BP or BSA - which does what better?

[Beavah]

Yah, a salute to our new member ajmako for encouragin' us to "get real" (and get calm and polite) with this debate on BP vs. BSA. I figured movin' it over here to a new thread would help a bit.

 

So, Kudu, tell us a bit about what your troop looks like. How is leadership set up, what do boys/adult do, what's an average campout and meeting look like, that sort of thing. Help us see what you're talkin' about. Tell us what it looks like, then connect that to the principles you're tryin' to convey. Yah, yah, and sure, it's OK if yeh focus on da stuff that's most different from an average (or above average) modern BSA troop.

 

I think I sorta get some of what you're sayin' (though I lose the melody in the percussion some times ), but I don't want to put words in your mouth by takin' a first jab.

 

Beavah(This message has been edited by Beavah)

[BrentAllen]

Beavah,

Here is the answer Kudu gave back on 10/30/06:

"More recently, one of my Assistant Scoutmasters, an Eagle Scout who never participates in our winter camping or canoe trips, came up with the idea of having his son's Patrol pack a bagged lunch in empty backpacks and take a day hike to satisfy the Camping Merit Badge optional backpacking requirement. As he pointed out to the Merit Badge Counselor, the requirement merely states "Backpack for at least four miles." Nowhere does it actually specify that the backpacks have anything in them! He was really angry when I pointed out to the Counselor that their day hike had been less than a mile.

 

This tension only increased when I caught him trying to correct this error by talking the Counselor into letting Scouts wearing empty backpacks walk around the block during weekly Troop meetings until they finally reached the four mile specification that I was being so "difficult" about.

 

I was able to shame the Counselor into rejecting this idea but in the end he got his way by scheduling a "Patrol campout" for his son's Patrol on the same weekend as a Troop campout (so that I wouldn't attend). Afterward he notified the Counselor that the Scouts had fulfilled the requirement by walking with backpacks in circles around the perimeter of his suburban woodlot until they had walked a total of four miles."

 

Does that sound like the boy-run, Patrol-led group he is touting? Dear ol' dad scheduling a Patrol campout for his son's Patrol?

 

How about this for the dreaded Adult Association he has protested against?

"Since then I have refused to sign blue cards for Camping Merit Badge unless the Scout has already been on a simple four mile weekend backpacking trip with me."

Sounds like adding to the rules to me, as well. And he complains about SM conferences??

[Stosh]

It all boils down to how much one trusts the boys to actually lead themselves? If every time there's a bump in the road the adults step in, it's not really boy-led.

 

Didn't the boys walking around in circles all afternoon have enough spit to say this was stupid to the adult dad? Surely a sense of integrity, confidence and leadership from the boys would go a long way with the SM and the Dad battling it out. Sounds like a mom and dad fighting over the kids in a divorce. Had proper boy-lead patrol training been done, it would have encouraged the boys to stand up for themselves even if it means going toe-to-toe with the SM and parents.

 

I teach my boys the phrase "With all due repect...." when they wish to take on an adult interfering with their leadership opportunities.

 

Set a goal and aim at it with whatever program you wish, but stick to your guns. If one is going to be adult-led, let the boys know so their expectations are adjusted correctly. If it's going to be boy-led, lay out the program's expectations, If it's going to be some combination in between, make sure the line in the sand is clear so the boys know the boundaries.

 

It's not an issue of what's better, but what works best for your people. Of course, who makes that decision will be the ultimate dynamic of the eventual program. :^)

 

Stosh

[sst3rd]

I figured I'd go ahead and weigh in on this BP Patrol System vs. the BSA program that's being talked about on all of these associated threads and subjects.

 

The BP Patrol System is interesting, but is not the BSA program. Is the BP Patrol System being implimented throughout the US in BP Troops? I don't know, but wish Kudo well in his desire to spread the word of the BP Patrol System and to start these BP Troops.

 

The Troop I currently serve, uses the BSA program. The Scoutmaster regularly trains the youth leaders, the youth leaders (through the PLC and the Patrols) executes the programs they plan, and the adult leaders (Scoutmasters and Committee), support the PLC's programs. All of the details in the BSA program go towards the successful completion of our Scout's goals.

