Positions of Responsibility

[TAHAWK]

Nothing said so far goes against the reasoning that the PORs that count for advancement are ones that call for boys interact as much with other patrols as their own.

Before a meeting, PLs determine "wolfs are service, bears are program, crows are spirit" during a meeting, PLs sound off regarding the exploits of their respective patrols. They then have their break-out sessions. At which time a couple of PLs decide to team up and have a JASM teach them ultimate catapult design. They reconvene as a group for spirit patrol to lead closing. Service patrol cleans up.

 

At what point is this a troop activity? A patrol activity?

Yeah sure. And your boys are hanging out with another troop for a weekend. Are they casting their independence aside?

When they double in size, and camp on opposite ends of the field and the PLs cross to the middle in the morning and say "hike at noon, meals at four, capture the flag at eight, taps at ten, got a bugler?" ... Are they performing a troop activity or patrol activity?

Re" PORs

You could well have verbalized the rationale of whoever created the POR list.  Has BSA ever said?

 

Re: troop activity

 

Since you asked.  

 

 

 

Senior Patrol Leader

 

The senior patrol leader is the top leader of the troop. He is responsible for the troop’s overall operation. With guidance from the Scoutmaster, he takes charge of troop meetings, of the patrol leaders’ council, and of all troop activities, and he does everything he can to help each patrol be successful. He is responsible for annual program planning conferences and assists the Scoutmaster in conducting troop leadership training. The senior patrol leader presides over the patrol leaders’ council and works closely with each patrol leader to plan troop meetings and make arrangements for troop activities. All members of a troop vote by secret ballot to choose their senior patrol leader. Rank and age requirements to be a senior patrol leader are determined by each troop, as is the schedule of elections. During a Scout’s time as senior patrol leader, he is not a member of any patrol but may participate with a Venture patrol in high-adventure activities.

 

 A troop activity would seem to be one of the supposedly less common activities involving all of the patrols.  

 

The troop meeting should primarily consist of "patrol break-outs"  

 

"“[T]he Patrol must have a genuine life apart from the Troop.â€

 

 

"[Patrols are] “. . . small groups of Scouts who camp together, cook together, play together, and learn together.â€

 

“[The patrol members] interact in a small group outside the larger troop context, working together as a team and sharing the responsibility of making their patrol a success.â€

 

“[The patrol is] the place where boys learn skills together, take on leadership responsibilities, perhaps for the first time . . . . â€

 

"Patrols are where Scouts learn citizenship at the most basic level. . . . â€

 

“Patrols need to meet regularly to get their work done.â€

 

“Patrols will sometimes join with other patrols to learn skills and complete advancement requirements. [emphasis added]â€

 

“At other times they will compete against those same patrols in Scout skills and athletic competitions

 

“Your Boy Scout troop is made up of patrols, with each patrol’s members sharing responsibility for the patrol’s success.â€

Edited May 12, 2016 by TAHAWK

[Beavah]

Yah, hmmm...

 

Folks have to remember that da BSA program materials are a one-size-fits-all attempt put together by Really Big Committees and very few capable editors .   Don't get too caught up with da details, eh?

 

Fact is there are a lot of troops that are only da size of one patrol.  There are some troops that use mixed-age patrols, and some that use same-age patrols and some that use NSP and some that don't.  There are plenty of "troop method" troops that do fine things, and some strong patrol method troops.   All those different permutations mean different things for PORs, eh?

 

Da point of a POR is to give a lad an opportunity for growing through takin' on leadership and responsibility.   So in your troop, whatever it's structure is, yeh should give lads credit for work that involves genuine commitment and responsibility and leadership in their role, eh?   One that leads to real growth in the boy.  

