Re: Boards of Review
James A. Sheckels (sheckej@EARTHLINK.NET)
Tue, 19 Aug 1997 19:10:11 -0400
> From: Jim Peterson <jpeterson@TZNET.COM>
> Date: Sunday, August 17, 1997 13:42 PM
>The Board of Review _does_ have the option of "denying"
> a Scout's advancement, if they find compelling evidence that the
> requirements have not been met. As documentation, I offer the
> quote from the _Scoutmaster's Handbook_, page 98:
> "At the end of his review the Scout leaves the room while the board
> discusses his qualifications. He is then called back and told that
> qualified, or what additional action he must take to qualify."
> This clearly indicates that the Board may deny the advancement and
> what requirements must be met in order for the advancement to be
I suppose one could say I'm splitting hairs - but I don't think a
finding of "disqualified" equals "denial of advancement".
If I remember, this particular thread wound around a Scout being
denied advancement due to a perception of the quality of what he had
learned, not failing to actually do the requirement. This is where
there is a question of denying advancement.
My perception of lashing is probably different from other people's.
I would hope that a Scout would not only properly lash items with the
correct lashing, but that he would know what each lashing is used
for. The First Class requirements for this subject are to
demonstrate correct knot tying and using them to lash, and to make a
useful item utilizing lashing skills.
Simply demonstrating how to properly lash does not mean the Scout
knows when a particular lashing is called for. Making the gadget
based on a book diagram does not support his knowledge of when to use
a specific lashing. It ONLY shows that he can tie the lashings
correctly, and make at least one useful camp gadget.
Now, were a board to query a Scout "When is a shear lashing used?"
and he could not answer, is this reason to DENY advancement? Reason
to determine a Scout is "unqualified"? I think NO in both cases.
OTOH, if the Scout stated he had NEVER tied ANY lashing, he is
undoubtedly UNQUALIFIED because he did not perform the requirement as
If he said he used a diagonal lashing to make a tripod, but did not
know when a diagonal lashing is to be used, he is STILL QUALIFIED.
In this case, if the BoR refuses to advance the Scout, he has been
DENIED advancement, but never the less, he is QUALIFIED.
This is where I think the thread was centered. OUR (read ADULTS)
perception of QUALITY of STANDARD beyond the stated requirement.
Yes, I think that quality should be there, as a matter of course.
NO, I don't think it is right to DENY advancement when the Scout has
performed the requirement as stated, therefore qualified for
advancement. It is up to the adult and youth leaders to ensure the
quality is present in a Scout's learning BEFORE he is tested, which
is BEFORE the SM conference and BoR. If we do this, there should be
no question of QUALIFICATION or QUALITY.
I hope this makes sense. Sometimes it's really hard to get across
the meaning in a text environment!
YIS, Jim Sheckels - I used to be a Bobwhite SE 308-7; 1SG,US
3501 Farm Circle Road Fayetteville, NC 28306-8303 (910)
CM P-742, CC T-742, Hope Mills, NC Nat'l Assn of United Methodist
District Advancement Committee, Assistant Council Commissioner
Kia Kima District, Occoneechee Council #421/Lodge
Scouting IS NOT an exact science, so use your brain - no one else is!
Information Systems Manager/PC Technician -- Dupont - Fayetteville
Terry Howerton Sakima Group, Inc. SCOUTER Magazine Kansas City