A Tale of Two Troops (spin off from Guide to Advancement)

[bnelon44]

I agree with Brewmeister.

 

Think Leadership EDGE. They start out very enthusiastic about Scouting but have no skills. Then their enthusiasm dies down but they still have little or no skills, so they get frustrated. The patrol has to gain skills and confidence to get over this hurtle or they will disband (quit.) So you emphasise skill training. That is the purpose of FC1Y.

[fred8033]

Beavah et al. - I'm continually amazed at the contempt you show for BSA and BSA advancement. Ya stand up and want to be a BSA leader but continually show contempt for the program and those who administer the program. ... "just isn't any vision anymore" ... "just aren't all that savvy themselves" ... "Add that to some poor staff input and editing for other reasons" ... "fundamentally poor policy making and materials development" ... "It's an example of national folks bein' out of touch with da units" ... and more and more and more.

 

The issue is not that the vision or generalities or specifics are not there. The issue is that you don't like the vision. You don't like the program, but ya want to wear the uniform, eh. Ya want to create something different but ya don't want to call it something different.

 

And then ya depend on truisms. Obviously it's about the scouts. Obviously the program depends on good talented people. Obviously....

 

...

 

Scout Oath and Law. Trustworthy. Loyal. Helpful. Friendly. Courtieous. Kind. Obedient. Cheerful. Thirfty. Brave. Clean. Reverent.

 

So ya know what BSA documents, communicates and promotes. When you directly do things that contradict the BSA advancement program you are not being trustworthy, loyal, helpful, kind and definitely explicitly in-your-face not obedient. No wonder you also complain when you see EBOR decisions being overridden by national.

 

...

 

Going rogue? No one and no unit are perfect. IMHO, that's not what defines going rogue. It's the approach. It's how you fix things. Do you try to learn all you can about BSA advancement and materials? Do you look for creative solutions within those boundaries? Or do you do what you want? Do you justify your choices by slighting the organization you serve. Your troop two is going rogue. It knows what BSA expects and has chosen to ignore it. That's going rogue. Now if they want to exist that way, fine. But don't get offended when I point out they are going rogue. Don't get offended when I won't hold them up in such esteem.

 

...

 

As for this troop one or two scenario

 

- I lean toward troop one because they have better outcomes for kids. And it reflects what I care about. I want the scouts to get out there and start doing things as soon as possible instead of shadowing older scouts. As a result, troop one tends to be more active, more confident and independent and stronger friendships and more adventures and have better scouting experiences. That's not to say I think poorly of troop two boys. They are fine. But they don't really know how to lead and how to trust those that they lead. They learn too much about over control and how to be Dilbert managers.

 

- Now I'm not saying I'll go into Dilbert's team and start telling them their boss is doing it all wrong. They already know the good and bad. But if they ask, I'll share what I've been taught and read. I'll share consistent with BSA. But I can't share that which I have not been taught or read or have been authorized to promote.

 

I always cringe when I hear the wise old scouter communicating things that contradict BSA. No wonder there's such confusion. No wonder there's so many advancement details.

[Beavah]

The patrol has to gain skills and confidence to get over this hurtle or they will disband (quit.) So you emphasise skill training. That is the purpose of FC1Y.

 

Yah, that's our guess as to what da purpose of FCFY is, eh? Just like it's your guess as how to read the sentence "Establish practices that will bring each new Boy Scout to First Class rank within a year of joining, and then to Star rank the following year" in da strained way yeh do, eh? What with redefining the words "will" and "each".

 

Where in the actual BSA materials are we presenting that sort of vision that yeh want to advocate for, bnelon44? It's just not there. Your read on Advancement Method has the emphasis on narrowly parsing da words of da requirements, not on skill training. Lots of other folks are readin' our stuff that way too, eh? Just look at how fred8033 is interpretin' things. Even though all of us who understand da system understand that the emphasis should be on the development of skills and proficiency. What yeh reward is what yeh get, and many units are usin' da more recent advancement guidance not to reward skills development.

 

To improve that, we have to move aggressively away from this narrow-parsing of words nonsense and get back to sharin' the vision and fun of Scouting with people, the way da R&R direct us.

