Serious Problems In My Troop

[Stosh]

Young'n,

 

Welcome to life.  The simple fact is, 1 out of 15 of you is mature enough to be in a boy-led troop.  Doesn't get any better in the adult workplace. 

 

Maybe there is this super-troop out there where everyone pulls their weight and the boys can lead, but it's probably a smaller troop. 

 

I just got back from camp with 25 of my boys. 

 

The SPL checked out, and didn't do much of anything all week (except for text his parents on the phone he snuck along).  And no, I didn't take it away, but did ask him if his integrity was worth the ability to text.

 

The ASPL tried to pick up the slack, but most boys wouldn't listen to him.

 

The duty roster was ignored by the vast majority of the scouts.

 

The most mature boys, other than the ASPL Star scout were all 2nd class and below.  The bulk were my new scouts.

 

I'd swear many of these boys are so lazy they have someone to come in and wipe for them in the mornings. 

 

Now you might take your 4 or 5 friends who are mature enough for a boy-led troop, along with a couple of ASMs who would find that refreshing, and find or found one of these super-troops where every scout takes care of business.  I'd like to know how you will handle the scout who will do nothing, or the scout who is a babysitting problem.  And how about those "syndrome" scouts?  Are you versed enough to handle them?  Will your new super-troop shun "problem children".

 

I'd suggest that these super-troops are full of scouts who want to be there, rather than scouts whose parents pushed them into it.  Eagle looks good on those college applications, don't you know.

 

Now, if you and your buddies can show the ASMs and SM you can handle the troop, then by all means try it.  Demand your PLs have duty rosters, sleeping assignments, etc. in writing before your next camp out.  Have equipment checks and uniform inspections.  Practice leave no trace. 

 

But most importantly, before you accuse the adults, look at the boys.  I do believe I've had to light fires for most all my life scouts.  Are you a troop which can be boy led?

 

Now for all you keyboard commandoes who will chide me for being such a cynical ASM...  PM me and I'll invite you along to summer camp next year.

 

I'm having trouble wrapping my head around this issue.

 

The SPL and ASPL are trying to run a troop of 25 boys.  Good luck with that.  A highly trained professional teacher would have a fit with a classroom of that size and they can demand compliance with a snap of a finger or the evil eye.  And you expect an immature boy to be able to do that?  That is how one sets boys up to fail.

 

10 seconds after seeing an SPL with electronics that are not allowed, he wouldn't be SPL anymore.  He is totally unable to lead by example.  

 

No one's listening to the ASPL, now the SPL?  No problem have the SPL direct all the PL's to take charge of their boys and get organized as a patrol.  Your comments never mentioned the PL's doing anything.  It's about time they start.  If one has a boy-led program it HAS to be patrol-method.  The group of responsibility is too large otherwise.

 

The new SPL is there to help the PL's get their patrols in order, not do it for them.  The PL's need to step up or be replace on the spot.  Otherwise let them wallow in their ineptitude.  It's not the SPL's job to babysit patrol members, just PL's.

 

So, what's the issue here?  First of all there is a total lack of leadership skill showing at all.  Marginal management skills are there, but not sufficient to handle that large of a crowd.

 

Here's how it works.  

 

Friday night, the SPL directs (management) the PL's to separate themselves from each other and set up patrol camps.  No more troop camping.  PL's are now responsible to take care of their boys.  If they need help, send their APL over to get the SPL.  

 

So the APL shows up and asks for the SPL's assistance.  He goes over to the patrol and the PL says Johnny won't help out with anything.  SPL confirms that Johnny isn't doing anything.  Asks PL what he wants him to do about it.  SPL is there to assist the PL, not do his job for him.  PL says he doesn't know.  SPL says when he figures it out, send the APL to fetch him.

 

Until the boys realize the game is self-responsibility, they are all going to slack off.  When no one shows up to feed them, tuck them into bed and read them a bedtime story, they will quit acting like invalids.

 

If we are expecting the boys to grow up into manhood, it is a good time to quit coddling them like infants and expect them to man up.  As long as there are adults there to be their personal chef and valet, they are not going to lift a finger.  Heck, if I were to be waited on hand and foot, I'd slack off too.  

 

Boy-led only works in the patrol-method troops.  The reason you think it works better in the smaller troops is because a troop of 8 boys is really only a patrol.  When one gets up to 25 boys there has to be 3-4 PL's working to make it work.

[packsaddle]

Stosh, my classes are regularly at least 80 students or more. The one I'm teaching right now has more than 100. OTOH, I have absolute power in the classroom. That helps.

[Stosh]

Stosh, my classes are regularly at least 80 students or more. The one I'm teaching right now has more than 100. OTOH, I have absolute power in the classroom. That helps.

 

I can guarantee you don't teach 6th, 7th, or 8th graders.... I would guarantee the maturity level of a college student is not found very often in a Boy Scout troop.

[packsaddle]

Agreed. But I fit your description of "highly trained professional teacher" and I can demand compliance with a snap of my fingers...and I get it. You didn't mention any other conditions.

Edit: as for maturity, I think you are underestimating the maturity of scouts (at least the ones I interact with) and overestimating the maturity of college students (at least the ones I interact with).

