Formation and expanding of new Patrols

[Buffalo Skipper 13]

We have had this discussion many times in one form or another, but let me present this from a particular perspective.

 

We have 2 active patrols of 6 each with an SPL in no patrol (no ASPL for this small a troop). We have been contacted by a couple of scouts possibly interested in transfering from other troops, and we are working closely with 2 packs/webelos dens and we expect to have 6-8 recruits in the late winter.

 

Last year, we had a "New Scout Patrol," which worked out OK, but for a variety of reasons, we may want to avoid a NSP this year. Can you all throw out some ideas on how to divide a group of 2 into 3 and divvy up new scouts? I want to talk to the SPL about this at some point, but my question is when do we start working this out with the PLC? Crossovers are at the end of February, which is 2-3 weeks before elections, so when do we start organizing this? I have for some time been pitching "growth" to the troop, and this is when it will likely kick into gear.

[Stosh 3452]

Our "policy" is that anyone wishing to take on a position of responsiblity (PL) needs to recruit their patrol. This means that Scout A wants to be a PL and he goes back and recruits a Webelos den coming in to be his patrol. Or an existing patrol can as a group go and recruit one or two Webelos to come and join their patrol to fill their numbers up to 8, or, or, or whatever the boys wish to design their patrols. If the boys make the selections, they have ownership in the decision and are more apt to follow through with their choices.

 

If the older boys don't want a bunch of new scouts they can choose not to recruit any. Maybe the will recruit from a patrol whose membership has dropped below the minimum 6 to come into their patrol and they thus move towards a more Venture patrol style. Again, it's their choice. Maybe one or two of their members dropped out to be PL of new boys coming in. They realign according to their own decisions. The only "rule" is that a patrol needs at least 6 members and cannot be more than 8. This "rule" was decided on by the boys themselves.

 

Adults are not involved in this process.

 

Stosh

 

Forgot to add: If a Webelos den of at least 6 come into the troop and want to form a patrol of their own and elect their own PL they can do that too. If they do that I will SUGGEST, and only suggest, that they pick out an older scout to help them out as a TG if they choose this route.

 

Stosh(This message has been edited by jblake47)

[acco40 95]

Many ways. One thing to think about - don't think of dividing up a troop to make patrols. Think of patrols coming together to form a troop.

 

What we've done for Jamboree troops is the following - get all the boys together in one room. Ask them to pick a buddy. Now you should have everyone paired up. Let the boys make that decision. If there is an odd number of boys, let there be one and only one "trio." Next, ask each pair to pick another pair - so now you have a group of 4. If an odd amount a few groups of four and a group of two. Then do this once more and voil, you have patrols.

[Buffalo Skipper 13]

Acco40, that is a unique way to accomplish this, but I do like it. Granted, there are problems when you have don't have an even number of groups, but I do like it. How would you suggest we do this when we also have a number of new scout pairs? It seems to me that it would be likely we would end up age specific groups.

 

 

 

For the time being, maybe we should keep our current patrols. Before the Webelos cross over, we could find 2 scouts from each patrol who would be willing to form a new patrol. When the Webelos do cross over, we could have them "pair" up into 3 equal groups and have each choose a patrol to join. How is that? Of course that still leaves the question of how far out do we divide out into the third patrol before the Webelos join.

 

"When" is the question on which no one seems to want to comment.

[Eagledad 2777]

This is a tough spot. You know I am a big proponent of mixed age patrols and not fond of NSPs. But experience has proven that existing patrols more than two to three new scouts tend to loose the cohesion that has been developed in the patrol. So this is a situation where I would consider a NSP. But you already mention that is not a very good option this year.

 

Here is the thing, the BSA looses more boys in their first six month of a troop experience than any other time and any other age group. The reason is the scouts loose the trust that the boys near their age can safely lead them in scouting activities. Or, their experience is so regimented by adults that they arent having any fun. You will know within a few weeks after summer camp whether you will keep those scouts.

 

Also keep in mind that when a troop gains sudden surge of new boys that is about 40% or above the troop size, the troop program is basically starting over, especially if you dont prepare everyone for the changes that a coming. It is very very important that the troop adults convey they understand the challenge to the new parents and are working hard with the PLC to ease the transition for ALL the scouts. Even the most experienced scouts will struggle because the new scouts are undisciplined and out of control. Its as hard for them if not harder than for the adults.

