DuctTape

and it's never "a scout's own" if it is required, planned, organized, and/or executed by an adult.

I agree in principle. The how and when though is not obvious to many. First if the PL is struggling with "setting up a tarp", I immediately wonder what the older boys who know how are doing at that moment. If it were at a troop meeting, the PLC decided on that activity, did they have an instructor ? if no older boy was available, then they could have planned to have an ASM demo. If it were on a campout, then I wonder why the PLC didnt plan to instruct this at the prior troop meeting, or again where are the older boys. If none are available, then I might ask to see the PL, and away from his patrol teach him how to do it. Then he could go back to his patrol and teach them. I am sure this is what you were getting at, but the nuance on the how to do it without "impinging on their leadership" is not obvious to many adults. As you pointed out, they interpreted their role as "hands-off", which tells me they had difficulty seeing the nuances. Props to you for showing them how to move towards "hands-off" as a goal but not the means.

I agree that is what those courses are for. But, the curriculum at IOLS and SM specific (i haven't done wb) do not even come close to addressing the development of boy-led, patrol method scouting. Before gaps can be filled, the core curriculum needs to have this fundamental concept at its core operation, not just words. For example at IOLS. Instead of the module on woods tools with the participants "acting as a patrol" to learn the totin'chip skills. the module should be 1. what does the boy-led patrol method look like when scouts are learning and using woods tools, 2. what are the roles of the adults. 3. what are the roles of the scouts. 4. how to transition to a more boy-led patrol method structure. These (off the top of my head) should be the curricular goals of the modules using the scouting skills as a medium, not the goals themselves. Currently the curriculum is for participants to learn the (woods tools) skills, not how to foster and grow a boy-led patrol method scouting experience.

I think we are all on the same page here, it is only the inhibiting medium of interweb forums vs sittin around a campfire which allows for a more nuanced discussion.

Four days is plenty to respond with: "Thank you for bringing your concern to our attention. I will put this topic on our agenda as new business for our next committee meeting on (date/time/location). As always parents are welcome and invited to attend our commitee meetings. I hope to see you there."

I read those stages as the individual stages for a scout, not the troop. So I agree with you Barry, that an older troop has the older boys as the main role models etc... But I disagree that those stages are only in new troops. Older boys as the main role models and leaders is consistent with the boys being 3-5 years older and in stage 2 or 3 of their scouting career. The first year scout is focusing (in general) on core basic skills as taught/modeled/etc.. by the older boys and in 3 years that new scout will be the older boy continuing the cycle. Or perhaps I misunderstood the stages.

I always punt my response to a face to face discussions. Email is for: sending/recieving documents setting up appointment date/time thanking someone after the meeting It is NOT for: discussions So for this situation, I would reply to the scout's email with: "I am happy to provide some guidance and clarity with the cooking merit badge process. Will you be at the next scout meeting? I will arrive 10 minutes early to give you my undivided attention. Please let me know if this works for you. I can also be available at other times if this date/time is not convenient."

Wisconsinmommas post reminded me of something more... Often the boys don't know what they are really missing. As I said before the Patrol Method is also a goal, so as a means to get them "out of their rut" this non-boy-led idea can help. Offer to be their camp cook (and cleanup) if they go this really cool spot you found. Keep the backpacking distance and terrain easy, and make awesome food (which is still easy to make). The boys will learn of a new location, and see a new awesome menu too. They might take the idea and run with it. Another thought. Often the simple menu is not about the ease of cooking, it is the cleanup. We make the cleanup process so cumbersome and ridiculous it is no wonder the boys choose a no cleanup hot dog on a stick. Simplifying the cleanup (which is necessary when backpacking anyway) helps. I personally hate the 3-bin system. It is too much work, and often more unsanitary than other methods unless it is adult run.

I think the same idea can be used albeit much heavier lift. I often share with my scouts the adventures beyond the car. Photos and stories go a long way. Another is to find a really cool spot when day tripping from the car camp. The hidden campsite off trail near a waterfall for example. Then the idea of camping at these other locations becomes the goal. Instead of looking at the question as car camp vs backpacking, instead it becomes "destination". Then how do we get to that cool spot might require backpacking or paddling. Another idea is to go with another dad and his son (the 4 of you) to a really cool camping spot which requires backpacking. Cook awesome food over and open fire, explore the nearby lake, go fishing. Then on the way home say to your sons "ya know, your patrol could do that, what do you think? Maybe you two could plan that instead of the troop trip next month".

