Stosh

Your CC needs to be trained in the policies of the BSA. As a DL I did lots of stuff with other dens that were not part of the Pack meetings. The Webelos were always taking the Bears on a hike or something. The part of the whole process that irks me the most is when people quote false information to squash an attempt to make it fun for the boys. I would really love to know what their agenda is all about. And a good dosage of MYOB to the CC on this one. Maybe a pass given to a CM who doesn't know, but two DL's can plan den meetings in the same place at the same time with no problem. Stosh

To me this is the #1 problem with adult-led, troop-method programs. Any initiative, adventure, etc. the boys want to try out and squashed by some adult along the way. Eventually after the boys beat their heads against the wall long enough they either 1) quit out-right or 2) focus solely on their Eagle and then quit. In a boy-led, patrol-method, the boys should be deciding on who's in what patrol and what emphasis that patrol wants to take. I don't think that's going to happen for you anytime soon. My boys would never ask me to redefine patrols, who's going to be in a patrol, or anything else that is the patrol's responsibility to decide. Unless it's an issue of safety, looking and acting like a scout or having fun, no adult is allowed to interfere. Looks like you boys are not having fun, breaking the rules in my troop. My advice to you: Fix it. Unfortunately that's not the advice you're going to get from your SM. So, then, you feel like you're overwhelmed? not going to accomplish what you want to in scouts? Let me guess, it has nothing to do with girls, cars or sports, right? There is a rule in scouting that scouting should be fun. You need to let your SM know he's not following the program because you and your buddies are not having fun. Put together a reasonable proposal that indicates that as long as the boys are safe, doing scouting stuff, and having fun you'd like to give it a try. If not, you need to find a troop with a SM that agrees to that because that's what scouting is all about. Boy-led? Yesterday I got a call from my QM scout, he organized a group of boys to head out to do some shoveling, a blizzard was on it's way. They made $40 for their efforts and figure to buy two new stoves with it. They finished up in time to get to a late afternoon Webelos den meeting and assist their adults with instruction on the Readyman pin. That was organized by the OA Rep boy. Tonight is the regular meeting. As SM, I'm afraid if I tried to stand in the way of my boys, I'd get run over! Your mileage may vary Stosh

Mark my words... the day is coming when parents will be held accountable for neglect if they leave their children outside for more than 15 minutes at a time. Stosh

Platypus96, Taking into consideration your concerns of other issues in your troop, here's my suggestions and criteria for making them. It sounds like you have an adult-led program. No problem you can still work within it. Bigger challenge, and maybe bigger reward. You have only three boys in your patrol. Most literature suggests 6-8 boys in a patrol so you are too small to be effective. Now, you can do a couple of things. 1) You can cherry pick all the good scouts out of all the other patrols to become Real Boy Scouts, but I'm thinking your SM won't be interested in leaving leadership voids in all the other patrols. I'm thinking that's not going to fly. 2) You can take on a group of newbies to bring them up to the standards of real Boy Scouts you have identified. Nice challenge, but your patrol might have problems with age limits on some activities. Patrol method expects the all-for-one, one-for-all attitude and as older boys you may have to forgo some activities to show solidarity of your patrol buddies. If you take on relatively younger boys, 14-15 FC/Star scouts, that's different, the ages won't hold you back on the big activities. 3) My suggestion would be: You can also merge into another existing patrol. With only three of you, explain to the SM that there's always a buddy problem with three boys and by merging with another patrol of 5 you have your quorum of scouts for a full patrol. Have YOUR PL step down, take another POR if he needs one. Take on their name and yell, and "lead" from the backseat, as I tell my boys. Help, guide, mentor the PL/APL team to become Real Boy Scouts. Make suggestions, have fun. If you're the older boys, relative to those of that patrol, they will look up to you and naturally consider your suggestions on improvement. Be careful not to take over, help the PL/APL be the leadership team! Be there to show them that getting water, cleaning up, sweeping out the latrine, etc. is really the best part and most fun of the activity. The three of you always be the first to volunteer for the worst jobs (you're going to get stuck with it anyway, might as well have some fun with it). They'll all know it's a joke, but by all laughing together you'll get the job done. Eventually, each of you grabs a different patrol member, announce that he's your new latrine cleaning buddy and the two of you are best there is and no one dare challenge you. Then each of you others grab a new buddy and make a game out of the "argument" of which team is better!. Teach the others that if they want to get in on the fun, they had better roll up their sleeves and participate. Make everything a game that's fun, but always teaches something along the way. The name of the game is to be effective as a patrol and have fun. No SM, even if he's running an adult-led program is going to yell at scouts for getting the work done and having too much fun in the process. By putting together a patrol of effective scouts, not only will you be setting the example of excellence in your patrol, your patrol will eventually set the example of excellence in the troop. Your mileage may vary, Stosh(This message has been edited by jblake47)

