Patrol Issues

[Bob White]

What I can't figure out is if you have 8 patrols with 8 patrols leaders then what the heck do you need 8 assistant senior patrol leaders for???

 

 

[Stosh]

"Who said that we talked to anyone other than the Scoutmaster?"

 

It wasn't indicated in the example, thus it was assumed they didn't.

 

"Who said any scout ducked their responsibility? We were removed from our offices! We said to the SM "that's not your job"...guess what...he disagreed. He was no more willing to learn what the program actually was than you are."

 

With 45 boys why didn't they start their own troop? They had the boys, they had the skills, they had everything, but they did nothing. To me that is indicative of ducking the responsibility.

 

" Had the boys stayed with the original approach of boy-led, patrol-method, they wouldn't have needed any training."

 

"Who do you think taught the skills to the youth? Who do you think teaches the older scouts how to teach the younger ones? "

 

Older boys, it's their program after all.

 

"If you don't do anything that is of value to the troop you serve then why do they need you? "

 

If it's a boy-led program, maybe they don't.

 

"How many other registered adults in the unit you serve jblake. In fact why does that unit have any adults at all? Now that your scouts are trained, according to you, they should be self-sufficient from now until kingdom come. Shouldn't they? "

 

Yep, you got it, wouldn't it be great if that is how it worked? I have an ASM in charge of advancement, he collects info from the PL's and puts it in the computer. I have an ASM in charge of fundraising projects (council required). I have a CC and MC-Treasurer, I have other CM's that chaperone to keep the numbers necessary as required by council. 2 adults + 1 adult for every X# of boys thingy. Gotta keep the powers to be at bay. Other than that I think I just barely cover the requisite number of adults to keep the council happy.

 

"The boys didn't give up, when it was a scouting program we wanted to belong, when it was no longer a scouting program it held no interest for us. "

 

At least not enough interest to make a go of it. I find that those things that are important to me I keep an interest in. If an adult changed the program, the boys could change it back.

 

"A a scoutmaster the scouts we served experienced a scouting program. One that was you planned, and youth led. And they got that experience because they had trained adults who understood and followed the program and taught the scouts how to do it. "

 

And as soon as they were gone, the boys fell apart. It would appear the adults had more leadership involvement than what was indicated. Surely had all high school graduates forgot everything they learned once they graduated, we would be in a world of hurt. Learning this stuff and living it are two different animals.

 

"Had my last scoutmaster come in and done nothing it would have been better for awhile, but the reason that he did what he did was that he did not know the BSA program. And the reason it worked before him wasn't that the previous SM did nothing, but becasue he only did his job, and taught us how to do ours. "

 

And how well one learned is directly proportional to the success of the troop.

 

"If the scouts you serve are not learning anything from you then what the heck are you doing there? "

 

As little as possible, because it's a boy-led program. :^)

 

What I can say is that about 2/3rds the boys that crossed-over in Feb of this year are 2C and one or two requirements short of FC. Most of them have held APL and functioned as PL on occasion. They have attended a camporee, summer camp (patrol method, in-site cooking, developed own menu and shopped for food).

 

I have done the requisite SMC's and these boys know their stuff. I spend a lot of time holding back adults that want to interfere, and make lots of suggestions the boys may want to consider to make life easier. If these suggestions are "training" then maybe one could conclude that.

 

"If the scouts you serve are not learning anything from you then what the heck are you doing there? "

 

If one really wishes to know the answer to this, one'll have to ask the boys, after all it's their program. So far the program has quadrupled in size 6 -> 23, boys are advancing, they're having fun, they are going places and doing things that they hadn't been doing for the past 3-4 years and they are excited about tripling their numbers this coming Feb 17 -> 47 when the new Webelos boys become available.

 

Now if you'll excuse me, my coffee cup is empty.....

 

Stosh

 

 

[Stosh]

"So how big can a patrol-method troop be? 1 SPL has 8 ASPL's, 7 ASPL's have 8 PL's each PL has 7 members of his patrol. Ok, that comes to 457 boys and one hasn't even started counting the Troop officer Corps under the 8th ASPL. With 457 boys, that means one has multiple TG's, Scribes, QM's, etc. to handle that many boys. 500+ boys ????? Impossible! But even then NO ONE BOY LEADER IS RESPONSIBLE FOR MORE THAN 8 BOYS!!!"

