Rank Advancement Deferred

[Dozy]

All Star Rank requirements were met. Advancement deferred 3 months by BOR. Reasons cited:

1) Work on Merit Badges individually

 

2) Work on leadership and communication

 

3) Not enough initiative No additional information given to Scout. Any opinions?

(BOR members are not active Adult Leaders.)

As an SM, how would you feel the denial of Rank Advancment to a Scout, who, in your opinion, is a GO all the way?

I started this in another thread, but for different reasons. I'd just like to know how you SM's feel about being over-ridden by your Committee? OR, does this not happen to you?

AND I'd like to discuss this either on this issue, or any other issue, to this end... you, the SM being circumvented by your Troop Committee -- being that the SM basically sets the quality control standards for the troop, spends the most time with the scout or scouts, and the TC is supposed to support the SM and may or may not necessarily have ever spent time as Adult Leaders.

Thanks,

Dozy

(a lowly committee member)

[Lisabob]

Dozy I don't understand this. Troop Committee members ARE adult leaders. If they're not registered as adult leaders, I'm sorry, but they're not committee members.

 

 

Lisa'bob

[Dozy]

What I mean is that these BOR people, though Adult Leaders and Committee Members are not active participants in the Scout programs. They do not come to events, outings, meetings... they are not drivers or second Adult Leaders where 2-deep leadership is required. They volunteer for nothing, but show up for BOR's and Committee meetings and have their votes, but are not there to help carry out any suggestions they make... hence, they are not active at the support level or at the Troop level.

 

In our Troop, traditionall the SM and ASM do everything, I sub as an Adult Leader when required, which is often because due to the health of our ASM (hip problems), I'm available... and then, out of the 9 warm bodies that are left, no one wants to help be 2nd Adult leader.

 

We were told time and again, and of course, this is the guideline... no 2nd adult, no nothing. So here I come to save the day... again, and again, and again, and again.

 

So hence, these Scouts are being judged by people who do not actively participate as Adult Leaders in their own program.

[scottteng]

"1) Work on Merit Badges individually"

 

This makes obvious the lack of training here a MBC is not permitted to meet with an individual. The candidate must have a buddy with him to meet with MBC. I suppose that he could have a buddy that does not want that merit badge just come along, but why not find someone who is interested in doing the same thing. Most merit badges have at least some group effort requirements it is hard to "discuss" a subject by yourself.

[evmori]

If all the requirements were signed off & the Scout actually did them, he must advance. The BOR has no control over merit badges. If the Scout has blue cards for those MB's that are complete & signed by a valid MB counselor, then they are completed.

 

If I was this Scout I would appeal. He will win. The other reasons the BOR stated are poor.

 

Have these committee members ever been trained? Do they have a clue?

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

Happy Birthday USA(This message has been edited by evmori)

[Eamonn]

It seems from what you have posted that the problems in the unit are a lot bigger than just BOR's and advancement issues.

A well run Troop is made up of different groups who while they have different responsibilities and perform different duties are in fact one big team.

When we start seeing it as a "Us and Them" is when things start going off course.

I'm 100% for the training's offered by the BSA. We encourage everyone to get trained, we don't use the fact that they are not trained or it has been a long time since they were trained to score points or "Rub their nose in it!" I see this as not only being childish, but not being kind which goes against the Scout Law.

The adults in a Troop should all have assigned roles and perform the duties that are needed.

This of course means that they need to have a good grasp and understanding of what their role is and what is expected of them.

I'm a very firm believer in holding people accountable for doing what they are supposed to be doing and have done.

If for example the Troop equipment is scattered to the four winds, because the Troop Quartermaster has been to busy working on fund raising. It would seem clear that something isn't working and this needs to be looked at and corrected.

One sad thing about us (All of us -Me included!) in Scouting is that we at times take on more and more duties, which result in us not doing the role we were assigned as well as we maybe could.

When things don't go as they should. We need to go about fixing or correcting them as quickly and as amicable as possible.

Leaving conflicts hanging means that they will fester and grow.

The place for the fixing is at the monthly Troop Committee meeting.

Before the meeting everyone needs to understand that we are moving toward a positive future and that dwelling in a negative past will do no good what-so ever and will in fact only act to make things worse. Sure we all learn from things that don't or didn't go well, but we move toward doing things better or right.

It would seem from what you posted that the people who serve on the BOR are in need of some help and enlightenment.

