PLC meetings and Adults

[d2smith 10]

Our troop's PLC meeting time was recently changed and I am now able to attend as an ASM. These meetings are run by another ASM who went to our committe chair to tell me I was not to attend as my is now the SPL and of course, will be at the meeting. The ASM does have her husband present so this is not a 2-deep issue.

 

I would have expected any adult leader not only be permitted to attend but also contribute to the meeting.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[msnowman 10]

In Nephew's Troop, the only adults that attend and play any sort of active role the PLC are the SM and an ASM (NSP advisor).

That's not to say other adults don't stay - the troop committee meets at the same date/time/place to conserve gas for the drivers and heating fuel for the CO. However, unless they are asked by the SPL for input, other attending adults are essentially "not entitled to an opinion". The boys do the planning. The SM/ASM approves/disapproves what they are doing. The SPL presents to the Troop Committee as necessary.

 

It may vary in other groups - but I think it is the norm for other adult leaders "not" to attend the PLC.

 

YiS

Michellle

[Lisabob 13]

Perhaps the other ASM is concerned that you are having too much voice and in effect crowding your son as he tries to do his job as SPL. I have seen that happen and in such circumstances I think it is better if a parent is able to step back a bit. But it isn't easy to do and (supposing this is the other ASM's motive to start with) it does sound like the person might have been a little more tactful in phrasing the request.

 

Our PLCs currently meet in our SM's kitchen. There isn't a whole lot of room for lots of extra adults to hang out and personally I think that's fine because we do have a few adults who have a hard time letting the boys run the show, when they're around.

[scoutingagain 20]

"I would have expected any adult leader not only be permitted to attend but also contribute to the meeting. "

 

Well any adult leader or parent can "observe" any scout activity. But any contribution to a PLC meeting, in theory, is at the descretion of the SPL. Without knowing anything other than what you posted, I'd guess the Lisabob may be on the right track.

 

In the unit I serve, we currently have too many adults attend the PLC and they have a tendancy to overwhelm the youth. It would be nice if the SM would step in and run some interference for the boys, but he tends to be non-confrontational. As much as I'd like to attend the meeting and have input, I don't want to add another adult presence.

 

Instead I tend to try and coach the SPL and PL offline about how deal with the adult presence. i.e. Be polite, but don't let the adults take over the meeting. It belongs to them. So far with limited success.

 

SA

 

[evmori 11]

scoutingagain got it right! Any adult, registered or non-registered parent may observe, but it is up to the SPL as to who participates.

 

Ed Mori

1 Peter 4:10

[Eagledad 2779]

Great Monday All

 

>>I would have expected any adult leader not only be permitted to attend but also contribute to the meeting.

[Stosh 3452]

It never ceases to amaze me why SM's don't teach their boys Parlimentary Procedure. It is basic to citizenship in this country. If one doesn't know the process, they can't effectively participate and control any meeting they are expected to chair.

 

Have the PLC adopt PP. Then have the SPL offer the floor to only those he chooses to have speak at the meeting. Visitors are just that, visitors. If they can not refrain from disrupting the meeting they are to be removed from the procedings. Basic Civics!

 

For those who choose not to use PP, then it's a crap shoot as to what they get for their boys in their attempt to lead. For Citizenship MB's we have the boys attend civic meetings and unless they know basic PP I'm sure it's a reach as to understanding how the process is working right there in front of them. If they ever aspire to be on one of these boards they had better learn this process and what better place than in a scout troop.

 

If one is going to teach leadership at least teach them the tools to do it with.

 

Stosh

[AvidSM 11]

Good post by Eagledad - especially when he says, "The boys brains are trained to respect adults when they speak, and we adults trained ourselves through parenting that when we speak, youth better listen, or else. It is not an equal relationship and the boys know it."

 

A good scoutmaster knows to watch very carefully what he/she says at a PLC meeting because of the way boys are trained. It's not natural to keep your mouth shut and you really have to learn when it is a good time add your words of wisdom.

 

I don't agree with msnowman's statement, "The boys do the planning. The SM/ASM approves/disapproves what they are doing. The SPL presents to the Troop Committee as necessary."

 

The SM/ASM guide, advise and mentor the PLC in order that they make the right decision. They do not have approval authority over the PLC. This would mean that they have the final say in the decision process and not the boys. It that is the case, the boys are not really making the descision, the adults are.

 

The SPL should not have to report to the Troop Committee, that is the Scoutmaster's job. The SPL reports to the Scoutmaster, who acts as a buffer between the youth and the adults in the troop. You cannot expect a youth to deal with the adults in the Troop committee with respect to all the program issues. Let the SPL deal with the boys - let the Scoutmaster deal with the adults.