I took WB 15+ years ago. Don't remember much about it, had a good time, met some nice people (I was just getting back into scouting), totally enjoyed doing my ticket (Webelos transition), still wear the beads. You couldn't pay me enough to repeat the program with the new 21st Century program. From what I have seen and heard from participants, it's probably a good thing I won't. I thought it rather strange this year the new Council Training Chairman didn't seem to want the "old guard" doing the outdoor leader training and has come around and asked some of us old last century guys to teach instead. I haven't been on training staff since I was a SM on Fundamentals. I guess I'm back in the saddle again. Your mileage may vary, Stosh

I suppose it all depends on where one lives as to what one could recommend. Our council camp has winter quarters and the Boy Scouts host Webelos boys to introduce them to the nuances of the fine art of sledding. Our camp has three nice sledding hills, Hamburger Hill, Killer Mountain and Suicide. All with well-earned reputations. Most of those plastic sleds do not return home in one piece, but the boys usually do. So far the greatest number of injuries have come from the older "boys" trying to relive their youth with their sons. A good snowball fight isn't discouraged. Snow fort building competition. A game of kick-ball is nice. What we normally do for a winter outing in Wisconsin is kick them out the door in dry clothes and tell them to come back when the stink's been blown off. We have snow, remember? That white stuff that falls from the sky when you look out the computer room window! Your mileage may vary, Stosh

As SM I go to as many activities as I can make. The rest are covered by my ASM's, that's why I have ASM's. Just like APL, he takes over when the PL isn't there. Duh! Sometimes my boys plan activities when it doesn't fit my schedule. I did 2 weeks of Jambo and 1 week of summer camp. That's all my vacation for the year. The boys also did a 4 day back pack trip Wednesday -> Saturday. There was no way I was going to take off work without pay to go with the boys. I had an ASM and his wife that went with the boys, no problem. He's a school teacher and had the summer off. Some of this stuff is common sense, but it sounds to me from the very first posting that there are control issues being bantered around in T&S's troop. When everyone runs around looking for something in writing, it usually means something's afoul. Stosh

GrubMaster makes menu, directs shopping, and cooks the weekend. The rest of the patrol assists as needed. GrubMaster is not a permanent position, it can change from one campout to the next. Your mileage may vary. Stosh

Special projects are written in the requirements, yet I know of some SM's who don't adhere to that. My CC reads and understands the requirements, does orientation with new BOR members to make sure they understand and then proceeds. There are SM's who insist that only scouts and scouters can work on an Eagle project and they have to be in uniform when they are doing it, too. the was to gently poke at them if they're lurking about. Your mileage may vary. Stosh

The one CM who's bringing his Webelos boys over thought about a third troop, but we meet in a American Legion hall that can accommodate 150+ people. We have plenty of room. We could grow to 75 scouts and still have space for them to bounce off of walls. They decided to take a wait and see and allow our troop a chance to make good with their boys. If they wanted to start another troop, we'd just fold and go over there. No difference except I'd be free to go elsewhere closer to where I live and most of the trained leadership I have would not continue on as well. Your mileage may vary. Stosh

