Eagle94-A1

So why not start with who they want to be with rather than random chance?  It ought to be possible to have every Scout in a patrol with one or more of the Scouts he wants to be with.

 

I didn't come up with the idea of random chance, the PLC came up with it. Another ASM came up with an idea to refine it, specifically putting each patrol in  their own cup and pulling out instead of everyone in one cup and drawing, and that is what the PLC decided.

I agree with you, I would have liked to see how the Scouts themselves would come up with patrols.

They are basically looking at ways to hold boys up until the feel a scout is "ready" to advance, but no one can explain what "ready" means as it is "different for each boy". The life bor is the "last chance" to hold a boy back. The current cc has it in his head that I'd we "let" a scout eagle too soon we will never see him again.

 

 

Tells me more about the troop than anything. If folks are getting Eagle and leaving, there's a problem with program. I've been fortunate, most of the troops I've been with had folks staying on after getting Eagle as best as they could. College. military service, jobs, etc can put a damper on things. But ifyou have an active program, they will stay.

On a different note, when I did my project, it was one page. I needed the SM's signature, beneficiary's signature, and the DAC's signature. That was it.

@Richard_B,

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought  you and others (I questioned these rules to my SE and he looked in and replied to me) stated the following:

1) Some units work with other non-profits to do service projects, Habitat for Humanity was mentioned by someone, that DOES use the DOL laws in conducting service projects, that was one reason for implementing DOL rules for a VOLUNTEER ( emphasis) organization.

2) Since BSA does employ under 18 year olds at their day camps and summer camps, CONSISTANCY (emphasis) needed to be applied across the board.

Personally I think the rules and regs are stupid. But most of our society considers anyone under the age of 26 a "child" still. Don't believe me? Look at the rules for healthcare, who can rent cars and houses, etc.

Regarding me suggesting things and the Scouts following. That is what I'm most scared off. I want them to think for themselves. I want them to try something new, fail, and learn from it. I don't want them just coming up to adults and doing exactly what they are told to do, nor listening to ideas the adults give out and following exactly the suggested idea. In the past, that is exactly what has been done.

On the opposite side, the Scouts have only seen things done one way. They sometimes cannot think outside fo the way they were shown. Even at the PLC, someone mentioned doing age specific patrols, essentially the current set up.

Big ole balancing act.

Troop guide wants a break. BIG TIME.   Funny thing is, I saw the list of scouts in the patrols and the "older Scout" has a good chance of being SPL again. The other older scout hasn't been seen in 3 months. Long story short, I have a feeling HE will be the "older Scout" in his patrol

The more I deal with the troop I'm currently in, the more respect my old SM gets, and trust me I got him on a pedestal already . I think a lot of the challenges the troop is facing IS because the adults are meddling into things, helping them out too much, and not letting them struggle some.  Scouting is suppose to be a place where kids can screw up royally in a safe environment and learn form their mistakes. Adults need to step away and let them struggle, intervening only when needed. I've compared the situation I feel I am in as being on a tight-wire on a ropes course without the belaying gear on. I'm trying to balance mentoring and letting Scouts grow on their own, but realize that in today's environment, kids are so use to adults telling them what to do and how to do it, they can't think on their own. My SM growing up knew how to balance that, and keep adults away form the Scouts.

He also had a cadre of older Scouts who would mentor and mold the younger ones. Unfortunately we don't have that in the current troop.

I know that struggle can solidify a patrol. There is something about overcoming a challenge that motivates folks. I know that those of us from my troop who went to Canada, while in separate patrols, did keep in contact with the other members in our 1/2 of the troop. ( 4 patrols total: 2 patrols formed one group with one set of guides, 2 patrols formed a second group with one set of guides).  My friend who treated me for hypothermia was in a different patrol, but still looked out for me when the 2 patrols were in camp together.

And while the 2 groups did have different experiences, they were similar enough to form a strong bond among us after the event.

