Eagledad

Sometimes we can be too smart for ourselves. I had visited a couple troops that elected SPLs annually instead of biannually. It seem to work well for them because it gave the SPL enough time to get used to the job and still have time to advance the program with their personal ideas. So I proposed the idea to the PLC and they scratched their heads to what the troop would gain. I am usually a pretty good sales man, but they saw the change as more work than gain and said move on. So as you wisely noted, the real differences was how they handled their program within the tradition we were using. I still would have liked to have seen how it worked. LOL Barry

Yep, and that was based from the discussion trend of justifying scheduled conferences and BORs because the adults are too busy during meetings. I was the SM of a big boy run program and we certainly had the time. I wasn't saying your troop should be like ours. Now maybe your troop is struggling for adult time, I stand corrected. But then I would ask, will you change the routine of your conferences and BOR schedules later when the adults have more time? I have never heard that to be a goal in any troop. Same goes with my comments on patience. If teaching scouts the skill of patience is in fact the primary reason for long periods of time between BORs and conferences, then I applaud the attempt toward character growth. But it appeared to me in the discussion to be a disingenious attempt to raise it unworthy to discuss. I'm only saying that I have more respect for "we have always done it this way and see no reason to change" rather than covering our pride with a less truthful reasoning. That is why I said, and still say that we shouldn't feel pressured to make up noble reasons to cover ourselves in subjects that have little consequences to a scouts experience in the program. If you feel that kind of pressure, then something else needs to change. Barry

That' brilliant! Didn't someone else say something like that? OH YES, it was me: "Why can't you just say, "we do it this way because it works for us." ? Does every tradition, process or habit in your unit have to be justified by nobility of the effort? Can't it be justified because it flows well in your program? What next, Thursday Troop meetings are the best because it forces the scout to practice loyalty? Let's step back a little and present some ideas without feeling like we have to defend our reasoning. At least with stuff like this." Barry

Yes, you are right. I was very conscious of the guidelines while trying the idea. But it was important to me at the time that scout responsibilities be pushed as far as it could. I was passionate about scout independence and responsibility at the time. The scouts roles were limited and watched closely. As I said, the real challenge was finding the scouts with the time. I think that, more than the BSA guidelines, is why the experiment faded out. By the way, the DE and District Commissioner knew we were trying it and were guiding us to try and prevent us from stepping out of line. Barry

Until 1990, Webelos Dens crossing over in one big group wasn't common way for scouts to join a troop. Webelos crossed over either by reaching a certain age or when they earned the Webelos rank. The dens depleted one of two scouts at a time, so the numbers worked fine to mix the scouts into existing patrols. Group crossovers were a result of the NSP, not the other way around. Is that what you meant by not adding up? As for Hillcourts quotes, both he and Powell encouraged patrols of friends during a time when friends were commonly defined by local relationships, not age as we discuss it here. I had friends both older and younger than me when I was the scout age. I think parents struggle with that concept today because it is unusual for neighborhood friends to become patrols. That is not to say Powell and Hillcourt wouldn't still encourage groups of Webelos to join a troop together, I'm sure they would. But it is important to understand the context of their quotes and the dynamics of the patrol. Friends joined patrols of existing patrols of friends as they reached the proper age. My dad was a boy scout during WWII and his troop never had more than two new scouts join at a time. Since they hiked everywhere they went, even to campouts, all the scouts lived very close to each other and where neighborhood friends long before they reached the age of scouts. It was a different time. Also, I don't think the quote about frequent shuffling of patrols applies to this discussion. That is different situation. Barry

We tried different approaches to BORs over the years. We found that using parents was a good way for them to get involved enough to see how the program works. The challenge was maintaining a consistency with the quality of the BORs as different parents came and went. We fixed that problem by asking one or two experienced committee members to lead BORs. They had a lot of BOR experience and were trained with the BSA advancement documents. The BOR leaders guided the parents during discussions and helped keep the reviews on track. They basically set the tone for the parents to follow for asking the questions. We had written questions for each rank that we gave the parents so they didn't get too far off with their questions. The BOR leader also knew the appropriate off the cuff questions that could be asked to enhance a scouts review. But the trick with using parents successfully in BORs was using and experienced leader to guide and set the tone of the discussion. We also tried using older scouts in the BOR. It was my attempt to bring in more boy run responsibility for the scouts. We found that having an older scout on the board relaxed the new scouts because the board to them was just a bunch of adult strangers testing their skills. Believe it or not, the challenge was finding enough qualified scouts because they were pretty busy. Barry

