more BOR - constructive approaches to "problems"

[Lisabob]

While we're on the subject of BORs here, I have a couple of questions about how you handle these things at BORs:

 

1) To what extent do you pursue behavioral issues with scouts?

 

We have a few scouts who have acted rather badly lately. Some have attitude problems. Some have medical/psychological problems that contribute to behavioral issues. Some are just teenage boys doing dumb things when they should know better. In all cases, the presumption is that the SM has discussed their behavior with them in private (I say presumption, because the SM is a hard person to nail down and not very good about sharing information w/ committee members in a timely manner - another problem for another day though.). And since he must have signed off on Scout Spirit and SM Conference, there's a presumption that by the time they arrive for a BOR, they're ready to advance in his eyes. Given that, how far do you press behavior issues in a BOR?

 

2) Boys are frequently asked what they like about the troop and what they'd like to change, or what they have difficulty with, or something along those lines. What do you do in your troop with negative feedback, in terms of actually following up on it?

 

Lately we've heard a lot from our younger boys about problems in the patrols and leadership issues. Their comments suggest to me (and others) that we need to revisit the way that adults mentor youth leaders. Learning leadership is a trial-and-error process to be sure, but at the same time it helps to have someone to talk things over with, and a 10-15 minute BOR every few months really isn't sufficient for that purpose. Our SM and a few of the "old guard" ASMs take an extremely hands off approach here (and as mentioned, the SM himself is, by personality perhaps, just a hard person to nail down on anything.) and so any comments to the effect that there needs to be a little more adult guidance tend to be viewed in a hostile manner as an attack on the way the troop is run, rather than as intended, as constructive attempts to make the troop even better. Result: there doesn't seem to be much, if any, follow-through on negative feedback from the boys at BORs.

 

It's a strange dynamic, but I bet that some of you have been there, done that, so I'd appreciate your feedback.

 

Lisa'bob

 

 

[scoutldr]

It is one of the SM's core responsibilities to conduct troop-level JLT. Is he doing that? With elections every 6 months or so, this should be a regularly scheduled thing on the troop calendar.

 

We also ask the question, "what would you do to make the troop better?". Frequently we get "do more camping" or "play different games". Then we explain to the scout how he can make that happen...that he needs to express his ideas to the youth leadership, and it's not up to the adults to make it happen.

[Lisabob]

Yes, our SM does conduct JLT twice a year. And there are patrol advisors assigned to each patrol and troop guides for the new scout patrols. A couple of the patrol advisors do a great job of mentoring the boys who are PLs and APLs through quiet conversations; others, well, not so much either due to personality, temperment, experience, or due to the fact that a couple of them are rarely at the meetings. The troop guides have struggled too, particularly with the new scouts, several of whom have behavioral disorders and are just tough to work with anyway.

 

In the patrols where we're hearing a lot of frustrations, the patrol advisors aren't very involved. So once JLT is over, for most of these boys, they're kind of on their own. The problem is compounded by the fact that the SPL this year was rather young (14) and missed as many meetings as he attended, and the ASPL, who has been SPL in the past, a good leader, was a graduating senior with a lot of competing demands on his time. So in terms of older boys mentoring the younger boys, there wasn't all that much of that going on, either.

[Beavah]

1) To what extent do you pursue behavioral issues with scouts?

 

Only to the extent the scout brings it up or the SM indicates that we should. Trust the people closest to the boy who have more information.

 

2) What do you do in your troop with negative feedback, in terms of actually following up on it?

 

Pass it along to the SM; remember it and think about it if there are some committee-level implications.

 

Sounds like at the moment your troop is doin' as well as any with the resources it has. When "blessed" with younger, less-experienced leadership boys, the mentoring and coaching is important after TLT is done. More important than TLT is, in fact.

 

At a committee level, it may be that one of the things the group should take up is recruiting more ASMs who enjoy coaching kids. Unfortunately, the BSA really doesn't provide any good training on Adult Relationships method in practice, that could help your weaker patrol coaches, but you might also look for an outside provider.