"So you're in a start-up (or re-start) situation?" Yep. I took over because the troop was about to fold. Troop is about 60 years old, but didn't have effective leadership for the 10 years before I took over. Former SM burned out trying to run an adult-led program with out help from all but a couple of parents. "What happened to your recruitin' this year? Startups are always hard, and the recruitin' piece can be the hardest." Recruiting is difficult because the competitive troop (where I came from) is very adult led and parents prefer it for their boys. We are right in town and parents drive right past our troop to attend 11 miles away in the country. While we retain almost all of our boys, they lose more than we have each year. In comparison of involvement in activities we are about the same. When we attend a camporee, however, our attendance is about 90% whereas theirs hovers around the 30-40% levels. We had 11 of 12 boys and 2 adults at the last camporee, they had 14 of about 40 and 8 adults. This year we put out the same number of Eagles as they did. They had about 20-25% of their boys attend Jamboree, we had 50%. Even with half our boys going to Jambo, 100% of them attended summer camp AND did a 4-day backpack trip they organized on their own and went on. We had several boys join our troop because their buddies were involved with us, only to have them go to the other troop because their older brothers were out there. It was a parent's decision, not the boys. We have 3 feeder packs which last year crossed over 40+ boys all of which went to the other troop. Out of that I believe they retained maybe one patrol of 8-10 boys. It was nothing to loose 75% of the boys their first year while I was in that troop. They didn't have enough adults to handle that many boys and they have a meeting room which only holds about 20 boys at a time. They have to have their recruiting open-house outside because the building is too small to have the bulk of them indoors. It's difficult for 12 year old boys to compete with adults with 20+ years experience in scouting. As for my BOR personnel and training? CC is parent of one of the boys (older one is Eagle, younger one Star in the troop (Chaplain's Aide)), totally on-board with the boy-led program. MC's consist of former SM (WB trained) and his wife (former CC), another former SM, now treasurer (WB Trained), and 3 parents. My staff is ASM #1) a former SM moved in from a different troop out-of-state, (Eagle with palms), and ASM #2) WB trained, working on ticket (Eagle). I'm thinking my troop doesn't lack for trained adults. The reference I used with the was to indicate that there are those out there that believe unless a boy is elected/assigned a POR and wears the patch, he can't get credit for advancement, i.e. my former troop. One of the CM's from the feeder packs told me the reason why parents don't want their boys to join my troop is because it's too small, poorly run, and doesn't provide enough programs/activities for the boys. He's been watching us for a year now, and has indicated his Webelos cross-overs will be coming over to our troop because he likes what he sees and his son is one of the Webelos. Most parents don't look seriously at a troop, they only look at the surface impressions and draw conclusions from that. Your mileage may vary. Stosh

Training my BOR is not my problem. That's what I have a CC for. My Committee does a very good job with being all trained and printed criteria handed out to all participants on how to run BOR's at every BOR. Non-Committee members are given an orientation to BOR's before they can sit in on them. The smiley face at the end of the sentence does have significance. "Huh? You're a one-patrol troop, eh? Your 12-year-old is in a mixed-age patrol by definition." Maybe it would be good to give a definition of what you mean by mixed-aged when all are the same age except one new guy doesn't really fit. They don't all need to have the same birthday to be a same-aged patrol. Hmmmm. Maybe my 31 year old Life scout makes it a mixed-aged patrol. Or maybe my new boy TF is included? Nope, he's gone and done his leadership thingy by being a DC. Eagle Scout? Age 16 and comes to meetings and sits in the corner doing homework, doesn't like to camp. He's there because his dad's an ASM and expects him to be there. Basically the troop is one grade level with the exception of a couple of people. Neither of which really fit in, but are politely accommodated. "Da real issue is that in a small troop, young fellows might get opportunities for a troop position like popcorn guy that would be taken by older scouts in a larger troop." I don't think so because over and over again the Council refused to work with the boy who constantly had to run out to the car and have his mom come in and sign for things, listen to explanations, etc. all of which the boy did and mom went back to the car and said, I hope you got all that, I didn't understand a word he said. "The trick in a bigger troop is tryin' to maintain the mixed-age collaborative experience you've got goin' now on a bigger scale." No, the trick is to split the troop into two patrols at the boy's discretion and let them work in two independent operations, each with their own set of goals and interests. Efforts to expand a mixed-age collaborative experience is to turn the troop into a troop-method program. "I'm with Eagledad. Train your BORs." see above Note the

