Requiring "Virtual" Patrols at District Events

[funscout]

Okay, I'm confused. I am still just a Cub scout leader who participates as a parent helper with my older son's troop. I thought the troop was supposed to be boy-led. The BOYS in my son's troop are the ones who are choosing to combine patrols for special events. Are the leaders supposed to over-ride their decision and tell them they MUST stick with existing patrols only? I'm planning on taking the training to become a Boy Scout leader when my 4th grader crosses over to Boy Scouts. Maybe I'll understand better, then.

 

The 2 patrols that would have had only 2 boys each, are both made up of older boys. Many of them now have jobs and can not attend as many scout activities as they would like. I'd hate to be the one to tell the 2 boys who are left that they can not combine with another patrol. On the HILLY wooded trails that our Klondike Derby covers, I don't see how it is possible for 2 boys to pull a sled which contains all the gear that is required. I've seen patrols of 4 boys struggle greatly to get their sleds up some hills, especially when there is little or no snow. If our 2 sets of 2-boy patrols had not been allowed to combine with the other 6-boy patrols, then I'm willing to bet those boys would have stayed home from Klondike. Instead of encouraging boys to attend, this would have discouraged them.

 

So, I'm wondering, is it really better to deny the BOYS the right to choose to combine patrols in special circumstances, or to FORCE them to compete with only 2 boys?

[funscout]

On another note, I've noticed that the younger boys actually tend to do better than the older boys at Klondike. The older boys tend to assume they already know everything, while I see the younger boys studying up on the skills needed.

 

Last year, I was an adult walker for a patrol of boys who were mostly high school aged. Even though they had competed for many years, they did worse than my son's patrol (which was completely made up of brand new scouts). At our "sled ferry," the older patrol dropped their sled in the bottom of a ravine, because they hurried through their knot tying. The younger patrol was slower with their knots, but their sled made it across just fine.

 

This year, my son's patrol didn't do as well as last year, again, because I think they felt they already knew all the skills, so they didn't "study" like the new scouts did.

[Eagle76]

I'm going to weigh in on funscout's question, and elaborate on the underlying issue.

 

"Are the leaders supposed to over-ride their decision and tell them they MUST stick with existing patrols only?"

 

First, there may be specific occasions where combining patrols or creating temporary patrols is the lesser of two evils. However, in general, we should be striving to create strong patrols which work together. We should not be too quick to abandon the Patrol Method.

 

The underlying question, I think, is when do adults override the boys. You may have a better understanding after taking Boy Scout leader training, but I know people who have take training and have not reached that understanding, IMHO.

 

There are some things the boys may "decide" to do which adults must veto in order to maintain the standards of the BSA. If they do not, they are not delivering on the promise of providing a Scouting program for the boys.

For example:

The boys can't "decide" not to follow the Ideals of Scouting.

The boys can't "decide" that they will not wear the Scout Uniform

The boys can't "decide" that they will not operate with the Patrol Method.

The boys can't "decide" to forgo all Outdoor activities, and become a card-playing or video gaming club.

 

I think you see what I'm driving at. The decision making authority of the boys does not extend to altering the 8 Methods of Scouting. Yet I have seen instances where adults have allowed boys to take the easy way out, in ways which contradict or at least weaken the Methods.

[CNYScouter]

I agree 100% with Eagle76!

I also agree with there are many leaders who after taking training still dont understand this concept or decide that their way is better and do it some other way.

 

To expand on what Eagle76 said, the SM does have veto power over what the PLC decides.

 

The Trainer who does this section in our SM training uses clothes shopping with his teen-aged daughter as an analogy: I never tell her what to buy. However, I do have the power to say NO to whatever she picks out and then tell her to go pick out something else. I only give my advice when asked.

 

Its the same with the SM and the PLC. The only decisions made by an SM or any adult leader should be with concerns of health, safety and youth protection, such as the PLC wanting to do paintball. The SM should directly say NO.

When something comes up that goes against the BSA program the SM has to steer the boys in the right direction.

 

The SM should never force the Scouts into anything.

In the situation where the PLC decides to combine patrols the conversation should have gone something like this.

