Eagle Scout Recommendation Letters
MikeShull
guidelines and made sure the first people to see the recommendation letters
were the members of the Eagle BOR. When the three required letters
returned from National along with the certificates, etc., I saw that the
Eagles got all the letters (usually 5 or 6) to include in their
scrapebooks--for their golden years. Parents and Eagles were very
appreciative of this gesture. My 20+ years of teaching and high school
coaching tell me that adding confidence via letters in a major plus for any
young person as well.
My question: A good scouting friend recently told me that a member of our
district advancement committee says that the Eagles should never see these
letters and that the ones returned from National should be destroyed also.
Destroying these letters can't possibly be national policy, can it? Why
would we build up the boy's Eagle award and destroy part of the evidence
that supports his inclusion in Scouting's pinnacle of success?
Vigil Keeper
Bruce E. Cobern
<msh...@ptdprolog.net> wrote:
> My question: A good scouting friend recently told me that a member of our
>district advancement committee says that the Eagles should never see these
>letters and that the ones returned from National should be destroyed also.
>Destroying these letters can't possibly be national policy, can it? Why
>would we build up the boy's Eagle award and destroy part of the evidence
>that supports his inclusion in Scouting's pinnacle of success?
Actually, I believe it IS national policy, and for some very
good reasons. But first of all, NONE of the letters go to
national. According to the procedures for the "12 Steps
from Life to Eagle" in the 1998 edition of Advancement
Guidelines (#33088A), on pages 17 and 18, "ONLY THE EAGLE
RANK APPLICATION IS FORWARDED TO THE NATIONAL EAGLE SCOUT
SERVICE." (Caps to reflect bold print in the text.)
Nothing else goes to national, not the project workbook, not
any of the recommendations, nothing. They may go in to the
council office, and may or may not be returned to the unit,
but they don't go to national.
Now, in the 12 Steps there are four references to the
recommendations which, if you take them in the context of
the whole process, indicate that they are not returned to,
and never seen by the Eagle.
Step 5 talks about what happens when the paperwork first
arrives at the council office before the board, and says:
"The council advancement committee or its designee contacts
the person listed as a reference on the Eagle Scout Rank
Application either by letter, form, or telephone checklist.
The council determines the method or methods to be used.
The candidate should have contacted those individuals listed
as references before including their names on the
application. The candidates should not be involved in
personally transmitting any correspondence between persons
listed as references and the council service center."
In step 7 it says that "the application, . . ., and
references will be returned from the council service center
to the chairman of the Eagle board of review so that a board
of review may be scheduled." It further says, "Reference
checks that are forwarded with the application are
confidential, and their contents are not to be disclosed to
any person who is not a member of the board of review."
Step 10 says that after the board "the application, . . .,
references, . . . are returned to the council service
center."
And, finally, in step 11 it says that the Scout Executive
signs the application, etc. and "The Eagle Scout Project
Workbook and references are retained by the council. The
Eagle Scout Project Workbook may be returned to the Scout
after council approval."
From this it seems clear that while the project workbook may
be returned to the Scout, the references remain in the
council service center. It is also specifically said that
the references are confidential and that nobody other than
the members of the board should see them. The candidate is
NOT a member of the board and neither are any of the people
who would view the letters in the scrapbook.
So, why does this make sense? Well, because when we ask
somebody to provide an evaluation or recommendation IN
CONFIDENCE, we are duty bound to respect that confidence.
If we disclose the contents of that recommendation to
anyone, particularly its subject, without the permission of
the author, we have violated our pledge of confidentiality
and, since a Scout is trustworthy, we certainly can't do
that.
Besides, what do you do when one of the recommendations
contains something that the Scout really should not see?
How do you return the letter from his teacher, but not the
one from his parent? What explanation do you give?
What could there be that couldn't be shared with the Scout?
Well, it is possible that an honest evaluation contains
negative comments about the Scout as well as positive ones.
Do we really want that in a scrapbook celebrating his
accomplishments?
But even without being negative, a letter might include
pertinent (on even irrelevant) information that the Scout
does not know, like that he was adopted, maybe? A parent
might share this while trying to explain something in their
letter, but the Scout might not be aware of it. If the
Scout doesn't already know this he certainly shouldn't find
it out from us when we show him a letter his parents wrote
in confidence.
