SPL issues

[Basementdweller]

Well my SPL has been in his position for nearly 4 months now and has asked for an Smc for advancement. Let's just say his performance has been really weak. Missed plc's and failure to plan upcoming outings...... less than prepared for the meetings......heck he can't even tell you what the next out is going to be..... He is aware thoughts on his performance and has a improvement plan......He has yet to implement anything we have talked about.

 

I have tried to train the lad....met with him weekly to plan next weeks meeting......still nothing. Let's just say I am not happy with the performance and much less happy regarding his request for a smc.

 

I don't see any option. other than meet with him and pass him on to the bor and give the cc a heads up on my thought..... To me he has not fulfilled the por in a reasonable manner So to the group......whether it is laziness.....lack of Interest or parent driven......what have you done with this scout??????

[Old_OX_Eagle83]

Basement, assuming the youth understood his duties, was trained, and supported, and his performance has been that egregious, he should not be given credit for his office time. The experience should be used as a growth opportunity, and he should work with his scoutmaster on understanding his failings, and how to overcome them. Personally, I’d assign a project to help him learn the lessons he’s being coached on, and if successful, give him credit toward advancement.

[Kristian]

since he hasnt done the work he should not get credit for it. if despite your best teaching he still isnt up to the task of being the spl which can be an essential role depending on the experience and drive of the pl's you troop is going to need a new spl or the experience of all of the scouts will continue to suffer.

[Twocubdad]

Is extending his term an option? With a very specific list of markers he has to hit?

[Eagledad]

Every new SM has the same experience. I onced asked the forum the same question and a wise SM asked me to ask the SLP how he felt he was doing. I did and was amazed at learned. So i ask you, has he grown at all in the position? Ask him what he thinks of his performance. I've had scouts who in this discussion choose to not advance until they felt they improved. Most all of us Scoutmasters start out by judging how scouts perform in "our" minds. But Our job isn't to shape boys into our image of a scout, it's to guide them into wanting to make good decisions. You can't make them do it, you need to figure out how to get them to voluntarily change. It means nothing if only do it for you. Barry

[Basementdweller]

Let me see.....

 

Simple meeting.....He some times starts on time, He can lead the pledge, oath, law and outdoor code and thats it. He cannot make announcements for upcoming events, he cannot conduct or guide the PL's to do the sign ups. His contribution to the troop meeting is british bull dog.

 

I asked how he thought he was doing my weekly meetings with the SPL.....He thinks he is doing fine....We review the meeting and I ask....How did your portion of the meeting go?? he says great.....I follow up with what did you teach tonight???? silence.

 

Been trying to get him to plan our august outing, the date is set....that is it..... Might just have to miss August I guess.....

 

[Stosh]

BD, I'll take the Devil's Advocate in this. How many patrols does the troop have? Is the SPL in charge of the PL's or the "whole troop"? I would think that if one has 3 patrols all with functional PL's doing a great job, the SPL is pretty much useless and will spend a lot of time "doing nothing". Once a month, the SPL get's the PL's together and says, "How's it going guys?" and they all say, things couldn't be better, then the SPL is pretty much going to sit back and wait for some problem that may arise for at least a month until the next PLC meeting where he's ask the question, "How's it going guys?". However, if the SPL is in charge of the "whole troop", then he'll need to be interfering in the work of all the PL's, over ruling their decisions for their patrol and pretty much trying to be SUPER Patrol Leader of a patrol equivalent of the whole troop. Good luck, this boy will never be a success and will struggle and fight for authority throughout his tenure. If things go awry, he'll be blamed and he won't have the where-with-all to handle situations that most adults struggle with. This is why the really good leaders avoid the SPL position. They know a losing proposition and will put in some young scout based on some false sense of ego, just so he'll stay out of the way and take the inevitable heat from things going wrong.

 

In my troop I had fairly good PL's and whenever a SPL was needed for an activity, they drew straws as to who got/had to be SPL. the "loser" was always the one who had to be SPL. I asked one of my better PL's why this was that way and he basically summed it up as the SPL stuff was pretty much a waste of time and would prefer to be with his friends leading the patrol.

 

As you can see I'm a big fan of true patrol-method with strong PL's and an SPL that supports PL's being better rather than trying to run the "whole troop". Heck, some adult SM's can't even do that themselves, how would they ever expect some poor scout to pull it off?

 

Is my bias against SPL's showing?

 

Stosh

[Basementdweller]

Currently 3 patrols....My troop is very young and there lies part of the problem.

[Eagledad]

"Is my bias against SPL's showing?" Yep, and so is your EGO. Really good leaders have no bias or pride. Humiliy gives them unlimted vision to build men of character in every situation, every program style with every personality. Barry

[Basementdweller]

BD, I'll take the Devil's Advocate in this. How many patrols does the troop have? Is the SPL in charge of the PL's or the "whole troop"? I would think that if one has 3 patrols all with functional PL's doing a great job, the SPL is pretty much useless and will spend a lot of time "doing nothing". Once a month, the SPL get's the PL's together and says, "How's it going guys?" and they all say, things couldn't be better, then the SPL is pretty much going to sit back and wait for some problem that may arise for at least a month until the next PLC meeting where he's ask the question, "How's it going guys?". However, if the SPL is in charge of the "whole troop", then he'll need to be interfering in the work of all the PL's, over ruling their decisions for their patrol and pretty much trying to be SUPER Patrol Leader of a patrol equivalent of the whole troop. Good luck, this boy will never be a success and will struggle and fight for authority throughout his tenure. If things go awry, he'll be blamed and he won't have the where-with-all to handle situations that most adults struggle with. This is why the really good leaders avoid the SPL position. They know a losing proposition and will put in some young scout based on some false sense of ego, just so he'll stay out of the way and take the inevitable heat from things going wrong.

