Stosh

"For your troop, how exactly do you determine SPL and PL's?" SPL/ASPL - appointed for a 1 year term, nothing says he couldn't continue beyond the 1 year. PL/APL - NBP appointed for a 1 year term, the rest elected by the patrol membership every 6 mo's. "How about other positions?" Most other positions are appointed for 6 mo. terms. Den Chief is appointed for 1 year term and during that time they are expected to earn the DC Award. They must commit to the whole year with the Cub Den they are serving. "Do you use elections?" We announce the 6 mo's are up and each patrol needs to run an election. Turn your results into the SM. They can vote verbally, by consensus, secret ballot, whatever, we don't tell them how to run their patrol. "Do you put any restrictions on who is eligible (ex. rank requirement, SM approval, etc.)?" Nope. Our SPL is 14 yo Star, should turn Life in next month or so. the Honor Patrol (HP) has the SPL and 2 Den Chiefs (both 12 yr old) all Star ranked. "How 'bout requirements to stay in a position? (recall elections? removal for non-performance?)." That's up to the patrol. If they don't like their leaders they are free to change them at any time. "If you use elections, how do you actually conduct the elections (speeches, one night, many nights," Our elections usually take about 5 minutes to run. The boys know each other and how they operate and so they have a pretty good idea who's going to be PL even before the vote is taken. " what if few patrol members show that night, etc.)? Bummer, if you are worried about who's going to lead you, better show up. "If you do something else, tell us about that, too." Appointments are based on a number of different factors. For example, last Tuesday's meeting: A boy (1st Class 13 yo) approached me about being the TG for the NBP that formed last month. I asked him if the patrol wanted one. He didn't know. I figured the conversation would end at that point, it didn't, the boy went over to the NBP meeting and asked if they wanted/needed a TG. After a discussion the NBP PL came over (2nd Class 12 year old) and told me the NBP would like to have a TG. I said OK, did they have anyone in mind? He said the patrol would like to have the boy to brought up the issue in the first place. I said ok, but he needed to talk with the SPL because this is not a patrol position and the patrol need/want would be taken under consideration by the PLC. The TG candidate was a member of a different patrol and this interpatrol issue would need to be addressed there. PLC with SM held an ad hoc 5 minute meeting and figured it was to everyone's benefit. The TG candidate really did not need to be doing that position for POR he was already Troop Scribe. I dug out a TG patch from my records box gave it to the SPL who presented it to the new TG. The only problem I had with the whole process was my involvement. Hopefully someday this will happen without having to ask if being leaders on their own had to be ok'ed every step of the process. Up until 2 weeks ago we had 5 patrols. Two patrols merged due to loss of membership. We as adults kinda masterminded this. The patrols were struggling but were hanging on. Not the best situation to be in, but not the worst either. What we did was take the PL from one patrol (2nd year scouts) and made him APL of the NBP, and took the APL from the other patrol (older scouts) and made him PL of the NBP. The patrol then merged to strengthen their position in the troop and reestablish their patrol leadership staff. They came up with a totally new name by which they will now operate. Another patrol is the Honor Patrol which operates quite different than any other patrol. They are the #1 support group for the other patrols. The SPL is the PL of the HP. Every member of the HP has to hold a POR all the time. They need to be Star rank of any age to be considered for an invitation by the patrol to join. The 2nd Class Scout who took on the NBP PL position and is doing a fantastic job and the 1st Class Scout to stepped up to the TG postion are two prime candidates for the HP once they have fulfilled their responsibility to the NBP and advanced to Star. The membership of the HP is based on demonstrated merit and scout spirit, not popularity. While we banter around a lot about the patrol method we aren't there yet, but we're getting closer. The patrols are pretty autonomous, but we have troop support both boy led and adult led there whenever they need it. Sometimes we "interfere" with the process, i.e. the merging of the patrols described above, or sitting in on a patrol meeting to see how things are going, kinda followups. We have been an adult led troop for many years and it's difficult to make the necessary changes, but some great things are happening because we are. Stosh