Frankly CONGRATULATORY letters are much better in a scrap
book than reference letters. There is nothing wrong with
contacting the people who wrote the recommendations to let
them know that the Scout has passed his board and asking
them to send letters of congratulations.
--
Bruce E. Cobern
Advancement Chairman
Founders District, Queens Council, NY
mailto:b...@pipeline.com
Paul S. Wolf
>
> In my nine years as a scoutmaster (15 Eagle Scouts), I
> followed the guidelines and made sure the first people to see the
> recommendation letters were the members of the Eagle BOR. When the
> three required letters returned from National along with the
> certificates, etc., I saw that the Eagles got all the letters
> (usually 5 or 6) to include in their scrapebooks--for their golden
> years. Parents and Eagles were very appreciative of this gesture.
> My 20+ years of teaching and high school coaching tell me that adding
> confidence via letters in a major plus for any young person as well.
> member of our district advancement committee says that the Eagles
> should never see these letters and that the ones returned from
> National should be destroyed also. Destroying these letters can't
> possibly be national policy, can it? Why would we build up the boy's
> Eagle award and destroy part of the evidence that supports his
> inclusion in Scouting's pinnacle of success?
Bruce Cobern's comments were very accurate and on the mark, as usual.
But just to make sure, he wasn't misled, I hope you weren't referring to
a letter FROM BSA, signed by the National President of BSA and Chief
Scout Executive, and one from your Council Executive. Those, of course,
should be given to the Eagle Scout.
Any REFERENCE letters, as Bruce said, should NOT be sent to BSA after
the Board of Review.
Also, you mentioned 3 REQUIRED letters. There are NO required letters.
As Bruce also said, quoting from the advancement guidelines,
"The council advancement committee or its designee contacts
the person listed as a reference on the Eagle Scout Rank
Application either by letter, form, or telephone checklist.
The council determines the method or methods to be used."
The Scout gives a list of references, but if he leaves any of them out,
such as employer, religious leader, or even parents, that doesn't
automatically void the application.
--
Paul S. Wolf, PE mailto:Paul....@alum.wpi.edu
Traffic Engineer, Cuyahoga County Engineer's Office, Cleveland, Ohio
Past President, Great Lakes Region, Federation of Jewish Men's Clubs
Winding Rivers Dist. Advancement Comm., Greater Cleveland Council, BSA
Advancement Webmaster, US Scouting Service Project (www.usscouts.org)
Hobdbcgv
>district advancement committee says that the Eagles should never see these
>letters
That is not always possible and definitely is not within BSA's sphere of
control -
We have had the providers of letters of recommendation give a copy of their
letter to the Eagle candidate the day the provider mailed the original to the
Advancment chair- and our letter clearly says their letter will be kept
confidential and is for the board's use.
I have been asked by the three scouts who have received such copies if that
was "illegal". I told the scouts that while we do not provide copies of the
letters to the scouts, we have no control over the persons who provide the
letters, and if the writers give the scout a copy of the letter, that is the
writer's choice, and that is not "illegal", and the scout will not get in
trouble if he sees a letter given to him by a writer before (or after) the
scout's board appearance.
(With a smile and a cautionary "And don't go asking for a copy, either." to
the boys)
We only ask the providers of the letters that they provide us with the
letter and return it in the provided SASEnvelope, and I guess I would resist
adding a clause to our standard letter which prohibits providing a copy to the
scout.
From conversations with some of the providers I knew, I think some of the
providers felt so strongly about the boy's good character, they wanted to show
the boys they thought highly of them. Some writers have asked and I have
advised "it is not normal practice", and one lady said OK and sent a copy to
the boy (anyway?)
I say such actions are the writer's call. If they think that much of the boy,
then who am I to tell them no. We all should have friends like that.
^sig^
Sorry 'bout this - times have changed and the mailbox is junked.
- Please pull "nono" from the address to reply.
- My name is being used by another (AOL says they can't prevent it). Thus
uncivil mail is not from me- tell me of nastys please?