 

The dilemma for troops is keeping the adults close enough so the new scouts still feel some security of safety while at the same time keeping them far enough away that the scouts can develop their own independence and freedom to enjoy scouting. I found that if a scout wants to stay even after the first six months, you have a lot better chance of making changes without loosing them. This is why we move the new scouts out of a NSP into existing patrol around six months if we used a NSP that year.

 

I dont have the perfect answer for your situation yet, but I think you need to preplan how your adults and your scouts that they have to will work together to make sure the new scouts are comfortable with the program. I found that the new scouts boy leaders should always be the point of contact for the new scouts. If for what ever reason the observing adults feel something needs to be conveyed to a new scout, the adult goes through the boy leader so that the new scouts observe that adults trust the boy leader. The adults need to keep their distance. Close enough so the new scouts can find an adult if they have to, but far enough away that their experience is pretty much boy run. As the new scouts get more comfortable, the adults should get farther away to even just disappearing for awhile. It wont take that long if everyone is working together. What you are doing here is weaning the new scouts away from their idea that the adults are responsible for their experience even though they call it boy run. They need time to develop confidence in their boy leaders and even the program itself.

 

Our Troop kind of works the same way as Stoshs, but Im different in that I would not add new patrols least six months after receiving new scouts unless your new scouts only make up about 10 to 15% max of the troop total. Im not in favor of killing patrols at all.

 

 

Since you have a relatively small troop, I think it is fair to prepare all the scout and adults to working as a team to welcome the new scouts and work to get them up to speed in the troop program.

 

I know that isnt a simple answer, but it is a complicated challenge. A good challenge however.

 

I love this scouting stuff.

 

Barry

 

[Beavah 205]

Yah, I think yeh get the boys workin' on it and thinkin' about it right away, eh? Often as not, they'll really surprise you with their wisdom, and they'll buy into a solution that's primarily theirs.

 

I'm not as fond as Eagledad of da notion of usin' NSPs when a troop goes through a growth spurt. I think any time yeh increase the troop size by that much it's goin' to change the dynamic anyway. Better to have your patrols and patrol leaders be full partners in the process. And when they are full partners, they almost always want to pull new guys into "their" patrol, even though it's goin' to change the dynamic.

 

For the additional patrol(s), there's almost always a few lads who are ready and willing to take on a new challenge and be the Founding Fathers of a new patrol. Let 'em!

 

Yep, your troop will be in many ways "startin' fresh". Yep, your youth leaders will be workin' like mad, stormin' and normin' and all that. But it's fun, eh? And it's theirs.

 

Beavah

[BrentAllen 10]

Buffalo,

We were in that same boat last Feb./March, and this is how we handled it (after MUCH head-scratching and discussion with my mentors):

First, I'm not fond of NSP's so we didn't go that route. Once we knew the numbers (and we didn't know those for sure until the cross-over), we knew we would need one new patrol. At a Troop meeting, I told the boys our predicament and said I didn't like splitting up patrols, but I needed some volunteers to start the new patrol. Three boys volunteered, and were the foundation for the new patrol.

When the new Scouts arrived, we asked them to pair up. Then we divided the pairs into 3 groups. For the months of March and April, these three groups - A, B, C - spent a couple of weeks with each of the three patrols, the goal being for the new boys to get to know all the other Scouts. Then, at the first of May, the PLC asked each new Scout to fill out a form giving first and second choice of the patrol they wanted to join, and a buddy. The PLC took the forms and divided the Scouts up, trying to give first choice or buddy to every Scout while keeping the patrols to 8 boys each. In the end, it worked out pretty well.

 

We wanted this all completed in early May so the patrols had time to start really Forming and go on at least one campout together before we headed off to summer camp (3rd week of June). This was a real importance to us since we cook in camp.

[Buffalo Skipper 13]

Barry, thank you for your input; I really appreciate your detailed and thoughtful response. I do know you are not big on NSPs, and it is after reading your posts as well as Stoshs and others that I wanted to consider other options.

