Advancement Appeals

[Doug343]

For the past two years, instructors, at a Council sponsored "University of Scouting" training day, have distributed a flow chart that depicts an advancement appeal process. The flow chart diagram starts with a Scoutmaster's Conference. The "pass" line goes to the Troop Committee for a Board of Review. The "fail" line also goes to the Troop Committee for appeal. Both Troop Committee actions have subsequent "pass" and "fail" options. The "fail" option proceeds to the District. Some that review the flow chart quickly see little of interest, but as a Scoutmaster, it surely got my attention.

 

Last year I inquired about the origin of the flow chart and researched the published BSA policies. The Advancement Committee Policies and Procedures (BSA #33088C) seems to be the only guidance for appeals on page 31. I brought my objections to my local DE and District Committee. To my surprise, the next year the same flow chart is being distributed again. I recently summarized my objections to the Council Scout Executive who forwarded my inquiry to the Council Advancement Committee. The Chair of that committee tells me the flow chart is correct.

 

My objections to the flow chart are several. First, I have trouble understanding why anyone would produce and distribute such a document. It is obvious that BSA is not encouraging advancement appeals, so what would motivate a Council to do so. Second, I believe the chart is incorrect. The guidance provided by Advancement Committee, Policies and Procedures (#33088C) clearly notes that the appeal would be to the next higher level. The next level above the unit is noted as the district. The Council Advancement Chair claims that a Scoutmaster decision, that a scout was not ready for advancement, would be appealed to the Troop Committee. If the Scoutmaster and the Troop Committee are both at the Unit level, it seems, this would not be as intended.

 

To illustrate my objections to the flow chart, I made up a situational story and included it with my memo to the Council Scout Executive. The story was as follows:

 

A Tenderfoot Scout requests a Scoutmaster Conference for the rank of 2nd Class. Upon review of the Scout's handbook, the Scoutmaster notes that the required 1 hour service time is not complete. The Scout explains that he picked up trash in his neighborhood, with his Dad, last week.

 

The Scoutmaster commends the Scout for this good deed, but explains that service time must receive prior approval by the Scoutmaster. The reasons for this include safety, youth protection and authorization from property owners. The Scoutmaster explains that the Troop has up- coming service with "Scouting for Food" or the Scout could participate in a project at the Chartering Organization.

 

The Scout returns home, explains to Dad, who contacts the Troop Committee Chair. The Committee Chair, who has meant to attend Scouter Training for some time, does not understand the issue of the service time and schedules a Board of Review. The Scout attends the Board of Review and is awarded the rank of 2nd Class.

 

What has just happened to this Troop? What would be the reaction of the Scoutmaster? What would be the effect on the Scout? This is not a true story, but could very well happen based on the "Boy Scout Advancement Appeal" process flow chart passed out at University of Scouting, this year and last.

 

The response that I received from the Council Advancement Chair does not answer these broader impact questions, but seems to focus on the scout in the story. He explains that the rank would never be taken away from the scout, just because there was a disagreement among the scouters. While I see this point, I also see that the Scoutmaster has lost any authority with the scouts. The Committee Chair is now running the troop program.

 

In the response from the Council Advancement Chair, he tells me that the Boy Scout Advancement Appeal flow chart is correct (and that there is and should be appeals within the Troop/Unit). He then states [about the story] that there is no question that this should not have happened. It would seem, if the flow chart is correct, then the appeal happened as it should in the story. However, when he notes that the scouts father appropriately appealed to the unit level, it makes me wonder what level the Scoutmaster is (as the unit leader).

I apologize for the length of this. I would glad to e-mail the Boy Scout Advancement Appeal flow chart to anyone who would like a clearer understanding of the issue. Any thoughts or comments are appreciated.

 

[k9gold-scout]

I have never seen an appeal for anything other than Eagle Scout. This process is spelled out on the Eagle application. The decission is made by National with the input of the local Council.