This month the TG has basically said "you are on your own." At the patrol meeting this weekend, he's reiterating that for this camp out, he's there for supervision only. The hope is that the struggle will solidify the patrol. Grant you I do have some doubts, but I have been surprised by these guys a lot of time before.

Please keep it up, and thanks for bearing with the rambling.

We have 3 patrols currently, and will keep 3 after the switch over.  I think some "horse trading" regarding keeping toxic combinations apart dealt with friends. While they may not be with their best buddy, they do have friends together.

I've been doing a lot of thinking on the matter.I was with the PLC when they made the decision. I was not around when the new patrols were selected.Talking to the son, he said he thinks the adults pulled the names out of the cups and not the SPL. If that's the case, I'm having some concerns. 1) Even if the selection went without a hitch and done exactly as the PLC wanted, there will be the appearance that this was the adults decision, not the Scouts. 2) Who decided on the avoidance of toxic combinations? If it was the adults, then A there is no youth ownership and B) the youth didn't learn a valuable life skill: organizing groups of people.

I feel like the move to a true Boy Led troop is two steps forward, one step back. Gotta remember that we are progressing, and keep in mind getting the 23 Scouts we currently have fully ready to lead the 14-23 new Scouts we can get in December. It's going to take the entire troop to being prepared to take on that many new Scouts.

It's always worth playing with the structure of things. I think this is a good process. Also, I believe adults have a role to play in this, I don't think you or another leader has overstepped (​based on what you've told us.)

 

But I will reiterate, scouts go to what patrol they want to be in. Roughly five years ago our SPL and PLC tried to experiment with a variety of methods to make more balanced patrols. Despite the adults reservation (I was just finishing up my time as a youth) they allowed us to give it a try. It didn't work for us, it may work for you all. The scouts just informally hung out in their natural patrols.

 

Your PLC has made the decision, and your job as an adult is to help them learn to manage and execute their decisions. 

 

​Best of luck, and feed us regular updates, I'm really curious to see how your scouts do with something mine couldn't make work.

 

​Sentinel947

 

II think the ASM announcing the new patrols, was overstepping. Especially without explaining why. Again when we talked to the older guys to come up with ways to get the situation resolved because of the massive influx headed our way. Yes they had concerns, but that potential is a massive thing to be concerned about.

Going off on a tangent and slipstreaming some.

What are some ideas you guys have to make the switch more palatable for the older Scouts?

We got one, some special activities for them based upon their skill levels.

One that I want to do, and was shocked that it wasn't being done, is having the SPL, PLs and a few others signing off on the S-T-2-1 requirements. Grant you there is no guarantee that the older scouts will be elected PLs. But hopefully the scouts will realize they need the best being leaders instead of anyone who wants the job.

Anyway, I'd love to see the PLC and selected others be able to sign off on the S-T-2-1 requirements for all the ranks they have passed. I think giving them responsibiltiy and ownership of advancement will help them and improve the troop.

Another thing I thought would help give them more ownership is actually running Courts of Honor. Ok I've been to only 1, but if all of them are like it, the adults run it with little to no fanfare. I'd like to see the youth run it, and incorporate some ceremony to it. I think making the rank aadvancement memorable is another way of giving ownership to the Scouts.

Yeah, I believe scouts want to hang with their friends.  And for the most part you can't force it.  

 

I wish you the best.  Changing from mixed age to scouts choosing their patrol is relative easy.  Switching from age based or self-picked to mixed age is harder.  Switching to "assigned" patrols I've seen too.  Scouts have quit over it.  Mainly because they are now being told they can't hang with their friends.  Usually, it's the 14/15 and higher ages that it hits hardest. 

That is something I'm afraid of. Why I and other leaders have talked to the older Scouts about the situation and have just about begged them to come up with ideas to solve it besides going mixed aged.  One thing that the older guys are holding on to, and one that we adults need to keep faith with, is allowing them to do some separate activities, i.e. backpacking trip while the rest are hiking, doing a more difficult train at a place that has multiple trails, etc.

