Venividi

Divide and conquer.   Look at your patrol structure.  If there are a lot of young scouts in a single patrol, they feed off each other and the patrol leader has increased difficulty in keeping them focused.    If you are able to keep the number of new scouts to 2 per patrol, they can stay more focused, and pay more attention to the older scouts in their patrol, which helps them from acting out.   

Age based patrols:  Webelos cross over to Boy Scouts expecting fun and adventure.  They look up to the older scouts and want to be like them.  They select a PL from their midst, but they do not respect or follow him like they would an older scout.   Reason: their PL likely has no more experience or knowledge than their own.    (Adult equivalent would be if 8 random adults were placed together and told to elect one of their own to lead them in building a chemical plant in India.)   Without at least some experience, the PL is thrust into a position that will result in frustration.  

PL role then either a) gets a bad reputation - you have to go to more boring meetings and no one listens to you, or b) becomes adult led to keep the patrol going.   Then by the time scouts are 14 or 15, the patrol has a hard time finding anyone that wants the position.   

In the district that I used to be involved with, they did an excellent job of keeping MB counselor list up to date.  Even with that, I did not receive calls from a scout except for a (rare) call to finish a partial from summer camp.  Although the purpose of MB program as stated by BSA includes the benefit of calling an unknown adult, working with a caring adult with a knowledge of a subject area, etc., in reality, opportunities to get MB's at adult planned events (summer camp, MB weekends, in troop MB sessions, etc., there is little incentive for a scout to make a call to a MB counselor to arrange a meeting.

The beginning of the end for me was when a highly respected scouter asked me to teach first Aid MB on a Saturday at district event.  I agreed, because the person that he had previously lined up had fallen ill.   I was shocked that the expectation was that the format was to show the scouts a skill,  have them repeat it, then sign off on the related requirement.   The long time, highly respected scouter that organized the event shrugged his shoulders and said that although he didnt agree with it, that was just the way it was now.   I felt bad that I participated in a program that had little benefit to scouts.   At the same event, another MB counselor who was leading another MB workshop, bragged about how he had all the pieces required for a project prepared in advance, leaving a small section of wood uncut for the scout to finish, thereby technically meeting a MB requirement to cut wood for the project with a saw.

Some time later I had a committee chair call me to set up a First Aid MB class at their troop meetings.  I turned her down.

I believe that adults want to help there kids advance, and are doing so by taking away anything that might possibly be an obstacle to advancement.

Thrifty,

Young boys learn best by watching older boys.  When adults do the planning, well, that is just something that they are used to - adults do such things, and they cannot envision themselves doing that.   Young scouts typically look up to the older scouts.  They want to be like them, have the experiences that they have had.   When they see the older boys doing planning, AND the older boys helping them to plan, they can envision themselves doing that.

Without a few older boys in the troop that have the understanding that they are role models, and that they have the responsibility and privilege of assisting and training the younger scouts, you have a challenging task.   It will take time.  As adult leaders, discuss what you would like the boys to be doing by themselves in 1, 3, and 5 years  (i.e., the vision).  You should also discuss with the older boys their ideas of what they think the troop should be like in the future.  Then break each down into tasks, and introduce one or two at a time.  Work through the SPL and other older scouts to train them in the skills, and give them the responsibility, expectation, and guidance to implement.

from your example:

A PL sent out an email asking for his patrol to meet up to go shopping for groceries prior to camping.  It was 3:30 in the afternoon on a weekday.  How are any of the others going to get to the store if their parents are at work?  No arrangements such as sharing a ride were suggested.    

this could be something that people might agree would be important to improve over the next several months.  This situation is very typical.   What seems obvious to us is not to a scout, especially if he has not observed or assisted another SPL do this when he was a younger scout.  i.e., if he had never seen an email, text message, or received a phone call from SPL or PL for every monthly campout, he would not know that such detail was expected.   Also, boys typically look to put as little effort as possible into what they may view as a task that is , lets say, l"less than fun".  In this case, one potential action would be for the SM to sit down with the SPL and ask guiding questions:  How did that work out?  Did the scouts do what you requested?   Why do you think that was?  Do you have any ideas for doing something different next time?  What are they?  How would you do them?  How will you remember to do them next time?  etc.

