Stosh

When I was a den leader (Webelos) I used the system very similarly to the PL/APL system of Boy Scouts. After all the denner system should be part of the leadership training process. Denner should work with the DL in planning, organizing and executing the den meeting's program for that night. He coordinates setting up chairs, making sure materials are handed out, etc. He would also lead the flag ceremony if there is one and would initiate the Pledge of Allegience, etc. Working with the Ass't Denner, they would make sure the treats were handed out fairly, etc. and coordinate any cleanup following the meeting. While not every boy can actually DO all of that, they should at lease be given the OPPORTUNITY to DO all of that. No one can learn leadership unless someone gives one the opportunity to do so. In the earlier dens, this opportunity might consist of the comment, the denner will now lead us in the Pledge of Allegience, etc. and build upon that during the course of the next few years until they can do it on their own. By the time they cross over, they should all have a working knowledge of the boy-led, patrol-method of scouting and have had the opportunity to safely try some of the concepts involved with some hands-on leadership along the way. Stosh

Please feel free to inject the words "Trip to Oz" instead of whitewater canoeing. It was an off the cuff example to distinguish between a routine camp experience and a "Trip to Oz" that would offer a more challenging and exciting experience for a more experienced patrol that would be capable of doing an independent patrol activity. (One may feel free to loosen their undies and relax at this point, the panic is over.) I also indicated in the third paragraph of my comment, 9 patrols going to Camp A (needs adult supervision) and 1 patrol going to Camp B (single patrol activity, doesn't need adult supervision). I don't see this as a problem with BSA guidelines, so I'm confused by BW's comment (which is normal). As far as 8 boys going off by themselves for an outing they may do so with/without their parents permission, do whitewater canoeing (i.e. Trip to Oz) and fill out no forms, take no adults along, get no permission from the SM and leave the uniforms home. BSA is off the hook for any legal liability, everyone sleeps easy at night and if the SM has done a good job of training these boys, developing independence and leadership, instilling the values of Safety Afloat and Safe Swim (there might be some rivers in Oz), the boys are mature and responsible, I guess they can go off and do their canoe (Trip to Oz) thingy. Every parent (and SM) must pass this "test" sooner or later. There comes a time when all the training, nurturing and guidance must come to and end and the boys need to take their plunge from the nest. If one has done their job correctly as SM, these boys should be able to handle any situation that comes their way whether there's an adult there or not. As a matter of fact, I have experienced some boys that were more mature and responsible than the 21+ adults with them. Age is just an arbitrary number that holds sway in a court of law. Period. Stosh

Here's where I find the 300' thingy a little too regulatory. It is my premise that if a patrol doesn't want to go to summer camp and decides instead to go whitewater canoeing for a whole week 300 miles away, the 300' mark sounds a little strange. An independent patrol should be able to under adverse conditions be able to tolerate distances less than 300' to get by, but not the ideal situation. If they get the 300' then it's great, but if not, they should be able to adapt for a short period of time. I'm not only an advocate of 300'+ but also an advocate that says a PLC cannot decide for a patrol it has to conform to the other patrols and their voted on activity of the month. If 9 patrols want to go to Camp A and 1 patrol wants to go to Camp B, then they go their separate ways. In this case it is up to the PLC to work with the patrols to assist both trips with the resources available and make it work for everyone, rather than overriding the decision of a patrol and telling them they can't make independent decisions, but must conform to a troop vote (Troop-Method!!) It is at this point that I deviate from the prescribed org chart of BSA that says the troop PLC dictates to the patrols. This is NOT patrol-method in my book. Independent, self-sufficient, self-directed patrols are what I'm working towards, not sub-groups that are directed by some troop-method overseers whether they be adult or boy based. The patrol is its own highest authority and the PLC is there to assist them only in support of the accomplishing their goals or enabling any necessary inter-patrol dynamics, such as 5 patrols all want to go to Camp A, and the PLC assists in this preparation so as to not duplicate the same effort 5 times. Once these boys work together independent of any other adult or troop contrived interference, they should be in 3-4 years (14-18 years of age) ready for some extensive non-adult activities. I have a 14 year old finishing up on his Eagle requirements (project is done) that can easily take his NSP out on a day hike with a cooking lunch planned without having to have me tag along. I have told my older boys (PLC) that if they decide on their own to go whitewater canoeing without adult supervision, it doesn't mean they can't and shouldn't invite me along. After all, I don't want to miss out on any fun either! Stosh

