ILTS/TLT in Your Troop. Who does it?

[FrugalProf]

 

WOAH!

 

Are you the UC or the COR? Frankly, buster, I'd bounce your butt out of my campsite faster that you can say "silver epaulettes." It's not your dad-gummed job to dictate to a SM how he trains he youth leaders. Maybe he DOES need to work on camp cleaning with the troop. Maybe the SM has determined his youth leaders need more work on basic skills than discussing "communications theory". But it's none of your business. If you gave him a copy of the JLT syllabus, you've done your job. Now back off.

 

Undermining the SM by ginning up a group of "concerned dads" is WAAAAY over the line. As a SM I'd be on the phone with the DC letting him know you are no longer welcome at our troop.

 

There are many ways to teach leadership. Following the national TLT syllabus is just one. I'm not surprised troops don't use the syllabus. Until the latest one came out, the program was the pits -- a stack of business cards with job descriptions and 15 minute program for discussion the job description with the Scouts. Years ago, I wrote our own day-long syllabus for our troop to use. Actually, it is very similar to the new national syllabus. But we change it every year, in part to keep it fresh for the Scouts who have take it several times, but also to focus on program elements the leadership believes is important or perhaps the troop needs to brush up on. We've used the program to introduce the youth leaders to new methods and procedures. When we thought the troop was slipping in the quality of camp cooking, we use dinner at the end of TLT to challenge the boys to try new things. Guess what, one year we had a session on camp clean up when we changed the way we did thing.

Twocubdad,

 

Thank you for your candor. I should add that members of the Troop Committee approached me about concerns over the troop, particularly that there have been no TLTs or even PLCs in the Troop for the three years this young Troop has been up and running. It is the classic case of an adult led troop - SM steps into room, boys are quiet and attentive. He steps out, and chaos ensues. Until very recently, the SPL (over multiple individuals and through several election cycles) was largely unable to gain control over the boys. Only with the election of a new SPL and some instruction from the Committee Chairman and the SPL's dad did the SPL gain the confidence and knowledge to lead the boys. However, the troop is still adult led, largely. Boys do not meet in PLC, they are not taken on green bar camping trips, there is no evidence of any formal training for the boy leaders and the parents are complaining about it. That makes it my business.

 

I understand that it is the SM's right and privilege to teach leadership to the boys and I respect that. That is why I have waited for two years for it to happen and it hasn't. Now, as UC, I am faced with a severe threat to the survival of the Troop...with the imminent departure of the long term Troop Committee Chairman, MANY parents have openly stated they plan to leave at the end of the TCC's time in the troop (he and his family are moving). The primary complaint of the parents is lack of training for their boys in leadership but with the continued expectation that they lead, the parents are saying their sons are being set up to fail, not succeed. So, my duty to assist the Troop to be the best it can be and to survive year over year to rechartering is now in direct conflict with respecting the SM's right to teach the boys. As UC, I am supposed to help the Troop deliver Scouting as dictated by the District, Council, and National Offices. A fundamental responsibility of the SM is to teach the boys to lead, but this is not happening. I acknowledge that I am crossing the line by stepping in without the SM's explicit invitation. But I also attend meetings and other Troop events without an invitation as well. I am a friend of the Troop, not just the SM. I am stuck with the difficult task of resolving conflict that is brewing between the Committee and the SM. It is a lose-lose situation for me and the Troop unless I can convince the SM that ILST (or at least some form of leadership training) might be helpful to him and the troop in the long run.

[MattR]

FrugalProf, have you tried volunteering to run it? Maybe the SM just doesn't have the time or isn't quite sure about part of it. If that isn't accepted and nobody likes the SM then maybe it's time for the CC to have a talk with him and see if he can let loose some of the reins.

 

I wouldn't get too hung up on running ILST exactly as it's in the manual, especially if you have a young troop that has little experience with leading. For a 12 year old I wouldn't expect much more than to get the troop to line up and be quiet. That would be a good start.