You also need to look at what happened when the shopping didnt get done.  Did adults step in and do it?  (reinforces that there is no downside to the scouts if they do not complete needed chores).  Or did scouts arrive at the meeting place ready to leave for the camp out , but without food, and the troop then have to make a stop for groceries, resulting in less time for fun on the campout?    Does the SPL check with each patrol leader before departure to check that the patrol has the food, tents, and other camping gear that they need?  If not, that is also fodder for a retrospective witht eh SPL.

Good Luck - take joy in baby steps.

1) Patrols need to matter.   Avoid combining patrols on camp outs.  Combining patrols conveys the message that patrols don't matter.  This month a scout is in the liger patrol (combination of lions and tigers because only a few from each patrol attended the campout); next month he is in the leagles (lions and eagles), following month, it is the leagears (combination of lions, eagles and bears).  Loyalty (and the resulting spirit) doesnt build with a random, ever changing group.

2) Have meaningful competitions.  Interpatrol activities at each meeting and camp out need to be patrol vs patrol.   Patrols need to have bragging rights that they bested the other patrols.  This implies that there should be more to competitions than simply dividing up into 2 groups for a large game of capture the flag; a 3 or 4 team (i.e., patrols) will work better at building patrol spirit. 

3) Patrols camp at some distance from each other - this topic has been covered extensively in other threads.

4) Mixed age patrols.  You want older boys to care about and nurture younger boys in their patrol.  This creates a bonding that doesnt happen as easily when all of the boys are of near equal ability.  It is also needed to have meaningful competitions  (there is not much spirit building when a patrol consisting of 8th grade boys competes with a patrol of 6th graders).

Stosh,

To say that it is all due to how the program is run (as to whether FC and Eagle scouts are equivalent in character, citizenship, fitness), discounts the maturity that happens in anyone between 12 and 18.   The program should help guide and encourage growth in those ; i.e., character, citizenship and fitness.   If it does not, if a Star, Life, and Eagle scout have not developed further, then the program is deficient.

I do agree with you that some scouts at FC exhibit more maturity than some Eagles.   I love it when I meet scouts that draw their motivation to improve from within themselves rather than from external awards.  They are great examples.   I wish everyone was like that (youth and adult alike). 

Regards,

Venividi

Stosh,

I admire your sentiment that a good first class scout is the same as a good Eagle scout  (dynamics is the word that you used).   However, I just cant imagine that even in your troop an Eagle scout wouldn't have a deeper understanding of the scout oath and law, this impacting beliefs and behavior.   BSA stresses first class in 1 year.  If a scout progresses no farther in his trail to Eagle than in the year (or so) to First Class, then what is the point of additional years of participation in scouting?   We've already helped him as far along as he is able to go.

Don't be patient.  If no camping activities are planned in which all scouts can participate, those that cant will soon lose interest and drift away.

Is it reasonable to assume that the few new kids are all in one patrol?   They can have patrol meetings where they plan and set up patrol camp outs.  

If the PLC is planning troop level activities that leave out the younger scouts, and older scouts are shooting down all activity suggestions in which younger scouts could participate, they are not living to the scout law.    It would be a good topic to raise at troop committee meeting on the direction of the troop.

An Eagle Scout should exhibit the characteristics that make him someone that we would hold up to other scouts as an example.   Living and demonstrating the scout oath and law is in my opinion the most important requirement for Eagle, yet many are inclined to ignore it because it is by nature subjective.

Eagle is an  award that to the public embodies the Scout oath and law.  Picking out just the first 3:  Trustworthy, Loyal, Helpful

Is a scout that has camped 20 nights in 3 or 4 years trustworthy, loyal or helpful to his patrol?  In my opinion he is not, because he let his patrol mates down by skipping so many campouts. It is not demonstrating loyalty to his patrol; he was not there for them to be helpful; cannot be trusted to show up or participate.

