Ad hoc patrols

[DuctTape 1230]

A patrol is a gang of boys who do scouting things together. Too often we focus on numbers or ages instead of who the boys want to be with and what they want to do. If a troop has many instances of little participation' date=' perhaps it is the activities being planned that is the problem? I have no problem with a patrol in which 2 boys show up for the campout. However, I would start with encouraging the patrols to plan activities, camping trips etc... that they want to do instead of what the adults have planned as a troop. I am not suggesting that ones troop isn't boy led, but it may not be patrol based if all the activities are done at the troop level.[/quote']

 

So if only some boys are going on campouts,

and a patrol is a gang of boys who do scouting/outings together.

That means the boys that go on campouts the most should be in patrols together, doesn't it?

so maybe that's the problem, the patrols are based on who likes to hang together in the regular meetings, but the meat and potatoes of scouting occurs on the outings, so the patrols should really be formed on a campout, with those boys.

The ones who ONLY go to meetinngs, well maybe they should be in a patrol together, or reevaluate why they are actually in scouting if they don't like outings.

Outings are not exclusively camping. If possible I would like to see meetings be held out of doors too. Here in NY, the climate isn't really conducive for it. I don't think a patrol that likes to camp should necessarily exclude those who do not. If the boys like to hang with others who don't camp when at meetings, that is fine. The patrol is doing scouting things together, just not ALL things. I am assuming they are doing scouting things at the meetings. Perhaps the non-campers will eventually want to attend a campout if there buds are going. This increases in likelihood as the patrols do other outings together besides just camping.

[qwazse 4344]

Seems to me the problem is that, more than ever before, we have boys with extremely diverse interests and extremely diverse family situations. That's not changing anytime soon. So padding a patrol with 10 boys so as to get 6-8 for a given event might not be a bad idea. The down side is the more boys on the patrol roster, the more likely a boy will think he's not essential to he program.

[Brewmeister 132]

I talked to the boys about this at our campout this past weekend. I explained the reason we thought the patrols should be reformed and they agreed. I asked them how they thought we should do that, and after coming up with a few different ideas they unanimously agreed "at random." I tried to play devil's advocate and asked them, well, what happens if you randomly get separated from your better friends in the troop or put with boys you don't like as much? They said well, that's just the way it works--you have to learn to work with people you don't get along with. So....random it may be. Although I believe we should "randomly" draw by ages so that ages are at least somewhat distributed among the patrols for competitions that involve physical skill and so on.

 

I'm sure there will be many differences of opinion....

[Eagledad 2779]

I talked to the boys about this at our campout this past weekend. I explained the reason we thought the patrols should be reformed and they agreed. I asked them how they thought we should do that, and after coming up with a few different ideas they unanimously agreed "at random." I tried to play devil's advocate and asked them, well, what happens if you randomly get separated from your better friends in the troop or put with boys you don't like as much? They said well, that's just the way it works--you have to learn to work with people you don't get along with. So....random it may be. Although I believe we should "randomly" draw by ages so that ages are at least somewhat distributed among the patrols for competitions that involve physical skill and so on.

 

I'm sure there will be many differences of opinion....

Looking at it from this point in time, what life lesson do you think the boys will take from this experience? What life lesson would you like for them to take from this experience? Barry

[Brewmeister 132]

I talked to the boys about this at our campout this past weekend. I explained the reason we thought the patrols should be reformed and they agreed. I asked them how they thought we should do that, and after coming up with a few different ideas they unanimously agreed "at random." I tried to play devil's advocate and asked them, well, what happens if you randomly get separated from your better friends in the troop or put with boys you don't like as much? They said well, that's just the way it works--you have to learn to work with people you don't get along with. So....random it may be. Although I believe we should "randomly" draw by ages so that ages are at least somewhat distributed among the patrols for competitions that involve physical skill and so on.

 

I'm sure there will be many differences of opinion....

I understand that you're critical of our program and I accept that, but we have to start from somewhere. Up until now the boys have had zero input into the way the patrols were structured b/c they have been age based. Combined/ad hoc patrols at campouts have done little to promote team building or continuity.

