Misrepresentation During A Board Of Review

[blw2]

reading the rest of the thread, I'm finding this very interesting.

 

So part of the reason for the BOR is to celebrate the boys accomplishments and what he achieved and earned. Gives him interview practice, etc...

 

But it is not a retest, so the BOR committee aren't really verifying that the sign-offs weren't pencil whips.....

 

So what is it, a discussion to feel out the boy's attitude during and after these tasks?  A Q&A of what he learned or how he grew through the process?

 

And the BOR committee is supposed to somehow gauge the program, the boys general abilities and knowledge, his attitude, his skills for the sole purpose of giving program feedback to the Program Leaders.  Makes sense.

 

They are suppose to do this without testing the boy.

 

But BOR members will commonly test the boy anyway.  They might ask the boy to tie a knot, for example.  

Does the boy understand that this is not a pass/fail request from the BOR?

Does the boy understand that this is a test of the program, not a test for his rank?

 

Yep, it's a really clear process......

[Gone]

I think most folks, especially committee members don't really know what they are supposed to be doing.

The little training that's available doesn't help much, with confusing language and it's vagueness which is open to interpretation

Most folks learn by example, especially since they have little time for the training or doing their own research.

 

 

 

They are suppose to do this without testing the boy.

 

But BOR members will commonly test the boy anyway.  They might ask the boy to tie a knot, for example.  

Does the boy understand that this is not a pass/fail request from the BOR?

Does the boy understand that this is a test of the program, not a test for his rank?

 

Yep, it's a really clear process......

 

Let's face it, one person's "test" is another person's discussion. How can you evaluate if a scout is learning ANYTHING without "testing" them in some way. If you ask him about tying knots, you are in essence testing his recall of how he was taught. So what's the difference if you ask him to tie a knot? The spirit behind the "you can't re-test" idea is that the BOR is not intending to fail or not pass a scout if they cannot tie that knot. It DOESN'T mean you can't ask him to tie the know, it just means you can't fail him if he doesn't remember how.

 

As for training your BOR members might I suggest:

• Include BOR preparation as part of your annual parent training. We use this site as a great way to get them up to speed.
• Each quarter get a pool of folks to volunteer to be on BORs. Rotate this pool. Had a former county clerk (who managed jury pools) come up with this idea. Worked great!!).
• Have someone from this pool be your trainer for future pools. Train the trainer so to speak.

[acco40]

 

So fat Scouts cannot be Eagle? How do we define "personal fitness"?

I was a personal fitness merit badge instructor for many years.  The first thing most folks screw up is equating personal fitness with physical fitness.  I suggest you read the personal fitness merit badge book.

[gumbymaster]

So committees act based on the models they were shown.  The folks that came before them... which are generally driven by some person's interpretation or intuition, which may not always the best.

So I'd imagine that the folks sitting on BOR's are doing things because that's how they were shown to do.... with a little bit of their own intuition thrown in.

 

In my world, we call this the propogation of error.  If the first group is 95% right, and teach the second group which is 95% right to what the first group taught and so on, it still doen't take long (~14 times for the oversimplified formula) for the group to be less than half right.  They become wrong even faster if there is no accounting for official changes in how things should be done.

 

The BSA puts out the Guide to Advancement on a regular basis, and that document, while not perfect, does clearly indicate duties and responsibilities for the BOR.  We may not all agree with them, we may not agree with all the parts of them; but that is the way it should be done - until the next update comes out.

 

Anything less, and are we doing any better a job of teaching our Youth about adhering to the Scout Oath and Law than the Scout we are reviewing?

[Gone]

I was a personal fitness merit badge instructor for many years.  The first thing most folks screw up is equating personal fitness with physical fitness.  I suggest you read the personal fitness merit badge book.

 

So one can be 5'4", 300 lbs, have high cholesterol and still be "personally fit" and get the MB? Last time I checked that MB requirements you had to show progress over a period of time. That requires effort and progress. It's the same with requiring guys to know their core skills.

 

The rest of my reply above still stands.

[Scouter Matt]

I have had this happen on an Eagle Board of Review. We asked the candidate if he planned to stay involved in Scouts. He told us what he thought we wanted to hear, that yes he would. We found out shortly after he really only was in Scouts due to parental pressure and was getting out after he had the Eagle in hand.

 

I have since quit asking about future scouting involvement, candidates will tell you they plan to stay involved even during college, hope to have kids in the program, etc., and then as soon as the Court of Honor is over they aren't seen ever again.

 

It is a rare thing to find a youth that will say what they actually think to an adult these days. More troubling, most adults have no problem similarly making a "misrepresentation" in a job interview, and most interviewers ask questions that if ever answered honestly would disqualify every applicant.

 

After all, it is true "from a certain point of view" in this world where it depends on what the definition of "is" is, so "what is truth"?

[Stosh]

My first Eagle scout I worked with just got married.  I traveled half way across the country to be there.  Since getting his Eagle, he has become SM trained, WB (beaded at the wedding reception) and is currently in the Air Force.  Plans on getting out and back into scouting as soon as he's done.  Oh, by the way, his new wife is also SM trained, WB beaded at the wedding ceremony.    There are real Eagles out there, but as you say, they kinda are more the exception nowadays.  

