Whither the Patrol Method?

[Kudu 186]

ozemu writes:

 

Is there some confusion in BSA about the Patrol Method ... and the Troop Method?

 

"Troop Method" is a derisive term used to characterize units that do not use the Patrol Method.

 

Some would say that this is because such Troops do not apply what they learned in training. We "Traditionalists" maintain that the "Troop Method" is the natural result of our emphasis on the Scouts' future business resumes: Eagle Merit Badge Factory summer camp with summer school cafeterias rather than Patrol Cooking; and BSA training based on "Leadership Development" rather than skills that get the Patrols camping 300 feet apart.

 

Bob White writes:

 

First, let's remember that Leadership Development Method and the Patrol Method are two separate but related methods used as tools to achieve the aims of scouting.

 

Well that is my central point: The Patrol Method is usually described in Leadership Development terms, Patrol Leader as a "leadership opportunity" for instance. The Patrol Method session in Scoutmaster Specific Training is only a description of leadership styles, and never uses the term "Patrol" separately from the term "Troop."

 

Bob White writes:

 

Wood shaft golf clubs were used by everyone because at the time that was the best technology there was. But times changed and I doubt anyone will argue that todays technology gives the golfer a greater advanctage than the old one shafts.

 

The analogy is not valid because golf clubs today are used for the same thing as golf clubs 40 years ago: to drive a ball down a fairway.

 

The purpose of Leadership Development now is to teach Scouts "how to be a leader." 40 years ago the purpose of Patrol Leader Training was to teach Patrol Leaders how to use Patrol Meetings away from the Troop to plan Patrol Hikes and Patrol Overnights away from the Troop. It also taught Patrol Leaders how to teach and sign off on Advancement away from the Troop.

 

A better analogy would be to Little League Baseball.

 

Boys join Little League mostly to bat, run bases and catch. If they are really lucky their team has a great pitcher.

 

If Little League had embraced Leadership Development in 1972 in the same way as the BSA did that year, then the first thing to have gone would have been batting, catching, and special pitching practice: You swing at a wiffle ball with a hollow plastic bat once, get "signed off" for that skill, and advance to Leadership Development.

 

Training would no longer develop the practical skills that boys actually join Little League to do, but teach them "how to be a leader." Practice would be all about blindfolded "Team-Building Exercises" and sitting around in a circle to introduce your potato.

 

Pitchers would have exactly the same "Team-Building" training as everyone else because the popularity contest held before every game gives every boy the same "leadership opportunity" to be pitcher.

 

40 years later the idea of throwing dangerous objects at other boys and swinging wooden clubs around would be derided as hopeless old-fashioned. Injury statistics from the 20th century would be held up as proof that pitching and hitting in litigious 2008 American culture is impossible. What would the parents think if you suggested something as dangerous as that?

 

If Little League had a monopoly on baseball, then nobody would know how to actually play baseball, just as few Boy Scout Patrols know how to camp 300 feet apart now.

 

Boys would make fun of Little Leaguers because baseball sucks.

 

Some Beaver wrote:

 

Being an effective leader has very little to do with being an effective patrol leader. Once the boy turns 18, there's not going to be much demand for one's patrol leader skills.

 

Yeah, Leadership Development is good for you like algebra.

 

Kudu

 

[Stosh 3452]

Well, it's nice to see everyone actually reads the posts even though it is often misquoted and taken out of context. Gotta love these forums for their entertainment purposes.

 

So, getting back to the issue at hand. I stand by my introductory remarks AND the 5 paragraphs of explanation that follows. :^)

 

"Being an effective leader has very little to do with being an effective patrol leader. Once the boy turns 18, there's not going to be much demand for one's patrol leader skills."

 

If a person (of any age) is an effective leader, it has very little to do with being an effective PL in a unit. A boy can be defined as an effective leader if he manipulates, coerces, threatens and bullies as long as he accomplishes the task to which he has been assigned. After all the word manipulate and manage come from the same Latin root word. Taking the example of a SM stating how things are going to be done, then passes the task of getting it done down to the SPL, who in turn FOLLOWS directions and passes it down to the PL, who in turn FOLLOWS directions and gets his boys by any means of "leadership" at his disposal to get the boys to FOLLOW directions and get the task done. In that whole process the only leadership comes from the SM, everyone else follows. Now the boys can all be viewed/defined as great leaders because they accomplished great things with their efforts, but there is no true leadership being demonstrated.

