Old_OX_Eagle83

Many UC's aren't, and don't want to be UC's, they just want to feel like they're involved by being on a roster. Another issue we have is many UC's don't understand the job, they take the BSA training, and off they go. To gain understanding of the job a new UC needs to be paired with a seasoned ADC, or a fantastic UC, for several months.

The other part of this is getting to know your unit and charter org, establishing good relations, developing friendship, and gaining trust; without these you can't do the job. Every unit is different, with different needs, and will expect different things from you; it's not easy sorting all this out.

Being a UC is very rewarding, it's an important function, and one that can truly make a difference.

Although, like you said, there were better ways to handle some elements of this, I don't see where any rules were broken. The time frame for a BOR to happen isn't defined to my knowledge. Likes you're correct, this parent was going to go off anyway.

I said parent specifically, as you as SM appoint your assistants (ASM's). This guys behavior is way out of line for a scout leader. Lots of people have given good advice for how to handle the young man, mine is remove the ASM.

Thanks Stosh, I can see positive ways where this might be implemented. As you've guessed, our SPL is often ran ragged, as is the ASPL. We have 17 officers (including PL's), and although all but the SPL, ASPL, and JASM are patrol members, this is still a lot of people for the ASPL to manage/mentor, while backing up the SPL. I'll share this idea with the SPL, see what he thinks; after all it is his troop

From my point of view I see the key Venturing issue as something that hasn't been mentioned here, structure. Freedom to choose program does not equate to freedom of structure and organization; although some crews think so.

Scouting at it's inception was based on military organization, structure, and methods; to this day they are the bones of the organization.

Regardless of addressing a new PLC, Crew President, Lodge LEC, or leaders doing Scoutmaster Position Specific Training, I always start with the same message: Shared Vision; Communication; Planning; Team Development; Servant Leadership; when combined are a recipe for success. (these do appear in BSA training, but this isn't from a specific training module). My point in mentioning this is; like anything else BSA teaches from ILSC, to NYLT, to Kodiak, to NAYLE, to Wood Badge, to Power Horn, it assumes existing structure and organization.

I think, even if they don't know it, national is looking for a way to infuse Venturing with structure and organization. In an ideal world the program participants would recognize the need, or be coached to it, but this isn't an ideal world. Some of the most amazing Advisors I've encountered post here, and likely I'm not telling you anything new. The question is how do we get new Advisors, and those who are struggling, to recognize the need for structure and organization, along with freedom of program, and relay this need to the youth in a way where they'll own, and implement, it?

There is some great advice here, I'll not restate it. However, I will say this:

For both Troop and Crew this is not a unit issue, this isn't small potatoes. There's a very real possibility of dire consequences, criminal charges, law suits, loss of charters. Cut this young man loose from your programs, and let the BSA professionals and Charter Org handle things from there.

 

I have no problem with what you are saying. But I believe you indicated that every patrol had an ASM assigned to it???? Why? If the PL has a problem who does he turn to: the ASM patrol advisor or the SPL? If the PL turns first to the ASM then why have an SPL? If he turns to the SPL, then what's the sense in having an ASM patrol advisor? The boys seem to be doing fine without him/her.

 

If the program is youth led, couldn't a TG be assigned by the SPL for every NSP and the other patrols all have access to a contact ASPL? if the troop is large? Would they not function as a youth mini-SM and the adults just drink coffee?

 

Yes one of the ASPL's should "PL" the Troop Officers on outings. And if the patrols are all 300' away and the SPL gets called to a patrol because of something a PL needs, why can't an ASPL step in as SPL until he gets back? The SPL doesn't need to not completely show up before an ASPL is needed, especially in a big troop. If a huge troop has 3 NSP's and the TG's are a bit overwhelmed with trying to teach a new PL and get camp set up? Maybe an ASPL or two could jump in to get them through the tight spots rather than an adult patrol advisor. Never do as an adult what a boy can do. I stick to that principle and it works really slick regardless of what Kool-Aid flavor one drinks.

 

Stosh

Thank you for the response. The simple answer to your question is an ASM Patrol Advisor's job is the take some of the load of a SM with more coming at him then he can handle (not an uncommon issue in big troops), serve as adult supervision on patrol outings, and act as part of the required adult supervision on troop outings. A secondary use of the position is to find out what adults may be suited to be SM one day, and groom successors for the job.

As I explained before, the ASM Patrol Advisor is delegated a portion of the SM's responsibility, like doing SMC's, finding MB instructors for scouts in his patrol, reviewing his patrols medical forms before camp, handling his patrol's meds. Just like the SM, the ASM Patrol Advisor is going to send a PL, or other scout, packing who is asking something that he should be asking his PL or SPL; youth responsibilities are youth responsibilities, and adult responsibilities are adult responsibilities, nothing changes this.

