POR and Eagle

[Beavah 205]

Yah, in da parent thread jet raised the followin' thought, and it seemed interestin' enough to spin off:

 

My troop currently has 30 scouts 1st Class through Life. I have an additional 8 Eagle Scouts for a potential leadership pool of 38. Of those 18 currently need a POR (After BORs this will go to 43 and 26). Added up the troop has openings for about 20 PORs plus as many Den Chiefs as I can field. After elections and appointments I still have 6 scouts that need PORs. Some I'm working on getting them connected to Dens as Den Chiefs, others can wait until the next elections, etc. But two are 1st Class Scouts with less than 18 months until they turn 18. Neither has the temperament to be Den Chiefs and they can't blow a bugle. So, you bet I'm giving them opportunities to lead special projects. I can't make them succeed, that is up to them, but it is my responsibility to make sure they have the opportunity.

 

My position that jet was respondin' to was (and is) that it isn't the SM's or Committee's job to provide POR's. POR's are earned by boys, either through election by their peers or appointment by their peers. One might expect even in a big troop that an interested, capable lad might hold more than one position if he was good at both, rather than making the lad do less just so someone who contributes less can have a shot. If they don't perform well enough to be selected for responsibility, then they probably shouldn't advance, eh?

 

What says the group?

 

Jet doesn't say how big his troop is overall, but I'd also wonder how common this problem is?

 

Beavah

 

[gcnphkr 11]

As a point of reference. The troop currently has 57 scouts in 7 patrols.

 

We do not prevent people from holding an office just because they don't need one. Of the leadership team the SPL, a ASPL, the OA Rep, a DC and (soon) a TG no longer need their POR for rank advancement as they will either be Eagles or completed the POR for Eagle. I'd fight any attempt to remove these scouts from office to make room for someone else. I view these positions (okay, not the OA Rep) to be critical and not suitable for all scouts.

 

The patrols do tend to elect a PL that needs it, an on occasion a PL will step down in the course of his term to make room for someone else in their patrol. But this is neither expected nor encouraged.

 

The other appointed PORs go to those who the SPL chooses from among those who are willing and able with need being a secondary consideration. If a scout is not fulfilling their commitments they are counseled and if nothing changes they are asked to step down.

[evmori 11]

Let's see.

 

That would be

 

7 Patrol Leaders

1 SPL

3 ASPL's

1 Troop Guide

2 Chaplin's Aides

2 Quartermasters

2 Instructors

 

 

That's 18 right there!

 

It is not the responsibility of the adult leadership to "give" POR's. The adult leadership should be supplying the Scouts with every opportunity possible to advance. It is up to the Scouts to take advantage of those opportunities.

[gcnphkr 11]

What would you do with two Chaplain's Aides? For that matter, I'm not sure what I would do with two Quartermasters or a third ASPL.

[Beavah 205]

Yah, thanks for the additional info, jet526. I was figurin' you were a bigger unit.

 

Does this unit have a higher number of older boys perhaps? Or maybe a really aggressive FCFY program? I'm tryin' to figure out what's causin' the congestion, so to speak.

 

Sometimes with a FCFY program yeh get all the lads to First Class pretty quick, but then they may be havin' fun scouting for a while buildin' up skills and confidence before there's an opportunity to serve in a more responsible role. I think that's OK, eh? No need to rush through ranks.

 

If the unit has a lot of older lads, yeh might consider doin' pull-out high adventure patrols for a high adventure or three. Those might have their own Patrol Leader for a stretch, givin' you a few more .

 

Interestin'. I do wonder how common this problem is.

 

Beavah

 

[evmori 11]

What would you do with two Chaplain's Aides? For that matter, I'm not sure what I would do with two Quartermasters or a third ASPL.

 

Those were just suggestions. I'm sure with a unit this size, two QM's would be a benefit! As far as the ASPL's, I would think assigning two patrols/ASPL would be a good idea.

[gcnphkr 11]

We have a bit of both. We have 19 scouts that are 15 or older, primarily Life or Eagle. There are 15 first year scouts 8 of which are either 1st Class or only need a SMC and BOR. The other 21 are a mix of mostly 1st Class and Star Scouts.

I don't push the scouts into POR's. But I try to have something for the SPL to tell them should they ask. They need to advance at their own pace, but I need to make sure they don't have to wait for an opportunity to advance.

I like numbers and I find the rank break down interesting:

 

8   Eagles 11 Life 4   Star 15 First Class 7   Second Class 9   Tenderfeet 3   Scouts

There is a bottleneck between 1st Class and Star but I'm not totally sure what is causing it. Part is that prior to this year we averaged 22 months to 1st Class so the first years are caught up with the second years and even some of the third and forth years.

[Beavah 205]

Part is that prior to this year we averaged 22 months to 1st Class so the first years are caught up with the second years and even some of the third and forth years.

 

Yah, that's it, eh? When yeh switch from a traditional program to a First Class First Year program yeh will get that kind of backlog.

 

In a traditional program, lads advance about a rank a year, some a bit faster, some stalling occasionally. Gets 'em to First Class right about the time they're Ages & Stages mature enough to want to start steppin' forward into leadership roles.

 

In FCFY, they'll make FC in a year or so if they're reasonably active. Then yeh have 6 years worth of kids needin' POR's for rank. Doesn't work to have 6/7 of the unit be "chiefs" and 1/7 be "indians."

 

A lot of units just press on, gettin' lads positions as 7th and 8th graders so that they Eagle by age 14. That way after a bit you work through the backlog and yeh only have two years of kids needin' positions. Older boys go join a crew or join an older scouts patrol focusing on high adventure and maybe servin' as instructors.

