New Scouts joining large troop.

[1333scouter]

To start things off I am currently the SPL for the troop. I have been SPL twice and I am running again in the next week. We have 45 new scouts crossing over in the next month. We have around 40 active scouts in our troop at this time. How can I enforce the Patrol Method. A big problem that I am having at alot of the campouts is that the older scouts (ages 13-16) are pulling away from the other patrols. I would like to see the older scouts bonding and assisting the younger scouts and patrols. I would love some new ideas on how to improve my troop.

 

Thank you for your help!!!

[Bob White]

Talk to your Scoutmaster about using the three tiered program format recommended by the BSA.

 

Make 5 New Scout Patrols from the incoming scouts and assign an older scout with good skills and positive tempermant to each New Scout Patrol. Ask the SM to assign an assistant scoutmaster to work with the Guides and develop a program calendar to teach the new scouts the basic skills from Tenderfooyt to First Class. They should be able to teach, practice and apply those skills during the first 12 to 14 months in the program.

 

Let the other scouts do a different program for the next year. Things that are more fitting with their age and abilities. You can wait for a year before you begin to integrate the new scouts in with the older ones. Let them get caught up to them in skills and abilities and a little closer in maturity before you try to push them together.

 

Congrats on such an amazing growth spurt.

BW

 

 

[Beavah]

Yah 1333! Welcome to the forums, eh?

 

Congrats on being elected SPL, and kudos to your troop for doing exciting things to attract so many new boys. What have you and your SM talked about so far? Some of us might suggest it's time to spin off a new troop!

 

BobWhite gave you one possibility that often works well for troops that get as large as yours, eh? It's patterned after the way the LDS church approaches Scouting, and might be comfortable if you've got some Mormon kids comin' in. If you think about it, what this approach does is accept the thing that you don't want to see happen - the older scouts pulling away - and institutionalizes it. The older guys become a separate patrol, and the PLC becomes guys of mixed age and skill over time.

 

Another way to think about it is to say, "hey, we're doubling our troop, so we'll double the number of patrols." If you've got 5 patrols currently, spin off 5 more, maybe based on older scout APLs becoming new PLs and some of their friends joinin' 'em in the new patrol. Then add the new guys to patrols based on their friends and who they seem to "click" with among the older guys.

 

What you end up with is a PLC made of experienced scouts, and each patrol having a mix of older and younger boys. The young guys learn from all the older boys by example and by some teachin' and coaching along the way. It makes patrol competitions more fair and fun, and really helps with the kind of bonding you're talking about. The older guys really get to know the younger guys and vice versa.

 

Now, the danger in your first year of doing that is that yeh really have to get all your PL's on board in terms of "service leadership", and the rest of the current scouts as well. Leader training for your PLC members is a must. With so many new guys in each patrol, it's going to feel like "babysitting" to a PL if his other friends in his patrol don't help out - at least until the new guys skills improve a bit. Which is the goal, right? Patrol competitions really help, because they give everybody in the patrol a challenge - the PL gets a leadership challenge, the other older scouts get a support challenge, the young guys get a skills challenge, and they all have to work together. Think Hogwarts houses and points for the House Cup!

 

Your job as SPL becomes helping set up things like those patrol competitions, and helping each of the Patrol Leaders as they develop skills leading the younger guys in their patrol. Part of your role also becomes making sure your hard-working Patrol Leaders have some adventurous fun of their own in conjunction with PLC meetings and perhaps high adventure/leadership training. Make sure it's not all work!

 

No matter what, this is going to be a great challenge for your current troop members! I think it's really exciting and you'll have a great time with it. And in a year, when the next round of new guys comes in and this crowd joins "the experienced hands" in each patrol, you'll be amazed at how great your troop is.

 

Beavah

 

 

 

[Stosh]

And here's the 2-cents worth from the guy who has no idea of how scouting works... :^)

 

First of all, it is my opinion that the boy led, patrol method, starts with the PL as the most important/highest ranking position in the troop. Start with that position as your #1 priority, If it is your concern that this troop be boy-led and develop the patrol method, what better way than to select your very best for these PL positions.

 

Find the best of the youth leadership and put them in the PL positions of the NSP. Yeah, yeah, I know, but asign them there or do a one person nominated ballot if one needs to vote. If the new scouts were so lucky so as to have had a DC from the troop, consider having this person put into the PL position, he already has a foot in the door with the new scouts. It may ease some of the situation anxiety the new scouts may have if they have a trusted scout leading them.