 

It has and continues to work great for us. It really isn't that difficult to understand. Work the BSA program. If you'd rather run the BP Patrol System of scouting, join a BP Troop. That's all from me. I'm done.

 

sst3rd

[Beavah]

Yah, I'm with jblake as usual, eh? I think a lot is figurin' out what works for your unit, and being consistent and good at communicatin'. Sometimes we let the boys fall and sometimes we catch them, where we draw the line depends a lot on the boy's experience level, a fair bit on our views, and a lot on how big the cliff is the boy will fall over.

 

But lookin' for new (or old!) ideas is always a good thing, 'cause they just may be useful.

 

Here's one that I've heard Kudo go on about, and what I think it means if I try hard to read in the most favorable light. The BSA "leadership" courses, both for adults and kids, do draw a fair bit from popular theories of organizational management. You know - mission statements, goal-setting, and on and on.

 

What I hear him saying is "forget all that, it's way too complicated. Half the adults and most of the kids don't get it." Instead, leadership in scouting should be learned as apprenticeship, not as theory. Make sure kids have solid scoutcraft skills, then teach 'em da practical nuts&bolts of how to run a patrol. Get 'em doing stuff, hands on. They'll figure out the important parts of "management theory" through experience and an occasional hint as they go.

 

That seems pretty OK to me. It might mean things like selecting PLs from one or two APLs (apprenticeship). Probably also means doin' TLT not as a one-day event but rather as a whole series of one-day or weekend events spread out a bit, and tightly focused on "this is how to work meals in your patrol" and "these are the things you should do at a patrol meeting, let's practice!" Real hands-on, pragmatic stuff.

 

I think most of us put a lot of that in our TLT just naturally, eh? So it's perfectly possible to do in a BSA program. But it might help new scouters more if we had materials that focused on practical stuff more specifically.

 

Kinda moot though if he (or others) don't have a real live working troop as an example of what they're talkin' about. All theory shines until it hits the hard dirt of reality.

 

Beavah

 

[gwd-scouter]

If this is what actually happened "More recently, one of my Assistant Scoutmasters, an Eagle Scout who never participates in our winter camping or canoe trips, came up with the idea of having his son's Patrol pack a bagged lunch in empty backpacks and take a day hike to satisfy the Camping Merit Badge optional backpacking requirement"

 

then that didn't satisfy the camping merit badge requirement at all since it says that the backpacking must be done while on a campout.

 

Hmmm, very interesting.

 

Back to the topic: I've read Kudo's posts and jblake's post and while I agree with some of what they've said and have learned quite a bit of perspective on how I'm trying to guide our Troop, I have to say that I think we all in the trenches do what we can to adhere to the current BSA methods of scouting and try to deliver it the best way we can given our own local constraints.

 

For instance, our troop only has nine active guys so we have one patrol and must make accommodations to fit into the model given what we're working with. Also, since we've essentially started over in our troop teaching the boy-led concept, we still have a bit more adult-led going on than some on this forum would feel appropriate.

 

We certainly do not fit into some of the more ardent adherents of various interpretations of the Boy Scout Program and I concede that. But, we're doing what we can to deliver the Scouting Progam the best way we can.

 

 

[Kudu]

 

I'm growing old and feeble, Beavah. I had already retired from the Scoutmaster business (while still staffing local Council advanced cold weather training [Okpik], and acting as course director of Introduction to Outdoor Leader Skills [iOLS]) when a few years ago the District Commissioner (DC) across town asked me if I would be willing to serve in one of the Troops in his district which was operating without a Scoutmaster. One of the dads was the acting Scoutmaster, and a few others were Assistant Scoutmasters but nobody wanted to step up. The Troop is located in a transitional neighborhood where the Chartering Organization's Cub Scout Pack was in its last year before finally folding.

 

The Scouts were mostly older teenagers who were in their last year or two before aging out. One of the two Patrol Leaders didn't know the name of his Patrol, and neither of them knew exactly who was in which Patrol. The weekly program was mostly instant Merit Badges and basketball, but they did camp regularly.