 

Therefore: "Being an effective leader has very little to do with being an effective patrol leader." Being a effective follower has a lot to do with being an effective patrol leader in this unit model. It is adult-led, troop-method.

 

Add the twist of having the SM manipulate the SPL into thinking he is running the show by doing all the things he thinks the SM wants him to do and still, in reality he is merely following. (Boy-led, troop-method)

 

No one needs to actually think in this model, just follow the directives of what someone else thinks needs to be done.

 

"Once the boy turns 18, there's not going to be much demand for one's patrol leader skills." Gotta love this one. Once a boy ages out of the unit and there is no more need for patrol leader skills because there is no patrol, makes perfect sense. However, if all the boy as ever done is merely followed directions how much LEADERSHIP skills has he developed along the way? NONE, regardless of how effective he might have been as a PL.

 

Now, replace that model of false leadership dynamics, with a boy given the responsibility of taking care of a handful of his buddies. He has to interact with them, understand them, figure out their needs, help them with their development and basically nurture these boys along in the process of growing up. This care-giver approach (servant leadership) forces the "leader" to think on his feet, adapting the resources available to the needs of the boys. He is in fact teaching leaders to care for others and gives them the reason to care for others along the way. One can always teach any body the skills of leadership, but one can't always teach the skills/inner drive to care. I can take any boy that cares and teach him to be a great leader, but can't guarantee anything if I start with a boy that doesn't care. He will be a leader, but I won't guarantee he will care about those he is entrusted with.

 

Soldiers will follow their leader if they know he cares about them and will do his best to keep them safe. Students will follow their teacher if they know they care about them and will do their best to teach them in their best interests. No one follows a dictator unless they do so out of fear of repercussion.

 

If we teach only top-down leadership, the most effective leaders will do so most often by coersion and manipulation.

 

Explain to me how a top-down style of leadership in a scout unit is better than a patrol-emphasized team of small-group buddies watching out for each other, and troop officers taking care of their patrol leaders and adults taking care of the troop officers.

 

No, the boys will never again be Patrol Leaders, nor will they need their PL skills, if they care, they will be fantastic husbands, fathers, teachers, caregivers because of their understanding of what true leadership is all about.

 

I have found that after 10 years of running a Venturing Crew based on a military style of activity, I have never had to enforce any kind of discipline for bad behavior, yet, I have a number of charter members from 10 years ago as some of my best adult leaders today. I have adults who respect the leadership capabilities of many of my boys, and there's only one explanation for it. It is because of how they were taught based on who they were to begin with.

 

So I'll never apologize for my comments on leadership dynamics because they work and they work well.

 

For the past year, I have applied these same principles to a 5 member dysfunctional troop that is now 4 times larger and running great. Because of what has been happening, we anticipate another major jump in membership in 6 months.

 

And as far as my northern accent, Beavah, I do believe in non-written communication, you'd be surprised. :^)

 

Stosh

 

(This message has been edited by jblake47)

[Bob White 20]

jblake most of your examples are not related to leadership skills of patrol leaders but simply bad scoutmastership in the troop.

 

Nowhere does the BSA teach or even suggest that the behavior you are sighting is considered to be leadership. While in makes for a wordy rant it is so disjointed in premise that a logical conclusion is not possible.

 

 

Kudu your example of Little League relies soley on accepting your abilities as a fortune teller, and I do not believe that is a credible skill to base you conclusion on.

 

You have no way of accurately forcasting what little league might have become 40 years after your premise. Your conclusion asks that we accept without a shred of evidence what you beieve could have happened but didn't.

 

Again, a fine wordy rant but with no actual credible substance.

 

Rather than deal with what used to be according to what you have pieced together from the past, or from you think might happen in the future, let's look at what actually exists today.

 

And what actually exists are a plethara of available resources, on line, electronic, human, and print, from which adult leaders can learn the program methods of the BSA.

 

The fact that the BSA has leaders that understand the Patrol Method and Leadership Development Methods along with the other Methods of Boy Scouting proves that. There there are lots of young people each year who improve in leadership skills each year through their involvement in scouting. Lots of troops use the patrol method. Some better than others, some more than others, some longer than others, but that has always been the case. Keep in mind that LOTS of scouters do not post on Internet forums, this or any other ones. That doesn;t mean that they know or use the methods of scouting less than some of those that do post.