Is a scout that demonstrated a  requirement once and then never did it again because it was signed off Trustworthy, Loyal, Helpful? Again, in my opinion he is not, because how can he help other scouts learn a skill, be relied on in the wilderness, be prepared for an emergency, if he does not willingly practice skills nor teach them to others? A scout that has met the requirements no more no less does not fit the image that has been promoted to the public of what an Eagle scout is.    Some years ago, someone posted a comment something like  Mom:  "Help! Help! My baby is choking!"  Eagle Scout:  Sorry lady, I took First Aid merit badge when I was 11 at Summer camp.  I only did it once, so I don't remember what to do."  

Is a scout that has not attended a troop meeting for 2 years, and then shows up and expects time from leaders to help him complete rank requirements for Eagle an Eagle scout?  How has he demonstrated trustworthy, loyal, helpful?  He has left his troop and patrol mates to fend for themselves instead of being helpful or loyal to them.  (In this, I also fault leaders because they continued to register an inactive scout in their troop, which is not trustworthy, loyal, or helpful to the troop).

Is a scout that concentrates exclusively (or mainly) on requirements in pursuit of rank advancement being trustworthy, loyal, or helpful?   It is a bit of an oxymoron that a scout that so focused on obtaining Eagle that he does not pay much attention to helping fellow scouts, or participating fully with his patrol is given the award and held up to other scouts as something special.  When we as adult leaders have done that, we have taken eyes off the aims of scouting - character, citizenship, fitness.

Adding something that hasn't been raised yet: Who is doing the training and setting the expectations for a scout in a new POR? If it is the SM or an ASM, then the boy very well may view it as an unnecessary job only being done because the adult told him to do it. If it is a same age scout (i.e., the PL in a troop with age based patrols), then the scout's view may be that the PL doesn't know any more than he does, so why should he listen to him? Besides, they just want to goof around together.

However, if the person doing the training and setting the expectations is another scout that is older than him, the scout is more likely to follow through, because the older scout is likely looked up to and respected by the scout. He wants to be accepted by the older, "cool" kids in the troop. Consider moving to placing the responsibility of training and follow up to a JASM or other older scout. Moving to this type of structure may take several years for the troop to adopt, as the current older scouts have grown up in an environment where such jobs nover got done well, and therefore they have no view as to how things could or should be.

I would not object to expulsion, but I don't see the CC going along with that.

I don't see where CC should be overriding the SM on decision as to whether a scout with long term bad behavior should be able to continue to participate in scout meetings and activities.

I think it would be interesting to listen in on that conversation:

SM: CC, you are aware of all of the issues with scout X, from all of our previous discussions, correct?

CC: Yes, why do you ask?

SM: We have lost scouts and despite repeated conferences with him, he is still bullying younger scouts. I expect that it will not be long before we lose more scouts.I am going to meet with him and his parents and tell them that he will no longer be allowed to participate in the troops activities. I will give them contact info for other troops that they could approach to join. I am requesting your support.

CC: Sorry, you dont have it. You cant give up on this boy.

SM: The ASM's and I have done as much as we can. It is a problem that we do not have the ability to resolve.

CC: You still have to keep the boy and try your best.

SM: Aren't you concerned that the other boys in the troop? About having some quit, and about the negative experiences that they are having?

CC: You dont know that any will quit, and it is a life experience in dealing with difficult people. You have to keep him.

SM: I can see that I and my ASM's do not have your support, and are unable to deliver an effective program as a result of this boy. You have my resignation. I am going to tell the boys that there comes a time when everyone must stand up for what they believe in. That this is my time, I believe in them, but that the CC does not believe in what I am doing. So let me know who will be replacing me. I will be glad to work on a transition plan with them.

Kudu wrote: "Because in the Troop Method, Patrol Leaders are the fifth (5th) tier in leadership talent (JASM->SPL->ASPL->TG->TI->PL)."

 

I often run into others that support such a structure which is not as Kudu says, "leadership talent". What you have here is a management organizational chart of delegation. It has nothing to do with leadership. In management, the accomplishing of a task is the goal and top down delegation gets it done. This all can happen in a leadership vacuum. Basically the SM sets forth the task, delegates down to where the PL gets "stuck" with the ultimate responsibility of getting it done.

