Sentinel947

Sometimes things have a right way and a wrong way. Sometimes things have an optimal/most efficient way, but there are other options out there that work and stuff that flat out doesn't. Sometimes there are handful of equally good ways (when applied properly) and stuff that flat out doesn't work. In our case, our goal is to develop youth in character, citizenship and body. Most users of this forum know that the patrol method is the only way to run a troop. But how do you use the patrol method? Is there only one way to use the patrol method? From my ownexperience, and from what I've learned from folks like Stosh and Eagledad, I'd say that answer is no. There is more than one way to use the Patrol method. I have a thread opened that I'm exploring this topic a bit more. I'd love some contributions from anybody. http://scouter.com/index.php/topic/27926-new-scouts-patrols-a-thought-experiment/ Sentinel947

@@Eagledad I've quoted your last post in it's entirety. My assumption is that you seem upset at something I've written. If I'm miscalcuated, please correct me. @@Krampus due to your upvote, and your post, I'd assume I've upset you with something I've written beyond our discussion in I&P. If that's so, I'd like to make that right. All: I'm putting it out there right now. I think highly of everybody on this forum. I look up to everybody here as a mentor and a role model. I value the experiences everybody brings to the table. That being said, typed posts have a lack of context. It's hard to strip away my bias that we read into other people's posts. When I read somebody's post, I don't have the context of your troop, how it works. I don't have everybody's scouting history to reference. I'm working off of memory. So I have to take posts at face value with a little bit of what I know about each of you. That's all I have to work with. Language without being spoken is hard. Words can seem sarcastic or harsh without that meaning meant to them. Little smiley faces don't help much with that. @@Eagledad : I don't think anybody makes up stuff, and spews it out. Even over in I&P. I don't think I've ever doubted the sincerity of anybody on this forum that they are trying to do the right thing for their scouts. That's a pretty huge accusation. I didn't make any post saying anybody here takes Scouting less seriously than me. There are plenty of folks here that give up plenty more of their time, effort, blood, sweat and tears on scouting than I do. I'm not some Super Scouter or Saint Sentinel. "Do you know how hard it is to find places to camp with 100 scouts where the patrols can camp 100 yards apart?" My troop doesn't quite have a hundred, but we have a difficult time finding places to camp with the 50-60 boys we sometimes have on an outing. "I am pretty sure that you would not have left our troop the first night. Of the hundreds of new scouts we brought into the troop, I can't recall a single scout leaving because they were mixed in with with an established patrol. We had a lot less complaints with scouts joining established patrols than the families of NSPs, especially with the parents. Older experienced scouts are pretty nice guys and know how to have a lot of fun. " I can't say what I would have done with your Troop. It wasn't an option to join your Troop. (At least I don't think it was.) My experience is unique to me. I included it as a point of caution. I can't play what if's with that situation. You yourself said it best. "I bring balance to the discussion." For every point. There is a counter point. That's what's so great about forums such as this. We enrich ourselves and others by sharing and reading other people's posts. I don't think anything I've said has disparaged the work you've done, the methods you've chose, or your motivations for doing so. If I have, or it seems like I have. I apologize, for that's not my intention. I'm not here to spread the Scouting Gospel according to Sentinel, but to share my experience, pick up the experiences from everybody, and maybe help a newer leader along the way. What I've learned about the patrol method and being an adult leader from the people here has helped me and my unit in a way I cannot put a price on. But I value it, and each of you, immensely. All the best, Sentinel947

I provided a link to the poll. I also did not miss the BSA's poll on current Scouters. I also cited it. Did you even read my post? It's number 31.