Bruce E. Cobern
wrote:
>That is not always possible and definitely is not within BSA's sphere of
>control -
> We have had the providers of letters of recommendation give a copy of their
>letter to the Eagle candidate the day the provider mailed the original to the
>Advancement chair- and our letter clearly says their letter will be kept
>confidential and is for the board's use.
> I have been asked by the three scouts who have received such copies if that
>was "illegal". I told the scouts that while we do not provide copies of the
>letters to the scouts, we have no control over the persons who provide the
>letters, and if the writers give the scout a copy of the letter, that is the
>writer's choice, and that is not "illegal", and the scout will not get in
>trouble if he sees a letter given to him by a writer before (or after) the
>scout's board appearance.
> (With a smile and a cautionary "And don't go asking for a copy, either." to
>the boys)
> We only ask the providers of the letters that they provide us with the
>letter and return it in the provided SASEnvelope, and I guess I would resist
>adding a clause to our standard letter which prohibits providing a copy to the
>scout.
> From conversations with some of the providers I knew, I think some of the
>providers felt so strongly about the boy's good character, they wanted to show
>the boys they thought highly of them. Some writers have asked and I have
>advised "it is not normal practice", and one lady said OK and sent a copy to
>the boy (anyway?)
> I say such actions are the writer's call. If they think that much of the boy,
>then who am I to tell them no. We all should have friends like that.
I agree with this 100% and just want to make sure that
nobody interprets my comments as indicating that the author
can't share the letter with the candidate. That, of course,
is their choice. Our point is that WE have an obligation to
maintain the confidentiality of the correspondence. The
author is free to do with the letter as they please.
I inform all our candidates when dealing with the
recommendations that the ONLY way they will see the letter
is if the author CHOOSES to share it with them, but they
won't see the letter from us. My guess is that many of the
letters get shared with the candidate, and that is fine.
>^sig^
>Sorry 'bout this - times have changed and the mailbox is junked.
>- Please pull "nono" from the address to reply.
>- My name is being used by another (AOL says they can't prevent it). Thus
>uncivil mail is not from me- tell me of nastys please?
Scott K.
recommendation letters go to National and are kept in the Eagle Scout's
file. They are not returned to anyone. Somebody must have received a bad
letter in the past , and got mad. That is the only reason I can figure out
that the letters are not returned.
Scott
Paul S. Wolf
>
> Last week I was at an Eagle Board of Review. The new policy is that
> the recommendation letters go to National and are kept in the Eagle
> Scout's file. They are not returned to anyone.
(1999 edition) _Advancement Committee Policies and Procedures_ book
(#33088B) it still isn't. The following is a direct quote:
"The Eagle Scout Service Project Workbook and references are
retained by the council. The Eagle Scout Service Project
Workbook may be returned to the Scout after council approval.
"Only the Eagle Scout Rank Application is forwarded to the
national Eagle Scout Service"
So the references stay AT THE COUNCIL, and are either filed or destroyed
after the Eagle credentials are received from National.
Paul S. Wolf
>
> One cannot disagree with Bruce or Paul, therefore I will disagree with
> the rule itself, mostly for a practical reason. I have never yet seen
> a recommendation that was not, in essence, a glorification of the
> Eagle candidate - a rubber stamp of approval. How many of you would
> include the name of a person you thought might malign you?
Thanks Hugh, but I do make a mistake once in a while (last time was in
1982, I think) :-)
You are correct, to a point. HOWEVER, here is a case in point:
A recent Eagle candidate in MY troop submitted a list of references.
I wrote to them a form letter, asking for their references, and included
a copy of the Scout Oath & law for their info.
One of the references NEVER replied (a teacher)
Another sent the worst LOOKING letter I have ever seen, full of typos,
strikeovers, handwritten inserts, misspellings, etc.
I wouldn't THINK of letting anyone other than the Eagle Board of review
see the poorly drafted letter, and for sure wouldn't let the Scout or
his parents see it.
If I give the Scout SOME of the letters, and not all, he would ask where
are the others, and I do not want to tell him two people didn't take the
time to send nice letters.
I told him, before he turned in the application, that I would NOT share
them with him, and that I would (and did) tell the references that I
would not, but that they were free to do so IF THEY wished.