 

In my troop I simply flip this management organization chart up-side-down and have the PL at the top. He is the "highest" ranking officer in the troop. He knows what is going on with his boys and they FOLLOW him because he's doing what is best for the patrol. If he needs help or advice, he has the SPL to go to. If the SPL isn't going to help him, he's not going to FOLLOW him anywhere. If the others in the troop are of no help, the PL is on his own and will FOLLOW no one. He is only going to go to someone that can help him and if he finds that person, he'll FOLLOW him.

 

That is leadership, not management and it is all personality based, NOT task based. The task will get done by any and all who know their leader has their back and aren't going to get jerked around by some inept manager.

 

Leadership training starts and ends with. "Do what it takes to help your boys. If you do, they'll follow you anywhere!"

 

Stosh

That is what I like about mixed aged patrols. It puts scouts in a situation where leadership can happen naturally, because young scouts look up to an older, experienced PL. He already has had adventures that they want to have, has skills that they envy. The PL in turn gets a feeling of self worth because he is able to share his knowledge with those that do not yet have it. It is a structure that helps foster success for leadership development (older scout), and skills development (younger scouts).

Ok, so in reviewing the roster, some things became clear. When you discount boys who will probably fall off the roster this year because they have not been around, we have 24 active boys. So thinking back, our typical campout attendance is usually between 15-18. So we are actually pushing 75% which seems pretty typical--the problem is that we have 6 patrols as follows:

 

6 6th grade

6 7th grade

5 8th grade

3 9th grade

4 11th grade

 

Therefore, the reason we usually end up with 3 ad hoc patrols is that it reflects the natural breakdown of what the troop should be; i.e., 3 patrols.

 

I had a discussion with the SM and he agreed that having 3 patrols would be optimal and that we should let the boys self-organize into those patrols. Now this is a huge step for us--normally the troop plunks boys into a NSP and they stay together until the end.

 

Ideally we'd see 3 patrols of 8, but...who knows what will happen.

 

Reading the threads here, there seems to be as many ways of having boys organize their patrols as there are troops. I can't remember how we did it when I was a scout and if it was covered in leader training I either missed it or have forgotten it. I do believe that giving the scouts a parameter for the number of patrols desired (3) is the way to go. Yes, I've read the discussions in other threads about letting boys make as many as they want and learn from their mistakes but that's not what we're going to do.

 

So with that backdrop, what are the ideas for having the boys reorganize into 3 patrols?

One possible way:

Have meeting with SM, CC, AC, key ASM's to dicsuss what you are trying to do. Discuss their ideas and concerns so that all are on same page.

Talk to SPL about observations that the troop really isnt using the patrol method, there are no inter-patrol competitions, etc. and that you would like to add this to the agenda at his next PLC meeting.

At next PLC meeting, pose the problem to the boys. I would use the inter-patrol competition as the hook, because boys love games and love to compete. Point out that the BSA program includes interpatrol competitions. That the agenda planner that they use to plan meetings has a spot for inter-patrol competition, that the council's Jr Leader Training taught interpatrol competition, and that you want their ideas on how to implement it. Give some guidelines: patrols need to be structured so that teams (i.e. patrols) are fair. That each person should have one or two buddies in the patrol that he is in. Let the PLC sell it to the rest of the troop. boys work it out with the guidelines provided. If things look lopsided, ask if they really think it is fair.

You may need to write off the high-school age folks. They may not be willing to change, though they may surprise you.

I agree with qwazse's suggestion for informal recognitions; as an addition to rather than a substitute for a) bragging rights after winning that night's inter-patrol competition and b) keeping score between COH's and recognizing the patrol with something that the boys value. I think that competitions are one of the most effective, yet least used ways to engage the boys; for motivation to continue to practice skills that were signed off long ago, for working together as a team, etc.