 

SPL: The Troop is going to the Klondike Derby. How many scouts do we have going?

PL1: 4

PL2: 4

PL3: 2

PL4: 2

PL3: I have an idea. Why dont we combine patrols 3 and 4? This way we will have a better chance at winning.

 

SM: Hey guys wait a minute. We do things by patrols. So, the combining of patrols is out. Can you come up with some other alternative?

PL3 & PL4: no, we cant think of anything.

SM: The sign of a good leader is getting people to do things. Perhaps, you should call up your patrol members and see if you can get more of them to go. Or maybe instead of competing you could participant by running one of the stations. But, if you want to compete you will have to use whoever in your patrol is going.

 

Even if the PL calls his members and gets no one else to come, he has had the chance to practice his leadership skills. And the decision to compete is left up to the members of the patrol.

 

What are we teaching by combing patrols?

(This message has been edited by CNYScouter)

[ljnrsu]

 A different question is what are we teaching in your scenario CNYScouter, boy led or adult led? What Aims or Methods of Scouting are being ignored while maintaining one

Method? PL3: I have an idea. Why dont we combine patrols 3 and 4? This way we will have a better chance at winning.

 What are the Scouts showing with this idea? Decision making,leadership,working to a common goal? To an adult their reason of winning may be flawed but to them it may make sense.

SM: Hey guys wait a minute. We do things by patrols. So, the combining of patrols is out. But, if you want to compete you will have to use whoever in your patrol is going.

 The SM is telling the Scouts what to do and how it must be done. What is the SM telling the Scouts with this? Scouts opinions,decision are invalid? Could he be questioning their leadership,initiative,resourcefulness and character?

SM: The sign of a good leader is getting people to do things. Perhaps, you should call up your patrol members and see if you can get more of them to go. Or maybe instead of competing you could participant by running one of the stations.

 Here the SM is offering suggestions or alternatives that the Scouts may not have thought of. The SM is offering options in the decision making.

 Question becomes what is a Patrol? Is it a group of Scouts working together under the leadership of one of its members?

Last question. What is patrol method? Could it be the way a patrols function determines the method, not the way they're organized or created?

 

[CNYScouter]

ljnrsu-

 

The SM uses the directing, coaching, supporting, and delegating styles of leading.

 

OK, so in my senerio the SM should have first told the scouts that he liked the way they come up with a decision and how they wanted to work for a common goal.

However, as Eagle76 pointed out the PLC can't vote not to use the patrol method and this is one instance where the SM can veto the combining of patrols as this is not the patrol method. (directing).

 

If the scouts can not come up with alternatives the SM can make suggestions on how to resolve the issue(coaching). He hasn't made the decision for the scouts and still leaves it up to them to come up with a decision.

 

A patrol is just not any group of kids thrown together.

A patol is the same group of kids that work together to form a patrol.

It takes time to build a good patrol and to develop a leader.

 

If you are contantly allowing scouts to combine patrols they will never come together and function to their full potential as a patrol.

A group of scouts assembled for a weekend can not truly function as a patrol in that short of a time frame.

 

I don't think I can answer what is the patrol method very quickly.

Go read what BP and William Hilcourt says about the patrol method.

Check out Kudo's web site (www.inquiry.net) also it has a good deal on the patrol method also.

 

How the patrol is created is just as important on how it functions and is organized.

A patrol made of friends with similar interests will come together much faster and work better than a patrol made of total strangers.

 

A patrol in the BSA is organized in one way. A PL leads, with an APL who fills in for him when he is not available. A patrol without a leader is not a patrol, its just a bunch of kids hanging out.

 

 

 

[CNYScouter]

Try these links for what the patrol methos is:

 

http://www.whitestag.org/patrol_method/index.html

 

http://www.inquiry.net/patrol/index.htm

 

http://www.greenbar.ws/4adults/index.cfm

 

 

 

[funscout]

Eagle76 and CNYscouter: Thanks for the lesson! I look forward to Boy Scout leader training after my younger son crosses over to Boy Scouts in one year.

