Growing the Patrol Method

[dkurtenbach]

The point of the Patrol Method is to create opportunities for boys to learn practical citizenship. In the small group environment, each member is given important responsibilities that contribute to the comfort and success of the group. Members learn to work with one another (and deal with each others' flaws and quirks), learn the consequences of failure to do their part, learn to rely on each other, and practice leading. In this way, the patrol becomes a high-performing team that is fun and satisfying for its youth members, while developing the qualities in those members that make it satisfying for the adults (that is, they are making progress toward the Aims of character, citizenship, and fitness).

 

The Patrol Method only operates when the patrol has tasks or projects to perform. Only if it has real things to do (with a fun, challenging, or rewarding objective that will motivate them) can the patrol members take on assignments and responsibilities that will challenge them, benefit the other members, and provide the raw material for patrol member interaction, sharing, and teamwork.

 

The more opportunities that the patrol has to practice teamwork, the better the Patrol Method will work. Patrols that are mostly intact most of the time will develop faster, and thus the learning and growth of its members will occur faster. Patrols with random meeting and outing attendance will naturally take longer to develop their relationships and ways of working together, and thus the learning and growth of its members will take longer.

 

If we want to "grow" the Patrol Method in our troops, we have to follow some basic principles:

 

1. Patrols have to have real tasks and projects to perform as patrols. Those tasks and projects have to be big enough and complex enough that they can be divided up into meaningful pieces and assigned to various patrol members.

 

2. Those tasks and projects can't just be occasional. In a troop, there should be some jobs that a patrol must perform continually or on a recurring basis (in rotation with other patrols), and many jobs, large and small, that arise based on the next campout or activity or meeting program. Patrols need to stay busy carrying out their patrol responsibilities.

 

3. Patrols must be real entities with their own identities. It must be obvious to the patrol members that (a) they have a place, a small community, that they are part of; (b) that little community will take care of them; © they must help take care of that little community. Patrol flags, yells/slogans/catch phrases/songs, special places in the troop assembly, tables or corners in the meeting room, etc. all help develop that special identity. The troop leadership must help promote and develop that identity; it has to think always in terms of patrols, not individual Scouts.

 

4. Patrols need to stay together as much and as long as reasonably possible. That doesn't mean that patrols can't be reorganized, just that every time a change occurs, it is a pause or a step back in the development of patrols toward the goal of becoming high-performing teams and a loss of patrol identity and spirit, and in some cases it can be frustrating for the Scouts.

 

5. Patrol identity should remain intact on outings and activities, even if only one or two patrol members are present. Regularly taking a Scout out of his "regular" patrol, or sending the message that "regular" patrols only exist for convenience at meetings, undermines team loyalty and patrol spirit. See No. 3 above. This doesn't mean that _patrols_ can't be tasked to work together/camp together/cook together etc. as a temporary "super patrol" team on an outing or activity (planting their patrol flags together in their campsite), but it should be clear that they are patrols working together, not individual Scouts pulled out of their regular patrols and combined into another "patrol" they have no prior connection to. The practical effect is the same for purposes of the outing or activity, but the symbolism is very different. High adventure crews or special purpose patrols are another matter -- they should be formed as an _additional_ patrol or team that the Scout belongs to _along with_ his membership in his "regular" patrol.

 

Dan Kurtenbach

Fairfax, VA

[pargolf44067]

Dan,

 

I agree with you on the patrol method. My question is how do you get to this point if you have a troop that isn't there yet. The other question is a logistical question -- if you only have one or two boys at a campout, how practical is it to have them do their own meal(s), etc? That is one issue that I have about the patrol method and campouts.

 

Bill

[dkurtenbach]

As the President is fond of saying, it will be "hard work," with (at least) one step back for every two steps forward. You have to start with a clear vision of your goal: What will your Patrol Method troop look like? How will it do things (big things and little things)? Then sit down and plan out step-by-step how to get there from where you are now. What things do you need to start doing? What things do you need to stop doing? What things do you need to continue doing? Then you'll have to figure out how fast you can start to make changes. If old processes and traditions are well-entrenched, it is going to take some time. On the other hand, if you have lots of young Scouts, you may be able to move faster. Avoid areas where you sense resistance and work on the things that are easier to implement, but plant the seed for future changes in those areas. You'll want as much help and buy-in as you can get -- find adults and Scouts who have a clue, and explain the little changes and how they are important to a better troop or a better activity or better meetings.