 

My mission for the DC was to steer the Troop back to the standard BSA program and then hand it off to a new Scoutmaster, most likely either one of the current Assistant Scoutmasters (an Eagle Scout from the Troop who was now in college); or the Cubmaster of the CO's floundering Cub Scout Pack (an Eagle Scout who would soon be crossing over with his son).

 

The Eagle Scout in college got married and is now delaying Scoutmastership until he and his newborn son go through the Cub program. The ex-Cubmaster (the dad mentioned in the post that Brent-Allen quotes with glee) emerged after Scouter training as an outspoken critic of not only high adventure but the Patrol Method itself. He appears to be less than the perfect candidate to replace me :-/

 

So I don't have much to report in the way of really radical departures from the BSA program in the Troop that I currently serve.

 

For instance some of you are aware that I am very critical of what I call "Resume Scouting" (summer camps geared toward advancement rather than the Patrol camping, and youth leadership training based on corporate management rather than practical specific Patrol Leader skills).

 

Well, a couple of weeks ago the "Frontiersmen" Patrol Leader (FPL) saw a flyer for this year's National Youth Leadership Training (NYLT) and told the SPL he was going bump the evening's planned activity for the older Scouts so that he could talk to them about his own experience in the course. The older Scouts circled their chairs and what was the first thing out of his mouth? "This course rocks! It is even better than Eagle on your resume! I listed it on an application and I got hired right away to lay fiber-optic cable out west this summer!"

 

"Da stuff that's most different from an average modern BSA troop":

 

1. Patrol Leaders' Council (PLC): The FPL (likely our next SPL) is the ringleader of a movement to sneak PLC meetings into weekly meetings when the adults aren't looking. He points to the diagram of the PLC on page 37 of the Patrol Leader Handbook and says "Do you see 'Scoutmaster' in the blue area? No!" This seems to have greatly energized the Junior Leaders as a group so I sometimes let them slink off to plan things on their own, although I do maintain veto privileges.

 

2. Troop Elections? We don't have them:

 

a) The older Scouts have secret Patrol elections for reasons of their own. I usually find out about them after the fact when someone asks me for a Patrol Leader's patch. I only require that Patrol Leaders camp regularly.

 

b) When we have a Patrol of very young Scouts, I try to appoint the most popular ex-SPL as their Patrol Leader at least for the first year. I also appoint the Troop Guide (TG) (as was recommended in the last Scoutmaster Handbook). The ideal combination is when the PL and TG are good friends so they don't mind camping together with the young Patrol away from their age-peers. The Patrol comes "of age" when they figure out that they can hold their own elections without anyone's permission.

 

c) SPL has only one vote in the PLC and is therefore not the Patrol Leaders' boss. He is usually selected by the consensus of the Junior Leaders with as little input from me as possible, as in both Hillcourt's BSA Baden-Powell's programs. The FPL is already running the PLC and many of the activities, but if our very competitive Troop Guide won't sign off on the FPL being SPL, then the PLC will hold an election of some sort.

 

3. ASPL: In a small Troop an Assistant SPL is a complete waste of talent. B-P did not use them (and even SPLs were merely optional) and Hillcourt did not use them except in very large Troops. The Troop Guide should be the most talented non-PL in the Troop so he certainly does not need a less talented Scout as his supervisor, and what Patrol Leader needs an SPL-appointed ASPL acting as SPL in his absence? So one of our Patrol Leaders acts as SPL when the SPL is not around.

 

4. Blue Cards: I only sign Cooking Merit Badge blue cards with me as the Counselor, and I would only sign a blue card for Camping Merit Badge if the Scout had already been on a four mile backpacking trip with me (so far I haven't had to refuse anyone). The FPL wants to camp in the Allegheny National Forest and he is a natural Troop leader with a lot of charisma, so it appears that we will be a backpacking Troop again this year! A Scout who can't cook and who has never walked into the woods with a pack on his back is just a paper Eagle.

 

I agree with Beavah that what most people want to hear about is personal experience. To go one step further, I find that I receive the most grateful "off-list" Email when I write about all the "warts" of my Troop's shortcomings: candid accounts of where our program falls far short of the ideal. A number of Scouters seem to be inspired more by these frank posts than by glowing accounts of what goes right, or by what Beavah dismisses as "mere theory."