 

[msnowman 10]

Avid - then let me clarify what came across as poorly worded.

 

SM/ASM do approve the PLC plans - in as far as 1 - Banned by G2SS (no paintball or sod-surfing), 2 - Pointing out potential for scheduling conflict (ie - two far-flung activities on the same day), 3 - banned by Council (ie - camping in November, anywhere in the Council EXCEPT for the 1 island w/ no hunting allowed). Otherwise the boys do have final say...thus why they had a "lock-in" at the church that they wanted instead of the camping trip the SM really wanted them to do.

 

YiS

Michelle

[CalicoPenn 729]

Ah yes, the month of November in Maine, where fall color season made the miraculous leap from Trees to Man, and Blaze Orange was the predominant color in school, work, city, town, village, field and woods. My dog had her own orange vest, which she wore everywhere in November, even if it was just in the yard. I swear I saw maples weeping with jealousy at the amazing transformation of cows and horses from browns and white to orange, then back again in December.

 

Memories......sigh.

 

Calico

[John-in-KC 311]

Welcome Mr or Mrs Smith...

 

I don't care if it's band, football, cheerleading, or Scouting... our own children do best when we give them room to grow.

 

His SM and Crew Advisors deal with EagleSon as a Scout. His band director deals with him as a musician. I'm someplace waaay over in the support structure. It was bad enough on his ELSP when I had to eyeball him and explain why he had to be in uniform to sell his supported agencies!

 

I see too many parents wanting to hover over their kids. Unless something requires a particular expertise you have, let him be SPL under the tutelage of the SM. Period.

[Gold Winger 9]

" The ASM does have her husband present so this is not a 2-deep issue."

 

Two adults aren't required for a meeting, only an outing.

 

As for attendance . . . if you can stay quiet in the background and not speak unless asked a direct question, go for it.

 

I used to attend PLC when my son was a PL, simply because I didn't feel like driving back and forth. I'd use it as paperwork time, just sit in a corner and fuss with advancement paperwork or read. If a question was directed to me such because of my knowlege and expertise, I'd answer and stay out of the subsequent discussion.

 

Remember, the SM's job is to teach leadership. The ASMs are there to support the SM. Only one adult needs to be involved in the PLC.

[MarkS 11]

Gold Winger said, "Remember, the SM's job is to teach leadership. The ASMs are there to support the SM. Only one adult needs to be involved in the PLC."

 

Meaning to me that the SM needs to participate in a PLC meeting and the ASM does not.

 

I believe the quorum for a PLC meeting is the SPL, enough PLs to conduct the business of the month, and the SM. I doubt very much that a PLC meeting would be successful with fewer participants. Adding the ASPL, the rest of PLs, all the TGs, and the Scribe would give 100% attendance. Any more than that and you have extra people (see evmori's comments about participation). Personally, I think ASMs should attend to get information from the PLC first-hand. They should be able to contribute without interfering. That's pretty much their job.

 

...except probably in the case where an ASM and her husband might run the meeting under the belief that the CC has any cognizance at all in making decisions over attendance...

 

The SPL is supposed to run the meeting with the committee, not the CC, approving decisions made by the PLC when necessary (financial stuff, BSA policy stuff).

 

Finally, when two-deep leadership is needed, a married couple providing the leadership could potential open themselves to conflict of interest issues. While this isn't specifically mentioned in any BSA guidelines or policies, common sense says that if a boy says something happened, investigators might think one spouse is lying to protect the other. Yeah... the chances of something like this happening are extremely small but they're not zero--FWIW.(This message has been edited by MarkS)

[Gold Winger 9]

"The SPL is supposed to run the meeting with the committee, not the CC, approving decisions made by the PLC when necessary "

 

Someplace buried in all of my literature is a statement that Committe doesn't have to have a say. The CC should operate based on concensus but that isn't required. The committee members jobs are to do their assigned tasks, not vote or approve.

 

 

[FScouter 24]

The multiple references in this discussion to youth protection seem to me more of a smokescreen to justify adding more adults to the mix. Really, if you can't trust the SM to sit in on a meeting with multiple Scouts, you've got the wrong man for the job. Or ultra-paranoid adults.

 

Maybe it's rather a secret desire of these outside adults to keep the proceedings pointed in the direction they want things to go. It's bad enough having the SM present, but adding even more adults serves only to interfere with the development of these boy leaders; these extra adults add no value to the proceedings. In fact, if the SPL is sufficiently skilled in keeping a meeting on track, even the SM is superfluous.