Re: BOR Help -- to retest?
Paul H. Brown (phbrown@CAPACCESS.ORG)
Fri, 8 Dec 1995 07:59:09 -0500
> Well, since the requirement is to know a particular skill at a point in
> time it would seem to me that what you really need to do if your inquiries
> lead you to believe that the person who signed off the requirements did not
> do his job is to train or retrain that person.
To take knots, as an example: the requirement is to tie half a
dozen knots. Period. It doesn't say to tie them with the book closed.
It doesn't say to tie them twice. It doesn't say to tie them in the
dark, one handed, behind your back, or hanging from your knees on a
branch. Just tie the knots. Once, where someone who has the authority
to sign the line in the book can see it. Not again, months later, before
a bunch of frowning strange adults who are clueless about scouting's aims
> Unfortunately I do not control the BOR in my troop. If I did there would
> be a quantum change in the type of questions being asked. Most likely the
> questions being asked at EVERY board would be of the type asked at an Eagle
> Board. The aims of Scouting address Character, Citizenship, and Fitness.
> The BOR should be examining the Scouts progress in developing in these
> areas. Thus, I agree with your point about maturity, but not about
> competency. Thus I would ask questions about the Oath and Law, what he
> likes, dislikes about Scouting and the troop, how the troop could be
> better, which skill was the most fun, etc., etc. You would not hear "How
> do you tie a taut line hitch." But you might hear "What did you make as
> your camp gadget."
Agreed. If the BOR doesn't ask the "How could the troop be better"
questions, they are missing an important opportunity for feedback.
Paul H. Brown, UC, GW District, National Capital Area Council
Terry Howerton Sakima Group, Inc. SCOUTER Magazine Kansas City