 

In mixed-age, patrol-method troops yeh often find APLs and PLs who function more as co-PLs.   The same way in youth run troops yeh tend to get SPLs and ASPLs that are more collaborative than subordinate.   If that's the case and an APL is takin' on responsibility and growin' a lot through da role, give the boy credit.   If your troop does a lot of water sports and so yeh have a Chief Water Poohbah who trains his fellows in Lifesaving and who leads setup on water activities, give the lad credit for a POR.

 

At the same time, if your troop doesn't have a library or da role of a scribe doesn't really amount to the same sort of responsibility and growth for that boy as you'd expect of a PL or such, then don't give POR credit for those positions, eh?   Or if a NSP PL really doesn't have any responsibility because da work all gets done by the TG and ASM-NSP, don't give credit for PL.  

 

It's all about the boys, eh?   And where your unit is at in terms of its own structure and maturity.   There aren't any program police, and one size doesn't fit all, eh?

[blw2]

That would be me ranting about the APL not being a position of responsibility.

 

 

 

In my son's case, he has been more of the patrol leader than than the PL.  Also had served as a PL on outings more than anyone in the troop.

 

 

I'm working on our training program  The first step is doing a leadership campout.  The second step was to decide to have the materials printed on 5 x 7 cardboard cards that are connected by two round binder rings (so they can flip through them or tear them out as needed).  It will cover the ILST materials PLUS teach real leadership.  I'll post the card deck when it is done for comments and feedback.

may have been mentioned before, apologies if so....

over at scoutmastercg.com a while back, Clarke had what he called something like "5 minute PL traiing" (or was is 15 minute?....)

I don't know

the point was it was short

it was a nice outline basically, of a conversational approach to getting the boys thinking.

I thought it a perfect replacement to the ppt training ILST

might be worth a search if you haven't seen it

[TAHAWK]

Ah yes.  Details.  But the Devil is in the details.

 

The C.Y.O does fine things.  So do school crossing patrols.  Even organized sports.  But they do not do  Boy Scouting,

 

The words I quoted, while current from B.S.A., are fully consistent with what has been said for over eighty years. - Bill Hillcourt's Patrol Method, an adaptation of B-P's Patrol System to a more democratic and less class-stratified society, is described in the quotations above - and in others because the Patrol Method has details, such as "patrol spirit" and a job for everyone.

 

That fewer and fewer adults supply Boy Scouting to youth does not mean they are not "doing good."  What they are not doing is supplying Boy Scouting as originally defined here in the U.S. by Bill Hillcourt. They tend to ignore the express promises made to Scouts in the literature B.S.A. publishes for them. They are not called on their behavior, and the Scouters who follow the program are not recognized.  But the Scouts notice.

 

As for the "why" of such behavior:

 

Some few know they ignore the rules and policy, at least to some extent.  They have given the topic some thought and decided that they know better.  Mostly that leads to the adult-run troop method so popular today.  However, that behavior seems a bit more than ignoring "details.  It's ignoring the most important aspects of Boy Scouting - Boys primarily Scouting in the patrol context and boys planning and leading the program.  Maybe they behave this way becasue they are so darn "helpful; maybe they always wanted to be the platoon leader; or maybe they just believe they get better results with Dale Scouting or Ralph Scouting.

 

Then we have the great majority, I believe, who go astray because they don't know any better,  They do not make a decision that this or that aspect of Boy Scouting  should be ignored.  They just don't know what they are honor-bound to do.  They are surprised to read words like those quoted above and the other words.  

 

Surprise is hardly shocking given that B.S.A. stopped delivering coherent training on the Patrol Method some fifteen years ago.  B,S,A, still tells the adults to use the Patrol Method, but fails to present one list, one article, one chapter, or one training session that lays it all out - or even the most important aspects.  One result is that many well-meaning Scouters think "the Patrol method" is no more than the "boy-led troop," missing the whole "patrol" thing in the "Patrol method."  We need some of those "capable" people writing - and capable writers who actually understand the Patrol method, which some at B.S.A. clearly do not.

