Leadership
BuddyVette@AOL.COM
Wed, 15 Jun 1994 12:42:56 EDT
Mike Walton's comments yesterday about getting Scouts to lead fit right in
with something that happened at our Troop Committee last night. One of the
new committee members, a lady who had been involved with Cub Scouts for the
past four years, voiced a concern of her own and that of some other parents
of boys who had joined the troop in February. These boys are in one of our
two first year patrols which were set up in February - this lady's husband
was recently appointed advisor to that patrol - I serve as advisor to the
other. Her concern was aimed specifically at the next troop outing, which is
a trip to a large water park about 5 hours away. She voiced a concern that
the troop seems to be taking "too many" trips where a long drive is involved.
Indeed, two of the last three outings have involved driving 5 or 6 hours,
arriving late at night and setting up in the dark. Specifically, she
questioned why we should be travelling several hours to a water park when
there are two in this area less than an hour away, and we wouldn't have to
camp overnight, take food, etc.
Well, this story has some interesting circumstances leading up to the
"problem". This trip was planned in August of 1993 at the annual planning
session. The original intent was to go "tubing" in the Guadalupe River with
the boys who could not or did not go to Philmont during that same period of
time. Recognize that about 25 of the troops 50 current members were not in
the troop at that planning session, and that this group of boys is the one
which would be involved primarily with this trip. As the date for the trip
approached, the "circumstances" started piling up. The Camping Chairman
resigned due to job-related travel prior to making any arrangements for the
trip. The Scoutmaster realized that none of the new Scouts had done any
Scout-related swimming (no Second Class or First Class test, let alone the
swimming merit badge) and that a policy somewhere would not allow these
Scouts to participate in the tubing trip without each one having a parent
present. Knowing that would be impossible, the decision was made to return
the issue to the boys for further discussion.
The boys were told that the tubing trip would not be possible for safety
reasons, but that they could choose other options. The primary options were
(1) go to the same area, camp out, and go to a large water park in that area
(it's an older park, not Wet and Wild - it's Schlitterbahn for those of you
familiar with the New Braunfels area), or (2) spend the whole day at Wet and
Wild locally and not have to worry about camping and cooking. The boys voted
by patrol, and the vote turned out 3 to 2 for the camping trip. Oops, one of
the "circumstances" happened here. Two of the patrol leaders left the troop
meeting before telling the SPL how they voted - actually they were APLs who
wanted to talk to the PLs and some of the boys who missed the meeting. So
the SPL had to call everyone again and "recount" the votes. One of the
patrol leaders who was called (one who missed the meeting) had not contacted
his entire patrol for their votes and, instead, asked his mother what to do.
She told him, "Vote for the camping trip", which he did. As it turned out,
7 of the 10 boys in that patrol did not want to go on the trip. OUCH! Well,
the SPL, after receiving the 3 to 2 vote, proceeded with plans for the
camping trip, turning over that responsibility to the ASPL as the SPL left
for Philmont.
Well, the next troop meeting comes along and still there is a problem. The
patrol which did not get contacted asked for another vote. The Scoutmaster
allowed the vote and, since the composition of the meeting was different than
the previous week, the vote turned out to be a tie, 2 patrols for the trip, 2
against, 1 absent (all at Philmont), so the ASPL broke the tie in favor of
the camping trip.
So what does this all have to do with the issue at the Troop Committee
meeting? Well, the issue really was "How can you let the boys go on this
trip when it seems so poorly planned?" The Scoutmaster and Committee
Chairman tried their very best to point out that the boys run this troop and
that the adults are there to provide support and, where necessary, guidance.
This particular trip was not poorly planned - the "circumstances" made it
poorly executed (but easily salvageable). Further, and more importantly,
there are lessons for the boys in this episode. First, you don't plan outings
for boys if they aren't qualified to go. Second, you communicate with people
prior to expressing an opinion in their behalf. As Mike said, sometimes you
let them fall on their faces, but you have to be there to pick them up and
help them understand what happened. You cannot take their responsibilities
away from them, as I feel like some of the adults would like to do.
It's really been interesting watching the two new patrols develop since
February. The patrol that has had some problems has an attendance record at
outings of about the troop average (80% or so), while the other patrol is
averaging 95% attendance at outings and functions (yes, that's the one I
advise - I am bragging a little). The more interesting bit of development is
among the parents. The parents of the first group have been less than
enthusiastic about giving up control to the boys - they still want to plan
things like in Cubs (but just try to get them to help drive to an outing!).
In fact, this group of parents asked the Scoutmaster to put on a special
session of our Troop Operations Workshop just for them and their boys (4 of
10 attended). On the other hand, the second group has adapted very well to
the troop's approach, and, in a survey done by the Patrol Leader, the parents
and boys prefer to wait for the next regular session of the Workshop so that
the whole troop will be present.
I suppose the real clincher at the Troop Committee meeting was the lady's
comment that "I have been doing this type of planning for this age group for
the last 12 years..." Well, not in this troop. These boys have to learn for
themselves, make their own mistakes, fall on their faces, Mike. Of course, I
could be all wet here, but there's hope! Since I'll be attending the Working
with Junior Leaders class at Philmont later this month, I'll find out
everything I'm doing wrong (or right). Anyone else going? Let me know and
we'll get together (bring patches to trade).
YIS,
Buddy Givens, ASM Troop 123
Tonkawa District, Longhorn Council
Whatever it takes.
Terry Howerton Sakima Group, Inc. SCOUTER Magazine Kansas City |
