Patrol Make up

[ScruffyJake]

Recently, I have returned to Scouting as my son has become active in the local troop.

 

The troop creates patrols from the new scouts that join, creating patrols with members of the same age. From the group of 6-8, leadership positions filled by a patrol election. Older scout guides are assigned to the patrol to assist in their planning, learning and growth, but are not members of the patrol.

 

In the past (my past), patrols were made up of youths of various ages and experience levels, which allowed older/more experience youths to lead.

 

I can see benefits for both methods, but would like hear other opinions out there. Also, is the same age method a recommendation from National.

[Beavah]

If yeh do a search, you'll find several long threads on this topic, eh? That might help yeh. Doesn't hurt to have the conversation again, though, with new people.

 

The background is that mixed-age patrols were the norm until 1990, when the BSA made a program change to "new scout patrol(s)" for first year boys, which focused on workin' the trail to First Class in a year. Sentiment at the time was that it would help with first year scout retention if things were a bit more like cubs/webelos - yeh come in with your "den" and work on a 1-year focused program which gets yeh a couple of fast awards, but under the direction of a youth Troop Guide (assisted by an ASM) rather than under the direction of an adult Den Leader (assisted by a Den Chief).

 

Some units switched to the new system, others didn't. Some tried it and switched back. Most of da troops started after 1990 use this system.

 

At the same time, with the introduction of da Venture Patrol (nee Crew) in the troop, the BSA encouraged same-age boys in older scout patrols, eh? So most troops doing the post-1990 thing have horizontal or "same age" patrols, though a few opted to use new scout patrols but kept vertical mixed-age regular patrols (new scouts move into an existing patrol after some period of time or after they make First Class).

 

With horizontal same-age patrols, patrol competition fell by the wayside both at the troop and camporee level (hard for 11 year olds to compete with older boy patrols in most things), as did da notion of a "permanent" patrol (usually yeh see troops needing to "consolidate" patrols as boys get older and some boys leave). The patrol became a less tight working community and more of an administrative entity.

 

I reckon we can safely say at this point that da notion that the 1990 change would improve first year retention didn't pan out. It stayed about the same, might have decreased a bit. First year retention I reckon depends more on things like making connections/friends by going to summer camp, etc.

 

Arguably, another effect of the change was to cause troops to lose more "middle" and older boys. Leastways yeh seem to see more almost-all-middle-school troops these days.

 

In my opinion, da FCFY (first class first year) component sorta "cubified" Boy Scouting advancement, and resulted in a lot of units watering down expectations for First Class Scouts as well. I think it also increased the hazing/bullying a bit, just because da notion of older boys being responsible for younger lads went away. I'm sure others would disagree, though.

 

Still, yeh can find some very successful large troops that run with horizontal patrols, eh? A bit too adult-run for my taste in most cases, but it's not a bad way to go. Lots of happy kids, some merit to keeping den-mate friends together, active parents involved in da first year program, that sort of thing.

 

BSA still encourages new scout patrols/horizontal patrols, but allows the mixed-age patrols. If yeh follow the changes in the books, I think yeh see that they're less gung ho about same-age patrols than they used to be, and more open to variation.

 

So nothing wrong with what your son's troop is doin', it can be a fine way to go. Just goin' to be different than what you remember.

 

Beavah

 

[Eagle92]

Scruff,

 

1) Welcome back and glad to have ya.

 

2) Beav said it best. all this started in '89 or so.

[Mike F]

ScruffyJake,

 

Great words from Beavah.

 

I have served two troops who used the two different methods in recent years.

I guess the same-age patrols might work somewhere, but my observation was the youth leadership was very weak in the same-age troop - probably because peer-leadership is the hardest of all. The same-age troop I served switched back to mixed-age. Transition was rough, but troop is growing and healthy today.

The troop I serve now has mixed-age patrols which the new guys join within a week or two. Patrols take total ownership of the new guys. Our retention rate is great - about 75% who join stay active through HS graduation.

