Parent Patrol

[Stosh]

One cannot develop true boy-led through osmosis. They need to be trained and then trusted.

 

Part of their training can be doing their own thing, but then there has to be review and reflection when things go wrong and need to be "fixed" for next time. This is not accomplished by boys standing around watching adults, they do it by rolling up their sleeves and getting dirty which has nothing to do with watching a model patrol. The WB and SM/ASM training does not teach by showing, they teach by having the students do it. Same holds true for the boys.

 

A "model" patrol of adutls is basically a waste of time and assumes the boys will actually learn. It just ain't gonna happen. They're going to be off on their own struggling and pretty much not worrying about what the adults are doing, they have enough on their plate to worry about.

 

No matter how much one tries to pretty it up and justify it, it's just an excuse for Adult Scouts of America.

 

Stosh

[SSScout]

The SM names some Instructor/Guides. He might actually have some idea who is good at what skill. SM and ASMs teach the I/Gs some skills (Totin Chip, knots, etc. ) . These I/Gs teach the younger Scouts the skills. Use the EDGE method, if you wish. This is where the adults model behavior...... The SM INSISTS on this. He then instructs the Patrols to elect their PLs. He then convenes the PLCouncil, where he trains the PLs in PLeading. See www.scouting.org/Training/Youth

Or, send them off to the Council's NYLTS. Give each of them a copy of the PLHandbook. INSIST they do PLeader things! When they come up and say "you mean I can DO that?" the SM says yes...

 

Choose a SPL and a ASPL or two. SM might appoint the first time out, and after a year or so, the Troop or PLC elects them. The adults drive the cars, catch the kids that fall down, but they do not prevent them from falling down!

 

Howzzat?

[Stosh]

Or, the SM teaches the first go-around PL's then the PL's take over their patrol and from there on,the registered/trained adults drink coffee and help only when asked. EDGE method is not a modeling process, it is an educational process and there is no place where BSA uses modeling as a teaching recommendation. The youth associate with adults. That may imply some interaction between the boys and adults as the boys develop their program. What that interaction is, is not nailed down all that much, but it is definitely not taking over and running the show on the part of the adults.

 

SSScout, why is the SM INSISTING on everything? Is he really running the show? Instructs the patrols to elect their PL's? Or directs? Or INSISTS? SM sends them off to NYLT... again the SM is running the show.

 

I don't care if the troop elects/selects/appoints an SPL and ASPL. It's their decision, the SM doesn't need to appoint anyone to be in that position. If they don't need a PLC, why would the SM insist them have one? And why would the boys come to the SM and say "you mean I can DO that?" unless the SM has been running the show and the boys aren't. As part of the teaching why weren't they told that right from the start?

 

I don't know if it is just a hyper-sensitivity on my part, the way people write on the forums, or what, but I hear a lot of more "what we as adults are doing for the troop" than I hear "what the boys are doing for the troop".

 

Who actually holds the power and authority in the troop? I have heard everything from the IH right down to the SM, but I hear very seldom any youth level positions having the real power and authority in the troop. It's gotta be really frustrating for the boys to have the responsibility to lead and no real power and authority to actually do it.

 

Stosh

[Papadaddy]

Barry, et al...don't get me wrong. I am fully in favor of a parent's right to "observe" any BSA activity at which their son or daughter is participating, and in the many years I was serving a unit, we always had "nonregistered" parents along to provide transportation, adult supervision, or to teach/mentor skills. But what I heard described was a uniformed "patrol" of parents playing Boy Scout alongside the youth. Forgive me if I misunderstood.

[Stosh]

Barry' date=' et al...don't get me wrong. I am fully in favor of a parent's right to "observe" any BSA activity at which their son or daughter is participating, and in the many years I was serving a unit, we always had "nonregistered" parents along to provide transportation, adult supervision, or to teach/mentor skills. But what I heard described was a uniformed "patrol" of parents playing Boy Scout alongside the youth. Forgive me if I misunderstood.[/quote']

 

You didn't.

 

"nonregistered" parents along to provide transportation, - Not a problem

 

adult supervision, - without YPT, no way!

 

or to teach/mentor skills. - Without training and YPT, no way and our boys do the teaching and mentoring anyway. My ASM's are trained to help only when asked, parents get in there and mess where they don't belong.

 

We even register MB counselors and have them do YPT. Why in the world would we have parents hanging around the youth with no registration, no training and no YPT?

