PLC Stuck In A Rut

[Kudu]

Twocubdad writes:

 

I think the guys promoting that idea don't use PLC's in the first place. So factor that in.

 

That is a lie. So factor that in.

 

 

[shortridge]

One idea-generating option: Pick up a copy of Backpacker magazine. Tear out the info card in the back, and send off for information from all the parks and resorts and guide trips they have, no matter how far-fetched it may seem. Then go online and request tourism information from the states immediately surrounding yours. Bring all that stuff you get to the next PLC meeting and pile it on the table as a way to get the ideas flowing.

 

Another technique you might try is make a list of all the places your troop has been in the last 3-4 years, chronologically. Make sure to include repeat locations multiple times. Use that to demonstrate just how stuck in a rut the troop has been. Kids' active memories generally don't go back all that far - you need to show them how boring it's gotten.

[Stosh]

I don't use a PLC because I don't need one. I figure I'm going to need at least 4 patrols before I would ever consider having one. Having or not having a PLC is totally irrelevant to the boy-led, patrol-method program.

 

Just for simplicity, assume there are two patrols. One is a NSP and the other a VP. So, we have a PLC and the NSP has 8 boys and the VP only has 7. National average is 14 boys in a troop so those numbers are not out of the ordinary. Okay, they have elections for SPL to run the PLC which turns out is NOT the PL of the VP, but none of the NSP can be elected so they basically don't count for anything anyway.

 

Okay already, there's a problem with whether or not the SPL is part of any patrol, etc. Okay he's with the VP. PLC meets and it's two against one and the NSP will lose out on any vote of the PLC, even though the VP is a minority of boys. So much for a lesson in civics.

 

Now the vote goes to the VP who decided that they are going to Philmont instead of summer camp. None of the NSP can go because they're too young.

 

So SM steps in an fixes everything. They're still going to summer camp and the older boys will go to Philmont.

 

Ever notice that if SM and PLC were to have stayed out of it, it would have resolved itself exactly the same way with far less hard feelings?

 

The only other dynamic that would further complicate this whole thing is to have two mixed patrols. So now in order for everyone to get a challenging summer activity, both patrols would have to be split into two patrols of which either is too small to function but would be merged for expediency sake so you still have the older boys going to Philmont and the new scouts going to summer camp but both patrols would be contrived, just like they were when they were originally mixed.

 

I really like boy-led, patrol-method because it just makes a lot more sense than what a lot of what's being promoted by adult-led programs. Discipline problems, interest issues, mixed patrol issues, advancement at different levels, all would somehow just go away if the adults just let the boys set up their troop the way they want to and then the adults could start spending more energy on teaching and developing real leadership instead of trying to resolve contrived problems of their own making.

 

Stosh

 

 

SR... not to pick on you, but notice the comments I put in... don't mean to yell, just needed a way to show what I inserted.

 

Pick up a copy of Backpacker magazine. Tear out the info card in the back, and (GIVE IT TO THE BOYS AND HAVE THEM)send off for information from all the parks and resorts and guide trips they have, no matter how far-fetched it may seem. Then (IF THEY WANT TO THEY CAN...) go online and request tourism information from the states immediately surrounding yours. (HAVE THEM) Bring all that stuff (THEY) you get to the next PLC meeting and pile it on the table as a way to get the ideas flowing.

 

Another technique (THEY) you might try is make a list of all the places your troop has been in the last 3-4 years, chronologically. Make sure to include repeat locations multiple times. Use that to demonstrate just how stuck in a rut the troop has been. Kids' active memories generally don't go back all that far - you need to show them how boring it's gotten. (LIKE THEY DON'T ALREADY KNOW THIS???)

 

BP said, something like, Don't do anything a boy can do for himself.

 

My apologies if this sounded a bit like I was picking on someone, it is not, all I wanted to do is point out how easy it is to have the adults do the work for the boys and take away their opportunities for real leadership in the patrols/troops. I don't know if people will become more adept at their wording but the conversation comes across loud and clear that with the adults doing all the planning, work, execution that they have an adult-led program.