[ljnrsu]

Yes,CNYScouter a SM sould use directing, coaching, supporting, and delegating styles of leading. But in your scenario I can only see coaching being used and the others not at all.

 

In many of your posts CNYScouter you have complained about not finding boy led Troops in your area. Yet in the scenario you wrote you demonstrated an adult led unit. Which I do not understand why.

 

Two Scouts is really not a patrol and they can not effectively demonstrate the Patrol Method.

While you may have Scouts who would go on an outing with only 2 members and talk up what fun they had. The opposite may also take place and they may complain on how much work it was. Scouts are not naive enough not to realize how much work and effort is involved when you only have 2 to share that work. And there may come a time when an outing is cancelled cause you have 8 boys from 4 patrols going and that they decide not to go as 4 patrols of 2 considering the amount of work and effort involved.

 

Many Boy Scout publications state that minimum size of a patrol is 4-5 scouts in order to function as a patrol. It may be that the boys have been trained and did learn that to effectively demonstrate Patrol Method you need more than 2 scouts. A "virtual patrol" is not an ideal patrol but it can function as one. And give the Scouts an opportunity to practice the Patrol Method. It comes down to the who and why they were formed. If the Scouts or PLC decide to create a patrol this way and it was done for the right reasons ie not cancel an outing or to divide work on a more even basis. Then why not,it is the boys Troop to run. They are trying to follow Scouting Methods within the resources that they have available at that time.

 

A Scoutmasters job is not to run his Troop but to train boy leaders to run their Troop.

 

As Baden-Powell says, "To get the best results, you must give the leader real, free-handed responsibility. If you only give partial responsibility, you will get partial results."

 

Aren't we as Scouters supposed to: Train em, Trust em, Let em Lead!

 

The statement about what a patrol may be is an excerpt from the Third Handbook for Scoutmasters, Twelfth printing March 1945, Vol 1, page 162. Which William Hillcourt wrote. And is referenced in one of the web sites you mentioned.

 

The statement about what the Patrol Method may be also comes from a Scoutmasters Handbook. Sixth Edition, First printing 1972, page 144. Which also was the Edition of the Scoutmasters Handbook in current use when I was first trained as a SM in 1977.

 

Yes, I said first trained as I do not believe in "trained once for life". Any time that training has been changed for the position I served in I have taken that training again.

 

I am very well aware of William Hillcourt and his writings concerning patrols and Patrol Method. He wrote both the Boy Scout handbook and the Patrol Leaders Handbook I used as a Scout in the 60's.

 

I do believe that there are things in older Boy Scout publications that are just as appropriate today as when they were written 20-60 years ago.

If you do not learn from history you tend to repeat it.

 

 

 

[CNYScouter]

A SM selects the appropriate style of coaching for a particular situation and doesn't necessarily use all 4 styles in every situation.

 

Even in a boy-led unit the SM may have to step in and and say that a decision made is not appropriate Scout activity or is not in line with the Scouting program and to find an alternative.

 

So, if the SM has trained his scouts well on the Patrol Method the scenario of the PLC wanting to combine patrols should never happen because they know that is not the way the patrol method works.

 

And if the boys can't not come up with a viable alternative he can make suggestions. If the SM can't say what is inappropriate how is he going to train his scouts how a Troop should be run.

 

If the PLC decides to go paintballing or decides that the uniform is going to be Flannel Shirts and camo pants or that on camping trips the adults will setup all the tents and do all the cooking and cleaning?

 

Do you do these just becuase the PLC decided them?

 

What do you think the SM should do in these cases?

 

There are limits to what the PLC can decide to do.

Just as the PLC can not decide to change the uniform or not use the uniform, they can not decide to abandon the Patrol Method and the combing of patrol is abanding the Patrol Method.

 

It says that the Patrol Method works best with 6 to 8 scouts. As it has been said here on these forums many times, 2 scouts can function as a patrol, not as good as 6 to 8, but they can function as a patrol.

 

6 scouts thrown together for a weekend is not a patrol.

It takes time to build a patrol into a working unit.

It takes a good deal of time to build patrol spirit.