[Gone]

I have had this happen on an Eagle Board of Review. We asked the candidate if he planned to stay involved in Scouts. He told us what he thought we wanted to hear, that yes he would. We found out shortly after he really only was in Scouts due to parental pressure and was getting out after he had the Eagle in hand.

 

[snip]

 

It is a rare thing to find a youth that will say what they actually think to an adult these days. More troubling, most adults have no problem similarly making a "misrepresentation" in a job interview, and most interviewers ask questions that if ever answered honestly would disqualify every applicant.

 

 

Had a similar issue. Scout said he planned to be involved for "a long time". Quit right after his paperwork came back. Made it a point to drop by his house and remind him of his promise in front of his parents. Did not good, but called him out right there. We still think of that kid as the least "Eagle-like" of any of the Eagles we've honored.

 

On the latter point, this year alone we have 12 guys turn 18, all but two made Eagle. They stayed in all the way. Had coffee with one yesterday who is leaving for college. Great JASM. Two are seniors and are taking IOLS to become ASMs their senior year. Not sure if it is the food we eat as SMs or for bragging rights as being the first two scouts to officially cross over directly from youth-to-adult status, but who care.

 

It took a LONG time to build that level of participation. We have 12 juniors and 10 sophomores still in. About 14 freshman. I'd say about 80% or more will stick around through senior year. Not bad.

[Stosh]

@

 

well done!

[HICO_Eagle]

@@HICO_Eagle and yet it is a Board of Review, not a Board of Inquisition.  However, I'm willing to concede with all the Paper Eagles out there on any given day, most FC scouts couldn't go back and retest well on the T-FC requirements to save their soul.

@@Stosh ... and this is an example of why I have a problem with the contemporary definition from National.  Since when is asking someone to demonstrate they still know something that is supposed to be a core skill the equivalent of an Inquisition?  That attitude is right up there with Bryan on Scouting whining that having a boy sing or do something else to reclaim the handbook or other item he continually leaves laying around is "unkind" or that waterguns are to only be used on targets as if they were BB guns or .22s.  You'd think National was headquartered in California rather than Texas with all the idiocy emanating from there.

[Gone]

@@Stosh ... and this is an example of why I have a problem with the contemporary definition from National.  Since when is asking someone to demonstrate they still know something that is supposed to be a core skill the equivalent of an Inquisition?  That attitude is right up there with Bryan on Scouting whining that having a boy sing or do something else to reclaim the handbook or other item he continually leaves laying around is "unkind" or that waterguns are to only be used on targets as if they were BB guns or .22s.  You'd think National was headquartered in California rather than Texas with all the idiocy emanating from there.

It may be in Texas but it ain't run by Texans. That's obvious.

 

Btw, had a parent meetin last night. Have a trip to the state fair planned. Some brought up, tongue in cheek, that to comply with BSA policy we'd have to watch what carnival games our scouts played. If we follow BSA policy around the whole squirt gun issue, now our scouts can't hit the midway and play the water guns. I wasn't aware but innocent ceramic clowns are being injured leading to aggravated abuse of real clowns with handguns nationwide by former scouts.

[Stosh]

It may be in Texas but it ain't run by Texans. That's obvious.

 

Btw, had a parent meetin last night. Have a trip to the state fair planned. Some brought up, tongue in cheek, that to comply with BSA policy we'd have to watch what carnival games our scouts played. If we follow BSA policy around the whole squirt gun issue, now our scouts can't hit the midway and play the water guns. I wasn't aware but innocent ceramic clowns are being injured leading to aggravated abuse of real clowns with handguns nationwide by former scouts.

 

One has to remember that these boys will be pointing symbolic lethal weapons at symbolic human figures.  A definite no-no under BSA policy.  If allowed, those poor young boys may have to face the consequences of 20-39 years.... of professional therapy that will result in such activity.  Squirt guns are a gateway opportunity to eventual WMD's.

[Gone]

One has to remember that these boys will be pointing symbolic lethal weapons at symbolic human figures.  A definite no-no under BSA policy.  If allowed, those poor young boys may have to face the consequences of 20-39 years.... of professional therapy that will result in such activity.  Squirt guns are a gateway opportunity to eventual WMD's.

 

Oddly enough, one of our kids went to a lock in with another unit. Dad went too. Was a video game lock in. One of the district pooh-bahs was there...the one always quoting chapter and verse about BSA policies. Guess what the most popular games being played were? Call of Duty, Halo and GTA. District guy didn't flinch once so I am told.

 

Makes you want to host a Super-Soaker event and invite him.

[Stosh]

Remember, we're dealing with the BSA here.  It doesn't need to make sense.

[Gone]

Remember, we're dealing with the BSA here.  It doesn't need to make sense.

 

Correct. But one would think that if a district exec gets p.o.'d about a patrol going to play laser tag (on their own time and not in uniform) he'd be more upset about a unit-sponsored event where violent video games that are expressly created for killing human analogs are being played.

 

This is the same guy that did not like our archery range that had 3D animal targets on it...said it simulated hunting. Yet he has no problem with Billy taking out Tommy with a head shot playing GTA?

 

We are way off topic. My apologies.

Edited August 14, 2015 by Bad Wolf