 

Beavah

 

[JMHawkins]

Beavah

 

Thinkin' about these two troops and others, yep, there's also a correlation with experience, but that one I'm less sure about. It might just be there because less experienced folks have had weaker materials in recent years to learn from, and some have been taught really odd ways of thinkin' about those materials. So it's not so much experience but poor guidance and support on our side, eh? That's what I'm worried about.

 

There's the old hiring question about they guy with 20 years in a particular field. Does he have 20 years experience, or 1 year of experience, 20 times? Funny, my first thought reading your original post was that Troop 1 was kinda like their own NSP - inexperienced, highly reliant on Guides (Troop Guide, Guide to Advancement, G2SS, etc) to function, and pretty much limited to following a checklist someone else came up with. And sort of like the scouts in that NSP, even when they reach First Class, they have a tenuous grasp of the skills, and since the checklist of learning ran out after that first year without them learning how to function without a checklist, they're not able to progress any farther. Metaphorically they're stuck doing dump camping, stuck at "1 year experience" no matter how many years they've repeated it.

 

I think it happens just because da folks on district and council and national committees lose touch, eh? So we start to believe that filing paperwork is more important than getting a lad the badge to recognize his achievement and wear with pride. That happens just because we folks who serve at da grey or gold-tab levels spend more of our time dealin' with paperwork, eh? So we start to think of it as important for its own sake instead of thinkin' of it as being a service to boys and units.

 

I have a different take Beavah. I think what happens is 'da Grey an' Gold Tab' folks don't trust the Green Tab unit volunteers, so they try to rewrite the rules to limit the unit leaders autonomy. It's bureaucracy in action - focusing on Policies and Proceedures over training, experience and competence. Yes, the higher-ups lose touch, but it's their response that makes the problem. Trying to "impart their wisdom" through rules is a poor substitute for doing it through leadership, example and mentoring. It plagues our society at large too - I've mentioned it before, but really, BSA has no business claiming it teaches "Leadership" to our youths when it's own competency at the skill is so poor.

 

Even when yeh have talented folks, it takes a fair bit of time to learn Scouting. To really understand youth leadership and the patrol method is pretty counter-cultural.

 

Very much so. I think I have two advantages in that regard over lots of my contemporaries. One, I was a Scout myself ages ago in a troop that did the Patrol Method really well, and I know from experience that it works. I also have a decent knowledge of history, and know that throughout human history, scout-aged youth have shown themselves capable of far more that the mainstream of our today's society assumes. Kudu's notion of having scouts watch Master and Commander to show them what 13-year olds were - are - capable of is great. Maybe Woodbadge ought to show that movie to the adults too and get the message across. Too many adults think scouts are barely capable of tying their own shoes.

 

At summer camp last year, the troop camping next to us was highly adult-led. Wednesday night was "cook your own dinner" night, with the Dinning Hall giving out raw hamburger, veggies, etc,. We were a brand new troop, about three months old at the time with zero experience scouts. All of our guys cooked their own food - I coached, explaining how they could tell the meat was done etc., and I even helped a few guys fish their hobo packs out of the campfire when they needed it, but they cooked. The neighboring troop - which was 80-some odd years old - had the adults cook for the scouts. Their SM told our SM later "oh, we would never let the little guys cook for themselves..." Same troop at a MB campout this year had two new crossovers take my Astronomy MB. They showed up with a Troop Mom shepherding them from class to class - even though the same troop had an older FC scout taking Astronomy with me as well. They don't trust their scouts to do much of anything.

 

Just like a lot of Grey 'n Gold Tabbers don't trust the unit volunteers, when you think about it.

[Beavah]

As a result, troop one tends to be more active, more confident and independent and stronger friendships and more adventures and have better scouting experiences

 

Yah, fred8033, I actually know these troops, eh? So I can say with some degree of confidence that analysis is incorrect. You assume that followin' the program as you have interpreted it will always lead to da best outcomes. Me, I'm just reportin' on real-world outcomes and approaches. Maybe that's where da wisdom and experience thing comes in.