 

When you combine patrols you're sending a message that patrols are not important.

 

This weekend was the NBA All Star Game. Coaches hate this becuase it takes a person from their team and has them try to work in another team. Have you heard of the All-Star slump. Teams often take a while to get back on track after these.

And these are adults who do this for a living.

Inexperianced scouts will take much longer to have the patrol fully functioning again.

[ljnrsu]

 CNYScouter,to answer your questions paintball is a violation of G2SS and redesigning the uniform is violating National Policy. And any responsible Scout leader would have to step in and say no to them.

 But we are not talking about violating G2SS or rewriting National Policy. We are talking about patrols and patrol method. How can a patrol of 2 scouts develop leadership or demonstrate patrol method?

  When you combine patrols you're sending a message that patrols are not important.

 Are you or are you giving them the opportunity to practice leadership and the patrol method?

 What message is a SM sending when he says either you go as a patrol of 2 or don't bother going to the klondike. How are the Aims and Methods being fulfilled? Why would a Scout leader force Scouts into a task that is next to impossible to accomplish?

 Have you ever tried or watched 2 scouts pull a loaded klondike sled? One of the tasks in a klondike is getting the sled from station to station. How many Scouts do you think it takes to move a loaded sled through mud, snow or what ever else may be on the ground at that time?

 So what you are saying is that strict patrols have to be followed no matter what. Even if the tasks involved is impossible to acomplish and the Scouts may be doomed for failure with 2-4 Scouts involved?

 Scouts are not that naive,they will put up being in very small patrols on outings for only so long. What happens to the patrol method when Scouts stop going on outings because they do not want to be in a patrol of 2 or 3 on an outing? Or even worse they leave your Troop. Without Scouts you have no patrol, and without patrols you have no Troop.

 What I am saying that in certain situations and circumstances a "virtual patrol" is a viable solution. If the Scouts decide to combine 7 Scouts from 3 patrols in order not to cancel an outing, then yes I would approve it. They still would have to have a PL and APL. I would rather have 7 Scouts practicing the patrol method than cancelling the outing and having none. 

 Sorry I can not accept following the patrol method blindly. As a Leader I can not put Scouts in a situation that sets them up for failure or limits their performance from the start. Or creates a situation where the amount work involved to perform tasks is excessive given the amount of Scouts participating.

  Why as Scout leaders would we create burdens like this for our Scouts? What message are you sending the Scouts when Leaders do things like this?

 To borrow something William Hillcourt wrote. A Troop is not divided into patrols. A Troop is the sum total of its patrols.

 

[Eagle76]

Since my comments seemed to set off this debate, I'm going to try to play mediator a little.

 

In my original post I said that in some cases combining patrols may be the lesser of two evils. I was just saying that we shouldn't jump to it too quickly or automatically. In the Klondike example under discussion, I like CNYScouter's idea of encouraging the PL's to contact their patrol members to try to encourage them to attend. This is making a worthy effort to strengthen patrol spirit and to get them to work together. However, if this effort failed, then I would not prohibit the two small patrols from joining forces.

 

Does that make sense, or am I being wishy-washy?(This message has been edited by Eagle76)

[scoutingagain]

Eagle 76,

 

No, I think you're being pragmatic. I would do the same.

 

This seems like an area where good, well meaning folks have different approaches. All want to follow the methods of scouting and provide opportunities for the youth they serve.

 

I think we all agree the preference would be to have outings conducted with the standing patrols scouts are in during meetings and other activities. However, as Eagle76 points out, there maybe times where strict adherence to those groupings is not in the best interests of the scouts. Sure, 2 scouts trying to compete against other full patrols may teach them a lesson in how important it is for all members of a patrol to participate. It is also just as likely to teach them, that Boys Scouts is a messed up organization that sends them into events with no hope of effectively competing.

 

What message is a two scout patrol likely to bring back to the other scouts and their friends after spending a cold day trying to drag around a full sled and comming in last or near last in every event. That the others missed a really good time and they should participate next year? Doubt it. More likey it will be, you guys had it right. Klondike is bogus. Then your down to a 0 scout patrol the following year.