Kenk, Remember that this whole process/method is not a forumula for doing things, it is an attitude/understanding one has for doing things. There is no ritual/routines, to-do lists or organizational charts that is going to get your people into boy-led, patrol-method. No amount of "training" is going to get you there either. The "new" approach will be every boy will be taught to say "With all due respect Mr. _______, you are taking away my opportunity to lead. May I please do it?" every time they see an adult doing scout work. And every adult will be taught to say "That's the boy's job." every time they see another adult doing scout work. The boys didn't go to camporee last fall because they didn't do anything to plan for it. The parents complained as did the boys, my other leaders remained mute. They didn't go to fall klondike, nor winter survival for the same reason. The parents complained as did the boys, my other leaders remained mute. Now they are beginning to see that the adults really mean it that the boys are going to be running the show or nothing's going to be done. They did make it to spring camporee but summer camp was far more difficult than it had to be, but now they know better for next year. Do the parents complain? Sure they do. Do the adults find it easy to let the boys fail? No they don't. Are the boys learning and improving little by little. Yep! Is this process painless? Nope. Does this happen overnight? Nope. Is it worth the grief one gets for not doing it like every other troop out there? Yep. Do the boys embrace this? Some do, some don't. Those that do become very active and dedicated, those that don't, quit. There really doesn't seem to be much middle ground when the process relies on the boys stepping up and actually leading. Stosh

Servant leadership = taking care of others, meeting their needs, and assisting them in being successful. When the boys look good their PL looks good. This concept is basic to scouting and is not as useless as some have suggested. Tenderfoot - buddy system = this is basic servant leadership. Each boy taking care of someone else in their patrol. A scout isn't there just for himself. If he was, he should never advance beyond Scout rank. Every boy is responsible for someone else. Patrol members are responsible for taking care of their PL and vise versa. Each troop officer is assigned a task of taking care of the patrols and their leadership and the adults are expected to take care of the boys. This servant leadership is true teamwork in action... everyone taking care of someone or something other than themselves. Scouts who care only for themselves and their Eagle accomplishments are parlor scouts who have read the book, did the task and got the credit, but have in no way learned one iota about true leadership. The boy that directs, delegates and otherwise bullies or bosses the others around has in no way learned one iota about true leadership. The scout who will do anything to make things go well for everyone in the troop, not just his buddy, not just his patrol, not just his PL or troop officers, but even the adults and SM is the most powerful leader in your unit. When my boys look good, I look good. That's the true essence of servant leadership as per my definition. Stosh

I guess I don't restrict my patrol identities/activities to just outings. At opening flags of every meeting the boys gather as patrols with PL having the flag, rallys the boys and then brings his patrol on the troop flag line. Normally this is one line side-by-side patrols. The patrol assigned the flags for the week stands in the middle of the line flanked by the other patrols. 111PL 222PL 333PL TG 111APL222APL333APL After flags, each patrol goes to their corner of the room and the adults get a corner of their own to do their "stuff". SM does his Conferences, etc. in the middle of the room. When the meeting is over the patrols once more gather for flags fall into ranks, do flags and are then dismissed after a SM minute. The "troop" is only together for flags. At camp where the boys are expected to line up behind the SPL in a single file line, we stand as a block of patrols with the PL and flag on the right end of each line. 111PL 111APL 222PL 222APL 333PL 333APL TG (SPL if necessary) Adults We operate very much like a Cub Pack with each "Den/Patrol" operating independently of the other "Dens/Patrols". This autonomy has allowed a development of commraderie that seems to be working very well. If for some necessary reason the TG can call the patrols back into line as for flags. Without the constant interference of other people in the room, these patrols have built a strong basis of teamwork, esprit-de-corps, and focus on task. I believe the only time we have ever met as a "troop" was for outside speakers coming in to address all the boys. Without saying anything I did notice even then the boys sat in the audience as patrols without anyone suggesting it. When we travel to events the boys ride in cars of patrols, if there isn't enough room sometimes the PL's travel together so they can discuss logistics about when they arrive on site. The boys take the patrol method to the extreme and shy away from troop oriented activities. The dynamic that is mantra-ed into the boys is that the PL and patrol is a mini-troop of an "adult-led, troop-method" but the PL is the "SM" and the 7 boys are his "troop". Because of this constant patrol emphasis in the unit, the necessity of 300' between patrols doesn't really matter. I can put them separated but rather close and there is very little if any interaction between members of the patrols. When there was (last summer at camp) a twine fence was put up and the patrols enforced camp protocol in their patrol areas. Every opportunity for patrol emphasis needs to be reinforced by the SM to insure the boys the opportunity to actually function as patrols. Stosh