I think both NSP's and mixed age patrols for new Scouts can be equally viable. Like most organizations, this depends on the unique factors of your troop. (This is a slightly different discussion then using mixed age versus same age patrols in your troop as a whole, as we're only focusing on new scouts. If this experiment goes well, I'll create another thread for all patrols, not just what to do with new scouts.) Here are the parameters of my little game. Game: What I'm looking for: Explain how your unit handles new scouts. Describe your troop. How big is your troop? How many adults do you have? Do you use a New Scout Patrol? Do you seed them into existing patrols? What are the roles of Scoutmasters and ASM's in your system? Give your pros and cons for why you do what you do. Do you think it's working? Would you consider switching? Why? Feel free to add something I didn't think of. It's not about answering my direct questions, as much as explaining your troop and how ya'll do things. What I'm not looking for: Why your unit down the street uses XYZ and it sucks, so don't use XYZ. Make sense? I'll start: My Troop: My Troop is a pretty large suburban troop. We have about 80 Scouts on the roster. our retention is pretty good, but I don't have the numbers committed to memory. We have A Scoutmaster in addition to 4 ASM's. We have 10 patrols, some average more than 8, some less. We have 1 SPL, and two ASPL's. We use new scout patrols. The Scouts come in as Cub Scouts in March. In January, the Troop elects POR's for the Jan-May. Even though it's not BSA kosher, all POR's are elected. Troop Guides are elected and their job is to work with the new scouts, to teach them the skills they need, and to work with the PL the new scouts will elect. The Troop guides are the only position in the troop with a year long term, but we're pretty flexible if a scout has another commitment and can't complete the whole year. This is helpful because the guys who run for Guide self select into being the guys most interested in working with new scouts, avoiding the scenario where older guys ignore the newbies, or worse, push all the work onto them. This is a challenge because like well meaning adults, well meaning older boys will sometimes try to do all the work, and not give the new scouts the chance to do camp tasks like cook or make the evening campfire. Training Troop Guides is really critical. We like to get them sent to NYLT whenever possible. (This is another can of worms, My council does NYLT very well. I know that's not the case everywhere.) One of the ASPL's works with the Guides. My role in the Troop is the new scout ASM. I observe the guides and the new scouts as discretely as possible. I work with the ASPL to coach and train his guides. Ultimately, I do very little. Since it was only 6 years ago that I myself was a Troop guide, it's a weekly struggle to sit on my hands and not interfere. =P So our new scouts cross over in March. The Troop Guides meet with them and help the new guys break down into patrols. From there, the Troop guides break themselves into groups and assign themselves to patrols. The Troop guides help the new patrols conduct patrol elections to select their first patrol leader. For the first few months, the new scouts work with the troop guides to prepare for outings. This also helps them complete T2F requirements. They are more or less separated from the Troop, so the troop can conduct a full program, and not have to return to the basics with the whole troop every year. I'd say maybe half of the new scouts achieve first class in the first year with the Troop, but it's not something we stress. It's also important to stress the chain of command, or lack of in my Troop. While it may look like one. ASM>ASPL>Guide>NSP PL. It isn't really. If the ASPL doesn't want my help, then I'm content to observe, the ASPL has to train the Guides, but not actively interfere with the Guide doing his job. the Guide needs to keep in mind that the NSP PL is a PL, and to help that PL lead, not do the job for him. The Scouts stay in this system until the end of the year. When the Troop goes to do elections for the following January-May term the NSP is no longer the NSP. They can stay together, they can split up. Some can stay, some can go to other patrols. The Adults nor the SPL sets the rules for how that transition happens. It doesn't work perfectly, but we generally have between 15-20 new scouts to start the year, and maybe lose 4-5 though a year, either to sports or them finding out that scouts isn't that thing. We almost never lose new scouts to going to another troop. We would consider switching if the scouts pushed for it, or if we started bringing in too few scouts to create a patrol. Overall we are pretty happy with what we have right now. We think it orients the new scouts, gives the Guides a good mentoring role, the ASPL a good training role, and lets the rest of the Troop program operate a little more regularly without having to stop and take new scouts up to speed. Sentinel947

"Similarly, 56 percent of Boy Scouts and Venturers opposed the policy, with 42 percent strongly opposing it. Fifty-eight percent of past Scouts and Venturers oppose the current policy, with 31 percent strongly opposing." What else can that be other than current Scouts and Venturers?

