Pros and Cons of Patrol Type

[BrotherhoodWWW]

For this discussion let first agree on two terms; "traditional" patrol = mixed ages of youth in each patrol, "modern" patrol = patrol division by age groups i.e. NSP plus older scout patrols and maybe varsity/ venturing patrol(s).

 

Which type does your unit use and why?

 

Have you done the other way?

 

Any regrets or problems with they way it works for your unit?

 

The reason I''m asking is I''ve always been involved in Troops using the "traditional" patrol, if it truely is traditional or not is not the point. I have seen this work in the past and this is what my unit is currently using but I''m starting to have doubts as if it is the best course to take. The younger scouts seem likely to get short changed when it comes to their needs to satisfy advancement requirements. The older Scouts in our troop do not seem to be as good at mentoring the younger Scouts as I would have hoped. I''ve read in other topics where some (well at least Lisabob''s) units have moved away from the "modern" format.

 

Anyone actually using a varsity patrol?

[GernBlansten]

We just switched to a varsity patrol. It was due to frustration in integrating the ages and the young scouts getting short changed. Older scouts not stepping up to mentor their younger peers, losing interest in scouting and just not working. When the issue was brought to the PLC, they suggested the varsity patrol.

So far the enthusiasm has been boosted. We do require that all varsity patrol members have a POR and most are troop guides assigned to the other patrols.

[Beavah]

What da heck is a varsity patrol? Venture patrol you mean?

 

I've seen both, been a SM in both. There's challenges to both. Of the two, I firmly believe that "traditional" is the proper application of the Patrol Method, and leagues above a "modern" patrol for all the things I care about in Scouting... character, leadership, adventure, etc.

 

Eagledad probably writes most eloquently about this, and I'm sure there's a whole raft of old threads on the topic, eh? So if yeh want, we can come back around to those general things, Brotherhood. But let's talk yer specifics instead.

 

Yeh say that the older scouts aren't as good at mentoring the younger scouts as you would like. That's a problem that can be addressed. Let me ask some questions:

 

1) Is there any reason why they should mentor the younger ones? In other words, how good is your troop's use of the patrol method? Are there competitions, where if the younger ones don't know something, the whole patrol "loses" and the older boys "feel" it? Do patrols really camp and cook on their own, so that if the young ones don't learn how to do things, the older guys "feel" it? Do patrols get points for each boy who advances, so there's an incentive to help each other? Do the adults give recognition to older boys who are good mentors?

 

2) Mentoring isn't an automatic thing; it's learned. How is your troop teaching its older boy patrol leaders? What is your TLT program like, and is it ongoing? Are your troop adults good examples of caring and mentoring, or do they just hang out with their same-age adult buddies? Does mentoring and leadership really play into signoffs for POR's and Scout Spirit, or are those just quicky check-box signoffs?

 

3) How good are your older boys' skills, really?. All boys are reluctant to teach/mentor if they feel they're not sure of something or don't have a lot of confidence in what they're doing. People say "teaching is the best way to learn" but that's adult malarkey. Teachin' and leadin' is scary for kids. It's really stickin' your neck out. Not something to do unless you're really confident. So if your guys aren't there, they're going to stay in their comfort zones and avoid teachin' and leadin'.

 

Overall, it seems like if yeh feel the young guys aren't getting enough attention, reducing the number of people who work with them (by putting them off in their own New Scout Playpen and assigning one or two sitters) isn't the way to go. Yah, sure, you might get rapid advancement on paper as the sitters whip through Advancement Classes, but yeh won't get the same kind of real growth that comes from being part of a group with older boys to watch and emulate.

 

It's also really a bugger if yeh do things other than car camping, where you need those stronger, more capable older guys to keep the young ones happy and safe. Puttin' all your weakest guys together... yikes. Take a look at the accident rate in LDS troops.

 

Venture Patrols (aka Senior Patrol aka Leadership Corps and apparently aka Varsity Patrol) in a traditional patrol structure are a pull-out group that does high-school-level more advanced activities. In some ways this is a reward for their work in leadership roles with the younger guys. But in some ways this is also training for them - building up their advanced skills so that they can demonstrate them in leading others. It's a good and perhaps important feature for a traditional program. Yah, but in most ways it's a cure for a different problem, eh?

