ramanous

We agree the aim is to be Youth Led. In your opinion / experience, under what conditions is it appropriate for adults to step-in? When you step-in, what is the appropriate correction for a Youth Led troop?

Certainly adults need to intercede when safety is a concern. I think I'm looking more for the grey areas. For example, do you let the troop meetings consistent of kickball games with occasional youth-led advancement sign-offs? If not, what is an appropriate correction for something of this sort without turning into an Adult Led troop?

In the sprite of "mad libs," how would you complete something like "The [PL / SPL / Patrol / Troop / ASM / Parent] is expected to A)______________. If this does not occur, then B)________________" (OR your own version of the statement.)

A)

B)

Good idea. I guess the general belief is that age 16 or High School is the make or break moment. Sticking around is a good sign that the scouts are enjoying themselves. Making it to First Class is a measure of program success. Any rank after First Class is more about individual ambitions. So,

• What is the retention rate of 16+ scouts?
• How many of our Scouts made it to First Class?

To clarify, I am looking for measures of success of the youth from the perspective of a Scouter. For example, one of my least favorite measures is probably "How many Eagle Scouts did we produce during my tenure?" But, alternatively, one that I think might be good is "How many (percentage) of our Scouts made it to First Class?" I'm not really sure why I think that; its just a gut feeling at this point.

I do get that the answers to my OP are likely subjective by most standards, though my intent is to figure-out if there are reasonable objective measures. Certainly, too @Skeptics point, the best measure is probably something like "How many of our former adults participate in Scouting as adults, or introduce their kids to Scouting?" But, that's hard to track

I like @MattR's response, through its subjective or too general so I might ponder how that could be measurable. For example, retention of scouts after they make [First Class or Eagle or have been SPL]? Or, for that matter, age or rank at which a Scout becomes inactive?

I see too many kids that take the "Get Eagle, Get Out" path.

I'm just spitballing ideas.

3 hours ago, Eagledad said:

I agree, but I have never met a Scoutmaster who didn't think their troop was scout-led.

If you we're trying to explain Scout-led to another person, are there specific examples you could point out? The main reason I'm asking is that I'd really like to drill down into objective measures of success (if possible.) If we get too far into the weeds on this subtopic, we might be going off on a tangent from the OP but I'm thinking something like:

1) Scout starts & runs the troop meeting without an adult needing to speak ✅

2)

I've seen that Ladder of Youth Leader poster, which I think would be a great survey for a troop. So one measure might be how far up the ladder the troop has made it based on a group survey

Of course, I doubt there is any perfect measure

The tricky thing about "voting with your feet", I think, is that some significant number of scouts will stay in a troop because their friends are there. And, that's a circular issue. So, to some degree, I think that may give some false indications until its too late (multiple families leave at the same time.) 

As a Scouter, what outcomes do feel are the best measure of success for a troop? What makes you feel good about the program? I don't mean JTE, but what personally do you strive for?

How does your Key3 address parental suggestions and concerns, especally those brought up at parent / TLC meetings, that are at odds with the Key3 methods? Will they take the time to discuss the matter(s) with parents? Or, are the parent meetings basically presentations?

TLC: Troop Leadership Committee - the adult committee that oversees the program consisting of the Chair, Treasurer, Secretary and various other positions. Or, the adults that sit around a table occasionally chatting about the scout program. I think when I was in scouts the TLC was the term used for the PLC now, but that was a long time ago. 

Who sets the PLC targets? JTE and/or troop specific targets, I assume.

I'm an Eagle from a troop that did practice the patrol method, so I get it but the other parents don't really understand. The involved parents see the problem, but so far I haven't been able to find a succinct, convincing way to explain why the patrol method is the solution; coupled with the fact that the SM & CC have the podium.

The response from other parents is usually something like, "OK, but what if we did this other thing"

I've pointed them to the aims & method; quoted Baden-Powell; tried to explain how a SPL learns to lead by being a PL. One thing I haven't gotten across is that the PL learns from practicing, especially at the outings. Maybe I need a patrol method brief... here what it is, and why it works (and other "methods" don't.)

However, I don't think it matters even if the concerned parents demanded change. SM has dug his claws in & the CC supports him. Most of the parents aren't engaged, so I expect don't care & would probably get upset at the rabble-rousers. The primary reason we're in this troop is that my son's friends are in it. That's making in tough to leave, but I think we've got to go.

"Patrols make a Troop" is a great line (in your other post).

Yes, that sounds much more like I would expect.

Does the PLC send their "annual plan" directly to the TLC for review or does the SM intercede?

Does the TLC follow a formal agenda?

Forking off this post about parent communications

I've read the Troop Committee Guidebook, so I know whats supposed to happen...

In practice... what methods and level of information detail does your SM and TLC / Scouter Reserves discuss? What responsibilities does your TLC have, especially in how it affects troop plans and implementation?