BTW, Having recently (a year ago) had my son go thru the Grad School
application process, and having done references myself for job
applicants, the procedure is standard. Reference letters go into sealed
envelopes, and are NOT shared with the applicant. BSA's procedure is a
good training experience for the boys.
I'll copy my form letter to the group in a separate message.
Paul S. Wolf
> I wrote to them a form letter, asking for their references, and
> included a copy of the Scout Oath & law for their info.
Here is the text of the form letter and enclosure I use:
__Council_Name__
Boy Scouts of America
__Address__
__City__, __State__ __ZIP__
__Date__
Dear Sir or Madam:
__Scout's_Name__, a Life Scout in __Unit_Type_and_Number__, chartered to
__the_Chartered_Organization__, __City_Name__, Ohio, is a candidate for
the Rank of Eagle Scout.
As the final step in the process of determining the qualifications for
the rank of Eagle Scout, an Eagle Scout Board of Review must be
conducted. At that time, members of the Board of Review will discuss,
with the Scout, his achievements as a Boy Scout, and in his daily life,
and determine if he indeed meets the requirements for the high rank of
Eagle Scout. Those requirements include a series of advancements, the
earning of at least 21 Merit Badges, and evidence of leadership skills.
A candidate for Eagle Scout must serve in one or more leadership
positions in the Troop, and must plan, develop, and lead others in a
service project helpful to a religious institution, school, camp, or
other community organization not affiliated with the Boy Scouts of
America.
An Eagle Scout candidate must also demonstrate that he lives by the
principles of the Scout Oath, and Law in his daily life. In this
regard, the candidate has indicated that you know him personally, and
that you would be willing to provide a letter of recommendation on his
behalf. I have enclosed a copy of the Scout Oath and Law for your
reference in preparing the letter. Please note that the contents of the
letter will NOT be shown to or discussed with the candidate nor with
anyone not a member of the Eagle Scout Board of Review. You are free to
discuss the information with him or provide a copy of your letter to
him, if you so desire.
If you are willing to do so, please send a letter, addressed to Eagle
Board of Review for Candidate's Name, in the enclosed envelope, as soon
as possible. If you are unwilling to provide such a letter, please
contact me as soon as possible, at (___)-___-____.
Thank you for your cooperation.
Yours in Scouting,
__Chairman's_Name__
District Advancement Chairman
enclosure:
The Scout Oath
On my Honor, I will do my best
To do my duty to God and my country
and to obey the Scout Law;
To help other people at all times;
To keep myself physically strong,
mentally awake, and morally straight.
The Scout Law
A Scout is TRUSTWORTHY. A Scout tells the truth. He keeps his
promises. Honesty is a Part of his code of conduct.
People can always depend on him.
A Scout is LOYAL. A Scout is true to his family, friends, Scout
leaders, school, nation, and world community.
A Scout is HELPFUL. A Scout is concerned about other people. He
willingly volunteers to help others without expecting payment
or reward.
A Scout is FRIENDLY. A Scout is a friend to all. He is a brother to
other Scouts. He seeks to understand others. He respects
those with ideas and customs that are different from his own.
A Scout is COURTEOUS. A Scout is polite to everyone regardless of age
or position. He knows that good manners make it easier for
people to get along together
A Scout is KIND. A Scout understands there is strength in being
gentle. He treats others as he wants to be treated. He does
not harm or kill anything without reason.
A Scout is OBEDIENT. A Scout follows the rules of his family school,
and troop. He obeys the laws of his community and country.
If he thinks these rules and laws are unfair, he tries to have
them changed in an orderly manner rather than disobey them.
A Scout is CHEERFUL. A Scout looks for the bright side of life. He
cheerfully does tasks that come his way. He tries to make
others happy.
A Scout is THRIFTY. A Scout works to pay his way and to help others.
He saves for the future. He protects and conserves natural
resources. He carefully uses time and property.
A Scout is BRAVE. A Scout can face danger even if he is afraid.
He has the courage to stand for what be thinks is right
even if others laugh at him or threaten him.
A Scout is CLEAN. A Scout keeps his body and mind fit and clean.
He goes around with those who believe in living by these same
ideals. He helps keep his home and community clean.