I think where we're not connecting is on what an ASM Patrol Advisor is. I'm simply talking about an ASM focused on one patrol. Honestly, I may be tougher than you on what's adult, and what's youth; for example, as an ASM I'd never team a scout skill to a patrol, and as a SM I'd get rid of an ASM that did. I'm huge on the chain of command.

Honestly, as often as not, our adult leaders are near the scouts, with one eye out, doing what they enjoy. I tend to do beadwork, or leatherwork, others work on making better bow in drill sets, carve, whittle, read, or even juggle.

We do have a tradition as old as the troop, 87 years, where our uniformed adult leaders camp and act as a patrol in the field. We never directly instruct, but always set the example not only in our well honed skills, but also by bringing innovative, and forgotten outdoor skills into play. This also keeps us out of the scout's hair.

To backtrack, I've heard of multiple ASPL's, but regardless of troop size, never seen them used. I mention this because I'm interested in hearing more about how this works. I've always thought of the ASPL as managing the administrative officers for the SPL, and filling in if the SPL is absent.

My original lodge had them; the only rule I recall is you had to be a dues paid member to wear the lodge neckerchief. I know explorers, who were dues paid members, did wear them.

You could make a custom LLD patch that says Executive Committee.

Technically there are no OA POR patches for youth, except Troop Guide. You can find Lodge Chief patches, official (if your lucky), or unofficial, and others, but remember they're considered temp patches, and are worn on the right shirt pocket.

Sentinel947 , that's a well worded post. I come here for new ideas, and to see things in new ways. Like you, I respect Stosh, and get quite a bit from most of his posts. I don't explain everything I post in detail, unless someone asks, for the sake of time. I operate on an assumption of good will, as well.

To many here I'm still a newbee, but I've been around the block a few times. With the exception of a few years, I've been scouting in one way, or another, since I became in a Cub in 1974. My scouting involvement has taken me on a journey through Cub Scouts, Boy Scouts, Varsity Scouts, Exploring, Venturing, the Order of the Arrow, as well as District, Council, and Region service (and back again); I forgot a ten year stint with Girl Scouts! I've worn many hats, and scouted in many places, with many people, learning new things in each place, and from each person...and scout.

The key here is to learn and grow from this fellowship site.

 

So then the SPL is undermined instead. Got it!

 

I would rather see an ASPL assigned to each patrol as a mini-SM instead of an adult. Just my boy-led thingy I guess. Like I said, too many boy leaders is not a bad thing!

 

If the SM needs to delegate it means he's directing and controlling the situation. Kinda like what happens in an adult-led program.

 

But if anyone is delegating, the SPL can call up any number of ASPL's to help him with a larger troop.

 

And by the way, an adult as a mini-SM for each patrol is grossly over dominated by adults IMHO.

 

Stosh

I'm not sure what kind of cool-aid your drinking ...

An ASM is an assistant to the SM, sharing whatever portion of his duties he delegates to the ASM ... which has zero to the with the SPL or ASPL. An ASPL can't do SMC's, approve/assign MBC's, or issue blue cards. The additional ASM's actually create more time for the SM, allowing him to available to the SPL.

The SPL is responsible for his PL's, not the ASPL, unless the SPL is absent. Yes, in a large troop, you may choose to have more then one ASPL, to assist the SPL with carrying out his duties. However, traditionally the ASPL has zero to do with patrol operations, that's the SPL's turf.

The SPL is responsible for patrol operations, and works directly with his patrol leaders. The ASPL is responsible for the balance of officers, with a few exceptions, in certain troop models. The ASPL has the group I term the junior officers, my words not BSA's: Quartermaster, OA Rep, Scribe, ect.

Youth and adult roles and responsibilities in a Boy Scout Troop are completely distinct and different. I hate adult ran, or led, troops. The only thing worse than an adult playing "the world's oldest SPL", is a youth leader hanging out in the wind without proper training and adult support.

I have seen troops with a ASM patrol adviser. The ASM usually is running the patrol and SM is acting as the SPL. The SPL acts as a runner relaying information with very little authority. That is just the impression I get as an outsider looking in.

SM Bob you've seen some troops, this can, and in out case has worked well for about five years. Our patrol advisor system is modeled off the Wood Badge Patrol Guide program, and works well. This in no way undermines the PL, or patrol function.