 

I used to do the standard ILST and it didn't seem to help the scouts at all. I tried some other things but that was only slightly better. For a year or two I just never did anything but after talking to the scouts I came up with a modification of the standard ILST. I added a lot of exercises to the ILST syllabus after asking the scouts what their biggest concerns were. We talked for half an hour and then spent the rest of the time doing exercises. So, less talking and more doing. The exercises were all of the form of a problem that had to be solved in five minutes. Scouts took turns being PL. Sometimes I coached the other scouts to do something that would cause another problem. The scouts had fun. They even wouldn't let me stop a few minutes early. This is the second time I've done this and both times were right around the time of the elections. I like the idea of a lock in. I'd really like to do it on a campout so I'd have more opportunity for more realistic exercises. That was the biggest complaint about the standard course, if one thing they need to do is make a duty roster, then have an exercise about making a duty roster - and throw in a kid that doesn't want to clean dishes

[Twocubdad]

Sorry, none of that makes it your business. It is your business to provide guidance, advice and resources when asked. If you want to be this involved in the troop's business, do it right and put in an application to be the new CC -- or SM for that matter. If accepted, THEN it's your business and responsibility. Currently it is neither. All this stuff you say is your duty are situations in which you have wrongly inserted yourself. If the troop committee members approached you with these concerns, you could have advised them on how to effect change through the troop committee. If changes in unit leadership were needed, they needed to put their big boy pants on and make it happen.

 

Frankly,the TLT issue is only a symptom of the real problem, and a fairly minor symptom at that. The real issue is the lack of effective adult leadership. Where is the COR in all this? Mediating conflicts between the committee and SM, assuring the quality of the program and recruiting new leadership is the COR's responsibility. Who is going to be the new CC? What's the transition plan? Who is going to take over as the new SM when the old guy gets tired of the criticism and meddling? How many of the whiney parents are serving as ASMs? Why haven't they stepped up and helped the SM with training?

 

The solutions to the troops problems must come from within, not from the commissioner corps. If not, it needs to fold and the Scouts transferred to a functioning unit.

[FrugalProf]

FrugalProf, have you tried volunteering to run it? Maybe the SM just doesn't have the time or isn't quite sure about part of it. If that isn't accepted and nobody likes the SM then maybe it's time for the CC to have a talk with him and see if he can let loose some of the reins.

 

I wouldn't get too hung up on running ILST exactly as it's in the manual, especially if you have a young troop that has little experience with leading. For a 12 year old I wouldn't expect much more than to get the troop to line up and be quiet. That would be a good start.

 

I used to do the standard ILST and it didn't seem to help the scouts at all. I tried some other things but that was only slightly better. For a year or two I just never did anything but after talking to the scouts I came up with a modification of the standard ILST. I added a lot of exercises to the ILST syllabus after asking the scouts what their biggest concerns were. We talked for half an hour and then spent the rest of the time doing exercises. So, less talking and more doing. The exercises were all of the form of a problem that had to be solved in five minutes. Scouts took turns being PL. Sometimes I coached the other scouts to do something that would cause another problem. The scouts had fun. They even wouldn't let me stop a few minutes early. This is the second time I've done this and both times were right around the time of the elections. I like the idea of a lock in. I'd really like to do it on a campout so I'd have more opportunity for more realistic exercises. That was the biggest complaint about the standard course, if one thing they need to do is make a duty roster, then have an exercise about making a duty roster - and throw in a kid that doesn't want to clean dishes

Thanks MattR,

I like the shut in idea as well and I think the green bar campout will work if it gets tried. The new ILST has some of those problem solving tasks and suggests rotating them like you and twocubdad have. I think it is great that you and twocubdad have developed some of your own ideas...never hurts to tailor the delivery of the training to what the new of the troop are. Regarding the volunteering to conduct the training...I have and so have several of the committee members. The SM always says he will get to it. The problem is not so much that he doesn't follow a specific training, like TLT or ILST but that he doesn't train the boys in leadership, period. Even more challenging is the fact that he has declined offers to help from committee members and parents and even ASMs, some of whom have left the troop in frustration. At the last committee meeting, I urged the committee members to be direct with the SM and let him know they want their boys trained shortly after the elections so they can succeed in their positions. I also, once again, spoke to the SM and offered to help with training if he wants me to help.

I'm going to check in with them in two weeks (they have Monday off for Memorial Day) and see if there has been any progress.

Thanks for your suggestions.

