Calion

Are you serious? At Wood Badge, the SPL stands in front of the formation and says, “all patrols, when reporting to a station, the PL confirms everyone is there and has the patrol give the patrol yell”? People here seem to think that patrols giving patrol yells are at least somewhat important. Awesome. Could you reference the page number in the Handbook that tells just when and how patrols give patrol yells? Or a Web page that does the same?

Okay, who knows just what the SPL should do to call for patrol yells? I don’t understand what the confusion here is. I asked two questions: When should patrol yells be given, and how they should be called for. The first question has been largely answered. No one has even attempted to answer the second question.

Cool. Excellent idea. Just how?

And if no older Scouts know how to tie knots? Sorry, what?

Okay, so are you saying that procedures for the SPL to call for patrol yells are in the handbook?

Cool! How is that done?

I see. So none of the experienced adults here have any idea how this can be done successfully, but we expect a 14-year-old to figure out how to do it on his own. Shall we have Scouts figure out how to tie knots without instruction as well?

Let’s go back to my original problem:

YES! To all the above, and more! How can the answer to “when and how does the SPL call for patrol yells?” be “YES!”?

YES! To all the above, and more! Um…I don’t think you understood my question. Loved that show so much when I was a kid.

Okay, these are good ideas, but when the patrols give their yells when forming up, just when and how do they do it? What does the SPL say to trigger these yells? Are they all done at the same time?

Scouts BSA Handbook: "Patrols have yells, too. If your patrol is named for an animal, you can use that animal’s sound—the howl of a wolf, for example, or the hoot of an owl. Or your patrol might decide on some other shout that identifies it. Members can give the patrol yell whenever they do well in a troop competition or reach an important goal, and even when they’re ready to chow down on a camp meal."

Every patrol is supposed to have a patrol yell. Great! But when are they actually used? When does the patrol use its patrol yell? It’s not much use if it’s never used.. I have been trying to get the SPL to have the patrols give their patrol yells during opening ceremony, but he’s never yet done it, perhaps because he doesn’t know exactly when or how to have them do so. Well, I don’t either. is there any official or unofficial guidance on this subject?

That is an excellent idea. I think I'll do just that. Thank you everyone for your thoughts and advice. Just writing this out helped me clarify things. Mainly, I realized that the right thing to do was to speak to the Unit Commissioner (who had signed off on these things). He, of course, had no idea of the situation until I informed him, and based on his and ya'll's advice, I think what I'm going to do is hold the SM conference as normal, but tell him that I'm disappointed that he seemingly went around me, and that I very well might have signed off on the requirement if he had brought it to me now, but that at this point, I'm going to inform the committee of the situation. He'll get his BOR, and almost certainly get his rank, but if they scare him a little about this, then I think that's probably the best I can do without making a capital case out of it, which I'd really like to avoid.

I don't know how he got Star; I was ASM then and had nothing to do with it. I have no reason to question his merit badges. He has time for Eagle still. As I said, I spoke to him multiple times about his performance. I don't think he's done badly enough not to give him leadership time credit—we've certainly had worse SPLs. But him going around me to get signed off makes me even less kosher with him getting Star at this point. The thing is, I don't know what to do. Can I/should I refuse to sign his book for SM conference? What are my options here?