There will always be those who feel it necessary for a moderator to step down when they adhere to a viewpoint different than theirs. However, whether or not the content of a post is still within the sphere of moderation. There are those who, simply by the way they post, seem to give an air of emotion that may or may not reflect the content but the tone of the post. I see a lot of personal attacks and sarcasm that is not moderated out of posts. But once the attack get out of hand, it's time to either close down a thread or remove posts. When I moderate other forums, whenever I removed a post it also included a personal response to the poster as to why I did what I did. That, however, is a personal expectation I place on myself rather than an expectation placed by the forum owner. There is a lot of moderation that normally goes on behind the scenes that the general viewer does not see. I have no idea how much if any of this is going on with this forum. From the comments made, it does not seem to apply on this forum, the moderators discussed behind the scenes quite a bit before banning a member or imposing some kind of restriction on them. On some of the more intense forums, there were times I placed more moderator-to-moderator posts than actual posts on the forum. There was no sense of scout-like expectations placed on these people so this was necessary. All in all, from what little I have seen this forum seems to be very well moderated and find it difficult to wade through the junk that seems to pop up every now and then when someone hijacks a nice discussion with insessant concerns about how the thread is being moderated. If someone has a problem with a particular moderator, contact that moderator directly and keep it off the forum. If a thread is brought up to deal with moderation efforts it needs to be done with a specific thread as it is being done here. The rest of the forum isn't interested in such discussions unless it is in a dedicated thread in an appropriate area of the forum. My 2 cents worth Stosh

I guess I don't have all that much problem with the actual training, there are some foci that don't seem to impress me, but after-training execution by the trainees that seems to pose the greatest problem. There isn't much BSA can do about that. I do like the concept of annual refresher courses being taught other than a scattering of ideas presented at such places as Roundtables and University of Scouting. These optional training opportunities don't seem to be doing as effective job as a required 1 hour intense training to renew the training by bringing everyone up-to-speed on what is expected by BSA to make sure the leadership is current with the concepts of BSA. This should remove the idea that the training after 2000 and that which occured pre-2000 is something different and thus better in some respects. There are a lot of scouters out there that could fulfill their up-dated training without having to start all over from scratch at added monetary expense and time. Stosh

This is always a stickler of a issue with Cubs because they grow so fast. But then again so do the Boy Scouts... If one is feeding into a troop with full uniforms, it might do well to expect full uniforms for Cubbing as well. Always remind the parents not to cut off the cuffs of the pants and plan on re-hemming them multiple times. Also tap into on-line auctions for cheaper pants than the scout office has for the boys who have financial struggles. I presently have about 20 pairs of Boy Scout pants and have them available for any Scout that wants them. Periodically multiple lots of pants are on sale on E-Bay and I've picked up pants for as little as $5 each. Thus there is no reason why my boys can't have a full uniform. If one is feeding into a troop that doesn't use full uniforms then I guess anything will do. Unfortunately this is the rule in most councils in that I believe my Troop is the only one in my council that expects full uniforms for the boys. I also have the situation where my boys will wear their full uniforms more often than other troops which makes finding them in a crowd very easy. Over the past year my boys have taken a liking to wearing the full uniform and have often commented they feel better in them when they look the part of being a Scout. That kind of pride is often difficult to establish in a unit, but if the expectation is there, the boys seem to like stepping it up a knotch over the other units. One more thing. When my boys came back from summer camp I had one parent ask if the boys had taken off their uniforms during the week. I guess they might have been a little "soiled". I told her that if the shirt looked fairly clean, he probably even wore it swimming. Stosh(This message has been edited by jblake47)