In our temporarily small troop, one patrol moving on to two shortly, the PL makes a duty roster, posts it per the requirements and then everyone promptly ignores it for the activity. With leadership being shared, rotated, and assumed by all, if the GrubMaster yells out, "Need some water!", a couple of boys grab the water container and head out for the pump. Usually when they return, they fill pots for the GrubMaster knowing that's why he needed water. They have been GrubMasters so they know the routine. So do the duties rotate? Sure, the next activity will be headed up by a different scout who will function as a PL for the activity. This way when it is necessary to get water and no one helps, he has a chance to set the record straight on his outing. I bust my butt for the GrubMaster this weekend because next weekend he'll bust his butt for me when I'm GrubMaster. If he doesn't he'll hear about it. I guess it's kind of a long term roster idea that spans a number of activities, not just the one. The PL usually has to "enforce" some sort of duty roster as needed because everyone wants to cook all the time, but not clean up. One of the big incentives for the boys to take on an activity is that they get to direct the activities. If one doesn't like fetching water all the time, then volunteer to organize the next activity and assign yourself a plum job. Yes, we have a couple of handicapped boys that can't fulfill the leadership positions, but the boys recognize this and adjust for them. I have a 31 year old scout working on his Eagle who operates on about a 10 year-old level. It's going to take him a long time to get that put together so the boys don't stack a lot of extra responsibility on him at any given time. We also have an autistic boy that struggles with focus and can't follow through so he does end up with a lot of short-term duties on activities. The boys cut him slack on that as well. They do expect him to put up his own tent and keep his gear together and then after that he gets assigned little duties here and there throughout the activity. So, do I make up a roster and expect these boys to be the GrubMasters? Or maybe the GrupMaster asks him to come help out and some of the other boys can fetch the water this time around. With my boys all trained in all the positions, the need for duty rosters is rather minimal. The more they rotate, the more they understand the responsibilities of each position. Only my Chaplain's Aide, QM, and OA Rep actually wear POR patches. The rest rotate things around pretty much. All I expect out of the boys is that when they go into their BOR for rank, they have a ton of examples to brag about of how they showed leadership in the past 6 months. It's pretty hard to turn a boy down that waltzes into his BOR and lets the Committee know that there is no POR patch for Popcorn Chairman, but he organized the whole project, held 8 show and sells with sign-up rosters for each one in various places throughout the community, photocopies of all the boy's personal selling, finances completed on time, orders delivered, prizes acquired and presented, and a report for the Committee that states that the troop raised 3 times as much money this year than last, etc. Not bad for a 12 year old scout. Yeah, right, the BOR looks at the book and says, sorry, you need a patch to get credit.... (Falls under the special project section approved by SM so he's safe!) I often wonder how many 12 year-old young scouts get this kind of opportunity in a mixed-age patrol. Your mileage may vary. Stosh