After listening to the volleys going back and forth on this issue I'll toss in my 2-cents worth as well. First, there seems to be a B-P vs. BSA difference of opinion on the issue of leadership. To me this appears to be very strange because I am quite unfamiliar with Kudu and B-P's "side" of the issue. I have read only the BSA "side" of the equasion and yet seem to lean towards the dynamics spelled out by B-P. Maybe it's too many years of business analysis and thinking outside the box that lead me to this conclusion. There's very little in the BSA program that runs contradictory to the B-P program. With that being said, what's the problem? I sit and watch and it seems to be in interpretations and definitions of words significant enough to draw the BSA program away in intent from the B-P style program. On the forum I have heard people define and redefine, intepret and reinterpret many issues. What seems to be happening is the old story about the blind gentlemen that were asked to describe an elephant. One man walks up and touches the tail and announces an elephant is like a rope. The next touches the leg and announces an elephant is like a tree, the third touches the side and announces an elephant is like a wall, the next touches the trunk and announces an elephant is like a snake, the next the tusk and announces an elephant is like a spear, etc. Well, as some on this forum have demanded, who's right and who's wrong? They can't all be right! From each of their perspective they are right. They have all drawn their conclusions correctly given the circumstances. With that being said, one must first of all start with a common perspective, which we on the forum do not do. We insist on starting with our own agendas and work from there justifying why we do it this way or that way so that others out there don't judges us as being wrong. With such "blindness" we will never understand why someone else could conclude something so obviously different from what we see. Right from the git-go, we all come from various perspectives. Some of us are in scouting because our kids are there. Others to work with youth, others for their their own edification, others out of a sense of volunteerism, others because they are "wrangled" or "railroaded" into it by others. So, with that being said, first everyone must personally evaluate their own perspective and/or agenda, understand it and then work from there. There is NO common perspective or agenda we are dealing with here when discussing this issue. Once we have all agreed on that, we can move to the next step. The B-P method and BSA methods ALSO have their perspectives which must be taken into account for. They are slightly different, but really not too much. Not enough to warrant the seriousness of the discussion generated here on the forum. Then we must also take into account the perspectives of our society in relationship to these two methods. Once we have evaluated in our minds each of these dynamics then we begin the process of common definitions. Are we all meaning and understanding the words in the same way? I am willing to say this area is the biggest problem generator for the forum. We are NOT using the words in the same way. For example: the SM is to coach the boys... By dictionary definition a coach is one who instructs and trains. Yet when we as a public see coaches they are directing and leading. Our perspective is not in line with the definition. So, when a SM coaches the boys does he train and instruct or select the players, make the decisions, direct the action, etc.? The same holds true for the word direct. Pointing out the way is far different than managing from a supervisory position. Does the SM direct or give directions? How does one keep all this muddling around in perspective? Are there commonalities that allow a basis of understanding for both perspectives? First of all in any organization (right down to a group of two people) some kind of leadership structure (both people can't lead or both can't follow in a group of two). So how is leadership and the flow of authority accomplished in the B-P and BSA programs? On this basic level they can from the material given, be exactly the same. Once it's interpreted and applied, all bets are off. This is where the rub comes. From what I have read in the BSA program material and from what little I have seen from Kudu's explanation of B-P material, the patrol method is the preferred choice. Unfortunately there are many definitions of what "Patrol Method" is all about, thus the many discussions on this forum. But I accept the perception that the patrol is the initial basis of authority in order for the patrol method words to be used by the progam developers. There are perfectly acceptable and functioning structures in our society to demonstrate this concept. From the patrol starting point to it's first line of support under them is the PLC which binds a confederation of patrols together into a supportive organization, the troop. This troop is supported from below by another level of adults who coach, train, and assist the PLC/Troop. The original intent of the US Constitution was set up this way as a confederation of states, united with a supportive federal government to offer common defense and encourage cooperation amongst the states. Since the American Civil War, that has been reinterpreted in it's reverse where the federal government basically dictates to the states. This happened without changing one word of the US Constitution! The perspective changed not the program. The adult led program is just another interpretation of the BSA program which means the flow of authority originates from the adults and flows to the patrols, similar to the structure of the US military. The patrols support the troop basically and the troop is directed and supervised (gotta love those words) by the SM and his/her staff. Most scouting groups fall somewhere in between these two divergent interpretations of the program. This is glaringly obvious, but where between is not, and most importantly which direction are they moving on the scale as they develop new things for the boys? Is your troop kinda SM heavy-handed and wanting to move more towards patrol authomy? Does the SM run the show? Does the PLC run the show? Are the patrols authomous enough to be independent of the troop and camp/hike without troop and/or adults around? If the boys are expected to be learning leadership, the smallest component of the program is the best place to start that process...the patrol. Eight of your buddies and we're going to find out the simple lessons of leadership in a safe and encouraging environment. Need help? Ask! That's what one's SUPPORT group (PLC/SM) is there for. But what if group authority flows down from the SM to the PLC to the patrol? Then there is no leadership, the patrol only follows direction and never learns to lead. Unfortunately this flow of authority is something very foreign in our society and is not taught to our youth. Some of the better and brighter youth are helped in the school system, but nothing for everyone. Military does a good job, it has too, leadership is defined in terms of life and death. But Scouting has a mandate to do it for all the boys. For the most part, we all have problems with it. We as adults often times don't want to look "bad" in front of our peers by having a struggling troop. So we step in and fix it. How many adults do the work and how many of the boys just follow along? We see it happening all over the place and our egos deny us the opportunity to remedy the problem appropriately. No one in our society today can really say they can trust the boys to lead! A scout is TRUSTWORTHY... Well, gee, right out of the blocks! Let the boys lead, support them, encourage them, help them do their job! They are worthy of trust. As leaders we need a little scout spirit too to honor the first of the scout laws... a scout is trustworthy. So with that being said, look at the B-P method with an open mind, same for the BSA method and then look at your troop and see if you are any near either of them with your development of leadership (I think B-P called it citizenship, same thing) My apologies for going on so long, but everyone seems to be pretty entrenched in their own little worlds to allow for some sunshine to come in. Stosh

Hey, it's the end of the week. It's your 18th birthday tomorrow, Purcelce, you an Eagle? Stosh

Pick a series of ingredients and have a competition on how to "improve" on the tried and true. For example if I were to mention: Potatoes Hamburger Carrots Onions Other than tinfoil dinners what could one do to make a terrific meal for the boys? My boys always carry flour, garlic and brown sugar now that they have gotten over having to do the tinfoil dinner for the 1,000th time.