 

But I'd say what you're describing is "normal" for a fairly sound, good troop. It's always a struggle balancing the coaching and freedom of youth leadership, and as an ASM learning that balance.

 

 

[Lisabob]

Beavah, that's an interesting response and perhaps this is part of the difficulty I see our troop facing. In the 15 or so months since my son crossed over and I've been involved with the committee and sat on probably 60% of the BORs, the SM has not once provided any input prior to the BOR. To be fair, neither has he been asked for specific input as far as I'm aware. Seems that there is a communication gap here.

 

Out of curiousity, how common is it for others of you to either provide input (as SM or ASM) to the committee on issues you hope they'll address at a boy's BOR, or (as Committee members) to seek such input from the SM?

 

Whichever side of the line you're on, would you perceive unsolicited info from the SM, or a request from the committee for input prior to a BOR, as normal/acceptable? Or would this be a turf issue from one side or the other?

 

Lisa'bob

[fling1]

Hi Lisabob,

"And since he must have signed off on Scout Spirit and SM Conference, there's a presumption that by the time they arrive for a BOR, they're ready to advance in his eyes. Given that, how far do you press behavior issues in a BOR?"

The BOR serves two purposes: 1) double check the completion of requirements as evidenced by sign-offs and dates. I've had one come back to me because I overlooked a service hours sign-off, although I had just reviewed it as part of the SMC. Cool -- it worked! 2) monitor the program quality, as revealed through the impressions and opinions of the youth membership.

Ideally, if the Board felt that a boy came to them with a Scout Spirit sign-off that was not deserved, they should take that up with the Scoutmaster that signed it. Likewise if their monitoring efforts (listening) revealed a weakness in the program, those findings ought to be shared with the Scoutmaster - perhaps leading to a plan for addressing the shortcomings.

The BOR should not be treated as an inquisition nor an opportunity to "veto" an existing signature, however. Helpful?

[EagleInKY]

Great questions.

 

First, I think the BOR is a great place to reinforce behavior standards. If a scout has challenges in this area, I'll inform the BOR of it ahead of time. (Traditionally, I meet with the BOR before the review and give them the SM's POV on each candidate.) Just because I've signed off on Scout Spirit doesn't mean the scout doesn't have room for improvement. I look at Scout Spirit as something that improves over time. I raise the bar for each advancement. Youthful immaturity that is tolerated for a Tenderfoot should be significantly improved by the time they are going for Star (and replaced with teenage maturity.:-) )

 

On your second question, the BOR listens to the scouts complaints. They'll provide coaching if appropriate. For example, if it's around program matters, they may encourage him to talk to their Patrol Leader about it. If it's about how he hates the uniform, they may emphasize the purpose of that part of the program. If it's of a more serious nature, or involves adult or senior troop leadership, they'll talk to me about it. I cherish the feedback I get like this. It's the best way to drive improvements in the troop. "Feedback is a gift", I've been told. I try to use that with our PLC to make improvements whenever possible.

[Oak Tree]

I sit on quite a few BoRs. I generally follow up on any negative feedback by discussing it with the SM and CC, and we consider whether any adjustments need to be made.

 

We don't have a usual way for the SM to give the BoR any information ahead of time - but I do talk to the SM regularly and am generally aware of what concerns he has for the boys. There would be no turf battle over sharing information - we all seem to honestly be in it "for the good of the boys", as cliched as that sounds. And perhaps more relevantly, we all seem to have a reasonably close definition of what that means.

 

We don't really view the BoR as a time to pursue behavioral issues. It's not listed as one of the three purposes in the book, and I don't know that it would really be all that effective. But I can imagine that we might discuss it if it was brought up by the boy, or recommended by the SM that we do so.

 

Oak Tree

[Lisabob]

Thanks for the responses, they have helped me shape my thinking about these questions. And Oak Tree, I'd have to agree, it helps to have the same definition of what being "in it for the boys" means!

 

Lisa'bob