 

But with apologies to Beavah and his flat-tailed fellow-travelers, "mere historical theory" is the one unique thing that I do have to contribute :-)

 

As for radical departures from the "modern" BSA program, in my prime I contributed to the Troop I served mostly along the lines of the BSA program by William Hillcourt in his pre-1970s handbooks for Scoutmasters. I especially like Hillcourt's "Intensive Patrol Leader Training in the Green Bar Patrol" (PLT) course. The whole point of PLT is to get the Patrols hiking and camping on their own, but I admit I only allowed the most gifted Patrol Leaders to take their Patrols camping without adult supervision.

 

Terry Howerton and his staff interviewed one of them about ten years ago: a twelve-year-old Patrol Leader who had been a member of the Young Pioneers in Lithuania before he joined our Troop. Those of you who support Scouter.Com and have the back issues of Scouter Magazine will find a detailed account of what I consider to be a good Traditional Patrol Leader on page 12 of issue #5 (Winter 1997/1998).

 

Kudu

 

[ajmako]

The original idea behind Scouting was that boys would form patrols, do things on their own under their own leadership, and in that process they would learn personal responsibility and many other qualities of good citizenship. The key to this was that the Scouts really did do things on their own. The adult mentor taught skills and established what was expected of a Scout, but his responsibilities pretty much ended there. Another key was that patrols were permanent and troops were merely local groups of patrols who relied on the same group of adult mentors.

 

In the BSA system the importance of the patrol was initially reduced to the point where a patrol was little more than a convenient, temporary grouping. The adult mentor's role was expanded and made more important to compensate. This attitude has continued to exist in the BSA, even while it was under the influence of Green Bar Bill. The key to accomplishing the aims in the BSA system has always relied more on adult mentors than on the patrol.

 

Today the BSA is far different than it was initially. The problem is that there's a fair bit of confusion concerning the Patrol Method. On one hand the BSA tells us the patrol should be independent, that Patrol Leaders should be relied upon to do most of the work, and that the patrol is the basic unit of Scouting (things that are basically right out of B-P's mouth). On the other hand the BSA tells us that brand new Scouts should be put into a temporary patrol for their first year, move into "regular" patrols for a couple years, and then move on to a Venturing patrol; that troops are the "end unit" (troops are chartered, boys join troops, Scouts are moved from patrol to patrol within a troop); and that adult mentors can delegate some of their responsibilities to the Scouts.

 

This confusion is what causes the debate, and why it's entirely possible for two BSA Scouters to have differing opinions about the Patrol Method and both find support for their arguments in official BSA documents. Happily the confusion is only on a philosophical level. On the practical level adult mentors tend to do what works with the Scouts they have, and both the B-P and BSA systems work. The only real difference is that one system requires a lot more work on the part of the adult mentors.

 

What I have learned over the years is that B-P's idea of permanent patrols is better than the BSA's three-tiered patrol system. Both systems work, but permanent patrols are far less work for the Scoutmaster. One thing I want to make clear is that B-P's idea of the patrol is quite possible in the BSA system, can be easily achieved in the BSA system, and many BSA troops actually do it without realizing it.

 

The key to making both systems work is that patrols must be real. That is the patrol must exist beyond the troop roster, and beyond the troop meeting room. If the patrol isn't real the members of the patrol won't identify with it, and the Patrol Leader's job isn't real either. Real patrols are important to the program, to the troop, to the leaders, and to the Scouts. Real patrols do things on their own, outside the troop program. Real patrols don't like annual troop reorganizations, or forming temporary patrols for campouts and competitions. Real patrols take brand new Scouts under their wing and train them to be real members of the patrol without the need for a temporary "training" patrol.

 

The key to making patrols real is: "Train 'em, trust 'em, let 'em lead." (Green Bar Bill)

[Stosh]

Not only is there a lot less work for the adults under the BP method, but the boys come on-line with their leadership earlier than if the adults "meddle" in the patrols. If they support the patrols instead, the environment of leadership is encouraged and expected. The boys tend to step up and take charge when they feel there is no adult competition which they know they will lose of challenged.