@@barry I'm a firm believer in the NSP. I joined Scouts because my friends did. They pushed me to do it. I thought I was too cool to be a boy scout. Had I been separated from my friends at my first troop meeting, it would have been my last troop meeting. It may seem like a small thing to you, but it can be huge in the mind of an 11 year old. I look at the requirements for Eagle now, and they aren't super challenging, nothing I can't handle. When I was 16, they seemed extremely difficult. @@blw2 That being said, I think either an NSP or seeding the new scouts into existing patrols can work. Again, the trick is to have a clear vision for how it's going to work, trained youth leaders, adults that are willing to drink coffee, sit on their hands (except to drink the aforementioned coffee), and observe. The point is to have the patrol method, getting hung up on the type of patrols being utilized is arguing over two very good and viable methods to making it work. To all: Poorly utilized NSP's end up being Webelos 3. Poorly utilized mix age patrols can just as easily be webelos 3. This is on the adults, not as much the Scouts. Funny how so much of the issues we discuss here end up coming down to adults. The scouts are just out there to be with their buddies and have fun. Sentinel947

I'm not talking about today. I'm not talking about tomorrow. I'm talking about 5-10 years years from now. Only time will prove if my theory is correct. You are putting lots of words in my mouth, you should not do that. It's called creating a straw man argument, and it doesn't help anything. I actually never used the word change in my first post. You are again putting words in my mouth and you should stop doing that. I also didn't mention the Obama administration, nor am I a supporter of him. Now you are incorrectly stereotyping me, and attributing traits to me that I may or may not have. This is a dangerous assumption as well. You are pointing out a statistical fact on membership decline, and you are one hundred percent correct. Allow me to place my own Facts. Fact one: Millennials are not joining Scouts as an 11 year old anymore. A millennial is somebody born between 1980-2000. The youngest millennials are 15 or 16 right now. A millennial cannot be 11 years old. Fact two: A Millennial born in 1980 is 36. Fact three: A Millennial is between ages 15-36. Fact four: In 2013 the average age a woman had a child was at age 26. Fact five: If today's 36 year old millennial had a child at age 26, that child would be 10 years old today. Fact six: because of fact five, most millennials who have kids have kids of cub scout age. Fact 7: In 2013 the youngest millennials were 12-13. Fact 8: per the BSA. "Teens first read the current Boy Scouts of America membership and leadership requirements prohibiting open homosexuals from being Scouts or adult leaders. Fifty-seven percent of general population teens opposed the current policy; 38 percent strongly opposed this policy. Similarly, 56 percent of Boy Scouts and Venturers opposed the policy, with 42 percent strongly opposing it. Fifty-eight percent of past Scouts and Venturers oppose the current policy, with 31 percent strongly opposing." in short, current scouts, millennials, opposed the membership standards of barring homosexuals. Fact 9: Parents in the US oppose the ban. Current BSA parents approved of it. "Parents now oppose the policy by 45 percent to 42 percent, in stark contrast to 2010, when they supported it by 58 percent to 29 percent. Parents of current Scouts continue to support the policy, but only by 48 percent to 39 percent (down from 57 percent to 29 percent in 2010). The effect of the policy has also shifted toward the negative, with parents saying it makes them less likely to enroll their son by 23 percent to 22 percent (in 2010, it made them more likely to do so by 30 percent to 15 percent)." My conclusion: Older Americans (including current BSA parents) are more likely to support the ban. Younger adults and millennials are likely to oppose the ban. The BSA is making what it perceives to be the best move for the future, even if it's going to accelerate it's decline today. The trends are shifting. There is no denying it. Opinions are not snapshots frozen in time. More people support homosexual equality than they did 10 years ago. While current BSA parents support the ban, they will be leaving the BSA as their children age out in the next 4-5 years. Those millennials? They'll be having cub scout aged kids. And they don't support the ban. So you have a product that your current customer loves, but has a very dwindling opportunity for growth and has been declining for years with the gay ban in place, do you make the change and hunt future customers, knowing that you'll take a hit today? Or do you cling tightly to your current customers and go down with the ship? You can read the report here. http://www.scouting.org/filestore/MembershipStandards/310-561_WB.pdf You are prioritizing current parents and membership. I'm playing the long game. (I'm not currently a parent, I'm also about smack in the middle of the Millennial generation at 22. Our bias on the issue are not going to allow us to agree on the solution. Regardless of what the BSA chose, somebody would be unhappy. This situation sucks all around, the BSA needs to get out of the culture wars. Sentinel947