 

Then redesign your support corps to have one TG for every 2-3 NSP's. This person's #1 responsibility is to work "under" the PL's and assist them in keeping track of the advancement status and concerns of the boys in their patrols. This frees the PL's from having to keep track of such information and frees him up to work more hands-on mentoring with the boys in his patrol.

 

Then pick some of the top older boys who have a modicum of teaching skills to be instructors for these NSP's. This group of Instructors, working with the TG, should be able to design an appropriate schedule of training to work through the target FC requirements. Let's say one has 3 NSP's they are dealing with. That would mean they would need 3 PL's, at TG and maybe 2-3 Instructors. That's six people. A ASPL should be able to lead/handle 6 people in this activity and as a support person for the ASPL in charge of the NSP's, ask the SM for an ASM to assist, maybe the ASM for advancement might work, or an ASM that just likes working with the new scouts. That's 8 people working as a team for the NSP's.

 

That "design" of leadership allows the SPL to only have one person he is in contact with to cover the support of the entire NSP setup for the troop. It's the same for the SM with his one ASM. It frees them up to work with other areas of concern in the troop. If one has put quality leaders into these positions, it shouldn't be any drain on the troop resources as these new scouts are assimilated into the troop activities. It also gives 6-8 scouts solid functional POR's to work at.

 

As a side note, the APL's of the NSP's should rotate every now and then to give each boy in the new patrols an opportunity to try out their leadership talents with the rest of his buddies. That way when he gets to FC, he'll be ready to start digging seriously into developing his own leadership skills.

 

So in fact this "setup" will take the equivalent of 1 patrol (6-8 people) and redistribute their skills into a team that should be able to handle 20-25 new scouts (3-4 patrols or 1/4th of the boys coming from a 100 member pack)

 

Ok, so you have 45 new scouts... take the forumula above and double it to 6-8 patrol leaders, 2 TG's, 4-6 Instructors, and 2 ASPL's and 2 ASM's.

 

What? That's half your boys? All serving in FUNCTIONAL POR's? You'll probably need a good QM to keep the gear organized and a functional scribe to keep all the paperwork in order, and a good Chaplain, etc. etc. etc. That means that just about everyone in your troop is going to have to actually DO SOME REAL LEADERSHIP in the next year if they are going to be able to take on all those new Webelos boys!

 

I think if I did the math correctly, that's 3 adults and a ton of boys working to support 7-8 NSP's. If you can pull that off over the course of the next year, look at what you have at the other end of the tunnel. You're older half of the troop has successfully pulled off a major advancement for the troop's strength and size. The younger half has been carefully trained, shown and experienced hands-on leadership all around them and has advanced to FC rank. You now have 35-40 experienced boys who have worked a year in the boy-led patrol-method style, another 45 who are just ready to spread their wings, and next year's crop of new boys ready to cross over? How many new boys do you think those 80 experienced FC scouts can handle? With that corps of boys ready to go, the SM just might have to take on another ASM to be ready to help out.

 

At the end of your second year, you have so many scouts with leadership skills, that the upper tier of boys will have to start looking at such things as Boundary Waters, Philmont, Jamorees, SeaBase and the such just to find something to do. Will they have the skills, training, and leadership to do these things? Without a doubt! You will have so much leadership in your troop that no Cub Scout Pack can garner up enough boys to even cause a ripple in your troop when they cross over.

 

Stosh

 

 

[FScouter]

You got some good advice about using New Scout Patols, Troop Guides, Instructors, and an assistant SPL. I don't agree however with that part about assigning patrol leaders. All Scouts deserve to be represented on the PLC and that's best done when the new Scouts select one of their own to represent them. The Troop Guide is there as an older experienced Scout to guide and help the inexperience PL.

 

You'll find a lot of good ideas in your Senior Patrol Leader Handbook too.

[Beavah]

Yah, jblake, I'm curious.

 

How does what you propose meet 1333's major concern about the older guys needing to bond with and assist the younger scouts?

 

When we separate the new scouts into their own patrol with just a few old scouts as PL/Instructor/TG, aren't we inhibiting that process rather than promoting it?

 

I think 1333 has a sound vision of a unit where servant leadership and outreach to the young scouts is something practiced by everyone, not just the select few. I can't envision that happening by separating them. Am I missing something?

 

B

 

[Bob White]

The nyounger guys are not only going to be younger than the older scouts the first year, The younger guys will ALWAYS be younger than the older guys. So why not give them a year to get some basic skills under their belt as awell as a little more experience to allow them to be able to interact better with the 'older' guys when they are integrated in next year?