 

.... and then one wishes to have them dress up and participate as mentors?

 

Sorry, this is so wrong on so many levels!

 

Stosh

[Eagledad]

Stosh, you have what, 5 scouts? If a troop can't do boy run with 300 ft separation, then what's the point. Scouts certainly don't know the difference. You have always been anti parents on camp outs since you been here. Yes I find that strange. That is a wrong attitude in this day and age. Just look at OA as the model that had to change when they were accused of being a secrete program. It's impractical to expect a troop to move 50 scouts around with all ASMs. It's even more impractical to say no to parents who want to see the program in action. In fact, it is suspicious. That's a different situation from helicopter parents and adults wanting to play Boy Scouts. If you can't run a boy run program with parents in the area, then maybe you aren't as good as you are always bragging to be. Barry

[Stosh]

Stosh' date=' you have what, 5 scouts? [/quote']

 

Currently 6, but who's counting. So your point is what? I have had as many as 35 as SM and close to 50 as ASM. How does that change anything?

 

If a troop can't do boy run with 300 ft separation' date=' then what's the point. [/quote']

 

I count the 300' between any patrol (even if it's only one) and adults whether they are trained and have YPT or not. So one can have 1 patrol or 50 patrols all 300' apart and that includes the adults. That of course is the theme of this thread. So then what is the point you were trying to make?

 

Scouts certainly don't know the difference.

 

Kids are a lot smarter than they let on. I've been working with youth for 40+ years and gave up on that assumption about 35 years ago.

 

You have always been anti parents on camp outs since you been here. Yes I find that strange. That is a wrong attitude in this day and age.

 

Never said I was anit-parent. All my best adult leadership is made up of parents. They are trained and committed to the program.

 

I don't think it's the wrong attitude in this day and age especially where National is putting it's foot down on registrations, training, especially YPT, and trying it's best to deal with a PR nightmare of inappropriate adult situations in Scouting. I would find it strange that anyone would miss that recent emphasis especially around recharter time and the mad scramble to get everyone trained. Just this last week I got an email notifying me who has and who hasn't received their training in my new troop.

 

Just look at OA as the model that had to change when they were accused of being a secrete program. It's impractical to expect a troop to move 50 scouts around with all ASMs.

 

Missed the point here. What's secrecy got to do with trained YPT registered leaders? If it's not practical to protect the boys by having qualified leadership moving them around, it might be a good time to revamp the troop structure so as to be able to handle it appropriately.

 

It's even more impractical to say no to parents who want to see the program in action.

 

Never said parents weren't allowed to see what is going on, just not involved in the program development with the boys I have adults sit in at all meetings with the boys so they know what's going on. They were all invited to come and observe on every outing I have run with my current troop.

 

In fact' date=' it is suspicious. That's a different situation from helicopter parents and adults wanting to play Boy Scouts. If you can't run a boy run program with parents in the area, then maybe you aren't as good as you are always bragging to be. Barry[/quote']

 

Nice conclusion drawn from a whole series of incorrect assumptions. I have never had any of my adults involved in any of the troops I have been involved with that were NOT parents or grandparents! They were registered, they had YPT, and they were trained for the position they held. The only one that did not have children in the program was me when my boy dropped out many moons ago. The only exception to this is one boy who having turned 18. He took YPT, SM/ASM training and Wood Badge before coming back into the troop as an adult leader

 

I don't brag about my program in as much as I point out that I don't seem to have the kinds of problems mentioned in a lot of posts on this forum. If I speak about what I do to avoid that and it sounds like bragging, I guess that can't be helped.

 

Stosh

[SSScout]

Stosh: I think we are on the same page here, but maybe different paragraphs. I am assuming we have a Troop trying to move INTO the Boy Led model. For that to happen, yeah, the boys need to be assured that "yes, you can do that" and not necessarily wait for the SM or ASMs to tell them what and when. And, the boys need to know what to pass on in the way of skills and know-how, hence the teaching of the Guides/Instructor/PLs so they can teach the next group. Knife and axe skill and safety is taught and exampled. You need an experienced person to start the tradition.

And , yes, the SM needs to "insist" some. Insist the PL lead, not wait for something to happen. Insist that the SPL take charge of the PLC. Insist that his coffee be black, or whatever. When he sees something about to happen badly ("hey, watch this!!") , insist that folks step back and play the "what if" game.

The SM can and should insist that the other adults get trained and then step back to watch ... or demonstrate a skill, if asked... or lead the bird ID hike....