Depending on how strong the District Committee is in your District? You might want to suggest to the CC or maybe the COR that extending an invitation to either the District Training team or the District Advancement committee to attend a committee meeting might be a good idea?

If the District team isn't that strong you might want to find the right time and place to talk with the Troop Advancement Chair or the CC about going over:

http://www.scouting.org/boyscouts/supplemental/18-625/index.html

Maybe if you are not to close to the problem at hand you might want to volunteer to present the training?

My take on the 3 points you listed really is of little use.

I don't know the Scout and I wasn't there. However:

1) Work on Merit Badges individually:

I disagree with scottteng.

Sure we never want to end up with a one one situation for YP. But the entire MB program is about individual Scouts pursuing and following areas that interest them. While some MB's can be worked on as a group many are by design individual interests. I don't see a group of Scouts working on dentistry!! The discuss requirement is with the MBC in order to demonstrate that the Scout has an understanding of the subject.

 

2) Work on leadership and communication:

I wasn't at the BOR. I don't know the Lad or what positions he has held in the Troop or how well he carried out his duties.

Did the SM try his best to prepare the Lad for the BOR?

I've sat on Eagle Rank BOR's where Scouts have come in looking like they just returned from a punk rock concert, slumped in a chair and spent the entire time talking to heir shoes.

 

3) Not enough initiative No additional information given to Scout:

This one gets me!!

How can a Lad correct something when he doesn't know where the fault is?

 

You all ask:

As an SM, how would you feel the denial of Rank Advancement to a Scout, who, in your opinion, is a GO all the way?

OK, I'd be mad as wet hen.

But they are doing their job.

I would expect an explanation and would hope that we might be able to discuss it in great detail at the next committee meeting. Maybe I'd try and sneak in the training that I listed above.

Eamonn.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Beavah]

I'd just like to know how you SM's feel about being over-ridden by your Committee? OR, does this not happen to you?

 

Most units, boys pass BOR's most of da time.

 

Most units, most of the time, if a boy doesn't advance, it's because the SM gave a wink and a nudge to the BOR that this boy needed a "no" in order to force him to work harder, because the SM wasn't gettin' through to the boy on his own.

 

In all good units, at some point a BOR comes back at the SM, either by not advancin' a boy, or by advancin' the boy but discussin' perceived deficiencies with the SM. Not frequently, but enough to fulfill the committee's role in oversight and program quality. Otherwise everything slowly degenerates into advancement mills, eh?

 

As a commish, I once sat in on a 2nd class BOR where it was discovered that the boy really didn't understand 2nd class 1st aid. The boy admitted it, and after talkin with the SM, the committee realized they needed to get their adult leaders more first aid trainin', because the adult leaders didn't know enough to teach it well. Committee paid for the boy, his PL, SM, and ASM to do a first aid class together (and later paid for instructor training for da ASM). Boy passed 2nd class with flyin' colors and a lot more confidence two months later. Boy's friends came to him to help learn/study 1st Aid for their 2nd Class requirements, and worked harder on really learnin'. Troop became a lot stronger.

 

Dat's the way committee oversight and a negative BOR decision are supposed to work, eh?

 

So in da case you mention, Dozy, I think the SM should fume and stomp a bit (quietly, at home), get over it, and then make sure he's clear on the committee's expectations. They're right, testin' for MB's should be individual at least, and if durin' the course of the BOR the boy really had difficulty communicatin', or did not show that he had really served as a leader in a POR, that's a worthwhile thing to address. Then the SM should get with the boy, apologize for not catchin' the issue himself, and then work with the boy to achieve a flat-out, knock-their-socks off success in a month or two.

 

That'd be a great lesson in citizenship and character for all da boys, eh? And the communication/interview skills the boy learns in the process will be a gift to him for the rest of his life.

 

[Dozy]

I'm a very firm believer in holding people accountable for doing what they are supposed to be doing and have done.

But how do you do these things gently, by suggestion, when you suggest and prompt, and the immovable wall won't budge? and in a time frame that doesn't involve wasted months?

Our District set-up a special Life to Eagle training class "just for us". Emailed and snail mailed invitations and encouraged out Committee members to attend. Guess who attended. Me and the SM, and about 50 other people from other troops.

In a Council's guidelines, I read that, "if an error is to be made, err on the side of the boy". Do your best not to have a personal opinion about the scout, and if you have a personal dislike for the boy, do not sit on his BOR, etc.