[MattR]

FrugalProf, have you tried volunteering to run it? Maybe the SM just doesn't have the time or isn't quite sure about part of it. If that isn't accepted and nobody likes the SM then maybe it's time for the CC to have a talk with him and see if he can let loose some of the reins.

 

I wouldn't get too hung up on running ILST exactly as it's in the manual, especially if you have a young troop that has little experience with leading. For a 12 year old I wouldn't expect much more than to get the troop to line up and be quiet. That would be a good start.

 

I used to do the standard ILST and it didn't seem to help the scouts at all. I tried some other things but that was only slightly better. For a year or two I just never did anything but after talking to the scouts I came up with a modification of the standard ILST. I added a lot of exercises to the ILST syllabus after asking the scouts what their biggest concerns were. We talked for half an hour and then spent the rest of the time doing exercises. So, less talking and more doing. The exercises were all of the form of a problem that had to be solved in five minutes. Scouts took turns being PL. Sometimes I coached the other scouts to do something that would cause another problem. The scouts had fun. They even wouldn't let me stop a few minutes early. This is the second time I've done this and both times were right around the time of the elections. I like the idea of a lock in. I'd really like to do it on a campout so I'd have more opportunity for more realistic exercises. That was the biggest complaint about the standard course, if one thing they need to do is make a duty roster, then have an exercise about making a duty roster - and throw in a kid that doesn't want to clean dishes

Join my troop! I'd never turn down an offer for help.

 

Sorry to say, but I'd start asking the wise old guys around the district and on the committee on what it might take to replace the SM. That assumes someone is willing to step up. Best of luck

[FrugalProf]

Sorry, none of that makes it your business. It is your business to provide guidance, advice and resources when asked. If you want to be this involved in the troop's business, do it right and put in an application to be the new CC -- or SM for that matter. If accepted, THEN it's your business and responsibility. Currently it is neither. All this stuff you say is your duty are situations in which you have wrongly inserted yourself. If the troop committee members approached you with these concerns, you could have advised them on how to effect change through the troop committee. If changes in unit leadership were needed, they needed to put their big boy pants on and make it happen.

 

Frankly,the TLT issue is only a symptom of the real problem, and a fairly minor symptom at that. The real issue is the lack of effective adult leadership. Where is the COR in all this? Mediating conflicts between the committee and SM, assuring the quality of the program and recruiting new leadership is the COR's responsibility. Who is going to be the new CC? What's the transition plan? Who is going to take over as the new SM when the old guy gets tired of the criticism and meddling? How many of the whiney parents are serving as ASMs? Why haven't they stepped up and helped the SM with training?

 

The solutions to the troops problems must come from within, not from the commissioner corps. If not, it needs to fold and the Scouts transferred to a functioning unit.

"The real issue is the lack of effective adult leadership. Where is the COR in all this? Mediating conflicts between the committee and SM, assuring the quality of the program and recruiting new leadership is the COR's responsibility."

-- agreed. The committee has allowed the CC to carry too much and the SM has been unresponsive to expressed concerns, hence the statements that the parents want to bolt as soon as the current CC leaves. The COR is the CO head, literally the pastor of the church, and while supportive of the troop, rarely shows to events, committee meetings, or even Courts of Honor (ex., just missed an Eagle Court of Honor - not sure why, but imagine it was for a good reason). So, the COR is a position in name only on the troop roster.

"Who is going to be the new CC? What's the transition plan?"

-- The election for the new committee leadership was held last week, including a co-chairmanship, not ideal but better than no chairman. The new leaders will take over immediately while the old CC is still around, allowing the new leaders to call on him for advice moving forward over the next six weeks or so until his move.

"Who is going to take over as the new SM when the old guy gets tired of the criticism and meddling?"

-- there are some potential candidates but the parents do not want to push the SM out, at least not yet.

"How many of the whiney parents are serving as ASMs?"

-- one stepped up at this past election cycle

Why haven't they stepped up and helped the SM with training?

-- they have but SM won't let them help

[Basementdweller]

FrugalProf, have you tried volunteering to run it? Maybe the SM just doesn't have the time or isn't quite sure about part of it. If that isn't accepted and nobody likes the SM then maybe it's time for the CC to have a talk with him and see if he can let loose some of the reins.

