Regular elections

[Eagledad 2779]

>>The assumption is that it doesn't really matter how good a Patrol Leader is. >In fact the politically correct position these days is that it is "wrong" for a Scoutmaster to judge which Scouts are the best leaders and to guide the Patrols in the direction of their own best leaders, as both Baden-Powell Troops AND the BSA did before 1972.

[Kudu 186]

What do you expect, Purple Fox?

 

Popularity contests are the natural result of regular elections, which are designed to "give everybody his turn" to "learn how to be a leader."

 

Without the addition of "Position of Responsibility" (POR) advancement requirements, the Leadership Development Method invented in 1972 would have been just as harmless as the 1972 "Personal Growth" Method

 

Before POR requirements, Patrols held elections only when they needed a new Patrol Leader. The Scoutmaster's job was to head off poor choices through diplomatic methods explained in the Handbook for Scoutmasters, and to encourage a Patrol to vote for its most talented natural leader. In turn it was THESE strongest leaders, the Patrol Leaders in Council, who voted for the SPL that they wanted to coordinate their efforts.

 

"Boy led" in THOSE days meant Patrols that hiked and camped without hovering adults. The BSA called them "Real Patrols."

 

"Boy led" THESE days means adults "keep hands off" regular six month elections so that they can teach business manager formulas to the greatest number of Scouts. And then make wisdom noise about how Scouts "learn important lessons" about democracy through the consequences of their poor choices.

 

And what difference does it make? The Patrol Leader's Training course that taught Scouts how to run "Real Patrols" was replaced in 1972 with "Junior Leader Training" that replaced specific outdoor Patrol Leader skills with generic group theory.

 

So the Scouts are correct. Regular elections are a joke, so why NOT elect the LEAST talented popular boy to be SPL? What difference does it make? Six months from now some other kid will take his place.

 

Regular elections give every boy a chance to learn abstract "leadership" formulas and how to make "ethical choices." Leadership Development "experts" (AKA business manager nerds) are very proud of that. They boast that what makes Scouting different from popular things like sports is that since its sharp decline in 1972 Scouting is no longer led by the most talented natural boy leaders.

 

As a Committee Member it is not up to you to change Troop culture, but any Scoutmaster can fix the problems caused by Leadership Development if he or she wants to:

 

1. Stop Regular Elections: The BSA does NOT mandate regular elections.

 

2. Figure Out Which Scouts are the Best Leaders: Before 1972 this was an important adult skill.

My own criteria are:

a) Above average IQ and verbal skills;

b) A natural sense of fair play, especially when adults are not looking (see Scout Law for specifics);

c) An absolute love of outdoor adventure which once a month places Troop campouts above sports or a weekend job;

d) A bearing that discourages anarchy when the adults aren't looking. A real leader MUST have control.

 

3. Talk to the Best Boy Leaders and Ask Them to Serve: There are reasons why your best leaders don't run again after they get POR credit. Find out why and empower the PLC to fix it. Offer the best boy leaders suggestions on how to get elected--leadership as service is to "help other people at all times," and it is more noble that stepping aside for an unqualified Scout.

 

4. Meet with a Patrol Before It Holds an Election: A Patrol should hold an election on its own schedule ONLY when it NEEDS a new leader. As the Handbook for Scoutmasters suggested before 1972, talk to the Patrol about what qualities make the best leaders. The fact that you consider their choice important enough to meet with them will usually lead them to make what you consider to be the obvious choice. At a certain point the older Scouts will start holding Patrol elections without informing the adults.

 

5. Move SPL Candidate Selection to the PLC: In 1972 the BSA moved SPL elections from the PLC to the whole Troop. However there are NO rules that govern the criteria (or lack there-of) a Troop uses to decide who is qualified to run! So simply move this qualifying process back to a frank dialogue between the Patrol Leaders and the Scouters behind closed doors, as both Baden-Powell and William Hillcourt suggested.

 

6. Make the Patrol Method Real: Philmont is nice, but Patrol hiking and Patrol camping should provide the primary SENSE OF ADVENTURE all year 'round. The least risky way is to allow your best Patrols to camp the furthest from the adults. If you are on good terms with the camp ranger, ask him for his advice on how to spread out your mature Patrols. Every Boy Scout camp has enough space somewhere. Physical independence from "sitting side by side with adults of character" is the only thing that makes a Patrol's selection of their best leader real-world IMPORTANT.

 

Oh, and welcome to the forum, MEpurpleWBfox!

 

Kudu

 

 

[Bob White 20]

First define what you mean by regular elections.

 

1) Nowhere does the BSA say when elections have to takle place or how often other than suggestion tenures ranging form 6 months to 1 year. Nowhere does the BSA in any training or resource make this the decision of the Scoutmaster, but recommends that it be determined within the Patrol or in the case of the troop officers by the PLC.