  No matter what process one uses, if they let the boys decide, then when things go awry, they have no one but themselves to blame.  I always go for that option whenever possible.  I never want to get holding the bag.

The Scouts decided the process: picking out of cups. I admit, I would have liked to have the older Scouts decide who to buddy up with to form new patrols. Then have the rest of the troop pick which older Scouts they want to be with.   I realize that so solution is going to perfect. Hopefully this will make transition work well, especially since they had ownership of the process. I believe if they own the process they will accept it better.

Good Questions.  I started a chat with my son on folks' thoughts, and I just found out how the new pairing was announced last nite (I was in another room talking to a parent about summer camp when they annoucned the new patrols in May). Essentially an ASM announced it just before the meeting ended. The ASM announced the new patrols and not the SPL. No explanation on why this came about, no explanation on why it's being done, and no explanation that the PLC, their elected officials, decided on this.

NOT HAPPY ABOUT THAT (emphasis)

His feelings is that he can live with it. What's funny, and frustrating, is that we keep telling folks about the potential influx of 13 to 24 new Scouts come December. One reason we needed to come up with a new way of doing things NOW is to get ready for this potential mass of new Scouts that will increase the troop 50-100%

@@Eagledad

I agree with you 110%!!!!!!!!!!!!!!could not have said it better.

Hope it works out. That type of change is never easy.

 

Did they consider at all whether to keep friends together as much as possible?  Particularly among the younger Scouts?

I hope so too.The troop has lost some potential Scouts because of the "disorganization" of the NSP. Doesn't matter that A) Scouting is  organized chaos and B) only the NSP is having issues. Folks see the NSP and it's an issue. Plus we have several Scouts frustrated with the situation.

As for friends being together, more on that in a bit.

How did the "toxic" scouts feel about it?

That was rather interesting at the PLC. When one person commented on he and his buddy becoming a toxic situation when together, he protested a bit. SPL basically said, think about it, do you and (your buddy) goof off too much, and cause problems when together? He admitted Yes and SPL stated He's the same way with one other Scout, so he understands what he;'s going through, but splitting up will help you in the long run if you think about it. And the Scout who protested thought and agreed.

THAT BLEW MY MIND! ( emphasis) These guys are growing despite the challenges.

I was having the same thought as Stosh, but I do notice you say "toxic combinations" rather than "toxic Scouts." What is it about these combinations that is "toxic", and what has been done to try to resolve the issues? And how many "toxic combinations" are we talking about here?

By "toxic" I mean 2 things either A) together they don't do anything but cause trouble making life miserable for all or B) together and there is a potential for violence. Mostly the A category, but we do have 1 combo where one scout has hit the other Scout twice. The two incidents were over a year apart, we've contacted parents, and are keeping a strong eye on the situation. The one that has struck the other will be moving shortly.

With the exception of 1 combo in the A category, SPL and his buddy, the rest are in the NSP, which as you can imagine makes life challenging.

BUT, on the last camp out, 1/2 the NSP couldn't make it due to illness or school. The toxic combos were NOT present, and it did work out great, in fact the best camp out for them. That's when my oldest commented on "toxic" combinations.

The boys tried it so I'm willing to give my benefit of the doubt. I will say:

 

My troop has tried this exact method, the Scouts will congregate into their natural patrols, unless quick steps are made to build patrol identies. My Troop stopped battling the natural patrol dynamic and let them form their own patrols, free for all. It's worked so far and done alot to eliminate the issues we used to have regarded patrol membership.

 

In short, Scouts will form into their preferred patrols naturally, your PLC can either battle this process or facilitate it. Clearly if what you did before wasn't working, your Scouts will not build their own patrols based on that, but I'm not sold on trying to build balanced patrols. I haven't seen that work yet. The scouts tend to abandon their assigned patrols and form into their usual gangs, (or as I've said, their natural patrols.)

Kudos to the scouts for their initiative, and I respect the scouters for having the courage to stand back and allow the scouts the freedom to do this without a bunch of adult nitpicking.

