Signs that your unit might be Adult Led

[Eagle94-A1]

One thing I forgot to add. The SPL had me work with them while he and the older scouts planned their AT trip. I role played the situation of the missing duty roster and how to solve it. I modeled how we did things back in the day, i.e. pairing an "experienced Scout" with a "new Scout" so that the older Scout taught the younger one. Most of them heard for the first time that the troop is expecting anywhere from 14 to 24 new Scouts in December, and that THEY will need to step up and work with them as THEY should know how things should be done.

 

At first they were shocked, but then it went away. Oldest told me that he heard on Scout say that there is no way we are getting 14 new Scouts in December, let alone 24. Long road ahead.

[Stosh]

@@Eagle94-A1

 

Stosh,

 

I try to keep an open mind.  So no, I won't ignore. I do think I need to adapt. I'm use to adults staying out of the way of the Scouts, interjecting only for safety purposes. And obviously this isn't working. Heck my son even said it last nite when we talked to the situation. He said they won't listen to anyone "except the adults and possibly the older Scouts." Wish I still had my 3d edition SMHB, because I remember  a training regime in it that may work.

 

As has been mentioned, these boys came filtering in a various times over a year's time.  That would mean that the PL of this group may be trying to handle boys that are just starting out in scouting AND boys that have been around for a year.  This is not a good option for a fledgling new PL or a semi-experienced TG either.

 

I guess I'm the one keeping the situation together at the moment. Not so much for fun, it's not, but more to keep the other two patrols that are working from being split apart at this moment. Several of the adult leaders want to split up the patrols NOW. I keep saying let the situation continue until the next  unit elections, which will be May 2nd. Why until then? Because that is traditionally when new SPL and PLs get elected. Also I want to give the older Scouts a chance to come up with ideas to change the situation that the adults may not have thought of. At the moment, it's looking like the a complete revamp of the patrols into mixed aged.  I am pushing and promoting and commenting that the Scouts need to decide which patrols they join instead of assigning them to patrols. 

 

But maybe we do need to speed up the transition process?

 

As I pointed out in the Levels of Conflict, the chance of a amicable resolution at this stage is very remote at best.  This one patrol seems to have spilled the problem out into the other two patrols as well and boys who will only listen to adults are indicating a maturity level of a toddler. 

 

To wait another 4 months of destruction to the unit probably is not a wise choice.  

 

"But if I ran the Zoo", said young Gerald McGrew, "I'd make a few changes, that's just what I'd do..."    If it was me, I'd speed up the corrective process starting next meeting.  Note to the boys they will need to determine their own patrols and who they will follow so as to not be dependent on the adults to referee every meeting.  Once they have what they want, then hold them to it.  The leverage is with the adults because the boys made the decisions. "All the adults, the SPL, the ASPL, and LC boys, out of the room, the rest of you boys, when you have gotten your 6-8 boys per patrol together and selected a leader you will all listen to, you come out and tell us so we can get the troop records updated. "

 

This should buy enough time to quiet things down before the next batch of boys coming in are taken on.  With a few new boys coming in and one doesn't want to do NSP, there's no need for a TG, so that POR goes away.  And if there are any patrol groups wishing to take on new boys they had better not select more than six so they can take on two new boys when they become available.  Otherwise there will be no room for them.  Spell out all the detailed expectations and let the boys problem solve and work it out the way they think it will work best for them.  

 

I would leave the locked in stone membership out of the process.  If all the patrols come back with 8 boys in each patrol and the Webelos cross-overs come in at 4 new boys,    The PL's of the existing patrols will need to decide how this will work.  Obviously there is going to be some shuffling around to make it work and probably a new patrol of some sort formed just because of the numbers.  One can call it a new patrol, but it at best the the new boys will be split 2 and 2 and 2 boys from the existing 3 patrols would need to form the new patrol or 2 boys from an existing patrol will need to take leadership of the 4 new boys, which is in fact a NSP.    Let the boys figure out what they want to do. 

 

All the political games that were being played will need new alliances and in the meantime,  the unit buys time to reorganize it's leadership dynamics away from listening only to adults.

