the ugly part of rebuilding a troop

[GKlose]

>> the advancement chair (the arbiter of "new rules") tells Scouts,

>> at a Board of Review, "okay,... from here on out you're going

>> to be expected to actually participate

>

>But that is not the role of the Advancement Chair, and they are not entitled to say such a thing. >The Advancement Chair doesn't decide if a requirement is met. The SM does that. The SM makes that >decision.

 

That was my original statement -- perhaps a poor choice of words. I meant "arbiter" in the sense that the AC was given responsibility of working the new policy into effect.

 

But let me spin this around into a general, "what would you do?" type of question.

 

What if it is an adult-led troop method, advancement-oriented troop? Some of the adult leaders aren't as interested in fostering a real patrol method type of environment as they were creating an advancement culture where things were signed off quickly (two years at summer camp, then two years at Eagle Week for Eagle-required merit badges), and making sure their own sons advanced. Patrol leaders exist, but functioning patrols do not. An SPL exists, but he doesn't really lead, because adults are tending to bark out orders. Other PoRs are considered "plum" because, for example, a librarian, scribe, bugler or quartermaster isn't really held accountable for their position. What would you do?

 

I'll tell you, it wasn't easy, I didn't do it alone (the real credit should go to the AC, now SM), and it took lots of time. In fact, it is an ongoing process. We're finding that our efforts are best spent at working with those coming into the troop, as older Scouts are aging out.

 

All in all, I'm pretty confident that I know the rules and policies -- I know what an SM is supposed to do, what an AC and a CC are supposed to do, and what youth leaders should be taking care of. The real question is if you'd take steps to work around some of those roles too, if you knew serious corrections needed to be made?

 

Guy

[Tampa Turtle]

Out Troop went through this. An ugly part of the switch is that you have to be willing to let some scouts and parents walk. Some are pretty invested in the old system and will not be happy. In our experience more threatened to leave than actually did but some adults backed off for a year until they saw things were starting to work out.

[TheGong]

The best thing you can do is sell the boy led troop and patrol method to the kids. They are the ones who want to lead and all they need is a chance to do so. If the boys buy into and you build a successful program the parents will buy into it and your troop will grow. Every troop has a boom and bust period it just happens some of us are more often in the bust period, but if we continually develop good youth leaders the program will thrive. Advancement will follow a good program. Getting the scouts to eagle is important but not at the cost of having fun and learning leadership, outdoor skills, and citizenship.

[qwazse]

I think SMs sometimes feel like they have to convert a bunch of adults when really the only adults they need to convert are the few who are willing to hike eight miles into back country with them and their boys.

PLs and SPLs, they need someone to help them get a vision for what they should do. ILST helps, but riding shotgun on the way back from camp with an SM or ASM for a sounding board is really really important.

Then you don't sweat small stuff like the AC stepping out of line. Tell the CC that you would rather see things done differently and move on. If he or she passes the message along, fine. If not train your boys on how to respectfully disagree. Train the young ones to set high standards for themselves. Tech them to read the book, show the book, do the book (even if it doesn't spell something catchy like other inferior methods).

[moosetracker]

The SM has the authority to either preform certain duties or allocate the duties to others in the troop, be it Adult leaders or youth.. The best SM are those who can delegate rather then those who have to wear all the hats..

 

So if the SM is fine delegating part of his responsibilities for advancement to the AC, then no problem.. The problem comes up only if he does not delegate the responsibilities to him, and he tries to take charge anyways.

[bnelon44]

GKlose

 

I guess the question to ask the parents is are they interested in developing their sons into leaders or getting a red/white/blue badge asap? What's the goal. If it is the former, the best way in Scouting to do that is the Patrol Method, and that takes a little bit more time than the latter.

 

The positions of responsibility in the troop (like scribe) should have clear job descriptions and should be held accountable for getting the job done. Doing nothing close to what is expected is not acceptable and they should be removed and not credited for the position. See the Guide to Advancement. Get your PLC to write up job descriptions and then task the SPL or an ASPL to make sure the jobs are getting done. You follow up with them and get a status report periodically (like once a month.) Have SM conferences with those who are not listening to the ASPL and then REALLY REMOVE THEM if they don't do the job. The troop will get the message real quick that you mean business.

 

my 2-cents.(This message has been edited by bnelon44)

[Venividi]

> Getting the scouts to eagle is important but not at the cost of having fun and learning leadership, outdoor skills, and citizenship.

 

 

Getting scouts to eagle should not be important to us. Providing a fun environment where scouts are challenged and can develop character, citizenship, and fitness is what should be important. It is a mistake to think that one implies the other.

 

I suspect that is what you meant.