 

In general, I think you'll find the troops with same-age patrols require more adult intervention.

 

Mike

[IM_Kathy]

my sons troop has been pretty much same age patrols (although a few mixed up but just 1 year)... this worked great from when the troop first started some 9 years ago, but what we are experiencing now is that as the boys have aged we have some patrols with fewer members attending campouts regularly and are having to merge patrols so that we don't have just 2 boys in a couple of patrols...

 

because of this the real leadership and bonding is just not there so the PLC is looking at changing it up to a mix of the "old school" and "new school" methods...

 

what has been passed on to me (my son was SPL and is now ASPL) is that in the winter with our new cross overs is when they will make the changes with mixing all current scouts into 4 patrols of mixed ages... the new scouts will spend 1 year in a new scout patrol with troop guides basically being their patrol leaders but rotating through the new boys so they each get their feet wet with leadership on campouts. Then the next winter those new scouts would split into the other patrols and we'd start again with a new scout patrol.

 

what I'm hearing is positive because the boys are really looking into what they like and don't like about both styles and trying to come up with something that works well for our troop. We have boys coming from 2 school districts (plus some home-schooled) and within those school disctricts we have 3 packs... so having that 1 year with the new boys all together does give them all a good chance to meld together and with the others in the troop.

[RANBOW]

Having just re-entered scouting after getting away about 1986. I recall the mixed patrols as well. This of course was prior to this change and during the time of skill awards. The mixed patrols always seemed to work well as the older boys were able to teach the new ones the basic skills and help them advance in the early stages.

 

This always seemed to create a chain of command structure that to me would actually seem to benefit the patrol method of scouting. It also allowed the new boys to go ahead and start to move forward on the idea of learning to follow in order to succeed in leading as well as becoming more independent and depending less on parental involvement while learning to work as a team.

 

I can see where this change probably did have a big impact on competition too. This to me would seem to defeat the whole purpose but, I still have a lot of catching up to do since the days of my youth and I have yet to experience or observe the lateral patrol method in action. Am I correct to assume that it was at this same time that the skill awards were also done away with?

 

[sbemis1]

My son's troop has been around awhile. For the last 20 yrs or so, the patrols are largly same age, but the PL for the younger ones is chosen from older boys (>=FC) who then become part of the patrol for their tenure. FCFY was never one of their mantras. Advancement is encouraged but not emphasized. Most boys joining in Feb are TF at summer camp and SC sometime in the next spring. Those who make eagle are generally banging against the 18 wall.

[Knot Head]

We use same age patrols and there are definitely pros and cons. Bevah covered many of these very well in his post. The troop where I serve was formed in 1995 when 5 webelos founded the troop and the troop has grown and has a very active outdoor program and high retention rate, which of course are good things. Since the beginning horizontal patrols has always been the way things were done. While I personally would prefer that we give vertical age patrols a try I doubt this will ever happen in our troop.

 

One benefit is the patrols are very tight since they are the same age and are good friends in our troop. The older guys (the Philmont Vets we call them) plan and go on two or three backpacking or canoe adventure trips in the spring, summer and fall of up to a week long after they return from Philmont. Usually our Philmont Crews are 14 year olds that go as a patrol on their trek. Their first years in the troop are spent preparing to take that trek together and when they come back they like to run their own patrol trips. So I guess they pick up some leadership and responsibility along the way despite the same age patrol issues. A few have returned to Philmont as a leader of a younger patrol or as part of the conservation program or eventually as rangers.

 

But I do wonder how things would be different in vertical age patrols. The new patrols do take more adult intervention to get them going on their first couple of campouts, although after about 3 or 4 campouts those guys are setting up and tearing down their campsite with little assistance and cooking and cleaning pretty independently. Now they may not be cooking very well but they do get it done. The key there is to reign in the new parents that have crossed over and make sure they do not set up tents or clean cooking gear or do any work for the patrol. Well cover this before crossover and then gently remind them when we need to. So maybe if you have horizontal age patrols you need to have your adult radar turned on so you can pull the adults back a little more often than a vertical age troop.