Gee, let me guess, the older boys once they get their eagles will all be history, but until then they need the younger boys to help on their projects so the feign interest in them. Middle boys have two patrols of two members? Lot of chiefs there getting advancement credit for little or no work. Gotta love it. NB's floundering with no leadership. Hmmmm. We've had lean years when we had less than 10 actives and here's what THE BOYS did. Toss out the troop structure rules. What they basically have is a one-patrol "troop". Define it anyway you want, but basically that's what it really is. Quit acting like a troop and start acting like a patrol. The ASPL is now the PL. Have him function as such. There's no need for a PLC, half the "troop" at this point is a patrol leader. A consolidation of boys will focus their concerns on patrol activities and program and they can ignore trying to resolve patrol/leadership/PLC structure concerns. Suggest a sit down discussion with the "troop" and have them direct the discussion. A SM can suggest questions like: What frustrates them, what inspires them, are they part of the solution or part of the problem? What do THEY want to do with this situation? What do they think would work with such a small group? An adult leader's job at this point is to coach, suggest, support and inspire the boys into deciding what they would like this group to be. They will purchase ownership in the process and commit to it if they feel they are part of the decision and especially the re-building process. If your 4 top scouts have no group loyalty and are interested only in what they want, eagle out and leave, the troop has lost the potential best leaders. Hopefully they were trained better in citizenship commitments and given the opportunity to give back to the group enough to stick around and get this "troop" back on it's feet. If they aren't committed scouts they shouldn't be getting Eagles, but that's a different forum discussion. If they are not reliable, as SM you may suggest to the boys to start working on training and organizing the program around what they want to do. Don't preach to the choir. These boys are coming, quit turning everything into a membership drive. Quit designing programs for the people who aren't there. Focus on the boys you do have. They've made a commitment, support them. Maybe all that you will accomplish is just going camping and having a fun time. Maybe your younger boys will bargain with the older boys, you help us with our advancement, we'll help you with your eagle projects. Let them work out the details. Create and allow an environment for change. What had been done in the past has gotten you to a difficult place in the life of the group. Do something different ANYTHING different is better than what you are doing now. What has been aimed at as a goal in the past isn't working anymore. Pick a different target, any target. Let the boys come up with what they think would be the ideal solution, trust their judgment and then work together to make it happen. Everything is relative.... you have too many boys to make a crew for a trip to the Boundary Waters. :^) Stosh

At any given time there are usually 3-6 red official berets floating on E-Bay at any given time. Prices and quality varies, but they are wool and durable. One shouldn't have too much problem coming up with the 8 or so needed.

I don't see the boy-led patrol method as being all that competitive. It doesn't have to be, but I suppose one could if it were encouraged. If a patrol is electing the best person for PL, one's skills and history of decision making should be sufficient for the boys to base their vote on. If they must politically run for office, then it can become competitive. I guess we don't try and emphasize the popularity kinds of elections. The boys know each other, they are patrol partners and so our elections usually take only about 5 mintues. A more friendly kind of competition occurs between patrols on occasion. The Honor Patrol knows the NBP can't stand up against the skills of the regular patrols so they sometimes step in and team up with them to make the game more fun. Nothing is ever serious as a sports type program where winning is the main goal of the event. A sense of pride between patrols sometimes leads to a bantering back and forth in fun, but no one ever keeps "score". At larger events, sometimes the patrols cooperate by uniting as a troop to compete with other troops. If we have on occasion when attendance has been extremely poor for an event, put together an ad hoc "patrol" for the competitions as well. We let the boys work out the logistics of this "patrol's" yell, flag, etc. All in all, I have never viewed the patrol method of scouting having anything to do with a coach dominated sports team. To me this is the ultimate troop method. The SM directs the program to insure the best possible outcome, i.e. the best troop in the district/council. Even if the sport is recreational rather than competitive, the coach directs/allocates positions so that everyone gets a chance to play. This is still SM led if followed in the troop. By the way: "Stosh and Kudu state the PL should be in charge of signing off on T-FC requirements, and if an adult is involved, it takes the power away from the PL." I don't believe I made that statement. The PL along with the TG in the NBP work through the advancement and then report back who me who has fulfilled the requirements. While I do not (as advancement ASM) don't go back and retest as if I were questing the authority and integrity of the PL and TG, but during games where these skills are to be used and the boy can't do them, I will quietly visit with the PL and TG to have them explain to me why they felt this scout had accomplished the skilled when he in fact really hadn't. This is never done in front of his patrol or anyone else for that matter. This is in compliance with quality leadership building. Never make corrections to an officer nco or commissioned in front of the men. "Since the BSA program, which is used for TLT, states an adult will sign off, I don't see how that can be seen as "emasculating" the PL." I use the format I do because it allows for a certain amount of ownership in the advancement process necessary for the NBP PL and TG to have. There is nothing worse that being given the responsibility to do something and no authority. Ever have someone assign you a job to do and no authority to do it? Well, it's a crappy position to be in and I don't want my scouts to ever feel that way. If they have the responsibility to do the teaching, they have the authority to turn in their report of what they feel they have accomplished. "If you want the PL involved, have him sign off first and then recommend a Scout to the ASM/SM for testing." This is a direct assault on the integrity of the PL. Are you in fact testing the scout or testing the honesty of the PL's report? "That gives the PL the "power" to make sure the Scouts in his patrol have met his standard before they go to the adults." This is the authority that goes with the responsibility. If the NBP officers, TG and Instructor have been given a responsibility (i.e. position of responsibility) and no authority to do it, then you have effectively crippled the whole process. If the boy feels he has the authority to do something of value, he will take ownership of the process and fulfill the responsibility more effectively if he is only doing it to please someone else who has the real authority. What it really boils down to is: can you give responsibilities to the scouts trust them with the authority to do it? If not, you will never build leaders, only followers. Leaders have authority to do their responsibilities, followers do not. Stosh