A Scout is REVERENT. A Scout is reverent toward God. He is faithful
in his religious duties. He respects the beliefs of others.
Bruce E. Cobern
Hugh Sullivan) wrote:
>One cannot disagree with Bruce or Paul, therefore I will disagree with
>the rule itself, mostly for a practical reason. I have never yet seen
>a recommendation that was not, in essence, a glorification of the
>Eagle candidate - a rubber stamp of approval. How many of you would
>include the name of a person you thought might malign you?
Hugh, I don't disagree with you that you rarely will find
something in a recommendation letter that COULD not be
shared with the Scout.
However, you might find a situation such as the one
described by Paul where you might feel that giving the Scout
the letters might embarrass the author. (I know, that
shouldn't be OUR problem, but it might be.)
The real problem is one of violating a confidence. If we
want the person writing the recommendation to be open and
honest then we need them to know they are writing in
confidence. If that's the case, then we really have no
right to violate that confidence and release the letter,
without the permission of the author. With the author's
permission there is no problem, but the author had the
right, from the beginning, to share the letter with the
candidate.
KYBLKEAGLE
>Last week I was at an Eagle Board of >Review. The new policy is that the
>recommendation letters go to National and >are kept in the Eagle Scout's file.
Sorry, Scott. The new BSA's Advancement Procedures booklet clearly states that
those letters are NOT to be sent to National (they remain, however, the
property of the LOCAL COUNCIL).
>They are not returned to anyone. >Somebody must have received a bad
>letter in the past , and got mad. That is the >only reason I can figure out
that the letters >are not returned.
Again, while "someone" may SAY that's National policy, I know firsthand that
this is NOT National's offical policy with regard to the letters of
recommendations. Those items and other items other than the Eagle Scout
applications (and correspondence from the Scout Executive stating unusual
circumstances involving the application) are RETAINED BY THE LOCAL COUNCIL and
the LOCAL COUNCIL decides how they are to release, withhold, or destroy that
information and to whom.
The information referenced above is found within the BSA's NEW Advancement
Procedures booklet, which is the latest version (the 1999 printing). It
supersedes ALL of the previous versions!!
Settummanque!
settummanque, the blackeagle ((MAJ) Mike Walton)
Co-Owner/Marketing Leader kyblk...@aol.com
Rose Walton Personal Computing Coaching
<URL:http://members.aol.com/rwcoaching/>
Burnsville, Minnesota USA "No fancy slogans....just GREAT work!
Charles C Caro
You know it seems very odd to me that on one hand we hear voices crying to
keep the reference/recommendation/congratulation letters written by people
that have been very close to the Eagle candidate separate and apart from
the Eagle candidate, but on the other hand we all encourage the Eagle
candidate's family or SM to solicit scores of congratulation letters from
VIPs that have never known the individual Eagle candidate except for the
fact the he completed the requirements for the Eagle award. In my mind
this seems near the peak of non-functional logic.
We leave the Eagle candidate with the idea that it is OK for him to see the
praise of strangers and somehow not OK to see the praise of those folks
that may have had significant impact on his growth and development.
From what I have seen of the recommendation letter concept, which is
considerable, there are actually two fairly different threads running on
the why of the recommendation letter. On the one hand the Scout is
encouraged (ne required) to attach such letters with his Eagle application
in much the same way a job application would attach such letters. On the
other hand the Council wants to have references, which they are supposed
to actually check, for the purpose of qualifying the Eagle candidates
character. Most Councils have gone to the practice of requesting letters
because the Council staff is so thin that there is no time or resources to
do the leg work required to physically make the calls. Somewhere along the
line someone or group decided that the two threads should be merged, which
has caused no end of discussion and debate.
The real kicker is that the recommendation letters are not a requirement
for the Eagle award (1999 Boy Scout Requirements, page 13-14, which means
that anybody attempting to add this requirement is not following published
advancement guidelines in the first place.
YiS,
Charles C Caro
J. Hugh Sullivan
wrote:
>Hugh, I don't disagree with you that you rarely will find
>something in a recommendation letter that COULD not be
>shared with the Scout.
>
>However, you might find a situation such as the one
>described by Paul where you might feel that giving the Scout
>the letters might embarrass the author. (I know, that
>shouldn't be OUR problem, but it might be.)
