Venture Patrol in the Troop.

[Eagledad 2777]

>>Barry

 

I agree with most of what you said. The thing being that since we started a Venture Patrol within the troop about 6 months ago, we haven't lost any more older scouts.

[bt01 10]

The Venture Crew is not part of the troop. They are there own unit. They have there own leadership, Adult volunteers, ect. ect., ect.. The crew are coed. Here is a list of some themes that the crew are involved in:

 

General Interest

Shooting Sports

High Adventure

Drama/Theater

Sea Scouting

Environmental Sciences.

 

The ages are 14 to 20.If the crew is coed , so are the advisers.

 

[Bob White 20]

Btps,

By qualified leadership I mean that if you are going to have a patrol focusing on high adventure you need an adult familiar with some of the skills, safety and area resources available to make the program happen.

BW

 

[KoreaScouter 13]

I think Venture patrols recognize the human dynamics inherent in teenage vs preteen boys -- others have mentioned. Most of these lads enjoy Scouting and want to stay active, but don't want to be full-time "babysitters" in a regular patrol (their sentiments, not mine). Done properly, a Venture patrol will meet their needs, and the needs of the troop, too. Venture patrols have PLs and APLs, and with their age, experience, and (hopefully) maturity, every other Scout in the VP should have a significant Troop POR, too. The lads don't mind helping the FY Scouts or anyone else for that matter, as the Troop Guide or an Instructor. That worked well for us in my last troop, at both meetings and outings.

 

Our VP got some additional privileges and considerations, based on their age, experience, level of responsibility, and maturity (for example, later lights-out times).

 

Another thing, too. If you insist on leaving Venture-age Scouts in regular patrols, a very awkward thing happens when a younger and/or lower-ranking Scout is elected PL. He's now in the uncomfortable position of having to direct the activities of an older/higher-ranking Scout. Can they do it? Sure. Will the older Scout submit to his authority? Yeah. But, it's not a natural thing for those boys, at school, in their families, in their neighborhoods. It almost always creates tension, and although it's almost certainly not the intent of Venture patrols to eliminate that tension, it's one of the side benefits.

 

I'd recommend a VP, with strict adherence to the program, full involvement, and a very frank understanding up front that formation of a VP will mean more work and responsibility for them versus less. Also, if you have the resources, I'd hang an ASM on them, similar to the NSP ASM concept. Ideally a younger guy, closer to their ages, who can relate better and has the physical attributes to do the activities they plan.

 

KS

[bt01 10]

Bob White

 

You wrote

" By qualified leadership I mean that if you are going to have a patrol focusing on high adventure you need an adult familiar with some of the skills, safety and area resources available to make the program happen."

 

 

Yes.

 

BT

[Eagledad 2777]

>>He's now in the uncomfortable position of having to direct the activities of an older/higher-ranking Scout. Can they do it? Sure. Will the older Scout submit to his authority? Yeah.

[silver-shark 10]

Barry

 

Thanks for the words of support.

 

When we first talked to the boys about the type of VP they wanted to have, maturity level in the group was something that was very important to them. Therefore, THEY decided that to be a member you had to be at least 13 and Life, 14 and Star, or 15 and FC. This helps us a lot. They are now concidering other things, such as Previous PL, Troop JLT, and other things that show more experience in the troop.

 

These might help some of those struggling with this process, but the most important part is the boy's input into THEIR program. Now they have a vested interest in the success of the group.

[Mike F 10]

Two comments and a consideration:

 

First - a change in Troop structure to use the Venture patrols equates to a change in the execution of the program. Not unreasonable to have Troop Committee buy-in.

 

Second - the pitfalls of pulling the experienced boys out of regular patrols are right on. We've been moving our guys out of regular patrols and into Venture when they began High School and troop leadership has been going downhill every since. We're probably going to delay move to Venture Patrol until at least the Sophmore year and maybe Junior. A sister troop in area has had same problem and recently dissolved Venture Patrols - expanded regular patrols back to more traditional models - and are much happier.

 

Consider option to just provide occasional high-adventure opportunities for older boys without regard to regular patrol affiliation. They'll get together, plan a rafting trip, etc., have a blast and come back to their regular patrol charged up with exciting tales and experiences to share.

[Bob White 20]

I have to ask where the idea that the venture patrol is a program change within unit comes from. The Venture Patrol is a standard part of troop operation. It is part of a paced graduation as a Boy Scout grows from New Scout Patrol, to Regular Patrol, to Venture Patrol. It takes into consideration the changing needs of a boy at different developmental stages. Venture Patrol is part of the regular troop organization, and is taught as such in all levels of troop training and the SM Handbook.

 

I would also disagree that the Patrol method is fragile. Quite the contrary, over the years I have found it to be a strong natural occuring social behaviour among youth. The BSA has simply identified this behavior, named it and given us tools to direct it in a positive way.

 

Training is 100% the key to a strong Patrol Method. There in lies the problem as to why every troop does not use it. It requires the SM to make training junior leaders their #1 priority. It also requires them to understand what "boy run" is.

 

First of all I'm not sure that phrase exists in the BSA program (although I used it in two posts last year). BSA talks of a "Boy Lead Patrol", and a "Boy Lead Troop". But the program is adult run. The difference is that boys control the boys, not the adults, and that the boys have a controlling say in the activities of the patrols and troop. But the Adults have a responsibility to keep the boys decisions within the guidelines, aims and methods of the Scouting movement.