 

Whatever wrinkles ensue, I'm sure the scouts will solve them.

Maybe this may seem like adult interference, maybe adult guidance, but the adults did mention a few ideas to divide the patrols when things were just not working out and the SPL asked for some help.

I gave them an idea to use  an approach similar to Sentinel. have the older Scouts divide up among themselves, and let the rest of the troop join who the older Scouts they want to be with. Another ASM suggested modifying the pick out of a hat approach they wanted to do, by drawing out of the hat by patrols in stead of dumping everyone's name into the hat and completely random.  The PLC liked that idea and went with it.

@@Krampus

 

If left alone, do you think any of these boys would naturally want to be in the same patrol as the others?  I find that boys that don't like each other will find patrols that are different.

 

However, with that being said, I had a kid in my Cub Scout den that was a real jerk.  We even went so far as to "take it out back."  In Boy Scouts we became best friends.  Go figure. 

 

As an adult I don't know how all these things work out.... so I stay as far away from the selection processes as I can and for some reason the boys always seem to find a way on their own.... which makes life a lot easier for me. 

I honestly do not know. The older Scouts surprised me once when we were talking about one of the NSP members, who knows his stuff and can probably hang with the older Scouts when they do camp and go backpacking, but can be a goofball at times. They commented about how if he could focus and avoid being a goofball until the appropriate time, he would not be a bad Scout to camp with.

More later and keep the questions coming.

So the PLC had a lengthy meeting last night. After doing all the pros and cons on NSPs versus Mixed Aged, they decided on Mixed Aged patrol effective  Monday May 2nd.

Once that was decided, they had to decided how to organize the new patrols. That got interesting. First thing they came up with was who NOT to put together. The Scouts knew which combinations of Scouts would be toxic. Apparently part of the NSP's problem is all the toxic combinations are in the same patrol. Once that was decided came the actual deciding. One suggestion was lining up by size. Another was a single line and  "1,2,3,1,2,3...." One was by age, but it was pointed out that essentially that is how the troop is already divided, and it aint working.

Eventually the idea of pulling names out of a hat came about, with the caveat of separating the toxic combinations. And essentially that is how it was done. Older Scouts in one cup, middle scouts in a second, new scouts in a 3rd.  Results are pretty balanced and I have only 1 concern. One patrol has  an older Scout in it who was SPL, and would like to run again. And will probably get it. The second older Scout in the patrol has not been seen since recharter.

Overall i think they did one heckuva god job.

Interesting.  I haven't had the time, nor the WB beads, to staff the local NYLT, but my understanding was that regional/national could yank approval if you didn't do it their way.

personally, I'd like to see some of the BA22 traditions come back, i.e. plain uniform with only CSP,  numbers 22, and your patrol emblem, awarding smokey bears upon completion, etc.

It happens even within the same district. One DAC thinks a project is good enough to be use, but another DAC later on doesn't think it's good enough.

That happened to a friend of mine. DAC during the approval process thought making portable training obstacles for the local search and rescue team's dogs was a great idea. When he goes for his EBOR, the current DAC expresses how he didn't think it was good enough for an Eagle project, and he would not have approved it. But since it was approved and completed, there was nothing he could do about it.

I know Green Bar Bill was listed as an Eagle Scout, don't know if it's honorary, or if he got it pre-adult ban. But he was a Knisght Scout in Denmark.

Yes, national doesn't want any changes of the NYLT: no more calling the course Brownsea, Golden Acorn, or any other name used in the past or locally. Nothing is to be added to or taken away from the program. And If I'm not mistaken NYLT course directors also need to attend training on par with WB course director at the regional/national level.

As for beads and other bling not being a big deal, it can be. I've done uniform inspections for camporees in the past. I've seen some unauthorized bling on NYLT grads, and when I point out that it's not authorized and I will need to take off points, you need to see the reactions they, and their SMs, will give me.

@@RichardB that could be.