I guess I'm the type who, if no one else would walk the other side of
the street, would. There is good and bad in sharing the letters of
recommendation. When making a rule with national import it is always
better to err on the side of caution.
I like the way the adjacent district, where my grandson lives, does
it. The candidate writes letters requesting letters and includes
sase's for mailing to the SM. The letters are retained by the Board
until the application is approved by National, at which time they are
given to the candidate. At times some discretion would be essential.
Maybe our problem is that we haven't lost our small town ways. The
religious leader, the school teacher, the neighbors - all who wrote
recommendations for Jason - were his adult counselors and friends, not
strangers.
Isn't it interesting that we discuss "Letters of Recommendation" when
the book only speaks of references? It appears we assume the content.
Hugh
Stephen M. Henning
> You know it seems very odd to me that on one hand we hear voices crying to
> keep the reference/recommendation/congratulation letters written by people
> that have been very close to the Eagle candidate separate and apart from
> the Eagle candidate, but on the other hand we all encourage the Eagle
> candidate's family or SM to solicit scores of congratulation letters from
> VIPs that have never known the individual Eagle candidate except for the
> fact the he completed the requirements for the Eagle award. In my mind
> this seems near the peak of non-functional logic.
Reference letters are about an Eagle candidate who is up for review and
need to be candid and must be private. If they are not private, they
loose their ability to be candid.
Congratulatory letters are for the Eagle who has already passed a very
rigorous process of review and are meant to be given to the Eagle in a
public setting.
What is strange about that?
--
Cheers, Steve Henning, Reading, Pennsylvania, USA
Correct email address is shen...@fast.net (Please forgive my spam deterrent)
Visit my home page at http://www.users.fast.net/~shenning
J. Hugh Sullivan
Henning) wrote:
>ca...@worldnet.att.net wrote:
>
>> You know it seems very odd to me that on one hand we hear voices crying to
>> keep the reference/recommendation/congratulation letters written by people
>> that have been very close to the Eagle candidate separate and apart from
>> the Eagle candidate, but on the other hand we all encourage the Eagle
>> candidate's family or SM to solicit scores of congratulation letters from
>> VIPs that have never known the individual Eagle candidate except for the
>> fact the he completed the requirements for the Eagle award. In my mind
>> this seems near the peak of non-functional logic.
>
>Reference letters are about an Eagle candidate who is up for review and
>need to be candid and must be private. If they are not private, they
>loose their ability to be candid.
>
>Congratulatory letters are for the Eagle who has already passed a very
>rigorous process of review and are meant to be given to the Eagle in a
>public setting.
>
>What is strange about that?
One must agree with the above distinction between "references" and
congratulatory letters.
But, when an Eagle candidate is asked for references, who does he
name? He names his favorite teacher, the religious leader he chats
with every week and the next door neighbor who loves him like a son.
In 26 years on the District Board, and missing only 4 candidates, I
have yet to see an uncomplimentary letter. They are "candied" not
"candid".
It's supposed to work as Steve says - but who believes it does? Maybe
it does work! Maybe every candidate IS as good as his letters say.
Hugh
Stephen M. Henning
>But, when an Eagle candidate is asked for references, who does he
>name? He names his favorite teacher, the religious leader he chats
>with every week and the next door neighbor who loves him like a son.
>In 26 years on the District Board, and missing only 4 candidates, I
>have yet to see an uncomplimentary letter. They are "candied" not
>"candid".
Since the Eagle application does not call for references, just for the
names of people who will provide references; we frequently call or
otherwise talk with the references. We get a more candid appraisal. We
have rejected 2 Eagle candidates in the past 9 years in our district.
Both had received badges which they did not try to earn. We rejected the
candidates for trying to cheat.
KYBLKEAGLE
>We leave the Eagle candidate with the idea >that it is OK for him to see the
praise of >strangers and somehow not OK to see the >praise of those folks that
may have had >significant impact on his growth and >development.