[sst3rd]

If the Scoutmaster's Conference requirement was not signed off by the Scoutmaster, the advancement process stops there. The Board of Review has NO authority to advance the Scout without it. The Board cannot meet without this signature. If they did (and the Scout passed), the rank is VOID !!!! I'm a Scoutmaster with years of experience and the training to back this up. The CC in your example may or may not have had the training, but does not change the advancement procedure prescribed by the Boy Scouts of America. No Scoutmaster's Conference, no Board of Review. There MUST be a signature from the Scoutmaster in the Scout's book to validate the Conference to proceed to the Board. These requirements are clear and NOT flexible in any way.

 

sst3rd

[eisely]

I find the idea behind this flow chart somewhat apalling. Never heard of it and would hate to see it implemented.

 

As with the previous post, the only appeal process I have heard of involves Eagle awards. I can't imagine why any council advancement committee would want to get involved in such things. Reminds me of our federal judiciary that complains about its case load at the same time that it invents new law and new legal processes for things that should never be brought into a court room.

[Bob White]

Appeals almost always result from "adults" refusing to play nice together.

 

An appeal process does exist for all rank advencements. It is clearly outlined in "Advancemenet Committee Policies and Procedures" as stated by Doug343.

 

Doug, I agree with you, the process you have described in the distributed flowchart does not follow the national policies.

 

I see nothing wroung with training anyone who wants the information on the advancement process about the appeal process. After all it is in our printed publications.

 

I would prefer that leaders focused on the spirit of advancement and the aims of scouting as to whether or not a scout advances. Here are some points to remember.

 

1. The whole point to advancement is not to become an Eagle Scout but to be a good person. We are not trying to teach how to build a fire, we teach Character, Citizenship, Mental and Physical Fitness. The rank requirements are tools we use in this development.

 

2. Don't read to much into the requirements. example- the handbook does not say that a service project must be PRE-approved. It says the project must be approved. If the scout comes in and offers evidence to having done a worthwhile sevice project (citizenship), you are expected to sign the book.

 

3. You might be surprised by the number of adults who use the with-holding of a boy's advancement as a way to express their distain for the boy's parent(s). A cowardly but common act. You need to ask yourselves, "is it the character of the scout we are evaluating or the emotions we feel toward his family".

 

4. Commuicate with the board or reveiw. Scoutmasters and ASM may not be present at Board of Reviews (there is an exception in Eagle Boards), but that does not mean you as SM cannot tlk to the Board before hand and share areas of concern you would like them to discuss with the scout.

 

5. KNOW your scouts. Scoutmasters have two jobs, train Junior Leaders and know the needs and characteristics of every scout. You will only have the time to do this if you use the patrol method and let the boys run the troop. Don't be the dictator of the troop and then complain that you have problems with the program. If your not using the program you can find the problem in your bathroom mirror.

 

6. Have a program that allows the boys to advance as they participate. Then you just watch for boys to use the skills they learned and sign them off. (catch boys doing things right)

 

If you havae appeals happening in your unit I guarrantee that adults are doing something wrong, not the boys.

 

I hope this helps you.

Bob

 

[FScouter]

Certainly BSA needs to have a appeals process in place. But I would hope that the process not be used simply to mete out justice for any and all perceived wrongs.

 

If a boy feels he has been unfairly dealt with he basically has two alternatives. He can complain about it to his dad, who can complain further, demand justice, and initiate a formal appeal. If the appeal is ruled in favor of the boy, he will have attained his objective. On the other hand, the boy can accept the decision of his Scoutmaster, and work with him to meet the expectations, however unfair he may think they are.

 

Either way, the boy will have his attained his objective. But what has he learned? In one instance he learns that if you complain and go over the head of your superior, you can win. In the other instance, he learns that sometimes life is not fair, but that he can still accomplish his goal, though with some extra work. Both alternatives achieve the same objective. But through which alternative is the boy better prepared for life? The former choice is what we see too much of in society today. The latter choice builds character.

 

[Doug343]

I appreciate the comments and suggestions, but I am still concerned about the adoption and distribution of the Advancement Appeal flow chart described in the opening dialog. Since this chart has been approved by the Council Advancement Chair and distibuted at training classes for the past two or more years, it seems like an uphill climb to get a serious evaluation, with regard to BSA policy.

 

I believe this chart is very detrimental to the very scouting values that we are trying to teach. After all, the rank advancement is a tool to teach values. If we suppose what was actually learned by the scout, father and others in the story, it is contrary to scouting values. How can the flow chart be correct?