 

Without some serious fixing going on, I can see this becoming a slow motion train wreck over the next few months and on into the summer.

Edited February 10, 2016 by Stosh

[Eagledad]

I know we are missing a lot of details here, but you paint a pretty dark picture. Why do you think these scouts keep coming? 

 

Barry

[qwazse]

On behalf of my liberal muslim friends, I must object to @@Stosh's use of "jihad" for his Conflict Level 6. Perhaps "Carpet Bombing" would be more suitable and typical of an American conflict response. {rant over}

 

I advised a TG who was frustrated by the boys to just lower his expectations of what gets accomplished. If there's an instigator, send him to me to help find something for supplies.

 

Your NSP is not new in age but maybe in experience. How often have they camped? Have they ever planned one activity (e.g., a hike around town) just their patrol?

 

Whatever you're expecting of this patrol, they don't want to do it.

 

You really need to get these guys away from busywork like rosters and onto tasks. Surely the CO has a bathroom that needs cleaned or a closet that needs organized, or (as you all aren't inundated with snow) weeds to pull and fire ants to poison? Start giving them service opportunities. Tell the PL that you hate to interrupt their very important meeting but someone asked if the boys could do X. (Obviously, make sure X is a ten minute task 'cause it sounds like this lot will take thirty to do it.) Or, fill a bucket of water and challenge them to relay it across/around the property without spilling it. Then get another bucket and challenge them to relay them in opposite directions. Then challenge them to use their buckets to fill a barrel.

 

Meanwhile, get yourself a nice chair, a cup of tea (Chamomile, given how these boys are getting under your skin), sit back and watch. It won't be any prettier, but it will sure be funny.

[Stosh]

"On behalf of my liberal muslim friends, I must object to @Stosh's use of "jihad" for his Conflict Level 6. Perhaps "Carpet Bombing" would be more suitable and typical of an American conflict response. {rant over}"

 

@@qwazse  My sincere apology if the wording offended anyone, it was in no way intended as such.  Back in the late '70's the Conflict Management seminar by Speed Leas, used both the terms "Jihad" and "Holy War" interchangeably to define the 6th level of conflict.  So, no, it is not MY use of the term for this Conflict Level 6.  This would indicate that the conflict had gotten to the "I will destroy you even if it means I will be destroyed in the process, too" level.  I guess I'm a bit behind the times when keeping up with all the new re-definitions out there that are being created on a daily basis or some political connotations connected to them.  Obviously "Carpet Bombing" wouldn't be appropriate either because the crew of the bomber would not be affected by the process.  I'm thinking "suicide bombing" or "kamikaze" would be more appropriate because both parties would be destroyed, i.e. Level 6 Conflict.  I'm thinking the only truly American description of such a level of conflict might be the Hatfields and McCoys.

 

Since taking the seminar many 40 years ago, Mr. Leas has modified his Conflict Levels down to 5 levels but modern Level 5 and historical Level 6 are the same.  I do note that he has also dropped the term Holy War and Jihad from updated verbiage as well.  As will I.

 

http://www.nwswi.org/webfiles/fnitools/documents/levels_of_conflict_speed_lea.pdf

Edited February 10, 2016 by Stosh

[Eagle94-A1]

I know we are missing a lot of details here, but you paint a pretty dark picture. Why do you think these scouts keep coming? 

 

Barry

 

I'm splitting off to give this topic it's own thread. I think we've gone off topic.

[Krampus]

I'm splitting off to give this topic it's own thread. I think we've gone off topic.

 

We've gone off topic? Never. Doesn't happen.

[Hedgehog]

It's good to have a variety of interests. But you've got to watch out with the throwing knives and tomahawks, the next thing you know the kids will be using water guns.

 

 

We'd never use water guns.  We prefer foam water pump squirt toys :http://www.amazon.com/Foam-Water-Squirt-assorted-colors/dp/B005GPCL1K

 

Seriously, we don't go canoeing or kayaking without them (provided the weather is warm enough to get a little wet).