 

[Eagle92]

My troop growing up was an integrated one, save the Leadership Corps which comprised of older scouts who had served as PLs and were voted in by the LC members. We did the NSP one time. it didn't work as the PLC liked, and we went back to integrated patrols. New Scouts were split up among the two or three patrols, and every 6 months when elections were held, if folks wanted to switch patrols, they could. Rarely this happened. In fact if memory serves, the only time this happened is when a new patrol needed to be formed, or we had to downsize from 3 mixed patrols to 2 mixed patrols. LC size varied from as few as 4 to as many as 10 and was never disbanded.

 

The 2nd Class, First Class and Star Scouts worked with the younger scouts in their patrol, sometimes almost as a mentor like state. it worked very well and the troop was an active one.

[artjrk]

When my oldest joined the troop, it was same age patrols. It had the numbers to have 1 or 2 patrols at each age level. Well as time has gone by our numbers have been dropping and some years we only have 2 or 3 guys. When I became SM, one thing I felt was needed was a switch to the mixed age patrols. I felt we needed to have more interaction between the older and younger scouts. Well it hasn't been easy. There are those that say they only come to scouts to be with their friends and now some of their friends are in others patrols. When we break for Patrol Time they just wander off together and it is hard to get much accomplished.

 

This year we are going to introduce a compromise. 2 patrols of the High School age boys and 2 of the middle/elementary aged boys. Then as a boy moves on to HS he moves into one of those Patrols while the new scouts join into one of the two lower age patrols. The premise is that the older patrols will concentrate on HA and troop leadership and leading instruction while the younger ones concentrate on personal skill learning. We will see.

[Stosh]

As I have mentioned before, the boys pick who they want in their patrols. Because of our numbers we presently have Tfoot through Eagle in our single patrol. Most of them are FC. Once we get back to 12 members, they can then decide who goes in what patrol. Our only "rule" is 6-8 boys per patrol, they make all the decisions as to how it works out.

 

Currently our one patrol doesn't have a PL/APL, but two of the boys switch back and forth taking the lead on various projects/activities the patrol is involved in. Other patrol members take on activities and might act as PL for just that activity.

 

When a boy is not taking point on an activity he is free to do anything else, i.e. QM, etc. to fill up his "free time".

 

At the present time I have:

 

1 boy lining up Popcorn Sales for the fall drive (FC) (with funding going to new equipment)

1 boy lining up wreath sales for the pre-Christmas fundraiser (FC) (with funding going to Summer Camp)

1 boy planning our fall camporee (Star)

1 boy working on a recruitment drive for the Blue/Gold crossovers in the spring. (FC)

1 boy looking into service project opportunities because of the need for service project hours (TF)

1 boy planning out our winter camp location/program.(FC)

1 boy working with OA getting next year's eligible boys ready for an election (FC)

1 boy not involved in any leadership work presently (autistic) (FC)

1 boy just finished up putting together next year's activity calendar and putting it up on the website. (Eagle)

 

9 total

 

This is the "structure" that the boys have decided on with an emphasis on tasks rather than job positions. Two of the boys will be attending the "adult" Roundtable program this evening to get information on the Popcorn Sales and OA contacts.

 

With this blend of boys, it's difficult to decide who gets to wear PL for 6 months and get advancement credit while the others who are doing a ton of leadership work for no credit. The boys have decided that elections for PL will "just get in the way" and encourage boys to sit back and let whoever gets stuck with PL do the work. At least this way we avoid the "10% of the people do 90% of the work" issues.

 

When we had a NSP (boy's decision) the TG acted as PL for the group, but rotated all the new scouts into the PL position so they all got a feel for taking lead on different activities for their patrol. Instead of one boy taking camporee responsibilities, one boy might do menu, another equipment, another finances, etc. Getting a piece wasn't overwhelming for the younger boys this way.

 

Stosh