Ok, so in reviewing the roster, some things became clear. When you discount boys who will probably fall off the roster this year because they have not been around, we have 24 active boys. So thinking back, our typical campout attendance is usually between 15-18. So we are actually pushing 75% which seems pretty typical--the problem is that we have 6 patrols as follows:

 

6 6th grade

6 7th grade

5 8th grade

3 9th grade

4 11th grade

 

Therefore, the reason we usually end up with 3 ad hoc patrols is that it reflects the natural breakdown of what the troop should be; i.e., 3 patrols.

 

I had a discussion with the SM and he agreed that having 3 patrols would be optimal and that we should let the boys self-organize into those patrols. Now this is a huge step for us--normally the troop plunks boys into a NSP and they stay together until the end.

 

Ideally we'd see 3 patrols of 8, but...who knows what will happen.

 

Reading the threads here, there seems to be as many ways of having boys organize their patrols as there are troops. I can't remember how we did it when I was a scout and if it was covered in leader training I either missed it or have forgotten it. I do believe that giving the scouts a parameter for the number of patrols desired (3) is the way to go. Yes, I've read the discussions in other threads about letting boys make as many as they want and learn from their mistakes but that's not what we're going to do.

 

So with that backdrop, what are the ideas for having the boys reorganize into 3 patrols?

One of the issues/inconsistencies that we recognized that we had as a troop was that awards/recognitions were typically individual based (rank advancement, merit badges), yet one of the aims of scouting is citizenship. In order to move towards the vision that the adults have for properly functioning patrols, patrol based behaviour needs to be rewarded. When all incentives are individual incentives, then patrol cohesiveness isn't fostered. (In my opinion, the advancement method doesn't do much to promote patrol cohesiveness). We needed to create reasons for them to pull together as patrols and not just as collections of individuals.

Consider recognizing "best patrol" at courts of honor. You will need to determine what that is. Perhaps patrols earning points for any or all of the following:

winning the inter-patrol competition at troop meetings; winning inter-patrol competitions on campouts; Clean and neat patrol campsite for the weekend; patrol organized and run service project; patrol participation in troop service project; First troop to be packed up, patrol campsite policed and cleaned, and all scouts properly dressed and ready to leave at the conclusion of a campsite; best patrol meal on campout as determined by the SPL (no ties), All patrol members properly uniformed at meeting/campout/activity; any patrol that have all members packed and in vehicle ready to leave for a campout by the designated leave time; patrol with x% members in attendance at meeting/activity; has patrol flag with them at meeting/event etc. - you can pick anything that is consistent with your vision of a properly functioning patrol.

Pick a suitable reward. Traveling trophy; lunch provided by SM at next campout; popcorn for the winning patrol at the COH, winning patrol gets served refreshments first at COH, totem to add to patrol flag, etc.

You can discuss this with PLC; then give guidance as the scouts organize into patrols. I would not be surprised for the scouts to self organize into roughly age-based patrols, as that is what is familiar to them. familiar is comforting; unfamiliar is scary. Whatever they come back with, ask Socratic type questions to help them move towards your vision: i.e. "Do you think that distribution will fair to all patrols at inter-patrol competitions?" would be a great question if they come back with age based patrols.

Good luck; you are asking the right questions.

There is a myth a lot of adults hold to that Boy Scouts is the boys program; it is not. Boy Scouts is an adult program designed to develop boys into men who make ethical decisions. What are the expectations of your adults for your troop? That being said, I know how hard it is to change a culture, but the adults have to decide if they are satisfied with the status quo. My son and his wife are both high school teachers in to different high risk schools, but with basically the same student demographic. Ninety Seven percent of last years graduating class of one school went on to college. The other school had far less than 50 percent. When I asked him what was different between the two schools, he said "expectation". Your troop can do better if the adults want it. Barry

if you are not getting the results that you want, (or if you find that some method isn't implemented correctly), it is possible to re-deal the cards.

I am a bit confused over the intent of your original post. In it you expressed that you felt things weren't quite right. Once several people validated that your feelings were correct and offered suggestions, it appears that instead you were looking for validation that what your troop is doing is the best that can be expected. If you have the program that you want and are happy with your results, that is fine. No one is insistent that you must do it differently; hopefully just explaining some alternatives for consideration.