 

Yes we have patrol-sized troops.  That makes it easier to use the Patrol Method.  (And we once had the registered "Neighborhood Patrol.")  Can it a "pickle method " and use the Patrol Method and you are well on the way to Boy Scouting.

 

NSP/mixed-age.  Both are allowed, so those are details by definition - unless the adults dictate who is in which patrol.   Another "detail" :    patrols are supposed to be self-selected according to B.S.A for eighty years -- groups of friends.  

 

Strange that B.S.A spends so much energy on what most here think are details - squirt guns, using paint rollers, pulling little red wagons, wearing one of the several, disparate B.S.A.- branded trousers or shorts -- and so little energy on Scouting's "Most Important Method."  But pretend Boy Scout Troops fit the metric definition of "success," so no pressure to do what is promised the Scouts or recognition of those Scouters and troops that do use it.  (And some at National are well aware of this state of things, and they are trying to change back to Boy Scouting.  Look, we have a troop defined as patrols, instead of Scouts.  The longest journey begins with the first step, and we are past that.)

Edited May 18, 2016 by TAHAWK

[Beavah]

Yah, hmmmm.

 

I reckon da problem we have, @@TAHAWK, is the one yeh describe, eh?  National's policies and materials really conflict with each other, and departed from Bill Hillcourt a generation ago.  So when we're talkin' about "followin' the Program", I'm never really sure which BSA Program a fellow is talkin' about. 

 

It doesn't really bother me as much as it does some folks, eh?  I don't believe in magical one-size-fits-all Programs.   I reckon I've never seen a scoutin' unit that really "followed the program" entirely, eh?  But I've seen lots of great scout units doin' fine things for boys (and girls). 

 

My point was just in terms of usin' PORs as part of Advancement Method to help boys grow, eh?  I don't think it's that hard.   Just make your PORs meaningful for your troop's program, whichever or whatever it is.   Make 'em be real responsibilities, and help 'em learn new skills, and make the lads live up to those responsibilities.   If yeh really are Patrol Method and da APL has real responsibilities, then don't sweat the small stuff, eh?  Give the lad credit.

 

Beavah

[TAHAWK]

I see it, and have described it repeatedly, as less a matter of a deliberate "departure" from Bill's Patrol Method than the result of poorly written materials and lack of knowledge of the subject..  For example, some at B.S.A. seem to think that the Patrol Method is a "component" of the "boy-led troop," when the boy-led troop is a component of the Patrol Method.  But there are others who know better, and a push to educate about and encourage use of actual B.S.A. methods is being made.

 

The substance of everything Bill said about the Patrol Method is still there - somewhere.  If BSA didn't like Boy Scouting as defined by Bill, why don't they eliminate the words?   B.S.A. still says, for example, that a troop is composed of patrols, rather than Scouts; that a patrol is to have a separate life; that learning is to be centered in the patrol and only "sometimes" take place in the troop setting; and that the troop's program, including the annual program, is to be planned by the elected PLs, under the leadership of the elected SPL and then led at the troop-level by the SPL. 

 

I do not believe that Boy Scouting suits everyone any more than any program suits everyone.  It would suit some to have the baseball be larger - say 12" in diameter - and pitched underhand.  They play "softball" and don't pretend it's "baseball".  Anyone is free to try to start his or her own youth program. 

 

 As you doubtless know, current B.S.A. rules allow the SM to define a leadership project as a POR.  Titles don's have to matter if the SM takes this opportunity.   So what's the issue? .

[Beavah]

The substance of everything Bill said about the Patrol Method is still there - somewhere.  If BSA didn't like Boy Scouting as defined by Bill, why don't they eliminate the words?   B.S.A. still says, for example, that a troop is composed of patrols, rather than Scouts; that a patrol is to have a separate life; that learning is to be centered in the patrol and only "sometimes" take place in the troop setting; and that the troop's program, including the annual program, is to be planned by the elected PLs, under the leadership of the elected SPL and then led at the troop-level by the SPL. 