I have to agree. This is a strange conversation. I was the SM of a large troop and we do our SM conferences and BOR at the request of scouts. They usually didn't get a conference that day, but they might. Some folks here like to talk the big talk of their boy run or patrol method program, but I wonder sometimes. What takes up so much of your SM's time during a meeting? I had four task during the average Troop meeting: 1. Before the troop meeting I talked with the SPL about the PLC meeting to learn what they desired from the adults. We have a PLC meeting each week before the troop meeting. 2. Scoutmaster conferences and coffee with the adults. Time with the adults was important for me because that is where I talked a lot about the reasoning behind patrol method and why we weren't in the same rooms with the boys. And it also just fun talking about other stuff. 3. Scoutmaster minute at the end of the meeting (SPL only gave me 2 minutes). 4. Listen to the PLC during their post meeting discussion. That was it basically. Oh of course other things popped up like talking to parents, guest, CC on an as need basis, but basically my time during meetings was scoutmaster conferences and coffee and stuff. What do your Scoutmasters do? As for patience, our scouts practice patience full time while doing their scouting stuff. Patience is one of the most practiced skills as a youth leader and is discussed "A Lot" during my conferences and reviews with scouts. To be honest, with all the character traits the scouts' struggle with while making decisions in a boy run program, patience seems like a flimsy excuse for adults to justify a procedure used in their program. Why can't you just say, "we do it this way because it works for us." ? Does every tradition, process or habit in your unit have to be justified by nobility of the effort? Can't it be justified because it flows well in your program? What next, Thursday Troop meetings are the best because it forces the scout to practice loyalty? Let's step back a little and present some ideas without feeling like we have to defend our reasoning. At least with stuff like this. Barry

I'm not a fan of NSPs because they take longer to assimilate scouts into the troop program. NSPs have an advantages in some situations, but In most cases they slow down scout growth. The NSP was added to the program around 1990 in an attempt to lower the dropout rate of first years scouts. More scouts drop out of the BSA during their first year in the than any other year. However, the dropout numbers 15 years later did not show improvement. Which means the assumption of why new scouts quit was wrong. There is nothing wrong with the idea of friends joining the same patrol, but that should not be the primary or overriding motivation to give a scout the best possible opportunity for a successful career in a boy run program. I know our natural parental instinct are that groups of boys who have been together a long time would want to stay together, but my experience is only 1 in 10 groups want that option when presented with other choices. You would be surprised with the number of boys looking to start fresh because their group holds them in place within the hierarchy the group has already established. The first scouts who quit are scouts on the bottom of the hierarchy. And groups that stick together require a lot more outside patrol influence to achieve half the growth. I'm not suggesting troops use one method or the other. Our troop lays out all the options with no hint of bias. It took us awhile to develop a successful new scout program, but I knew we were going the right direction when I got fewer calls from the parents. Barry

I might be excited if they moved the Tigers into this program because that would reduce the workload on the rest of the pack. Sadly they kept the Pack program five years long, which is the main cause of burnout and drop outs. Barry

I have a lot of experience with boy run patrol method scouting and I can say that in all the years you have been on this forum, I think your program is more boy run than some, not as much as others. There are very few topics on this forum that I haven't experienced one way or another, so I can usually pick out posts that aren't quite what the poster claims. But that is OK because most of the time because posters are trying to make a point that would only get lost in details that don't matter to the point and would take up a lot of forum space. BUT when posters feel that have to force their theories by demonizing adults, scouts, and program styles with generalizations and straw men, then the thread has to be brought back to reality. Just because a SM doesn't perform to your idealistic theory doesn't mean they aren't doing the best they can. Who isn't proud of their program after the hard work. These hard working volunteers deserve more appreciation than "smiles and nicely ignores them", and the list here deserves more realistic detail of how to develop such a program without trying to intimidate opinion with generalized statements of adult run. Remember the quote: "I would find the question of whether or not the person is good or bad is not appropriate whereas the idea worked or not for them would be a better evaluation." There are many things you have stated in working with your scouts that I thought were a bit on the adult direct side, but so long as you understand the bigger picture, who cares? Adults work within their knowledge and understanding. If their knowledge and understanding is different than your knowledge and understanding, that doesn't make them bad. Instead, build a trust by passing ideas back and forth. Scouting is hard. It is especially hard for boy run programs because the scouts are more independent in their decisions and adults are by nature parents. The best advice for learning how to work toward a better boy run program is a little humility to listen to other ideas. Barry

Yes, but you have said more than once the SPLs are only used by Scoutmasters who want to control the Patrol leaders program. And you didn't imply it kindly to anybody using an SPL in troops of any size. Attitude of personal opinions is as much adult driving as direct interaction. I had kind of hoped you had moved past that opinion, but I can't tell. And it's too bad, I find helping adults work toward the a boy run patrol method program without pushing my personal idea of using Aims and Methods on them to be very rewarding. Barry

I've done a few ceremonies for all the ranks. I usually pick a theme and then build around it. I did one like you suggest where everyone stood in a circle. The ceremony goes pretty fast because there is no wait for the scouts to walk up to the CM. We use the American Indian theme and I had the scouts cheer, stomp, and clap with the announcement of each scout's name. I can't remember the cheers because that was over 20 years ago, but it was something like "Pride of the wolf!" and "Courage of the Bear!. Or something like that. We had a American Indian parent who after all the awards were given, showed us how to do a real Indian dance and the led everyone in the around the room doing the dance. Even the parents commented how much they enjoyed the ceremony. Really all you need to do is pick a simple theme and build around it. Just keep in mind the more the scouts are moving their feet and hands and the louder they yell, the more fun they are having. Parents and siblings too. Barry

