fred8033

I fear we read different things into the quotes of Baden Powell and Hillcourt and others. I fear BSA's definition of patrol has been mucked up by poor wording choices. I prefer the 1950s boy scout handbook (page 88): "The Scout patrol is the finest boys' gang in all the world. The patrol is the unit that makes Scouting go. It is a group of boys, usually six to eight, who pal together because they like to do the same things." ... I thought Hillcourt (or another author quoted with Hillcourt) wrote as a gang of friends who wanted to hang together and do things together. Where you

So I'm rephrasing yours to say it's more like #1. To make SM / SPL job easier. No bigger concept beyond that.

BSA "Troop Leader Guidbook" has replaced the "Scoutmaster Handbook". The previous scoutmaster handbook talked of regular, new-scout and venture patrols. The new guidebook has changed tone with "mixed age" or "same age". I've always viewed "same age" as a slight and I prefer it to be called "same interest" or "same experience". The new guidebook says "historically patrols were made up of scouts of all ages and ranks". But I think that was not necessarily inferring "mixed age" in what mixed age patrols infers today. From what I read more and more ... my interpretation is current BSA

I agree. I was attempting to say that scouts is not about teaching Robert's Rules. If anything, those rules can get in the way of our teaching our scouts to listen and be compassionate and thoughtful to each other. But if you can use those rules in a constructive way to teach listening and compassion and thoughtfulness, then great. The key is ... We are not there to teach our scouts to master bureaucracy. It's about the social dynamic and how to work with others. That's the leadership we're teaching.

That's fine, but ya know this is not about Robert's Rules or creating the perfect mini-legislature. It's a gang of kids that should be doing things. It's probably going to look and smell like a gang of kids when planning. Pay attention to the social dynamics and mentor the scouts there. Being kind, helpful, loyal, etc. IMHO, Roberts Rules are applied when there is opposition and winners and losers. Now if you want to use Robert's Rules to get to trustworthy, loyal, helpful, friendly, ... fine. It can be a tool. It's just not required.

"simply wear as many ... as possible" (that fit) ... I've many times seen adult leaders do uniforming checks but then be wearing four or five rows of square knot awards ... even though the adult leader uniform inspection checklist says the world crest needs to be centered between left shoulder seam and the top of the pocket. Depending on shirt size, many leaders should only be wearing two rows of square knots and not four or five. Shouldn't we correct our most experienced scouters first? Our scouts were recently doing a ceremony picture. I watched and kept my mouth shut. It was thei

Rules and procedures never can address all cases though back of the sash is a reasonable solution and explicitly stated. From all the uniforming violations I've seen, I think the best answer is make it look sharp and clean. Sashes have been sewed double wide and lengthened. Or use the back. As long as it looks sharp and respectable, no one should complain.

Rough idea ... stop troop camping. Maybe troop summer camp and a troop district camporee. Beyond that, patrols should function as patrols. Choose their activities and schedule. Find their own camps. If you really want patrols to function as patrols, minimize the troop focus. I say this as a rough idea because every troop calendar I've seen has a monthly troop focus with some sporadic higher adventure activity. I never see an annual calendar for the patrols. Maybe asking the patrols to have one or two months each year where they focus on creating the coolest patrol campout

I think SM signing son's rank requirements is absolutely directly analogous to MBC singing MB requirements, both per situation and per GTA. The key point I may have missed saying ... I'm very glad I got to had the honor to work with my sons on a few MBs. It was a very special and memorable time. If I had done many MBs, then I think my son would have missed out on growth opportunities. IMHO, the best advancement is varied. Some through troop. Some elsewhere. Some with parent. Some with other adults. Some with external MB fairs. Some where the scout picks up the phone and ca

Don't 100% avoid working with your son. It can be a very meaningful and grow your bond with him. As it applies to my sons ... I think MBC is an analogous role. For each of my sons, I've only mentored one Eagle MB. For the non-Eagle MBs, I've done one or two further. But then again, those extra MBs are more unique opportunities I don't think would be offered other ways. Motor boating for example.

As people said above ... You absolutely have the right to do it. You should not be embarrassed to sign off for them. They should not be penalized because you are the scoutmaster. The main reasons to NOT do it ... Perception. Avoid perception of favoritism or your son had it easier. Growth. Your son will grow more by working with people other than their parent. So ... if you can have someone else work with your son, great. BUT, don't penalize him. If there is no one else and your son would be penalized, I'd sign off

Fully agree. It's not gender specific. People want to spend their time in a meaningful way. Advancement for advancement sake is not meaningful. Hiking. Camping. Fishing. ... "ing" is meaningful especially when it's a new experience. I agree. Parents invest and drive their kids to things. They want to see a measure that the investment is worthwhile. They see it in the rank. I see it every time there is a slight bit more maturity in my kid after a scouting activity or event.

