Patrol Realignment

[Stosh]

You write: "ALL BSA literature has the adults coaching, supporting, never DIRECTING and never stepping in to correct." (emphasis added)

 

First page in the chapter on the Boy-Led Troop, SM Handbook, pg. 12:

"One of your most important challenges as Scoutmaster is to train boy leaders to run the troop by providing DIRECTION, coaching and support."

Yes, the SM DOES DIRECT.

 

The adult is challenged to train the boys to run the troop. It does not say they direct the procedures and policy of the boy-led troop. Suggesting direction, goals, aims, coaching the boy's progress and supporting them in their decisions on a PLC and troop level. Providing direction and directing are two different dynamics and a SM who cannot tell the difference will alter the effectiveness of his troop. One can tell from the context of the complete sentence what was intended by my comment rather than merely taking one word out of context to disclaim the the entire comment.

 

 

Same page, under "Leaders of the Boy-Led Troop":

"A Boy Scout troop is a small democracy. With the Scoutmaster's direction, the boys are formed into patrols, plan the troop's program and make it a reality."

 

I think that is pretty clear.

 

Yep, as far as the troop is concerned. But it's as clear as mud on a patrol level, which of course, the quote makes no reference to. I do believe my comments were in regards to the initial thread of patrol level problems.

 

As I have stated before. The BSA literature is not very clear and there are two entirely different tracts one can take with the meaning of the patrol method and boy-led.

 

The first interpretation is the patrol method is primary to all other concerns. The troop therefore is like the US founding fathers first envisioned our country. Each sovereign state ruled itself and used the centeral government for issues dealing with interstate concerns. However, that dynamic has totally flip-flopped and now the second interpretation applies where the centeral government dictates to the states. Both are basic interpretations of the same document.

 

If the patrol is primary (patrol method) then the troop is formed to support patrol activities. The troop takes it's direction from the patrols, they provide support, training and assistance, but they do not dictate or control anything the patrol has decided to do. The SM and adults support the PLC which is the central government of the troop where interpatrol cooperation is developed and designed.

 

Under this total autonomy model of patrol method the boys can and are encouraged to deal with their own programming, leadership, activities (meetings and outings), and if they are going on a joint patrol activity (i.e. troop activity) they take the recommendations from the PLC as to when, where, rides, etc. so they can make plans as a patrol to be involved if they so wish. Otherwise, even at a "troop" event, the patrol remains autonomous, they cook separately, the camp separately, their activities are separate from other patrols. When they go to the evening campfire they do a patrol skit or sing a patrol song.

 

The other model which is (in my opinion) a reversal of this is where the patrol is viewed as nothing more than a sub-group of the troop. The troop (usually directed by the adult's goals and plans) are mandating down to the patrols what they can and cannot do, how they are to be formed, who they are to associate with, and if only one or two boys from a couple of patrols show up for an outing, they are all dumped into one "no-name" patrol so the troop will be able to compete at the camporee contests.

 

The real difference is in the flow of authority. In a troop-method program, there never will be any personal ownership in patrols. They will come and go as often as the wind changes. Nothing's going to last very long. Leadership will be whatever with no commitment to anything other than POR requirement fulfillment. Anything they plan on doing together can in a heartbeat be cast aside and changed by the SM and/or PLC at their whim.

 

The lack of ownership and commitment on the part of temporary patrol members will continually undermine the operation of a true patrol method operation.

 

To think that just because the SM can direct the PLC and maintain the final veto vote, will have a positive impact on the ultimate outcome of the operation of the patrol method is rather foolish.

 

Our form of democracy was originally based on the principle of neighborhoods making decisions for the residents (patrol) and the town assisting and supporting the neighborhoods with their concerns (troop), and the counties supporting the towns, and the states supporting the counties, etc. This dynamic is no longer there, but that does not mean the principle wasn't the one that British born, military trained Baden-Powell didn't fully understand.

 

We don't have a contemporary understanding of this principle because we no longer adhere to it. Instead we maintain the top-down model and have the federal gov't dictate to the states and the states dictate to the counties, etc. right down to the neighborhood where people are basically ignoring it because it has little or nothing to do with their lives anyway.