I'm sure that all parents and good CM's would like their SM to have the same objectivity. 

[Dozy]

"I would expect an explanation and would hope that we might be able to discuss it in great detail at the next committee meeting. Maybe I'd try and sneak in the training that I listed above".

The CM refused.  Sneaking in training was tried and didn't work. 

Hope, there's a lot of hope, always hope... after a year of situations like these, there's isn't so much hope anymore.  Quality control is good, of course, when it's properly done, but not when there are two different agendas and a boy gets caught in the middle.

Incidentally, my son advanced to Star... so in case anyone is wondering if this is a personal involvement with my son, it isn't.  If my son makes Eagle, it will be on his own merit and initiative.  I have never helped him with his MB's, only driven him to the MBC's.  He asks advice, I give it open ended so that he can solve the problem on his own rather than me give the solution.  If he makes Eagle, I want him to be top notch.  If he doesn't make Eagle, I won't be disappointed.  It has to be what HE wants, not what I want.  I'll be his supporter, but not his carrier.

[John-in-KC]

I think most of us would agree this seems to be a Troop in need of some helpful assistance:

 

- When was the last time the District Commissioner, ADC, and (most importantly of all) Unit Commissioner visited the Troop? It feels like there are "gut-check" level issues with delivery of the Scouting program here.

 

- When was the last time the District Executive paid his annual call on the IH and COR? They have responsibilities to the youth of the program by seeking out volunteers for the program and ensuring they are trained!

 

If there is one thing I've learned about the adult side of Scouting, it's that program delivery to the youth works really well when all the moving parts (Chartered Partner, professional staff, commissioner staff, committee, and program officers) are trained and know how the parts link together!!!

 

Lisa, Beavah, and Eamonn have all given good advice in both this thread and int he Conflict of interest thread...

 

BTW, if the BOR denies review, there is the option of the Scout (and his family) filing a complaint with the District Advancement Committee...

 

Now, I will admit I have adjourned BORs for a week. As a CC, when I did this, there were specific reasons and instructions to the Scout . To my memory, the only BOR I've adjourned for longer than a week was due to a coming holiday or my knowing I would not have enough adults for a quourum.

 

There's an unwritten rule of advancement, told me by my District Advancement Chairman: Surprises in advancements are a BAD THING.

 

To the last question: If the Scoutmaster and the Committee Chair are not on the same wavelength regarding advancements, it's time to bring in the Unit Commissioner (I'd say COR first, then UC, but you've indicated you have a less than engaged COR--SM and CC are accoutable to COR).

 

[Dozy]

- When was the last time the District Commissioner, ADC, and (most importantly of all) Unit Commissioner visited the Troop? It feels like there are "gut-check" level issues with delivery of the Scouting program here.

 

- When was the last time the District Executive paid his annual call on the IH and COR? They have responsibilities to the youth of the program by seeking out volunteers for the program and ensuring they are trained!

 

.... we have no current District Commissioner, the post is vacant. We have a former DC on our committee, and he's part of the problem--likes to throw is weight around.

 

.... We do not have a Unit Commissioner

 

.... We are having a meeting with the District Executive in August to hopefully solve our training issues. We'd like him to say, "get trained or get out".

 

.... ADC? I can't place the initials.

 

BTW, if the BOR denies review, there is the option of the Scout (and his family) filing a complaint with the District Advancement Committee...

 

.... it's been done, June 23.

 

There's an unwritten rule of advancement, told me by my District Advancement Chairman: Surprises in advancements are a BAD THING.

 

.... agreed -- but that's been the rule not the exception here.

 

To the last question: If the Scoutmaster and the Committee Chair are not on the same wavelength regarding advancements, it's time to bring in the Unit Commissioner (I'd say COR first, then UC, but you've indicated you have a less than engaged COR--SM and CC are accoutable to COR).

 

.... yep, not enough hire ups to help us deal with this.

 

May I add this. I've had years of experience being a volunteer... I've sat on many committees, I've chaird a few,(I'm on 2 others currently, co-chair of 1) but none involving kids, or are as intricately structured as a BSA committee that can have a direct postive and negative impact on a human being, a boy.

 

I have never ever encountered such volatile, hostile, or rude people on church or secular committees.. I think it's the nature of the program that creates the monster. There in it for THEIR son, not yours. Or worse, for their own self-importance.

 

No, I have not been on a sports committee. Can I assume that it's not as pleasant either? because of the nature of the beast?

