Moving to a Patrol Method Troop.

[Stosh]

I have a similarly sized troop. Today I received two irate emails from parents because something isn't going right. My response is to explain how the scouts can solve this problem on their own and that I'd be happy to coach them. Now I have two parents pissed off at me. Not only am I not solving their problem I'm proposing to do their job. Bad day. Everyone is right' date=' boy led is chaotic. Two steps forward and one back..[/quote']

 

You are correct. Even though one makes the transition from adult to boy-led, the parents will be the last to accept it. The want a program FOR their boys. Their boys are to be entertained, they are to receive a benefit from it, walk away with something worthwhile. When the parents, pastors, teachers, program directors, coaches, etc. don't do that, they are quickly replaced with those that will. The natural tendency is to allow the parents to continue being parents and running the show. They really don't want their children to really grow up as fast as they could if it were a different culture. Coming of age in most cultures of the world is a generally around 14ish. In the US it's well into the 20's. So one has an uphill battle with that one and those people can easily solve their pissed off feelings by getting a different SM.

 

Getting a dominating SPL to back off is certainly important and probably not nearly as hard as getting adults to understand. Just as hard, if not harder, is to get the PLs to step forward. They really are the crux of the program. One problem I see is they have never had responsibility for others before, not even for themselves. So this is a very new idea and, at least to start, you need some good scouts that are OK with something new and also have a good heart. Some scouts, no matter how bright, competitive, outgoing, or whatever, can't see past themselves. What I'm finding is that once the boys hit puberty they're beyond the squirmy phase and while the older scouts might have better focus, it depends more on their heart. Give me a 13 year old that cares about others over a 16 year old that is so competitive he can't see the other scouts in his patrol..

 

Reverse the roles. PL's are responsible for their patrols and the SPL doesn't manage the PL's he supports them. This spreads the leadership out into the patrols and out of the hands of an often inept SPL. No professional teacher would want to have a class of 70 students, but we expect our SPL's to "run the troop"? Good luck with that.

 

We have homogenized patrols, and we have to figure out how to support the 11 and 12 year olds, but after that I'm thinking let's encourage younger, good scouts to be PLs. A good 16 year old PL could do good things with a 13 year old that wants to learn. And a good 13 year old PL will do better than a 16 year old suffering from high school drama. This is similar to what Eagledad is saying about how older scouts won't change but I'm finding that boys that honestly care about others will move towards boy led more easily than the selfish kids, irrespective of age.

 

Another point is "boy led" is not a yes/no thing. There are different aspects of the troop and different levels of boy led.

 

And you point out the fallacy of the mixed - age based patrols. Just because they are all different ages doesn't mean they are homogenized... The reverse holds true just as well, Just because they are all 13 doesn't mean they aren't homogenized in maturity. There are a lot of people who make those false assumptions. In a same aged patrol they are all at differing maturity levels with their leadership development, and they are bonded as peer friends. Their peer group pecking order is pretty much established and so it is a natural setup for a patrol. You break up a group based on age, instead of maturity, i.e. let's put Johnny as PL of the younger boys so he gets a chance at leadership. That's fine and dandy, but Johnny isn't/hasn't been in leadership positions before because he has absolutely no interest in leading. This does nothing more than set the boy up for failure. I see it happen all the time. Freddie needs a POR, he's 13, make him a PL for the NSP. So Freddie's maturity level is that of an 11 year old. That'll work..... Be prepared to "mentor" Freddie through his POR because he's going to pretty much sit this one out. As you said, what's in it for him?

 

Stosh

[JoeBob]

Has anybody been part of a troop that didn't use the patrol method and made this transition? Or took over a troop that made this transition?

Sentinel947

 

Boy Howdy! Have we ever drug the OP into the weeds!

[Sentinel947]

 

Boy Howdy! Have we ever drug the OP into the weeds!

 

Haha, it's actually all really helpful to me. I've spent my whole "career" in this troop, and so it's really helpful to get other people's perspectives, if not on my situation, then the Patrol method more broadly.

[meschen]

There is a lot here, I just want to make two quick comments:

 

1. The Patrol method is not going to significantly increase your Camporee attendance. That is a Troop spirit issue and you're fighting an uphill battle. What the Patrol method can do, if the PLC is properly vested with the ability to plan the Troop's activities, is to identify an alternative activity that the Scouts might actually want to attend instead of a Camporee. Are you willing to let them make that decision?