 

It could also be that by not augmenting the syllabus, new scouters will read unwritten principles into the G2SS and as a result the most important part of the BSA program -- encapsulated in the first page of the guide -- goes untaught.

Interesting issue.

 

BSA says we are on our honor to "support and use the recommended literature, materials, and procedures as I carry out my training responsibilities."

 

Does one fail to support and use the recommended literature" by adding to that literature?

 

What is consistent with the "values" of Scouting if the BSA literature is, beyond any doubt, incorrect and inconsistent with other BSA literature?

 

Now for the tougher issue.  What if the "recommended literature" is simply incorrect - even teaching procedures that are contrary to law?  

 

I hate to say it, but I have found the last BSHB, "the recommended literature," severely wanting in regard to IOLS skills. It was so bad, I had to create a booklet from older BSA literature to supplement what the handbook had.

So what is right, using the current BSA information that is inadequate or incorrect, or adding to the course by providing additional material from older BSA sources?

Unfortunately being a leader in the BSA is not a "science" in the classical sense of the word, but rather an "art." One size does not fit all, and you need to adapt to the situation in order to provide the best program for your youth.

Best example of that for me is the New Scout Patrol and the First Class, First Year mentality. While I know of units the NSPs work, I know of units where they do not work. Mixed aged patrols, which was the recommended BSA model from 1910 to 1989, do work for those patrols. What should a leader do: continue using the current recommended model which is causing Scouts to get frustrated and quit, or change to a mixed aged model that keeps folks in the program?  What is better, force feeding Scouts S-T-2-1 skills so they can meet an arbitrary goal, First Class in a year, but they have no mastery of the skills, or have the Scouts take their time, "master the skills" as older BSHBs stated, and actually know what they are doing?

... the op has alluded to a personal issue with the person, so their take is already biased.

 If they did something improper -- I confront them (nicely and privately) and let them know. Otherwise, I see no reason to be a coward and go behind someone's back. No excuse.

I need to play Devil's Advocate because I'm in a situation where I cannot communicate with someone directly, and must use intermediaries. It's not being cowardly, at least on my part, but rather trying to use my resources, specifically someone who the person WILL listen to.

The individual has a negative bias towards me as I "betrayed" him and the troop by letting my son choose a different troop that led to his buddies eventually joining. No amount of talking, emailing, begging, NOTHING will get him to reply to any communications. At the camp out 2 weeks ago, we were in the same campsite, and he would not acknowledge my presence. I had to use his long-time friend who is the CM to get him and the troop to become involved with the pack.  Yep I had to go behind his back, and use someone to talk some sense into him.

Every lodge is different, every chapter is different, and the type of leadership does help.

My chapter is very active. We run the trading post at multiple events at the local camp. over the past 10 years, Approx. $12K was given back to the camp in the form or equipment, and "maintenance." The little remaining goes towards a campership each year. I'm estimating $2,700 over the past 10 years.

One of the issues we have is nationals  new NCAP that has a "one size fits all" approach. New construction at camps need to use specific designs so that all BSA camps will look identical, and keep the "brand's" image. Sometimes that is not feasible. Best example of that is BSA's bathhouse design not meeting local standards. It's a mess.

I know for a fact that not everyone at national has field experience. And it seems as if more and more are getting in and changing things without knowing what they are doing. I saw this first hand when I worked for supply. While they have made some improvements, I like that they sell more camping gear now, they still sell a lot of silly stuff. Anyone remember the AOL belt buckle for leather belts?

The way we did it was teach a class or two on the topic prior to the campout, depended upon the when we did it. (More years doing it, more time we prepped). At the camp out, we spend the morning building shelters. We did patrol shelters, but a few folks did individual ones. Afternoon was pioneering games ( which is apparently another no-no from national now). Eventually we added utensilless cooking. Although the first time we did it was aluminum cooking.

UPDATE.

Well it's going to get interesting. WDL will be stepping down June 1 to become Tiger DL with younger son. They are trying to talk my wife into becoming DL since she is the ADL. Wife is considering it. Actually she is being "voluntold" to do it, especially since it's only 6 months we are talking about.