It's important that those providing references of the Scout can do so without
"recrimination" from the Scout nor the Scout's parents. It's also important
that the District/Council Board of Review members receive references from
people NOT LISTED on the "reference" part of the application. Many Districts
and Councils ask the parents of the Scout to provide them with names and phone
numbers or addresses of others that may know of the Scout's personal attitude
or personal character. Schools help out by providing input based on the
attendance and actvity of the Scout and anything other reference from the
Scout's homeroom teacher or guidance counsellor (or both).
This all takes me back to my own Eagle Scout Board of Review, when I tried to
impress upon the members of the Board how "studious" I was my Junior year of
high school. When they produced a letter explaining that I'd skipped school
twice that year, once for a "good reason," the tone of the interview changed
from one of me trying to "project the image of the ideal Scout" (in other
words, to try to b.s. my way through) to honestly telling them of my Scouting
experiences, and the people that made my Scouting such a good experience. I
didn't like my Scoutmaster, even though I PERSONALLY RECRUITED HIM and two of
his Assistants. He threw me into the pool a year back and FORCED me to either
"sink or swim!" He tasted my "food" and told me that "it sucked" and that "I
needed lessons on how to cook!" (which I later took and became the best cook in
my Personal Living class!!!) I told the four members of my Eagle Scout Board
those facts. They laughed when I told them my Scoutmaster thought my food
"sucked" and they were amazed that he taught me how to swim in one afternoon at
Gammon Fieldhouse's indoor (8 feet deep) pool. "But you broke the freestyle
record two months ago, right??"
"Yes." The point was made. Without me learning how to swim, I would have not
been able to do that well on my own.
But none of that stuff would have even came out during the Board of Review if
the members didn't ask my Guidance Counsellor (whom I didn't even list on my
Eagle application), two of my neighbors (didn't think about them either, even
though one wrote a very glowing letter about the time that I stopped a fight
between two kids and ended up getting hit on the head with a baseball bat!) nor
the girl I was dating at the time (whom had both bad and good things to say
about me, which was okay....we had broken up two weeks before the Board of
Review because I was "too much into the Boy Scouts" and not enough into her).
They did their homework, and I was both embarassed and proud that they did so,
for they knew things that my father had no idea about (they told him and shared
with him the various letters, something I don't recommend but they did it...)
My dad's only comment other than he was proud of me for becoming an Eagle Scout
that evening was "Joyce didn't really like you, did she? You sure know how to
pick them..." He was smiling.
No, Charles, the Eagle Board of Review is NOT supposed to be a cross between a
police interrogation and a Gestapo investigation....but the members of the
Board should try their best to find out as much as possible about the Eagle
Scout candidate:
*What things outside of Scouting does he participate in??
*What does his peers and those living around him think of him??
*Demonstrate to us that he is a leader, one way or another....Demonstrate to us
that he is a follower, one way or another
*Does he have a sense of ethics (or right from wrong)? How does he try to "do
the right thing?"
*Give me an example of a time in which he wasn't as "happy-go-lucky."
*Why should we approve this kid for the highest youth award in Boy Scouting?
Should we approve him? If not, should we reconsider him at a later time?
*If this was your child, would you be proud of him for the things you know
about him?
Again, those things should be kept in confidence because they reveal things
that could have been taken the wrong way by the candidate or the candidate's
family. For instance, a comment by someone that "All he does is Scouting" can
either mean that he's very committed to the Scouting program or that he's a
loner and Scouting's his own outlet.
"When he's not doing Scouts, he's constantly spending time after school...I see
him coming home frequently on the "late bus." For all this person knows, he's
constantly in trouble.... which may be the furthest from the truth; he could be
in band, or chorus, or JROTC, or tutoring other kids, or TV. Or into drug
dealing, prostitution, or even drinking off the school grounds with his "buds".
When I receive postings asking me what should be done with the reference
letters ("recommendations") ("nominiation letters"), I simply tell the person
to shred them, since they are no longer needed to make the evaluation and
nobody needs to retain copies of them. Everyone on the Board will review and
read the letters, so there's no reason to keep them. The person making the
reference is doing so in confidence and doesn't expect that the Scout will get
a copy. And besides, there's potential privacy issues that could arise
afterwards. So just shred them, make them a part of the "procedure" so that
all present can observe that the "background material" is destroyed.
