Stosh

Mankind has always had free-will and for that reason makes choices according to criteria either he/she sets up or those set up by others. Those that select self directed criteria usually tend to base those decisions on what "feels right" and that is a problem in that those feelings can be manipulated by the person as well as environmental factors surrounding the individual a the time. We have massive amounts of coping mechanisms to justify our actions and choices. Those that live by their own wits are very successful in creating the delusion of self-justification very well. but the world is not based on self-justification, but on corporate or community based justifications also known as moral codes. Whether these codes are divinely inspired or are just best practice results of trial and error, they seem to work in providing a certain amount of protection from other self-serving, self-justifying individuals. It is that common protection that theoretically will hold community together. The dynamics of self-interest are, however, constantly working against it by the choices made by individuals seeing to get a step up on the next guy. The choice is always yours, but the consequences is always measured by the corporate/community code of conduct or morality of those in the vicinity. If it be in one's best interest to self-justify against that code, then they run the risk of consequences in the process.

My approach to SPL is well documented in the forums, but whether anyone agrees with it or not, I do not have anywhere near the problems with the position than others seem to be experiencing. I have NEVER had a drill-sergeant attempt at the position by anyone,ever. They have always been functional and yes, a couple held multiple terms for quite some time. I found early in my scouting career that troop elected SPL's don't last very long In an adult-led program they are there only to fill in the POR and are assigned by the adults to do the adults' bidding. In my book that is truly a set-up-to-fail disservice to the boy. "Running the troop" is also a catch-all for problems. Most adults and no boys are capable to running a large group of boys without having to face major disciplinary problems. Again, the set up is to fail. Take a large troop 50 boys, 6 patrols. What boy is going to get elected to be SPL if the whole troop votes? The most popular of course. But 44 of the boys in the voting pool could care less about who the SPL is because they will have little or no contact with him during his term of office. He will be a figurehead MC at the flag ceremonies and Pet Scout of the adults. On the other hand if the Patrol Method is used and the PL's are the ones really running the show, the SPL is put into position by consensus/election of the PL's who will want him there as their #1 support person, the most senior in maturity and expertise as a PL himself. That's what makes him truly functional as SPL and with only 6 PL's to worry about, his disciplinary problems are virtually nil. He will be doing more support of the PL's doing disciplinary issues than dealing with them himself. Under those circumstances he has a chance to win without massive adult intervention and leadership. "Running the Troop" is truly a figurehead position. He goes and gets info at the SPL meetings and reports back his findings to the PL because the PL's are busy with running their patrols. He MC's the COH's and flag ceremonies because the PL's are busy with their boys. He's like the most experienced APL on steroids for the PL's and that is what will make him a successful leader. I have seen too many SPLs in the adult-led, troop-method set up that are not really leaders, but are nothing more than adult manipulated puppets filling a POR for advancement. I really don't think that's a formula for successful leadership for the boy. @@qwazse mentions the SPL position is a coasting position and it may look like that to most of the people in the troop, but behind the scenes, it is his job to make sure all of the PL's in his charge are successful. He has the tools to help them be successful and when they are successful, he is as well. When he runs the PLC, he is the political glue that holds together the different interests of different patrols. The younger boys want to go to summer camp and the older boys want to go to Philmont. The SPL works with the troop officers and adults to make it happen. He coordinates the annual calendar so everyone gets what they want in terms of program and activities. If a PL is facing a problem any any sort, he's there to back him up with advice and support. If a PL has a problem with a couple of boys in his patrol, he can't just drop everything to deal with it. He has a patrol to run. So his first call for help is his SPL that he personally help select to be there for him. Like I said, I'm not really a big fan of SPL's in a small troop, but once the troop gets up to 3+ patrols, then the SPL is a god-send. By the time one gets up to 5+ patrols, he is mandatory for the support that needs to be given to the PLs' success.

