Change in The Troop, It's Coming

[Sentinel947]

 

@@barry I'm a firm believer in the NSP. I joined Scouts because my friends did. They pushed me to do it. I thought I was too cool to be a boy scout. Had I been separated from my friends at my first troop meeting, it would have been my last troop meeting. It may seem like a small thing to you, but it can be huge in the mind of an 11 year old. I look at the requirements for Eagle now, and they aren't super challenging, nothing I can't handle. When I was 16, they seemed extremely difficult.

 

Sentinel, why would it seem like a small thing to me. You have no idea how hard we work to do the right thing with our whole scouting program. You think I just think this stuff up and spew it hoping to get praise from fellow forum members? And please don't assume that just because I bring balance to the discussion that I don't think the NSP has value. We used the NSP for several years right next to our mixed age patrols. Some situations require the NSP structure

 

Why in the world would you assume that we wouldn't take scouting as serious as you. You didn't get mixed into a patrol as a new scout, so you don't have a clue how it might have workedfor you. We took our new scout program so seriously that we gained a reputation for also being accepting and compassionate of all scouts. As a result, we were getting a lot of handicapped boys from the area. You want to talk about handicapped scouts in a boy run program. I have a lot of Balanced experience there too and a broken heart to show for it. I know watching our Patrols side by side the advantages and disadvantages of NSP, mixed age, same age, adventure patrols, leadership patrols, old scout patrols and and on and on. We started with 17 scouts and had over 100 when I retired as SM. And we were boy run. That is very rare. Ask any scouter here with a larger patrol method troop of the challenges of being a boy run program with a large number of scouts. But we are Patrol Method and that reputation seems to drive scouts to our troop. Do you know how hard it is to find places to camp with 100 scouts where the patrols can camp 100 yards apart?

 

I am pretty sure that you would not have left our troop the first night. Of the hundreds of new scouts we brought into the troop, I can't recall a single scout leaving because they were mixed in with with an established patrol. We had a lot less complaints with scouts joining established patrols than the families of NSPs, especially with the parents. Older experienced scouts are pretty nice guys and know how to  have a lot of fun. 

 

It is true, I think NSPs are a form of helicopter parenting because the motivation behind NSP is very much adult driven. But they do have a place in the program. It depends on the troop situation with new scouts. 

 

Barry

 

@@Eagledad I've quoted your last post in it's entirety. My assumption is that you seem upset at something I've written. If I'm miscalcuated, please correct me. 

 

@@Krampus due to your upvote, and your post, I'd assume I've upset you with something I've written beyond our discussion in I&P. If that's so, I'd like to make that right. 

 

All: I'm putting it out there right now. I think highly of everybody on this forum. I look up to everybody here as a mentor and a role model. I value the experiences everybody brings to the table. 

 

That being said, typed posts have a lack of context. It's hard to strip away my bias that we read into other people's posts. When I read somebody's post, I don't have the context of your troop, how it works. I don't have everybody's scouting history to reference. I'm working off of memory. So I have to take posts at face value with a little bit of what I know about each of you. That's all I have to work with. 

 

Language without being spoken is hard. Words can seem sarcastic or harsh without that meaning meant to them. Little smiley faces don't help much with that. 

 

@@Eagledad :

I don't think anybody makes up stuff, and spews it out. Even over in I&P. I don't think I've ever doubted the sincerity of anybody on this forum that they are trying to do the right thing for their scouts. That's a pretty huge accusation. 

 

I didn't make any post saying anybody here takes Scouting less seriously than me. There are plenty of folks here that give up plenty more of their time, effort, blood, sweat and tears on scouting than I do. I'm not some Super Scouter or Saint Sentinel. 

 

"Do you know how hard it is to find places to camp with 100 scouts where the patrols can camp 100 yards apart?"  My troop doesn't quite have a hundred, but we have a difficult time finding places to camp with the 50-60 boys we sometimes have on an outing. 