That's a false dichotomy. Scouting is the only youth group that meets year round. Life happens. No troop has people with completely similar priorities and clear calendars to make every event every time.

Brew,

Not a dichotomy, false or otherwise. It is a continuum. I didn't say that 100% attendance should be required (I made no mention of any specific attendance requirements, so I can see why you might have assumed that, sorry for the confusion). There is nothing wrong with a scout taking soccer season off, for example. If you are running 50% participation at campouts, (which would appear based on 4 patrols combining into 2), they never gel as patrols because it is constantly a different mix of boys. In my opinion, you are right to question it. You can create an environment where you use peer pressure to increase attendance percentage. You can use the carrot of advancement to increase attendance. To create an environment that fosters each patrol to gel as a group of boys that are close and will make every effort to be with their patrol.

Any time that a new "patrol" forms, which you are doing every campout, the group starts anew at the "forming" stage. The group never reaches the norming or performing stage. They are not getting the citizenship experiences; the being part of a group that they make every effort to help and support. The analogy is a pickup game of basketball compared with a team on a basketball league. In a league, not every player will be able to make it to every game and practice due to conflicts, but each individual will make every effort to be there because they know they will be missed. They want to support their team. With pickup games, even if regularly scheduled, individuals will not feel the same level of commitment. It still comes down to what the key leaders want the youth to get out of their membership.

Hope that this better explains my points.

regards,

yup - you can run a drop in program with a subtle message of "come if you want, but if you're not here it doesn't really matter, we'll combine patrols so you wont be missed", or a program where a patrol feels the effect when patrol members opt out of participation, and apply peer pressure on those that don't come. Or somewhere in between. Youth will gravitate towards and feel loyalty to organizations where the expectations of their participation are high; where they feel they are needed.

What are your attendance expectations? Have they been communicated to scouts and parents? Is a scouts meeting troop participation requirements a factor considered when signing off on scout spirit? Are scouts contribution to the troop (or lack thereof) a consideration when signing off on scout spirit? How does a scout feel that he is truly needed by his patrol, and will leave a hole if he doesn't show up if the message is "thats OK, come when you want, you're team (i.e. patrol) will do just as good without you"?

The choice is really that of the key adults (SM, CC, AC). If you want the boys to develop greater character and citizenship, tighten up your standards. If you want a "drop in if you want, you dont need to contribute much effort to the success of the troop, we will still give you an award" type program, you can have that also. What is it that you want? Are you willing to put in the effort to move the program in that direction? Then go for it. You will likely meet a lot of resistance, and lose some members that dont want that type of program, but you will gain some other members from families that are looking for that type of program for their sons.

You dont need to be the lowest common denominator if you dont want to. But if you do want to, that is OK too.

"disappear for several years then barnstorm the troop asking for help on their Eagle project from kids who've never even seen them, and squeeze Eagle in just in time to age out and be useless to the troop as an Eagle to begin with."

 

How do adults reconcile this with expectations for scouts to be Trustworthy, Loyal, Helpful? Some mental gymnastics need to be done to explain away why such a scout is not loyal to his troop or his patrol? Why his troop and patrol cannot trust him with any task? How has he helped his troop, patrol, fellow scout? We once had a scout that absent for anything that required work. When SM didn't sign off on scout spirit requirement, his Mom called and attempted to argue that her son showed scout spirit in his theater group (i.e., every day life), so it shouldn't matter if he didn't show scout spirit at troop functions.

 

If two of our aims are character and citizenship, what character trait is shown by a scout that only participates in the troop for the sole purpose of what the troop can do for him (receive an award to put on a resume?)? How do you reconcile that with being a citizen of the troop? Scout spirit has to mean more than "he never has been arrested".

 

We used to keep scouts on roster in the hopes that they would come back. We wanted to be welcoming. We finally woke up and realized that a scout coming back after several years absence only to work on Eagle requirements, was damaging our program. It was a lousy example to the scouts that did participate and demonstrated to the scouts that the adults may talk the talk of character and scout oath and law, but didn't walk the walk when they gave awards to scouts that did not participate, and were therefore not trustworthy, loyal, nor helpful to the other scouts.