 

They appreciated the opportunity to have input into the process, finally, and I think their observations were remarkably astute. Will it work? I don't know, but it can always be changed. From my point of view, it has a better chance of success in cultivating teamwork and leadership than we have now. And if it doesn't we are no worse off than we are today.

[Eagledad 2779]

I talked to the boys about this at our campout this past weekend. I explained the reason we thought the patrols should be reformed and they agreed. I asked them how they thought we should do that, and after coming up with a few different ideas they unanimously agreed "at random." I tried to play devil's advocate and asked them, well, what happens if you randomly get separated from your better friends in the troop or put with boys you don't like as much? They said well, that's just the way it works--you have to learn to work with people you don't get along with. So....random it may be. Although I believe we should "randomly" draw by ages so that ages are at least somewhat distributed among the patrols for competitions that involve physical skill and so on.

 

I'm sure there will be many differences of opinion....

Brewman, I'm am not in the least critical of your program and I don't think I've said anything of the sort. We've all been where your are at, so to be critical would be hypocritcal. I spent a lot of years working and guiding other adults with programs and I guess I'm just in my asking rhetorical questions mode to help direct thoughts in a certain direction. I learned it working with a 1000 scouts. Maybe it's a habit I need to change. I have no doubt you are doing the best you can and we are very thankful. As to the question, I have found that more often than not, adults tend get lost in the chaos when they don't know where they are going. All I was trying to do was maybe help you find a little light in the darkness. Barry

[Brewmeister 132]

I talked to the boys about this at our campout this past weekend. I explained the reason we thought the patrols should be reformed and they agreed. I asked them how they thought we should do that, and after coming up with a few different ideas they unanimously agreed "at random." I tried to play devil's advocate and asked them, well, what happens if you randomly get separated from your better friends in the troop or put with boys you don't like as much? They said well, that's just the way it works--you have to learn to work with people you don't get along with. So....random it may be. Although I believe we should "randomly" draw by ages so that ages are at least somewhat distributed among the patrols for competitions that involve physical skill and so on.

 

I'm sure there will be many differences of opinion....

Well if you consider where this thread started it was that I felt there was a lack of continuity and teamwork because of the need to combine patrols--the disconnect between troop meetings and outings.

 

Based on the suggestions made and questions asked, it became clear that the problem wasn't necessarily low attendance, but too many small patrols so that any drop off would necessitate recombination (or a bunch of very small patrols).

 

I know that VeniVidi recommended against reorganizing the patrols because "the groundwork hasn't been laid." However, right now the patrols are neither well-functioning nor cohesive, so what's the risk? Additionally, we took the opportunity to lay the groundwork and the reasons for it with the boys at the campout.

 

As to the life lesson the boys will learn from this? We simply haven't flown up to the 30,000 foot mark to figure out how this fits into the grand scheme of their lives. At this point it really is a tactical solution targeted at a specific objective/problem. It will either work, or it won't, and we'll either be better off or right where we are now.

 

So, that's the thinking.

[Eagledad 2779]

I talked to the boys about this at our campout this past weekend. I explained the reason we thought the patrols should be reformed and they agreed. I asked them how they thought we should do that, and after coming up with a few different ideas they unanimously agreed "at random." I tried to play devil's advocate and asked them, well, what happens if you randomly get separated from your better friends in the troop or put with boys you don't like as much? They said well, that's just the way it works--you have to learn to work with people you don't get along with. So....random it may be. Although I believe we should "randomly" draw by ages so that ages are at least somewhat distributed among the patrols for competitions that involve physical skill and so on.

 

I'm sure there will be many differences of opinion....

Yes, I like that. Nothing worse that seeing a problem and doing nothing. Some kinid of change will give a new perspetive. And it might be fun for the boys as well. Barry

[qwazse 4344]

I talked to the boys about this at our campout this past weekend. I explained the reason we thought the patrols should be reformed and they agreed. I asked them how they thought we should do that, and after coming up with a few different ideas they unanimously agreed "at random." I tried to play devil's advocate and asked them, well, what happens if you randomly get separated from your better friends in the troop or put with boys you don't like as much? They said well, that's just the way it works--you have to learn to work with people you don't get along with. So....random it may be. Although I believe we should "randomly" draw by ages so that ages are at least somewhat distributed among the patrols for competitions that involve physical skill and so on.