I had posted earlier that the PL OR TG could do well with the NSP, but I also added that the QM would work with the boys as would all other boys given the responsibility for troop POR. There would be a lot of hero-mentoring going on, BUT the older boys would be assisting the boys as they took on leadership opportunities and at least had a chance to try it out. Being in a mixed patrol means those boys would not have an opportunity to try out any leadership until they were well into the program and the older boys aged out leaving leadership voids. By then it is a little late to learn. They should have been learning all along. As long as the NSP is all under FC rank, why would anyone ever consider putting them out in the field without adults, 300' away from any assistance, and without the tools and experience to even have a remote chance of success. This is why a TG or PL would be necessary to support their efforts and help them develop skills to be able to do just that. So you have this group out on their first campout, the SPL has given them a pep talk, the QM has made sure they have the right equipment, and they head out. They reach camp and the PL says to his newbie APL, "If you were the patrol leader what would be the first thing you need to do?" Okay, then lets get the boys together and do it. Then the PL says, "Okay, what's next?" Okay, then lets get the boys together and do it. etc. I would have the TG there to give assistance to the process and buddy with the PL to make sure they have two-deep mature scouts working with the boys. The PL rotates the boys through the APL position so as to give each one of them a taste of what is necessary to run the patrol. No, they don't run the patrol, but they have two good older boys to refer to and get assistance when they run afoul. By the time they're FC they have some inkling about what it takes to run a patrol. Otherwise, they become champion water-boys and experts in doing dishes, and haven't a clue what it takes to run more than a trip to the pump let alone a patrol as a whole. Whereas they all get a chance to tote water, they also get a chance to run the patrol with the guidance of the two older boys. It's just a more fair playing field for the nurturing of real leadership in my book. I have a TF scout right now doing an excellent job as DC. He's he right age, crossed over just before last summer. He's progressing through the ranks, he's holding his own even at age 11. I have another boy, just turned 12, fresh out of the orientation period that wants to take on Instructor, another is OA Rep, etc. They have an idea of what the job entails even though they have all gone through the BSA TLT program. However, they all want to try and they all have an opportunity to give it their best shot. That wouldn't happen in a structured mixed patrol where for the next six months any opportunities that come along are all going to the older boys. I had a FC scout line up the entire Summer Camp logistics, did a nice job and he doubles as the QM for the troop. When it came time to designate an SPL to go to the Camp's SPL meeting, he just assumed that role and no one said a thing about him not being elected and/or vetted by the SM. Another FC scout took on "Popcorn Chairman" and this year we grossed 3 times as much popcorn sales than we did last year. Taking ownership of the process meant he needed to take responsibility and eventual leadership. Another of my boys who asked for OA Rep knows who's eligible for membership, those that were short, he prodded them on to get their requirements finished and has lined up the OA presentation and elections already for this year. No one ever asked him to do any of that. Another boy has a devotion every meeting at opening flags and a closing prayer at closing flags. No one ever asked him if he wanted to be Chaplain's Aide. One boy always gets there early and gathers everyone up, does a quick uniform inspection, assigns flags and runs the flag ceremony. Our Christmas party this year was organized, rooms reserved, etc. was set up by the OA Rep. Swim outing with BSA swim test was organized by the QM, and the Halloween Haunted House activity was set up by the Popcorn Chairman. At opening flags, with a new opportunity coming our way, I ask, "Who wants to take point on this project?" Normally about half the hands in the group go up! Strange thing about this whole process is that except for the TF scout that came in this year and is a DC in a wolf den, and last year's Eagle that doesn't participate much anymore, the boys are ALL THE SAME AGE!, a group that came in from a Webelos cross-over 2 years ago. They are all second year scouts. I have often wondered whether these boys would have accomplished as much growth and development if there had been a few older scouts influencing their enthusiasm. I wonder if any of these boys would have ever had the opportunity to take the lead on anything if they relied on older boys (or adults) all the time to do it for them. Oh, the OA Rep scout has signed the troop up for Philmont in two years. The council contingents were already taken for next summer. My biggest problem with this whole system? Sometimes I get left out of the loop and they forget to ask SM permission before they take off on one of their activities, like a backpack trip they planned last summer and they had to scramble to get two adults to go along at the last minute. The ASM and his wife that accompanied them camped off by themselves and had a great weekend while the boys did their own thing in the woods. As a person who believes in equal opportunity for the boys, one doesn't always get that with a mixed patrol. Your mileage may vary. Stosh

When I was in your shoes a few years back, I left the troop, found one that wanted to make use of a SM who wanted goals similar to mine and I've been a lot happier ever since. I miss the boys, but I don't miss the hassles. Stosh

With an older boy at the helm (PL) of the NSP, he can feel free to rotate the boys through the APL position to accomplish the same effect and still mentor and guide each of them through the formative time. TG could be on hand to do assist with that process as well. This way one has boys working with the NSP directly rather than adults who tend to take over and run the show in the NSP. The adults seem to focus more on advancement than on leadership development because they are leading and it isn't necessary for the boys to do any real leadership at that age. This way, by the time they are FC scouts they have no idea what leadership is and not a problem, the older boys in the troop will show them the ropes, and before you know it, you have 13-15 year old boys with no leadership experience. But not to worry, the adults have carried that load all along for the boys. Stosh

Proud Eagle, some good points you bring up. With the pre-planning in advance kind of thing, don't you think the boys ought to be able to re-arrange their patrols as they see fit before the event rather than after they get there? If you have a half a patrol that is super active and wanting to do all kinds of scout things and the other half dragging their feet, why not take the "super" scouts from the patrol, let them form a new patrol and they can plan out all the HA events they so desire without having half their patrol throw a wet blanket on it. The semi-active remainders, go into their own patrol where they don't have to compete with the super scouts and can have leadership development without competition. Younger boys that are marginal can step up and take on PL when they don't have to compete with 2-3 super scouts in their patrol. After all, the disenfranchised semi-active scouts aren't going to show up anyway and the super scouts are going to be merged into an ad hoc patrol for the event anyway. I'm thinking that some of the bored scouts may be inclined step up and be more encouraged to try on the mantle of leadership in circumstances such as this. This way, the scout that sees himself as sludge on the bottom rungs of the patrol caste find that the "top" of the pile is not out of reach anymore. And what's to say that the super scouts are all chomping at the bit to get to Philmont, and the rest would be happy to take a leisurely float canoe trip down the river instead. Maybe the boys that can't afford Philmont may find enjoyment in doing less expensive trips instead. There are a lot of factors that indicate that patrols of like-minded boys may fair better than an arbitrary mix-and-match option that they might be facing. Yep, been to Philmont, it was great, but at my age, the leisurely float sounds like just as much fun. I don't need to do winter survival for the umpteenth time, but going out and hanging out for the weekend and doing some fishing, swimming, and short day hikes still is a great way for boys to hang out with their buddies. Your mileage may vary. Stosh