 

"I am pretty sure that you would not have left our troop the first night. Of the hundreds of new scouts we brought into the troop, I can't recall a single scout leaving because they were mixed in with with an established patrol. We had a lot less complaints with scouts joining established patrols than the families of NSPs, especially with the parents. Older experienced scouts are pretty nice guys and know how to  have a lot of fun. "  I can't say what I would have done with your Troop. It wasn't an option to join your Troop. (At least I don't think it was.) My experience is unique to me. I included it as a point of caution. I can't play what if's with that situation. 

 

You yourself said it best. "I bring balance to the discussion." For every point. There is a counter point. That's what's so great about forums such as this. We enrich ourselves and others by sharing and reading other people's posts. 

 

I don't think anything I've said has disparaged the work you've done, the methods you've chose, or your motivations for doing so.

 

If I have, or it seems like I have. I apologize, for that's not my intention. I'm not here to spread the Scouting Gospel according to Sentinel, but to share my experience, pick up the experiences from everybody, and maybe help a newer leader along the way. What I've learned about the patrol method and being an adult leader from the people here has helped me and my unit in a way I cannot put a price on. But I value it, and each of you, immensely. 

 

All the best, 

 

Sentinel947  

[Stosh]

@@Sentinel947

 

Just recently I have begun to hear things a bit differently than what I assumed I heard originally.  I'll just stick with the NSP issue because we're on it.

 

I'm thinking that when I use the term NSP, it is universal in usage and application throughout the BSA.  What I hear Krampus say about his experience with NSP is not the same as what I experience in my neck of the woods.  Barry's definitions about boy-led are not indicative of what it means here.  Some people use certain terms that mean one thing to one person and something quite differently to another.  

 

Even with all the location differences, and the definition/understanding differences, and emotional nuance differences, it seems to be the consensus of assuming the worse in 99% of the cases.  No one ever questions further for greater clarity, they just start boiling things over on the stove.  More than once I have gone back to my posts and reread them numerous times and for the life of me can't figure out how another on the forum drew the conclusion they did from what I wrote.  Did I make a typo?  Is there a definition of a word that has two different meanings?  Was I speaking in Tongues?  Was I half awake when I wrote it?  I dunno!

 

So until those on the forum stop assuming the worse in other people's comments and start asking for clarity on an issue they find contrary to their own situation, this haggling is probably not going to go away anytime soon and it would probably be best to just put everything in I&P and not worry about it anymore.

 

I can see why Krampus doesn't like NSP's.  I don't like the NSP's in his area he describes either and I'm one that really likes NSP's, but only those NSP's that really function like NSP's run by the scouts and not Webelos III dens run by adults.  Once that got cleared up, it makes an opportunity to maybe work with blw2 type troops who have Webelos III dens and help him move that one troop closer to a functional boy-led NSP.  One troop at a time is good.  Maybe what we say might help any number of lurkers out there that are struggling with their troops as well.  We'll never know if all we ever do is bicker and fight.

[TAHAWK]

Or when confronted by others in his troop as to where he got such lame-brained ideas about how to run a troop using the boys as leaders, he can always says he got it from the idiots on the scouter.com forum. 

He can accurately say he got those ideas from the B.S.A., whose rules and regulations require it - even if some at B.S.A. seem to miss that point from time to time.

 

"“(d) The membership of a troop shall be organized on the patrol system.â€

 

    Rules and Regulations of the Boy Scouts of America (2016)

 

[blw2]

well put, Stosh & Sentinal.  Thank you.

How long has he been out of Cub Scouts? Speaking from experience on both sides of the spectrum, the worse adult offenders are former Cub Leaders. As a youth, the worse part of getting new Scouts were their parents. They kept butting in and interfering with the program. As an adult, I know I have interfered too much. I've posted elsewhere about striking a balance between adult involvement, and youth led.

 

To be honest, this is a relatively new experience; establishing, or re-establishing, a new troop. I've been fortunate to have been in established troops with older scouts who did the work. I know what my previous experience tells me (sit down and drink coffee until REALLY needed), and I am seeing another NSP mess like the I dealt with when my troop was guinea pigs back in the day.