 

 

Nah, sadly they have been eliminatin' some of the words too, eh?   Bill's Patrol Method assumed da mixed-age, neighborhood gang patrol, and we muddled that all up with da New Scout Patrol and Venture Patrols in the 90s.  As @@Stosh points out, if da troop is really made up of patrols then yeh plan activities at the patrol level and coordinate among patrol leaders.   Instead our materials suggest planning events at the troop level led by an SPL elected by da whole troop.  So that's what almost everybody does, eh?

 

From my perspective Patrol Method is da hardest thing for adults to grok in the modern world, eh?  As such it's usually the last thing a typical adult gets around to really implementing.   Generally, the troops that get there have older, long-term scouters who have learned and built cultures over time, eh?   Some never do.

 

When we get a gang of folks together to write materials we no longer have one fellow with experience and vision like Greenbar Bill, eh?   Instead we have a committee of dozens of folks.  Some from troop method troops, some patrol method, some good at mentoring, some more reliant on adult imposed structure.  Our materials reflect that muddle by bein' muddled.

 

It's OK, eh?   Scoutin' doesn't need a rigid structure to do good work.  It just needs to provide enough structure to help folks of different sorts out without gettin' too much in the way for others.... and then enough additional info to inspire continual improvement.   We do OK on the first, but as yeh point out not so well on da second.

 

Beavah

[vumbi]

Reference to Heinlein...nice.

[blw2]

 

It doesn't really bother me as much as it does some folks, eh?  I don't believe in magical one-size-fits-all Programs.   I reckon I've never seen a scoutin' unit that really "followed the program" entirely, eh?  But I've seen lots of great scout units doin' fine things for boys (and girls). 

 

I can respect that idea, but I still keep coming back to the root of it really being ONE method, and so that one method sorta boils down to a 'one-size-fits-all' program in a way.  It seems that time and time again, we see threads here about problems.... and it seems like in nearly every case it's because of drifting away from that "one method, one program".

 

Nah, sadly they have been eliminatin' some of the words too, eh?   Bill's Patrol Method assumed da mixed-age, neighborhood gang patrol, and we muddled that all up with da New Scout Patrol and Venture Patrols in the 90s.  As @@Stosh points out, if da troop is really made up of patrols then yeh plan activities at the patrol level and coordinate among patrol leaders.   Instead our materials suggest planning events at the troop level led by an SPL elected by da whole troop.  So that's what almost everybody does, eh?

 

and then we circle back to the "mixed age thing".

 

As I have read it, the root of it wasn't really set on "mixed" ages at all.

It centers around a natural gang or group of friends.  A small bunch of guys that have similar interests and abilities, similar life experiences, and that choose to hang out and do fun stuff together.

It's really as simple as that, right?

And so when you look at what BP observed, those groups are almost always roughly 6-8 kids, that happen to be roughly more or less a similar age.  Matches what I have observed over my 50 years, in my groups of friends, and others too....

....and by the way, how many players are on the field for most sports teams? (not the roster)  I don't know,but it sure does seem like these games might have stemmed from the neighborhood gangs..... this gang playing that gang., with 6, 8, 10 people on a side.....

As we get older, the age ranges of natural groups expand a bit, but on a percentage basis not by much..... as kids it's almost always the same grade, or perhaps Â±1 grade or so......not so typical to vary more than that.  As an adult, our groups tend to be not all that much different..... you don't see many 22 year olds as best buds with a 56 year old.... as an example.

Again, as I read it THIS natural gang idea was the concept of the 'Patrol' as forming a basis of the Patrol Method of scouting.

 

I personally feel like it would be better for us to stop using these terms of age (same age, mixed age, NSP, etc...)

but instead start thinking of the groups more in terms like this

the patrol (that happens to be made of mostly newer scouts (or roughly 5th/6th Graders if you like))

or.... the patrol (that happens to be made up mostly of older scouts)

etc....