AvidSM, I don't think anyone is suggesting that the NSP's, or any patrol for that matter, be left in a void to fend for themselves. But just because a group is in a NSP doesn't mean there is not going to be interaction between them and other boys in the troop. The TG will be most primary contact with the group. An older boy can be put into the PL position with the purpose of rotating APL's from the young boys to teach leadership along with the advancement requirements. The QM will assist the boys in getting their gear together for their campouts, the Scribe will help them with record keeping and advancement information, the Instructors will come in and teach scout skills, etc. All these interactions allow for the young boys to be assisted and helped by the older boys, boys that are specifically identified in roles that reflect their knowledge, skill and maturity. Did I mention any adults? No, they are not needed to babysit the NSP. I see the advantage of the NSP as a focused group with older boys coming in and giving leadership to them until they can develop leadership on their own. If the older boys are only wearing a patch, obviously they are not going to be very useful to the new boys. But by accepting a POR they are saying they are willing to give their time and talent to the younger boys to get them up to speed. They can then return back to their own patrol responsibilities and let the young boys absorb the the information and try it out without the older boys interfering or turning them into newbie slaves in a mixed patrol. It's bad enough being the new kid on the block without having to leave your buddies and take on the grunt work of the patrol. Like anyone else, I want to hang with people who are in the same boat with me, at least it allows me an even playing field to operate out of. I guess I don't want to be fetching water for a year until the new guys come along and I can dump that important leadership development on to the next guy. I like the boys all having an equal opportunity in their own patrol, with support and assistance from the older boys as needed and even requested on occasion. If they have a good older boy PL, a good TG and interesting Instructors, they will get to know who in the troop is there to help and will find their orientation a good experience. If you get put into a patrol that you don't know anyone, maybe someone will help, but if they don't and if I can't get out of that patrol, it's just a few steps away to getting out of the troop. Your mileage may vary. Stosh

CNYScouter, Could it possibly be the fact that the resuffling of patrols prior to Jambo have something to do with it? They had their cliques (patrols) and now they didn't. One has the Jambo and the not Jambo groups. All new dynamics being played out and with the attrition rate you experienced, maybe it didn't set well with the boys. However, on a smaller scale isn't this what a lot of troops do on a regular basis. They show up at camporee with half-sized patrols, force them together to get some numbers and then the boys aren't happy. Why not just leave them alone and let them feel the pinch and when it hurts enough, they'll apply the peer pressure on their buddies to show up. Boomerscout has maybe a fairly good solution, but I would have put the questionnaire out to the boys PRIOR to the shuffling. Okay, we have some boys going to Jambo, they are going to focus their time and energy on that, what do the rest of you who aren't going want to do instead? Philmont?, BWCA?, something of their own choosing???? Yes, it will split the focus on the troop and impose a lot of hassles to run two troops within a troop for a while, but at least you won't be losing them. Your mileage may vary. Stosh