 

Anyway, this is a volunteer organization and there is only so much you can say to a volunteer. Volunteers must be treated kindly and with respect, otherwise, you lose them. (We've lost two in one day due to how the CC treated a mother and a daughter -- I don't need this! is what I got, plus an apology to me for not being able to stick it out.)

 

When certain volunteers get to be in charge, I don't know, it's not all of them, but there are some that have a chemical meltdown in their brain and they become Grand PooPah's and beigin treating other volunteers horribly. Why would anyone stick around?

 

How does one politely tell a CC or a CM that they are being obtuse? or unreasonable? or rude? let's add a kind incompetent? It's practice in standard Roberts Rules, but only if there's a good CC, that the volunteer is used around in various areas until his/her niche is found. The person is a warmm body and needed, and they want to be needed and used. Use them properly and with respect and you can also have a great friend. Abuse them and they're history AND a big hole is created.

 

Roberts Rules of Order is not used at our CM's.

 

We've tried gentle prodding. We've tried to elevate our concerns, always dancing around the subject, not being direct. I'm a very direct person, but we had a 60th Anniversary Banquet to plan quickly (an idea first proposed a year earlier by the committee dragged and dragged and finally the CC jumped on it because suddenly someone was dying and we had to honor him... so our 60th Anniv was celebrated in year 61) and it took a quite a lot of time away from Troop planning (no Blue and Gold ever went through so much aggravation or even a party planner!). No one wanted that boat to be rocked until the Banquet was over... and indeed it was an amazing success, but again, only a few people did the work. We ended on a high note, but quickly, morale has tumbled (especially after the CC took the credit -- for doing absolutely nothing).

 

Seriously, it took a year just to beg for regularly scheduled BOR's. Frankly, how does a boy attend scouts regularly and not become Tenderfoot after 2 years? Is it the boys fault? the SM's? or the Committees? I'm not ready to blame it on the boy.

 

I have a few weeks to plan and outline a strategy. First I need to plan the desired outcome and choose an alternate outcome and then handle the course of action accordingly. There is no one in any corner pocket. We're not attending the meeting as "US vs. THEM". Everyone will be defending themself and I guess, their vision. It will be up to the District Executive to see which vision belongs to the BSA and which vision is trash, and we'll take it from there. So if I'm wrong, I will submit to the DE.

 

BUT, the DE is well aware that our Committee has been having problems, and fully aware that there's a lack of training and this has been a problem for years. A meeting was supposed to be held 3 weeks ago but the CC changed the date twice already. We assume it's to try to find a new SM. However, since it took nearly 3 years to find this one, I don't think that one will pop out of thin air as quickly.

 

I am proposing a reasonable set of committee by-laws (we don't have by-laws), plus what the SM wants: a Parents Handbook. AND I will be ready with that material in hand.

 

Any suggestions on what else I can propose?(This message has been edited by Dozy)

[John-in-KC]

ADC is Assistant District Commissioner.

 

If there is no District Commissioner, the next step up is to contact the Council Commissioner. He can bring resources from across the Council to bear.

 

District Executives (professional staff) have significant responsibilities, but individual unit health is not one of them. That is the province and responsibility of the Commissioner's Service, working with the Chartered Partner (IH and COR).

 

DE's big three items (just had this conversation with one of our DEs at Bear Camp Sunday night are:

- Youth Membership

- Adult volunteers, especially above the unit level.

- Fund raising

- Youth Protection (in most jurisdictions, this is a statutory obligation).

 

 

[Jeffrey H]

I cannot make a judgment about this BOR, but I offer this general comment.

 

If the Scout made a poor presentation of himself before the BOR, then his leadership and maturity will come into question. Im not an SM or ASM, but as an assistant cubmaster I speak with boy scouts often and Ive noticed some things they can improve on:

 

 

Look the person in the eyes when you are talking to them.

 

Look the person in the eyes when they are talking to you.

 

Speak clearly and dont mumble.

 

These are fundamental qualities of someone who has courtesy and respect toward others. Lack of these qualities leaves a negative impression when being evaluated for rank advancement, especially at the higher ranks.

 

Delaying an advancement for a month or two can be a good thing and a lesson for life.

 

[Dozy]

It works two ways when adults do not hold respect for the scout.

 

However, you are right, in a perfect world with perfect scouts, we'd have perfect BOR's and they'd present themselves perfectly.