Science is limited only to identifying what God made. Science has only just begun to try and understand what God has made. It's going to be a long time before Science catches up if ever.... Even with all the proven scientific knowledge stored up out there, there are still far more "mysteries" that haven't even been addressed properly by science. The best we have is the Big Bang and now even that has been tossed under the bus. When all is said and done even science won't have the last word....

1) the boy can cook himself and then the food won't get burned. 2) I as SM can burn the food with the best of them.

Can an 11 year old register in a Pack?

Check your US Flag Code and Boy Scout Handbook. The Marine is correct. The US Flag is always the first in and first out. The only time it is last is when it comes down the flag pole. It is always the last to be collected up by the color guard.

I found that the PL's job especially the younger ones, find it difficult to focus on multi-tasking. We have 2 boys working on Scout rank, a couple more finishing up on FC, the older boys want to go to Philmont instead of summer camp, etc. With interests all over the place it puts a pretty heavy duty burden on the PL's. Whereas the NSP's single focus is orientation and working on scout skills. Interrupt that with going camping and learning how to do that which fits nicely into the advancement expectations. The older boys already know this stuff and would be more than ready to dump it all on the new kid for the sake of his advancement. If the NSP elects an older boy (which they can very well do with my program) that scout might be only a year or two older than the newbies and his skill level as a PL is limited. Well he might have just come out of the S-FC training himself and can focus on that rather than a number of other things with a mixed bag patrol. His skill level as a new PL will be limited and a single focus would work well for him. He as a fledgling PL at say 12 or 13 years of age would also have TG at his right hand to help out and Instructors to do the training. He could focus on his organizational management skills by lining up programming for the patrol with this other troop officers. It is not beyond the skill set or maturity of a 12 or 13 year old to be able to handle that. I have had 13 year olds running the popcorn sales fundraiser for the troop and doing as good a job if not better as any adult. If the NSP picks one of their own to be PL, then the TG and Instructors will need to help get him up to speed rather quickly, but I would say a focused 2-3 months would be all it would take. At that point the TG and Instructors could be handing off some of the management skill sets to he responsibility of the newbie PL. How do I know this? I took over a failing troop and grew it to 30+ scouts in 4 years. I am taking a handful of boys and putting together a troop. I do not have the luxury of having boys old enough to go to NYLT to get trained. I don't have any FC scouts to pick PL's from. I don't even have enough boys right now to form a single patrol, but I have two boys working hard on leadership skills getting ready for when the others show up. It was a real blow to spend a whole year developing a scout only to have him recruited away by another troop in the next state over. His parent and grandparent stayed with the unit in the hopes it doesn't fold. So we start again. The new Webelos PL is doing just fine. Shows up in full uniform, shows up with his book for advancement, has his organizational notebook to keep track of things needing to be done, has organized the full year calendar for this year. Made plans for next year's summer camp experience all since he came on board in March of this year. He is not my oldest boy in the troop, but he's going to be an excellent scout by the time he's 13.

I would start with the boys. If they aren't on board with the idea why make waves all over the place on the adult level? Not only that the best allies you will ever have are the boys. If they come back with "Naw, we like it the way it is with the adults doing all the work and all we have to do is sit back and have fun." then why bother? You're heart is in the right place, but what about everyone else's, especially the boys. After all it's their program.

I would think functional troop officers would be doing that. PL's and their patrols are independent enough to handle their workload. But if one's troop officers are not functional and only hold those positions to get advancement credit then there's going to be a problem. TG - overall guidance of the new boys Instructors - advancment and leadership orientation QM - instruction on how the equipment policies work Scribe - instruction on how the financial policies work But like I said, these people have to actually be functional for it to work. I would think that with everyone concerned about "older" boys working with the newbies, this would make a nice opportunity for them. But if the boys are only holding POR for advancement credit and not doing their job, then one will need to find other alternatives or force the boys into the older patrols where they will have to be babysat until they are up and running.

