Peeved BOR Member

[RuddBaron]

I'm baaaaaaack. To paraphrase Charlie Chan, here is humble suggestion. If a Scout does as you indicated, DON'T pass him for Eagle unless his performance improves. Surely the intent of the requirement is to teach the boys responsibility and have them help lead the troop. Merely being the name listed by the office hardly does that.

 

Of course, there are other more immediate solutions to a QM not doing his job. Depending on the circumstances at hand, one could have things the troop is doing delayed until the QM and senior scouts show up to lead. Peer pressure resulting from punishing the group as a whole can be effective. (Gosh, I can't wait to hear the challenges to this method!)

 

Older boys managing and not doing the grunt work could be justified as part of their leadership training, BUT they have to be there to lead, not hiding elsewhere to avoid the work.

[Overtrained]

There is one more challenge here beyound this particular scout, as I see it.

 

If the Chair of the BOR felt the scout should not have been passed, than how did this get past the scoutmaster to even allow it to come to a board of review?

 

Lets see if I can articulate this better. I sat on a board of review shortly after a new scoutmaster started. We turned the boy down. Although the BOR is not a rubber stamp, it rarely turns a scout down. We expressed our concerns to the SM through the MC in charge of BORs. We have never come close to turning one down again. The SM understands the committees position and insures the scout is prepared. For our part, we do discuss scouts behavior and other issues at our committee meetings so the SM has a broader view.

 

As to this case, perhaps a talk to the scoutmaster about your concerns. It should keep this from happening again.

[RuddBaron]

There's another interesting question. If a boy comes to a BOR totally ill prepared, and it is obvious that he is winging it, then the board should turn him down. Now...in that situation, who is at fault? The boy, his Patrol Leader, his Patrol Scoutmaster, the Scoutmaster, or all of the above? Certainly the SM's ought to ensure that the boy is prepared. Does anyone's troop have the PL work on rank advancement with his patrol members and serve as another checkpoint in the system? My old troop about which you have heard me talk so much used to have the older boys do a "pre-board" for the younger ones to make sure they were prepared. Usually if they have to go through a lot of checks before they get to the BOR, there won't be a problem.

[acco40]

A boy cannot "fail" a SM conference. The requirement is to "participate in a Scoutmaster Conference." If the boy comes to the conference, listens to the SM and then calls him an SOB, he definitely participated and thus has met the requirement! Now, showing Scout spirit, that is an entirely different story!

 

 

[RuddBaron]

And this raises the next academic question of what constitutes a Scoutmaster Conference. The requirement says "participate."

What does participate mean in this context? It seems highly subjective, and thus at the discretion of the SM. If the Scout calls the SM an SOB and is rude during the conference, it seems the SM could easily decide that the Scout didn't really participate.

[saltheart]

The question was asked, in the context of a Scoutmaster Conference, what does 'participate' mean? The bulk of BSA literature and publications is pretty good at defining this and that, but a few things are left to our collective imaginations and common sense. 'Scout Spirit' comes to mind. And so does 'participate'.

 

In my tenure I used to put it to folks this way. In my profession, a couple of times a year each employee has a 'review'. The common knowledge is that these reviews will play a part in subsequent raises and promotions. They are not a guarantee of either. They are an opportunity for both the employer and the employee to get the cards on the table and come to an agreement regarding performance, enthusiasm, capability, good points and bad points on both sides. A clearing of the air, so to speak, and making certain that both understand where the other shines, and where a little polishing is in order. Praise and critique are both expected and desired. And so it is with the Scoutmaster Conference, and the Scouts 'participation'.

 

Mere 'participation' does not infer that the BOR will, indeed, be the next immediate step. If the SM, who is none other than the Scouts adult mentor and guide, feels that the Scout has truly shown competency, growth, enthusiasm, and Scout Spirit, then it is his duty to send the young man off to the BOR for his review, and expected approval of next rank. If the SM feels that the Scout is lacking in any area, he really should not be sending the Scout on to the BOR. Rather he should be mentoring the young man about those areas where growth and achievement still need that polish. Sending a underachieving candidate off to the BOR will do one of two things, or both. It will teach the Scout that mediocrity is a goal, setting him up for immense disappointment when the reality of life hits him squarely down the road. And/or, it will place the BOR in the position of having to either admonish the SM for not doing his job by sending the boy back with no approval, or reiterating that mediocrity is a good goal...something established by the SM when he allowed the boy to proceed. A BOR that is placed in the position of having to make that decision is no BOR at all...it becomes a referee or a rubber stamp. And that's not the intent of the BOR.

 

So, 'participate', while it is the word in the requirement, should not be looked upon as meaning the requirement is satisfied to the point of approval for next rank. It should be looked upon as meaning that this point in the process is where the Scout learns where he shines in the eyes of his Scoutmaster and guide, or where his mentor feels that he still needs to bone up on things and can be better. And that is a darned good reason for SM conferences being held more often than just for rank advancement. Our obligation as adult leaders is to perform by more than just the written word. Guidance and advice are precious commodities and should not be given lightly.

[Eagledad]

>>And that is a darned good reason for SM conferences being held more often than just for rank advancement.

[saltheart]

"With that in mind, a lot of people think the SM should be the gatekeeper, but I believe the scout should be his own gatekeeper. If a scout ask for a SM conference to go for a BOR and I didn't think he was ready, I would give him the choice of me signing the book with me feeling he wasn't ready and that he might fail the BOR. Or wait until HE felt he was reading. 99% of the time, they choose to wait."

 

Even though in your very next sentence you proclaimed impatience with adults with adults holding all the cards, by your simple act of giving the Scout a choice, you did something very important. And you might not have even realized it. You might have thought you were letting the boy make the decision.

 

You gave guidance by not stating what you might have felt was obvious. The Scout wasn't ready. And by not giving him that verbal reassurance, he understood that more time was necessary. Kids aren't all that dumb (although we do sometimes wonder...). They can percieve whether the adult who they trust as their guide supports their decisions, opinions, and feelings by what we say, or don't say...if we as adults use that moment wisely. You did, indeed, hold all the cards. And you played them wisely. And from that simple action, the Scout learns more about himself and his preparedness, and the simple methods by which we connect and communicate with each other...child to child, child to adult, and adult to child. (In a perfect world, even adult to adult would work the same.) And by giving the Scout that choice in which he didn't feel the strong assurance from you that you felt he was ready, you did him a huge favor. The next time he approaches a target for himself along the road in life, he may remember that and take the time, by himself, to make sure he's ready. Because someday, neither you nor his folks will be there to give him that edge. But he will have learned, if by no other reason than your not saying no, but not saying yes, either.

 

[Eagledad]

>>And you might not have even realized it. You might have thought you were letting the boy make the decision.

[acco40]

Similar to SM conferences, BOR can be held at any time, not just for rank advancement.

 

Saltheart, in your profession, you have reviews. So do I. On the appraisal form is a place for my signature that by signing it simply states that I had the review. Not that I agreed with it, liked it, hated it, did well, did poorly, etc. Just simply, that I had a review. It does not guarantee a promotion, raise, demotion, firing, etc. Similarly, the SM conference requirement is the same. It is a simple as "participate." By participating, it does not mean that the SM has recommended the Scout is ready for advancement.(This message has been edited by acco40)