 

Troop 1 in fact is fairly typical, though a bit larger than average. About 35 registered scouts, with low 20's who are "active" in that they come on events regularly. Older high school aged boys participate less or disappear for long stretches, and as you have described in your own approach, they consider that normal and are just happy when some of 'em pop back up for deathbed Eagles. At their EBORs, they don't talk in as animated and deep a fashion as Troop 2 about their adventures and scouting experiences.

 

Now, I get where you're comin' from, and I'm OK with it. I don't have a need to call yeh contemptuous or lay ethical judgments at your feet because of how yeh happen to use a children's program. That just seems over the top for me, especially since I consider critique to be a form of caring about people and organizations. I wouldn't suggest yeh leave da organization. I'd support your Troop 1 as best I could, and help yeh use the materials to accomplish what yeh wanted to accomplish for kids.

 

An old poster on these forums once mentioned that there's no resolvin' things when yeh set up what yeh are tryin' to set up, eh? There are different stages of moral development, and it's hard to discuss things across da stages. You are advocatin' for what Kohlberg would have called Conventional morality. Stage 4, being subservient to authority. Criticism is the same thing as contempt and all that. That's fine, if that's where you're at right now.

 

I'm tryin' to argue from Post-Conventional stages 5 and 6, eh? That's what I care about for kids, and really for everybody. I can understand how that makes yeh feel uncomfortable, and how easy it is to mistakenly characterize it as earlier, self-centered, pre-conventional stages. That would really be mistaken, however. For me, talkin' about da elements of a children's program as though they are High Moral Issues of Obedience and all the rest is pretty comical, at least when it isn't sadly misguided. We should be talkin' instead about what's the right thing to do for kids and families, not how to best comply with da corporation that makes children's books.

 

I reckon it will just take some age and wisdom to figure that out, eh?

 

For this thread, though, that's what I wanted it to be about. I wanted to bring it back around to being focused on kids, not on materials. If yeh want to continue the Stage 4 / procedural obedience stuff, let's keep it in da previous thread. I'll keep playin' if yeh want. But let's let this thread be about kids and real, live programs, with different perspectives.

 

Beavah

 

[Brewmeister]

The neighboring troop - which was 80-some odd years old - had the adults cook for the scouts. Their SM told our SM later "oh, we would never let the little guys cook for themselves..."

 

How the heck do any of the scouts advance beyond Tenderfoot? Even second class requires cooking.

[moosetracker]

Dont laugh Brewmeister, my son was in a troop like that (less than a year before we moved out).. Of course they were not

 

Hmmm.. I guess my whole Council has gone rogue per fred & bnelon.. I say this because last year I was the WB staff member who had to do the presentation on leading change.. In one area of my speech I compared the volunteers and program of BSA with JFK & the moon mission, Martin Luther King and civil rights, Margaret Thatcher changes in government and putting the English people back to work during recession, as well as Walt Disney..

 

All of them had a mission and a vision directed by their leaders.. But, they were not micro managed by their leaders, that they just couldnt be and obtain the same sweeping reforms and creative output.. Got into different styles in different groups.. Such as with Disney your prime objective was to make things family oriented, wholesome for the kids, but enough insight and creativity to entertain the adults.. But, you had the director of Fantasia creating his own cameras, to get impossible shots and Robin Williams free to ad lib as the genie in Aladdin and artists and engineers building state of the art robotics in Disney land & Disney world.. On and On..

Then I took it to the BSA and what was similar about being a volunteer in BSA and being a member in one of these great pioneers groups. The answer was we all had the BSA vision statement and Mission Statement, but each one of our units could interpret the vision a little differently, and organize differently based on our skills and interests. Therefore if I visit troop A, then visit troop B.. Id be surprise to see much similar accept a general outline and concept of what a Boy Scout troop is.. All will go in different directions based on their own interpretation of the BSA vision and mission statements.

 

Sorry, I never mentioned BSA guide books, or following micro-managing bureaucracy. Nor did anyone else in any other presentations done.. Why should we. The function was to excite and inspire and send these guys out into the world to do great things.. Why would we box them in to rules, regulations and micro-management?

