BOR Questions...a little long

[anarchist]

dan, dan, dan...

I never said I was an expert...(quoting BW here-don't put words in my mouth!)...just that I have had my share of first aid training...and I was unwilling to hypothetically "suspend my adult leader status 'cause I had a bunch of answers to FScouters ABCD quiz...and I bet you didn't try to construct the 5X5 matrix...or really try to ponder my posts...I am afraid it seems you, like others simply grab a bone and want to repeat "off with their heads! Off with their heads...!" How constructive is that?

 

Your advice to the scout/scout dad in the second paragraph was much better and right on...however I am not sure about your dismissal of the Board...I have seen a troop turn around...it wasn't easy but I have seen it work in real life...with the troop my sons went through. I have seen both the "lets bang heads" and the "lets work this out method" and I know the "bang heads method" is more wrong and needlessly hurtful. Working within is harder, longer and sometime frustrating, but for the long haul it is better for scouting...

 

And FScouter (again credit for saying "If"... as in "If failure to know the 'abcd' resulted in failure of the review..."(good job! maybe there is hope!)

 

on the ABCD- joeleeper wrote, " My son was told it is important to know but that it is not in his Scout Book" no mention. anywhere in the post of that causing failing the board...just a comment made by a member...FScouter - you have never shared a thought with a boy? something you felt would be good for him to know... that wasn't in the book?

 

some points of the original post:

1.)the boy was very upset and HE said he failed the BoR.

 

 

2.) according to what I read the post said; "the Board advised my son that some boys were not ready to advance yet"

 

...now a question, did the BoR say fail???doesn't look that way to me

 

3.)father posts, "then he was quized on first aid and CPR specifically..."

 

now a comment...seems like a good place for a board member to introduce the "ABCD (and 's')", to help said boy remember his CPR tasks, after all thats what the ABCDs tool is all about...helping one remember the steps!

 

4). father posts, "isn't the board...required to give specific items to improve on and set a specific date for another attempt?

...comment- two very good questions...but remembering we are dealing with a very upset (his words) boy here...perhaps he was told and simply did not process, nor retain the information due to his "disappointed" state of mind...

 

and as to the setting a date for a second BoR...for our troop, in our church...we only have the scout room on a repeating open schedule...all other facilities we must contact the church secretary and Pastor to schedule use...and some troops have additional 'manpower' (people-power?) problems with 'staffing' BoRs, so again setting a date before checking is problematic.

 

And once more into the breach..."Mr. anarchist" (thanks Mr. FScouter) knows we get less than perfect knowledge of situations in these posts...thats why "he" cautions against the "Off with their heads!" wholesale condemnations...that some here serve up like mashed potatoes! ;>)

 

good night and good luck!

Anarchist

[bbng]

If a boy has failed to meet the advancement requirements, then the board is obligated to withhold the rank. But they need to do it properly and in a positive manner such that the boy knows exactly where he went wrong, agrees with the decision, and knows what he needs to do to fix it.

 

Well said, FScouter.

 

The idea that even if the BOR is wrong, the Scout should simply be prepared to be retested is somewhat troubling to me, though with all the threads that indicate this happens (testing at BORs) I can see why that would make sense. I guess I just hope that we as adult leaders would be willing to do better than that and instead encourage one another to perform BORs in the correct way. Our troop seems to learn of Scout complaints about BORs through the PLC, and that is passed on the committee, where the committee takes time to review the purpose and together to come up with better ways of making the Scout comfortable (they are so nervous) and of asking better questions without testing. It has been agreed that this can be hard to do, since most are inclined to simply review the book, but easier isn't acceptable--doing what's right by the Scout is the purpose and that does need to be covered every once in awhile.

[dan]

anarchist anarchist anarchist anarchist anarchist anarchist

You said

so, no I won't have to give up my position...I earned it...with CPR, Wilderness First Aid, Defibrillation training...etc...

okay you did not say you where an expert you must have meant something us? But I do not know what you meant? Your good but not very?

Where did I ever say off with someone head? whose putting words in someones mouth?

My guess if you think a troop turned around it was more to the way you thought is should run and not the BSA.

 

How constructive is it not to answer a question?

[joeleeper]

Well, an update...

In asking the SM and one of the Board members, it appears that in being asked about the know, he could not get it tied around his waist.

And they continued to ask him to try, them they moved on to CPR, asking him what the A,B,C,D's were, but stating that they are not in his Scout Handbook.

He knew Airway, Breathing, Circulation, but had no clue on D.

They continued to ask him until he said he gave up because he had no idea what the D stood for. The board felt this is VERY IMPORTANT info and he should know it.

He was then asked to orient a local map with the Scout hut, etc. At this point he was not in the best of states.

The CC when I talked to her (she was a board member) said he WAS told what he needed to do, but when explained that he was so upset he didn't remember half of it she couldn't understand, because they TOLD him in the BOR...

oh well, the SM is supposed to talk the Board Chair to see what is what.

 

Joe Leeper

joe-leeper@comcast.net

[evmori]

This was a BOR not a congressional inquest! The board was way out of line. Another board with different people who know what they are doing should be convened for this Scout. He got a raw deal!

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[bbng]

Ok, Joe, now I'm mad. With you hearing these things confirmed by adults involved, and with what I read basically as a "shrug" by the CC, I'm wondering how exactly this BOR has this Scout's interests in mind. Is the letter forthcoming, and was the appeals process explained to your son? Of course he wasn't in the best of minds; he was disappointed--any Scout would be. Worse, he was being asked to explain things that he was told aren't in the Scout Handbook.

 

This board failed big time IMO by (1) testing the Scout, (2) testing the Scout on items admittedly not in the Scout Handbook, (3) apparently pushing him in more areas of testing when he wasn't getting the first areas rigth (I can see where frustration would be building up inside the Scout at this time), and (4) putting all the responsibility on the Scout. Right from the start they failed him, and they continue to do so. They need to make this right by this Scout, and they need to get at least a glimpse of what the BOR is all about. I'm on troop committee, and I don't hesitate to bring up the BOR issues, even if it might ruffle feathers. Thankfully, this particular troop is open to improvement when it's needed, so we don't run into long-term issues. The key here is this: each SM, asst SM, and committee member is committed to doing what is right by the Scout, and that means evaluating how that is going. Your troop, from what you share on this so far, is not doing that, and I find that disappointing. What's the SM's take on this?