 

oh, yes, very good point and I'm well aware of that potential.  As someone else here keeps pointing out, i'm in that similar boat too.  But to answer your question... he was a den leader until exactly 1 year ago.  He has a very calm demeanor, and seems to think things through.  I don't think he's the type to jump in too quickly.  He still is very likely to jump in too soon though, as are most adults I think, experienced or not.

 

Based on these closing comments of the post, may I suggest taking what you know and working with the ASM to make sure the NSP has a real chance at developing into a Scout patrol instead of a Webelos den?  This is my suggestion for leading from the back seat.  Help the ASM understand boy-led, patrol-method, trusting your boys, and letting them lead.  Nothing in the BSA book says you can't do that!  From your description of the guy, I seriously think he isn't going to tell you to bugger off.

 

Worst case scenario, you gain an enemy.  Best case scenario, you now have two boy-led, patrol-method champions in the troop.  If the two of you pull it off, every new Webelos boy will be eternally grateful for the opportunity to be a real Boy Scout from day one in the troop.  If nothing else, getting these new boys in the routine of self-leading will carry over into the future years of the troop as the boys get older.

This seems like a great suggestion.  In practice though i'm not quite sure how I'd go about that without coming off as a back seat driver.  After all, he is the ASM... I'm not.

Seems to me that my best approach is to observe, over that cup of coffee.  Then if I see something going south, have a quick brainstorm with him away from the scouts..... or maybe come back here for specific advice

Thank you for putting that idea to mind!  I definitely will keep it in mind and look for ways where I might do that effectively.

 

Barry

Your quotes didn't come through....

You said "what am I afraid of?"

I don't understand your question.  None of this discussion seems to be about being afraid of anything.....

 

It seems like this is a very hot button issue for some folks.

I will re-iterate that I don't really have an opinion either way, except my looking at it logically.... with my knowlege of people, kids, personality types, etc...

and when I do that, I have to say that I think Stosh is very likely right - in that some NSP's are structured to fail (such as Krampus'), and others really make a whole lot of sense.  

 

Most things have a right and a wrong way, so why should this NSP thing be any different?

[Sentinel947]

 

Most things have a right and a wrong way, so why should this NSP thing be any different?

Sometimes things have a right way and a wrong way.

 

Sometimes things have an optimal/most efficient way, but there are other options out there that work and stuff that flat out doesn't.

 

Sometimes there are handful of equally good ways (when applied properly) and stuff that flat out doesn't work. 

 

In our case, our goal is to develop youth in character, citizenship and body. Most users of this forum know that the patrol method is the only way to run a troop. But how do you use the patrol method? Is there only one way to use the patrol method? From my ownexperience, and from what I've learned from folks like Stosh and Eagledad, I'd say that answer is no. There is more than one way to use the Patrol method. 

 

I have a thread opened that I'm exploring this topic a bit more. I'd love some contributions from anybody. 

 

http://scouter.com/index.php/topic/27926-new-scouts-patrols-a-thought-experiment/

 

Sentinel947 

[Eagle94-A1]

_{Up until 1989, there were only two types of patrols: your regular scout patrol, what we call mixed-aged patrols since 1989, and you older Scout patrol. Older Scout patrol has had many incarnations over the years including Explorers circa 1950s and 60s ( And please correct me if I'm wrong), Leadership Corps 1972 to 1989, Venture Crew 1989 - 1998, and Venture Patrol 1998 to present.}

 

_{But someone in 1989 decided to change things, and added descriptors to the term "patrol:" New Scout, Mixed Age, Older.}

 

_{Me personally I'd love to go back the to thrill of yesteryear, when you had regular patrols of mixed ages and abilities, and the older scout patrol who were advanced, ran things, and help the troop out, while doing their own thing on occasion.}

[Krampus]

@Sentinel947, I upped @@Eagledad's post because I think the whole NSP it a crock *IF* it is run where the adults run the patrol rather than a scout. If a scout runs it then that's okay. HOWEVER, I will say I do not think first year's get as much experience in an NSP run by an older scout as they would integrated with a mixed age patrol.

 

We agree keeping boys together is key. The BSA study (forget the year) done a while back showed that boys that stay with friends are more likely to stay in scouting than those who don't. For my money you keep as many friends together as you can. I only move scouts based on discipline issues, at their request or if I see a leadership opportunity for them AND they want to make the move; otherwise, guys stay with friends...always.