 

As I was going to St. Ives, I met a man with seven wives, each wife...

 

It's a math problem, it would seem that I'm not the only one that hates math.

 

1 SPL - can have 8 people he supports

 

(1 SPL, 1 total)

 

8 ASPL - these are the 8 people, but each one of these can 8 people can support another 8 each

 

(1 SPL + 8 ASPL's, 9 total)

 

8 PL's, for each ASPL (I left one ASPL off to cover the number that would be needed for the Troop Officer Corps supported by this 8th ASPL.

 

(1 SPL + 8 ASPL's + 56 PL's (8 ASPL's but only giving PL's to 7, 65 total)

 

Each PL would have 7 other members in his patrol.

 

(1 SPL + 8 ASPL's + 56 PL's + 392 patrol members, 457 total scouts)

 

Then one can add on the Troop Officer Corps - 1 TG with other TG's to help, multiple QM's same thing etc. Just make sure no one is supporting more than 8 others.

 

The exercise was to show how big a troop could potentially be and still have each leader taking care of a maximum of 8 other people.

 

Now, write your name on the test and pass it to the front of the class...

 

Stosh

[Bob White]

The BSA program does not disagree that 1 SPL can lead 8, its just that the 8 are supposed to be the Patrol Leaders, not 8 ASPLS.

 

If the SPL is leading the 8 ASPLS then who is leading the PLC. It couldn't be the SPL by your method because then he would be leading 16 and not 8. So who leads the PLC?(This message has been edited by Bob White)

[Stosh]

The example was only an illustration to show that a huge Boy Scout troop could be designed to have it so that no leader would be responsible for more than 8 boys, well within the leadership skill set of boys this age. When we finally get to the point where we actually do have a troop of this size, we can then worry about how the SPL will chair a PLC of 65 members. Until then, the probability of such a hypothetical situation ever coming to fruition is slim to none. I'm not going to lay awake at night worrying about it.

 

However, if it be a bit more practical, it could be conceivable that a huge boy scout troop could exist of say 125 members, a number comprable to a large Cub Pack. This size would be quite difficult for any one adult or group of adults to keep control of. But 125/8 = 15+ so take one group of 8 (plus the leftover 5) and put them into the Troop Officer Corps) That means

 

1) SPL,

2) ASPL in support of 7 PL's,

3) ASPL in support of 7 PL's,

4) ASPL in support of half Troop Officer Corps

5) ASPL in support of other half of Troop Officer Corps.

 

In order to facilitate practical functionality I would suggest 2 PLC's each one "chaired" by an ASPL. With the exception of it just being linguistic changes it would be no different than a JASM (SPL) taking care of 2 SPL's (ASPL). Seriously how many times can a troop of 125 boys camp anywhere anyway?

 

What normally happens well before this comes to reality is the council will step in, take over, split the troop getting it's numbers back down to 60 and doubling the efforts of adults and the Troop Officer Corps so it's a moot argument even at 125 scouts. Whereas it would never be thought of for Cub Scout's is an easy conclusion to draw for Boy Scouts. Reason? With adults running Cubs (DL's), no problem, with adults running Scouts, it would look really bad to have an adult PL, so the numbers have to be kept small to keep adult control intact.

 

It's a reality, but definitely not a necessity.

 

Stosh

[BrentAllen]

The council steps in to break up a troop? I've never heard of that. The largest troop and pack in our district are chartered by the same church. The pack is around 170 boys and the troop is around 100.

 

Stosh, did you see my post to you at the bottom of page 3?

[Stosh]

Obviously there are exceptions to every comment made because no one ever does it the same way. Large troops and packs do exist, but it seem to be more of an exception than the norm. I would think that a good boy-led, patrol-method troop is capable of doing such.

 

As far as the posting on page 3,

 

"If you don't need an SPL with 3 patrols, then why do you need one with 6 or more patrols?"

 

Same reason businesses don't hire a full-time employee to do a part-time job. Once the job becomes full-time, we'll have an SPL.

 

"If the patrols are as truly autonomous as you suggest, they wouldn't ever need anyone else to supervise them."

 

Yes, that is correct, in our troop the PL's aren't supervised. They are supported.