I'll piggy back on Eagle94. Scouts that are all very young have a hard time leading themselves. They need an older scout or two to mentor them and help them learn the skills they need to be successful in the outdoors. The challenge is to not just split up the younger scouts. They want to be with their friends. To say "Well they need to make new friends." Doesn't understand the mind of a 11 year old. ​Let them make their own patrols, try to have some of the older guys join the youngest scouts and leaders and trainers.

I too found JoeBob comment interesting and will go back and reread it again. ​I think it's optimistic to say that it takes a year. Your mileage may vary, but it took me almost a year to get buy in from the right adults, get the older scouts on board, then the new SPL led the discussion with the PLC about our troop and what his vision was, what they wanted to do, and what they adults vision was. The second year was implementing some of that, and it's gone VERY slowly, because the boys are leading things. I'm happy for the progress we've made, and hopeful that we'll keep it going. Now we are in year 3. Perhaps it can take 3 years? ​However, my experience had a few things that made my troop's route different and why I think my way of converting a Troop to the patrol method is not reproducible for most folks. My Troop was a patrol method troop as recently as 2008. I was a member of the Troop back then and remember what it was like. Our Troop sends our Scout to NYLT and our Council's NYLT is top notch. I went to NYLT, I know exactly what they are being taught and how to build on it. This is my 10th year in the Troop. Everybody knows me, and there's a trust level there a newer leader wouldn't have. Getting buy in from the other adults wasn't terribly difficult, the CC was on board. The Scoutmasters wasn't sure what the end game was. He didn't see my vision. Being 22, I have more of a peer to peer relationship with the Scouts in my Troop than most parent/leaders can have. When I started discussing the Patrol Method and the youth leadership concept's behind it, our senior Scouts were hungry for the challenge and I knew what buttons to press. The Scoutmaster's son was one of those senior Scouts, he was able to make the case to the Scoutmaster better than I could. (The Scoutmaster's son then went on to be an ASPL and is now the Troop's SPL, a remarkable turnaround for a Scout who looked like he was just waiting out the clock on his Eagle.) To make the twist even more fun, I was a Troop Guide for the Scoutmaster's son when he crossed over into the Troop. The Scoutmaster and I went to Wood badge, now we both have a shared vision and can help keep the other adults on the same track. The big kicker is again, the senior Scouts bought in. The seeds were already planted, they just needed permission and the adults to get out of the way. Too long: didn't read, get to the point Sentinel!!! ​Even with the circumstances stacked in my favor, this has been a 3 year project. With everything in my favor beyond me being the actual Scoutmaster, this has been a slow process. ​Without a unity of vision from the adults, the patrol method cannot work. All the adult's must be on the same page and have a point person, it should be the Scoutmaster, but an ASM can make it work. (I had to steer the ship from the ASM position till the Scoutmaster figured things out.) In a Troop where the older Scouts aren't playing the game, this could easily turn into a 3-4 year process where you have to build the patrol system with younger Scouts, wait for the older guys who don't want to go along to age/Eagle/drop out. That's a tough proposition. Part of it is how it's being presented to Scouts. I don't frame it as work. It's about decision making, influence and leadership. Going to the patrol method means giving those things to the Boys, obviously subject to reasonable oversight. I think the more realistic scenario is some of the older scouts don't buy in, some do. Target the ones that do, build them up and coach them, especially if they are patrol leaders or the SPL. ​I'd keep going, but I'd like commentary before I continue to ramble about my experiences. Perhaps a little commentary can help me focus on the specifics. Sentinel947

Nah. You'll do fine, and we have your back.

CLEAR!!!!