I'm betting 90% are paired with a pre-existing troop for equipment, committee and probably also a scheduled of activities and events.

Agreed. ... IMHO, the scout should find pride in their journey, not just a rank. ... In my mind, I'd even argue "rank" is not a great measure of skill of a scout. I think other measures are much more telling. Number of nights in a tent. Number of nights in a tent below zero F. Number of miles on a river. Number of miles hiked. Number of high adventures. I disagree. Even fifty years ago, Eagle scout was prestigious and magazine cover art was around earning Eagle. IMHO, the higher percent of Eagles is because the bottom has fallen out. Fifty year years ago, yout

Thank you. I always think I know everything. I'm corrected and appreciate the information. It was once explained to me as a measurement of the whole scouting journey Tiger to Eagle. How many join and how many finish. The number seems much more reasonable then. I trust the number of Eagle is fairly steady (maybe growing), but the expectations are better defined and youth have many more resources. Then add that the number of members has drastically dropped resulting in those that are in the program are probably from families that really value scouting. And, thus want their kid to

Your metric isn't probably that bad as I think national's number is based on scouts joining as Lion and Tigers and all the losses that happen during Cub Scouts and before switching to the old scout programs.

@thrifty I don't like labels either. "Eagle factor" is a shallow snide label not worthy of a scout leader. Be specific in what is wrong wrong or what should change or don't say anything at all. ... Nothing against the original poster. It's just a term that has been thrown around too loosely for way too long. One statement in the article hit me. "“I think it’s a credit to several things but mainly the boys themselves have made the troop a fun activity within their curriculum, " ... Magical mixtures of scouts and scout leaders happen that make the program shine. In my 15+ years

I fully agree. And a 17 year old scout can knock off lots of requirements quickly because of maturity and the ability to focus.

Your mileage may vary ... but I've seen this done many times. My experience is this. ASMs are often not as experienced as SMs. It takes years to learn a more relaxed attitude and learn to sit on your hand to let the scouts really take charge. ASMs don't provide a consistent message from the SM. ASM attendance is far less consistent than the SM. You might have one or two dedicated ASMs, but then the rest will be hit and miss. ASMs often work agendas thru their patrol at the expense of the patrol members. ASMs look for voids to fill instead of letting th

... some ... it can be noticed fairly quickly. SM should adjust as things are noticed. My point is this should be treated as a situation to address, teach and grow. The possibility of this happening should not be used as an excuse to insert adults into the youth program.

I've found some very good comments here. My sadness is the ideal is hard to achieve and hard to maintain. Leaders change. Life happens. Adults don't always agree. More importantly, I truly believe the scouting program that I want my son to be part of rarely looks like the ideal troop.

I agree. At some point a measure of reasonableness needs to be applied. Here is my thought process. Two - So that a single person can't act in issolation. Registered - So that background checks are done. 21 years of age - Creates separation between the scouts they are protecting. Including meetings - To make it clear that when scouts gather, we want two leaders. My reasonable view is based on a common scenario that has happened multiple times. If we take the 20 scouts camping with two valid adult leaders, then we can't be everywhere at all times. Scouts go ge

Two adults do not have to sit in the PLC. The troop may need two adult leaders to open the building and have the scouts gather, but you don't need them in the room with the PLC. That would be like going to summer camp and two adults have to escort each and every set of scouts everywhere. It's not the point or the expectation. Have a special room for the PLC. Adults and other non-PLC scouts stay in the main area or another room. Troop committee could even meet in yet another room if you have that running concurrently.

I've seen different ways that PLCs are run. In my view, the best PLCs are where the SM guides the SPL outside the PLC meeting and doesn't even attend the PLC. Essentially, PLC is for youth. Troop committee meeting is for adults. Before the PLC, the SM meets with the SPL and asks what is being covered, what needs planning, etc. He also asks the SPL what the scouts need from the troop committee. Then, the SPL runs the PLC and the SM listens into the troop committee meeting. Sometime during the troop committee meeting, our SPL reports to our troop committee that is meeting at the same

If the PLC voted on it, it seems like you need to respect their wishes. Sort of boxed in. The question is the dynamics of the situation. You can expect people to listen for a few minutes to something they are not involved in. But if you ask them to spend 20 to 30 minutes, you waste their time. Wasting their time can result in bad behavior. IMHO, respect peoples time and they will respect yours. Waste their time and it comes back at ya.