 

Do we hold it against them if they don't say, "Sir, yes sir!"

 

We have a Troop, 1 of which is autistic, and 3 of which are ScoutReach and have poor interpersonal skills, 3 of which have severe ADHD and are on medication, and most of these kids have very poor skills with adults... in other words, adults terrify them.

 

In our situation, the adults have not made an effort to respect the scout, to learn their names, to make friendly contact. In the world these children live in, adults are the enemy.

 

No two troops are alike, and no two children are handled alike or are exactly the same. We have to get them to the point of trusting the adults around them. The SM and ASM has their trust. I do as well because I spend a lot of time with them. Unfortunately, I was not a part of this BOR, so the adults there were strangers.

 

At a BOR we want honest answers from the Scout, not answers the BOR expects to hear in a certain military manner they expect to hear it in.

 

Each Troop will have an expectation. We're trying to make all the boys equal, regardless of their background, or parental involvement, or lack of inter-personal skills. This all comes with time and gentleness. Scouting is not a military organization and we should not expect Scouts to behave in a manner to which they are unaccustomed... just gently push them in that direction.

 

I cannot expect an inner-city kid to act the same way as a country kid. Our African American kids do not act the same exact way as the white or asian kids. The cultures are different -- the way they handle their peers is different, and the way they handle or respect adults is different.

 

We try for uniform standards, a median of sorts so that all scouts feel equal and no scout is singled out because of a skill he lacks. We just quietly recognize the lack and work on it. A BOR has to recognize this.

 

If a Scout desires Eagle, he will know that the standards are much higher. I have said that in our Troop, our last 3 Eagles spent two years or more as Life Scouts being. During that time, it is everyone's responsibility to get that Scout to realize what is expected of him. If he's shooting high, he's going to have to work harder at the skills he needs to present himself well.

 

Each BOR, takes us to the next step. In our Troop we have not had enough "get to know you" BOR's and Scouts became terrified each time one was held because it was ONLY for advancement. Even though they felt confident that they had achieved the next Rank, facing the adults was an experience they all share as horrific.

 

The BOR's I sat on, I tried very hard to go by the book... to make it a friendly atmosphere. But I also KNEW the scout and KNEW his accomplishments. I KNEW his skill level and have seen him in action. I shared the SM's confidence that his Rank advancement was genuine.

 

We live in a world of dysfunction, much as we'd all hate to admit it, we have to accommodate to our surroundings. It's supposed to be "for the boys" and not "for the adults". And Scout's is not the place to beat the boy up for not saying, "Sir, yes sir!" or slouching, or answering, "Yeah."

 

I'm sure that all of the people here have had involvement in Troops quite different from the make-up of mine. Some will disagree and feel we're too lenient. Trust me, lenient is NOT what our SM is... but all people, all Scouts want fairness. When it's not fair, they'll be the first to point it out... and that's a good thing. Because of such cultural diversity, we have to find a median and work within that circle and then slowly, and then step up the pace to raise the standard to that of what we believe a Life Scout, and Eagle Scout, etc., should represent.

 

AND even there, there's always a difference of opinion.

 

No one here is pushing scouts through the Ranks. They EARN their Ranks, no matter how long it takes. They DO the work ON THEIR OWN. They EARN their MB's by their OWN work. Then advance on THEIR OWN MERIT. A boy who is not EARNing, needs a little prodding, needs confidence and the friendship of his leaders and junior leaders so that he can gain confidence in himself.

 

The book says, "when reviewed monthly by the TC, Scouts will recognize the importance of advancement. The only person in our Troop who has ever stressed advancement is the SM. He's the one ultimately responsible when the District sends out it's reports and troop comparisons, no one loos at the TC, they all look at the SM.

 

Scouting had at it's beginnning a focus on fatherless boys. In a way, it's still that kind of service. In our Troop we have 6 fatherless boys. We have to raise them, keep that victim mentality out of their heads, and have them rise above their situations so that they can have the foundation to keep away from gangs, drugs and violence.

[Jeffrey H]

Dozy,

 

I appreciate your comments. I agree with you that BOR's should not be intimidating and the Boys Scouts is not the military (and never should be).

 

I'm ignorant of BOR procedure and protocol? Can the SM and ASM sit in on the BOR's? After all, you know the boys and what they are capable of. It seems to me a good BOR would have a mix of those who work with the boys directly and those who don't know them as well.

 

--Jeff