 

I do like the permanence of the BP approach and that if tne boys wish to move from one patrol to another it's up to the patrols to decide that. We have "patrol transfers" allowed when the boys request it.

 

 

[BrentAllen]

ajmako,

I would say my thoughts mirror yours very closely. I would point out that B-P realized pretty quickly, after thousands of Patrols had formed across England in 1908, that he needed more adults involved. I don't think he put together the first Wood Badge course because he didn't have anything better to do. :-)

 

I think the term "permanent patrols" may be confusing to some. Some might think that means a group that is formed, with no additions or subtractions, for a number of years. A Troop has a choice of either spreading new boys among existing Patrols (vertical integration) or forming New Scout Patrols. In the former, the "permanent" Patrols will add and lose Scouts every year, but the core remains the same. As a Troop expands and contracts, those Patrols may have to do the same.

 

I don't know of any Troop that reorganizes their Patrols on an annual basis, as standard practice. I can't think of any good reason for such a practice.

 

The Troop my son just joined utilizes NSP's. I have very mixed feelings about that method, versus the alternative. I see positives and negatives to both. In this Troop, I haven't seen a whole lot of Patrol identity, as you mention in your last paragraph. The couple of campouts we have attended included a lot of ad hoc Patrols, which I really don't like. It points to problems with participation, to begin with. I don't see how any real leadership lessons are learned, and unfortunately, this has happened so many times, it appears to now be SOP.

As the ASM-NSP, I hope to have some influence in changing this attitude. I hope these boys will be an example how a Patrol is supposed to function. They will either influence the Troop, or be influenced. We'll see what has happened a year from now. :-)

[Eamonn]

Still being a young whippersnapper!

I joined Scouts in the UK just about the time when the Advanced Party Report and all the changes to UK Scouting came into effect.

My brother, who is four years older than I had been a Boy Scout and I had been a Wolf Cub.

The Advanced Party Report (1968-1969) Was in many ways responsible for the birth of a lot of "Alternative" Scout organizations /Associations.

Sweeping changes were made.

Wolf Cubs became just Cub Scouts.

Boy Scouts became just Scouts.

We said good bye to Senior Scouts and Rovers and hello to Venture Scouts.

The Scout Law went down to only seven points.

The uniform became a dress type uniform.

Sadly a lot of "Old Timers" seen this all as just being too much and quit.

I of course being only a little fellow was raised in the "New Scouting"

Was it better or worse?

Don't ask me! I only knew the program that I was presented with.

Sure I read about how things used to be and some of it looked like a lot of fun.

Moving from the UK after going all through the Scouting programs in the UK and spending over ten years as a Scout Leader (Scoutmasters went out with the dawn of the Advanced Party Report) To the USA and becoming involved in the BSA was a shock.

Things are very different.

Still here I am.

If I want to be a member of the BSA?

Doing things the way it's done is what I should do.

I suppose I could start an "Alternative" organization. But to do so would mean not having all the resources that are available to me and the Scouts I serve that the BSA and BSA membership offers.

Most Scouts and their parents judge Scouts and Scouting by what goes on in the unit that they belong to and maybe what they see of other units in their area.

The parents that do get involved might gain some sort of an insight as to "What the book" says?

Still very often even this makes little or no difference, as when they bring up "What the book" says all they hear is "We don't do it that way!!"

Scouts UK just went through another overhaul. I think because membership was declining at a great rate of knots.

Talking with the Scouter's who were Scouts when I was a Scout, there seems to be a 50/50 mix of those who think the changes are really good, while the others just don't like the changes.

But it also seems that the units that were strong and offered a good program before the changes are still doing so and the weak units are still weak.

Eamonn.

[ajmako]

Since Beavah asked for real, live examples, I'll give one. Years ago I joined up with a pretty big troop as an ASM. This troop focused on permanant patrols, insisted patrols plan and conduct their own activities, and handed Scouts most of the authority. When a group of new boys joined, they usually formed a new patrol, gave them an ASM and TG, and set them loose. It was probably the best troop I had ever been associated with.

