Eagledad

It's in who you know I guess. My experiences with UCs has been very good. In fact, more professional than the DE, which seems to come and go every couple of years. We owe our UC for helping us out of a situation similar to this one. Barry

I you decide to hold a committee meeting, invite only those who absolutely have to be involved. The more people involved, the more complex the discussion becomes. I don't agree with not inviting anyone outside the unit. If this situation was easy, you wouldn't be asking faceless keyboard jockeys for advice. My experience is that folks in general will make a wrong decision simply because they don't want to face conflict. District and council have monitored and dealt with many of these situations. How many has your unit handled? Things may have changed or you area is different, but my experience is that district and council policy is stand back and let the unit make the decisions, so the unit is held responsible for the decisions. However, if you don't know any of the outside members enough to trust them, then go back to my first point, keep the meeting participants to an absolute minimum. Barry

Well, maybe. But, your experience doesn't reflect all UCs. We had a very good UC whose opinion was highly regarded in these situations, even by the DC and DE. Barry

We would at this point require a parent attend camp and activities. That generally forces actions one way or another. Barry

Even though we had 100 scouts, this is how we pushed the patrols. It was a challenge, I admit. The Troop QMs job was teaching the patrol QMs their responsibilities and maintaining the troop trailers. The Troop QM had the keys to the trailer, so he was required for using and loading the trailer correctly. He also verified the driver was trained for pulling the trailer. The patrols where encourage to arrange transportation to take their gear. That could include the trailer is the patrols were camping with the troop. The system is not a pure as the old days, but it was a start in the right direction. Part of the challenge is the respect (of lack of) for the Patrol QM. When I was a scout, the PQM was considered more important than the Asst PL because they were responsible for the condition of the gear and for getting it to camp outs. The PQM today is more of a position used to give a scout a title. Barry

Very good thanks. What I meant by Scouter course is experiencing Patrol Method and understanding the intention of the process so they know why to apply it. Barry

What Wood Badge skills are being practiced? This course sounds more like a Scouter course for adult troop leaders, or what should be for troop leaders. Very interesting. Barry

What is this course? I'm not familiar with it. Barry

This happens every now and then, an Eagle does a really bad thing. The only time I remember the media hanging on to it very long is when an Eagle tortured a gay man. Even then it was less about the Eagle and more about intolerance. Barry

We do. That is where we send the computer nerds to get some POR time. Barry

This sounds like that the adults are taking more responsibility (too much) of POR performance accountability than the PLC. Goes back to my example of the SPL who removed several PORs because he was accountable for their performance and didn't see any practical need for them. Your situation is very common with most (if not all) troops because some of the responsibilities aren't tied to major patrol or troop team goals. They are just kind of off to themselves. We had this problem with our Troop secretary who takes notes at the PLC meetings. To add more accountable responsibility, we gave him the responsibility of updating the Troopmaster Advancement software. The advancement is important for the scouts to get recognition, but the software also tracks each scouts attendance to troop activities. Which are important for accountibility. This was an adults job, but by giving him the Secretary responsibility, he was also expected to train the patrols to keep records as well. The adult would check the Secretaries updates each week because frankly, these were sent to Council and the committee was concerned about accuracy. Work with the SPL/PLC and see if they can find ways to tie the POR expectations into overall goals. Then they would be part of a team that holds each other accountable, or else mayham would follow. Barry

He may have. The story is only one side told by the parent. Barry

Well! Yes! The scouter was not confident with his skill in working this scout. Soooo, he should proceed outside of his comfort and possibly put others in the area in danger! It isn't just an issue with this particular situation at summer camp, I've seen it repeated several times over the years with unit leaders. Scouters (volunteers) only have so much experience for the different challenges that confront them. AND, I'm sure it's not the parents first time to run into adults who aren't comfortable working safely with their kids. So, who is responsible? Parents need to step up an expect to provide the assistance needed for the gap between the adults apprehension and their child's handicapped limitations. Two friends of mine became Scoutmasters just so their handicapped sons could have a fulfilling scouting experience. Barry

