held. Most Scoutmasters, though, are like acco40, eh? When they're at a meeting, they're there for all the boys, especially the youth leader. It's unfair to expect 'em to devote personal time to any one boy for a SMC unless that's part of the normal meeting routine. I think da most common place I've seen SMC/BOR on the same day is at camp or on campouts, eh? There it seems more natural, if yeh have the adults to put it together. Any way yeh slice it, though, it's not an issue to be arguin' with the SM over. Beavah

Yah, at that level, JoeBob, it's very clearly the government's money, eh? A dollar bill is a federal reserve bank note. The minting of money is a government thing, a function of government to promote commerce. Render unto Washington what is Washington's eh?

Why? Because at 9, all it takes is about 10 seconds for a van to pull up, a full size adult to jump out, grab him, and toss him in then follow and drive off. Ten seconds! Yah, and if yeh really want to be scared, a meteor will kill him dead in even less than 10 seconds! And it's about as likely. Seriously, yeh would think that there were drive-by van-snatchings goin' on in all of our neighborhoods daily by the way this particular boogeyman comes up. It's even worse than da fear of lawyers in Scouting. Abduction by strangers is extremely rare, especially when you're talkin' boys who are out of diapers. I think more people get seriously injured or killed by revolving doors each year, eh? So be sure not to let your 9-year-old near those deadly things. Beavah (who waited on the street corner for the bus to kindergarten)

The inmates in the jail where I work have all the time in the world to find loop holes in the rules and polices that are in place. Or push it so that they are so close to crossing the line, that even without doing so, it becomes obvious what their intent is. While I'm willing to admit that I might be wrong. I can't help but feel that is the intent of this thread. Yah, hmmm... We all come at things from our own background and perspectives, eh? I confess da notion of "prison guard" is not a perspective I'd choose to compare with work as a forum moderator. I think that's likely to lead to the wrong choices for this environment. The intent of the thread is to critique the addition of an unnecessary (and somewhat silly) rule, and its application. That's different than "disparaging", "bashing" and all da rest. In the thread that generated this whole dust-up, there were already 6 posts on point, and the thread was goin' where it was supposed to, eh? There was no need for moderator intervention by any reading of da Oath or Law. That's worthy of criticism. Yah, the title pokes fun at the new unwritten rule, because humor is one form of critique (like da threads on Brent crude and Clemency & Law and the one about Oak Trees that is no doubt coming ). Da humor shows the rule to be silly. The rest of the thread makes various arguments for and against, as it should. I'm sorry that critique is viewed as "bashing" "disparaging", etc. It's not, it's critique. Criticizing an official action or a point of view is just criticizing. It's directed at the choice not at the person. I confess, however, that I do feel that a moderator who can't accept debate or criticism should probably turn in his keyboard. Nuthin' personal, it's just the wrong job for the person at this point in their life. Feedback, discussion, criticism, debate, they're all part of da ordinary life of a community. They work just fine for minor corrections, leastways until yeh have some goof who can't take feedback without puffin' out his chest and declaring that he is Master before God, eh? Only then do yeh have to think about makin' a change. This issue doesn't even come close. I reckon I am a bit disappointed by the "because I say so" responses from da moderators, and the more personal nastiness I got from one moderator by PM. I'd pull a SM aside who took that tack with kids, and there's really no place for it in an adult community of colleagues. For da rest, it's a debate about the propriety of closing a thread that was just fine based on an unwritten rule. I think da forum needs moderators with a light, respectful touch. And ones that can accept criticism thoughtfully, without a knee-jerk negative response. I think for the most part we do have decent fellows, when they stop to think about things. Beavah