 

If a patrol is a natural grouping of boys, I see nothing wrong with allowing the boys to re-group themselves for certain events if not enough patrol members participate. (After the appropriate attempt to try an convince others to participate.)

 

On the other hand, there may well be certain events a 2 scout patrol can function in. Say a backpacking overnighter. In this event a pair of scouts may be able to function reasonably well as a pair.

 

The point is, each situation has to be evaluated separately and the guiding principle should be what will be the best way to help achieve the AIMs of scouting, not necessarily how to fully comply with ALL the METHODS of scouting ALL the time. In my mind, it is better to have the scout PARTICIPATE in the OUTDOOR method and participate in the other methods while on an outing, than not participate because if they strictly applied the PATROL method, they are not likely to have as much fun.

 

Because...if they're not having FUN, they're not likely to stick around long enough to realize the PURPOSE of scouting. Nor are they likely to encourage their friends to participate.

 

SA(This message has been edited by scoutingagain)

[CNYScouter]

I know I'm comming on strong about this topic.

 

My son and I have been involved with two troops where the decision to combine patrols for an activity was made some where in the past and it then became a every month occurance.

The first Troop we were in then started doing this at weekly meeting because not enough scouts were coming to make up a patrol. It then got to the point that they just stop using patrols and met as one big group. For monthy activites they were broken into "food" groups.

When we left there were 3 PL's, no one knew the name of the patrols and the PL's didn't know who was in their patrol becuase it changed by who was going on the next activity.

 

The new troop we joined has moved in this direction also. I have even seen them appoint a temporary SPL when on my sn's first trip the SPL, neither of the two ASPL's or any PL's were going.

 

The new SM believes in teaching "Self-reliance". He wants every scout on all trips to have to supply their own tent, food and cooking gear.

He is an Eagle Scout and feels that this is missing from the BSA program so he's going to add it. Any time some one brings up buying new Troop equipment, he puts up such a fuss and insists that every kid should be suppling their own equipment.

 

I seem to be the only adult leader who has an issue with doing things this way even though there are 7 Eagles as ASM's or CM's. And yes they have gone through SM training.

 

I just think that the combining of patrols, no matter what the reason, is a slippery slope to start heading down.

 

 

 

[scoutingagain]

"I just think that the combining of patrols, no matter what the reason, is a slippery slope to start heading down. "

 

CNYS, I agree whole heartedly. While there are times when the use of "virtual patrols", may be the lesser of two poor choices, it should not be done automatically, and certainly not for the convenience of the adults. I would not condone the situation you describe and it is similar to the situation I faced when my son crossed over to scouts, now close to 5 years ago. The main difference was that the adults in the unit were amenable to change. Non had been a scout as a youth, and being an Eagle gave me some credability within the group. As it is, after 5 years as an Adult in this game, I will admit that I'm just beginning to be able to put into effective practice some of the skills learned. I emphasize the term "effective" practice. Frankly, initially while I knew what the unit and I should be doing, getting the boys and other adults on the same page was difficult and I will admit a tendancy to regress into parental mode instead of scouter mode. I did it wrong more often that I did it right. Now I feel with the group of scouts we have, we're just getting there. We could still do a better job with the patrol method, but we do better than we did 3 years ago. The same could be said for uniforming. But, we're doing a much better job at being boy led, advancement, and have sigificantly improved the outdoor program and the overall scouting experience for those involved has improved.

 

In the other thread it was mentioned it takes anywhere from 3-5 years to turn a unit around and I would have to agree with that assessment. That may even be optimistic, unless you can directly step in as Scoutmaster. Don't expect change overnight. Take satisfaction in what you can do, rather than in what you can't. For me the motivation was to provide the best scouting experience I could for my son, but part of that required changing the experience for all the members of the unit. Take baby steps. If your son is enjoying his experience, take satisfaction in that. Look for other scouting activities outside the unit that may provide your son better insight to what scouting is supposed to be. These include OA, provisional camping at summer camps, or participating in High Adventure bases as a provisional scout. He can bring those experiences back to the unit and help implement change.

 

 

Good luck.

 

SA