 

As for the practicality of one or two patrol members doing their own cooking and other tasks, I think it is really just a question of what you want to do and then planning that. If you are going to have one or more patrols with one or two or three members, there is no reason they can't plan for, buy groceries for, and cook for a small number of people. You can, of course, always have the tiny patrols cook not only for themselves but for "guests" as well -- the adults -- to give them experience cooking for larger numbers, but that isn't necessary; regardless of how many boys from the patrol are there, the cook is cooking for the patrol. Naturally, it will be _inconvenient_ to have little patrols doing things that could be much more economically and efficiently done by larger groups. But since when has Scouting ever been about convenience and efficiency?

 

Dan Kurtenbach

[EagleInKY]

Dan, This is a great post about the patrol method. As it is one of the big topics for us this year, I'm going to use this in my next scoutmaster's meeting.

 

Thanks for the thoughts.

 

 

As for the small group doing the cooking, I just ran into this with our troop. For our last campout the PLC decided that one patrol would not have enough to cook, so they could just share with the other patrols. I was quite upset with them. I explained to them how this defeats the goals of the patrol system, which we were trying to strengthen, not weaken. Among my concerns were:

- The "small" patrol did not have any voice in the meal selection.

- The other two patrols did not factor for extra people in their portions, so some meals were a little skimpy.

- Their patrol was dependent upon the other patrols schedules.

 

My suggestion to them was to look for a more creative way, if their concern was the patrol numbers. (I think the patrol only had 3 boys). For example, the patrol could offer to feed the SPL and ASPL for the campout. They could invite an adult to eat with them. They could come up with things that are easy to cook in small amounts or even individually (foil wrap dinner, omelettes in a bag, etc.).

 

There are lots of answers that are better than dismantling the patrol system.

[SueM]

Boy..a subject I'd love to hear more about..especially how to "convince" my boys that I'm not totally losing it when I try to explain to them that a single patrol member should still try to function as a patrol! I think I'll print out some of these and read them to my SPL & ASPL the next time they try to automatically "combine" a single into another patrol for the weekend.

 

sue m

[pargolf44067]

Excellent feedback on the issues. Since I became SM in October, we have had no campouts where we had more than one menu. It has been a troop menu. This is definitely something, as I move into my second year, that I will push hard with to the PLC.

 

Another question arises is in regards to equipment. Our troop has quite a bit of equipment. However, if there is certain equipment (say stoves) that is less than the number of patrols, how does this work out? Is it just a simple matter of scheduling?

[dkurtenbach]

Scheduling would be one way to do it, so long as you don't put one patrol at a disadvantage. For example, if you have four patrols and three stoves, probably better to shedule meals two patrols at a time, rather than three and one. Probably better in the long run to acquire enough equipment for each patrol -- with each patrol responsible for the care of their equipment. And perhaps leading to each patrol having a different mix of equipment, different brands/types, further adding to each patrol's unique identity.

 

Dan Kurtenbach

[CA_Scouter]

Regarding the SPL's decision to fold the smaller patrol into one...

 

Ok, yea, it undermines the patrol method a little bit, but the Scout made a command decision. Boy-run is the operative word here, isn't it?

 

I'm not saying it was the correct decision, but it was HIS decision. Now that he's seen how poorly the meals came out, he has learned something ( and so have the hungry scouts ) and probably will plan better next time.

 

One of the more difficult things we must do as adult leaders is to be silent at times like these. If you countermand or otherwise criticize his choice, you take the chance that he won't feel confident to make other decisions in the future.

 

 

Just another angle to consider...

 

 

 

 

 

[EagleInKY]

CA_Scouter - That's the exact argument the SPL & Troop Guide came back at me with. I told them it was a valid point. Although, the patrol that was dealt the poor hand didn't have much of a voice in it.

 

pargolf44067 - We have been the same way. We have three BIG stoves (camp chefs) that are big enough to feed an army. Unfortunately, they're big, bulky and use a lot of gas (kind of like a SM). We decided to get each patrol a small Coleman 2-burner stove. This is plenty for most of their meals. I think they were only around $35. On the occasion that a patrol needs extra burner space, they are free to use a burner or two on a big stove (where the adults cook). This has worked pretty well and has greatly reduced the conjestion around the kitchen area.