 

I wish I could post a copy of the flow chart for you to see - is there any way to do that?

[Bob White]

Doug,

I'm not sure I would get to worked up over the flow chart. I agree it is incorrect, and you have tried to bring it to the attention of the proper people. Bear in mind that just because the council advancement committee printed it does not over-ride the actual policy which you correctly site in the Advancement Committee Policies and Procedures manual.

 

My concern is in the story you created to explain your position. You site the policy correctly but you understanding of it is in error.

 

The parent in your story did the appropriate thing. Since parents probably have no idea of the advancement policies, or the above mentioned manual, they would call the SM or the Committee Chair. In your case they called the CC. The Committee chair would have hopefully called the SM for clarification, however in your story you had him go over the SM head and hold the Board. The board in your story approved the advancement. At this point you pretty much shut all the doors on yourself. Once a boy has been awarded there are no take-backs.

 

Thank goodness this was your own fiction, but I'm sure that this sometimes happens in real life. A perfect example of adults not being able to play nice together.

 

Had the appeal gone from dad to the district or council level, the board most likely would have sided with the boy. (the Scoutmaster was in error for adding to the requirements. The book does not say the work needs to be PRE-approved, just approved).

 

As far as the Scoutmasters authority. The scoutmaster's job is to train junior leaders and know the needs and characteristics of every scout.

1.Had the SM done his job he would be aware of the scouts advancement work and this situation would not have happened.

2. had the SM not altered the advancement requirements the dad would not have needed to contact the CC.

3. Had the CC and the SM had a good relationship they would have discussed the problem before having the BOR.

 

My suggestion, write a story where the scout and his family transfer to a more functional troop:-)

 

Seriously, the scout policy on this procedure has been around for a long time, advancement volunteers come and go. Wait for a change on the Advancement committee and then resubmit you note that the flow chart does not match policy. Drop the story however because it doesn't help you.

[Doug343]

Bob

 

I disagree that the SM in the story added to the requirement. The service project was not approved and the SM Conference was not signed off. If I were that SM, the scout spirit requirement would also be unsigned, since I sign that off at the SM conference.

 

The purpose of the story was to illustrate the flow chart. Without the story, no one would read the objections to the flow chart.

 

While I agree that the CC should have contacted the SM, it was not required by the flow chart. The point is, the story result is as it should be - if the flow chart were correct.

 

I appreciate the advice on how a Troop should be run ... but it is the distribution of this flow chart that I am concerned with. It needs to stop. Any suggestions?

[OldGreyEagle]

I am not sure I understand the issue Doug. How would you want to see an appeal process handled? I agree that an appeal is the last thing anyone would want to see, but how should the process work?

[Bob White]

Doug,

I admit to feeling a little silly debating a fictional scenario. Since you wrote it, only you know what was in the head of the characters. However, a service project can be approved after the event. The approval is for the quality of the service, not in the planning as in an Eagle project.

 

Don't sweat the flow chart. Appeals rarely happen, and when they do the national rules are all that count. if you feel that the District and Council are not following national policy (when an actual appeal takes place), you can contact the National Advancement Committee and get clarification.

 

Remember appeals almost always happen when adults misuse the program, and the appeal process is there to protect the boy not the "authority" of the adult.

 

This flow chart has little or no effect on the quality of scouting that you deliver to the scouts in your unit. I recommend you not expend either energy of attitude on it.

 

Rember the lesson of the Serenity Prayer

 

GOD, grant me the serenity to accept the things

I cannot change,

Courage to change the things I can,

and the wisdom to know the difference.

 

[Doug343]

I guess I have not been able to clarify the issue. The flow chart shows an appeal within the unit (troop).

 

Its nice to say that appeals rarely happen and that those involved would consult BSA policy if an appeal occurred. However, this is irrelavant to the issue here. Please note that the individual that distributes the chart at University of Scouting, claims to be Philmont trained and has served as the Council Advancement Chair.