All the suggestions given are nice, but keep it simple. FORWARD, MARCH This gets them moving. Just remember to start with your left foot. As leader you can not be "out of step". This means everyone else has to follow your lead and cadence. Only if the American Flag is being used this does not apply. Then the flag bearer cannot be out of step. Just match his left/right sequence. Have an ASPL call cadence by watching your step. That way you're off the hook. The speed used will be determined by your step. If you walk slow, the cadence will be slow and vice versa. Just walk slow so as to not tire out the other boys. When you want to stop just say HALT. The boys will take one more step and stop. MARK TIME, MARCH and the boys will stop moving forward and keep stepping the cadance. FORWARD, MARCH will get them going from either standing still or marking time. If you wish to call cadence, just say LEFT every time your left foot hits the ground. Everything else is unnecessary. Just keep it simple and dignified and you'll do just fine. Stosh

I wear the sign language strip because I learned it from deaf mutes. I can't do any interpreting for them for someone speaking, but I can make myself understood and can understand them in a rudimentary way. Surely after working and living with these people would qualify me in sign language. I can still make an evening of sitting and "chatting" with deaf people, but I don't think I would call myself "proficient" enough to be an interpreter. There's a wide range between being able to communicate and being proficient. I have studied French, German, Latin, Greek, and Spanish, but I wouldn't be able to wear the strip because of the requirements. However, if I'm in Quebec I could do well enough to feed myself, find locations, find the restroom and "get by". But that doesn't qualify me for the strip. Stosh

Our troop has the standard that the scout wears the full uniform for travel, meals and flag ceremonies. It absolves us from having to worry about whether or not it is proper. I have noticed that the PL's will not allow boys who have forgotten their neckerchiefs from handling the flags during a flag ceremony. At any other time, the scout it is recommended the boy wears any other clothing but have a scout t-shirt or sweatshirt. The "class-b" is not acceptable at flag ceremonies. I have informed the boys that to me the most important thing they do at a gathering of scouts is the opening and closing flag ceremonies and that it is important enough to look their best. This seems to have taken hold quite well in the troop and is being passed along to the new guys as a good example is being set by PL's and other troop officers. I guess the issue of saluting in a partial uniform has never been an issue with our troop. Stosh

As a moderator and owner of other forums, I can assure everyone that the moderators on this forum allow more than most others would. They may not be judicous as one would like, but I see far more "getting by the moderators" here than anywhere else. Let them do their job and behave, and there shouldn't be any problems. Here the harshest "punishment" seems to be having posts deleted. On other forums, banned members are off the forum without any knowledge until they try to login and can't. Count your blessings, it could be worse. Stosh

I wonder if some posts could have a bit more forethought and insight into them so as to actually talk to the subject rather than denegrate the writers. My mother always used to say: "Big people talk about ideas, medium people talk about things and small people talk about other people." Just a thought to consider. I'm off to Gettysburg's 145th reenactment with my Venturing Crew so everyone can rant all they want until I get back. Have a good one! Capt. Stosh Totally adult-led Venturing Crew Advisor!!! :^)

I don't necessarily adhere to the boys don't like change. I found that those who did go with the change would not go back to the way it was. When one of my older boys was asked whether he was going to the 2010 Jamboree the first thing out of his mouth was whether the contingent was going to be boy-led or not. It was the core basis for his decision. I changed the ceremonies, the meeting style, full uniforms (part of the PL's uniform is the PL flag/staff), etc. when I came on board. It was a major influence in changing the morale of the boys from "this troop is dying", to "this troop is going to make it and do it in a big way". They went to summer camp and took real pride in their patrol formations at flag ceremonies, and (much to the chagrin of their mother's) wore their full uniform most of the time. At first there were a lot of untucked shirts and missing neckerchiefs, but now everyone looks sharp for the ceremonies. When I was handing out summer camp participation patches I had gotten after the closing campfire, I called out the name of the first boy to come get his patch and my TG immediately walked over at me and said, "Shouldn't the PL's be handing these out?" Don't cha hate it when they really learn this boy-led, patrol-method stuff! That was the most enjoyable dress-down I had received in a long time. Stosh