Stosh, I disagree that a small group of eight functions the same as a larger group made up of groups of eight, for exactly the reason I added Patrol Advisors when I was SM. One person, even if he, or she, is a SM, is still one person with a finite amount of time. A SM with seventy scouts in his charge would not even have enough time to handle all his SMC, much less do anything else. The system I describe gives each patrol access to an adult leader, who is only tasked with being available to that patrol leader, and handling SMC for his patrol.

As far s adding another adult to interfere, and take over, not if your adults are correctly trained. After my tem as SM ended I was made a Patrol Advisor; I've never observed a patrol meeting, never camped directly with my patrol, only ate with my patrol if invited, never addressed the patrol as a group (although I've been asked to by the PL), never touched apiece of the patrols gear, and never gave the PL a directive ... none of those are my job. I have conducted many SMC's, listed to the PL mull over issues (asking a question here and there), I've issued blue cards, found merit badge councilors, and listened to many camp stories ... I've also been the but of a skit or two.

In a large troop the SM can't do it all, he has to delegate. A patrol advisor acts like a mini SM for one patrol.

 

Unless one is running a totally boy-led program. Then there seems to be far less mentoring and coaching going on. If the boy hits a snag, they turn to others for help.

 

Patrol members turn to PL

 

PL's turn to SPL

 

SPL turns SM

 

If it is determined that more help is needed or that an ASM should work with the SPL (at the SPL's request obviously), then that can be set up as well. Having monthly "mentoring" sessions with every scout really smacks of helicopter hovering by adults and really don't have any place in my troop. We have enough of that with parents, I don't need my ASM's doing it, too.

 

Because my PL's tend to be very well trained in "Taking care of your boys", I see very few problems getting to the SPL level. If it does and he needs help, then the SM gets involved. 99% of what needs to be addressed get worked out at the SM/SPL level, but that 99% is maybe 5-10% of all issues in the troop.

 

I often say that I personally don't see much of the problems mentioned on this forum as being something I have had to deal with. The reason for it, the boys usually figure out solutions to the problem and so seldom escalate to the SM level.

 

The whole patrol is in one tent and the talked all night long! OMG! - Well, they're 300' away so I don't have a problem with it. They overslept and didn't get breakfast! OMG! - Well, they're 300' away so I don't have a problem with it. See a pattern here? They get to a solution to their problems a lot faster if adults are 300' away.

 

Stosh

Stosh,

Either you didn't read well, or I didn't write well. Mentoring comes from senior youth (SPL for PL, ASPL for Historian, ect). SMC's are by adults (the whole adult association thing).

A mentoring session might be the SPL sitting down with a PL discussing alternative ways to present a skill one of this scouts is struggling with.

A SMC might be an ASM sitting down with a scout that isn't advancing, and has questions about what Scout Spirit is.

Often a SMC could be as simple as. ASM: Hey Joe Scout, good to see you on a camp out, we've missed you. Joe Scout: Yea, Baseball was keeping me busy. ASM: Did you have a good season? Joe Scout: Yea, I love Baseball, but I wish it didn't keep me away so much. ASM: Did you know there's sports related merit badges? Joe Scout: No, what are they? ASM: see the Librarian, he'll help you find the books; if you want to work on one see the SM about a Blue Card. ASM: Good to see you here, keep working on that pitching arm. Often there isn't an issue, or anything big to discuss. Just like BSA I believe in the value of adult association, and youth led troops/crews.

There is a place for frequent youth/adult association, and once a month per scout isn't that often. The important part is knowing what is for adults to discuss and be involved in, and what's not. As an adult, when dealing with a youth, typically I listen to what they want to share. I complement successes, ask questions about difficulties, to cause them to discover resources, two legged, or many paged.

Among a few other things, I'm a former SM. My scouts, youth and adult, go out of their way to talk to me about everything from new fishing poles, to a moral crisis caused by killing a man in combat; I think it's extremely important to be there for them. Sitting down for a conversation with your scouts, at least once a month, does nothing to undermine the patrol method.

Stosh, I respect you're PL's being trained to take care of things, they should. However, when I read your post I have to think you're discussing a mid to small sized troop. Out troop ranges from 50-70 scouts, and the SM has to have his assistants take an active role. Each patrol has a patrol adviser, as does the junior officer pool (the ASPL assigned officers). The SM works with the SPL, PLC, and his assistants.

jblake47 / Stosh ...

 

 

You have two parts going on here. #1 leadership. #2 fulfilling requirements. #1 Teaching leadership as taking care of your guys is great. But ...

 

#2 Evaluating POR performance after the fact is wrong.

