Troop Growing and Needs Another Patrol?

[Lauwit 9]

The Troop just had 6 boys cross over and we now have 10 to 12 Scouts in the troop. Assuming all 6 new Scouts are active we should have 9-10 boys at meetings. I have two questions for y'all. I'm planning on recommending the boys form 2 patrols of 4 or 5 with a SPL and ASPL and a Troop Guide. I'm thinking of keeping the new scouts together in one patrol and the older boys in their own patrol.

 

Does this sound like a good plan or am I going down the wrong path?

 

Thanks for the advice.

 

Lauwit

[Eagle92 110]

I think smaller than 6 per patrol is not effective. Grant you the original patrols at Brownsea were 5 man patrols, but BP wrote of patrols of 6-8 scouts.

[FScouter 24]

Scouts are not things an adult "keeps" in one place or another.

[frank10 12]

If you split them into two patrols you will find that for most events you will be combining them into a single acting patrol to which you will have to assign an acting PL. This kills the whole idea of the patrol and takes boy led with it too. Wait a bit longer and pull in a few more scouts before you make the split.

 

 

[Stosh 3452]

If one has only one patrol there is no need for a TG, SPL or ASPL.

 

With 12 boys - 2 patrols - 6 each

 

If an event requires an SPL, just have the PL of the older boys fill in for the day.

 

If the older boys need a POR, they can do the scribe, historian, bugler, DC, kind of thingies that don't directly affect the patrol structure.

 

If at an event only three boys from each patrol show up, then DO NOT COMBINE. This will not encourage the three boys to put the pressure on their patrol members to show up and be active. Maintain patrol autonomy no matter how painful it is. If the adults don't, the boys won't either.

 

Stosh

[shortridge 184]

First things first: What do the Scouts want to do?

 

Even with two patrols, there's really no need for an SPL, ASPL or TG in a troop of 12. Those duties fall naturally to a PL, which should be the most important position in the troop, anyway.

 

Assessing the two-patrol idea with such small numbers: Let's say you have a patrol of four Scouts. If three don't show up to an event, you have a patrol of one - not very functional. But if you have a patrol of 10, and three don't show up, the resulting patrol of seven can still perform just fine.

[Kudu 186]

The idea that you need two Patrols to use the "Patrol Method" is the Troop Method, not the Patrol Method.

 

In the Patrol Method our central concern is building a Patrol that can function independently.

 

In the Troop Method the Patrols are merely subunits, and we focus on stuff like "leadership positions" and "controlled failure."

 

I never split a new Troop of a dozen Scouts into two Patrols. One solid Patrol teaches them how a Patrol actually works.

 

Scoutmasters do indeed make these decisions until a Patrol can camp 300 feet away without him hovering nearby. Until Scouts have experienced what Green Bar Bill calls a "Real" Patrol, they have no business making decisions about the Patrol Method.

 

SPL and ASPL in Troop of less than four Patrols is the Troop Method.

 

ASPL is always a waste of leadership talent unless you use it to park Patrol Leaders who prove to be incompetent: "Why don't you go supervise the Troop Historian and Bugler, Tommy?"

 

Kudu

 

 

 

 

[allangr1024 71]

With a troop of 12, I would shoot for 2 patrols, both with 6 members. Let the patrols elect patrol leaders. Then have an election for SPL. In this way you have a patrol with 6 and a patrol with 5. You do not need an ASPL until your troop reaches over 35 in number. And the troop guide can serve in that job as well as be a patrol member. In fact, all other troop jobs can be done by scouts who are in patrols.

 

Now you have 3 main leaders to form the PLC, the SPL and two patrol leaders. These three should meet once per month for 2 purposes. First they plan the weekly meetings. I would instruct them to come up with 4 or 5 meeting plans for the month to come, possibly around a theme like first aid or water sports. Second, they would plan the upcoming camp out. If they plan the upcoming monthly meetings and the campout and have time left, let them keep going and plan further ahead.

 

On camping trips, these three supervise the main camping activity, be it a hike, orienteering training, or whatever. Your main job is to coach these 3 leaders from the sidelines.

 

I have a troop similar to this, with the exception that I had 3 new scouts, the others being older. We average 4 of our 12 on camping trips, and my 2 patrol leaders both started baseball season a month after their election. They did not think about being away from the troop when games were scheduled. That makes it tough to keep the boy led thing going.

 

Last of all, tell the new scouts to bring one or two buddies to the troop for a visit, or as guests on a campout. See if you can bolster the numbers that way. Scouts with buddies in the troop will have a better time and come to more outings.

 

 

 

[LIBob 10]

My suggestion is that for a designated (6-12 month) period you keep the younger kids together and assign them a senior scout (or two) as PL and perhaps an APL.

 

This will give the young 'uns time to work on things that do not interest the older ones and give 1-2 older ones an opportunity to develop leadership skills.

 

As iime passes however you will want to mix the two patrols in order to

- promote troop unity (prent cliques, and to

- give their PL a chance to stop working with tenderfoots (tenderfeet?) and work on his own advancement.