 

The only purpose for the story about the scout and the service project is to provide an example of what the published flow chart allows to happen. Any scenario where the scout does not get forwarded to a board of review by the SM would do. The scout gaining the rank in the instant example is also not the issue, unless you consider his future posture toward the SM. At a higher view point what has happened to the troop, through the use of this published and distibuted chart?

 

While not a problem at my troop at the moment, we have had untrained committee members and CCs in the past. I was glad to have a COR that understood the aims of scouting. I assure you there are many troops out there with CCs that have limited scouting experience. A flow chart like this can distroy a troop.

 

OldGreyEagle: I believe that BSA policy specifies that appeals go to the "next higher level" in order to pull some scouter experience in from the distict on these types of issues. If program decisions made by the scoutmaster are overruled by the CC, the scoutmaster is not serving as the unit leader. I believe if you saw the flow chart you would see my concern.

 

Bob White: I am sorry you feel that I should stick my head in the sand and focus on my own unit. I guess you could say that to any issue in this forum. My understanding is the "Issues and Politics" forum is not for everyone.

 

[Bob White]

Doug, maybe I'm misreading your posts, but you seem to be mostly concerned with maintaining the power base of the SM, and you see this errent flow chart as being able to undermine the SM. The SM is not THE leader of a scout unit. He or she is just one of the leaders of the scout troop. The scoutmaster helps with the program, the CC with the administration and the COR with the Charter organization relationship.

 

The unit committee has a responsibility to evaluate the troop program and the BOR made of committee members has the "authority" to advance scouts.

 

An appeal once it leaves the unit level will almost always find in favor of the boy, flow chart or not.

 

You might be surprised by the number of adults who use their "autority" to bend scouting to their vision of it, and in their wake they short change the scout. Having sat on locally and nationally requested appellate boards I can tell you that once an adult goes beyond the requirements in the Official Boy Scout Handbook the board will find for the scout.

 

Using your own scenario, even failing to have signed the Scout Spirit line would not have kept the scout from advancing. Why? because projects are not required to be pre-approved just approved. and refusing to do a conference or board (since boards and SM conferences can be done at any time not just at the moment of advancement)calls into question the scout spirit of the adult not the boy.

 

I am not suggesting you bury your head in the sand. It seems to me you took very appropriate steps to call to attention to the errors of the flow chart. But as some scouts find out, not all adults play nice. DEs change, Council Execs. change, local Advancement chairs change. Every time that happens you can point out the error again.

 

As long as you know that there is an appeal process available to the boys should they feel they have treated incorrectly, then you will be a great resource to your scouting community.

[Doug343]

Bob

 

I am not sure how else to articulate the issue. This posting is about a flow chart distributed by a council that [i believe] misrepresents BSA policy. You have provided advice and opinion about everything but the focus of the posting.

 

I would guess that you have not served in the Scoutmaster role. Your assessment that the Scoutmaster is "just one of the leaders of the scout troop... [he/she] helps with the program" is inaccurate. The Scoutmaster is responsible for the program and image of the Troop. Rank advancement is part (a tool) of the program.

[Bob White]

Doug,

You assume incorrectly.

 

I've served several years as a scoutmaster. I have never taken credit for the quality of the program beyond my role as the developer of boy leaders. I have always felt that the boys devloped and carried out the program hence "Boy" Scouts. I worked with the Assistant Scoutmasters, Committee Chair, Committee members, parents and the charter organization to see that the scouts had an opportunity for a true scouting experience. I never felt that I was more important than any other adult supporting the boys. If others felt I was, then I'm flattered. Did I spend the most time volunteering with the troop? Perhaps, but that is the role I agreed to take.

 

The flow chart you are so concerned over is only wrong by a squeek. It seems to ask the troop to try and settle the dispute in house before elevating it to the next level. however as in any appeal process, if the scout still feels he is not being dealt with fairly he can choose to go to the next level.

 

These appeals happen so rarely that this small error has no effect on the program. I guess I don't understand your concern.

Is it that you don't want the problem resolved in the unit level if possible?

Is it the ability of the scout to appeal advancement decisions?

Is it merely that the flow chart does not immediately send the scout to the next level, but gives the troop a chance to resolve the situation first?

 

Perhaps if you could clarify for your primary concern I would understand better.

Thanks,

Bob