So this then begs the question of when does a NSP cease being a NSP and begins to operate as a regular patrol? Does it have to be broken up to do this? What about the boys that have been in scouts with their buddies since Tigers, go through AOL, come into the troop only to be split up and farmed out. Could this have anything to do with the huge attrition that the first year boys face? Yeah, ideally it would be great to rub elbows with the big dogs of the troop once in a while, but one will still most likely want to be with his buddies over the long-haul. So the boys come from Cubs. They stay together for the first year and all obtain FC. Okay why break them up? They are all FC scouts and should be able to function properly as a regular patrol. TG goes back to doing his thing, the boys may or may not have liked their older boy PL assigned for the transition, so he can either stay or leave, but the boys now select their own PL and they are no longer a NSP, but a regular patrol. This could happen at any time in the process. 6 months, 9 months, 12 months, no problem. I just love it when we teach the boys TF requirement where they are to learn their patrol name and yell, bond as a team, hang with their buddies and then in 6 months scatter them throughout the troop. Okay, do away with the NSP and move them into regular patrols from the git-go. Out of the 8 buddies that crossed over with you, you can pick only one to go to to hang with people you may or may not know from Adam. There's an incentive there to stay with scouting? Instead of having a NSP, just call it something else, like the Owls, or the Wolves, or the Beavers, and let them be a patrol, except for the first few months have heavy duty orientation, interaction with the older boys in the troop and given a chance to bond and stay together as a patrol of buddies. Let them pick a TG of their choosing to help them. If they need a PL to show them the ropes, let them pick one from the troop. Whatever it takes to make it happen for the new guys, just don't scatter them to the wind and expect them to make new friends before they decide to quit. Beavah, It was an example for reference. So I'll put it in terms of scouting... The CC doesn't need to know what Johnny is doing in the patrol, unless it's her own kid or the kid that punched her kid. On the other hand the PL needs to know what Johnny and all the members of his patrol are up to. The SPL needs to be handy to the PL to help him when he needs it. The SM needs to be handy to the SPL to help him when he needs it. The CC/Committee needs to be handy to the SM to help him when he needs it. I'll try to stick with scouting terms that people all seem to have defined a hundred different ways to try and make myself clear in the future. Your mileage may vary. Stosh

Beavah, Recognizing the natural tendencies of the youth and accommodating it is necessary to focus the boys' attention on the tasks at hand. Thus the goal of a NSP is not the same goal as the VP groups. However, it is necessary to work leadership into the process and the only way one is going to do that is to have the older scouts have meaningful contact with the boys. That's a given of the BSA's leadership program emphasis. One can still have such contact if the PL of the NSP is an experienced scout who in fact makes a commitment to the goals necessary to the NSP. That means for a period of time he lays aside his goals for HA, etc. and focuses his leadership attention on the goals of the NSP, i.e. advancement, orientation, etc. A TG would also need to make such a commitment. It doesn't, however, change the goal of the VP to have one or two of the boys step out of their patrol roles on a temporary basis to do such commitments. The disruption in the programs and goals of the VP are far less affected. This will have a major impact on the NSP to have mature boys leading them and have minimal impact on the VP. However, if all the patrols took on one or two of the new boys, then all the patrols would have been impacted by the introduction of new boys. The goals of all the patrols will need to be adjusted and would necessitate the watering down of the program for the VP to accommodate the needs of the new boys. People who are doing two or three things at a time are not as effective as focusing on just one goal at a time. It would also have an impact on HA activities whereas all the patrols would need to break off the new boys when the activity happens to make it work. Age limits set by come of these activities mandates it. You're not yet 13, so you need to stay home. So you have all the new boys staying at home doing nothing. But if they were a patrol of their own, they could be doing an alternative scout activity at the same time and won't be sitting at home feeling left out. I just feel that the "segregation" of the boys by their goals (naturally falling on or hear the ages of the boys) will have less impact on the total operation of the troop if it only affected individuals in the troop and not entire patrols. It can work out through the PLC that maybe a VP might take on an occasional activity whereas they interact on the beheft of the NSP, such as taking them under their wing to get them up and running for the next camporee. Teaching them the necessary skills would be a great way to get the two patrols to interact and would be by definition temporary and not have a long term affect on the operations of the VP. Individuals from the VP could be doing this especially in the short run as well. John might be the Instructor who regularly helps with the NSP, but still keeps his duties and responsibilities in the VP. Ideally the Troop Officers' Corps "patrol" (TOC) would be doing this on a regular basis, providing TG, and instructors, while still maintaining their focus on helping out the entire troop, not just the NSP's. By virtue of their ages, maybe the VP could work out the details of the HA activity and invite the TOC to go along as their guests. That way you also have meaningful interaction between the older boy patrols, too. Those individual boys with leadership focus on the younger boys would still be expected to maintain their focus in their home patrols and would be available for common camping, HA opportunities, and the such. One maintains each patrol with it's goals intact without annually introducing new blood to continually drive the goals towards helping out the new guys all the time. It doesn't preclude it if the patrol desires this, but if a VP decides that this year they want to go to Philmont, BWCA or some other HA activity, they not be "strapped" with doing double duty of getting that organized AND trying to help young boys get through FC who will still be too young to go as a patrol with them anyway. Maybe by pure definition I need to be using the term "focus group" to indicate the patrol's goal setting rather than ages. When I say "segregated" patrols it is more on the basis of interest rather than saying all the 11 year-olds in one patrol, 12 year-olds in the next, etc. I'm under the standard that patrols with multiple goals do not function as well as those that have only one or two they are working on at any one time. This is of course, as I stated already, predicated on the principle that the individual scout may in fact have multiple goals, but it would be by choice, rather than having an entire group need to be making such choices. Far less disruption if Johnny goes and does occasional Instructor duties with the NSP and still have him available for the Philmont trip next summer. A good leader should be able to individually juggle a couple extra goals/duties along the way. However, not everyone in the patrol is affected and so you have quality interaction rather than half the patrol onboard with the NSP activity and the other half standing around with their hands in their pockets wasting time or causing disruptions. Your mileage may vary. Stosh