Edited July 12, 2015 by packsaddle

[Stosh]

Agreed. But I fit your description of "highly trained professional teacher" and I can demand compliance with a snap of my fingers...and I get it. You didn't mention any other conditions.

Edit: as for maturity, I think you are underestimating the maturity of scouts (at least the ones I interact with) and overestimating the maturity of college students (at least the ones I interact with).

 

I'm not focusing in one the maturity of the scouts in as much as the leadership/training maturity of the boys called to lead.  Suppose you had never been expected to teach a class of 40 junior high school students and now you have to and you went to college to be a forester, not a teacher....    Good luck with that.  

 

It's not just the "students/scouts" or just the "teacher/(S)PL" it's a combination of both.  What we have in most scout troops is immature leaders trying to lead immature scouts.  BP felt that handling 5-7 other boys was a pretty fair handful for any fledgling leader.  I tend to agree with him.  Being SPL and trying to run a troop of 25 boys?  I would NEVER put any of my boys in a position to do that.  That's why I think the patrol-method is necessary before even considering being a boy-led operation.  A good SPL should be able to handle 5-6 PL's under his wing with each of the 6 PL's having 8 boys under their wings which would make a troop of 50 boys with everyone's responsibility well within their maturity and comfort levels.

[eagle77]

I'm having trouble wrapping my head around this issue.

 

The SPL and ASPL are trying to run a troop of 25 boys.  Good luck with that.  A highly trained professional teacher would have a fit with a classroom of that size and they can demand compliance with a snap of a finger or the evil eye.  And you expect an immature boy to be able to do that?  That is how one sets boys up to fail.

 

10 seconds after seeing an SPL with electronics that are not allowed, he wouldn't be SPL anymore.  He is totally unable to lead by example.  

 

No one's listening to the ASPL, now the SPL?  No problem have the SPL direct all the PL's to take charge of their boys and get organized as a patrol.  Your comments never mentioned the PL's doing anything.  It's about time they start.  If one has a boy-led program it HAS to be patrol-method.  The group of responsibility is too large otherwise.

 

The new SPL is there to help the PL's get their patrols in order, not do it for them.  The PL's need to step up or be replace on the spot.  Otherwise let them wallow in their ineptitude.  It's not the SPL's job to babysit patrol members, just PL's.

 

So, what's the issue here?  First of all there is a total lack of leadership skill showing at all.  Marginal management skills are there, but not sufficient to handle that large of a crowd.

 

Here's how it works.  

 

Friday night, the SPL directs (management) the PL's to separate themselves from each other and set up patrol camps.  No more troop camping.  PL's are now responsible to take care of their boys.  If they need help, send their APL over to get the SPL.  

 

So the APL shows up and asks for the SPL's assistance.  He goes over to the patrol and the PL says Johnny won't help out with anything.  SPL confirms that Johnny isn't doing anything.  Asks PL what he wants him to do about it.  SPL is there to assist the PL, not do his job for him.  PL says he doesn't know.  SPL says when he figures it out, send the APL to fetch him.

 

Until the boys realize the game is self-responsibility, they are all going to slack off.  When no one shows up to feed them, tuck them into bed and read them a bedtime story, they will quit acting like invalids.

 

If we are expecting the boys to grow up into manhood, it is a good time to quit coddling them like infants and expect them to man up.  As long as there are adults there to be their personal chef and valet, they are not going to lift a finger.  Heck, if I were to be waited on hand and foot, I'd slack off too.  

 

Boy-led only works in the patrol-method troops.  The reason you think it works better in the smaller troops is because a troop of 8 boys is really only a patrol.  When one gets up to 25 boys there has to be 3-4 PL's working to make it work.

 

  In my first 3 years as SM I fired 4 SPL's, 9 PL, and 1 QM. Once the boys realized I was not kidding around and they would be held accountable for doing their jobs the rest was easy. Had a couple of parents take their boys elsewhere, no problem.  Setting the proper example is job number one if you ask me.

[eagle77]

 Oh and before I did the firing I had SMC with each of the boys and let them know what needed to happen and what was expected of them. I just did not come out and fire them.

[Stosh]

 Oh and before I did the firing I had SMC with each of the boys and let them know what needed to happen and what was expected of them. I just did not come out and fire them.

 

I didn't wait until after they screwed around on the job.  They were told up front what was needed to keep the job.  They didn't need a SMC for me to tell them again, they already knew they were going to get left in the dust.

 

I had boys even refuse leadership positions because they knew they weren't going to be able to do a good job for the others.  At least by cutting to the chase right from the beginning, a lot of hassles can be avoided.

 

I should also mention that I don't fire the leadership, the boys do it.  If their PL isn't doing the job, they simply hold an election and get a new one in.  With one patrol there's no SPL, but we did have a change of PL leadership a couple of weeks ago.  

Edited July 12, 2015 by Stosh

[eagle77]

 The only scout leaders I fired directly were the SPL's the PL's and the QM were fired by thier patrols and the SPL. None of that happened though until I could get it through to the boys that if you want to hold a position and lead you would need to do the job. The SMC's were my courtesy to them. They were well aware of what they had gotten themselves into.