 

"In fact, if they are as autonomous as you say, they don't even need a troop! Why don't they just each become their own troop?"

 

Wouldn't it be rather stupid to have a SM, CC Committee, and CO for every 8 boys in scouting? It is a little more feasible to consolidate some of these issues.

 

"IMO, due to your structure, you will be missing out on a great part of Scouting - the special relationship between the SM and the SPL."

 

I have a special relationship with all my boys, especially my PL's because they are all so different with their leadership styles.

 

"In the traditional BSA model, the SPL works closely with the SM to deliver the program to the troop through the PLs."

 

My PL's know the program, why would they need someone to deliver it? And we are not troop-method so we have no troop program, we are patrol-method so we have patrol programs.

 

"This includes understanding the vision of the SM and passing it along to the PLs."

 

This comment indicates the root of a truly adult-led approach. And if I were passing on my vision to the PL's I'd surely wouldn't need an SPL to do it unless I was trying to give the process a sense of boy-led propriety. I don't need an SPL to do my bidding.

 

"When an SPL is correctly trained (just as a PL is correctly trained), he will not micromanage the patrols, nor do the other things you mention. Tell me why your PLs can be trained to perform their jobs correctly, but an SPL can't?"

 

I didn't say he couldn't. I just said it would be rather useless to train him to do a job that doesn't need to be done. When the position needs to be filled, we will have plenty of excellent PL's to choose from.

 

And of course the boys have the final say-so in this issue and at the present time they don't feel they need one and I haven't seen anything to indicate that their decision was not correct for their particular situation.

 

Stosh

 

 

 

[Eagledad]

>>The council steps in to break up a troop? I've never heard of that.

[Stosh]

While council interference is rare, it does happen. It was an option a year ago in my council. 1 adult run troop 25 members, 1 boy led troop 6 members, and the council considered, 1) me taking over boy led troop (was a ASM of the adult run troop) or 2) start a new troop. The problems of the boy led troop motivated council personnel to consider starting all over from new or put new personnel into the troop. I moved over and the members who would have started a new troop came to the boy led program.

 

In BW's case where 45 boys walked away from an established, they could have started a second troop but chose not to. Had council support been requested, I'm sure they would have assisted the process with the boys.

 

A lot of large troops that are adult led tend to hang together on the personality of the SM and other leaders. When those dynamics change, either they fragment or collapse under their own weight. The council always has the option to step in to minimize the damage.

 

There is a lot of council involvement in the situation than there appears to be on the surface.

 

Stosh

[Eagledad]

>>A lot of large troops that are adult led tend to hang together on the personality of the SM and other leaders. When those dynamics change, either they fragment or collapse under their own weight. The council always has the option to step in to minimize the damage.

[BrentAllen]

["In fact, if they are as autonomous as you say, they don't even need a troop! Why don't they just each become their own troop?"

 

Wouldn't it be rather stupid to have a SM, CC Committee, and CO for every 8 boys in scouting? It is a little more feasible to consolidate some of these issues.]

 

I don't know - would it? The same 5 adults could serve all the different troops. Then they wouldn't have to all meet at the same time for troop meetings, right? This solution would take care of all the problems you mentioned you had at summer camp. If they are all doing their own thing, I'm guessing each patrol is already securing their own Tour Permits and arranging their own transportaion to campouts. In the model you describe, why does each patrol need to be a part of the troop?

 

["This includes understanding the vision of the SM and passing it along to the PLs."

 

This comment indicates the root of a truly adult-led approach. And if I were passing on my vision to the PL's I'd surely wouldn't need an SPL to do it unless I was trying to give the process a sense of boy-led propriety. I don't need an SPL to do my bidding.]

 

This comment indicates to me a lack of understanding of a boy-run, patrol method troop. Providing a vision does not affect the actual running of the troop - the boys still run the program. But if they get off track, the SM/SPL are there to get them back on. If you have 11 year-old PLs who can form and explain a vision of where they want their patrols to be in a few years, and detail how they are going to get there, more power to you. My experience has been Scouts that age have a hard enough time planning their menu for the next camping trip and putting together a duty roster.

[Bob White]

"In BW's case where 45 boys walked away from an established, they could have started a second troop but chose not to. Had council support been requested, I'm sure they would have assisted the process with the boys."