 

2) Figure out who is best suited and make them the leaders??? Boy, for someone who talks about the youth neing in charge do you notice how Kudu makes the decisions in his troop.

 

The BSA Boy Scout program leaves that decision to a vote by the scouts that the eklected postion will represemt to the PLC, the troop elects the SPL, and the patrol mmebers elect their own PL.

Having the Scoutmaster tell the boys who they representative will be is not youth leadership it is unblemished adult dictatorship.

 

3)Talk to the best Scouts and ask them to serve? Yes but not the Scoutmaster, let the Senior Patrol Leader and each Patrol Leader do that. This is about the Scouts leading not the Scoutmaster. The Scoutmaster's role is to council the junior leaders and help them deveop the tools to make those decisions themselves. Again of tell them who their cabinet is going to be then your are just dictating you are not developing their leadership skills.

 

4) Meet with the patrol leaders before an election. Heck meet with them before a campout, meet with them beore a troop meeting, meet with them after and event. You role as a leader is to observe, evaluate and coach. Met with them whenever the situation to develop them is right.

 

How about having the SPL meet with the patrol before their election and remind them the importance of choosing the scout they believe is best suited to lead them and about what real leadership means. Never do anything that you can teach a scout to do.

 

5) Move the Candidate selection to the PLC. This is another excellent example of Kudu not knowing what the current program is. The BSA Bosy Scout program already recommends that the PLC set the requirements for holding troop offices. His suggestion is no great throwback to the past. This is what the program has always suggested.

 

6)Make the Patrol real. How about follow the Patrol Method. It has not changed since its beginning. Patrols are designed to function both independently and cooperatively. An element of scouting which, based on the posts on this forum, is grossly underused by the vast number of posters on this site.

 

You do not need to follow the Handbooks from 1911. Todays Scouting program has changed very little in its leadership and operating procedures from those of the first handbook.

 

Kudu knows what the program used to be but dioes not know the actual content of todays manuals or training. He assumes they are more different then what they actually are by focusing what he sees and reads on this forum rather than on the actual content of the BSA trainings and resources.

 

He is right about some of the things he says that works, he is wrong about it not still being taught and supported in today's program.

 

And for someone who professes Boy Leadership he writes a lot about "telling" his scouts what to do, rather that coaching them on how to make good decisions, and then letting them practice by making their own.

(This message has been edited by Bob White)

[SMT224 10]

The bottom line is what works best for the individual Troop, and it's not the same for every Troop.

 

Our Troop has done several of the leader selection and term processes described here. However, after much discussion in PLC (Greenbar) meetings the Scouts decided on regular elections based on clear leadership criteria and eligibility. They also wanted all eligible Scouts to be able to serve as SPL if desired. Now we have SPL and PL elections every six months (September & March with JLT in October & April). The Scouts know exactly what they need to do to become a leader and usually who will be the next SPL. It has worked out really well because everyone supports it - Scouts and Adults alike.

 

A big part of Scouting is leadership training by experience, not simply having good leadership in the Troop. Letting everyone take their turn at leadership is not dumbing anything down - it's giving all the Scouts an opportunity to have successes and make mistakes in a safe environment. Depriving some Scouts of a leadership opportunity just because one Scout is a great leader and does good things for the Troop misses one of the fundamental parts of Scouting - preparing our boys to become leaders of men.

 

Do we hold regular Troop elections? Absolutely! And it works great! What with the incessant change our boys are subjected to out in the "real world", a little consistency seems to be one of the things they really appreciate about Scouting.

 

[Stosh 3452]

Telling the boys they have to have elections every 6 months vs. no tenure definitions, vs. appointments, vs. qualification requirements, vs. popularity contests, vs. ????

 

So, what does one tell the boys? I teach all the different options and then let the patrols decide what they want to do. No, they don't all have to do it the same way, they don't have to have scheduled elections, if they get one boy that does a great job, he can stay as long as the patrol wants him to do so. Teaching them Greenbar, JLT, and TLT/NYLT gives them all the options for their consideration. As it has been pointed out, there's a lot of myth floating around and even more adult interference in the processes. (after all where does one think is the #1 source for these bogus myths?)

 

And who says the boys all need POR's for advancement? Re-read the requirement... carefully. A POSITION OF RESPONSIBILITY is not necessarily leadership... it's a functional duty and a scribe and historian doesn't lead anyone, they just fulfill the responsibility. A bugler leads no one, they only announce activities for the boys based on a time-piece or when their leadership told them to sound the call.

 

And if the patrol has a crackerjack PL, why would they be so dumb as to trade him out for someone who needs to wear a patch for 6 months?

 

If the patrol comes to the SM and tells him/her that the PL for their group is someone new, so be it. Why would the adults ever want to know why or how it was done? It's a done deal, live with it, the patrol members are planning on it, mark it in the book and move on.

