Re: BOR Help -- to retest?
Bruce E. Cobern (bec@PIPELINE.COM)
Fri, 8 Dec 1995 16:46:32 -0500
On Dec 08, 1995 12:30:34, '"Settummanque, the blackeagle (MAJ)
Mike Walton" <blackeagle@HCC-UKY.CAMPUS.MCI.NET>' wrote:
>This is wrong, and you should have (if you had a copy of the BSA's
>Guidelines booklet) waved that booklet in that person's face and tell him
>her that "you cannot add anything to the BSA's policies. You're NOT
>him"; he failed the initial Board, and has to once again participate
I know of nothing in Advancement Guidelines that would make what national
did in this case "wrong." Yes, it is true that a BoR can defer a
candidate, but, since it NOT supposed to retest, how can they justify
deferring him because his skill level is not adequate. That would appear
to be ONE of the reasons that would NOT be acceptable for deferral,
although I'm sure its done all the time.
>Where are they getting that stuff from, John?
How about from the stated policies, which you seem to be misinterpreting,
IMHO, that preclude retesting and would, therefore, move any determination
of adequate skills ability to some level prior to arrival at the board. In
reality, the determination of skills level is to be made ONCE, at the time
the skill is signed off by a person authorized by the troop to sign off
that skill. Any lack of ability by a Scout is merely a negative reflection
on the job these people are doing.
>but at Tenderfoot or Second Class, what's more important is the fact that
the Scout is learning the >skills and able to apply the ideals of Scouting
to his daily life.
Applying the ideals is important. The board is uninvolved in the skills
certification so that certainly can't be important at BoR, other than as a
review of how well the troop program is functioning. Remember, the skills
are only means to an end, not an end in themselves. They are designed to
make it easier for the Scout to function in the type of environment in
which Scouting attempts to meet its aims by using its methods.
>On the Advancement Report, John, there's a space at the bottom for "Scouts
>were interviewed but NOT ADVANCING (my emphasis). This is where you
>place those names of the Scouts that Board of Review talked with but DID
>approve their advancement.
I believe that those spaces are for Scouts who are not ready for
advancement, haven't been for some time, and have been interviewed by the
BoR to find out why.
Bruce E. Cobern
Terry Howerton Sakima Group, Inc. SCOUTER Magazine Kansas City