 

2. It has taken me a while to learn this lesson, but the only person who should have a say on what Patrol a Scout should be in is the Scout himself. PLC's, or much worse, adults leaders will only make the Scout unhappy if he is told to join a Patrol that is not his first choice. You might you wind up with a Patrol without a qualified Patrol Leader, but that is one of the reasons the Troop Guide position exists.

[Stosh]

There is a lot here, I just want to make two quick comments:

 

1. The Patrol method is not going to significantly increase your Camporee attendance. That is a Troop spirit issue and you're fighting an uphill battle. What the Patrol method can do, if the PLC is properly vested with the ability to plan the Troop's activities, is to identify an alternative activity that the Scouts might actually want to attend instead of a Camporee. Are you willing to let them make that decision?

 

The patrol method can be quickly undone by adults associated with a troop, but a poor PLC can do it as well. This is where the verbiage gets muddled and the discussion breaks down.

 

If the SPL is running the PLC is he running the troop or just the PLC? A pretty well defined difference, but not always that obvious. So one has 6 patrols and 6 PL's and the SPL on the PLC. One can toss in a few more if they wish to muddy the waters a bit.

 

The SPL takes a vote of the patrols and the 2 NSP patrols want to go to camporee. Of course, they've never been there before, it sounds great. The two middle group patrols go along because they still think it's okay and it's too much work to do anything else, so they vote that way too. However the 2 older boy troops have been to way to many camporees to feel that this one is going to not be any better than the same-old, same-old. They want to do something different. But they get voted down.

 

Okay, can anyone tell me why the attendance at the camporee seems to have a loss of older boys when the two patrols decide there's something more important going on at home that weekend?

 

So, you have mixed age patrols. Long before they get to the PLC the patrols take a vote and they all decide to go to camporee because there is a small minority of older boys in each patrol. They never have enough voting block to do anything other than the same-old, same-old. And so when it comes down to actually going, all the older boys have other commitments going on and as long as they always get voted down on anything really good anymore, they might as well miss the next half dozen events as well. Or just stay at home and work on the Eagle project so they can get back to hanging out with the buddies on the weekend. Now instead of having to come up with two events, camporee for the younger boys and something else for the older boys, All the patrols are affected by the blue flu.

 

At least with the age based patrols there's a bit more flexibility. In my last troop there were three patrols NSP, a middle aged group and then the patrol of older boys. The two younger patrols went to camporee with my ASM and another adult, and I took the older patrol whitewater canoeing with another adult. Everyone ended up happy and overall attendance was great. I think only 2-3 boys out of 25 couldn't make it that weekend.

 

2. It has taken me a while to learn this lesson, but the only person who should have a say on what Patrol a Scout should be in is the Scout himself. PLC's, or much worse, adults leaders will only make the Scout unhappy if he is told to join a Patrol that is not his first choice. You might you wind up with a Patrol without a qualified Patrol Leader, but that is one of the reasons the Troop Guide position exists.

 

Never, never, never, let anyone other than the scouts decide on the patrols and the leadership. and don't be surprised if they come back broken down by peer groupings. If one is going to have fun, they want to be doing it with their friends, not a contrived group that some adult said they had to have. There are a lot of troops that justify such actions because it's good for the younger boys to learn from the older boys, and a few other justifications, but when the dust settles I am never surprised by the exodus of older boys from most troops when they vote silently with their feet.

 

Yep, Stosh is full of BS 100% of the time, but my retention percentage runs about 85-90% of the boys and about that same percentage on attendance at events. I have never had to stop and calculate how many events a boy showed up when it came to advancement. Most of my attendance problems are because of divorce/family scheduling. One of my boys missed summer camp this year because he was showing his cow at the fair and had made that commitment long before joining scouts. Heck, I get better attendance out of my scouts than I do out of my adults. But that's really not a problem because they are there most of the time just because of the 2-deep issue.

 

I find that most boys learn by doing leadership rather than simply watching others. For the most part they don't pay attention until it's their turn and then it's too late and no one ever taught them, the adults were just assuming it was soaking in along the way rather than giving them an opportunity for hands-on leadership learning.