That's unfortunate that there are so many adult rules that hold back competent boys and postpone their leadership development according to adult. It's real interesting to note that when one starts a new troop from scratch and have only Webelos cross-overs, the boy-led leadership out of necessity doesn't need to follow these adult rules. As a matter of fact, my most promising scout was just recruited away from the troop because of his boy-led leadership skills. He's 12 years old. So now we're focusing in on leadership training for the remainder of the boys. We may fold because of lack of numbers, but we aren't going to fold because of lack of leadership. By the time my boys reach 13 and get to go to NYLT historically they come back letting everyone to follow that it's a waste of time and money.

There's nothing in my way of setting up patrols that mandates the boys have an NSP. Those that do stay together seem to get up to speed faster than those that take their chances in an already established patrol where the focus is not on getting them acclimated to the troop's organization. Yes they eventually get caught up, but I have found it takes a bit longer. When a group of Webelos came into the troop, one or two of the boys went into open spots in patrols with older brothers. Other than that, aggressive recruiting of other patrols that were short handed might have picked up another one or two. But for the most part they stayed together by choice.

People come and go quietly all the time on forums. Usually they don't make any big announcements. I'm thinking there may be a reason for that.

@@Eagle94-A1 First of all you need to read the book "The Peter Principle". Everyone rises to their lowest level of incompetence. However, one can beat the system through what the author suggests as Creative Incompetence. I use it all the time on the boys. They know the game I'm playing and appreciate it in many circumstances. The boys will follow those they think can expertly lead the best. Usually that is easily seen as anyone over 18 and drives a car. However, here we have a SM who is struggling to get out of his immobilizer when that is the #1 most perfect time to be SM. "Hey boys, we gotta get this weekend planned and I can't do it alone, need some help over here." You are creatively incompetent and you need the boys to rely on for getting things done. "Hey, John and Jimmy, I need some meals planned for the weekend and can you line up a crew to do the shopping?" "Hey, QM, everything ready for the weekend? I'd be a lot more comfortable if you gave it the once over just to ease my concerns." "Hey, Scribe, has everyone who's going paid up for the weekend?" Etc.... The last thing you want them to do is get you a cup of coffee because they will figure out really quick the little game you're playing. Yes, you're providing directive leadership at this point, but it is how the process will shift to a competent SPL away from the "Incompetent" SM. Eventually the only question the SM will ask is to the SPL when he asks, "Do the boys have everything covered?" The day may even come when the SM can correctly assume that will be a positive answer and doesn't even need to ask. At that point the troop belongs to the boys and the esprit-de-corps will begin to set in on its own.

Normally the PL works with this patrol members, the SPL works with his PL's, the SM supports the whole process through the SPL. However, with that being said, there are times when the SM deals directly with one of the scouts either at the scout's request or at the request of his PL. At those times it is a SMC. Otherwise if a scout comes to the SM for the approval of a special project isn't that a SMC? Does he need then a "real" one later on like quazse suggests? If the SM isn't comfortable with sending him off to the BOR because he isn't really ready, but they have already done the SMC, does he get a pass and try to convince the BOR he's done his requirement. He did have a SMC, just wasn't to the liking of the SM, but too bad, he has to sign it off? Lovely little can of worms here....

By the way, any scout that wants to do a special leadership project in lieu of a POR is welcome to do so. They sometimes ask me what one might be, others have just figured one out and then came and old me about it. That puts a really big onus on the boy to make sure the project is truly a worthwhile project and has to come to the SMC and PROVE it to me. If he can't, I don't sign off on it. I have only had to do that once and for the most part some of those special projects would qualify for Eagle projects if the boy wished to do all the added paperwork around it. For the most part, leadership has not been a real problem in my troops in that they start from TF on with designing and contemplating their own leadership skills and styles. By the time the scout is FC, he can handle the leadership of just about any service project or fundraiser we do without any adult intervention. Some of the TF struggle a bit at first but his PL and TG are there to step in and help mentor him. Remember the TG is there to guide on multiple levels in the troop.