 

There is a subtle, silent message to a 15+ YO that does participate - that he is foolish for puting in effort towards an award that adults approve for individuals that don't participate. Peer pressure will result in more scouts disappearing after 15 - (Why are you hanging out with all those little kids?) It becomes the culture. The culture wont change by itself. If you want to change that culture, the adults will need to lead that change.

"disappear for several years then barnstorm the troop asking for help on their Eagle project from kids who've never even seen them, and squeeze Eagle in just in time to age out and be useless to the troop as an Eagle to begin with."

How do adults reconcile this with expectations for scouts to be Trustworthy, Loyal, Helpful? Some mental gymnastics need to be done to explain away why such a scout is not loyal to his troop or his patrol? Why his troop and patrol cannot trust him with any task? How has he helped his troop, patrol, fellow scout? We once had a scout that absent for anything that required work. When SM didn't sign off on scout spirit requirement, his Mom called and attempted to argue that her son showed scout spirit in his theater group (i.e., every day life), so it shouldn't matter if he didn't show scout spirit at troop functions.

If two of our aims are character and citizenship, what character trait is shown by a scout that only participates in the troop for the sole purpose of what the troop can do for him (receive an award to put on a resume?)? How do you reconcile that with being a citizen of the troop? Scout spirit has to mean more than "he never has been arrested".

We used to keep scouts on roster in the hopes that they would come back. We wanted to be welcoming. We finally woke up and realized that a scout coming back after several years absence only to work on Eagle requirements, was damaging our program. It was a lousy example to the scouts that did participate and demonstrated to the scouts that the adults may talk the talk of character and scout oath and law, but didn't walk the walk when they gave awards to scouts that did not participate, and were therefore not trustworthy, loyal, nor helpful to the other scouts.

There is a subtle, silent message to a 15+ YO that does participate - that he is foolish for puting in effort towards an award that adults approve for individuals that don't participate. Peer pressure will result in more scouts disappearing after 15 - (Why are you hanging out with all those little kids?) It becomes the culture. The culture wont change by itself. If you want to change that culture, the adults will need to lead that change.

5yearscouter, In scouting, everything is interconnected. When you are having discipline problems, take a step back and look at the bigger picture, and you may find a non-obvious solutions. When do the discipline problems occur? Perhaps the PLC needs to plan more activities or different activities to keep scouts engaged, reducing the likelihood that they have time to fill with discipline inducing activities of their own.

How are patrols structured? A patrol of same aged boys is more likely to let actions get out of control without one of the patrol members stepping in than is a mixed age patrol.

What incentive is there for scouts to behave in a scout-like manner? A discipline policy is stick-based. What carrots is the PLC using? What carrots are the scouters using? Is there an opportunity for recognition or reward for patrols that exhibit scout like behaviour? For cleaning up after meals/cleaning gear/packing gear properly quickly/etc? Make use of positive peer pressure by recognizing patrols rather than individuals.

Are the patrols that go on campouts "real patrols", or ad hoc patrols formed by whomever shows up for that particular campout? The difference is that ad hoc patrols dont develop a patrol identity or pride because it really is not "their" patrol.

Does the PLC ever discuss discipline problems? No need to wait for the next month's PLC meeting. If the troop is having discipline prblems on a campout, Ask the SPL to pull the patrol leaders together to review expected behaviour and what they are going to do about it, and in turn for the patrol leaders to review with their patrol, and what the patrol is going to do about it.

Are patrols separated for most of the meeting/campout time? Patrols may have a joint campfire for stories/skits, etc. but if several patrols are all camping next to each other and camp kitchens are near each other, there is much more opportunity for disipline problems to arise in a group of 15 - 30 scouts than there is within individual groups of 6 -8.

These are just some sample questions to consider; as you look at your own situation specifics, you may think of more.

good luck,

I would recommend not paying attention to advancement. Focus on having fun in the outdoors and on developing the skills needed for having fun in the outdoors and the planning skills needed to prepare a patrol for camping. (which is how it should be for all scouts.)

christineka,

I advise you to take a few moments and reflect on what you want your son to get out of scouting. Do you want him to learn and practice life skills that he can use, or are you looking to accumulate accolades, pins, awards, trophies...?