Dug, To a certain degree yes. But if the PL and APL are spending all their time refereeing the 3 troublemakers, then in reality the non-elected boys are running the show. The ASM within the patrol would be a show of support for the PL and APL so they can be freed up to do their job. The boys continue to led and be more effective and the ASM in a supporting role maintains disciplinary control over the boys. In all my comments, I never suggested the adults and Troop were not to be involved with the patrol in a supportive role. That is why they are there. A boy-led patrol needs guidance and support and will need to turn to someone for assistance at different times for different reasons. In this case if they ask for help, there's nothing wrong with a SM or ASM or PLC giving help. You seem to imply that I don't want the troop or adults involved with the patrols. Quite the contrary, the troop and it's PLC and all adults need to work cooperatively with the patrols as the patrols have need of them. Cooperatively can also mean many things. Suggestions on problem solving, guidance, encouragement, training, or whatever the patrol is in need of. If a patrol wishes to go on a patrol outing without the troop, I find nothing wrong with them asking the SM/ASM's for help lining up rides and supervisory YP trained adults to make it happen.

It is interesting to note that both sides of the issue claim they are boy-led while insisting the other side is adult-led. Both sides indicate there are certain elements of adult involvement, but not enough to keep their side from being anything other than boy-led. Neither side really wishes to know more about the dynamics of why both might offer valid improvements to the process which will occur regardless of their feelings. i.e. scouting today isn't what it was yesterday and it's not what it's going to be tomorrow. Therefore we spin our wheels with the he said/she said debate of redundant iterations of each other side's point of view. We all know that what works for one troop isn't going to work as well, if at all, for another troop. Therefore, if the BSA program of today is touted as the one-size-fits-all, perfect-solution-to-all-situations, then you are basically getting sold a bill of goods. We tweak our program, try different things, use contemporary and historical resources, to try and find what works for us today. All bets are off for tomorrow, we'll need to go back and start the process all over again for that. What we have is a program now that the boys and their adult leaders feel is not necessarily ok, but works. Our level of dissatisfaction motivates us to try different things and re-tweak to try and improve. We are currently pushing VERY hard on the patrol-method. We are discussing multiple chuck boxes, more tents, patrol flags instead of generic rag dragged out from the troop trailer to make an ad hoc patrol for some activity. Just last night the committe questioned the use of patrol neckerchiefs. The Honor Patrol has them, but the other boys should use the troop neckerchief because of their troop identity being emphasized at outings. They didn't forbid the use of patrol neckerchiefs, but they were concerned about the impact. At the camporee this spring however the boys will first have to build a troop gateway before they can put up patrol gateways. These dynamics don't change over-night, they don't happen over-night, nor do they come without a price. Some on the committee see this new emphasis on boy-led as a move to destroying the troop and it's identity, other see it as a necessary step to implement the patrol method. The adult leadership is nervous, but they haven't come down with a heavy hand and stopped this "new way" of doing things. As leaders that have worked together for over 15 years, no one ever says anything is right or wrong, just different. Our Troop Guide for the NBP was "decided" last night. A boy came up to me and asked if he could be the TG for the NBP. The first thing I asked him was, did the NBP want a TG and if they did did they want you to be it. He didn't know, but he did go over to the part of the room where the NBP was meeting to find out. Eventually the NPB PL came over and said that they wanted a TG and asked if so-and-so could be it. I sent him (the PL) over to the SPL for further discussion. The SPL came to me to ask if that would be ok, and I sent him on to the SM. Eventually the TG patch was found and presented to the boy with everyone's approval all along the way. The only part of the whole process that bothered me was why did everyone feel it necessary to first "check" with me. I didn't need to be part of any of that process. This will be a topic on the next PLC meeting. Change doesn't come easily and may take a painful amount of time to accomplish. But sometimes it has to be done. Stosh

New leader burn-out? I thought burn-out was for the guys and gals that hung around too long! My suggestion: Do what you can do for the boys and let the rest of the stuff go. Focus on the boys and make sure they get what they need to have a good scout experience. The rest is just fluff. Focus on the den meetings and run a nice pack meeting and all the rest of the stuff just forget about until you get a leader that steps up and takes the reins on the project. When anyone starts something new from scratch, it's important to realize that you will not have a full-blown program right away. It will take time, resources and people to put it altogether. Be patient and build it a little at a time. Once the boys get established and den leaders found, cubmaster comes next, add to that his staff, then a support committee, train them all so they know what they're doing (nothing more frustrating wandering around wasting time wondering what you should be doing). and then start adding the special things. Pace yourself by defining priorities, set goals and take sufficient time to do it right and it will go a long way to keep from getting burned-out. Stosh