The Patrol method in my opinion is also a goal. What I mean is, looking at any of our descriptions are there areas where we can improve ie more cohesive patrol/less troop, and/or scouts doing more/adults less. When I list all the things we adults actually do, I also make a note of which could(should) be done by the boys. If the PL isn't ready to do it, I need to get him trained up. Ultimately the only items that only adults can do are things like driving and legal contracts and such. From what I have experienced, the more cohesive the patrol, and when the patrols do activities instead of just troop activities, the less the adults are doing. Thus I see the patrol method as a means and a goal since the patrols and scouts are not static but growing, learning and changing. Looking at progress towards the independence instead of "this is how its done currently and forever".

I am guessing "patrol advisor". If ot is an adult, that is a sure way to have it run like cub scouts. If it it a scout "troop guide" then the conversation should only come from the SM (or ASM)

or if the scout were a Jehovas Witness whereby their religious doctrine prohibits such "pledges", or a multitude of other reasons.

IIRC, one of the reasons for the BOR back in the really old days was for boys to gain "interview experience" for when they were job seeking. To help them become comfortable with strangers asking them questions about their experience, and accomplishments.

I do not disagree. Reading your other post about how you train is excellent. However, I still maintain that using the term "adult led" is wrong, especially when linked to "boy run" as it makes a specific distinction that the youth are NOT to lead... that is the adults job. I like the final quote you posted above.

How? if the adults are leading then by definition the youth are following. https://scoutmastercg.com/where-is-it-written-that-troops-are-boy-led/

Welcome to the forum. I like your spirit.

The only big issue for me is the focus on advancement as the goal instead of a method. This is my beef with any of these events whether it in mB college, etc... Instead, imagine an event with scouting activities whereby participating in the adventure has the secondary result of fulfilling requirements for mBs and/or ranks. No classes, but adventure. Imagine a camporee where a telescope is available and after campfire, scouts have the opportunity to use it. An older scout shows a few how to locate and identify planets, nebulae or the moons of jupiter. Among a few other things. At the end, can you hear the older scout saying, "hey I did 3 requirements for the astronomy merit badge tonight" and the younger scout saying, "really? that was fun, maybe I should do astronomy mB too". IMO, that is how advancement is used as a method to fulfill the aims.

Has cubs changed that much since I was a kid? Our den meetings had just the two den leaders, no other parents. The same for all other den activities. It was rare for another parent to be around. We did not have that many whole pack meetings that I recall. Pinewood derby, blue&gold, i recall one holiday themed party. Everything else was den based with just the leaders. Perhaps that is why we transitioned to the patrol method so easily.

I also see the "it's adding to the requirements", when disagreeing with any decision or practice of the troop even when it has nothing to do with advancement. I think this is partly due to the (over)emphasis put on advancement. For many, it appears, advancement is the mission instead of a method.

not just stepping in to avoid failure, but even before with forced organization via schedules.

I also agree with you. I will guess that another place we will agree (please correct me if I am mistaken) is the need for all new leaders to be provided excellent training (or refresher) in boy-led-patrol method scouting techniques. As is being mentioned by others, hands-on and doing are the bread and butter of scouting, and training adults in how to allow (implement) the best boy-led-patrol method organization the adults need specifics, not philosophic quotes on flip-charts. The handbooks (boy and adult) used to give examples of situations and how the SM could respond. In trainings, these scenarios should be discussed, acted out, debated. As you mention, even those of us with significant patrol method experience disagree. I believe when we debate the specific action, even if we disagree, especially when we disagree, it strengthens our understanding of the patrol method and the vision of scouting in general. Thus I think this training in boy-led-patrol-method scouting, when done by highly competent people with highly engaging materials and with a focus on the outcome is paramount for scouting regardless of past experience. Unfortunately this training doesn't exist. Some will say "it is embedded in..." which means it is not the focus of the training.

Outdoor experience yes. But not specific to being a scout. As I said, many with scouting experience did not experience the patrol method and try to do scouts in the way they experienced it, which takes a lot of time to retrain them into proper patrol method leaders. Those with outdoor experience and no scouting experience are more willing to learn to implement the patrol method with no need to unlearn bad habits.

And sometimes (often) the prior scouting experience was not really following the bsa methods. I have had the most difficult time with that type of experience, some even eagle scouts but from adult led troop focused plop camping experience. Sometimes it is easier to instruct from a blank slate than having to erase 8 years of anti-boy-led-patrol-method experience.

It took my wife a few years to realize how safe I actually am on my outdoor adventures, even the more "extreme" ones. In the early years, I would tell her the most dangerous part of my trip was the drive to/from the trailhead. I would sometimes text her when I got back to my car with... "out of the woods, back in danger."

So as not not edit my previous response... I want to add the idea in my opinion would require training the OA board by the SM and he provide oversight through SM conferences. The more I think about it, the more I like it to help the boys grow. I see the bigger picture here, and not just a focus on advancement.