 

You do not quit using any of the methods because the boys vote not to use it. You do not ignore policies because the boys vote not to follow it. So do not misuse "Boy Lead" to abdicate the adults responsibility to keep the program on track.

 

As Baden-Powell said, "The Patrol method is not one way to run a troop, it is the only way."

The BSA has refined the patrol method over the years by studying the nature of scout age boys. Just aas Troops who use New Scout Patrols and First Class Emphasis see a great retention rate in the first three years, troop that use the three tiered patrol structure in their troop organization see a greater retention of scouts past the age of 16.

 

I am always amazed by SM who tell of the numbers of boys they lose to gasoline and girls, and yet when asked if they use the venture patrol they invariable say no. Even more interesting is the number who say they dislike it so much that they never tried it.

 

Do not try to do the patrol method. Do it. Do not try New Scout patrols or Venture Patrols. Do them. There is a reason to the information shared in scout handbooks and training, it's what the scouting program is.

 

Bob White

[Mike F 10]

Bob White,

In response to your question: "I have to ask where the idea that the venture patrol is a program change within unit comes from. The Venture Patrol is a standard part of troop operation."

SM Handbook, page 142, first sentence under heading VENTURE PATROLS: "A Venture patrol is an optional older-boy patrol..."

 

Some may opt to use them. Some may opt not to. Neither is wrong - it's optional. If you're currently structured one way and plan to change, it's a change to the program that needs full discussion and buy-in at all levels.

 

I have boys in two different troops - one has Venture patrols and other doesn't (they have occasional special activities for older boys instead). They're both working to keep older boys interested - older boys get to do some exciting stuff without younger ones and the younger scouts look forward to the day when they can join in.

 

The advantages of Venture patrols have been discussed - I don't disagree. But there are pitfalls. Eagledad and others have touched on most that come to mind. Maybe we should start a separate thread, "Ideas for Making Venture Patrols Work"?

 

btps,

You started this as an idea to keep the older Scouts active. Later you mentioned that your troop is not really a camping/hiking troop. Maybe that's really the source of your problem and solution - don't give up hope there - it can be changed.

My brother recently took over a troop that didn't have much of a camping/hiking program either. Initial efforts were resisted - mostly by other adults. He persisted and they started out with less than 20% of kids in attendance. But they had fun and talked it up. After a year, the boys are all getting out there and some new adults have stepped in to help. (They were bored with old program, too, but just stayed out of the picture.) Now they're planning a major troop activity in New Mexico next summer.

Maybe if your troop meetings revolved more around planning and learning skills they'll be using at the next campout, they'll all be more interested.

One idea I saw used many years ago was a special PLC training campout - emphasis was on developing skills in map/compass, cooking, hiking, and camping in general. Leadership topics were served up around the campfire along with some hot cobbler - the first these boys had ever seen. Boy leadership was then energized with lots of new ideas to pass on to their patrols and we were on our way to raising the interest and skill level in the whole troop.

 

[Bob White 20]

Optional doesn't make it unique or unusual. It's not as if you are starting another program. or doing something outside of a normal troop structure.

 

BW

[Eagledad 2777]

>>I am always amazed by SM who tell of the numbers of boys they lose to gasoline and girls, and yet when asked if they use the venture patrol they invariable say no. Even more interesting is the number who say they dislike it so much that they never tried it.

[silver-shark 10]

Barry

 

You hit the nail on the head when you talk about training for the scouts. This is a huge reason that we have had success with our VP and troop since it's inception.

 

Of the 3 regular patrols that we have, all 3 have at least 2 scouts that have participated in Troop JLT, and at least 1 scout that has help run it. Additionally, one of these Regular Patrols had 2 boys go to Council JLT last month.

 

The VP boys are also the trainers at every Troop Meeting. This keeps them involved with the rest of the troop.

 

The VP boys also camp with the troop and do their own adventures in addition to what the troop is doing. They cook some great meals by themselves as an example to the rest of the boys as to what can be done, and many times still help out the younger boys even with that.

 

We truly have some exceptional, caring, older scouts in our troop, and are very fortunate to have a way to retain them with the VP program. But, as you said, it might not be for every troop. It truly takes a lot of work from everyone, especially the trainers of the boys, who happen to be the ASMs, myself included, because the SM has never done it himself.(This message has been edited by silver-shark)

[Eagledad 2777]

>>We truly have some exceptional, caring, older scouts in our troop, and are very fortunate to have a way to retain them with the VP program.

[KoreaScouter 13]

All my literature is still packed up and unavailable, but aren't the patrol types referred to as NSP, VP, and "experienced"? If my recollection's correct and that's the term, then moving Venture-age Scouts to a VP shouldn't create the dilemma of leaving these Scouts in the experienced patrols, or moving them and robbing these patrols of experience. By definition, the experienced patrol members should have about a year's experience and be at or close to First Class, right? Frankly, I don't see anything inherent in a PL, APL, or appointed patrol POR that requires the skill of a Venture-age Scout to carry out.

 

Fear of failure shouldn't stymie our efforts to develop the lads.

 

KS