 

Beavah(This message has been edited by Beavah)

[LongHaul]

For those who may have forgotten Varsity Scout Teams http://usscouts.org/advance/docs/vvvtable.asp

LongHaul

[Beavah]

Yah, LH, I know about Varsity Teams. They are a separately chartered unit, like a Venturing Crew, but for boys age 14-17 with a sports emphasis. Don''t have a SM; use a Team Coach. Wear orange tabs.

 

Now there''s also Venture Patrols, which are an optional program element of Boy Scout Troops.

 

But I have never heard of a Varsity Patrol.... which would be kinda like a Venture Patrol, only with a sports emphasis(?).

 

Beavah

[GernBlansten]

You say venture, I say potatoe, lets call the whole thing off.

Actually, we do refer to it as a venture patrol because all the members are part of our sister venture crew.

Is the term venture patrol still valid, or a remnant of a bygone era? Can we still get the venture patch? Would the UP put the clappers on them if they wore it?

[BrotherhoodWWW]

Beavah,

Thanks for the insight. Lots of great questions that I am in the process of finding the answers to. I''m the CC in my son''s troop and we have only been with this unit since June so my ability to change things are rather limited. I have found that I get desired results by working behind the scenes suggesting things to the SM and ASM''s. Past that I''m really powerless. Our unit is facing many challenges. It appears that it has been down the adult led trail and we are trying to correct that. We do not even have a functioning PLC. The older scouts with leadership postions have never even heard of it.

 

What I am hoping for is responses to the direct questions in my OP. I''m sure there are units out there that use the "modern" method with success. I''d really like real world input form those that have tried this format both pro and con. I am hoping to help my unit move in a positive direction and am open to ideas that have worked for others.

 

Sorry for my non-understanding of Varsity Scouts. I was not trying to focus on this only. Years ago there was a Leadership Corps. Now it seems there is not. Some units are forming Venture Patrols. Whatever the name is matters little, these folks are using what I''m calling the "modern" patrol.

[Beavah]

Which type does your unit use and why?

 

I prefer traditional, because:

* It''s natural for older, more experienced boys to be leaders (PL''s, etc.). They''re ready for it, they''re mature enough for it, it''s the right level of challenge. It isn''t natural for a new boy or even a 2nd year boy to be a leader. They''re still learning, they''re still at the maturity level where they want to be one of the gang and not "stand out".

* It makes the PLC be a real panel of "equals" each of whom can contribute meaningfully. First and 2nd year PL''s really don''t have that same level of experience, so most of the organizational work falls on the SPL, which pushes things toward "troop method" rather than patrol method.

* It "divides and conquers" the new guys - each young scout has several older brothers of different ages to look to as an example and learn from informally. TG''s in a "modern" unit are more like adults "teaching class" rather than teammates to follow.

* Putting all of the new guys together in a NSP requires a particularly special kind of adult to be ASM-NSP. If yeh don''t have that kind of person, it''s a recipe for chaos and lost boys.

* It''s the only way to have meaningful patrol competitions.

* It''s safer, in that having a ratio of experienced:inexperienced scouts of 3:1 instead of 1:12 is a lot better.

* It encourages proper use of advancement as part of regular activities, rather than Advancement Classes and rush to First Class.

 

Have you done the other way?

 

Yah, sure have. Tried it a bunch of ways when it first came out. Never could get it to work well, in terms of the outcomes we wanted for kids. Younger patrols needed a lot of adult/TG support, which only taught them to be adult led.

No patrol spirit because competitions are meaningless between a team of 14 year olds and a team of 11 year olds, and because in this system patrols aren''t "permanent". They''re regularly "consolidated" at the upper levels.

 

Any regrets or problems with they way it works for your unit?

I think if yeh get a really big influx of new boys that can "swamp" the patrols for a bit, so yeh gotta watch that.

It''s definitely more work for the youth leaders than hangin'' out in their own patrol, but that''s what we want, eh?

Still, yeh gotta watch that it doesn''t become a baby-sitting chore for them.

I think havin'' a Venture Patrol/PLC/Leadership Corps/etc. that does "advanced" stuff as a reward for the service leadership is a good thing to put in place.

 

Beavah

 

[anarchist]

I''ll play,

 

We have been working on a "operating experiment" for the last three years...course the experiment seems to change slightly...each year...