Making reference back to historical documents usually indicates a basis of historical context not who's right and who's wrong. Much of what was written historically may or may not be better than what is being practice currently. Often times historical context gives a greater understanding of the current, other times it offers a differing alteration to what is currently practiced. When we look back on medical practices 200 years ago, we stand in amazement of how anyone could ever survive a doctor's visit. On the other hand, people from the 23rd Century are going to look at us and be amazed how barbaric we are with our medical practices. B-P put forth a program of scouting which has proven to be very efficient and effective for 100 years. That which we have altered over the years, may or may not offer anything of value to that efficiency and effectiveness. Is it right or wrong? I don't think that is a valid question. Obviously B-P must have been doing something "right" to give a good start to where we are today. Is what we do today that is different than B-P right? wrong? better? worse? Have fun, but those questions really don't help the program much. Is it effective and is it efficient are two better systems of evaluation. Stosh

I usually don't get involved in these political he said/she said kinda drivel, but I'll drivel in on this one. First of all Presidents don't declare war, but as Commander-in-Chief they are the sole responsiblity for their operations. Secondly Congress does declare war, but are not in any way responsible for it's operation, only it's fiancial support of the armed forces it sent into the war. These are Constitutional directives. We need to go back to our Citizenship in the Nation MB and review these principles. Stosh

It's always good to be aware that for various reasons, with varying degrees ALL BOYS need what Scouting has to offer. Some are just more obvious than others. Don't forget the kid that doesn't brandish a knife, he may need the most help. Stosh

Knots are knots regardless of your present duties. I have Cubbing, Webelos, Scout knots on my Venturing shirt. I have trained on my shirt also because I am trained in all levels besides, otherwise I would have to have a second shirt to show I wasn't trained in the level of the program I was currently working in. I do however, find it a lot easier to have a different shirt for each responsibility/training level I work at. The knots on all the shirts though are the same. Stosh

Dug! Slow down. I am not stating my opinion, I'm only giving observations. If you wish an opinion, it has to be for a specific situation because generaltities seldom work in all cases. If you wish to have a well organized precise military type of troop, then one has to go more with the dynamics of B-P. Is it right or wrong? or are we judging good or bad? You can do all the right things and still end up with a bad conclusion and you can do all the bad things and end up with a good conclusion. Gotta make sure everything is defined relevantly. Otherwise if you wish to promote other dynamics which are encouraged by modern BSA, then you go more with the literature of today. Is going by the BSA always the best? Is it always right? Not everything works best in ever situation. Our NBP gets an appointed PL and APL. The new boys will need some time to know what those positions are supposed to do and a more experienced scout can lead by example right there in their patrol. These new boys don't know what a patrol leader is supposed to be/do but they are expected to vote for one? Usually it's a dump job on someone they think is going to get stuck with all the work and they are generally right. Then their observations of the floundering PL and APL is usually what NOT to do when you're PL. It's a sure remedy for failure for a new boy right out of the blocks. Not a good idea in our estimation. The appointed NBP PL usually has had some Den Chief, TG or works well with other boys experience and has had other PL/APL responsibilities and has shown he can cover the bases if necessary. He also has to expand his leadership to work cooperatively with others like the Instructor and TG, something usually not necessary with the patrol he came from. Being a NBP PL/APL is a bigger challenge for the boys than being a PL for your buddies. If a boy wants the expaneded challenge to push his growth, this is a good candidate for the job. The older boys all elect their PL and APL which we find no problem with. So to say we always do it one way or the other isn't true. Depending on the needs of the patrols, the boys and the troop, we often time do what will work. The troop has to work well enough to actually be a supporting structure for the patrols. Who can the patrols turn to when they have problems and the troop isn't being run very well? And no, democracies don't always work better than dictatorships. :^) I also am an advisor for a Venturing Crew. We are so far out in left-field as far as BSA is concerned they quit looking over our shoulder and now they don't get so upset anymore. I am the Advisor, but I am also the CO Executive. Scary, huh? I outrank everyone on the Crew Committee except in certain situations where the CC outranks me. That may occur at an event but never at a Crew meeting. However, in order to teach leadership skills, there are times when one of the boys is dictator for the day and call all the shots as he sees relevant. I step down completely and do not and cannot question his judgment. We are a Venturing Crew of US History with military emphasis. We reenact mostly American Civil War. Our CO is an adult group of reenactors and we "fall in" with them when we attend the same events. As Captain/President of the CO, my dictatorial command is always just that. My CC is Lt. Colonel of the state umbrella organization over the CO and so at times, he dictates to me and I pass it on to the "boys". Does it work? Yep. Do the boys complain? Nope. Does BSA really want to knwo what we're up to? Nope. :^) The nature of the beast dictates the tact we have to take with different situations we find ourselves in. Do I have trouble shifting gears? Nope, I feel very comfortable standing as a Private in the ACW ranks, as Captain of the company or as Adjutant to the Colonel at times. I have never found a problem with being just an ASM in the troop either. I get more time with the boys as an ASM than I would if I were SM. The SM has to decide what kind of troop, patrols, adult staff he would like to have, have a Committee that supports him and then use the correct tools to maximize the benefits he is seeking. Remember, you can pound a screw in with a hammer, but in the long run a screwdriver will work more efficiently and last a lot longer. Stosh