 

I'm sure there will be many differences of opinion....

It could be entirely possible you got a bunch of guys who mesh well together, and they truly cannot envision one combination better than the other. It's more likely there is a little oil-and-water, but because they haven't made much effort to work as tight patrols, they've avoided the adversity of having to deal with a bad mix. (Kinda the difference between shacking up and tying the knot, only less dramatic -- although with some of my boys, I wondered.)

 

If you get no other input, sort them by age to the day (then alphabetically) and count off. Show the older boys the results. If neither they or the direct-contact adults see any "ticking bombs, " run with it for 6 months. That should give you and the boys a chance to switch up before summer camp, maybe even before taking on any cross-overs.

[MattR 2659]

Seems to me the problem is that, more than ever before, we have boys with extremely diverse interests and extremely diverse family situations. That's not changing anytime soon. So padding a patrol with 10 boys so as to get 6-8 for a given event might not be a bad idea. The down side is the more boys on the patrol roster, the more likely a boy will think he's not essential to he program.

One patrol this past weekend only had 2 scouts show up out of 6 and they had a blast. They recruited a few other scouts from other patrols to run the relay and they got first place at the camporee. Sure they picked all the fast kids but they had a problem and they solved it. I tried making larger patrols once before and it didn't really help, especially if everyone showed up at a campout. It's hard to cook for 10 - 13 people on one of those little stoves.

[JoeBob 606]

We have 3 patrols.

Every year we'll split the new boys and add them to the two patrols with the lowest numbers. That way the new guys have some of their friends with them, and we spread the ages. And if the WeebII leader tells us that X doesn't get along with Y, we'll slip them into separate patrols.

 

It's working okay so far, but I don't have a lot of history to report yet. We try to keep the patrols together in every activity that we can, to strengthen their identity. But there are times that we still mix ad hoc to make a game or a low attendance trip work.

[Stosh 3452]

I don't think that ad hoc patrols is the real reason for the problem of attendance. As a matter of fact they are simply a work around for a bigger problem that is basically ignored because it's easier to make up the rules along the way than it is to solve the problem.

 

A) We have low attendance at our events.

B) So we combine patrols to keep from dealing with A above.

C) Boys that show up have fun, the rest miss out. But that's okay, those that showed up had fun.

 

What's wrong with attacking the problem at the A level? Why is there low attendance in the first place. If one can solve that problem, then the issue of ad hoc patrols becomes moot... AND ALL the boys have fun.

 

Stosh

[Brewmeister 132]

I don't think that ad hoc patrols is the real reason for the problem of attendance. As a matter of fact they are simply a work around for a bigger problem that is basically ignored because it's easier to make up the rules along the way than it is to solve the problem.

 

A) We have low attendance at our events.

B) So we combine patrols to keep from dealing with A above.

C) Boys that show up have fun, the rest miss out. But that's okay, those that showed up had fun.

 

What's wrong with attacking the problem at the A level? Why is there low attendance in the first place. If one can solve that problem, then the issue of ad hoc patrols becomes moot... AND ALL the boys have fun.

 

Stosh

Because scouting is not all that boys do. Expecting 100% attendance in a program that spans 7 years is unrealistic.

[MattR 2659]

I don't think that ad hoc patrols is the real reason for the problem of attendance. As a matter of fact they are simply a work around for a bigger problem that is basically ignored because it's easier to make up the rules along the way than it is to solve the problem.

 

A) We have low attendance at our events.

B) So we combine patrols to keep from dealing with A above.

C) Boys that show up have fun, the rest miss out. But that's okay, those that showed up had fun.

 

What's wrong with attacking the problem at the A level? Why is there low attendance in the first place. If one can solve that problem, then the issue of ad hoc patrols becomes moot... AND ALL the boys have fun.

 

Stosh

It doesn't have to be 100%. I require, for a scout to be in a patrol, he go to roughly half the events. It works well and the scouts have plenty of time for other activities. I no longer need to mix patrols unless it's extreme and only one scout from a patrol shows up (it happened once this past year) and the scouts no longer even mention combining patrols. We have 6-8 in each patrol.

[Horizon 97]

For POR - missing campouts means you might be replaced. Triggers an SMC and discussion of sign offs..