 

We had a NSP this year, of sorts, and it mostly worked out ok. When our Webelos joined this year, we combined our older scouts into a single patrol (excluding the oldest who are approaching 18, not active and are separate). Call this group of mainly 1-2 year scouts Patrol A. Patrol B was a new scout patrol with a PL who was 14 (oldest active scout); this was mostly the remains of a Webelos den plus a couple of other new scouts. These scouts had good skills from Webelos, a sense of team, and got along well. Before summer camp, the PL transitioned to TG (seemed logical as the PL/TG would be away from camp at high adventure) and they elected their own leader. It simply did not make sense to break up their team at this point. Where the NSP idea failed is that the scouts in Patrol A, even though 4 of them have been together since Webelos, have never really leaned to work together. Most every scout in Patrol A wants to be PL, so no one takes direction from the others. They get along all right, but there is little teamwork, and their skills, after 19 months are about as refined as Patrol B, who has 12 months less experience.

 

Our retention has been pretty good. We have lost 3 scouts in the past 2 years due to moving, one dropped as he lost interest, and one was removed from the charter; all others who left have aged out. Hearing the 40% growth figure from you about being like starting over is telling and makes sense to me; in fact, it explains last years growing pains and validates my concerns and reasons for starting this thread in the first place. What you said also states that getting our (our being the PLC) ducks in a row soon, and getting the ASMs and committee on board is the right thing to do. Seems like after this year, we should have sufficient critical mass to avoid this in the future.

 

A lot of this, in my mind, connects to the other thread I started at the same time as this one regarding the First Class Emphasis (FCE). Right or wrong, I see that FCE and NSP are 2 pieces of the same puzzle. We have had some elements of the FCE program in our troop this year, but our emphasis has been on skills, outings and fun (from which advancement should come naturally). Based upon the 40% theory you mentioned, it suggests that forming a NSP with 7-9 crossovers may be a good thing to do, but it is best to break up that patrol after 6 months. Presumably this would be a group with close enough adult association to reinforce confidence in the new scouts. Even with that, however, we would still be realigning the patrols by about 40% after 6 months, so in a way, it is only delaying the inevitable. It suggests a now or later scenario.

 

Beavah, I do want to get the boys on board and I want them to make the right decisions on this. Last year when we merged our 2 small patrols into one, it was what I felt we needed to do (in part from responses here on the forum); I didnt want to, but I felt it was best. I asked the PLC for ideas on how to integrate the new scouts and work the growth. On their own and without my prompting, they decided to make one older patrol and have the crossovers make a NSP with an experienced scout as PL. I was impressed they made the decision, and perhaps it was the best thing for us. In retrospect, I cannot imagine that putting a 40% growth in these patrols would have been better than what happened, but what we got was not perfect, so you never know.

Backing up a little, Our quiet goal this past year was to have all our scouts complete Tenderfoot before summer camp. This meant that one boy from Patrol A (joined winter 2008) had to work past Scout; the only one who did not earn Tenderfoot was out of town for 2 months of the summer and did not attend camp with us. Most of the rest are now 2nd Class or close (both patrols). What good advancement by Patrol B has done, is prompt some in Patrol A to be a little more motivated, which cant be a bad thing.

 

Brent, it does sound like we are in a similar position to where you were. We have a unique advantage here in that I am the Webelos 2 DL from one pack and the W2 DL from the other pack (he is actually the CM, his wife is DL) Eagled with our troop 18 years ago, and he is an ASM with the troop and is committed to his alma mater. Both packs and the troop share a CO, and the dens meet at the Troop building. Knowing our Webelos, we already have a good sense of numbers here, but of course it is subject to change up or down.

 

A couple of quick questions for you; how closely did you work with your PLC on the split and how far beforehand did you start this? Also how did you handle the new scouts on campouts during that March to early May time when they were rotating between patrols?

 

Can anyone add something more on this?

[BrentAllen 10]

I let the PLC handle as much of the process as they could, which was 90%. They did have some tough calls to make on where to place a few boys, and we discussed the options and their possible outcomes. I thought the PLC did a very good job of trying to give every boy their first choice. Some of the PLs all wanted the same boys, and they were very interested to see which patrol they selected. The process was very fair to all involved.

 

From my perspective, I had two goals:

 

1. Let the new Scouts have a voice in their patrol selection.

 

2. Each patrol be equal in size. (We had 25 Scouts, so we needed 3 patrols of 8 plus the SPL)

 

As far as timing, I can't remember it exactly, but as soon as we had enough committments that we needed a third patrol, we started talking about it. This was probably very late February. The three boys that started the new patrol came up with a temporary name. For those first two months, Group A of new Scouts was with the Jackalopes for 3 meetings and the campout. Then we rotated and Group B was with the Jackalopes and A moved to the Llamas, and so on. Ideally we would have had 3 months so each Group could camp with a different patrol. In the end, the boys had plenty of time to observe all the patrols and make an informed decision.