 

Stosh(This message has been edited by jblake47)

[Twocubdad]

I suppose I deserve that. It is probably foolish and totally unnecessary to point out that Kudu has an agenda. Even if you are new and haven't read Kudu's posts for the past five years, that should be completely clear to anyone reading his highly perjorative list of true/false questions in this thread.

 

While I haven't made a career of tracking Stosh's and Kudu's troop organizations, from Stosh's posts over the past few weeks or months I believe he has about a patrol and a half and no PLC. I believe I am correct in recalling from Kudu's posting that in his troop whenever there is a need for someone to take a troop-level responsibility, one of the patrol leaders will step up and take it. But again, I don't claim to have full knowledge of how their troops operate, which is why I opened with "I think" and didn't mention either of them by name.

 

If either gentlemen would like to set the record straight, I will welcome the correction. If all Kudu wants to do is name-call, then I suppose I can join Beavah and add him to the squelch list.

 

Stosh, (and thank you for your reasoned response) I will absolutely agree with you that returning the troop to a Scout-led operation is the goal. (Although I believe you and I fundamentally disagree on how patrols operate within the troop, that's probably the topic for another thread.)

 

I guess we also agree that CubsRgr8's troop is in need of a radical surgery to fix the problems -- although our solutions are radically opposite.

 

Neither of us, however, know what the real situation is in this troop. Based on his post, however, I'm assuming CubsRgr8's troop is a more modern, PLC-oriented troop. As such, I tried to suggest ideas for training and reinvigorating the PLC. And given that we have ballpark a thousand "lurkers" who read but don't participate in the discussions, a diverse response is healthy. On the otherhand, if CubsRgr8's troop runs more like yours, then disbanding the PLC may be the answer. Fortunately for CubsRgr8, it's not up to either of us.

 

(Looks like Stosh posted just ahead of me. Thanks for the clarification, but I'm not going to re-write the whole post.)

 

(This message has been edited by Twocubdad)

[Kudu]

Twocubdad writes:

 

It is probably foolish and totally unnecessary to point out that Kudu has an agenda.

 

That is ad hominem "Wood Badge Logic."

 

The basic idea is to destroy Patrol-based Adventure (which requires that you stick with each Patrol's best leader), and replace it with a Troop-based PLC with rotating Patrol Leaders so "everybody gets to be a leader."

 

According to Wood Badge Logic anyone who reasons against that must have an "agenda" or a "vested interest."

 

Wood Badge Logic dates back to 1965 when Dr. John Larson destroyed the life-work of the first American Wood Badge Course Director, William Hillcourt. Hillcourt was the man who brought the Patrol Method to the BSA twenty (20) years after every other Scout association in the world began using it:

 

Larson later reported, " He fought us all the way... He had a vested interest in what had been and resisted every change. I just told him to settle down, everything was going to be all right."

 

"Everything is going to be all right" is Wood Badge jargon for: "We will lose two million Scouts, but killing Hillcourt's 'Patrol Leader Training Course' is the right thing to do."

 

http://inquiry.net/patrol/green_bar/index.htm

 

Twocubdad writes:

 

I suppose I can join Beavah and add him to the squelch list.

 

Don't let the tent flap hit you on the way out.

 

Twocubdad writes:

 

that should be completely clear to anyone reading his highly perjorative list of true/false questions in this thread

 

In other words you got a perfect score: 22 True

 

Nailed It at 300 feet,

 

Kudu

 

http://kudu.net/

[shortridge]

Stosh,

 

No offense taken. I'm a firm believer in the boy-led method, and love BP's quote, but sometimes - on rare occasions - boys need a little jolt, a kick in the pants, a gentle nudge, a shot of coffee, etc., from adults who can take the big-picture view by dint of their worldly experiences.

 

The trick is knowing how to toss out those ideas and then shut up and sit down.

[Twocubdad]

I've edited this to delete my response to Kudu's last post. I'll just back away instead.