Yep, you stated it perfectly. It's about engaged, not advancement. I found in my own observations and poling that if a scout stays active after summer camp, the scout likely stays for several years. I believe summer camp is where everything the new scout has experience up to that time all comes together, or not. The BSA looses more youth during the first year troop experience than any other time. The problem is that difference from being told how to do just about everything by parents to relying on their independent decision making is huge. Up until they join a troop, most boys feel safe around adults. Now their safety depends on other scouts. Troops that help the scout just enough so he doesn't feel lost, but gives him enough of the independence to like making decisions have the most success. The numbers show that doing that kind of program is challenging. Barry

In most cases, leadership sessions are best used where role modeling doesn't exist for a needed skill. When our troop was young, we observed the patrols struggling to be organized on campouts. So, we scheduled a special session to work on organization. I remember the adults simulated a typical Patrol Corners meeting where the PL ran a meeting to plan menus and review camp schedule. About 2/3s way through the simulation, one of the Patrol Leaders said loudly "OH! I SEE!". And we saw a big performance change on the next camp out. The adults assumed the young PLs knew how use patrol corners for planning, but they were never taught and didn't know what they didn't know. As in most cases, it's a matter of understanding expectations. But once the skill is brought into the program, it shouldn't need to be taught again. For me, a required teaching session is a red flag that the patrol method is failing somewhere. Of course no troop program is perfect, and troop performance changes with scouts coming and going. So, there is always the need for some kind of training. But the key is identifying a need so the students have an eager desire to fix an annoyance. Barry

Interesting. Camp Alexander in Colorado with an elev 8200 ft. has a heated pool. They also do a Polar Bear swim one morning in their small lake. We typically ask the camps we visit for a free Troop time at one of the ranges. They never turned us down. It's not for advancement, just troop fun time. Barry

We are pretty much the same, but because we want scouts to actively use their independence to control their program, we don't tell them to ignore the summer camp first year program, we just ask that our Older Scouts sign off their books. That way the scouts have their independence and the troop protects the integrity of skills knowledge. Works pretty well. Barry

Why do parents believe scouts only have one summer camp to get their stinking badges. We don't need no stinking.......... If camp is fun, they will come. Swimming so the scout can attend water activities. Fun stuff for the rest of the week. Barry

Well said. Part of the problem with older scouts is that they are past the learning phase of scouting. Oh, they can learn a few tricks here and there, but basically what they are is what they became before age 14. I tell troop leaders that if they want to change the program, they need to build two programs. One for the older scouts to just hang on until they age out (if they stay that long), and the other is the new program with the young scouts. AND, training is really the wrong way to look at leadership development. The experts tell me that youth before puberty learn 90 percent of their habits by watching their role models. So, the best way to teach young scouts to be good leaders is expose them to good older scout leaders in action. Get them outdoors and let them take care of themselves. That is when the scouts start learning. I say all this so that adults start thinking about using adventure activities as the method of teaching instead of structure teaching sessions. As to the complexity of scouts not having enough experience, I agree. I think adults need to expose some of their experiences to scouts. Maybe even push them a little when the scout have some hesitancy. Scouts learn who they are by the decisions they make during their adventures. But if they aren't experiencing any adventure, they aren't making any decisions. Yes, push some adult ideas and experiences on them. Get them to think out of the box by role modeling thinking out of the box. They may grown at first, but young adults like being pushed out of their comfort zone. Just remember, once the stone starts rolling, get out of the way. More harm is done by saying "no" than by saying "show me". Barry