 

With being a new troop, we don't have the "luxury" of a blended age patrol. All my boys are 11 years old, the PL, the APL, the QM, the Scribe etc. are all 11 years old. They're doing just fine and attendance this evening was 100% as was it last week and the week before. It's been over a month since one of the boys couldn't make it.

 

Next winter when the new batch of Webelos come in, I'd be a fool to try and break up this group of boys "for the sake of the troop".

 

Stosh

[Sentinel947]

There is a lot here, I just want to make two quick comments:

 

1. The Patrol method is not going to significantly increase your Camporee attendance. That is a Troop spirit issue and you're fighting an uphill battle. What the Patrol method can do, if the PLC is properly vested with the ability to plan the Troop's activities, is to identify an alternative activity that the Scouts might actually want to attend instead of a Camporee. Are you willing to let them make that decision?

 

I'm using the camporee as an example of a general trend in the troop it's the only outing I have solid numbers for. As for letting them make that decision, I'm willing to, but I'm not the Scoutmaster, so I hope he will.

 

[Stosh]

 

I'm using the camporee as an example of a general trend in the troop it's the only outing I have solid numbers for. As for letting them make that decision, I'm willing to, but I'm not the Scoutmaster, so I hope he will.

 

It's a lot easier to blame the scouts than take the blame for adult's poor decisions.

 

Stosh

[Hedgehog]

Part of what needs to happen is to change the culture. To do that you need to not only manage but change expectations for both the boys and the parents. I explain to the new scouts that scouting is about leadership. Leadership is about being responsible for others. The best way to be responsible for others is to become responsible for yourself. I tell the older leaders that they are servant leaders - their job is to make things happen. I also tell them that leading isn't doing but enabling others to "do." I also tell them that they are in charge and they can do anything they want as long as it isn't illegal or contrary to G2SS. With the parents, you have to sell the idea of boy lead. Most parents love the idea that their boys are learning to be responsible. In 6th and 7th grade the boys really make a transition in school for being responsible for themselves. Scouts mirrors that transition. I explain that Scouting gives them a safe place to fail - something that is missing in most kids experience. I had a parent concerned about her son cooking for his patrol and she asked if I would help him. I told her that the older boys know their stuff and they will help him. I then smiled and said that he would be fine and reassured her that we've never had a patrol starve on a campout I explain coffee cup leadership to the adults accompanying us - that their role is to get a cup of coffee and sit in a chair and watch. If I see them interfering, I say let me talk to the PL, it's his job to make sure that gets done (200 feet distance helps a lot). I also tell the PL how to handle the adults - a polite "Mr. Knowitall, I've got this." What you need to do in corporate speak, it is called "buy in" in religion is is called proselytizing. It is a continual discussion with parents and scouts of "this is why boy lead, patrol method is good." Finally, as others have said, moving to boy lead is a process. The first step is telling people what you are doing, the second step is trying to do it, the third step is "start, stop and continue" - evaluate and change. The last step is to keep repeating steps two and three.

[Hedgehog]

Part of what needs to happen is to change the culture. To do that you need to not only manage but change expectations for both the boys and the parents. I explain to the new scouts that scouting is about leadership. Leadership is about being responsible for others. The best way to be responsible for others is to become responsible for yourself. I tell the older leaders that they are servant leaders - their job is to make things happen. I also tell them that leading isn't doing but enabling others to "do." I also tell them that they are in charge and they can do anything they want as long as it isn't illegal or contrary to G2SS. With the parents, you have to sell the idea of boy lead. Most parents love the idea that their boys are learning to be responsible. In 6th and 7th grade the boys really make a transition in school for being responsible for themselves. Scouts mirrors that transition. I explain that Scouting gives them a safe place to fail - something that is missing in most kids experience. I had a parent concerned about her son cooking for his patrol and she asked if I would help him. I told her that the older boys know their stuff and they will help him. I then smiled and said that he would be fine and reassured her that we've never had a patrol starve on a campout. I explain coffee cup leadership to the adults accompanying us - that their role is to get a cup of coffee and sit in a chair and watch. If I see them interfering, I say let me talk to the PL, it's his job to make sure that gets done (200 feet distance helps a lot). I also tell the PL how to handle the adults - a polite "Mr. Knowitall, I've got this." In corporate speak, it is called "buy in" in religion is is called proselytizing. It is a continual discussion with parents and scouts of "this is why boy lead, patrol method is good." Finally, as others have said, moving to boy lead is a process. The first step is telling people what you are doing, the second step is trying to do it, the third step is "start, stop and continue" - evaluate and change. The last step is to keep repeating steps two and three.