 

If this is the reaction you wish to get from your patrols and their membership, it will work every time.

 

I try to get as much responsibility and authority into the hands of the boys as possible. At that age they can handle a group of about 8 people with their leadership skills. They can experiment, try, suceed and fail with little or no serious consequences to the overall program of the troop. If they suceed, they become a great lead by example patrol for others to learn from. If they fail, the PLC and other more skilled scouts can offer suggestions, assistance, encouragement, etc. but the ultimate success of the patrol has to constantly be pushed back into the patrols. If they don't get back on their horse after being thrown, the leadership lesson will be lost to that patrol.

 

Every time an adult steps in and corrects, directs, mandates, issues ultimatums, etc. they are basically telling the boys they are not leading, they can't lead, and somebody has to step up to the plate and it isn't going to be the boys.

 

I see this constantly among the troop-led or adult-led units. And thus the ownership of the patrol is lost and the interest and growth won't happen.

 

The #1 responsbility of the PLC and adults is to make sure the patrols are independent, confident, trained, encouraged, and celebrated in their accomplishments. This is what the patrol-method is all about. If the patrol is not #1 in the program, then it's not the patrol-method in my book at least. And anyway, that's how we operate and it works great and if it ain't broken, we don't intend to fix it.

 

Stosh

 

 

[DugNevius]

haha i apologize. I was in a teasing mood.

[DugNevius]

anyway, back to the topic.

 

STOSH: "The other model which is (in my opinion) a reversal of this is where the patrol is viewed as nothing more than a sub-group of the troop. The troop (usually directed by the adult's goals and plans) are mandating down to the patrols what they can and cannot do, how they are to be formed, who they are to associate with, and if only one or two boys from a couple of patrols show up for an outing, they are all dumped into one "no-name" patrol so the troop will be able to compete at the camporee contests.

 

The real difference is in the flow of authority. In a troop-method program, there never will be any personal ownership in patrols. They will come and go as often as the wind changes. Nothing's going to last very long. Leadership will be whatever with no commitment to anything other than POR requirement fulfillment. Anything they plan on doing together can in a heartbeat be cast aside and changed by the SM and/or PLC at their whim.

 

The lack of ownership and commitment on the part of temporary patrol members will continually undermine the operation of a true patrol method operation."

 

 

I think this statement is way to generalistic and subjective. This is not always the case and i dont think you should post as though it is.

 

Our troop functions in a way that is probably very different then other troops. The patrols are not for life, or by age and the PLs are elected democratically and the patrols are formed democratically as well.

 

I know already, you dont have to say it. Not by the book.

 

But to say that this leads to adults dictating or undermining patrol unity or lack of commitment is simply untrue and not the case at all. We dont tell them how to do things, we dont tell them who is a better leader. We dont change things on a whim. We dont fold the patrols into one if only a few make a trip, the spl doesnt do the job of the patrol leader. Our patrols compete year round, work as a group and have strong unity. They have patrol trips where the PL dictates the program and carries it out with no conflict from senior scouts or adults.

 

I think you are confusing "Troop method" with over controlling adults. two different issues all together.

 

[BrentAllen]

This is very simple. When JJ asked what we would do, you said only the patrols involved should be a part of the process. You said the SM, SPL and other leaders should not be part of the process in making the decision.

 

I pointed out that goes against the SM Handbook, which is used to train all youth leaders. Again, I will quote:

"With the Scoutmaster's direction, the boys are formed into patrols, plan the troop's program and make it a reality."

 

I don't see how there can be any confusion about this. According to the SM Handbook, who is to provide direction in forming patrols? The Scoutmaster. To say he should have no part in the decision making process goes 180 degrees against the SM Handbook.

[Stosh]

"At the direction of the SM...." No matter how one cuts it, defines it, justifies it, having adults leading means the troop is not boy-led.

 

Maybe the boys ought to read the SM handbook to find out how little authority they really have in the functioning of their patrol method troop. Like the ASM, they serve at the discretion of the SM, it would seem the boys do too.