 

For me that is what scouting is about.

[Krampus]

 

_{Me personally I'd love to go back the to thrill of yesteryear, when you had regular patrols of mixed ages and abilities, and the older scout patrol who were advanced, ran things, and help the troop out, while doing their own thing on occasion.}

 

Bravo. Bring back...

 

[Sentinel947]

@Sentinel947, I upped @@Eagledad's post because I think the whole NSP it a crock *IF* it is run where the adults run the patrol rather than a scout. If a scout runs it then that's okay. HOWEVER, I will say I do not think first year's get as much experience in an NSP run by an older scout as they would integrated with a mixed age patrol.

 

We agree keeping boys together is key. The BSA study (forget the year) done a while back showed that boys that stay with friends are more likely to stay in scouting than those who don't. For my money you keep as many friends together as you can. I only move scouts based on discipline issues, at their request or if I see a leadership opportunity for them AND they want to make the move; otherwise, guys stay with friends...always.

 

For me that is what scouting is about.

I agree. But can't an adult run any patrol? NSP or not? That's more of an issue with adults not understanding the patrol method, rather than NSP's specifically. 

[MattR]

Too many labels. The term NSP seems to mean many different things. It would cool this whole discussion down if people would define what they mean by NSP. How long, who the leaders are, that kind of thing.

 

My complaint with the one particular NSP was primarily with the idea that a scout couldn't leave until he was first class. That's dumb.

 

We have something we call a NSP patrol that has two older scouts as PLs, only runs for about 4 months, and gives the new scouts a chance to figure out who their friends are and learn a bit about the huge change between cub scouts and boy scouts. The adults don't need to be involved because the scout leaders in that patrol are old enough to deal with cats. It works well for us. The scouts are ready to leave when it's done.

 

Something I rarely see mentioned is that scouts must have friends in the troop or they will leave (I did). In particular, after they're 13 it starts getting very hard for them to make friends in a troop setting compared to what they get in school. So the first two years are critical. Just as important, 1 to 3 really good friends is all they tend to have or need. More than that and I start seeing too much high school drama if the friends are all in one patrol. What that means for us is our patrols are tending towards different aged clumps of friends. It's certainly not a single age and it's not evenly split. Right now my patrols are better than they've ever been so I'm happy with it.

Edited January 27, 2016 by MattR

[Krampus]

I agree. But can't an adult run any patrol? NSP or not? That's more of an issue with adults not understanding the patrol method, rather than NSP's specifically. 

 

In my opinion? No. Adults should not have ANY say in what a patrol does UNLESS there is a health or safety risk (includes behavioral). It says Boy Scouts for a reason.

 

And when we say "adults" we are talking about trained, registered scouters. Not Dad or mom, an actual registered (and hopefully trained) scouter who knows BSA policies and what should/should not be done.

[Sentinel947]

In my opinion? No. Adults should not have ANY say in what a patrol does UNLESS there is a health or safety risk (includes behavioral). It says Boy Scouts for a reason.

 

And when we say "adults" we are talking about trained, registered scouters. Not Dad or mom, an actual registered (and hopefully trained) scouter who knows BSA policies and what should/should not be done.

Sorry I think my message was confusing. I did not mean to imply that adults should lead patrols. I was asking a rhetorical question, and thanks to my sloppy writing, it didn't work. Let me try again: 

 

Here's my thinking. Here's my scenarios.

 

1. You have a troop that puts new scouts into patrols together. Maybe, they have a Troop guide, or they elect a patrol leader. The ASM meddles with the patrol, often taking over for the TG or PL to lead the patrol. (We know this is wrong.)

 

2. You have a troop that puts new scouts into patrols together. A troop guide teaches the scouts skills they'll need to be boy scouts, and the patrol elects a patrol leader. The troop guide coaches the new PL who's new to being a PL. The ASM observes, (And that doesn't mean 100% of the time), and only intervenes in the case of health and safety, and coaches the TG and PL when they ask for help and when it's appropriate. (Is there something wrong with that? Isn't this an effective patrol method?)