Why do you think that it would not be beneficial for your son to get up in front of his den, show them his rock collection, tell them about it, show off what he learned? Being comfortable talking in front of a group is a learned and practiced skill. Starting to do this at a young age and continued doing so with every opportunity, (whether required or voluntary) will benefit him in high school, college, and life.

Practicing keeping records aka the chart for home chores for 2 weeks - why is it such a big deal to you? Doing a chore and keeping record of it is within the ability of a 10 YO. The benefit of making a habit of doing so will pay off in life. Once your son gets to middle school and high school, keeping a list of what needs to be done and what he has done will keep him current and help him do his best in school I make a list every day of what I want to do and what I accomplished, at home, at work, and for my hobby. I get accomplish more that way, and spend less time in "time-sucking" activities such as watching tv, things people do when they don't have anything to do in order to pass the time.

I'll be frank, and say that based on the attitude that you present in your posts, I would not want your son to cross over in to any scout troop that I was involved in. If you think that a committee member that wants your son to develop life skills is a "dictator", and a "spy", and that awards are more important than skills, then I think your perspective is skewed. Skills will help your son in life. pins, belt loops, patches, awards, trophies, will not do so in and of themselves. They will only help him if they provide incentive to try a harder and learn and do more than he otherwise would have. To give awards for minimal effort and legalistic arguing may make you and your son feel good in the present, but if you think they do a whit for his future, you are mistaken. I recognize that it is likely to be mutual - that you would not want your son to be a part of a unit that I would be part of, because I want boys to be focused on adventure in the outdoors, and not on the awards for the awards sake.

While SPL/PL should a Scout's priority be to the troop/patrol' date=' and should he not be attending events as part of the Crew instead? If an SPL/PL doesn't attend campouts, can he still say he fulfilled his POR?[/quote']

 

A Troop (or any other BSA unit) can not dictate what it's member's can, or can not, do outside of that unit. A Troop can not (or should not) tell it's members that the "Troop always comes first". That is wrong.

 

However - if a youth has a leadership position in a specific group and an activity with that group conflicts with an activity in another group (where he/she holds no leadership position), it is better form for the youth to attend the activity that they are expected to give leadership to. This holds for ALL types of groups, Scouting, and non-Scouting.

 

This is yet another way for a youth to learn, and grow. If a commitment has been made to serve as a leader on an activity,and a youth, for whatever reason, can not fulfill that commitment, then he is/should be held responsible to find a replacement, and/or make alternate arrangements so that the rest of the members are not left in the lurch. Failure to do that will bring consequences. The youth learn thru those consequences.

Scoutnut,

 

Whether a scout advances or not is dependent on the outcome of the conversation between the SM and the scout. If scout is otherwise a good leader, POR and scout spirit requirements are signed off. If scout continues not to do his job, then in good conscience, the POR and scout spirit requirements should not be signed off until the scout has met the requirements. Your adding " #1 at all times" loads the deck - there has been nothing here that said that a scout must put the troop first at all times; rather the discussion is about fulfilling responsibilities and making choices towards that end. It is not "withholding rank advancement", it is scout meeting or not meeting the requirements.

 

If a scout is advanced even when "The rest of the youth deciding at the next election cycle that they want a leader who actually does his job.", then obviously, the scout did not meet the requirements of the POR. And the rest of the scouts see that the adult leaders may talk about the importance of the scout oath and law, but by actions show that they don't really mean it; i.e., they talk the talk but don't walk the walk.

cherokee,

My recommendation is to ask your cc to invite a district trainer to your next committee meeting and presenting the Troop Committee Challenge to the committee as a whole. The training is much more helpful if the entire committee takes it together. Plus I have found that most committee members will not make the effort to take training on their own, whether instructor led or on-line.

For you own reference, stop at the scout shop and pick up a copy of the troop committee guidebook, (along with guide to advancement