Once permanent patrols were formed, all the members of the new patrol came up with their own name, the Mammoth Patrol.

[Eagledad 2777]

>>Even with that, however, we would still be realigning the patrols by about 40% after 6 months, so in a way, it is only delaying the inevitable. It suggests a now or later scenario.

[Mike F 10]

Our story:

 

About 4-5 yrs ago, we suffered from some poor recruiting years and our membership slowly shrank to the point of needing to reduce down to 2 patrols. Shortly after that, the PLC made the decision that recruiting enough scouts to re-form the third patrol was their top priority. After a year, their efforts paid off - we had recruited a few Webelos and some older boys, the two existing patrols were full, and we had a number of promised recruits.

 

In December, right before our elections, we decided to re-start the 3rd patrol so they could have time to adjust before new members joined all of the patrols in the spring. After discussing with the PLC, we asked one of our senior boys, who had served multiple terms as a PL, if he was willing to help start the new patrol and he was excited to do so. Then we announced at a troop meeting that Patrol 3 was going to be re-formed. Johnny had volunteered to help get it started. Who was interested in switching patrols to help him? We had a number of volunteers from both patrols. SPL, Johnny, and I went over the volunteer list and made the decisions based on balancing all 3 patrols in terms of age, skills, and future leadership potential. We announced the names for the new patrol at start of the next meeting and there was much celebrating. Johnny was elected PL, as we expected would occur. I've been through this process a few times through the years and must emphasize the importance of making sure the new patrol has one or two solid candidates to assume leadership. (This is mentioned in the SM Handbook.)

 

The 3 patrols worked a little short-handed for a few months, but were ready when the new crossovers came aboard. A year later, this newly formed patrol took top honors at our District Camporee (with the other two not far behind).

 

-----

 

Back to discussion, I have to agree with what Barry about what happens when an existing patrol gains more than 2 new, 11-yr old members. Three is not 50% more disruption and effort than two. That one additional scout has more like 100% more of an affect on a patrol's dynamics. After gaining as many as 3 per patrol two years ago and suffering some for it, we now limit it to no more than 2 per patrol at each crossover.

 

For Buff,

With your relatively small troop (12 scouts + SPL), you might want to put out the word through your scouts and parents that you're open to new guys besides the annual Webelos crossover. In the last 9-10 months, we've picked up two 12/13-yr old scouts who had dropped out of another troop and two 13-yr olds who had never been in scouting. If you have some mega-troops in the area, you might find a lot of scouts who feel like they're lost in the crowd and want a more personal scouting experience. I'm sure your guys have been bragging about the canoe trip you did last summer. Tell them to invite any of their buddies who thought it sounded like fun. Unless you can recruit some older boys very soon, I'd be reluctant to take on as many as 8 new guys at crossover.

 

[acco40 95]

Types of Patrols

There are three kinds of patrols: new-Scout patrols, regular patrols, and Venture patrols.

 

New-Scout patrols are for 11-year-old Scouts who have recently joined the troop and are together for the first year in the troop. An older, experienced Scout often is assigned as a troop guide to help the new-Scout patrol through the challenges of troop membership. An assistant Scoutmaster should also assist the new-Scout patrol to ensure that each Scout has every opportunity to succeed right from the start.

 

Regular patrols are made up of Scouts who have completed their First Class requirements. They have been around Scouting long enough to be comfortable with the patrol and troop operation and are well-versed in camping, cooking, and Scouting's other basic skills.

 

A Venture patrol is an optional patrol within the troop made up of Scouts age 13 and older. These troop members have the maturity and experience to take part in more challenging high-adventure outings. The Venture patrol elects a patrol leader, who works with an assistant Scoutmaster to put the patrol's plans into action.

 

The above is the scouting program. Haven't we agreed to deliver the scouting program to the youth? Patrols should be peer groups - which for many is same age ranges.

 

Why don't we stop debating if NSPs work or not and just deliver the program we promised to deliver?

[Eagledad 2777]

>>Why don't we stop debating if NSPs work or not and just deliver the program we promised to deliver?

[Mike F 10]

acco40,

Those patrol types are recommendations, not mandates. If we decide not to use them, I do not believe it's fair to say we are failing to deliver the Scouting program.

Our retention is high, our skills are excellent, and spirit superb. It works for us.

As always, your mileage may vary.