 

3. You have troop that seeds new scouts into existing patrols. The ASM meddles with the patrol, often taking over for the patrol leader. (I think we all agree this is wrong.) But this is a regular patrol. They aren't using an NSP here. But it's still not meeting our goals for the patrol method. 

 

4. You have a troop that seeds new scouts into existing patrols. the PL leads. The new boys learn from the older ones. The ASM observes (And that doesn't mean 100% of the time), only intervening in the case of health or safety, and coaches the PL if they ask for help and when it's appropriate. 

 

@@Krampus . What are your thoughts. Which of those scenarios are o.k usages of the patrol method? I think we will agree. 

 

Sentinel947

 

[Krampus]

1. You have a troop that puts new scouts into patrols together. Maybe, they have a Troop guide, or they elect a patrol leader. The ASM meddles with the patrol, often taking over for the TG or PL to lead the patrol. (We know this is wrong.)

Agree this is wrong. Downside is the new scouts never have that association with older scouts to learn from the "experts". They get a guide but in an "integrated" age patrol they'd have more than one person from which to learn. If you have a weak guide you are not teaching much. At least in a mixed age patrol has more than one "expert".

 

2. You have a troop that puts new scouts into patrols together. A troop guide teaches the scouts skills they'll need to be boy scouts, and the patrol elects a patrol leader. The troop guide coaches the new PL who's new to being a PL. The ASM observes, (And that doesn't mean 100% of the time), and only intervenes in the case of health and safety, and coaches the TG and PL when they ask for help and when it's appropriate. (Is there something wrong with that? Isn't this an effective patrol method?)

I think Instructors should be teach skills and guides should be "mentors". You still miss that constant association that happens when the guide or instructors are not around. This is certainly better than #1 but not as good as #4.

 

3. You have troop that seeds new scouts into existing patrols. The ASM meddles with the patrol, often taking over for the patrol leader. (I think we all agree this is wrong.) But this is a regular patrol. They aren't using an NSP here. But it's still not meeting our goals for the patrol method.

My issue is then with the ASM(s) and reminding them of their role. I would have the TG's aligned with the PLs or to act as new scout mentors. Instructors would teach the skills. The new scouts gain experience through daily work with the older scouts in their patrols. ASMs are invited by the PL to get a cup of ocoffee if they intervene inappropriately. In fact, in my unit if a Scout asks if an adult needs a cup of coffee that's code for "Thank you for your input but you are meddling again."

 

 

4. You have a troop that seeds new scouts into existing patrols. the PL leads. The new boys learn from the older ones. The ASM observes (And that doesn't mean 100% of the time), only intervening in the case of health or safety, and coaches the PL if they ask for help and when it's appropriate.

This is what my troop does with the exception I noted above around guides and instructors.

[Sentinel947]

I think Instructors should be teach skills and guides should be "mentors". You still miss that constant association that happens when the guide or instructors are not around. This is certainly better than #1 but not as good as #4.

 

My issue is then with the ASM(s) and reminding them of their role. I would have the TG's aligned with the PLs or to act as new scout mentors. Instructors would teach the skills. The new scouts gain experience through daily work with the older scouts in their patrols. ASMs are invited by the PL to get a cup of ocoffee if they intervene inappropriately. In fact, in my unit if a Scout asks if an adult needs a cup of coffee that's code for "Thank you for your input but you are meddling again."

 

 

This is what my troop does with the exception I noted above around guides and instructors.

That's awesome about the coffee. I nearly choked on my water while reading that.  . I'm inclined to agree with you. I think 2 and 4 are the better options. My Troop uses #2. It works well for us. Ya'll use #4 There are obviously some pros and cons to both. The important thing is that we've found a way to implement the patrol method that works. 

 

I will grant you that #4 has less moving parts than #2 which is highly reliant on Troop Guides to be effective and well trained. 

 

Sentinel947 

[blw2]

....We agree keeping boys together is key. The BSA study (forget the year) done a while back showed that boys that stay with friends are more likely to stay in scouting than those who don't. For my money you keep as many friends together as you can. I only move scouts based on discipline issues, at their request or if I see a leadership opportunity for them AND they want to make the move; otherwise, guys stay with friends...always.