Anyway, wife knows how Webelos-to-Scout transitions go. She was involved with another troop when we were in MS. So she plans on making calls to visit every troop in the area. She will be contacting the CO's troop first, and try to get a visit and camp out with them. But everyone will be visiting.

I'm hoping the CO's troop does something.  I've talked to the Scouts about wilderness survival and Webelos, and they seemed to think it will work. When I told the adults about the idea a few years back,  they said I'm crazy.

I'd include Webelos for Wilderness Survival, but do go easy on them. . #1 It can help them meet CASTAWAY ADVENTURE.(caps emphasis)  #2 WILDERNESS SURVIVAL IS THE BEST RECRUITING TOOL I HAVE EVER ENCOUNTERED IN 30+ YEARS IN SCOUTING! ( caps emphasis, OK maybe a little shouting at the top of my longs to show enthusiasm )

Seriously, my a fluke my troop did a wilderness survival camp out, and everyone loved it. First time around, we had to improvise heavily as we found out the nite before our gear was destroyed or damaged, but we kept on doing it year after year.

I've suggested it to no only the troop I'm with, but also the Cub Scout pack's CO's troop multiple times. The leaders in the CO's troop think I'm nuts for suggesting it, but when I mentioned it to their Scouts last weekend, they think it's a good idea. My troop plans to do it in December, but with some district/council scheduling changes, 8 weeks without a camp out will cause  camping withdrawal. Going to mention the schedule changes and suggest they switch activities for November and December, and change dates,

Camping of any sort was not required in order to earn Eagle from 1972-1979.

Pages 79 - 91 of the 1972 handbook shows the requirements, and Camping Skill Award nor Camping MB is required.

Tenderfoot required Citizenship Skill Award, an elective Skill Award, and 1 MB

Second Class required 3 additional Skill Awards, and 2 MBs.

First Class required 3 additional Skill Awards and 2 MBs. That for a total of 5 MBs which 2 had to be Cit Com and First Aid.

Star Required  a Scout to have total of 9 MBs which an additional 2 had to be Eagle Required.

Life required 15 total MBs with7 Eagle required

And of Course Eagle required 24 MBs with the following required:

         First Aid

         Cit Com

          Cit Nat

           Cit World

           Communications

           Safety

         Emergency Prep

         Env. Sci

         Personal Management OR Personal Fitness OR Swimming OR Sports

Notice Camping is missing?

While the book does contain some information on camping, it is not as extensive as previous editions, nor GBB's 1979 edition.  My brothers, when they transfered troops do to a move, the troop didn't camp, and they left.  My cousin, who is an Eagle, does not remember camping as much as his son's troop did. Nor did his troop ever do OA elections ( he didn't know a thing about the OA until I became a member and talked about it.)

Yep he became an Eagle in the 1970s.

While not every unit took the outing out of Scouting, my troop certainly didn't, it was usually those units with established leaders prior to tyhe ISP that had the outdoor program.

If Backpacking is limited to 14+, then my troop is in trouble. Troop is doing a 50 miler on the AT instead of Philmont due to leadership issues. We couldn't get enough leaders to go to Philmont this year.

But we now have an ASM heading up the AT trek only because his 12 year old can do the AT, but not Philmont. 12 year old is looking forward to redoing that section of the AT again. It's been 3 years since he did it.

EDITED: Just noticed that  Wilderness and Backcountry is limited to 14+.  Where are we suppose to go camping, only at Scout camps?  Why do I think the folks who wrote these guidelines were either A) Never in Scouts or B) In Scouts in the 1970s when they took the OUTING out of ScOUTING.

Sad thing is, you got folks who will look at part of the document, without reading the entire thing. And it is confusing. We did orienteering courses at day camp, and the cubs loved it. When we did geocaching with the Webelos in December, we also threw in "old school geocaching:" orienteering. Again the Webelos loved. it.

Maybe I should call  the orienteering course a 'map and compass" course?