Several months ago our then second-term, now third-term SPL (and son of the CC) brought me his book wanting a Scoutmaster conference for Life. He had nothing filled out; none of the other requirements for Life had been approved. Instead of giving him a Scoutmaster Conference, I looked up what merit badges he had earned, and worked with him to sign off as much as I could. However, I did not sign off his Oath and Law requirement. This Scout has been a cut-up for years, and had never taken his SPL responsibilities very seriously, often missing meetings and campouts with little or no notice, talking badly about other Scouts, keeping a hand in his pocket while leading the Pledge, Oath, and Law, and in general not comporting himself in a way I expect from an SPL shooting for Life Scout. I'm not saying he's a bad apple or anything, and I'm certainly not saying I have any animus toward him; he's done a (barely) satisfactory job as SPL (clearly most of his peers think so!). I just wasn't comfortable signing off on that requirement at that time. I told him that when he completed all his other Life requirements besides that one (and SM conference, of course), to come back to me and we'd discuss his Oath and Law requirement, and in the meantime I asked him to try to take his role as a Scout and as SPL more seriously. He agreed. In the intervening months I mentioned this to him a couple more times, trying to make clear what I expected from him, and he acknowledged it without complaint. Recently, he comes to me again, asking for a Scoutmaster conference. I look at his book and see that all of the remaining requirements have been signed off by our unit commissioner/former Scoutmaster/treasurer/equipment coordinator, who often attends meetings and campouts. I do not know what to do here. I feel that this Scout, instead of attempting to address the issues I raised either by remedying them or discussing them with me, went behind my back to get everything signed off by someone else. I haven't even authorized this Scouter to sign things off, though I never told him I didn't want him to either; it hasn't come up before, and as he's not an ASM, and has been around much longer than I, it didn't really occur to me to tell him what he could and could not do. Advice? There wasn't time to give that SM conference when he asked, but next time I'm going to be on the spot.

Forgive me, but I don’t see how. In each situation, a Scout is in a situation where he has no idea what to do. Do you let them fail, having no idea how to succeed, or do you step in and help? Or do you step in and do it for them? Do you see a fourth option? Wait, you’re kidding, right? You’re talking about everything being Scout-led, with little to no adult interference, only post-hoc guidance, and you’d be surprised that the Scout leadership had not ensured that every new Scout had been properly instructed into how to put up his tent? But not if that Scout is in a leadership position, right? Or, in that situation, would you simply take over?

That's worthwhile advice. I’ve been wondering what the ideal tenure was for new troops, or new Scout patrols. I’ve seen anything from one month to six months.

I don’t at all disagree that allowing failure is a key part of Scouting. But if the Scout has absolutely no idea how to do a task, do you just stand back and let him fail? Or do you guide and mentor him? If a Scout is having problems putting up his tent, and there are no other Scouts around who are experienced enough to help him, do you stand back and let him fail, and fail, and fail, because he has no idea what he’s doing? Or do you step in and guide and instruct?

This is great! What's the source (official or unofficial) for this? My only problem is that my swim trunks are BSA uniform trunks…

I don’t necessarily disagree with any of that, but when a new Scout (particularly, in my experience, a girl) is put in charge of a patrol or troop, they often really have no idea what they’re doing, and, more importantly, lack confidence in their ability to do it, no matter how much talking beforehand you might do. Therefore, I simply don’t see a problem with significant hand-holding in the beginning, even, as I said, to the point of literally whispering what to say next in their ear, should that become necessary. And I don’t understand why you do. Obviously if it’s this way for more than a handful of meetings, you’ve got bigger problems, but you’ve got to start somewhere, right?

Seriously off the rails like the Scout sitting there like a deer in the headlights, having absolutely no idea what to say or do?

There seems to be some confusion here. How else in the world could a new troop get up and running? Just throw the Scouts in, leave them alone, and let them figure it out with no guidance, assistance or experience? That doesn’t sound like “whispering in the ear.” It sounds like still adult-led, with more youth autonomy than previously. I’m talking about the SPL/PL still being in charge, still running the show, but with a lot of handholding, even perhaps to the point of the adult literally whispering what to say next into the youth’s ear. That’s still Scout-led! It’s just a lot closer supervision than is the case in more experienced troops. Yes—adult supervision and guidance. How much is needed depends on the experience and confidence level of the youth leadership. I agree. Which is why I didn’t suggest that. I'm glad you had such a great experience. But I said “can,” not “will necessarily. It all depends on the situation. Simply throwing young Scouts into the deep end will not always work well, in my experience.

Here’s my question: Is that really a problem? Acknowledging your other concerns and focusing on this one, what’s wrong with their first year in Scouting being an AOL 2, with the Patrol Advisor continually whispering in the PL’s ear, while the new Scouts get used to Scouting? That’s basically how new troops work in my experience; why not new patrols? Heck, even in established troops it can work that way if the older Scouts have gone inactive or aged out and younger Scouts are leading the troop.

So what failed about it?