@@TAHAWK and @@Stosh , the two of you aren't far apart at all. Arguing semantics I think. I second this. I've seen it first hand. We've let them experiment beyond the 6-8 number. It hasn't always worked, but it lets them make their decisions, experiment and learn from the experience. I am on board with Tahawk's point. If Billy is not being included in a patrol, I'm going to have the Patrol leaders take a crack at the issue first (assuming the SPL hasn't already facilitated that.) Next the SPL gets a chance to resolve the issue. If he can't do it, it comes up to the Scoutmasters. This hasn't happened in the nearly 4 years our Troop has fully gone "jungle rules" or "Lord of the Flies" and let the scouts decide what patrol they want to be in without conditions. (Exception, we use new scout patrols) so the 15-20 new Scouts we get divide into roughly 2 patrols but even there, they choose which one they want to be in, and still even with 11 year olds, nobody has ever been left out. Edit: since Stosh posted while I was typing. He added "One troop which has boy-led down quite well, may need a 5-minute tweak here and there as needed, whereas another troop who has been heavily adult-led, troop-method for many years may take a very long time with major overhauls to get anywhere near a boy-led, patrol-method unit. That's the issue I was trying to describe in my comments and probably wasn't clear enough. " I think this is absolutely on point. Changing institutions takes time, it's very messy, but we shouldn't be discouraged, and look for and celebrate the little changes, because they are meaningful. Sentinel947

Well stated.

Welcome @@Bear456! Feel free to go and read(and comment) on anything you feel like. We are OK with old threads being resurrected, just keep in mind that this forum has been around a while, some people who have made posts in some old threads may no longer be active. Also keep in mind that we are not an official resource of the Boy Scouts of America. While this is a great place to get opinions and feedback, you should be careful to make sure that what you read here lines up with BSA rules. If you're really stumped, your District Executive or Unit Commissioner should be able to give you the official answer. With that in mind, I don't see how a Cake Walk is a game of chance. Everybody enters a pastry or cake, every participant finishes with a pastry or cake. Sounds like a gift exchange, only with food. Yours in Scouting, Sentinel947

I think so! You just go a few steps further than I am willing to. As usual, our disagreements are generally only a few degrees of separation. For somebody in the 20-30 age category, the highest chance of dieing in the back country is probably "do something stupid." That's a pretty wide range of things to prepare for. @@Krampus, I'll keep the advice in mind. I've never been to Alaska.

I would expect a team of Scouts and adult leaders. When I was a Scout, I would have wanted to be part of the delivery teams, and when I say "part of" I really mean leading the delivery teams. Just takes away another opportunity for the Scouts to do and lead in the name of adult convenience. Can a 95 pound 1st year Scout move all that mulch himself? Of course not. Can a whole patrol? Maybe. What about two patrols? a Troop is a team. Boy Scouts can't sell Christmas trees or do cook whole spaghetti dinners without help either, I don't see the difference here.

Did she not teach reading? He said former Cub Scout. So your word problem is flawed from the first sentence.

I like this. And I think Part of this is not worrying about the short term results. There have been times over the last year where I've observed meetings and wondered if the chaos I've created with patrol method has been worth the stress on the Boys, myself and other adults. In the end, I'd say it's been worth it, even though our journey is far from over. While things aren't where I wish they were. While there are parents concerned over the chaos, at the end of the day, our measurable metrics are up (membership, attendance) and the intangibles, (older Scouts being more involved, more effective patrols, a stronger program (We're finally doing new events rather than recycling last years events!!!!!!)). It's scary to change things. But we gotta keep in mind what our goals are in Scouting. I think we're giving ourselves the best chance to achieve Scoutings goals if we use the Patrol Method. Sentinel947