I have always encouraged the WB style of separated patrols and it does work better for patrol autonomy and reduction of adult intervention. I also have consistantly fought an uphill battle to accomplish this for the boys at various times when dealing with district and council level events. Very little teamwork, group dynamics and commaradarie can happen when the patrols are constantly mixing and interacting with members of other patrols. This dynamic is very common in all aspects of society when businesses use the off-site meetings, schools use in-service meetings, churches use retreats, etc. etc. Why does it seem so foreign to working with boys on the unit level? No school can operate effectively if all the classes are always gatering in the gym for assembly level class learning. Basically I would be delighted if the districts, councils and individual units were to adopt the WB approach of separated patrols. Stosh

What's so wrong with looking like a scout at a scout activity? Stosh

How many people ask questions expecting to be lied to? If it's becoming ok to conveniently lie because everyone is doing it anyway, maybe that's why so many personal relationships seem to fall apart. Would be kinda nice to raise young men to aspire to honesty rather than some kind of relative morality that uses applied deceit and lies. Nope, count me out. What's the consequences when the boys find out that the word of their SM isn't something they can rely on? Sometimes the relativity is dependent on who's ox is currently getting gored. Lead by example, so they say. Stosh

I had 6 scouts last summer before a major cross-over and SM change in the troop. I now have only 3 of those boys struggling to keep things together. I asked the three why their buddies left the troop and I was emphatically told it was because I was using boy-led, patrol-method and they didn't want to work. If I take on 25 new boys each year and they whittle down to 10 because they had to actually be scouts and do the work, I figure I'm going to retain about 70 boys on average. That means a huge troop of dedicated boys. That's still twice as many as most troops out there where the adults do everything and the boys ride along being cared for and entertained. By the way with the 3 boys that didn't want to work, I also lost 1 to moving away and his best friend doesn't attend any more. I've lost on average one a month. That'll leave 13 at the end of year, and I'm still on track for a 70 boy troop. If one sticks with a proper program, the boys will stay. Those who are still with the troop, prefer this new method (boy-led, patrol-method) over the previous program. If I lose boys at twice the rate I'm experiencing, I'm still destined for a 35 boy troop. It kinda sounds like one doesn't have to work all that hard to maintain numbers in a troop with using the boy-led, patrol-method. Stosh

I wasn't able to get more than 20' between my patrols this past summer because of the camp setup, but when two PL's came to me asking for advice on how to control one boy from one patrol bothering a boy from the other patrol, I suggested BP's 300' rule. Being unable to physically manage the problem, they did put up a twine "fence" between the two patrols and that solved the problem of the bothering. It didn't solve the problem of "Permission to Enter" followed by "Denied" that echoed for the next couple of hours. :^) Surprisingly it worked well to separate out the patrols in a contrived manner. Stosh