For context in our particular case, the SM tells the TLC about the status of a few upcoming events, the treasure reports financial status, and the meeting is done. Several of the active, trained parents are frustrated they are basically sidelined at the TLC meetings, while the SM complains about lack of parental involvement.

EDIT: TL;DNR: What signs should a parent look for that the troop has healthy culture?

I realized after I hit submit that some of you might ask if this is about the youth or the parent. And, is this a case of parents trying to run the troop (rather than the youth.) There is more going on than described above. I am trying to understand a specific matter regarding troop culture. I've further edited to be more concise

So I think one suggestion you're making is to let the patrols self-organize naturally as much as possible?

We actually have the opposite problem than you, which is our SM refuses to use the patrol method in favor of the SPL running the troop directly (the PLs have no responsibility.) He's been a scouter for a long time, including woodbadge, so its confounding to me (I asked him privately to explain it; that was big mistake.) I'm speculating the Key3 want the troop to be an Eagle Scout factory so they see PL, SPL, etc as just requirements for rank advancement.

That's great to hear and I appreciate your observations! Can my family join your troop😉?

Do you have any advice regarding how to explain the patrol method and its benefits to both adults and scouts?

I've actually found a reasonably close troop that does implement the patrol method. I hate the thought of transferring my boy to a new troop but we're basically a SM lead troop as the SPLs struggle to control the scouts. Unfortunately, I've come to the conclusion that the SM is fine with this (politically he is not in any danger of being replaced) so I really don't think it matters what I say at this point. But, I'd appreciate your thoughts anyway.

I'm sure thats true, though some councils are going to be more capable than others for various reasons

Glad to see such things, too bad its not virtual. BSA really needs to include neurodiverity in its adult training, especailly since scouts seems to draw ND. So many neurotypicals just don't get it.

Sorry to reopen a old post, but I'm curious how your "Return to Patrol Method" is going? What lessons have your learned?

I have found it VERY difficult to convince the scouters in our troop about the importance of the patrol method. For the scouter parents, some have recognized that we're not developing leadership within the troop but still don't get why mixing up patrols every outing is a bad idea.  And the veteran scouters, well I've been an actively involved scouter for several years now and still don't understand their "methods."

Sharing some positive news:

https://www.kob.com/new-mexico/boy-scout-troops-utilize-skill-set-after-amtrak-train-derailment/

Quote

A true act of heroism from a group of boys not even old enough to vote. Scout leaders say the boys jumped into action almost immediately after the crash, busting out windows to help passengers escape the train — which was now on its side.

I definitely get what you're saying, including the struggle of keeping a troop from losing membership. To me, that's a double edge sword: for every kids that says it boring, there another that's looking for a proper Scouting experience. Who wins? You can't please everyone.

Boring meetings? Are these Scout led patrols? What Scouting things does the PLC plan for these meetings? If they aren't planning meetings, then that's the primary problem. If they are, then they need be "guided" towards fun activities with positive outcomes. If your patrols and troop aren't planning meetings, then the clique in charge (Scouts or Scouters) is winging it which can result in the appearance of favoritism and alienation... hardly the outcomes we want reinforced. 

Treat the meetings like short outings. Every outing needs some structure, preferably Scout led (meal times, activities, and that doesn't mean an outing can't have unstructured down-time.)

Reflect on the meaning of each individual word in Scouting Program. A youth group without the scouting methods is not scouting. Program is not free time.

Quote

an outdoor environment to stretch their comfort zone.  Thru that environment, scouts learn and grow

Which is the Outdoor program, along with the other 7 Methods of Scouting working together. If all we emphasize is the Outdoor Program and Rank Advancement, then we're being even more boxed in!

Quote

The problem with the methods is that they don't include what youth are really looking for.

Well, I think it depends on how the methods are implemented which I think is the point you're making in the second part of the statement...

Quote

All scouts want fun with friends and older scouts want a unique challenge (high adventure, working with younger scouts, service, it depends on the scout). To make scouting work they also need to learn how to create this on their own. That's not simple. It's more than organizing a camp-out every month.

These are the Methods of Scouting, and to reemphasize @Tron point, this is a Scouting program. If we're only concerned with getting highest rank and-or going camping or socializing, then that alone is not Scouting. There's other watered down youth programs for that

Outdoor Program is one of the eight official Methods of Scouting, which are derived from the Vision & Mission of Scouting.  Other methods include Patrol, Advancement, Leadership, Uniform.

https://troopleader.scouting.org/scoutings-aims-and-methods/

Now, how do you get other Scouters to care about implementing all eight methods? Should they be implemented with equal weight, or based on troop priority?

Quote

Amen. It would be sad, but I think I wouldn't want my kids in a poorly run troop even if it was the only one in town.