[Stosh]

"I don't agree however with that part about assigning patrol leaders. All Scouts deserve to be represented on the PLC and that's best done when the new Scouts select one of their own to represent them. The Troop Guide is there as an older experienced Scout to guide and help the inexperience PL."

 

Yes, I agreed that was not the most ideal situation, but 1333scouter's problem was that half of his troop was going to be new scouts. That's a lot of boys with no leadership training being assigned into patrols and producing half a PLC with no idea what's going on.

 

If the PL was an older scout "assigned", that scout could be a mentor to all the boys of the new patrol rotating them through the APL position teaching leadership along the way. During their training ALL the boys of the NSP would have an opportunity to participate on the PLC to continue their learning of how things work on the troop support level. If the NSP elected a PL and APL from their own numbers, they would serve for 6 months and if reelected would serve for a whole year, giving experience to 2 and nothing to the other 6. At best, 4 of the boys would have any leadership experience. If an older boy took PL and each of the 7 new scout served as APL for 2 months, that covers the 14 months of the first "year" experience.

 

I would only recommend this with the NSP's simply because they lack any idea of how the troop works, they have had no training, and the only basis for election would be on personality and not ability.

 

I wouldn't think of not having NSP representation on the PLC, but it would be good to have a PL who's looking out for the welfare of his boys, spearhead their introduction into the troop processes one at a time for 2 months each.

 

If the TG is going to be the mentor/assistant to the NSP's officers, that would mean he divides his time and focus on 3-4 patrols, and is in fact responsible for 6-8 boys who are responsible for 20-30 boys. I have found that is too much for any one person to take on. Most adults with multiple staff handle that many boys at one time. Remember 1333scouter's problem means he is taking on a group the size larger than many troops and he's trying to do it with minimally experienced boys leading totally inexperienced boys.

 

"How does what you propose meet 1333scouter's major concern about the older guys needing to bond with and assist the younger scouts?

 

When we separate the new scouts into their own patrol with just a few old scouts as PL/Instructor/TG, aren't we inhibiting that process rather than promoting it?"

 

If one looks closely at the math I proposed about half the older boys would be needed to work directly with the NSP boys. There would also be a number of others that would work indirectly such as the QM, Scribe, etc.

 

B-P indicated that the patrols should be 8 boys. That means 7 new boys/patrol, one older PL. Those boys would be in contact obviously with the TG but he would be shared amongst 4 patrols, and then there would be another 3-4 older scouts that would rotate Instruction in the patrols. That means 12 boys right there that would interact directly with 28 boys, about 2.5-to-1 ratio between older boys and new boys. It also gives functionality to the interaction between new and older boys. If that number is doubled because of 1333scouter's situational need that puts 25 of 40 older boys in direct contact with the new boys on a regular basis. That leaves 15 boys for such things as 2 Venture patrols and/or other troop POR's such as Chaplain, Historian, Scribe etc.

 

I would envision at least 2/3's of the older boys working and getting to know the new boys especially during that first year.

 

I have found that boys work well with functional boys working with training of younger boys without distinction of age.

 

Right now I have 11 year old Webelos coming into my troop that has 2 Life scouts (aged 14 & 16), 2 FC (both 15) and 3 Scouts (aged 14, 15 & 15). Ok who's the older boys and who's the new boys?

 

If the older boys are "forced" to interact with the younger boys through leadership and training, they will bond a lot faster than a total NSP of all newbies and the older boys interacting with them only as Instructors and Guides. That's kinda like teacher/students. Yes, some will bond, but not as good as being buddied up with them for training.

 

1333scouter is facing what I am presently facing but at a 2 to 1 ratio and a lot larger number of boys. I have 6 boys and 12+ new scouts, a 3 to 1 ratio. What scares me is next year I will once again face a major growth spurt with my 20+ boys taking on 50-60 Webelos. I've got just 12 months to train my boys up to a PL level with FC rank so I have a corp of boys functional enough to pull off next year. I don't see a problem except if I don't get my boys functional.

 

I'm not suggesting an ideal situation here or the solution that will fit in every circumstance, but 1333scouter is facing rather unique situation that calls for some thinking outside the box to make it work. The BSA program is designed for a specific program that handles a normal situation. How one adapts that program to meet extraordinary situations he describes, will challenge the leadership skills of more than just 1333scouter, but every boy in his troop.

 

If 1333scouter was taking on 25 new boys in a troop of 50, my advice would be different.

 

Stosh