 

with nothing saying that the patrol, that happens to be mostly older scouts, can't have a younger member or two, or visa versa..... but only dependant on who their buds are..... who they want to hang with, similar interests and abilities, and so on....

[TAHAWK]

A problem is thinking that "they" is monolithic.  What I see are committees which nether know much about Boy Scouting or communicate with one another.   "They" also say:

 

n     “Scouting offers what boys want: outdoor adventures, being with their friends….â€

         B.S.A. website, 2016

 

n      â€œthey self-select and they are friends….â€

         B.S.A., Scouting blog, 2015

 

n     “Scouts should be encouraged to invite their friends to join the troop and become a member of their patrol.â€

         B.S.A. website, 2016

 

n     “ ‘You set up a structure—six to eight Scouts—and let them figure it out,’ he says.

 

n     ‘Boys are going to want to stick together if you can use their friendships to put together a team.’ â€

  

    B.S.A., Scouting (May-June 2012)(quoting child psychologist   Dr. Brett Laursen )

 

 

"[A patrol is] . . . small groups of Scouts who camp together, cook together, play together, and learn together.†B.S.A.., Scouting.org (2016)

 

“[The patrol members] interact in a small group outside the larger troop context, working together as a team and sharing the responsibility of making their patrol a success.â€

 

                        B.S.A., Scouting.org (2016)[emphasis added]

 

“[The patrol is] the place where boys learn skills together, take on leadership responsibilities, perhaps for the first time . . . . â€

        B.S.A. Scouting.org, (2014)

 

“Patrols are where Scouts learn citizenship at the most basic level. . . . â€

 

                        B.S.A., Scouting.org.,  (2016)

 

“Patrols will sometimes join with other patrols to learn skills and complete advancement requirements. [emphasis added]â€

 

             B.S.A., Scouting.org. (2016)

 

At other times they will compete against those same patrols in Scout skills and athletic competitions.â€

 

                    B.S.A., website (2016)

 

“Your Boy Scout troop is made up of patrols, with each patrol’s members sharing responsibility for the patrol’s success.â€

 

                    B.S.A., The Boy Scout Handbook, 13th Ed. (2016) at  p. 25

 

Then we have the "three types of patrols" bunch; whoever put on Scouting.org that the adults, including all the commissioned Scouters, the troop committee, COR, and (for Heavan sake!), Unit commissioner, are all equal participants with the Scouts in planning the annula program, (more "efficient"); and whoever decided that the Patrol method is a component of  the "boy led troop."

 

I said the words are all there.  In substance they are.  However, there are these other, conflicting words.  So it's fair to ask, Who speaks for B.S.A. Scouting?

[Eagledad]

 

 

I personally feel like it would be better for us to stop using these terms of age (same age, mixed age, NSP, etc...)

but instead start thinking of the groups more in terms like this

the patrol (that happens to be made of mostly newer scouts (or roughly 5th/6th Graders if you like))

or.... the patrol (that happens to be made up mostly of older scouts)

etc....

 

with nothing saying that the patrol, that happens to be mostly older scouts, can't have a younger member or two, or visa versa..... but only dependant on who their buds are..... who they want to hang with, similar interests and abilities, and so on....

You have been struggling with this for a long time Blw2. I can see it is really important for you, but I don't understand why it is important that those of us who have successful programs with mixed age patrols agree with you. I have no desire to change your mind because if mixed age patrols isn't in your heart, you aren't going to do it. I can't agree that same age patrols work as well as mixed age patrols. I've tried both and mixed age is just better. But, I want to help you through your struggle. What can we do to help you?

 

Barry

[blw2]

You have been struggling with this for a long time Blw2. I can see it is really important for you, but I don't understand why it is important that those of us who have successful programs with mixed age patrols agree with you. I have no desire to change your mind because if mixed age patrols isn't in your heart, you aren't going to do it. I can't agree that same age patrols work as well as mixed age patrols. I've tried both and mixed age is just better. But, I want to help you through your struggle. What can we do to help you?

