Eagledad

Popularity is the only reason they added the 14 year old restriction.

This is interesting, we saw this too in our area, but it was in the same age patrol troops. For some reason these troops top out at age 14. My opinion is that it's less to do with patrol style and more to do with program maturity. Troops that struggle to plan activities more advanced than just using first class skills struggle to hold older scouts. After doing three years of the same thing, scouts burnout. By the way stosh, older scouts wanting just high adventure is a myth. I and others on this forum have found that the majority of scouts 14 and older can take it or leave. What they want is a program that challenges them mentally and physically. That is why Venture Patrols and many Troop created Venturing Crews fail so miserably. And it is never mentioned here, but the troop adults also burnout in these programs. If the troop adults are burning out, why would we assume the older scout wouldn't. Scouts 14 and older have the mental and physical maturity of adults. The nature of adults is measuring their place in society by comparing themselves to others. So instinctively older scouts like challenges where they can measure their performance. That is why giving them the reins of a complicated program like a troop feeds that challenge. If it wouldn't be interesting for the adults, it will be interesting for the older scouts. Barry

You are exactly right. If you can understand the mind of the scout, than you can better understand how to improve the scouts' growth. Think about the brave adults who start a new troop from a den of just crossed over Webelos. With the knowledge that boys this age don't want to lead, how do the adults develop a patrol or troop program that use the actions of leaders? We all have different styles, but the challenge is for those adults to give the young scouts enough leadership responsibility for develop habits and traditions without taking the fun out of the program. The adults have to be very understanding of the situation, very creative to encourage the scouts with challenging responsibilties, and very empathetic to know when the scouts have had enough. Starting a new troop is hard, I'm worn out just thinking about it. Barry

THAT IS EXACTLY HOW WE TRY TO DO IT.( Caps for applause). I couldn't have said it better. Experiences in the troop develops the scout's confidence to step up to the next challenge. Before every election, I gave the same speech that if the scout thinks the office he wants is easy, he is too mature for that office and will get bored. Challenges are fun and it is OK to screw up in our troop because it's a sign you are trying. Barry

Sounds like you have a great troop Hedgehog. And I agree, just because a scout wants to do an activity, doesn't mean he is qualified physically or mentally, There are different ways for scouts to prove or improve their physical and mental maturity. And, we learned the hard way that even adults need to prove their mental and mostly physical capabilities. Barry

Of all the problems that were created from the induction of NSPs, this was my number one struggle. See, I came from the sixties and seventies where scouts joined a troop as soon as they qualified by age or Cub scout advancement, so troops received new scouts 1 or 2 at a time all year long. It wasn't a hardship on the patrol because they started teaching the new scout skills as soon as he joined. As new leaders starting a new troop in the 90s, we were trying to build our troop from the memories of our youth experiences and the Webelos crossing over by Dens threw a huge wrinkle at us. After a few years and loosing a lot of first scouts, we eventually figured out how to make it work for a boy run troop. I know it can work, but the NSP is a challenge for the boy run program. The NSP system changed a lot of traditions that are here to stay even if troops don't use the NSP in their program. Barry

This is the kind of example that drove us to change our minimum qualifications for just about everything in our troop. You can't do much about Philmont's minimums, so we started looking for other backpacking treks at summer camps and found several good ones in Colorado and New Mexico that didn't have age requirements. We skipped the BSA boundary Waters guides and used our own. Our troop eventually developed what we call adventure crews (AC). These are temporary crews created just for a single trek then dissolved. Adventure Crews can be anything the scouts want. One year we had a snow skiing AC, back packing AC, Philmont trek Crew and a AC that went to Alaska. Over the years we have had river rafting ACs, scuba diving AC that went to Mexico and even an AC that went to six flags once. The only requirements to be in the AC are physical and mental minimums for the trek. Mentally means having the minimum skills for the trek. The troop also took out any age and rank requirements after above First Class in the all the PORs. Scouts only needed to qualify for just about anything based on their maturity and experience, not their rank above first class and age. Even ambitious new scouts with special skills have a chance for the more mature responsibilities. Although some young scouts found that members of their patrols wanted more from their leaders than just ambition. LOL Barry

Dumbing down is not allowing for the exceptional minority to accel to their level of challenge. The reason patrol method works is because the individuals of the patrol are not limited to a single level of challenges. Barry

Of course, that is what patrol method does. But a program should not be restricted for the few, rather it is designed for the many while not restricting the special talents of the few. Barry

Young guys don't want to be leaders, they want adventure. Young PL leaders is a new idea that came along with the NSP patrols. The nature of pre puberty boys is adventure in groups with their friends, not standing out alone as the leader away from their friends. That all changes with puberty. Pre puberty boys learn 90% of their behavior by watching those around them. Once they reach puberty, that natural learning switches off and their instinct for independent thought is driven by what they learned from observing. A troop doesn't have to teach leadership if the older scouts are seen doing it. Trust me, I've watched it work over and over many times. New leaders will basically mimic the habits they observed over the years from the leaders before them. I got all that from my child psychologist Scoutmaster buddies. Let the new guys enjoy the adventure side of the program, which is why they joined and let the older guys lead which is why they stay. Of course you can force the new scouts to lead and it will be fun for them at first, but it gets old really fast. They get bored, then frustrated because they are performing up to somebodies expectation. They don't have fun and they want to leave. It is the cycle of life. Even when we have NSPs, we don't make them lead. Barry

I didn't hear the podcasts, but I was also thinking along this line. Barry

If that is what the troop chooses, I'm with you. But the BSA handbooks don't mention a scribe/treasure relationship, so we have to be careful defining and/or adding to the scribes responsibilities for meeting expectations. Really the same goes for the treasure, some adults may not want the added responsibility of working with scouts. Barry