I concur with @@Krampus, the SMCs in my book are the last requirement to meet with the SM to make sure all the i's are dotted and t's crossed before heading into the BOR. If the SM thinks there's a problem with it, he can work with the scout to correct the problem. Any BOR that rejects the scout's advancement or has any questions is thus answerable to ME. I will go to bat for that boy at the BOR. I have put my seal of approval on his advancement and if the BOR feels it necessary to question his progress, they also question my integrity to make sure it was done correctly. I have NEVER had a BOR ever done anything other than congratulate the boy and talk about his future in scouting. To me that's what the BOR is all about anyway.

"Gone" formerly known as BadWolf

I have been ASM in an adult led troop that mandated who is in what patrol according to what they think is the best combination. It didn't really matter, the function as a troop method unit and the patrols were in name only and ad hoc patrols were the normal course of events. When I took over as a SM of a 5 boy troop that was on the verge of collapse, the numbers grew to a bit over 30 boys and yes we had multiple patrols and they were all created by the boys themselves. The year or two difference in ages was not prescribed by the adults, they could pick anyone they wanted in the troop for their patrol. The only "expectation" was the patrol needed membership of 6-8 boys. What they came up with was the results indicated the boys picked their groupings and they came out the 1 maybe 2 year difference in ages. Like I said, I really don't think my 16 year olds really want to hang with the 11 year olds. It was merely an observation, not an adult instituted directive. And in order to answer your question more precisely, If your troop was bigger, are you saying that you would select patrols, but not vary them by more than a year or two in age? I have never selected patrols. That is the exclusive domain of the boys themselves. They just come and tell me the names in the patrol and that's it. If they change around, I expect the courtesy of know who's with what patrol, when. As I mentioned before, the troop my son will likely go to, has the NSP setup I think..... so at least there's some comfort in knowing that I won't be dealing with a disappointed son who has to deal with his best bud and him getting split off into different patrols right away after they cross over.... I'm not so sure the NSP is the best.... but at least there's that! I wonder how many cross-over boys we lose because they have been with their friends since Tiger Cubs and now they come into Boy Scouts and they can't be with them anymore. That really sucks in my estimation. If it was my kid and he wanted to quit because he couldn't be with his friends, I wouldn't stop him, but I would help him find a troop for him AND HIS FRIENDS that allow them to be together. Let's just leave it at, if one wishes to know what's the best set up for patrols... either mixed or same/similar aged, just ask the BOYS and ignore the adults. It's the boy's program, let them decide. Who's in what patrol matters more to the boys than the adults. The more the adults interfere in this process the more problems they create for themselves, especially in the area of discipline.

@@walk in the woods I'm not sure with this answer, but I'm under the belief that the Flag flies at half-mast by order of the President or the Governor of the state. That protocol is outside the parameters of the US Flag Code which is prescribed for civilians and civilians do not have the authority to fly the flag at half-mast unless directed to by President or Governor. And you are correct, some of the biggest abusers of the US Flag Code are organizations and institutions.

If anyone wishes to know what respect for the US Flag is all about, one must first know what is prescribed in the US Flag Code. That is the MINIMUM of respect. Thoughtful and meaningful adaptations built on that basis are always welcome. However, when individual and groups begin to make up their own version of the US Flag Code and parade it around as "respectful" I have a problem with it. It is clearly obvious these people have no idea what is written in the US Flag Code or they wouldn't be doing it. Ignorance of respect is obvious all over and have a more profound affect than the occasional purposeful burning of the Flag in protest. They are knowingly being disrespectful. Ignorantly being disrespectful is worse. I was physically unable to serve in the military even though I tried to enlist, but I still teach my boys that there are only two important things that need to be accomplished at every gathering of the troop. One is the opening Flag ceremony and the other is the closing. I have seen a lot of errors from my boys as they learn the process of respect, but I have never doubted their sincerity of trying to do it the best they are able.