 

You are creating something different than BSA teaches us adult leaders. BSA says scouts need to do something with their position, ... BUT ... BSA also clearly says adult leaders need to communicate early and deal with it early. It is "UNFAIR" (BSA's word) to evaluate POR performance at the end of the POR tenure. Reflect and discuss, sure. Evaluate for requirement check off, no.

 

 

I'm not saying it is a bad program. I'm just saying it's different than BSA documents.

If things are handled correctly there is an end evaluation, but it's the product of several mentoring sessions, with the youth leaders responsible for the scout (except SPL), and monthly scout master conferences, with the adult assigned to work with the youth. Feedback, mentoring, and coaching, should be a constant two way street. However, at the end of the POR term, there should be an exit interview to sum things up.

Many units make an error by just using SMC's for advancement. In truth, every scout should have a monthly mentoring session with a senior youth leader and a SMC. Not all sessions need to be formal sit downs, as it's better to observe patters of behavior, and deal with topics when situations present them. Outings are a good for SMC's and mentoring moments. Many units also make the error of only having the SM do SMC's; a good troop will have at least an assistant per patrol, in addition to the SM, who should work with his, or her, patrol.

Patrol method? Why would patrols check out equipment? Shouldn't the patrol boxes belong to the patrols? Same for tents and other equipment. Let the patrols live with their abuse and/or care of the equipment assigned to the patrol. If all I needed to do is turn in a bad tent and figure I'd be lucky to get a different tent next time, I won't worry about the poor sap who gets stuck with a tent that the zipper doesn't work.

 

Stosh

Stosh,

I agree completely. Our wording in always specific to our units. In my home unit the patrols each have a full set of gear, which is owned by the patrol. However, the patrols are not allowed to just tramp into the storage loft, box truck, or trailer, and just take things. Each patrol, under the direction of the patrols leader, checks it's gear out from the quartermaster. The Quartermaster is responsible for storage of gear, securing gear for transport, as well as making sure whatever is checked out is turned in. The Patrol Leaders keep a camping log, including who is in what tent number on the outing, and an inspection of the tent when set up, and taken down. The Patrol Leader communicates equipment issues to the Quarter Master. This process creates checks and balances.

Each patrol has exactly the same gear, all tents are exactly the same. Everyone knows how to use the gear, and has the same camp experience.

What are you attempting to accomplish? I know you answered this, but ask yourself again. Decide what's unnecessary, what's overly wordy, and what doesn't accomplish your purpose, and remove them. This policy is overly complex.

Each troop is different, but, remember the patrol method is the core of scouting. My suggestion, each patrol checks out gear, and is only given enough tents to accommodate the members attending the event. Simply moving to patrol camping, along with checking in and out the tents with the quartermaster should cover everything you want to accomplish.

Here's some other suggestions. Camp all adults within sight and hearing of the patrols, but not along side them. Stop using personal tents, everyone gets exactly the same equipment. These small changes will vastly improve your scouts camping, and scouting, experience.

The simple answer is yes you can. If your a dues paid member of a lodge you can wear any flap of the lodge, but you should try to wear the most recent issue.

The key to advancement is: Setting expectations, communicating expectations, and only certifying a requirement as complete when a scout meets the expectation. No, I'm not talking about BOR's that's not when we test scouts.

Every POR should have a written, agreed upon, set of expectations. I like having the scout sign off on the expectations, like a contract, and take it home with him. National provides decent descriptions of the duties for each office, and this makes a good core of POR expectations. If you just go one step further, and define what "active", and "Trained" mean in your unit, you're fully within policy.

If a scout doesn't meet the expectations he doesn't get credit for the office. An example would be: The patrol leader presides over patrol meeting, or the patrol leader attends PLC meetings. No patrol meeting = no credit for the office; failure to attend PLC meetings = no credit for the office.

Of course you want defined and communicated expectations to cover life situation. An example would be: The patrol leader can't make a PLC because his family is on vacation. The expectation could be if you can't make a PLC meeting you must notify the SPL at least 7 days in advance, and arrange for your APL to attend in your place.

You have to think about POR the way you would a position in your work place, then temper that with the understanding you're dealing with children.

Rank advancement is no different. Most scout camps have some sort of first year program that covers requirements for the first several ranks. Don't check off the rank requirements in the scout's book at the end of camp, wait a few weeks, and have them demonstrate that they retained the skills, and only if they did retain them check off the books.

We test scouts prior to certifying completion of a requirement.

Your question, and the whole conversation, centers around Readyman; you're missing something. Your scouts, and the Boy Scouts involved, will gain much more than important first aid skills. Your program exists to prepare these young men for Boy Scouts. The Webelo scouts will be interacting with, observing, and learning from, Boy Scouts, in the field. Don't under value the experience of simply participating in a troop activity.