 

Barry

Barry

I interpret a tone that indicates you're frustrated.  What can I do to help you?

 

yeah, I'm not struggling with it at all, really.  Not asking for help at all on it. Not looking for agreement

 

I'm just throwing out my observations as food for thought for others.....hoping to help some boys out there to have a better and more full experience from scouting.....nothing more.

 

...and its not that "Mixed Age" patrols isn't in my heart..... I'm just fundamentally opposed to "FORCED age" patrols)

 

I've given it a lot of thought ( a whole lot more than I should have probably) and it just stands up to the "smell test".... of what just makes good simple sense to my brain.... there are just simply many more negative question marks that come to my mind about forced aged patrols than there are about similar aged ones.

   boys are in this for fun

   boys want to hang with their friends

   boys don't want to be forced into doing stuff they do not want to do

   boys do not want to be forced into hanging with anyone in particular that they don't choose to - i.e. you can't pick their friends

   boys aren't even thinking in terms of "age", not directly anyway, so why do we need to label it?

and it all just fits so nicely right in there with what BP wrote too.....

 

And every time I hear or read about an example of failure (as to your point), I can't help but wonder.....

.... could it be that it failed because of adult influence, even if it was sub conscientiously?.... &/or because of preconceived notions (youth or adult)?.... &/or because the scouts are just doing what they have seen modeled and aren't working "outside the box"?..... &/or because it was "Try", as opposed to "Do"?.....etc....

 

and every time I hear or read someone throw out the term "successful program", I can't help but wonder based on what or who's definition of successful?  It's just such a subjective concept....

 

And furthermore, every argument I can recall that was pro-mixed or Forced age, center around

   problems that seem to have easy and often natural work around and alternatives that might just happen on their own anyway        (such as not enough in-patrol experience or leadership)

   problems that are adult driven and defined (such as a need for advancement on a calendared schedule)

[Stosh]

BSA indicates three types of patrols.  They seem to fall into those categories naturally.  Obviously the new guys coming in are the Tenderfoot/greenhorns that need a bit of help getting their feet on the ground.  So they are identified as a patrol of new scouts.  But after a while, it's only natural to identify them as more regular patrol.  Then again, after a few years, those boys have kinda been there, done that and the conversation starts focusing on a more experienced challenging kind of venture patrol.

 

So then, when there is a push for what some called mixed patrols, how can that be the natural progression of things without some sort of outside intervention?  I don't see youth intervention any different than adult intervention.  Something has to be done different than naturally letting things take their course.  In a larger troop, this might have to be necessary, but then are larger troops necessary?

 

There's always a flip side to every coin.  With BSA promoting boy led, patrol method using New, Regular and Venture patrols, what's wrong with simply going with the program as prescribed.  I get a ton of push back for trying to stay the course here.  Why is that?

[TAHAWK]

The three-kind-of-patrol method, taken literally, has no patrol for a Scout who does not make First Class and turns 12.   

 

"There are three kinds of patrols: new-Scout patrols, regular patrols, and Venture patrols.

 

New Scout patrols are for 11-year-old Scouts....

Regular patrols are made up of Scouts who have completed their First Class requirements....

A Venture patrol is ... made up of Scouts 13 and older."

 

 

On top of that, B.S.A. repeatedly says, and has said for 85 years, that a patrol is a group of friends,  That means, beyond coaching the process, adults and the troop have no role to play - much less is there a role for bureaucrats in deciding who is in what patrol..

 

Good grief!

[Stosh]

I have no problem with a scout recruiting a friend at 14 into scouts.  He goes into the patrol with his friend, NOT the new scout patrol.  The PATROL is designed for the new scouts.  It is not meant to be dictated to individuals.  They can choose to do whatever they want.  So more power to them if they come in at 14, get FC by 15, and when the patrol of his buddies goes venture, he's right in there with them.