Input on youth leadership positions when SPL becomes an Eagle Scout

[Chippewa29]

First of all, in my troop we do troop elections every six months. If a Scout is going to turn 18 during the term, he is not eligible for one of the electable positions. If a Scout needs the "leadership" time for a couple of months before he gets his Eagle, I would appoint him as an instructor so he could show leadership but didn't really have week-to-week duties. This Scout is probably scrambling to finish his Eagle and filling out college applications and trying to enjoy his senior year of high school.

 

More importantly, I would be thrilled if we had an Eagle Scout who wanted to run for SPL. He isn't worried about getting his Eagle and can devote more time to actually developing his leadership ability- the most important requirement for Eagle Palms.

 

Just because a Scout earns his Eagle doesn't mean he is ready to stop growing and learning and getting more out of the program. At this point, the Scout is just coming into his own as a leader and has so much to contribute to the troop. Pushing him into "retirement" once he gets his Eagle is like these companies that force good executives to retire in their early 50's just as they are hitting to peak of their careers.

[Kudu]

For those with an interest in Baden-Powell and William Hillcourt's methods to view Scouting from a different perspective.:

 

SR540Beaver writes:

 

We've had boys who get elected multiple times to PL or SPL and there are other lads in waiting who start to get upset that they can't serve in those positions. Most of them see it from an advancement perspective more than anything else.

 

Prior to 1972 BSA Scouting was organized by the "Methods of Scouting" developed by William Hillcourt, the man from Denmark who brought the Patrol System to America in the late 1920s. In this traditional BSA model of Scouting, "Boy Leadership" is a subset of the "Patrol Method" and not a "separate" Method of Scouting.

 

Specific leadership advancement requirements were not added until this 1972 move away from Hillcourt's traditional Methods. It is the pressure of these advancement requirements that causes this "upset" and the tendency of adults and Scouts to "see it from an advancement perspective more than anything else."

 

A symptom of this is "Troop-wide" six month election cycles.

 

For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction and the cost of this relatively new Method is that when all of the Scouts who want to be Patrol Leaders (so that they can fill the position of responsibility requirements) are not equally gifted leaders, then the Patrol Method becomes secondary to the so-called "Leadership Development" Method because the priority is on the Scouts' advancement needs. Stable leadership for the Patrols is only a secondary consideration, if it is considered at all. Why should a Patrol have an election unless they are not satisfied with the Patrol Leader's performance?

 

Six month "Troop elections" are by definition the "Troop Method."

 

OldGreyEagle writes:

 

When I said "Penalize" I meant since the Troop elected the SPL for the term of office, why would you take the youth voted by the youth to be their leader and replace him with someone selected by the PLC? Seems like a short circuiting of the Democratic process.

 

In William Hillcourt's model of BSA Scouting, the SPL is in fact "someone selected by the PLC." In this Patrol-based model of Scouting, the elected Patrol Leaders run the Troop and they select the SPL that they believe will best coordinate their efforts.

 

In Baden-Powell's model of Scouting the SPL is appointed by the Scoutmaster and he not does not hold any power over the Patrol Leaders either.

 

Personally, when I recruit six-graders from the local school once a year I always ask the very best leader in the Troop to serve as their Patrol Leader for at least a year. He has his choice of an age-peer to serve as his Assistant Patrol Leader (since he will be camping with little kids). The Troop Guide is also closely associated with this Patrol (if not technically a member) so although this is a Patrol of new Scouts, it is also mixed by age and experience.

 

gshafer writes:

 

If an SPL becomes an Eagle Scout, he is then move to the position of JASM and the ASPL becomes SPL for the remander of the time until the next election.

 

So in short my answer is 1) earning Eagle should not effect a Scout's leadership position; 2) the ASPL (appointed by the SPL) should never have authority over elected Patrol Leaders; 3) all things being equal, the most talented leaders should serve as Patrol Leaders, not JASMs or ASPLs.

 

Kudu

 

[SR540Beaver]

kudu: "Why should a Patrol have an election unless they are not satisfied with the Patrol Leader's performance?"

 

Boy, I'd like to make a motion that we adopt this approach to Presidents and Congressmen!!!

 

In all seriousness, elected positions usually have some sort of term limit rather than a lifetime appointment.

[Eagledad]

Our Eagles have been in all PORs of the troop after they got their Eagle. For what ever reason, most of my SPLs jumped into the Troop guide position after their SPL time. Nothing was ever suggested from the adult side, they just did that. And they were really really good.

 

Personally I see pushing the Eagle into JASM a limitation on their growth because many scouts want to go back an old position again to do it better. At the same time, while I understand why the BSA put an age limitation of 16 on JASM, I also see it as a limitation as well. Just like there are some special scouts who deservedly become Eagle at age 14, having to wait for a position that is really their next challenge and opportunity of growth. I did not use the 16 year old restriction.