 

Would the BSA membership and Boy Scout Program benefit from more units Using the Patrol Method? Absolutely! But if there is ample information out there for some to learn it then there is ample out there for all to learn it. It is much easier to show evidence of quality resources than to show evidence of quality leader selection by units.

 

You must admit that Units with good leaders are far more likely to employ the Patrol Method than units with poor leaders. The training resources are numerous.

 

 

(This message has been edited by Bob White)

[Beavah 205]

But if there is ample information out there for some to learn it then there is ample out there for all to learn it. It is much easier to show evidence of quality resources than to show evidence of quality leader selection by units.

 

Yah, while I'm not really a fan of Kudu's hyperbole and such, this is where I think yeh miss the mark, BW.

 

Just because some folks learn something doesn't mean that the information is readily available or taught well.

 

Even the worst classroom teachers on the planet can point to a few kids who get A's. But havin' a few kids get A's doesn't mean the teachin' or resources were any good. It means those kids were really bright, came from supportive families, and came with a lot of knowledge and experience before class even started.

 

To evaluate teachin' and resources, yeh have to look at what the middle and lower-middle folks are doin', eh? Not just da folks gettin' A's.

 

So I reckon it's a lot harder to show evidence of quality resources than you think. If, as you have claimed many times, there are a lot of people who just don't understand what they were trained in, that's a tell-tale sign of poor trainin' resources. Pointin' just to some folks who are successful is more likely a reflection of quality leader selection, or at least serendipitous leader selection. A lucky find of BP's "right sort."

 

Kudu doesn't need hypotheticals either, eh? The "success" of the management/leadership theories in da real world of business where they were developed has been remarkably poor. Bad resources. But there are good businesses out there, largely because of good people.

 

B

(This message has been edited by Beavah)

[Bob White 20]

So it would seem that you agree the difference is in the people.

[Beavah 205]

So it would seem that you agree the difference is in the people.

 

Me personally?

 

Yah, for sure. I agree with you completely on that point. In my experience if yeh find the right sort of person to be unit leader, they do what it takes to get good at it. They read lots, take trainin', talk to other people. Most important, they pay attention to kids and adjust what they're doin' when it doesn't work. They might not make Patrol Method work right away, but they puzzle it out and improve.

 

If yeh get the wrong sort, there's not much you can do. They've had a lifetime of experiences which make 'em a great undertaker or insurance salesman or marine, but not a great Scoutmaster. No amount of BSA trainin' can counter that lifetime of experience. Even when they try to do what yeh tell 'em for youth leadership or patrol method or advancement, they'll make a hash of it. Often just because the tone of their communication with kids is off. Worst cases are ones whose maturity and judgment is off.

 

By far da biggest impact on a program is had by a Committee and COR doin' a good job choosing adult leaders. Easiest way to wreck a unit is to appoint a "warm body" or not be thorough in vettin' a selection (or not makin' a change when they see a problem).

 

Beavah

 

[Its Me 10]

Even if I agree with the argument that the patrol method is whithering I feel helpless to change it under the current BSA model. Without a written program in place that better emphasizes the patrol method I couldn't convince parents that some concept from older scout programs and presented by some guy on the Internet is the way to go.

 

A few months ago we discussed how the NSP, crossover in March, summer camp, and the First class first year program all tie into weakening the patrol method. Weather you believe this or not is in material. This I have made up my mind on.

 

I now would like to consider that the structure of the annual calendar planning meeting as another patrol method killer. Our toop had a great year based on a strong and well organized calendar but it was a troop thing. How can a patrol leader set-up a patrol hike or other if all his weekly meeting times and monthly campouts are already planned? The scout's time allotment for scouting activities is some what fixed. There is no room for additional campouts.

 

Maybe in the calendar there should be a provision for a float campout. Patrols must plan and differentiate their campouts from one another. The campouts must be seperated by Date or miles.

 

I mean the 300' rule held up as some standard barer of a patrol system seems weak when the "troop" planned the event, they all drove together and will assemble together at 9:00 AM for opening ceremonies.

 

The standard time for patrols to meet is what 20-25 minutes? And its nestled in with a larger troop pragram that night.