 

Stosh

[Bob White 20]

Why feel you have to go back to Green Bar Bill? The Current handbook doesn't say anything different.

[Stosh 3452]

Because after attending NLYT, the boys came back disappointed and asked me to teach the "traditional" patrol method and TLT for their patrols. They think it's different, so I teach it. If it inspires the boys, what's the big deal? I figure too much training isn't going to hurt anyone. After all the big complaint normally is not enough training, now it's too much?

 

Stosh

[Bob White 20]

Theere is nothing taught in NYLT that is contrary to the Patrol Method.

 

 

In addition, no Scout is ever going to say "Teach us the 'traditional' Patrol Method." How does a scout know what is "traditional" and what is not when it comes to the Methods of Scouting? Unless of course "someone" has filled their heads with the incorrect notion that the Patrol Method used to be different in some way?

 

 

 

[Eagledad 2779]

>>Teaching them Greenbar, JLT, and TLT/NYLT gives them all the options for their consideration. As it has been pointed out, there's a lot of myth floating around and even more adult interference in the processes. (after all where does one think is the #1 source for these bogus myths?)

[Stosh 3452]

Hmmm, if leadership is a goal of scouting and teaching leadership is a fill-in activity, it's no wonder there's problems. Surely watching other screw up isn't as effective as teaching how to do it correct in the first place.

 

As far as NYLT's effectiveness? Well, I didn't attend it, my boys did and they came back thinking they wasted their time and money. And by the way, that occurred BEFORE I took over as SM of my present troop and the boys wanted "other" training to make up for it. I suggested the older traditional program materials and they reviewed it and said they wanted it taught to all the boys in the troop that wished to sit through it. Not all the boys did, but those that did appreciated it and are implementing many of the items emphasized. I'm assuming that the suggestion is not that too much leadership training is too much or the training the boys request should not be taught or that leadership should be taught only as a fill-in activity between games, maybe?

 

Stosh

[SMT224 10]

NYLT is part of the training process, as is Troop JLT and general Troop leadership experience. Both JLT and NYLT are required for a Scout to be SPL in our Troop. This is not my dictatorial edict, but what the Scouts came up with in PLC (Greenbar). Here are the full requirements (which posted and very transparent so all know and understand):

 

Senior Patrol Leader

Star Scout, 4 years in Troop, has held other leadership positions, attends Troop JLT, attends NYLT, 85% of Troop meetings, 75% of Troop outings and service projects.

 

 

[Stosh 3452]

Oh my! SMT224, your boys actually expect the SPL to be functional? to be proficiently trained? Does that mean that if the boy has all that and holds the POR for the first six months of the year and it's not a leap year he won't get credit for it? Oh my, what's the world coming to?

 

Give my congrats to your boys for going for the best!

 

Stosh

 

[SMT224 10]

As you can see CubScoutJo, there are a number of opinions on this issue. Work with your Scouts to find what works best for your Troop. Adult dictated processes, either to have regular elections or not, means the Scouts are not involved and thus will likely not support the outcome. Regular elections every six months, with possible re-election, has worked very well for us. But you will have to see what fills the needs of your Troop & Scouts. I suggest active PLC (Greenbar) discussions and a flexible attitude.

 

 

 

[IM_Kathy 32]

we have elections in Dec with take over in Jan and then in Jun with take over in Jul. we do have time between election and take over due to 1 year with terrible weather that ended up delaying elections.

 

one reason why 6 month periods work best is for those that are in sports to still be involved. typically they are either more involved in football in the fall or baseball in the spring/summer. for those in band instead the fall is their busiest time.

 

for established patrols they already know the make up of their patrol and what needs done and what doesn't. the new patrol(s) they don't, but since they are helped so much by their guides it's ok to have a PL that is clueless because they all are at that time unless their webelos den did a good job with using the denner position.

[asm 411 10]

I have read a lot of the old Patrol Leader and Scoutmaster Handbooks as well as the current ones. When I discussed with our PLC what the requirements for the SPL positions should be they decided on the following:

 

1) Run the election like the current OA election process. First week each member of the troop votes for everybody they think will make a good SPL. The second week those selected give a short speech about their vision for the troop and what makes them qualified.

 

2) No prerequisites. The PLC felt using the method above it would weed out the under qualified.

 

3) SPL elections are twice a year. The current SPL can run again but gives them a defined time period in which to look toward for getting their vision accomplished. Plus with sports and band it made sense. Elections in mid February and last week of August.

 

4) Patrols can change patrol leaders as needed with the approval of the SPL. This was only done because there was a fear of having some patrol with a patrol leader of the week syndrome.

 

I guess the most important thing is the PLC came up with the process with guidance from myself and the Scoutmaster in terms of what the options are.

 

When in doubt, ask the Scout. You will be amazed at how often the solution will be simpler and fairer than anything you could think up on your own.