This is all quite right. But, we once had a series of PLCs create positions that one SPL dissolved. He said they are boring positions that scouts dread. OK, so goes the circle of life. I think what is also important is that the troop doesn't get in the way creativity and ideas. Maybe the SPL was reducing the PLC to a size manageable for him. Or maybe he just likes to be efficient. We had one high functioning scout who in 6 months time was a Venturing Crew leader, SPL, planned a trek to Montana all by himself, and aced the ACT. All in six months. The kid was incredible. He also got a full scholarship to MIT that year as well. I regret that my life was busy enough that I didn't appreciate his full potential at that time. I wish I had stayed in touch, b we had fun together, and I will always have those memories. When I look at why our troop was attractive to older scouts, I think we were flexible enough for scouts to make it theirs. I believe three out of five Adventure Crews fail in their first five years is because they don't have the flexibility to be shaped by the scouts. I found that only 30% of our scouts 14 and older scouts liked high adventure. Why did the other 2/3s hang around? According to the BSA (and many adults), high adventure is the key to keeping older scouts. My observations don't support that idea. Young adults like challenges and hanging out with like minded friends. Just camping with friends might be enough challenge for some scouts. If a scout wants more mature challenges of leadership or planning than the troop provides, where do they go? Well, there is OA and Venturing. Many youth are just looking for outlets for their dreams. I wish I could say there were easy answers. Barry

Yes, of course picking the positions that seem interesting are a good entry into responsibilities. But, as the positions get more to the troop level, they are more demanding, which seems to filter out the scouts with low ambition. So, it's never really been a problem. If a scout has the aptitude and ambition, they will keep progressing. For me, I used the tree for higher levels development of specific skills that added to rounded mature leadership of an older scout. I believe that a Patrol Leader would learn all the skills in our tree if they were willing to run for the position several times. That was not unusual when I was a scout, but it's not encouraged today because it is considered and entry level position. I would love to have lifer Patrol Leaders because they develop all the same skills as the tree in the troop level positions. I personally believe part of the reason troops struggle today is because they push their young scout through patrol leading to get them in troop level positions. Patrols don't really mature to their potential because the leaders aren't mature. Patrol leading is the most challenging leadership position in the troop and really requires the maturity of a 14 year old and older to grow from the experience. But, times have changed. One and done, then move on. Barry

Yes, but that is common in most all troops. It's not a flaw specific to electing the ASPL. You would surprised to learn that most (vast majority) of troops do not have a plan for developing leaders into higher positions like SPL. In fact, some adults call that adding to the requirements. Even the Handbooks don't really talk about it. But, the better performing troops have a suggested leadership development tree. It's only suggested, the scouts can try their own plan. Our minimum development tree is PL, Troop QM, ASPL and SPL. But I had one scout who during his third year showed me his plan to be the SPL in 18 months. I was impressed, but I wondered if he could pull it off skipping one of the responsibilities on the tree. I assumed if he had the initiative, he had the will. He did and was a really good SPL. The reason his plan was 18 months was because he was also on the swim team and couldn't put the time into the job during swim season. Did I say he earn top score on his ACT? Barry

True, there has to be a process for giving the ASPL expectations for growth (method behind the madness, so to speak). That being said, some scouts just aren't good leaders and have to take responsibility for it. I'm warmed to the thought of replacing the ASPL instead of the SPL. I really like the idea of coaching the ASPL while the SPL goes solo with the brunt of responsibility. I know, I appear to be a cheerleader for elect ASPLs. But, many of the best run Boy Run Patrol Method troops I've observed used that method of selecting their leadership. The better ones have 1 year SPLs with 6 Month ASPLs. The method seems to bring stability to the program. As I said, I wanted to give it a try, but our well performingg PLC declined. Barry

Yes, of course. But it is easier to discuss the qualities of different traits in an exclusive manner. Barry

I have seen this work in a few troops because it puts ASPL in a training position. I personally like the idea, but my PLC at the time of my proposal didn' t see the need for change. Most troops don't really use the ASPL very well, which leaves them with very little growth or skills development from the experience. But the troops that elect their ASPLs generally push them to work close or side-by-side with the SPL. We find a good SPL needs 4 to 6 months experience to become productive. A ASPL working along side with the SPL can step in with more experience and confidence and become productive in a shorter time. The other Troop positions like Quartermaster are select positions as well, so the ASPL can still have the responsibility of selecting the next generation of leaders. Barry