 

For me that is what scouting is about.

this was pretty much the point I was trying to make earlier.

 

Too many labels. The term NSP seems to mean many different things. It would cool this whole discussion down if people would define what they mean by NSP. How long, who the leaders are, that kind of thing.

Good point Mattr.  I attempted to stab at this point earlier,

when it seemed some seemed to be saying that NSP= all the same age, i.e all 10 year olds

or same rank, or whatever.

In my thinking, the NSP would be the den of new signups.  

Could be a star scout that just moved in from another city, or a 13 year old that just decided to try scouting.

They would stick together as long as they wanted, or scouts would transfer out or in when they wanted as friendships develop, etc...

Sorta like what you outlined here, that your troop is doing.  I like the idea.

I also like the idea of exactly what you described except that they elect their own PL from within or from without as long as everyone is willing.

 

 

We have something we call a NSP patrol that has two older scouts as PLs, only runs for about 4 months, and gives the new scouts a chance to figure out who their friends are and learn a bit about the huge change between cub scouts and boy scouts. The adults don't need to be involved because the scout leaders in that patrol are old enough to deal with cats. It works well for us. The scouts are ready to leave when it's done.

 

Something I rarely see mentioned is that scouts must have friends in the troop or they will leave (I did). In particular, after they're 13 it starts getting very hard for them to make friends in a troop setting compared to what they get in school. So the first two years are critical. Just as important, 1 to 3 really good friends is all they tend to have or need. More than that and I start seeing too much high school drama if the friends are all in one patrol. What that means for us is our patrols are tending towards different aged clumps of friends. It's certainly not a single age and it's not evenly split. Right now my patrols are better than they've ever been so I'm happy with it.

 

 

 

I completely agree.  there are probably kids out there, those type that make friends everywhere they go... within 2 minutes of walking into a room of strangers.... but those seem to be an exception.

Friends are important

It's why I didn't stick with scouts as a kid

it's why I didn't stick with school band in HS after doing it for 7 years.  We moved, then none of my new friends were in band.

 

Sorry I think my message was confusing. I did not mean to imply that adults should lead patrols. I was asking a rhetorical question, and thanks to my sloppy writing, it didn't work. Let me try again: 

 

Here's my thinking. Here's my scenarios.

 

1. You have a troop that puts new scouts into patrols together. Maybe, they have a Troop guide, or they elect a patrol leader. The ASM meddles with the patrol, often taking over for the TG or PL to lead the patrol. (We know this is wrong.)

 

2. You have a troop that puts new scouts into patrols together. A troop guide teaches the scouts skills they'll need to be boy scouts, and the patrol elects a patrol leader. The troop guide coaches the new PL who's new to being a PL. The ASM observes, (And that doesn't mean 100% of the time), and only intervenes in the case of health and safety, and coaches the TG and PL when they ask for help and when it's appropriate. (Is there something wrong with that? Isn't this an effective patrol method?)

 

3. You have troop that seeds new scouts into existing patrols. The ASM meddles with the patrol, often taking over for the patrol leader. (I think we all agree this is wrong.) But this is a regular patrol. They aren't using an NSP here. But it's still not meeting our goals for the patrol method. 

 

4. You have a troop that seeds new scouts into existing patrols. the PL leads. The new boys learn from the older ones. The ASM observes (And that doesn't mean 100% of the time), only intervening in the case of health or safety, and coaches the PL if they ask for help and when it's appropriate. 

 

@@Krampus . What are your thoughts. Which of those scenarios are o.k usages of the patrol method? I think we will agree. 

 

Sentinel947

 

 

 

...... ASMs are invited by the PL to get a cup of ocoffee if they intervene inappropriately. In fact, in my unit if a Scout asks if an adult needs a cup of coffee that's code for "Thank you for your input but you are meddling again."

 

 

This is what my troop does with the exception I noted above around guides and instructors.

awesome!  I think I'll suggest that one to our scouts if they don't already have something similar.