If one teaches it is ok to lie, then there should be no consequences for lying. If a person's word is not reliable, trustworthy, then it basically negates both the Oath and the Law. Kids aren't saavy enough to know when some adult thinks it's a white like or a "real" lie. Sounds like a setup to really rip the kids. They will figure out such hypocracy faster than one thinks. If some gal asks a guy if she thinks a dress makes her butt look big, 1) she's picking a fight or 2) testing the honesty of her husband. Yep, I've answered that question. I didn't say the dress made her butt look big, I told her the extra 20 pounds made her butt look big. She quit asking me stupid questions after that. If one is trying to build relationships based on a person's word, integrity, honesty and trustworthiness, lying in any form has no part in the process. If one teaches the art of telling "polite", "diplomatic", white lies, then don't be surprised when the boys lie. Worse yet, when an honest scout catches a leader lying, one's integrity as a leader basically tanks right then and there. One can't teach scouting morals and character building based on lies. Sorry, I can't buy into such deception and if one does teach such deception, I hope they don't reap what they sow. And if someone asks me a question about something others would feel it necessary to lie about, just remember, not all questions have to be answered. I've dodged a lot of sticky situations simply by keeping silent. Had the boys just kept quiet they would have received the same punishment had they confessed. They knew the ASM was gunning for somebody. If they lie, the consequences are worse. If they did do it and lied about it, one wouldn't know if the practice of telling various kinds of "minor", "polite", "diplomatic", "white" or whatever kinds of lies in the past were acceptable to the leadership that taught them. I teach my boys to tell the truth. It's a simple process and eventually if taught well enough, one can actually trust and rely on what the boys say. It's kinda strange how that works, but it does work. Stosh

Many times the star football player is a scout? But of course, if it wasn't for the fact that Scouting is unique, though this person could have been just a star football player. Being a member of two differing organizations is not the same as being a member of two similar organizations. If Scouting offered nothing different than the next guy, most of the choices wouldn't be both/and they would be either/or. And in case one hadn't noticed, I was not referencing other scouting organizations and associations, I was making reference to BSA trying to duplicate the efforts of youth organizations in general, i.e. YMCA, Boys/Girls Clubs, 4-H, etc., thought I'd just mention that again, too. Stosh(This message has been edited by jblake47)

Personally I don't accept lying in any form and the promotion of white lies to preserve society doesn't do much for the trustworthy part of the Scout Law. Integrity training can go a long ways to maintain trust and honesty so as to not have to resort to lies to maintain relationships. Stosh

I would highly doubt that the editor of Scouting magazine set's National Council policy. I do look at literature and publications and find many references that just a magazine article comment to support a personal opinion. 1) The policy statement on uniforms identify what sources are acceptable to determine what a scout uniform is. 2) One of those sources is the BSA catalog which has two different sections dealing with clothing, one marked uniforms and one marked apparel. They differentiate for a reason. 3) Rip's comments deal more with Cub Scouts than Boy Scouts because policy statements and publications like the Boy Scout Handbook do allow for the mixing of uniform parts and non-uniform parts in one special circumstance...outdoor activities. These activities are the casual dress which is not the full uniform which is expected to be worn for more formal activities such as flag ceremonies and indoor activites. 4) A search of the entire National Council website produces only one reference to an "activity uniform". It is in conjunction with strenuous outdoor activity. In this case it was in relationship to hiking. It is at those occasions that it is acceptable to mix non-uniform parts, i.e. activity shirts (as defined by BSA catalog, under the apparel section and not the uniform section), or troop/camp t-shirts with uniform pants, belt and socks. It does however makes explicit reference to this NOT being a full uniform, something that is not acceptable in the Cub Scout program. The comment described the presenter having the option of wearing the full uniform or the activity uniform. It did not make the distinction of the full uniform being a field uniform, dress uniform, or class A uniform, just full uniform vs. activity uniform. But as I have said previously, there is no penalty for personal alterations of these issues stated by BSA, nor is there a penalty for non-compliance to the US Flag Code. But like the original poster stated, he has seen it both ways, meaning there are those out there that are doing it in a fashion of their own choosing. Stosh

There are certain things that boys/guys are always going to do. While spitting off a cliff is reasonably benign, I had to deal with the issue of peeing in the fire on previous outings. I don't confront the boys and "entrap" them into lying. I simply went over and looked in the fire pit and said, "I sure am glad I'm not eating breakfast out of that tomorrow morning," and walked away. It would seem that the rest of the patrol members dealt with the situation on their own. About a half hour later I saw one of the members of the patrol having put out the fire, cleaning out everything in the pit and scattering it in the woods. Probably took him about an hour to clean things up. I don't always think it's the job of the SM to deal with every little thing that comes along. Part of leadership is dealing with discipline on their own, let the boys learn. Stosh(This message has been edited by jblake47)