 

I was on the Scout Skills weekend of the home troop, and happened to be the first one up. I started the Adult stove and set a pot of water on to boil. When the first Scout got up and wandered over, he asked "what's that for?', indicating the pot of now boiling water. I said, "what could you use boiling water for?" I eventually elicited a list of uses: Hot chocolate, oatmeal, wash dishes, hard boiled eggs, wash hands.... he wandered back to the Scout side of camp (30 so yards away!) and woke up his buddies. I later overheard a conversation about planning ahead to have the dish wash water on to boil before the meal was even cooking. Was I leading or somehow letting the Scouts make their own decision/mistakes?

[Stosh]

SSScout:

Stosh: I think we are on the same page here, but maybe different paragraphs. I am assuming we have a Troop trying to move INTO the Boy Led model. For that to happen, yeah, the boys need to be assured that "yes, you can do that" and not necessarily wait for the SM or ASMs to tell them what and when.

 

So if one were moving to boy-led, why wouldn't the SM inform the boys up front that they can do what they want rather than having them find out later. My boys are never surprised to learn that "they can do that" because that was the first lesson they got as a boy-led program. Not only that it was reinforced that they had the authority to do it as well as the responsibility.

 

SSScout:

And, the boys need to know what to pass on in the way of skills and know-how, hence the teaching of the Guides/Instructor/PLs so they can teach the next group. Knife and axe skill and safety is taught and exampled. You need an experienced person to start the tradition.

 

Yep, I said the SM had the responsibility to make sure the PL's were well trained to do their jobs. Guides and Instructors are just former PL's Same for a DC. Sound like a lot of PL's? What if there is only one patrol/one PL? Teach them ALL to be PL's! There's no rule that says that because you're not currently a PL doesn't mean you can't be trained as such.

 

SSScout:

And , yes, the SM needs to "insist" some. Insist the PL lead, not wait for something to happen.

 

And Here's were we part company. I would prefer to have the patrol members insist the PL lead. If they aren't getting what they need out of their PL, all they have to do is select a different one. If the current PL needs 6 months for advancement, he had better be doing his job or he's going to come up short on his advancement requirement. Let the system work as it is supposed to be rather than impose SM insistence into it because he/she doesn't think it's up to snuff.

 

SSScout: Insist that the SPL take charge of the PLC. Insist that his coffee be black, or whatever. When he sees something about to happen badly ("hey, watch this!!") , insist that folks step back and play the "what if" game.

 

And now we have the SM running the show by insisting and directing everything. This is NOT the game plan for a boy-led program. Unless the "Hey, watch this!" involves a safety issue, then let it happen. Boy's will learn more from their mistakes than they will from their successes. Let them make the mistake and then work through the evaluation afterwards. Boys need to experiment their skills and talents, they need to be seekers. If the SM squashes that within the boys, they will simply shut down and it won't have been their fault. No one wants to fail, but no one wants to stay a child forever either. As SM you support that transition, not direct it. A good leader directs his own destiny.

 

SSScout:

The SM can and should insist that the other adults get trained and then step back to watch ... or demonstrate a skill, if asked... or lead the bird ID hike....

 

The SM can insist anything he/she wants when it comes to the adults. No problem, he directs and leads the program as designed by the boys, which means 90% of his time he's keeping adults out of the boy's hair. As one who is there to support, yes, if asked, he can support whatever the boys need.

 

SSScout

I was on the Scout Skills weekend of the home troop, and happened to be the first one up. I started the Adult stove and set a pot of water on to boil. When the first Scout got up and wandered over, he asked "what's that for?', indicating the pot of now boiling water.

 

1) Why are there boys wandering around in other camps without a buddy? Safety First!

2) If no other adults were up, you are treading on YPT thin ice.

3) Why did the boy think it was okay to come over to the adult area?

 

I wasn't at the outing and only you know exactly what happened, but half awake with no coffee, the mind isn't always focused properly.

Another scouter in another camp is just getting up and looks over towards your tent and sees a lone boy walking back to the scout area from the adult area and you are the only one moving around the camp. Your scouting career can end in a heartbeat. YPT is there for YOUR PROTECTION! .... end of "What If" game.....

 

Anyway, it is obvious the PL hasn't been doing his job, but it's not the SM's job to do it for him.