 

 

 

 

(This message has been edited by Its Me)

[ozemu 10]

From my side of the fence you're on the right track Its Me.

 

The calender. Fix it so that weekends are put in there for Patrol activities. If they are new at it the activity is a day thing. If they have experience it's a camp. All Patrols out on the same weekend or over a couple and at different venues is the Patrol Method bubbling along nicely. Over here if the Parol Activity is more than 10 hours long it counts toward advancement. They need one per level. That helps too.

 

We aimed for one every quarter. Didn't always get that but mostly did. Can you change the calender to read 'Patrol' rather than 'Troop' camp? That may be changing the way things are done. It will involve lots of coaching and practice for the Patrols. These things may be culture shock and meet with resistance. I know it is not as simple as replacing one word with another.

 

300 foot rule. It works I think. If the Patrols are to learn within a comfort zone the parents, PL's and Scouts will need the adults along to teach sometimes and to govern at others. So on Troop camps I would get the PL's together. We would walk over the available ground and decide where we would all put our Patrols. The adults were central'ish' and teh most capable Patrols were furthest away. Sometimes one would be out of sight and another would be a basketball length away from me. All depends on the abilities.

 

Troop parades etc. Essential if there are events run as a Troop or in a bull ring for Patrols to learn, practice, compete or be tested. Often a resouce (eg resus dummy) may only be available for a day. The Patrols need to get through this and when more than one Patrol is on deck we have a Troop and thereofre we have adults along too.

 

20-25 minutes for a PL to get some stuff done is enough. Most can barely handle that with all of the distractions that are around on a Troop night. This is not to say the Patrol meetings don't work. The PL just needs to have more control over the wider environment for Patrols to focus and get into things. So if I had a Patrol that wanted to meet elsewhere on a Troop night or instead of a Troop night then that was great. Didn't happen much so it defaulted back to Patrol camps and activity dates from the calender. For most PL's more than 15-25 minutes is a bit daunting - it takes planning and preparation (more then one hour!) and they have school work, non-Scout activities, family etc.

 

In the end we work with the resources and knowledge that we have and it turns out differently everywhere we go. It's supposed too.

 

Hope that helped - It's Me. If it works then make small tweeks and keep the baby.

[Stosh 3452]

The patrol method is taking it's abuses today because there are very few units that demonstrate it.

 

Looking at X amount of troops, they camp, cook, and run under the direction of their SPL. Never have I seen patrols register at camporees, they always register as a troop. Never have I seen PL's invited to the SPL meetings. When they compete at camporees, I have had people running the stations refuse my smaller patrols from competition because they didn't have enough people. They suggested that the boys find another small patrol so they can do the competition. Blending of patrols, and even reorganizing patrols to give a competitive edge during these events have always played themselves out over the years. Everything coming from our districts and council are oriented towards the troop method. Troops tend to be and remain small to accomodate this dynamic. Because of size constraints, they will never grow beyond a certain point. I have resolved myself of being on the outside looking in on this issue many times. When asked if my troop will be coming to camporee, I always answer, there will be X number of patrols showing up. If I'm going to be a promoter of the patrol method, I refuse to discuss it using troop method language. I believe that for the most part BSA literature and WB both teach the patrol method, however, I don't think it's practiced much in the world outside of the curriculum.

 

As far as only some patrols showing up and other patrols doing something else for a certain weekend, well, that will never happen when the PLC dictates that patrols all have to go to the same activities together... Does this sound like troop method? Sure does to me. Can a patrol sign up for summer camp on its own? Nope.

 

Can half the patrols go camping one weekend and the other half go to a museum? Nope.

 

The only explanation I have for these things happending is because the program is troop focused (troop method) rather than patrol focused (patrol method). I wonder what would happen if units began to actually do what the BSA literature states and WB teaches? From what I have seen from the comments of many on the forum, I don't see it happening any time soon.

 

Stosh

[Bob White 20]

It's me I am so curious, what scout leader tarining have you attended?

New Leader Essentials, Scoutmaster Specific, Wood Badge?

 

1. You don't have to convince the parents of anything, they are not the scouts. Your responsibility is to understand and deliver a scouting program to youth.

 

2. There is no such thing as a First Class First Year Program. There is a First Class Emphasis Program which is a planning program and not an advancement program.