Ah, very good. A quote worth saving for future discussions. So with that in mind, consider that none of the BSA materials or training provide guidance for troops without an SPL. From your post one can conclude that using or not using the SPL successfully in patrol method troops of "any" size depends on whether or not the idea works for the adults of that program. Good discussion. Barry

Yes or no, are adults who don't use the NSP or Venture Patrols bad leaders? Barry

The SM/ASM Fundamentals course does teach about the NSP, Regular patrols and Venture Patrols, they just don't teach it as the only way. Heretic is a name you gave yourself. I'm not sure others would give you that title. Your original stand was the promotion of only aged based and Venture Patrols as compared with the traditional mixed age patrols. You even said once that you were glad that the BSA killed traditional scouting. Lately your hard line has mellowed to consider styles other than yours that fit better with different adult personalities. But even with all the BSA materials and training, I think you can see just from the forum that the BSA program allows a very broad range of styles and ideas that still work within the program model which still works toward the common vision. Barry

Interesting quote. I was thinking of the comments I read a few months ago from a clergyman for one of the US churches that voted to accept a gay clergy and perform gay marriages (I can't remember which one now). He said the US church leaders fully expected the church to grow from the change, but that wasn't happening. He was concerned for the future of the church and wondered if the changes had caused a distrust in the members. I scratch my head trying to understand how any rational person can see growth from splitting the base with a change of doctrine. The organization looses much of the base and all of it's integrity. It seems the Catholic church has some challenges a head with this new Pope. Barry

It is old school because it came from the traditional scouting days where first class marked the scout as having the skills to camp in the woods safely without assistance. Senior Scouts Leaders should certainly have those skills. At the time I was SM, patrols could camp without adults, so we encourage first class for PLs for the same reason. But a trusted level of maturity isn't the prevailing perception of a the first class rank today. Barry

You are pretty much describing our troop. Most of our scouts' ECOHs are very near their 18th birthday. What's interesting about the phases your scout speaks about is that we can see the phase by how he dresses. At first it's full uniform with a little embarrassment. Then the scouts kind of wears the uniform. Then about 15 he always wears full uniform with pride. Stages of life. We did create a tradition that when National acknowledges our scout is officially an Eagle, the SPL gives the scout an Eagle Patch to wear until his ECOR. Barry

It sounds like you are next in line. The previous scoutmaster and I were close and a lot of times the only difference between us in are actions with the scouts was the titles on our shoulder patch. I learned quickly after getting becoming the SM that the title carried a heavy weight of responsibility that I never felt as an ASM. Careful what you wish for. That being said, it was a wonderful experience. Barry

Trust comes at the price of time and integrity. Sometimes a new scout wanted to be the patrol leader his first year and struggled because his patrol wouldn't elect him. I encouraged him by explaining that he needed to "earn" the trust of his patrol by making good decisions over time. Good decisions can mean supporting the present leadership and working hard for the patrol. Most Scoutmasters got that responsibility through hard work supporting the previous Scoutmaster. Barry

SMs don't need to duck and weave with the guidelines if they use the program to develop character and leadership development when the scout joins the program. The problems usually rise when rank and stature become priority over character and leadership development. We used to have a member of this forum a long time ago who said ove rand over that 90 percent of the discussions on this forum are a result of adults not using the BSA program. There are plenty of literature and training courses to guide adults, and when the literature and training have gray areas, there are plenty of resources in the district and council to resolve questions. As I have watched the discussions over the years, I have to agree that adult leaders create 90 percent of their problems because they don't learn and use the BSA program. And I also agree with the others that when the adults aren't running the BSA program, they have an adult run program. If the SM did nothing else except guide the scouts to use the PL and SPL Handbook to run their program, they would not have this discussion. That is why I asked all Scoutmasters at Scoutmaster Specifics Courses to use those books instead of the SM Handbook. Barry

Yes, but the "shoot first ask questions later" approach is a dangerous way of running a troop and can set the scouts up for disappointment. Asking the District Advancement chairman and District Commissioner clears these things up quickly. I've called them many times looking for help on advancement with handicapped scouts. They always gave us an easy solution in writing. Barry

Yes, and I can see the value of counselor critique, but from my experience with the one signature white card, I have no desire to add the second formal check. It's simply a bureaucratic step of forcing units to follow a process. We are supposed to encourage independence, yet we keep checking on them. This is one check that from my experience isn't required. Barry

Our council uses the white cards that don't require a 2nd SM signature. I have never understood the purpose of 2nd SM signature. The counselors signature is the important one. Barry

Wow! This is the kind of stuff we come to get on this forum. Barry