Units can be as creative as they need to encourage scout growth within reason for POR expectations, but the BSA gives the scribes more responsibilities that just taking care of scout funds. Barry

I've told this before, but one of our new scouts was getting his BOR for tenderfoot at summer camp. One of the board members asked the scout what he and I talked about at the SM Conference. He said "What conference?". She said the SM recommended you for a BOR after your conference today. He said "THAT WAS A CONFERENCE? I thought the conference was something hard. He bought me a popsicle and we just talked about fun stuff.". The scout's patrol leader requested the SM Conference for him, I just assumed he knew. LOL Our policies are for the scouts to request their SMC and BOR at any time, but summer camp gets kind of blurry for the new scouts. The popsicles are good in the Oklahoma heat. Barry

We did this and I feel it was a big contributor turning our Tiger program around. They weren't grandmas, but past den leaders who had three or more years experience in the pack. They maintain communication between the committee and the den as well as advise the den of ideas based on successful past experiences. Since it wasn't a demanding job, they really enjoyed the experience. You could kind of look at them a the Den Commissioner of the Tigers. Worked very well. I would do it again if I somehow become a leader for my grand kids. Barry

It needs to be something that you feel would contribute to his growth. If you feel it is inflicting something on the SPL, he is probably not ready. Give it time. Barry

Still some gold nuggets in this ground, stosh. Barry

Why? How better to see the program in action and enjoy the outdoors? By the way, I'm not implying anything of how adult leaders should work with scouts, but you should review the BSA published duties of the the Troop Treasure and scribes. Barry

I agree with MattR that boy run isn't less work for adults, it's different. In fact, it might be more work because what drives many troops to be adult led is the convenience of working the group rather than the individual. Example is the uniform. It is a lot easier to dictate a troop rule of full uniforms than guiding each scout individually to make good decisions. A lot of troops take their new scouts to a different summer camp than the rest of the troop so the scouts can basically advance together to first class. Scouts take a lot longer and require more troop resources when they are given the freedom to advance at their own will. Barry

I don't understand. Your troop doesn't allow committee members to camp with the other adults? ASMs in our troop don't get much more time than any other adult because the boys are doing the program. I'm not sure I understand what you think you are missing. Make pot of coffee and take it over to the ASMs, they will let hang. I got in trouble more than once with the SPLs because the adults come late to the opening. We get to yakking and forget the time. Barry

Boy there are some really good things being said here. While I was the SM, I was a pretty black and white person that believed that unless a troop was boy run, it wasn't a troop. But I grew up when I worked with units at the District and Council level. I found that my black and white passion was actually driving adults away from listening to my coaching. And, I talked to a lot of families that really liked their troop and didn't want a dramatic change to their program. I matured and could see that boys were getting some good scouting even if it wasn't my perfect vision of the program. In fact, they were getting a lot of good when I took off my blinders of MY perfection. Do no harm I think says it best. Barry

Man oh man do I agree with this. What Fred describes is the trend I've seen on the forum the last few years. Our discussions these days are more about drawing lines and defining good vs bad. In reality, scouting for both the adults and boys is a growing process toward giving the scouts the best opportunity toward growth. A patrol method program is proven over the years the best way to do that in the BSA. But that doesn't mean that all approaches to patrol method, boy run, boy lead and so on are the same. The saying goes that the troop in size and personality will resemble the skills and personality of the SM. THAT IS NOT A BAD THING. We need to encourage and give examples of what has worked for our programs without worry of being accused of being bad. As we hang around this forum and other places of knowledge, we grow to learn of different ideas, experiences and approaches to improving the program. We mature and gradually change to understand what we really want scouts to gain from their experiences. I once said before, we ask our adults to sit back and relax for six months before they start asking questions of the program. Then we can have an intelligent discussion. I love talking scouting stuff, so I'm never defensive. I know how it all works and like helping other adults gain the confidence. And sometimes new adults have a point about some aspect of the program. But it is hard to have a discussion with an inexperienced parent who attacks the whole program and wants to completely change it to something other than what they joined. I know the experience because I had more than one parent ask me to turn the troop into an Eagle mill type of program. Why did they join? Barry

Stosh has never given a single kind word for his former troop and has never really had a kind word for SPLs in general. It's fair to say he doesn't have the same experience as many of us here who have positive experiences with SPLs and trying ideas like SPLs going to committee meetings. My reasoning for the SPLs reporting to the committee is giving the scout another level of experience to build growth and maturity. We work hard for the scouts to take ownership of their program and reporting the status of the patrols is one way of doing that. Our experience is the Scouts and the Committee members enjoy the experience. The SPL feels more like he is part of the whole team and the committee gets a chance to have small personal interaction with the scouts. Something they don't normally get to do. And I wouldn't change it. Our senior leadership is often recognized for their high level of maturity and skills. So it works. But it must be done right. The troop is the real world scaled down to a boys size. The real world size for a troop of 12 year olds is different than a troop with 17 year olds. As scouts gain in experience and maturity, the bar should be raised to continue challenging the scouts and giving them experiences of growth. If you don't, they get board. You can read just from the scouters in this thread that the ones who encourage actions like SPLs at committee meetings are in troops with successful boy run programs. Different strokes for different folks, but the experienced scouters on this forum try these ideas for a reason. They are continually pushing the quality of their boy run program. So to me, it's not a debate of whether the SPL should be invited to the committee meeting, the discussion should be if your troop is ready for the SPL to be invited to the committee meeting. If you don't know how the SPL visiting the committee meeting would advance your program, then your program is likely not ready. Barry

Sadly we've come to the place where we are afraid to call leadership, leadership. Scouting is doomed. Barry

I have seen a lot of good boy run programs, but I have never seen one where all the scouts were in full uniform at the same time. Barry