Heresy or not, it works. B-P did not base scouts on democracy, he built it on a military structure basis and that means there is no democracy. American BSA changed it for a variety of different reasons than those established by B-P. If one wishes different results, change the parameters to accomplish the differences. B-P had efficient well organized functional scout patrols, i.e. military. The BSA program doesn't set that as a goal, so don't expect the same results. If BSA has a well organized functional scout patrols of a military style, you are not following BSA guidelines Many of these changes have occured over the past 40 years when there was an anti-military emphasis that grew out of the 1960-70's and thus the function and goals of scouting were altered. Remember that you're only going to hit what you aim at. Stosh

First of all there should be certain criteria and goals set for the patrol leader. Many factors play into the selection so many people should be doing the evaluation. 1) The boy's record needs to be taken into account - Age, rank, maturity, how well he relates with the other boys. 2) Certain POR's are important - if it's the NBP has this candidate been a Den Chief? Troop Guide? Instructor? All important skills for that patrol. 3) Psychological profile - is he patient enough for NBP and/or creative and charismatic enough for the older patrols? 4) Does he fit comfortably into what you expect in a leader for that particular patrol? 5) What are the opinions of other leaders who have worked with the boy? 6) How receptive are the boys to this candidate? 7) IF he were to take the position as PL offered, what training, counseling, challenges is he going to need to be supported by the adults/PLC to assist him in his duties as PL? The more one takes into consideration the better the candidate will be. Other factors that may apply are: 8) Does the boy need a challenge for his leadership growth? 9) Does he tend to step up to the plate when offered a major challenge? Some of the criteria that should not be heavily considered: 1) Does he need a POR? 2) Is this a popularity contest contestant? Stosh

He was also military trained and privates don't vote, not even in the American military. So voting is irrelevant. He patterned civilian scouts after military scouts for a reason. One's nationality has nothing to do with it. The best scout is appointed to lead the group because the survival of the patrol is dependent upon it. B-P was not concerned about this because it's great programatic structure, but because people's lives dependened on it. American scouting today is all fun and games. It wasn't always so. Stosh

Summer camp Decorah - Gateway Area Council, WI Phillips - Chippewa Valley Council, WI Buffalo Bill - Central Wyoming Council, WY Other Camps we have attended for various stays Tomahawk - North Star Council, MN Philmont - National NM SeaBase - National FL Non-BSA BWCA - Northern MN We are looking into Glacier's Edge Council, WI at the present time. Stosh

Stosh, Do the patrols all go to Summer Camp the same week? Yep. That's what each patrol decided to do. They do enjoy doing things with the other patrols in the troop. If so, is this just a coincidence? No it was a consensus of all the patrols because we will be camping 1000+ miles away. The logistics of transportation and adult vacation time availability were rather restrictive, but the boys were understanding and worked around it. Do they all want to go the same week? Nope, we have a significant number of boys not going this year because of the choice of week. But the week will never work out as you knew before asking the question. There is some negotiations amongst the boys going on now to form a temporary summer camp patrol to accommodate the patrols that took a big non-attendance hit. They haven't decided as of yet what they wish to do. They have time before camp to work it out on their own time-table. The largest hit seemed to come from the older boys who have summer sports, etc. who wouldn't have attended anyway. Summer camp for our boys this year will be 12 days long. The SM was REALLY ticked off because his big family reunion falls right in the middle of summer camp and so he'll miss out on it. Do they camp in the same campsite as the other patrols in the troop, or do they get their own camp? The camp is not patrol method friendly, surprisingly not many BSA camps are. Again, I think you already knew the answer to that before you asked. They cannot register as a patrol, nor can they camp as patrols in different sites as per B-P's recommendation of a 200' separation. Hopefully that will change back to the B-P recommendations someday. Until then the boys will have to do the best they can considering the limitations imposed on them by others not implementing a patrol method opportunity for the boys at summer camp. When they get a patrol method friendly event, yes they do camp separately as patrols. Do your patrols wear troop numbers on their uniforms? Only on one sleeve. On the other sleeve they wear their patrol patch. It kinda balances itself out that way and reminds them they have different role responsibilities in BSA. However, some of my boys also carry dual neckerchiefs, one for patrol, one for troop, depending on what activity their are doing at the time. One patrol also carries a 6' patrol staff which singles them out as well. The SM has a real problem with those staffs all going along on events in they are kind of cumbersome to transport. The boys are aware of when they are functioning in a patrol directive role and when they are functioning in a troop support role. At flag ceremonies they stand together as patrols with their flags, and when they travel to events they try and catch rides as a patrol in the various vehicles as best they can. Kinda like those who have had the opportunity to experience Wood Badge and those who haven't. I'm a Beaver, and Beavers always lead off and everyone else follows, need I say anything more? Being in the Beaver Patrol meant more to me than the troop identifier C-9W-93 does. The SM and CC of my troop are Bobwhites, of troop C-9W-93, but I don't hold it against them. :^) Stosh And you forgot the last question: No, the boys do not ignore each other when they are gathered together as a troop. There are plenty of inter-patrol opportunities, training, etc. that goes on between patrols that work it out with each other. It's all part the training that goes on with one's leadership awareness. Yes, you're a part of a family (patrol) but you have a responsibility of citizenship to your community (troop), nation (district) and world (National BSA) all of which are out there to make sure you have the best family for you as an individual (the patrol method of scouting).