 

SSScout:

I said, "what could you use boiling water for?" I eventually elicited a list of uses: Hot chocolate, oatmeal, wash dishes, hard boiled eggs, wash hands.... he wandered back to the Scout side of camp (30 so yards away!) and woke up his buddies. I later overheard a conversation about planning ahead to have the dish wash water on to boil before the meal was even cooking. Was I leading or somehow letting the Scouts make their own decision/mistakes?

 

You were leading because that whole lesson should have been taught by the PL, not the SM and especially not under the circumstances described. Long before they got to that outing the PL should have had all his boys up to speed on camp duties. If it's a NSP, then the TG need step up and do his job of training the boys as PL's. I would have been a lot more impressed if this wandering scout would have wakened his PL and asked him what he needed to be doing to get ready for the day instead of wandering off to get that "guidance" from the SM.

 

Unfortunately the next time this boy has a question/concern, who is he going to seek out for help? ...and unfortunately you are going to have to say to him, "Go ask your PL." in order to make up for the poor lesson you taught the morning of the hot water discussion. That's a little bit of the "What If" game you need to play on your own.

 

Yes, over the years I have made all these mistakes and even yet get caught off guard at times. But like the boys, I learn from my mistakes, too.

 

Stosh

[Sidney Porter]

Where was it said that the parent patrol would not have youth protection and be not be registered?

 

I an not a fan of the parent patrol idea but it appears that we are making an that assumption.

[Scouter99]

Go to Wood Badge, they say, it's the best training in Scouting, they say.

 

Ok' date=' I think I need to give a little back story as this conversation has gone a little awry. Before we joined this troop there were only 7 boys. They claimed to be boy-led but it turns out their definition was to let the boys decided what to do and the SM did all of the footwork to get them there. I don't think the words "go ask your SPL or PL" had ever been said, it was usually "go ask the SM". A new SM took over and is pushing to get us into a true boy-led troop. We have grown to over 30 boys in the last 2 years which has brought in a wonderful group of parents who want to help. Unfortunately the SM is running into the "this is how we always did it" mentality from many of the original parents which is creating obstacles. The original 7 boys have very little leadership experience so it is hard to tell all the younger boys to go ask them. The idea behind the parent patrol was not to create a competition between parents and boys, it was to create the image of how it is supposed to work. We need a way to give the older boys the concept and get the younger boys ready for when it is their turn to lead. The "mentors" will be there to help all of the boys through this transistion and give them the guidance they need to be able to become leaders. All parents in our troop that interact with the boys or go on camp outs need to have YPT. The new mentors will also all be registered and go through basic training as well as SM training. I envision the mentors will only be around for a year or so and then slim down to a couple ASMs.[/quote']

 

If your new SM wants to implement boy led then all he needs to do is first make sure he himself understands what it is, not simply what his idea of it is.

How does he know? He has to do his homework. A copy of The Handbook for Patrol Leaders by "Greenbar" Bill HIllcourt (http://www.amazon.com/Handbook-Patro.../dp/B003JDR8LY) and The Patrol System by Roland Philipps (free at http://www.thedump.scoutscan.com/Patrol%20System.pdf)

That is what boy led and the patrol system are.

 

Once your SM actually knows what boy led means, then he can implement it by simply telling his boy leadership the plan, empowering them, holding them accountable, and on the other side explaining it to the adults around him and telling them to get on board or get off at the next stop, whether or not they've gone and got their Wood badge baubles, I mean beads.

[Old_OX_Eagle83]

Stosh' date=' you have what, 5 scouts? If a troop can't do boy run with 300 ft separation, then what's the point. Scouts certainly don't know the difference. You have always been anti parents on camp outs since you been here. Yes I find that strange. That is a wrong attitude in this day and age. Just look at OA as the model that had to change when they were accused of being a secrete program. It's impractical to expect a troop to move 50 scouts around with all ASMs. It's even more impractical to say no to parents who want to see the program in action. In fact, it is suspicious. That's a different situation from helicopter parents and adults wanting to play Boy Scouts. If you can't run a boy run program with parents in the area, then maybe you aren't as good as you are always bragging to be. Barry[/quote']

 

The OA had to change, what version of alternate history did this come from. Let me quash several myths that drive me nuts:

 

1. The OA was never actually secret, it project an image of mystery that appeals to the youth.

2. The often misunderstood statement about the OA not being a secret society, wasn't a statement of change, it was an explanation of things as they were, and are.