You definitely are knowledgeable. I think you may have missed my point. Here's my reasoning. Lightning and Dogs kill far more people yearly than Bear attacks. It would stand to reason that there many more dog attacks than bear attacks, since dogs are more common than bears. Considering that a bear is a stronger, more lethal animal than the average dog, bears should kill a higher number of bear attack victims than dogs kill dog attack victims. Therefore it would make more sense to carry a defensive option on your evening walk with the Wife, or during your next visit to the city, in order to be prepared in the event of dog attacks since they are far more likely to happen, even if each canine-homo sapiens interaction is less likely to be lethal. You are certainly a more experienced outdoorsman than I am. Like you do, I take precautions in bear country and follow bear protocol in order to lessen the chances I will encounter a bear. Knowing that I've done everything possible to make a bear encounter as unlikely as I can, I deem carrying a weapon able to fight a bear unfeasible. The chances are so remote, and carrying such a weapon so cumbersome(and in some places illegal,) that it doesn't make sense for me. Local situations, individual knowledge and experience. I may be victim to a bear attack, and know in my final moments "****, Stosh was right." I could change my mind, bring a weapon, get cornered by a bear, fight and lose, even with a weapon. I could also bring the weapon, and not have access to it at the right time, and get mauled anyways. I could also fight off a bear a win. That's probably the least likely scenario. If I get in a throw down with mama Grizzly, she's a far better killer than I can ever be. There is one last scenario, and that's where I don't bring a weapon, I follow bear procedures, I don't see a bear, and If I do, I do the usual things one is supposed to do when confronted by a bear, and I live. This is the most statistically likely outcome of a bear human encounter. There's a chance right now, sitting in urban Cincinnati Ohio, that I could be the victim of terrorism or gang related shootings. I don't wear a bulletproof vest every day because I weigh the statistical likelihood of those events happening around me versus the cost and inconvenience of wearing a bullet proof vest every day. I view weapons in the back country in a similar way. There are definitely places where it might be appropriate, (as there are some situations and places in the US where wearing a vest would be helpful.) but for most people in most situations, it's just unnecessary. Anything is possible. But we can't be completely prepared for every possible scenario we may ever encounter in life. We minimize our risks, and improvise if something goes south, and let the chips fall where they may. Sentinel947

Lack of effort.

I don't carry firearms when camping, either with the Troop or when I go myself. Generally I don't carry large knives either. I weigh the difference of being prepared, versus the likelihood of the event in question happening. Especially while backpacking, the weapon wouldn't even be accessible to me, and I wouldn't get the chance to use it even in the extremely unlikely scenario that I needed it. There's an average of three bear fatalities in the US and Canada a year. Millions of people go out in the woods every year. I don't live in bear country, and take maybe a trip every other year that is in bear country. I've carried bear spray once, in Grand Tetons NP. In my two Philmont treks, once as a youth (crew leader), once as an Adult (lead adviser), I've insisted on bear protocol be followed to the letter. The result? I've spent 22 days on the trail at Philmont, and never saw a single bear. I don't begrudge Stosh or Krampus the need to be more prepared, especially in the back country of places out West, where the predators are a much more plentiful. Your mileage may vary, Sentinel947

Mixed feelings about this. Awesome that it'll be available online, but putting the onus on volunteers and scouts to verify consistently that their print versions of the books are up to date means that the books could become obsolete very quickly. If the requirements are only slightly tweeked versus completely overhauled, that's a huge waste of money for counselors and scouts to buy the latest book.

Part of the issue is that the information is out there, but only if you're really willing to dig for it. Our training methods shouldn't be targeting super scouters, but the average leader. It shouldn't assume that the average leader is going to continue to research how to be a Scoutmaster after they were told "you've met all the training requirements." Conducting a UOS would be a great way to fill this in, but it becomes just another weekend obligation that already busy leaders have to make time for. Ideally Unit Commissioners could fill this gap with guidance and coaching of units, but there aren't nearly enough of them, and their training is also scattered. I like MattR's summary above my post. I think it really breaks things down to the basics. However, theory is great, but I can say from my own work with my Troop, that taking an already established Troop to start using the patrol method is VERY difficult. It's worked in my Troop because the Scoutmaster and I were dedicated to the concept, had the right experience and training, and most importantly, it was a direction the Scouts wanted to go in. Sentinel947

I refuse to acknowledge it as being "the most effective way." Our goals are leadership and character development. We do that through the patrol method, and the boys leading themselves, under the careful guidance of adult leaders. Even advancement itself is a means to an end. I know I'm preaching to the choir, but I always feel obligated to push back against that notion, even though you aren't advocating for it.