 

I wouldn't get too hung up on running ILST exactly as it's in the manual, especially if you have a young troop that has little experience with leading. For a 12 year old I wouldn't expect much more than to get the troop to line up and be quiet. That would be a good start.

 

I used to do the standard ILST and it didn't seem to help the scouts at all. I tried some other things but that was only slightly better. For a year or two I just never did anything but after talking to the scouts I came up with a modification of the standard ILST. I added a lot of exercises to the ILST syllabus after asking the scouts what their biggest concerns were. We talked for half an hour and then spent the rest of the time doing exercises. So, less talking and more doing. The exercises were all of the form of a problem that had to be solved in five minutes. Scouts took turns being PL. Sometimes I coached the other scouts to do something that would cause another problem. The scouts had fun. They even wouldn't let me stop a few minutes early. This is the second time I've done this and both times were right around the time of the elections. I like the idea of a lock in. I'd really like to do it on a campout so I'd have more opportunity for more realistic exercises. That was the biggest complaint about the standard course, if one thing they need to do is make a duty roster, then have an exercise about making a duty roster - and throw in a kid that doesn't want to clean dishes

Wow you guys are out of line....

 

If the IH and COR don't have a problem with the way the SM is running the program, The boys are coming because they like it.... Who are a couple of outsiders to replace the Sm....

 

I have had one UC in all of my time as an Adult in scouting.....I thru him out after he conducted a uniform inspection that ended in a bunch of mad parents and crying cubs.

 

I, then CM, told him to leave and never ever come back.

[qwazse]

I should have replied earlier: 1. Thank the SM for not wasting the boys' precious time learning the false religion of EDGE. 2. Congratulate the SM for letting the boys endure a bit of the standard chaos of boy-led units. 3. Get him the district award of merit for thinking up the dish washing method as an applied leadership skill. Otherwise, follow BD's advise (it might have been to Christian of him omitting all of the expletives that may have been in the subtext of his reply).

[King Ding Dong]

I should have replied earlier: 1. Thank the SM for not wasting the boys' precious time learning the false religion of EDGE. 2. Congratulate the SM for letting the boys endure a bit of the standard chaos of boy-led units. 3. Get him the district award of merit for thinking up the dish washing method as an applied leadership skill. Otherwise, follow BD's advise (it might have been to Christian of him omitting all of the expletives that may have been in the subtext of his reply).

I am curious what the issue is with EDGE ?

[qwazse]

I should have replied earlier: 1. Thank the SM for not wasting the boys' precious time learning the false religion of EDGE. 2. Congratulate the SM for letting the boys endure a bit of the standard chaos of boy-led units. 3. Get him the district award of merit for thinking up the dish washing method as an applied leadership skill. Otherwise, follow BD's advise (it might have been to Christian of him omitting all of the expletives that may have been in the subtext of his reply).

Lest we hear groans of "Oh no, not again!" from senior members, let me refer you to:

 

http://www.scouter.com/forum/open-discussion-program/6952-to-edge-or-not-to-edge

http://old.scouter.com/Forums/viewThread.asp?threadID=312067&p=1

http://old.scouter.com/forums/viewThread.asp?threadID=311705&p=1

http://www.scouter.com/forum/working-with-kids/9559-wanted-scholarly-articles-on-edge

 

FWIW, although I think EDGE is an abysmal rubric for kids (especially those with English as a second language), when my SM wanted to waste a meeting on it, I granted him that with absolutely no complaint. I suggest FrugalProf go and do likewise.

[Kudu]

I should have replied earlier: 1. Thank the SM for not wasting the boys' precious time learning the false religion of EDGE. 2. Congratulate the SM for letting the boys endure a bit of the standard chaos of boy-led units. 3. Get him the district award of merit for thinking up the dish washing method as an applied leadership skill. Otherwise, follow BD's advise (it might have been to Christian of him omitting all of the expletives that may have been in the subtext of his reply).

Qwazse,

 

Thanks for the trip down memory lane!

 

"The only thing that EDGE has ever accomplished (that anyone can measure objectively) is remove the Patrol Leader and any description of a working Patrol from the Patrol Method presentation of Scoutmaster specific training. "