3.. Parents, or other parties interested for appropriate reasons, have always been allowed to view ceremonies, if they insisted after being given a full explanation, and being given access to materials that laid out the ceremony in question.

4. Our policy, as handed down from national, is "ceremonies are to be safeguarded, and are not intended to be viewed by non-members". This is true to this day, Ray Capp, the National Chairman, answered this question, yet again just a few weeks ago:

Q. Hi Ray,

I would like to know if parents / non-scouters are allowed at the Ordeal Ceremony?

Bruce

A. Bruce:

Thanks for your question. If you are wondering about this, maybe some others are, as well. The decision as to whether parents or non-members may attend the ceremonies is ultimately up to the Scout Executive, as the Supreme Chief of the Fire. However, our expectation, as stated in the OA Handbook, is that parents not attend the ceremonies. The ceremonies are open to current members and candidates for membership. Parents (or other non-members) may not be spectators at ceremonies beyond the call-out. Page 30 of the OA Handbook has the relevant text:

"Youth and adult candidates for membership into the Order of the Arrow are introduced to the Order's concepts of servant leadership though a safeguarded ceremonial induction. Nonmembers should not attend the ceremonies.

 

Although the content of the ceremonies is private, the ceremonies were designed to avoid offending any religious belief and have received the approval of religious leaders. The ceremonies are consistent with Scouting traditions and the spirit of the Scout Oath and Law.

 

The Order of the Arrow recognizes and respects the right of any parent, Scout leader, or religious leader to be interested in the content of the ceremony. The lodge adviser, or his designee, may discuss the content of the ceremony and any other issue brought to his attention by one of these interested and responsible adults, with the understanding that the adult will maintain the confidentiality of the ceremony.

 

If after discussing the ceremony with the lodge adviser, the parent, Scout leader, or religious leader continues to have questions about the content of the ceremony, that person will be permitted to read the ceremony text and view the Order's ceremony training DVD. Following this, parents will be in a position to decide whether to allow their son to participate in the ceremony. Candidates may not become members of the Order of the Arrow without completing the pre-Ordeal and Ordeal ceremonies."

In the end, the scout executive has the ability to permit exceptions to this guideline. In that case, the scout executive should be made aware of the steps taken to help the parent understand the induction process and then allow or disallow the request to view the ceremony, articulating that there is to be quiet observation only, without camera, video, or voice recording.

 

Hope this helps clarify how we might approach this question.

Ray

 

Last revised on August 06, 2014

 

[Eagledad]

Thanks Old Ox,but I was there before, during and after the traditions were forced to change. In the old days (ol about pre mid 80s) the Ordeal was kept unofficially secret by its members because it raised the level of its organizations mystic. True, officially it was not secret, but the traditions of keeping the Ordeal agenda a secret as well as change the method of the Call Out (TAP Out) was forced by parents who took offense at the appearance a secret organization. I remember the debate well.

 

I appreciate you reciting the official stand, but the defense, but it doesn't reflect actual history of it's traditions. Which gets back to my point, keeping parents away from the troop program will not be tolerated very long in this day and age. Yes, I have seen the lawyer card raised more than once over similar situations.

 

As I said, if adults can't run a boy run program with 300 ft seperation, then they won't be able to do it with 3 miles, 30 miles or 300 miles either. There is no reason a boy run program can't develop to full maturity with parents on a camp out.

 

Barry

[Stosh]

There's no reason a boy run program can't develop to full maturity with 2 cows and a few chickens on a camp out too.

 

Of course as SM, I really don't want to spend my activity time keeping the cows and chickens out of the boys' way either....

 

Stosh

 

I'm not trying to be snarky here. It's just that I really don't see the functional purpose of a bunch of adults hanging around doing nothing except being tempted to "help" the boys by interfering in what their PL's should have already planned out. If he hasn't then the SPL will take care of it, not some random adult looking for something to do.

[Stosh]

Where was it said that the parent patrol would not have youth protection and be not be registered?

 

I an not a fan of the parent patrol idea but it appears that we are making an that assumption.

 

How are you going to keep a parent from observing? They can drive up and observe all they wish. Observing is one thing, hanging around with nothing to do is another.

 

It would be one thing to call a group of adults who are registered and have a troop function (CC, MC, ASM, etc.) have YPT, medical forms, etc. having an adult leader "patrol", but does that automatically assume that a parent patrol would be the same thing? If that be such, just call it what it is an adult leader patrol. Parent patrol defines something altogether different.

 

Stosh