Not many, if any, like my comments, but I'll offer them up for discussion. Your mileage may vary. It is these kinds of situations that separates the boy-led patrols from the SM/PLC dictated patrols. I lump the two together because if the SM is running the show, he/she has control over the PLC as well. First of all, what do the boys of the NBP have to say about the situation? Are they complaining about these boys, or is it just an issue of outside the patrol adult supervision observations? Does the majority of members of the NBP want these boys out or is it just 3 boys not mixing but get along with the rest of the patrol on their own? Not much info here to evaluate, but if the SM and PLC are going to ASSIST in SUPPORTING/HELPING the patrol, the patrol needs to identify their problem, work it out, or ask for ASSISTANCE or SUGGESTIONS from the PLC for some ideas to try to correct the PATROL'S problem. At this point it is best to confine the problem to just the one patrol and have them work on a workable solution with GUIDANCE from outside resources. It will be an excellent, real-world opportunity for problem-solving and teamwork. Remember the games everyone plays at C.O.P.E.? Well, this is for real and it's for reasons of C.O.P.E. that we give these tools to the boys. The SM/Troop led knee-jerk reaction would be to split up the boys and put one in each of the other patrols. This is swell. Before you had one patrol with a problem, now you have three, and wereas it was 3 boys that were a problem, now you have all the member of three patrols with a problem. Don't pour water on a grease fire. All you'll do is spread it. Fortunately all three boys are in the same patrol! Having boys from one patrol fighting with boys of another is a far bigger problem. My suggestion would be to offer for the consideration of the patrol, now that they're no longer the NBP, to take on an adult of their choice from the ASM's to be their MENTOR/ADVISOR. They might accept this process in light of the fact that their Troop Guide would be moving on to the new NBP. If you have a skilled mature older boy JASM who has some strong leadership skills and an understanding of patrol-method scouting if he, rather than an ASM adult to be their patrol mentor/guide. Of course the person, if the patrol wishes them to be involved, would focus on working directly with these three boys on interpersonal skills, anger management, etc. and would have relatively little to do with the actual operation of the patrol, which would be left to the patrol as a whole. By having direct support for resolution of the conflict of the three boys, the problem is contained, address, somewhat isolated and the rest of the patrol can still function and develop. As the boys come to maturity or drop out because of the increased observation and attention, the situation will resolve itself. Remember these boys need BSA as much, if not more than the others. 1) Identify the problem - boys not getting along. 2) Identify the scope of the problem - 3 boys of one patrol 3) Contain the problem - Don't triple your problem by scattering it amongst the other boys. Keep them where you have them in one spot. This is why it's important to keep those not involved out of the problem. To make this a troop wide problem is not necessary. The PLC need not even have this on their agenda. It's a one patrol only situation. 4) Work with the problem directly - These boys will need to develop social and interpersonal skills to deal with each other. They are not getting this at home because they are separate at that point. But when they come together at school or scouts, the problem arises. The school probably just tolerates it or separates them into different parts of the classroom or different classrooms, which only postpones the ability of these three to ever learn how to deal with this kind of interpersonal conflict. It's time to have someone work directly with these boys, mentering, guiding, aiding, coaching, being involved with them to help the three cope. It is what a troop/adult support system is supposed to do, be there to help not direct. These boys get plenty of mandates, confinements, time-outs, and other disciplinary measures meted out to them at school. Maybe the scout program can step up to the plate and help them grow and develop as young men. Obviously what the school is doing isn't working. Doing any different would be better than repeating someone else's failures. And yes, this brings back fond memories of my early scout years. The only boy that I couldn't get along with in Cub Scouts, pushing and shoving, and once a free-for-all in the back yard of the Den Mother's house, went on to be my closest friend in high school. And yes, boys do grow up with proper guidance and understanding. Stosh

Ever notice the Beavers always lead and everyone else follows? Stosh Beaver C-9W-93

Purcelce, Most people on this forum don't agree with me on my comments on the forum because I'm blunt, specific, and call a spade a spade. One of the lessons of WB is: "Lead by example." Well, when your eagle candidate comes up to you and says he has it all done except for writing up the final report, not to worry, you can assure him that the reason you don't have your WB beads is because you screwed around until it was too late, and the two of you will better enjoy your common lost opportunities. If you can't motivate yourself to get your beads, you will never be able to honestly motivate young men to get their Eagles. I would suggest not working with the BSA program. The leadership of our young men is too important to be left in the hands of those who can't lead themselves. Quit whining, get off the sofa, get your head out of your butt, write report and get back to making men out of boys or at least just quit whining. Stosh Beaver C-9W-93