 

You miss the poin, this is not about the ability to start another unit. This is about your comments jblake that the skills of the scoutmaster has no effect on the program. They obviously can have a huge effect.

 

Your comments are without evidence and unsupportable.

[Stosh]

["In fact, if they are as autonomous as you say, they don't even need a troop! Why don't they just each become their own troop?"

 

Wouldn't it be rather stupid to have a SM, CC Committee, and CO for every 8 boys in scouting? It is a little more feasible to consolidate some of these issues.]

 

I don't know - would it? The same 5 adults could serve all the different troops. Then they wouldn't have to all meet at the same time for troop meetings, right? This solution would take care of all the problems you mentioned you had at summer camp. If they are all doing their own thing, I'm guessing each patrol is already securing their own Tour Permits and arranging their own transportaion to campouts. In the model you describe, why does each patrol need to be a part of the troop?

 

 

Nope, I'm going to stick with my first assessment that such duplication of effort on such a small scale would be stupid.

 

 

["This includes understanding the vision of the SM and passing it along to the PLs."

 

This comment indicates the root of a truly adult-led approach. And if I were passing on my vision to the PL's I'd surely wouldn't need an SPL to do it unless I was trying to give the process a sense of boy-led propriety. I don't need an SPL to do my bidding.]

 

This comment indicates to me a lack of understanding of a boy-run, patrol method troop. Providing a vision does not affect the actual running of the troop - the boys still run the program.

 

 

If the boys know the BSA program, they are well within their scope of leadership to set their own vision of the program. They don't need an adult telling them what their vision is going to be, they are capable of doing it on their own. Any time some adult makes decisions, sets goals, gives direction, provide vision, etc. it is adult-led. Sorry but if adults are running the show one can't honestly call it boy-led. Adults lead because the boys can't be trusted to do it themselves. A Scout is Trustworthy. I trust my boys to do the right thing.

 

 

But if they get off track, the SM/SPL are there to get them back on.

 

 

Yep, lead them back to the right path. That's adult-led. When my boys get "off track", I'll worry about it at that point. So far I've never seen much "off track" except when boy-led gets side tracked by adults running the show under the illusion that it in their best interest that the adults step in and get them back on the track that has been determined by adults. Sorry, I just can't buy into that line of logic as being boy-led.

 

 

If you have 11 year-old PLs who can form and explain a vision of where they want their patrols to be in a few years, and detail how they are going to get there, more power to you.

 

 

Thank you, my boys will appreciate the compliment.

 

 

My experience has been Scouts that age have a hard enough time planning their menu for the next camping trip and putting together a duty roster.

 

 

Sorry to hear it, my experience has been no such thing. My boys are taking this weekend to plan out how they are going to go about winning over two Webelos dens to come to our troop instead of the other troop in town, about making visits to their dens, to inviting them on outings, winter camp, and providing a DC if necessary. They are considering what troop officers they will need and discussed today a new recruit that has just moved to town. I think when one has boys that don't know what adult-led is, they have a tendency to step up to the plate and run it themselves. All this discussion was conducted while they were participating in a 10 hour service project that they will do again tomorrow. Of course this whole 20 hour service project was organized and put together by a Webelos scout that joined up last February. It was part of a little project his PL had him do as APL to get him ready for next year and maybe take a patrol of his own. The boys also thought that next week's planning session could be conducted around the campfire while on a canoe trip. Because it wasn't a patrol activity, the PL's got together with the TG and organized the outing/planning/canoe outing.

 

I am consistantly amazed by what kids can come up with if given an adult-free opportunity.

 

But for contrast sake, I do have to say that the boys did ask me to provide the names of three Webelos boys who would make good PL's next year because they are anticipating 3 new patrols. I gave them 3 picks. They took my list and will put it under advisement with the picks they came up with. It'll be interesting to find out who they select. And no, I don't think the new boys will elect their first PL. It has been already determined by the PL's that in the best interest of all concerned, it will be an appointed leader who can and will do the job correctly.

 

Stosh

[FScouter]

Uhh, without quotes, italics, or "he says", "my response", it's hard to tell who is saying what here. Too easy to blow through to the bottom and move on to the next topic.

[Stosh]

Yeah, there are always some who blow through the comments without really understanding them. Happens all the time.

 

Stosh