It is always interesting how everyone dances around everyone else's schedule, but no one else dances around scouts. In the end the boy will choose by interest level, how to prioritize his activities. He's in school band and the band director says he has to be at a concert the weekend you had an outing? But it's school, he has to be there for the band! Of course not! I know a ton of kids who went through school and never took band. Well Johnny is on the basketball team and they have playoffs on camporee weekend. Coach won't let him off. Too bad Scouts! Nope, There were more kids that did NOT play basketball in my school than did. All of these are Humpty Dumpty solutions to an already done deal. Maybe scouting should have gotten it's hand in the game BEFORE the others came along. Oh?! We've been in the game since first grade? Obviously we have done a poor job and competitive activities have drawn our numbers away. Well, in the prioritizing scheme of things, does one have a program good enough to compete? One or two boys will be left behind to anchor the patrol. Is it because they have nothing else to do that weekend? or is it because they are hooked on Scouting. Sure there are going to be a few things that get in the way, but for the most part my boys are doing things that they choose to do and set the level of competition accordingly. Why would the boys schedule a big canoe outing on the weekend of the big band concert? They don't. Adults do, however, unless the look at a ton of calendars accordingly and then take all the left over opportunities where there is no competition. It's not an issue of scheduling conflicts, it's an issue of the boys prioritizing their interests. Get in the game and have the boys design activities that they feel are important to rank higher on their to-do list than other things out there. Same-old, same-old doesn't cut it in today's competitive atmosphere. Your mileage may vary. Stosh

Two contingents of Jambo participants, a mix of ages, a mix of troops, a mix of programs. I said to the boys, divide yourself up into 4 patrols. Strange, but they naturally divided themselves up pretty much by age. Of course the contingent SM wouldn't go for that so he broke them up into mixed patrols. There were no magnanimous mentor leaders, they stuck the young boys with the poorer jobs, made them do the work and basically hung out with each other anyway. Now the group only had to tolerate each other for the two weeks of Jambo. They did not meld as a group because there was no commonality, and with longevity in the process everyone could survive 2 weeks. Maybe time would have resolved some of the issues, but from evidence of most troop membership rosters, they seem to indicate the common resolution is a general use of the exit door. It's not just Scouts, youth of this age pretty much do it regardless of the program. They have been well indoctrinated into caste levels of age since they were in kindergarten. It isn't college that the playing field begins to level off as it is in the adult world. It only takes about a week of school to know who all's in what class and then they further break it down into all their little cliques (i.e. non-mixed patrols) BP talked about this gang mentality, it hasn't really changed much in the past 100 years. If you have trouble wrapping your mind around this. Imagine how you would react if a senior boy wanted to date your freshman daughter. Nope, not gonna happen. But if your 25 year old daughter brought home a man who was 28, you wouldn't even bother with the math. Or maybe your 5th grade son is hanging out with a bunch of 8th graders in school? Same type of concern comes to mind. So, then what's the big deal with putting my 5th grade son with a bunch of high school juniors and seniors to mentor him in the ways of the world. Sorry, after working with youth for 40 years, I just don't see it happening in any effective way. But like some have stated, if it's working for you, fine, but don't use one or two anecdotal references as broad sweeping statements of proof positive. Stosh

They say there's a government bridge up in Alaska that's for sale, I'm thinking the market's pretty much open for that one. Stosh