[Sentinel947]

It's a lot easier to blame the scouts than take the blame for adult's poor decisions. Stosh

Huh?

[Eagledad]

Nice post Hedgehog. Barry

[Stosh]

Huh?

 

"I'm using the camporee as an example of a general trend in the troop it's the only outing I have solid numbers for. As for letting them make that decision, I'm willing to, but I'm not the Scoutmaster, so I hope he will."

 

Often a lot of the problems we face in running the troop, especially when it comes to attendance, is not a result of the scouts, but more often than not, the decisions of the adults.

 

You are correct with your comment about letting the boys decide, but the SM might not go along with it. The over-riding decision by the SM can and more often than not have an impact on the scout's reactions. I fought with a former SM for years to let the older boys pick an event, but he wouldn't go along with it because the younger boys would be left out. He would wave that for Philmont and Sea Base, but nothing else. When the older boys would eventually come to the conclusion that nothings going to be all that much fun because we always keep doing the same-old, same-old, they either start working on their Eagle, skipping meetings and activities, or they simply quit when the SM insisted that they attend or he would withhold their Eagle. That's the reality of the situation, but the story that was told to anyone who would listen was the boys would quit because of sports, cars, girls or jobs. It was never the fault of a poor scouting program or it's SM. This troop was a classic example of an adult-led, troop-method program. I know of at least 10-12 boys that finished their Eagles in other troops because of this SM. I also know hundreds that simply quit, too. For the 13 years I was with that troop, no SPL or PL was ever elected. SM assigned SPL to the boy needing POR and then directed the SPL to place PL's in the pseudo patrols based on POR needs. It was totally irrelevant that these boys were functional, it didn't matter, the SM ran the show anyway.

 

So, getting back to your comment, this is why I like the peer based patrols so they don't disrupt the others when they want to break away for something that interests them that the younger boys can't handle yet.

 

My alterior motive in this set up is that I get to go on twice as many outings with the boys and when I go with the older boys it's more like a group of adults which makes it really enjoyable.

 

Stosh

[MattR]

The son of one of the parents that burned me a new orifice called me up after I suggested to the mom that he do so. The problem is the PL hasn't organized anything for this week, so I told the younger boy to do it. He said he couldn't do that and I responded with, that's fine, he can give up and stay home. 20 minutes later I see email that he organized something. A slightly different view that failure can be good is that letting scouts have, and solve, problems is good. I've had to explain this 3 times to different parents in the past 24 hours.

 

The same age vs mixed age patrol idea brings up another problem I had with a parent. One of the parents, when he first joined, complained about patrols not being a 30 year fixture and that scouts move into a patrol and and not be allowed to move until eventually being a PL and aging out. But now his son is 13 and wants to start leading and dad's complaining that his son should be allowed to be PL because he'd do a better job than any of the other scouts.

 

We currently have mixed age patrols even though I haven't had anything to do with patrol makeup for the past 2 years. We handle the older scout issue by having special events for the older scouts that help out. I'm not positive it's the best way to do it but it works. I wouldn't mind seeing patrols with a 2-3 year age range.

[qwazse]

.... wants to start leading and dad's complaining that his son should be allowed to be PL ...

I think one of the most significant flaws in this organization is conflating leadership with a pach on the sleave. If you want to start leading, love your brother scouts and take care of them. Some PLs will lead others will just manage. The managers will get by just fine if the boys are caring for one another (i.e., if they are leading). The leaders might not manage all that well, but because they care, they'll be fine regardless.

[Hedgehog]

Ii responded with' date=' that's fine, he can give up and stay home. [/quote'] Somehow the idea that a Scouter is kind and helpful got lost in that statement. If I was the parent you would hear from me. Scouts need encouragement and guidance, not to be ridiculed for the insecurities about their abilities.