 

>>My point of view differs from the SM in that I'd like to see these guys who have served multiple times as a PL or as SPL and/or earned their Eagle to recycle back into the troop as Instructors, Troop Guides or ASPL's. Many of the boys see it as a pride and pecking order issue and think it would be going backwards for a former PL or SPL to take a "lower" position.

[SR540Beaver]

Barry,

 

Oh no, no, no, no, no!!! I'm quite content serving under someone who has far more figured out than me. But thanks for the vote of confidence. Besides, doing the ASM thing instead of SM gives me a little more freedom to spread my wings in scouting like staffing WB and such. I just signed up to be in the Campmaster Corps at Kickapoo. I'm sure I could do those things as an SM, but it just looks easier to do from an ASM perspective.

 

Speaking of Campmasters, we sorely need more.....what's on your scouter plate?

[Kudu]

I wrote:

 

"Why should a Patrol have an election unless they are not satisfied with the Patrol Leader's performance?"

 

SR540Beaver wrote:

 

In all seriousness, elected positions usually have some sort of term limit rather than a lifetime appointment.

 

My point was that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.

 

The pressure to have six month terms to conform to six month leadership advancement requirements is based in part on the idea that we use positions of responsibility to teach boys who are not the best leaders how to become better leaders, rather than teaching the best natural leaders how to be Patrol Leaders.

 

Likewise your assertion that Patrol Leaders should have "term limits" is based on the assumption that Patrol leadership should be secondary to lessons about how democracy works.

 

But at least for the sake of looking at Scouting with "fresh eyes," we should remember that the BSA way of doing things is only one possible approach to Scouting.

 

In Baden-Powell's model of Scouting, the Patrol Leaders are appointed by the Scoutmaster. This is the method in the military and in private industry where (at least in theory) the most qualified leader is appointed rather than elected in a popularity contest by his fellow-soldiers or fellow-workers.

 

For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. Both methods have their advantages and disadvantages.

 

In the United States we can not really debate this from our experiences in Scouting because Americans do not have the freedom to choose which model of Scouting works best for them. The government decides that for us.

 

Kudu

 

[ljnrsu]

Kudu writes:

 Specific leadership advancement requirements were not added until this 1972 move away from Hillcourt's traditional Methods. It is the pressure of these advancement requirements that causes this "upset" and the tendency of adults and Scouts to "see it from an advancement perspective more than anything else."

 A lot of things changed with the movement to "urban Scouting" in 1972 the leadership requirement was not one of them.

 The leadership requirement for Star,Life and Eagle ranks was added in 1968.

  Star Scout requirement #4 "While a First Class Scout,serve actively as a troop warrent officer(patrol leader, senior patrol leader, assistant senior patrol leader, junior assistant Scoutmaster, instructor, scribe, quartermaster, librarian, den chief) or carry out a Scoutmaster-assigned project to help the troop. (1968 Boy Scout Requirements pg 8)

 The idea of a Scout must be Eagle is adding to the requirement of JASM. The only requirement is "A Scout at least 16 years of age who has shown outstanding leadership skills may be appointed by the senior patrol leader, with the advice and consent of the Scoutmaster" (The Senior Patrol Leaders Handbook 2003 pg 110)

 The only requirement for JASM that has stayed consistant since atleast 1945 is one of age. I have 6 different editions of Scoutmaster Handbooks dating back to 3rd edition March 1945 printing.

 The position of JASM is very near and dear to my heart. Being appointed as JASM as a 16 yr old Star Scout in Jan 1970 is what kept me in scouting. Was also active in HS sports and CAP and had decided to leave scouts. It was because of the appointment as JASM and new responsibilities that went along with it that I stayed in scouting and eventually earned Eagle. It is what kept an older Scout who was in a rut in Scouting.

 

[red feather]

In the troop that I serve, I am introducing the Instuctor patch (something that we have not done before). As a scout advances to Eagle or has performed as SPL or ASPL and is working on their Eagle the positions that come available that may keep them interested become fewer.

 

As the scout advances they present a paper that is intended to convince the SM (or representive) that they have skills that they wish to pass on to the younger scouts. If that paper is convincing enough then they become an Instructor in that skill, ( if not they pick another skill or improve their paper) and are required to be able to present their skill at a troop meeting as a 'Plan B' when the original 'Plan A' falls through. After 6 mos (or so, work in progress) of the Instructor position they are then able to move up to JASM. As of this post their papers have most interesting and sometimes imaginative. The scouts that are interested see this as a middle step to JASM and also look on this as a continued advancement in scouting.

 

Of course if they age out they then move up to ASM ( still expected to have a 'Plan B'). So far this has been recieved well with the scouts as it gives the older scouts a purpose and a focus for staying active.

 

We will see how it is going 6-9 mos from now, but it looks hopeful and a couple of Eagles have become more active since we started this.

 

yis

red feather