I might be errant in my beliefs and passion for some piece of cloth that only symbolizes something to a few out there, but every time I see it, especially in a scouting setting, I am reminded back 45 years to two of my scouting buddies that didn't make it home from Vietnam. Yeah, I tend to get a little wound up when thoughtless comments or activities are done in my arena of awareness. My scouts talked about the way the flags were treated at summer camp last summer as recently as ... yesterday's meeting.

@@pargolf44067 not to worry, your comments were not the "inspiration" for that posting.

As far as forums go, this one is by far the most civil of any I have ever been on and that's nice. That doesn't mean I haven't locked horns with others here and there, but there wouldn't be much value in a forum where everyone thought the same way. We all have diverse backgrounds and all reside in different situations. The dynamics of our units are as diverse as we all here are. This is a good thing. I'm thinking that at one point or another I've probably rubbed just about everyone the wrong way at one time or another over the past 10 years. I've had my feathers ruffled and for the sake of being polite there are a few on the forum I no longer interact with. There is an "ignore" button for such occasions. But there comes a time when certain dynamics come together that makes it feel like the deck is stacked against oneself and then it's time to move on to more productive endeavors. Bob White simply disappeared. Beavah is gone too. Lost a couple recently, and these were respected key players. We are all volunteers on this forum and dealing with volunteers is far different than hanging out with friends, employment and other groupings in society. One of the reasons people volunteer is because they truly believe they have something to offer the situation. If that belief is lost, they're gone. We make fun of some of the "good ol' boys" clubs in our areas of the world, but for some reason or another they don't seem to hang around this forum for very long. The "good ol' boys" of the forum are the Bob Whites, the Beavahs, Old Grey Eagle and others who have a real passion for scouting. Maybe once they are convinced that the tenor of that passion is passe and no longer needed, that speaks volumes of the value of their expertise as well. Yeah, I promote boy-led, patrol-method ad nauseum some of the time.... no, lets say most of the time. and I may come on strong with the GBB training over what's put out there today, but there are those out there that need to know what the world of Scouting was like 50 years ago. Yeah, I walked 2 miles to troop meetings, in the snow, uphill both ways, too. But from those bits of information one can glean little nuggets of information that may rejuvenate a dying program out there somewhere in the world. If it becomes obvious that this forum doesn't want that information any longer, I too will move on down the trail as well.

First of all the "NSP" is kind of a orientation grouping where the new guys get to hang together as they absorb "what the H...L is going on here. This ain't WEBELOS anymore!" Like any other group, they can be picked up by an existing patrol if that patrol chooses them, i.e. an older brother in an established patrol, etc. The NSP has a TG to help them get oriented and this person is their first mentor and is usually an "older" scout looking for a POR. I have had one experience where the Webelos Den Chief switched over to TG when the boys crossed over. No DL, and it was quite interesting to see it work itself out. Instructors also are older boys looking for PORs and they will work with the new boys. Both those positions are not adult directed, they are helping because they need a POR and are willing to take on the responsibility. Of course the NSP can also incorporate older boys into it! If there is a list of boys needing POR, they might want to consider selecting one of them to be their PL, too. It's up to the boys what they want to do. In some respects this process is quite fluid. the older boy PL might be there for only the 6 month tenure and then go off to another patrol, or he might stay on if he enjoyed it. Everyone decides for themselves what they want, but I have found they tend to clump together for reasons known only to themselves and it seems to be a bit age based with POR exceptions here and there as the boys work out what's best for them. I also allow the boys to make changes in the patrol structures at any time they request it. If a PL isn't working out they can dump him in a heartbeat and have a new one up and running in an hour. If one needs a 6 month POR, they had better be ready to do the job for the full 6 months or they can be left standing at the altar overnight. Of course if a NSP youth takes on PL of the NSP, he could very well serve as PL of that group until he ages out at 18, too. I don't care one way or the other. The boys are the ones that care, therefore they should be the ones deciding.