All that is sent now to National is the application and any comments or
attachments from the Council's Scout Executive. That's it. The "Life to Eagle"
packet, the letters, none of that other stuff goes.
When I'm asked "What happens if the Scout appeals the decision...wouldn't you
need those letters to justify your decision??", I answer "no, because the
letters are just ONE PART but don't MAKE OR BREAK the Eagle Scout Board of
Review process. Remember, the purpose of ANY Board of Review is to review the
progress of the Scout along the lines of the Scout Oath (Promise) and Law in
his daily life and his personal progress as a Scout and a member of a Troop,
Team, Post/Ship, or Crew."
>The real kicker is that the recommendation >letters are not a requirement for
the Eagle >award (1999 Boy Scout Requirements, page >13-14, which means that
anybody attempting >to add this requirement is not following >published
advancement guidelines in the >first place.
But this is NOT a requirement for the SCOUT to complete. This is a requirement
for the DISTRICT OR COUNCIL ADVANCEMENT COMMITTEE to complete as part of their
"inquiry" into the character, citizenship, and personal fitness of the Eagle
candidate.
My opinion is that Scouts SHOULD NOT BE GATHERING ANY LETTERS AT ALL. Their
ONLY responsibility is to provide the references listed on the application.
That's it.
They don't go out and solicit letters, evaluation forms, or anything else.
That's the job of the adults serving as members of the Board of Review and the
adult serving as the District or Council Advancement Chair. So the Scout isn't
adding anything to the advancement process by simply completing the application
to the best of his ability.
While I agree with you that if a Scout refuses to complete the "references"
part of the Eagle Scout Application that it doesn't "disqualify" him from
earning Eagle or appearing before the Board of Review, it does raises the "red
flag" if I was the person reviewing the application at the District/Council
level or at the National level.
Hobdbcgv
>for the Eagle award (1999 Boy Scout Requirements, page 13-14, which means
>that anybody attempting to add this requirement is not following published
>advancement guidelines in the first place.
>
Actually, requirement 7 would apply-
which can be read -> candidates provide what the Board of Review wants, carte
blanche.
However, there are fairly specific guidelines about what an Eagle board can do
listed in the National Advancment Policies and Procedures pp 17-18
the paragraph titled "5" requires that when the application is received at the
service center, the contents be verified and the references be contacted -
"The council advancment committee or its designee contacts the person listed
as a reference on the [application] either by letter, form, or telephone
checklist. The council determines the method or methods to be used"
BTW, what is a telephone checklist? Does that mean the "checker" may NOT
interview the reference other than by following a committee/council approved
checklist, i.e., may not pull an OIC move?
J. Hugh Sullivan
Henning) wrote:
>Since the Eagle application does not call for references, just for the
>names of people who will provide references; we frequently call or
>otherwise talk with the references. We get a more candid appraisal. We
>have rejected 2 Eagle candidates in the past 9 years in our district.
>Both had received badges which they did not try to earn. We rejected the
>candidates for trying to cheat.
Hopefully the instances are rare where this occurs. The important
message is that it worked the way it was supposed to work in the above
cases.
If they had badges they had not earned, how did you discover this
without going behind some paperwork - which we are not allowed to do.
We should have rejected a candidate for the same reason a couple of
years ago and were frustrated because the SM and ASM were his parents.
Some Scouts in their previous troop had rejected badges approved by
the lady.
Hugh
Hugh
Stephen M. Henning
>If they had badges they had not earned, how did you discover this
>without going behind some paperwork - which we are not allowed to do.
In one case the boy was asked how liked a certain merit badge. He said he
never earned it. We said it was required and read him the requirements.
He said he had never done those things. We asked him to check this out
and come back. It turned out a relative had sent in the paperwork for the
merit badge without the boy ever doing anything. The boy was to be
commended and the relative reprimanded, but the boy did not make Eagle.
In the other case we got a tip that a Scoutmaster was forging merit badge
cards. We researched the issue by contacting all merit badge counselors
the Scoutmaster had professed to use and found that indeed the boys had
never even seen the merit badge counselors. The Scoutmaster resigned and
the boy never showed up for his Eagle review.
--
Pardon my spam deterrent; send email to shen...@fast.net
Cheers, Steve Henning in Reading, PA USA