Well, I don't want to give-up on Scouting. It was a great experience for me as a youth, and my boy does like it in general. I keep telling myself that there's a reason we're with the troop, and I just need to stick it out and keep trying to improve things. But, its obvious that the core Scouters have a different idea about what the Aims and Methods of Scouting should be. I'm just not sure what their idea is (I get the impression its  making sure the kids of the CO parents get Eagle.)

There's certainly a multiple competing forces directing the subjective priorities of any troop.

My impression is that emphasis on Rank Advancement above all else, from parents (many of whom are active in the CO), and from older Scouters who are trying to keep the program from folding (recruit and retain, whatever it takes.) Hence, you have Eagle Scout factories producing Eagles that can barely tie their own shoes, let alone knots and hitches.

At the same time, we've lost families frustrated that the troop appears to emulate Lord of the Flies more than the Scouting for Boys.

We have Eagle Scouts that can't start a fire, have no idea how to lead a patrol let alone a troop. What I hear from the older Scouters is: the boys are resistant to putting in the effort and we don't want to run them off by expecting them to meet every requirement or be trained. Just in the last 3 months, I've seen two boys get rank advancement without meeting some requirements (yes, I'm sure about that.) The SM seems to think the boys will figure it out without any training. I wish that were the case, but as some point someone has to explain it (whether the boys implement is another matter.)

Our council is a mess, and there are hardly any troops left in our district so switching troops isn't really an option. There's an argument to be made that any troop is better than no troop. However, I'm seeing a lot of bad habits being passed along so sometime I wonder if my boy would be better off not being in Scouting (I hate that thought.)

The leaders are only running the program National is pushing

Its one thing when a Scout advances quickly using thier own ambition, but pushing for 1st class in a year, and Eagle by 16 waters down the brand. The fact that there's are competing interests, and not enough "bandwidth", just means a Scout has to make tough decisions about what they think is important. Hence, why some Scoutd will earn Eagle and other won't. If all Scouts earned Eagle, then its just another particpation trophy.

Quote

I purposely left out one of the Aims, "Leadership Development". How can leadership development be tool for developing character habits and goal of developing moral and ethical decision makers at the same time?

I concur with your previous statement about the Aims & Methods. As an Aim, perhaps its better worded or "Ethical Leadership" or "Servient Leadership".  And, your idea about setting goals for the PLC is great. Now, just to convince our SM to try it.

Above discussion wasn't exactly what I had in mind when I posted, but nonetheless all good comments related to my concerns. I'm a newer, but not new, scouter, and 80s era Eagle Scout. I've definitely been troubled by the same things mentioned in these posts....

... requirements being relaxed or ignored outright. SM/BOR/TLC seem to pay no mind. I know the SM/BOR are NOT to test/retest the Scout on the requirement, but they should at least question themselves about how it happens.

... emphasis on earning Eagle more than achieving the Aims of scouting

... lack of Leadership Development, Patrol methods, and more about individual achievements

Now, I wonder if this is at least partially the result of unreasonable expectations. The idea that a scout should make First Class in a year? I question how many 11 year olds are mature enough to complete the laundry list of requirements to the letter (I've read guide to advancement, so I know to look at the wording of the requirement carefully.) Then, there are issues like First Class cooking requirement, where you have to break the patrol method in order to get enough opportunities for upcoming scouts to meet the requirement (not to mention the similar cooking & camping mb requirement)

And Eagle Coaches? That position exists for one reason: Troop priority placed on Advancement above any other Scouting method.  

On the other hand, there's little emphasis placed on Leadership Development. I think ILST and NYLT should be a requirement to get Eagle, along with a meaningful leadership role like Patrol Leader and probably some requirement to participating in creating a troop program. We have a couple Eagles who have NEVER been Patrol Leaders, let along served as SPL or in the PLC. And, that sets an example. Librarian, Historian, etc are not taken seriously by the scouts; they are patches to get easy "leadership" credit to meet rank requirements.

I don't blame the scouts for this, or even think its an issue with "today's kids". Maybe its the parents that don't know or don't care that Scouting is more than just "getting an Eagle" rank. Channeling Ed Demming, is it the people or the process (program)? I mean, we really weren't that much different in the 80's then now. I had plenty of distractions, including video games, exhaust fumes and perfume. Of course, the program changed in '89 but I don't know how much that had to do with any of this. One thing that is different: we have a lot more adults involved now than then, and most of them are not parents and have no interest in scouting skills beyond frontcounty camping. I suspect most are there for the fellowship with other adults.

From a scouter preservative, we take various standardized training. But when the Key3 vary from the standard, it makes our roles as adults confusing. I've been called out by the SM a few times for "doing things wrong" when in fact I was going by the book (which is consistent with my experience as a Scout also). I've pointed that out, and at least one instance was told "today's scouts are different", which relates to the above. Hard to volunteer in this environment where isn't clear the actual process being followed. Not following the plan (when there is one), also sets a bad example.