 

Stosh

[BrentAllen]

Stosh - question - does your troop conduct Troop Leadership Training (TLT)? If yes, what does the training consist of? What sources of material are used for the training? Who conducts it? Where did it orginiate?

 

These are not questions to try to show you up. These are legitimate questions, leading to a revelation, I hope.

 

[JerseyJohn]

Since we are off the original topic, I will chime in on the new one....

 

Patrols are autonomous but they do, and must report to h igher authority. Not necessarily for direction, but for advice and guidance.

 

Analogies - SURE

 

Military

A patrol may operate independently, in a manner they deem fit to get the mission done, given the mission they accepted or were tasked to do. THe SPL is the General, the SM is the Chaimrman of the joint chiefs, and the ASM's are the Chief of Staff

 

Business unit

A patrol operates to get the job done in manner they seem fit but are held accountable for their sucess or failure. The SPL may be the PResident or owner of the business, but he must fill in the Board (SM and ASM's)

 

One need not get into all the details to lead, only see that the mission is accomplished.

YIS,

John

[Stosh]

Stosh - question - does your troop conduct Troop Leadership Training (TLT)?

 

Yep!

 

If yes, what does the training consist of?

 

Everything the BSA program has to offer. The manual, SM handbook, SPL handbook, PL handbook, program books 1-3, etc. We do not skimp financially on our training resources.

 

What sources of material are used for the training?

 

All the material from the BSA program.

 

Who conducts it?

 

SPL, assisted by the members of his Honor Patrol.

 

Where did it orginiate?

 

After conferring with the SM on finances, I purchased the material and gave it to the SPL, said I thought it might be a good idea to have our people trained, and at his request sat down and went through it with him.

 

It is now his responsibility with full authority of the troop program to train his PL/APL's and anyone else with POR badges. Then there is a SECOND training of all the other boys so that they know what leadership is and that eventually they too will be called upon to fulfill different responsibilities in their patrol and troop. This way we can guarantee our individual patrol members know what leadership is, and have the opportunities, responsibilities and FULL AUTHORITY to do leadership as they mature in the patrol. When they get older and wish to demonstrate their leadership skills on a wider, more SUPPORTIVE role, can hold POR's on the troop level. Once the boys leave the patrol level, they take on positions of patrol support rather than patrol directive. Quartermaster makes sure patrols have equipment, Chaplain's Aide makes sure patrols have worship/prayer opportunities, Troop Guide supports the NBP as does the Instructor, etc.

 

Being a PL is the highest level of responsibility with full autonomus authority in the organization with the SPL the #1 supporter of PL's. It's called servant leadership which is more valuable that directing leadership, but always plays a supportive role. Hard to explain, a beauty to see in operation.

 

These are not questions to try to show you up. These are legitimate questions, leading to a revelation, I hope.

 

Excellent questions, but the same revelation I've always had, the boys are responsible and have been given full authority to fulfill that responsibility without worrying about adult intervention. Too often leadership is usurped by people who give someone responsibility to do something and then withhold the authority to accomplish it. That is a 100% guarantee receipe for failure for the boys.

 

Stosh

 

[BrentAllen]

Stosh,

Here is the revelation - if the BSA materials you are using for training says the SM should provide direction in the forming of patrols, how do you arrive at the conclusion that only the patrols involved should make that decision? Where does that method originate in the BSA training materials? As far as I can tell, it doesn't.

 

You feel your troop is operating as a boy-led troop. They are, but under your and your troop's definition of boy-led, not the BSA's.

[Stosh]

Hmmm.... the boys in the patrols hold elections for their officers. They decide, plan, organize and run their own programs and activities. They vote on and decide on their goals, aims, activities as a patrol. If they wish, they can call upon SPL, or other scout or adult leadership for clarifications, definitions, or wisdom opinions before rendering a decision of their own; having their own meetings and outings even without adult supervision; and when requested by the other patrols, assist in troop level planning, organizing and cooperation as needed. This is an inappropriate boy-led patrol method?