 

About halfway through my tenure with that troop things started falling apart. The patrols still functioned on their own, but the junior leaders were sort of slacking off. There was a lot more goofing off than usual, and it seemed like none of the PL's, ASPL's, TG's, the SPL, or JASM's would bother to do anything about it. The SM tried nudging the SPL. He tried focusing on leadership and responsibility in his Scoutmaster Minutes. Reluctantly he even fired the SPL. Nothing seemed to work.

 

The troop, you see, had 52 Scouts and 14 ASM's. We had enough adults showing up to each meeting to assign two to each patrol, and that's exactly what we did. All of us were highly trained, dedicated, properly focused Scouters, but we couldn't figure out what was going on. Finally we sat down with one of the JASM's and asked him what he thought was happening. He said: "No one does anything because the adults never give them a chance." Whether it was a troop meeting or a campout, you couldn't swing a cat in that troop without hitting an adult, and we needed a 16-year-old Scout to tell us that.

 

That 16-year-old Scout knew what was going on and had the guts to say something because he'd grown up with real, permanent patrols. He had been in one, been PL of one, been SPL of a troop of them. He knew what we expected, what the Scouts were capable of, and it was obvious to him why we weren't getting either. Most importantly, he knew the adults trusted him enough that he could state the truth flat out.

 

It's not the system you choose to use, it's how you use it.

[ajmako]

BrentAllen wrote: "I think the term 'permanent patrols' may be confusing to some."

 

Just to clarify, a permanent patrol is one that continues to exist long after the Scouts who started it are gone. Bringing in new Scouts is a vital part of it, and so is training those new Scouts in the First Class skills. The BSA's description of "regular" patrols (as per the SM Handbook) suggests the BSA expects regular patrols to be permanent patrols.

 

The problem is that B-P intended patrols to be permanent to the Scout as well. That is, he joins the Bat Patrol, and from that point on the Bat Patrol is the patrol he always identifies with. You sort of lose that side of the permanence when a Scout first joins a NSP, gets moved into the Bat Patrol after a year, and it's expected he'll move on to the Venture Patrol after a couple years.(This message has been edited by ajmako)

[Beavah]

The BSA's description of "regular" patrols (as per the SM Handbook) suggests the BSA expects regular patrols to be permanent patrols.

 

Yah, they're samplin' cactus buttons, eh? The SM Handbooks says they want patrols to be "peers similar in age & achievement (aka rank)". But that's not a permanent patrol. Anybody who lives in da real world will tell you that normal attrition will make that patrol too small to be workable by the time they get very far into high school if not sooner. And of course, when they age out, the patrol dies.

 

Steppin' back to a bigger picture, it's worth rememberin' that BP was a veritable paragon of progressive education from the era of John Dewey and all those folks. I believe that just like in the rest of the education world, there's tension in scouting between the progressive tradition of BP and Hillcourt and the back-to-basics/adult-run drill & practice crowd. So lots of the BSA materials reflect the tug-of-war between Baden-Progressive and Adult-Organized. Almost schizophrenic it is. The BSA materials on patrols are just one example.

 

Kudu might be right, though. Over the years, even over the last 10, I think the progressive stuff has been increasingly squeezed by adult regulation.

 

 

[OldGreyEagle]

Here's a thought, or maybe just a different way to look at things. But are having a new scout patrol and permanent patrols ( to the scout)mutually exclusive? Lets say you have a gang of Gung Ho Webelos cross over and become the Official Boy Scout Patrol (OBS for short).

 

For the first 12 months of it's existence, the OBS'ers operate as a new scout patrol. They have a Troop Guide and an ASM assigned to them and they rotate the Patrol Leaders job on a monthly basis until all have been in the position at which time they elect a permanent PL and the Troop Guide bids them a fond adieu.

 

When the following years cross oversarrive, the OBS Patrol moves out of New Scout Patrol status and becomes a "regular patrol", they now participate in a different program, but they are still with their buddies. In three years, they graduate to the level of a Venture Patrol. The same eight scouts, in the same patrol, who have stayed together with the program that the troop offered to it changing as the boys matured