Eagle Scout is not the goal of scouting. Have those scouts focus on scout skills, fun outdoor activities, and the patrol method.

Advancement, including Eagle, is "A Method of Scouting", and has a place in the program; this is something to discuss once a First Class scout, who has mastered his skills, is an active contributing member of one of the functioning patrols in a boy led troop.

The last year as a Webelo, and first year as a Boy Scout, are already overwhelming, don't add fuel to the fire.

Btw, the strategy for earning Eagle is: get active, have fun, master your scouts skills, live with scout spirit, and inspire others to do the same ... oh ya, check off some stuff in your book along the way. There ya go, all you need to know without buying the book.

"Toilet paper reference removed upon request"

SM Bob, Adult led, Boy ran isn't the way I'd put it, or the way I'd ran a unit. I'd put it this way:

A Boy Scout troop is a large scale experimental learning lab, but like all with experiments, boundaries and expectations must be set and adhered to.

The best approach I've found to setting boundaries and expectations is creating an expected program template. This fits into the initial SPL/SM talk where they create a "shared vision of success", following the SPL's election, and prior to the SPL making officer appointments, and partnering with the SM to put on ILST.

Simple start by saying: "we have six a year ahead of us, what do you feel the correct balance of events should be?" Lead a discussion about what needs accomplished in the year, and what the SPL would like to accomplish. Come up with an expected number of troop and patrol events, and the purpose of each event, based on needs and wants. You should end up with a template that might look like:

12 monthly events, 2 of which will be recruiting, 1 summer camp, 1 high adventure, 2 service, 4 patrol competitions/scout skills, 2 training/team building. The formula will obviously vary unit to unit, and SPL to SPL. My point is, here's the place to the SM to set his expectations, not at a PLC meeting. At a PLC the SM should be reminding the SPL of the purpose of the outings his leaders are planning, if they stray, and asking them how the planned event accomplishes the established goal, to prompt reflection on decision making.

You'll not this is not adult led, it's a product of coaching and mentoring.

You'll also notice this is the province of the SM, not the CC or IH. The CC or IH might better spend his time coaching, mentoring, and developing his new SM's skills and understanding. Part of developing a good SM is sitting down at the beginning of the program year and together establishing a framework for the program, and a template for events ... ect. I would expect the IH would have a similar discussion with the CC at the beginning of the program year. The plan and template states out as vague, tentative, very general at the IH/CC level, and gets more detailed as it moves down the line, until the PL and his patrol members are putting the finishing touches on it.

Green Bar Bill did a much better job of explaining this, but I hope this helps.

Never adult led or ran ... never

Your not alone, from bottom to top I like the CS program changes. Typically I'm not a fan boy of what national pushes out, but I think they got it right this time.

The program looks like it will be easier to understand, deliver, and track. The themes, and related activities, are designed as a springboard for fun. Everything is not only labeled, but designed as an actual adventure. The Tiger and Webelo program have long been plagued with problems, and the new program resolved these issues decisively. With all of that being said, what I like best is the smooth flow of the Cub Scout to Boy Scout transition, which new start on day one as a Tiger, and the precision with which the new program is designed to achieve the aims of scouting.

I've not seen this program in action yet, but I'm 100% sold.

I have a good topic for discussion. Like so many lodges today council mergers have given us a vast area of cover. We do use a Tribe and Chapter system, which solves some issues, however the LEC still has to handle quite a bit of business.

What's the best answer to holding productive PLC's with members scattered across four states? What works for you?

Why do you think completing all twenty is so important? Oh, btw, get used to calling a 2nd year Webelo group a patrol, it is under the new AOL program

SSScout,

What I'm reading here is a fantastic example of scouting working as intended. Your guide is doing exactly what he should be, as are you. This exact process is exactly what so many units are lacking.

Qwazse,

Thank you for taking the time to explain what your saying, and where your coming from. You're correct I've been all over town, lol. I think it's a product of how I approach being a scouting volunteer; "If I can I will". I've been volunteering with BSA for nearly thirty years, which still makes me a youngster in this community

Currently I have more hats then I care for. I'm cultivating my replacement as Crew CC, and although I remain active with my son's troop, I've moved from a primary ASM role, to being an available resource. Moving forward my intention is to continue as UC for my Charter Org (Pack, Troop, Crew), and to continue as an Associate Lodge Adviser only.

Our troop does operate two Venture Patrols. However, we operate in no way resembles the Venture Patrol program we ran just prior to, and during the Venturing pilot. The pilot where the Venture program existed only in troops is what I'm making reference to, when I talk about a dead program.