 

I got applauded, which I thought was typical, until one of the seasoned WB staffers came up to me afterwords to compliment me, and stated Did you hear that applause?.. That was not the typical applause! You nailed it, and these guys really got it. After that, I heard from others on staff many seasoned Council & district members who said I was dead on..

 

So, Troop # 1 is good if they are happy and following their vision.. Troop # 2 is good if they are happy and following their vision.. Troop #3, #4 & #5 would also be good.. The troop who is failing would be the one loosing boys, and totally adult lead, and not following any possible interpretation of BSA Mission & Vision statement.. Most likely never even read or heard of them.

 

PS.. I also do IOLS & SM Specifics.. IOLS is all about trying to teach skills in a firehose method to those totally green. Nothing about how to advance their scouts or following G2A, a small blurb on G2SS (small).. SM Specifics.. Heres some books that might help you (in with other books is G2SS & G2A)..

 

Neither syllabus has us going into long speeches to break open either book and read out rules & regs and interpret the meaning of them for them. As far as I'm concerned they will help give them an idea on how to set up their program, but they are not the Holy Grail..(This message has been edited by moosetracker)

[Brewmeister]

I don't understand that, moose tracker.

 

How can you ever advance a boy if they don't cook and plan a meal?

 

Then again, how can the boys in my sons troop earn Tendefoot without a patrol flag and yell? Maybe it is a small thing, but it is in there.

 

Maybe I am just too literal, but it says DO something you must DO it...not do something perhaps a bit like it, or what you feel like doing. And second class 3G and 4e are pretty unambiguous.

 

Maybe I'm just naiive but I thought the pencil whipping stopped once mom and dad were no longer Akela.

But at this rate, if litttle league were like scouts, it would be ok for the parents to bat for the boys, different teams to have their own variations on the rules, and runs would score if the runner made it a little ways past third base.

[moosetracker]

Easy, you don't advance anyone.. Not needed. The SM son was not into advancement, so the SM thought it was no big thing to just throw advancement out and run it like a boys club or something.

 

Adult lead (no POR's for the boys, except for SM's son was SPL, he got to pass out the handouts the adults made up.. that was the SPL's job).. Nothing else was run per BSA ypt or anything else.. Boys never had to pick a patrol site, or pitch a tent either. One large family tent and the SM slept with the boys, don't know about all the other 2nd Adult leaders. When my husband went, he brought his own pup tent, and we got our son his own pup tent so he did not have to sleep with the SM.. Sometimes 2nd Adult leader was some friend of the SM, unknown and unrelated to anyone in the pack.. etc. etc.

[Eagle92]

Bnelson,

 

In regards to the "War Chest" advancement reports and council records, even if the records are turned in, there are sometimes challenges. I know of one Eagle who was initially denied by Eagle becasue council still had him listed as FC. What's funny is the other scouts on the form had their correct records. Ok the dates were off, but that is a different story.

 

I know the ACAP stated that rank should be given as soon as it is earned. While some units could get it within a week, for other units it could be challenging. Aroudn my neck of the woods, it can take up to 2 weeks to get stuff, andsometimes even longer if they are out. Heck one pack I knew of would order their ranks for an entire year at one time, and the paperwork was turned in to be forwarded to their council. Don't remember if they put in one date for all, or if they estimated the dates, but the boss told me to fill the order, and ship it to Prague, Czech Republic where the pack was located. I forgot how long it took for them to get their stuff, but it was some time.

 

And I admit it is a pet peeve due to personal expereince, but I hate not being able to give an award to a Cub who earned it and is expecting it at the pack meeting, and council is out of it. Sorry I know how that cub feels and I do not want to put another in that position.

[bnelon44]

Eagle92

 

Looks like an area of improvement for the GTA and your local council.

 

the boy deserves what he earns in a reasonable time. With Internet advancement you should be able to get all advancment except Eagle filed right away. The GTA should be clear that once filed, you can award the rank. The only time that is different is with Eagle since national wants to be the authorizing official for it.

 

I can understand if you are overseas that a "stash" makes sense. If you are in Phoenix, AZ it does not.(This message has been edited by bnelon44)

[Eagle92]

Actually it's a supply problem with national IMHO. Reason I say that is because I saw the problem when working for national, and supply division didn't have enough to ship out.