 

In my troop I had fairly good PL's and whenever a SPL was needed for an activity, they drew straws as to who got/had to be SPL. the "loser" was always the one who had to be SPL. I asked one of my better PL's why this was that way and he basically summed it up as the SPL stuff was pretty much a waste of time and would prefer to be with his friends leading the patrol.

 

As you can see I'm a big fan of true patrol-method with strong PL's and an SPL that supports PL's being better rather than trying to run the "whole troop". Heck, some adult SM's can't even do that themselves, how would they ever expect some poor scout to pull it off?

 

Is my bias against SPL's showing?

 

Stosh

And weren't you removed as an adult leader from that troop??????

[koolaidman]

BD has he performed badly enough for you to remove him from his POR? If so, replace him and mark time served.

Pages 22-24 of the 2011 GTA cover this. It says, "only in rare cases - if ever- should troop leaders inform a Scout that time, once served, will not count."

 

If it is for Star (assuming since you mentioned 4 months), remove him, give him the POR credit and let him know the standard he will be held to for Life. Hold him to his POR standard early on...

[Stosh]

BD, I'll take the Devil's Advocate in this. How many patrols does the troop have? Is the SPL in charge of the PL's or the "whole troop"? I would think that if one has 3 patrols all with functional PL's doing a great job, the SPL is pretty much useless and will spend a lot of time "doing nothing". Once a month, the SPL get's the PL's together and says, "How's it going guys?" and they all say, things couldn't be better, then the SPL is pretty much going to sit back and wait for some problem that may arise for at least a month until the next PLC meeting where he's ask the question, "How's it going guys?". However, if the SPL is in charge of the "whole troop", then he'll need to be interfering in the work of all the PL's, over ruling their decisions for their patrol and pretty much trying to be SUPER Patrol Leader of a patrol equivalent of the whole troop. Good luck, this boy will never be a success and will struggle and fight for authority throughout his tenure. If things go awry, he'll be blamed and he won't have the where-with-all to handle situations that most adults struggle with. This is why the really good leaders avoid the SPL position. They know a losing proposition and will put in some young scout based on some false sense of ego, just so he'll stay out of the way and take the inevitable heat from things going wrong.

 

In my troop I had fairly good PL's and whenever a SPL was needed for an activity, they drew straws as to who got/had to be SPL. the "loser" was always the one who had to be SPL. I asked one of my better PL's why this was that way and he basically summed it up as the SPL stuff was pretty much a waste of time and would prefer to be with his friends leading the patrol.

 

As you can see I'm a big fan of true patrol-method with strong PL's and an SPL that supports PL's being better rather than trying to run the "whole troop". Heck, some adult SM's can't even do that themselves, how would they ever expect some poor scout to pull it off?

 

Is my bias against SPL's showing?

 

Stosh

Yep, because I expected too much leadership from the boys. Everyone had positions and when a few boys who didn't like to have to do anything complained to their parents, I was asked to leave and the troop reverted back to adult led. The only people upset with the process were the boys who were really liking the boy led thingy, picking their own activities, camps and being involved. A number of boys walked away and joined another troop in town that was also intensely adult-led, but had far more activities planned by the adults. They said as long as the adults were going to run the show, they might as well join a troop noted for it's Eagle-mill, high intensity advancement and little or no work on the part of the boys. The troop I had was too small to pull off the nice events. The other troop had been to BWCA, Philmont, Jamboree and Sea Base all within the previous 5 years. That was the troop I was in competition with and winning. I went from 5 boys to 29 in 3 years. Now they are about 12, four of them the new SM's sons, the other eight, their friends. A small adult-led program cannot compete effectively against a large adult-led program. One has to offer a true alternative to attract boys.

[Stosh]

Currently 3 patrols....My troop is very young and there lies part of the problem.

Being young is not the problem. One effective older boy teaching leadership will raise the bar on the leadership corps very quickly. If the only emphasis being promoted is personal advancement and not group leadership, the young problem will persist for quite some time. I have personally witnessed 11-12 year-olds doing what in other troops were being done by adults. Teach your boys real leadership and let them go. Age determined problems are generally an adult perspective. The boys all know who's really running the show, and more often than not, it ain't them.

[Stosh]

"Is my bias against SPL's showing?" Yep, and so is your EGO. Really good leaders have no bias or pride. Humiliy gives them unlimted vision to build men of character in every situation, every program style with every personality. Barry

Ego/pride vs. dedication/sticking with the program outlined by BSA? Yep, kinda hard to tell at times, especially when one looks at it from only one point of view. By the way, good leaders do have bias and pride in the program they lead and inspire others with. And as far as EGO is concerned, show me a effective historical leader someplace that wasn't affected by a huge ego. It goes hand-in-hand.

 

Stosh

[Basementdweller]

It is more my growing frustration with the lad.......The return on my time spent with him, is next to zero...I just don't see any growth or interest in the position.

 

His failure to consistently provide leadership in the troop.....Unless I call him to make sure he has a program scheduled he won't do it.