 

For the first seven years I worked with the troop we were a straight "NSP to Eagle/or out" unit...Worked pretty well but the biggest "wart" was the "over time drop-out" effect. While troop retention is pretty good with lots of boys staying until they turn eighteen, the area is becoming highly transient (sp?). Lots of military and Dot.commers. Result was eight and nine boy patrols slowly whittled down to 4/5/6 scout patrols and the PLC was concerned that two or three scouts on an event could not "act as a patrol" (hog wash! but I am not the SM).

 

Few years ago we had to recruit an new SM. A great guy, but one who had no Boy Scout experience outside of trying real hard to help his own two kids have a great time in cub scouting...he stepped up and in no time the PLC and he were blending platrols...first for events so there were enough bodies for roster duties...then "because it was better this way" As a committee member "t''wasn''t" my place to be a nay-sayer ...Boy led after all!

 

We tried letting the boys pick their own patrols....slipped back to "age groupings" with one or two young scouts wanting to be with the older boys...and the older boys really not wanting the younger boys... The younger boys got shut out of leadership positions, and many activities...caving, white water canoeing, rock climbing., long distance hiking...Of course, this led to disturbed parents...and lots of negative "vibs".

 

Then we tried multi age groupings with the PLC and SPL dividing up the troop (6th -8th grade; 9th-10th grade;11th-12th grade and NSPs)... and these were generally 10-12 scout patrols...and... we had similar issues though not as stark...interestingly two of the patrols ended up with the youngest boys in the patrol (and weakest scouts) as PLs...and the results were they did nothing for much of a year...This was even though each patrol had two ASMs assigned...PLC meetings were great...but all talk and no follow through...poor scout master was spending his entire time on the phone checking up on the SPL and PLs...can you say "not having any fun-burnout"?

 

It has been tough to watch. Poor Scoutmaster and CC really hate to see me show up at committee meetings and parents meeting because I remind them that they need to constantly be working their boys and they can''t let down...It''s their experiment and failure is not an option. This past summer after Sea Base the patrols returned to age/grade based with NSPs and the only blended patrol being the "high adventure patrol" some 15/16/17 who want to do "cool stuff". So we will see how it goes...we are also looking for a new SM...poor guy wants to decompress for his son''s last two years or so...

 

''Course, all this being said, part of this problem was brought about by sort of a perfect storm...New SM, two back to back really weak SPLs (gotta work with the ''material'' the boys elect in "boy led troops", don''t cha know!)and a large group of middle scouts who while basically good kids realy do/did not want to work or take responcibility ...they just wanna be indians...not chiefs...so the adults work is that much harder...coaching rather than ordering folks around is difficult work.

 

A big fan of NSPs

Anarchist

[Beavah]

Yah, here''s some old threads for yeh, Brotherhood:

 

http://www.scouter.com/forums/viewThread.asp?threadID=142147

 

http://www.scouter.com/forums/viewThread.asp?threadID=143584

 

http://www.scouter.com/forums/viewThread.asp?threadID=152302

 

http://www.scouter.com/forums/viewThread.asp?threadID=152463

 

Ways of Thinking

Sometimes it helps to think of the two different methods by thinking of examples.

 

Traditional Patrols are very much like Hogwarts Houses in Harry Potter. You join one when you come in, and you stay in it forever, and it exists after you leave. You compete against other patrols for points & Quiddich cups. You are led by older Prefects and Team Captains in your house. Your patrol/house is your home. You eat in it and sleep in it. Older boys in your patrol show you their secret maps and such.

 

Modern Patrols are very much like the Cub Scout grade-based program. You're a Wolf this year and a Bear next year. You stay with your same age group, and older instructors come into your den to teach and lead you. You advance on schedule with your group, by just doing your best. You don't compete with other dens. You might elect a Class President, but because you're all peers, that's mostly a popularity contest. The real leadership comes from others outside your group like the SPL or SM.(This message has been edited by Beavah)

[epalmer84]

A bit of history here...

 

In 1989 the Leadership Corps was dropped; Venture crew and Varsity team programs within the troop were introduced for older boys. Varsity Scouting was moved to its own membership group within the Boy Scouting division in 1996. Venture crews were renamed to Venture patrols in 1998 with the introduction of Venturing.

 

More info at:

http://www.geocities.com/Yosemite/Falls/8826/venture.html

 

The Varsity Scout program is not officially used within the troop; Boy Scouts in a troop cannot earn Varsity Scout awards such as the Varsity letter or the Denali Award.

 

Ed