 

Now part of that problem is that a national shuts down shipping late Dec-early Jan. for inventory. Now I know ho much of a PITB inventory was at my store, and we actually

"started" inventory after Thanksgiving b/c if we followed national's time frame, it would not be done in time. Hate to see the warehouse's inventory problems.

 

part of the problem is that there are SOP standards that dictate how many of a particular item you can have in the inventory. A store can have only so many items, and if you are under stock, the system notify you to order, and if you try to order more than you are suppose to have,, the system will tell you and prevent it.

 

As for the T1/T2 comparison, like Beav I too see many T2s more active and successful than T1s.

 

And as I posted in another thread, it is true that the further up you go, the less you know about what's going on in the field. One reason Why I'm glad he's and ASM and posts here time to time. Also glad national is using FB more. While it may not eb the same thing as being in the field, it is an attempt.

[bnelon44]

Eagle92

 

On the T1/T2 examples. Advancement adds to a good program but doesn't replace a good program. IMHO, troops that focus on advancement over a well rounded program end up being a weak troop. That's why I keep saying advancement is only one of eight methods. GTA says the same thing by the way in one of the first chapters.

 

I agree that it is easy to fall into the advancement = program trap(This message has been edited by bnelon44)

[Beavah]

Advancement adds to a good program but doesn't replace a good program.

 

Yah, I'd say instead that advancement is part of a good program. I'm sure that's what yeh meant.

 

Despite what we say in the GTA or training, however, there's no question that advancement is more than just one of 8 methods when yeh look at how much time and resources are spent on it. Havin' a whole separate Guide for example. Where's da separate guide for Patrol Method? For youth leadership? For adult association? For Personal Growth?

 

Maybe if we had those and they had an equal footing, and demanded equal paperwork, we'd see more balance, eh? But our own actions speak louder than our words about our priorities sometimes.

 

Mrs. Beavah has been a teacher for many decades, and I learn a lot from listenin' to her (I type a lot here because it's hard to get a word in edgewise when listenin' to Mrs. Beavah ). One of da things she talks about is alignment between curriculum and tests. Yeh have to assess on the same things and with the same methods that yeh taught. Seems straightforward enough.

 

I think that's what I want to see in each troop's use of Advancement, eh? Advancement should assess and recognize da same things the program is trying to teach. That's how advancement and recognition support the rest of the program.

 

My core problem with da way some folks seem to approach advancement is that they mis-align advancement from da rest of the program. The rest of the program wants boys to be able to plan, purchase, and cook a meal, but the way they use advancement they recognize boys for just talkin' about it. The rest of the program wants and needs boys to be proficient in First Aid, but the way they run advancement recognizes boys for one-and-done-poorly. That's an alignment problem, and it confuses kids, and sends mixed messages to everyone.

 

So I don't mind if Troop 1 has a program that is mostly car-camping where adults buy food and boys bumble through cookin' such staples as hot dogs. In that case, the way they're interpreting da requirements lines up with what they're doin' in practice. We might work on helpin' 'em think about youth leadership a bit more, but they're usin' advancement method to support the program they have. Same with Troop 2, eh? If their program expects boys to plan, shop, and prepare a weekend's meals on their own, I don't mind if their advancement interpretation is that a First Class scout actually has to go to da grocery store on his own and handle food safely.

 

Da problems all happen when Troop 1 tries to hold up advancement because the boy hasn't done a 4-course meal for his BOR, even though the program has only called for adult-purchased hot dogs. And the problem is just as bad for Troop 2 if their program is teachin' proficiency in meal planning and prep, and some nitwit from da district or an internet forum is tellin' their boys and parents that all they have to do is talk about food safety while readin' from a cheat sheet in order to advance. Both things "break" Advancement Method because they don't line up recognition with program.

 

I think fred8033 worries a lot about da former, and I worry more about the latter. That's just because we have different preferences in terms of troop style and youth outcomes. But perhaps we all can agree that advancement should support da program that is bein' offered.

 

Beavah

 

[bnelon44]

Beavah asked, Where's da separate guide for Patrol Method?

 

It's called the Patrol Leader's Handbook