George

With apologies for resurrecting such a long-dormant thread, does anyone have the syllabi for any of the AOFS operations? I have Brownsea Double-Two but would be grateful to read the others, especially Flying Start and Go Silver Bars. Thanks in advance for any leads!

On 2/13/2024 at 8:28 PM, InquisitiveScouter said:

We split up and have about 4 patrol outings per year in the troop program,  Older Scouts are more likely to choose backpacking.  We do 15-20 milers.  We also shoot for one long term backpacking trip per year... 5 days, 4 nights, 50-miler.  We do not encourage young/small/inexperienced to do backpacking.  But neither do we discourage. 

Thanks for all your insights. I wanted to follow up on the above. Does your troop used mixed-age/traditional patrols? Assuming the answer is yes, when your patrols choose backpacking, do the young/small/inexperienced patrol members stay behind or do the older Scouts help them along? Thanks again!

@Eagledad Sorry to ping you, but I've seen you mention in other posts that you're associated with a backpacking troop. I would be grateful for your thoughts!

For those of you who are or were volunteers with troops that describe themselves as a "backpacking troop," what best practices can you share? What defines a backpacking troop, anyway? How does your troop prepare recent crossovers and other young/small/inexperienced Scouts for backpacking? How many backpacking trips does your troop typically do each year (and what do you do the rest of the year)? If you converted your troop to backpacking, what challenges did you have to overcome? In your experience, how does backpacking support the patrol method?

Thanks in advance for your insights!

Most of you are describing precisely the sort of emphasis on the PLs and PLC that I also support. Authorizing PLs to sign off on S-T-2-1 skill requirements is straightforward enough, but I would like to go further. I realize that, under current policies, I can't permit the PLs to sign off on requirements that expressly reference the Scoutmaster or "other adult leader" or let the PLC take the place of the Scoutmaster conference or the board of review. But it seemed to me that the PLC could handle the "Scout spirit" requirements (and maybe also the "[b]e active in your troop" and "serve actively in your troop" Star, Life, and Eagle requirements, subject to the Guide to Advancement's requirements to have reasonable expectations in place on those issues).

Anyway, I appreciate all of the comments so far! Please keep them coming!

In his 1954 book on the Court of Honour (i.e., the patrol leaders' council), John Thurman wrote (with my emphasis in bold):

Quote

The Court of Honour can fulfill a tremendous function in the regard to the award of Badges, which are the reward for effort and achievement. The examiner for a badge can deal only with the Scout vis-a-vis the conditions of the particular badge. In other words, the examiner is concerned to know that the Scout can, for instance, signal accurately at the approved rate. He decides that the Scout can fulfill the requirements of the test or that he cannot do so: what the examiner cannot know is what sort of Scout the fellow is. Does the boy taking the badge pull his weight in the Patrol, is he a credit to the Troop, is he making a real effort or is he just concerned with his own personal progress? The Court of Honour, as the guardian of the honour of the Troop and as the body which deals with rewards, should be allowed to say whether or not a particular boy should enter for a badge. In my old Troop no boy ever entered for a badge unless and until the Court of Honour approved. They were concerned as to whether he tried to live up to the Scout Promise and supported his Patrol, etc. If, through your leadership as Scoutmaster, you can get the Court of Honour to accept this function and with your guidance put it into practice you will find a tremendous strengthening of the whole spirit of your Troop.

It goes without saying that the BSA's advancement method is quite different from B-P's traditional Scouting. Even so, perhaps an American Scoutmaster who desired to emulate this concept in their troop could, consistent with Guide to Advancement topic 4.2.1.2, authorize the patrol leaders' council (as a body) to sign off on the "Scout spirit" rank requirements (i.e., Tenderfoot requirement 9, Second Class requirement 10, First Class requirement 11, Star requirement 2, Life requirement 2, and Eagle requirement 2). Is there any BSA policy that would prevent this? If not, would you all consider it a good idea?

Thanks in advance for your thoughts!

Given that the BSA requires two registered adult leaders 21 years of age or over are at "all Scouting activities, including meetings," it seems that the old ideal of weekly Patrol meetings outside of the Troop meeting--at, for example, a Patrol member's house--is more unlikely than ever.  As a result, is it time for Troops to reallocate more of their weekly meeting time and space to Patrols?

@Kudu reprints some of Green Bar Bill's advice to Scoutmasters on this subject at http://inquiry.net/patrol/troop/index.htm:

Quote

 

How Often Does The Troop Meet?

Although many Troops meet every week, this is by no means a requirement for running a good Troop.  Patrol work is the important thing.   Troop hikes and camps come next.  Troop meetings are only necessary to hold the gang together and help the boys to steer the right course.

The idea, then, is to have just enough Troop meetings to round out the Troop's program of hikes and camps and Patrol activities.

If you have smoothly working Patrols and a Patrol Leaders' Council that's running in high gear, one meeting a month may be just enough to supplement your outdoor activities.

Or you may find that your schedule of hikes, Patrol meetings, and leaders' meetings, will suggest a Troop meeting every two weeks.  The monthly arrangement for the whole gang might then be somewhat along this line: Patrol meetings every week . . .Troop meetings, first and third week . . . planning meeting of Troop Leaders Council, second week . . . training get-together of Leaders' Patrol, fourth week . . .Troop hike or camp, third Saturday.  This arrangement has proved satisfactory to numerous Troops.