 

You wrote "Whether you believe this or not is immaterial. This I have made up my mind on."

 

Ah yes! The old "my mind is made up don't confuse me with facts" defense. Not a good attitude if you ever hope to learn more than you think you already know.

 

3.How does a PL get a patrol outing on a troop calendar? One way is to represent the needs and wishes of his patrol at the PLC. Another option would be to not put in on the troop calendar but on a patrol calendar since it is only for his patrol and not the entire troop.

You see its really not that hard to do.

 

You say "There is no room for additional campouts"

 

Who made that your decision? are you a member of the PLC. There is room for whatever they make room for. Who is dictating to them how many campouts the troop nust have?

 

It seems you do not have a good understanding of the basics of the troop leadership structure or of the purpose and responsibilities of of the PLC.

 

You wrote "I mean the 300' rule held up as some standard barer of a patrol system seems weak when the "troop" planned the event, they all drove together and will assemble together at 9:00 AM for opening ceremonies."

 

HUH?

First: There is no such rule in scouting nor is this "standard" taught in any current BSA program. It is a personal preference of a poster from a time long past. Good luck finding a variety of camp locations where that is always possible. Some parts of the country may still have aenough wilderness area available but in most places you will not have the luxury of that much space especially if you have more than just a few patrols.

 

Secondly: While the troop PLC may have planned the event, the patrols are still separate functioning entities, They should be able to camp wherever the topography and the rules of the property they are on allows them.

 

Thirdly:What does being 300ft apart have to do with how they got there or what time assembly is?

 

That is an awful lot to be wrong about in just one sentence. That should tell you something about your current understanding of the program and the danger of your "my mind is made up" approach to being a "leader".

 

4. The standard time for patrols to meet DURING THE TROOP MEETING is 20 to 25 minutes. That does not mean that the patrol is not allowed to meet or communicate at other times. It is their patrol they can meet and plan whenever they want.

 

I really don't see where you understand the Patrol Method at all.

 

The problems you point out are not problems with the Scouting Methods they are problems with the unit you serve not utilizing or not understanding the Methods of the program.

 

Ozemu

While I appreciate your empathy with It's Me, I think it is important to recognize that you are in a different program and that you are not trained in the program methods of the BSA. Without you knowing what he is supposed to know it would seem impossible for you to compare what he is writing with the actual BSA program.

 

 

(This message has been edited by Bob White)

[Its Me 10]

 

Bob White, I know you see yourself as the chief apologist for all things scouting. Your main mantra on these forms is pretty much that the program is perfect and that it is just poorly implemented by ignorant leaders. That you will pick up on the term first class first year and say "there is no program", which being the literalist you are correct (I know those words are like nectar to your ears). But whether it is a emphasis or program is the subject of endless forum debate. Its defecto policy writen or not.

 

The rest of your post is rant. We have had endless discussions about the the 300' seperation as posted by Kudo to indicate sign, treatment or whatever for firming up a patrol and giving it true independance.

 

Now BW here is the issue. Does the annual calendar planning as presented in the program features conducive to the patrol method? I will suggest no. Becuase the feature is generally implying that the troop will have a single campout a month.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Bob White 20]

NOWHERE does the BSA say that a unit should have a campout a month, That again is an error in your knowledge of what the Scouting program is.

 

The suggestion made by the BSA is that a scout unit should do an "outdoor activity a month". That can be a day hike, an outdoor troop meeting, a day at a local pool or any number of other outdoor activities. What that activity is should be determined by the decision of the PLC.

 

There is nothing magical about 300ft that cannot be accomplished in 100 ft or 299 ft or any other distance allowed by the topography of the camp location. The Patrol method simply support s the patrols being as independent as possible.

 

There was no rant. I took you argument point by point and addressed it using the actual Boy Scout Program. You are welcome to try and counter my points using the same technique.

 

Just because I and thousands of others understand the program it does not make us apologists, just trained and practiced.

 

(This message has been edited by Bob White)

[ozemu 10]

Sorry BW. Wasn't trying to link It's Me with BSA arrangements. I was trying (probably hamfistedly) to help with applying the Patrol method.

[Stosh 3452]

Ozemu has it right. Until we quit thinking of our units as a troop and begin seeing it as a group of patrols, the patrol method will never have a chance.