 

Alternative is that after First Class the lads have to do patrol-level jobs for a year or more, if yeh have strong patrol method goin'. Patrol QM, APL, patrol scribe, etc. While they don't get credit for rank advancement, they do develop the skills needed to move successfully into a troop-level POR down the road.

 

I always tell units that it's important for 'em to decide consciously what their vision and plan is, eh? Not just let it happen. Plenty of successful units operatin' traditionally, with mixed-age patrols and boys makin' First Class in 2-3 years and Eagle at age 16+. Plenty of successful FCFY programs with boys makin' Eagle at 13-14. And a fair number of the FCFY who then let kids play and develop responsibility in the patrol before they take on troop positions and Eagle at age 15-16. But while each is successful, the outcomes for the kids are different, eh? A unit should decide what it wants in terms of outcomes, and choose the right method to get 'em there.

 

Beavah

 

[gcnphkr 11]

Going more for the third option. There have been lots of changes this year. Patrols have been mostly just divisions of the troop with about the only things they did independently was cook and eat. This year we are making a change to really use the patrol method. The scouts seem to like it and the older scouts have made comments along the lines of "Wish we did that when I started." Not a simple task with lots of retraining and culture changes.

 

I like the FCFY if for no other reason then it has had a big impact on the dropout rate. Last year we lost about 40% of the new scouts, the year before was over 50%. This year, with 14 that crossed over and two that have joined since, we have lost 1 scout and that was because he moved about 50 miles away. They are having fun, learning the skills better than in prior years and are generally excited. It is starting to have an effect on the older scouts. They see a new scout get a rank that they've been dragging their feet on and they start moving again. The goal in not so much that they the get their First Class in the first year, but that they can function as part of an autonomous patrol. Still have a long way to go on that.

 

In the past scouts would go inactive during 10th grade only to show up again at 17.5 to finish up their Eagle by 18 but not really do anything with the troop. We are now looking at 15-16 and then keeping them active in leadership roles. We'll see how it goes. Fortunately we are very active in the OA which gives them an additional outlet in Chapter and Lodge positions, and several are also members of a crew. There are a few that are concerned that if they get their Eagle at 15-16 that we will lose them for the last two years. To me we lose them anyway, we just keep them on the books. This way they are at least active through their Sophomore year.

[CubScoutJo 10]

So,am I reading this right: A troop can have more than one ASPL and both boys can use it as a POR?

 

This would be great for the troop I serve because the current ASPL is often busy and unable to come to all the meetings. If there were two, they could work it out between them to make sure the dates are covered.

 

Jo

[John-in-KC 311]

There is no hard and fast "set" leadership structure for a Troop, beyond the Patrol Leader. Every other POR is the result of a specific need of the Troop

 

If the Troop is big enough, yes, 2 or 3 ASPLs can be appointed.

 

If the Troop Trailer demands sufficient attention, 2 or 3 Quartermasters can be appointed.

 

If the Troop is big enough that 1 Scribe would be busy handling money and another is busy helping the Advancement Coordinator, do that.

 

I've seen units which, short of the Eagle Required (for Eagle) PORs, use Webmaster now, and there are several unofficial POR patches.

 

The SM should encourage the SPL to look at the needs of the unit and the burdens of the positions.

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~`

Now, one place where either I disagree with the Northern furry creature with long teeth, or I'm not sure the point is on the table:

 

The Scoutmaster, in his role as The Program Guy in the Troop, has to keep an eye on all his charges. There may be a Scout who is hung up on the trail because he cannot get over shyness to ask for a POR, There may also be Scouts are playing peer headgames with one Scout, so the one is not getting POR time he may be ready for, In those cases the SM needs a quiet, but perhaps forcefully blunt word with the SPL.

[Stosh 3452]

If I have a boy that needs advancement and doesn't have a POR because the youth leadership doesn't have a position available, or won't get him one, I just assign him a special project. It's all within the SM's scope of operation and it doesn't interfere with the leadership of the troop. I have had a lot of boys doing these special project and never question whether or not they have a POR on their shirt, they just do their job and get their advancement. Need a new trailer? Why can't a boy research the project and make a recommendation? Need special speakers for a number of different programs? Boy can line those up. Need ideas for Eagle projects? A boy can get his ear to the ground and come up with some options. There's a lot of stuff being done by adults that a boy is very capable of doing. If leadership is part of advancement, then maybe some of these special projects responsibilities may be more effective in showing leadership than sitting around counting MB pamphlets as a Troop Librarian, or taking a few pictures here and there as a Troop Historian.

 

Stosh

[bacchus 10]

Kind of the opposite situation here. I hear through the grapevine the SM will not allow one Star Scout to have a POR because he wants to hold off his advancement. I'm the COR and will be checking into it tonight. If somebody wants to hold a Scout back, it would seem the more appropriate route would be through the SMC and this just feels a bit dishonest. Thoughts?

[Buffalo Skipper 13]

bacchas,

The only reason to hold back advancement is...not having completed the requirements. Intentionally deciding to hold back a POR to keep a scout from advancing is like telling a new scout, we aren't going to have any first aid instruction in the troop until next year, because we don't have time to teach you that now.

 

I am glad to see that you, as a COR, are taking an interest in this and will act on it. That is the way it should be, but from my experience, it is uncommon for a COR to pony up to that aspect of their duties. Keep up what you are doing.

[Lisabob 13]

There are occasionally boys who say that they want a particular POR, but that POR is either not open, or that POR would be a really bad match for the boy in question at the time. In the latter case, I can imagine people actively dissuading a boy from taking on a particular POR.

 

More broadly: What about a situation where a boy has recently demonstrated poor judgment and behavior, but demands a POR anyway, right now, despite his clearly demonstrated lack of responsibility, maturity, leadership, trustworthiness, etc.. Under those circumstances, is the SM within his rights to deny a boy a POR?