Hmmm.... the boys in the patrols hold elections for their officers. They decide, plan, organize and run their own programs and activities. They vote on and decide on their goals, aims, activities as a patrol. If they wish, they can call upon SPL, or other scout or adult leadership for clarifications, definitions, or wisdom opinions before rendering a decision of their own; having their own meetings and outings even without adult supervision; and when requested by the other patrols, assist in troop level planning, organizing and cooperation as needed. This is an inappropriate boy-led patrol method? But SM directed patrol membership, troop mandated activities, and everyone else in the scout program able to trump-veto their every decision they don't agree with is an appropriate boy-led patrol method? Unless it's an issue of a breach in BSA policy, Scouting principles, or safety, I totally disagree with the modern troop-method distortion used today. Everyone got bent when the SM stepped in and wanted all e-mails to go by him first, but very few seem to think its wrong for the SM to step in and mess with the membership of the patrols. To me it's all the same thing, a direct abuse of the democratic patrol method. Stosh As one last thought. If anyone is going to respond to this post with a comment that includes "SM directed" along with "boy-led patrol method" in the same sentence/breath, we aren't going to agree so I'm ready to agree that we aren't going to agree. (This message has been edited by jblake47)

This is from B-P himself: "The Patrol system has a great character-training value if it is used aright. It leads each boy to see that he has some individual responsibility for the good of his Patrol." Yes!, the primary focus for the scout is on the patrol. This is basis of what I have been saying all along. Others seem to contradict B-P at this point and say the troop is primary. When this happens I refer to it as troop method rather than patrol method. "It leads each Patrol to see that is has definite responsibility for the good of the Troop." Each patrol has a responsibility to other patrols which comprise the troop and at times it will be necessary to work together with those other patrols. Thus a means by which this can happen is with a supportive troop structure. If all the patrols decide on attending the local camporee, it would be rather wasteful of time and talent if all the patrols were to have their own trailer and try to line up their own rides and find their own drivers, etc. so a cooperative interpatrol council is needed to coordinate this type of activity for the patrols. Every time the boys decide what the patrol is to be doing, the patrols then decide what the troop will be doing. Democracy in action. I don't have any problem with a troop structure taking on this supporting role for the patrols. The patrols, banding together, can accomplish greater things than they can do on their own. "Through it the Scoutmaster is able to pass on not only his instruction but his ideas as to the moral outlook of his Scouts." Unless someone does the Chinese Fire-Drill approach to patrol membership where no one knows who's buddy will be from one year to the next and the patrols are so mixed up so as to have experienced and inexperienced boys mixed together there shouldn't be a major problem. The younger boys will get more of the SM's assistance than the older boys, who have already had that opportunity and won't need to sit through it for the sixth or seventh time. They can go off and make plans more appropriate to their interest and skill level. "Throught it the Scouts themselves gradually learn that they have considerable say in what their Troop does." Yes, the patrols direct the troop rather than the troop dictating some program of no interest to the scouts that someone else though would be a good idea for them. "It is the Patrol system that makes the Troop, and all Scouting for the matter, a real co-operative effort." Absolutely!!! It's the patrol method that makes the troop, not the troop that makes the patrol method. The real cooperative effort is when those patrols come together to direct the work of the troop so as to support the patrol autonomy. This is the guarantee that the SM or SPL won't grab the reigns of some arbitrary authority and begin dictating to the patrols how they should or should not operate, thus destroying the whole patrol method process with some dictatorial mandate that the patrols must follow. Where's the democracy in that process? "I don't care what you voted as a patrol, you will be going to the camporee and that's final." No, final is when none of the boys show up from that patrol and go somewhere else and hang out for the weekend... B-P knew what he was talking about! Great quote! Thanks for posting it. There is nothing that says the boys always have to meet as a troop. As a matter of fact, the national honor award for a patrol requires two meetings a month of patrol along with another outing as a patrol, and if one does the math: add to that the monthly meeting of PLC planning, that leaves one week a month left over for the inter-patrol needs of a troop meeting. Otherwise, you have 1 PLC planning meeting, 3 troop meetings, 1 outdoor activity, 2 patrol meetings and 1 patrol outing per month. That means the scouts in order to do both the patrol method AND troop method have to meet twice a week to get it all in. I don't think there are that many out there ready for that much activity. When patrol method is used effectively each "troop" meeting means rather than the continual mix and remix of patrol members at the whim of adult arbitration, the NBP works on advancement with the troop Instructor and Troop Guide, (i.e. map and compass), the next older patrol does a refresher on orienteering getting ready for camporee competition, the next age patrol level is out playing with a GPS, the next age patrol is working on the Orienteering MB with a qualified MB counselor, and the venture patrol is out learning how to set up the COMPASS GAME so they can lead the compass competition at the next camporee instead of some other adult leaders. Yes, a truly boy-led camporee. Everyone in the troop can be together for the opening flag ceremony and then splitting up each patrol scouts end up with an age and interest appropriate activities to keep them in the program, and coming back together at the end they end up with a closing ceremony, SM minute, song and then break for the evening, everyone having a relevant experience of scouting. I simply can't understand why people wouldn't think this patrol method is such a terrible thing? It's too bad B-P isn't here to explain what he thought he explained in the first place. Stosh