 

But SM directed patrol membership, troop mandated activities, and everyone else in the scout program able to trump-veto their every decision they don't agree with is an appropriate boy-led patrol method?

 

Unless it's an issue of a breach in BSA policy, Scouting principles, or safety, I totally disagree with the modern troop-method distortion used today.

 

Everyone got bent when the SM stepped in and wanted all e-mails to go by him first, but very few seem to think its wrong for the SM to step in and mess with the membership of the patrols. To me it's all the same thing, a direct abuse of the democratic patrol method.

 

Stosh

 

As one last thought. If anyone is going to respond to this post with a comment that includes "SM directed" along with "boy-led patrol method" in the same sentence/breath,

we aren't going to agree so I'm ready to agree that we aren't going to agree.

(This message has been edited by jblake47)

[BrentAllen]

Stosh,

Do the patrols all go to Summer Camp the same week? If so, is this just a coincidence? Do they all want to go the same week? Do they camp in the same campsite as the other patrols in the troop, or do they get their own camp? Do your patrols wear troop numbers on their uniforms?

[Stosh]

Stosh,

Do the patrols all go to Summer Camp the same week?

 

Yep. That's what each patrol decided to do. They do enjoy doing things with the other patrols in the troop.

 

If so, is this just a coincidence?

 

No it was a consensus of all the patrols because we will be camping 1000+ miles away. The logistics of transportation and adult vacation time availability were rather restrictive, but the boys were understanding and worked around it.

 

Do they all want to go the same week?

 

Nope, we have a significant number of boys not going this year because of the choice of week. But the week will never work out as you knew before asking the question. There is some negotiations amongst the boys going on now to form a temporary summer camp patrol to accommodate the patrols that took a big non-attendance hit. They haven't decided as of yet what they wish to do. They have time before camp to work it out on their own time-table. The largest hit seemed to come from the older boys who have summer sports, etc. who wouldn't have attended anyway. Summer camp for our boys this year will be 12 days long. The SM was REALLY ticked off because his big family reunion falls right in the middle of summer camp and so he'll miss out on it.

 

Do they camp in the same campsite as the other patrols in the troop, or do they get their own camp?

 

The camp is not patrol method friendly, surprisingly not many BSA camps are. Again, I think you already knew the answer to that before you asked. They cannot register as a patrol, nor can they camp as patrols in different sites as per B-P's recommendation of a 200' separation. Hopefully that will change back to the B-P recommendations someday. Until then the boys will have to do the best they can considering the limitations imposed on them by others not implementing a patrol method opportunity for the boys at summer camp. When they get a patrol method friendly event, yes they do camp separately as patrols.

 

Do your patrols wear troop numbers on their uniforms?

 

Only on one sleeve. On the other sleeve they wear their patrol patch. It kinda balances itself out that way and reminds them they have different role responsibilities in BSA. However, some of my boys also carry dual neckerchiefs, one for patrol, one for troop, depending on what activity their are doing at the time. One patrol also carries a 6' patrol staff which singles them out as well. The SM has a real problem with those staffs all going along on events in they are kind of cumbersome to transport. The boys are aware of when they are functioning in a patrol directive role and when they are functioning in a troop support role. At flag ceremonies they stand together as patrols with their flags, and when they travel to events they try and catch rides as a patrol in the various vehicles as best they can.

 

Kinda like those who have had the opportunity to experience Wood Badge and those who haven't. I'm a Beaver, and Beavers always lead off and everyone else follows, need I say anything more? Being in the Beaver Patrol meant more to me than the troop identifier C-9W-93 does. The SM and CC of my troop are Bobwhites, of troop C-9W-93, but I don't hold it against them. :^)

 

Stosh

 

And you forgot the last question: No, the boys do not ignore each other when they are gathered together as a troop. There are plenty of inter-patrol opportunities, training, etc. that goes on between patrols that work it out with each other. It's all part the training that goes on with one's leadership awareness. Yes, you're a part of a family (patrol) but you have a responsibility of citizenship to your community (troop), nation (district) and world (National BSA) all of which are out there to make sure you have the best family for you as an individual (the patrol method of scouting).