Some Troops may come to the conclusion that they can manage weekly Troop meetings, besides the weekly Patrol meetings, regular leaders' meetings, and Troop hikes.  Fine--but only if such a schedule strengthens the Patrols.  If weekly Troop meetings crowd weekly Patrol meetings off the calendar, then you'd better take stock and reconsider--the tail may be wagging the dog, the Patrols may be losing out.

In all events, let the Patrol Leaders' Council make the final decision.  The boy leaders know how much time their Scouts can give to Scout activities without impairing their school work and home life.

 

For those Troops who wish to be especially faithful to the Patrol method, why not ditch weekly Troop meetings so that Patrols may use the same time and space for their meetings?

Say, for example, that a Troop presently meets every Monday.  Instead of the Troop meeting in the usual way every Monday of the month, why not substitute Patrol meetings on the second and fourth Mondays, retaining Troop meetings (with Patrol corners) on the first and third Mondays?

Do any of your Troops meet less frequently so that Patrols can meet more frequently?  Is two Troop meetings a month enough?  What about only one Troop meeting?

Thanks in advance for your observations.

I would also like to read the draft.  Thank you!

It depends on the activity.

Fair point.  I'm especially interested in criteria for day hikes in the 5-10 mile range.  Thanks!

As you all know, "[t]here are instances, such as patrol activities, when the presence of adult leaders is not required and adult leadership may be limited to patrol leadership training and guidance.  With proper training, guidance, and approval by troop leaders, the patrol can conduct day hikes and service projects."

In your units, what "training, guidance, and approval" do you require for no-adult patrol activities?

Why not just recognize the already-existing Corps of Discovery?

We have elected officers.  We're hoping to have the Council VOA officers instruct ILSC (they previously did Crew Officers Orientation for us); we're just waiting for them to complete their changeover to schedule it.  In the meantime, I have been introducing some of the key points at relevant moments.  We're also waiting for the VOA meeting schedule to begin sending one or more crew representatives (the previous VOA officers met on the same night as our crew meeting night, so we have not previously sent representatives).

Upon chartering, we elected officers, completed Crew Officers Orientation, and then did a very abbreviated form of annual planning--more like quarterly planning--so that we would have activities on the calendar and activity chairs appointed to organize them right away.  “A [youth] on joining wants to begin Scouting right away," after all.  We conducted our first outing, a full-moon night hike in a nearby national park, less than 30 days after starting.  We then went backpacking and fishing in that same national park, had an evening of belaying instruction and then free climbing at a local climbing gym, completed wilderness first aid training, and most recently had a service project for Memorial Day.  We're two weeks away from our next outing, a weekend camping trip to our Council's rustic/primitive campground.  We have now completed program planning for the rest of this calendar year.  For each event, there has been an adult--an associate advisor, committee member, or me--designated as the consultant/supporting volunteer for the activity chair to call on for advice/assistance, as needed.

Our youth are likewise a mix of Boy Scouts, (former) Girl Scouts, and non-Scouts.  The Boy Scouts come from local troops that are patrol-based only in a very superficial sense; they're essentially "troop method" outfits.  The (former) Girl Scouts left the GSUSA for lack of outdoor programming.  The non-Scouts just enjoy doing outdoor things and are absorbing the conceptual framework of Scouting through osmosis.  I agree with your point (and Balsillie's) that inter-patrol competition would not be their cup of tea.

Thanks for your comment, qwazse.

I should have mentioned this in my original post, but this possible discussion with the crew president about the patrol system will be broader than just a discussion about that one system.  My intent is to pose questions about organization and whether what has worked for us as a small crew will continue to work as we become a larger crew, what adaptations or adjustments need to be made, how to make sure new Venturers are able to participate in the crew's decision-making, etc.  If they want examples, I was going to suggest the current Venturing structure, the Explorer Scout "program committee" structure, and the patrol system.

Your point about activity chairs forming subgroups around that activity is interesting.  We have only had one activity chair do that, and it happened at last week's meeting.  If that becomes a trend, then it might check some of the same boxes that the patrol system checks, especially the ability to ensure that every member can influence the unit's program.

Thanks again for your comment.

One additional data point:

 

WHEN we officially started Senior Scouts in 1946 we tended to soft-pedal the Patrol System.  Our intention was to stress that Senior Scouting was much more adult than Boy Scouting and every possible difference in organisation was stressed.  Thus, instead of full-throated Inter-Patrol Scouting, so distinctive and successful in a thriving Boy Scout Troop, we tended to run our activities on a Troop basis [. . . .]  Experience has, in my view, shown that this is excellent in theory and works well in practice for a few months, but, quite frankly, I don't recommend it as a permanent feature.  I am tending more and more to emphasise the building up of a strong Patrol spirit in each Patrol and encouraging the authority of the P/L by every means in my power.  But do not imagine that the inter-Patrol rivalry of the Boy Scout Troop will go down well in the Senior Scout Troop - because it won't.  A much lighter type of pastry is needed.  I find they don't want inter-Patrol competition of the running sort so successful in the Boy Scout Troop.  Inter-Patrol competitions taking place will go down well providing the dominant note is fun and not intense rivalry.

Another difference is the size of the Patrol.  I have come to favour four and I prefer three to five.  [. . . .]

Melville Balsillie, Running a Senior Scout Troop: An Official Handbook for Scouters 23-24 (1964), available at http://www.thedump.scoutscan.com/runningsenior.pdf.

VenturingCrew4.org