 

The really strange thing about it is that the program of BSA already teaches, demonstrates, proves it's workable and yet for some reason there are those who think that their troop-method program is a better program.

 

Huge cub program comprising 10-12 dens all gather monthly yet remain autonomous and thrive, serving many more youth than most boy scout units can even imagine. Why when we have a model run by adults, we can't translate that into the same model run by youth?

 

The only reason I can conclude is that traditionally the boys are run differently than cubs for whatever reason. That's why scout troops serve far less youth, run pseudo-leadership training and run around trying to convince people that this is a great thing for boys.

 

The reason there is very little patrol-method used is because it doesn't work with the mindset of most scouters. The patrol method is basically taught, both in Essentials as well as WB, but not practiced by most units.

 

Stosh

 

 

[Kudu 186]

Bob White writes:

 

First: There is no such rule in scouting nor is this "standard" taught in any current BSA program. It is a personal preference of a poster from a time long past.

 

300 feet is Baden-Powell's standard. When someone characterizes as "old fashioned" what Baden-Powell or "Green Bar Bill" have to say about the Patrol Method, what they are really saying is that teaching boys how to be One Minute Managers does not help them run what the BSA defined as a "Real Patrol."

 

Good luck finding a variety of camp locations where that is always possible. Some parts of the country may still have aenough wilderness area available but in most places you will not have the luxury of that much space especially if you have more than just a few patrols.

 

The only place I have not been able to do that is on small islands and at Camporees in parks. Most Scout Camps have plenty of room. All of the National Forests in which I have camped do not have any such rules except in fee-based established campground areas.

 

This "practicality" argument should be familiar to anyone who can remember all the excuses Wood Badgers came up with for why it was absolutely impossible for the BSA to make an outdoor uniform. Until the Switchbacks

 

Notice that they never, ever, say anything like "The Troop that I serve has found that 30 feet or 100 feet is the maximum practical distance between Patrols for the following reasons." Or, "We found that when our Patrols camped more than 50 feet apart the following things happened."

 

The reason is that One Minute Managers are not curious about the Patrol Method beyond what business management gurus have to say about "leadership."

 

When you actually separate the Patrols, you learn a whole lot about leadership in a hurry. If you share your experiences with others, the reasons for failure become interesting topics of discussion: problems to be solved. People who use Scouting as an excuse to teach manager theory do not want that to happen.

 

Its Me writes:

 

"Without a written program in place that better emphasizes the patrol method I couldn't convince parents that some concept from older scout programs and presented by some guy on the Internet is the way to go."

 

This guy on the Internet says stick with the BSA program but separate your Patrols. There is no rule against it. Start with 30 feet and see what happens.

 

If you like what camping 30 feet apart does for your Patrols after six months or a year, then try the "Intensive Training in the Green Bar Patrol" course after PLC Meetings, with the goal of training Patrol Leaders how lead Patrol Meetings to plan a Patrol Hike on a Troop Campout.

 

If you are not comfortable with a Patrol hiking to a spot for lunch in a Scout Camp without adult supervision, then have a couple adults "shadow" the best Patrol from a distance with the STRICT rule that Scouts and adults are not to interact in any way what-so-ever except in an emergency.

 

Then try the second part of the course (the Patrol overnight) on a Troop campout with an adult shadow party as above.

 

Back when all BSA handbooks insisted that Scoutmasters get their Patrols out hiking and camping without adult supervision, BSA training was about leadership based on practical outdoor skills, not One Minute Manager theory. The BSA Guide to Safe Scouting still allows adult-free Patrol Camping, but we no longer provide the correct training to do so. So be cautious, don't go beyond the comfort level of your trained Scouters, but move slowly and deliberately toward truly functional, independent Patrols.

 

ozemu writes:

 

300 foot rule. It works I think. If the Patrols are to learn within a comfort zone the parents, PL's and Scouts will need the adults along to teach sometimes and to govern at others. So on Troop camps I would get the PL's together. We would walk over the available ground and decide where we would all put our Patrols. The adults were central'ish' and teh most capable Patrols were furthest away. Sometimes one would be out of sight and another would be a basketball length away from me. All depends on the abilities.

 

That is some really great advice. Its nice to see that the real Patrol Method works in similar ways all over the world.

 

Kudu