 

CubsRgr8, I hope you are getting the info you need.(This message has been edited by Twocubdad)

[Stosh]

Shortridge,

 

I know you, like me, try for the boy-led, patrol-method, (I had hoped you'd understand from your earlier posts) but it's really, really hard at times to sit back and let the boys struggle. What's even worse is when you've let the boys stall out, crash and burn and then have to go back and rehash everything as a learning process. There are days when I'd just prefer doing it all myself and getting things knocked out correctly and quickly, but alas, it would not do the boys any good in the long run and it's not what I signed on for.

 

After 30 years, I'm still waiting for a troop of 3 patrols, 24 boys, all Eagles, running like clock-work, and two to three high adventure trips being planned for the coming year. Then maybe I will sit back in my camp chair and enjoy my cup of camp coffee. Until then we can only dream!

 

Stosh

 

 

[GKlose]

Stosh -- I get what you're saying, but at the same time, you pulled apart my response, quoted and responded to it (making some assumptions that just plain aren't true) and then interspersed it with quotes from other sources, leading one to believe the quotes were related. That's just plain misleading...

 

First of all, back to my original statement -- "I like JFL's idea" (of having the SM counsel the SPL, and then the SPL counsel the PLC). You're assuming I meant adult-led in this circumstance and it isn't what I was implying at all. The question is, how does the SM counsel the SPL, and what does he say? I am most certainly not assuming the SM would say "Mr. SPL, the PLC seems to be stuck in a rut, by camping in the same places month after month...so why don't you see what you can do to change it." That most certainly is adult-led and driven.

 

But what if the SM actually counsels, or mentors, the SPL, and asks the SPL what he thinks, and if he sees any problems with what is going on. Maybe the SM would point out that attendance on monthly outings has really dropped off, and asks the SPL if he thinks there are reasons for that. Then maybe he takes it from there.

 

Secondly, I threw a quick story about the place where my troop is coming from: adult-run troop method. I've told many stories about that, even though I don't assume everyone will remember those stories and link them together. I've had private conversations with a couple of guys who have offered a ton of great ideas about moving away from adult-run troop method.

 

I was offering that story for exactly the reasons you picked up on...despite reorganizing a PLC, it was still an adult-run troop (where adults debated the annual calendar, not the PLC -- adults were choosing the same things month after month, based on the previous year's success, saying "well, everyone seemed to like it, so why don't we do it again?"). The Webelos group did split off, for what they would consider the right reasons, and are still quite happy about it. It's one of the best Webelos III adult-led, patrol-leaderless troops where everyone advances one rank a year, that I've ever seen. And they sure do have a great outdoor program, going all sorts of places, with father-son camping.

 

Like I said in my post, there is a whole lot more to the story. I don't want to hijack the thread any more than I have.

 

Guy

[Stosh]

Guy,

 

I surely didn't want to single you or anyone else out, I was only using the references to show how easy it is to slip into adult-run situations. I'll use your example, not of any judgment but because it can illustrate the differences that I'm thinking we both agree on.

 

Adult-led: SM notices the PLC is stuck in a rut, makes a suggestion to SPL with full expectation he pass it on to PLC for resolution. (In a nutshell with over simplification overtones, of course. )

 

Boy-led: PLC sees it's in a rut, goes to SPL for assistance in getting everyone moving, SPL seeks insight into the problem and asks SM for advice.

 

The dynamics of movement is what I was hoping to point out. Adult-led has the flow of energy (leadership directive) originating with the adults and moves towards the kids. In the Boy-led dynamic the flow of energy goes from the boys to the adults (for advice/support, if necessary, but hopefully they can resolve the issue themselves). I generally don't get involved unless asked.

 

To often the dynamic flow of movement towards the boys by the adults can have a "better do it" flavor to it that forces the boys to follow that "friendly advice", or else.

 

Looking at the thread: "PLC Stuck In A Rut", who seems to be upset about this? The kids or the adults? Who want's to initiate change? The kids or the adults? How come it always seems to come back to the adults? If the kids like it, leave it alone! However, if the kids themselves are not satisfied then what may be helpful for the SM to do in this situation may mean nothing more than leave a seed of doubt in the minds of those on the entrenched PLC. Maybe he is a catalyst for the boys to originate some leadership movement. But being a catalyst is not the same thing as taking over! Let's say the SM says: "I wonder if the older boys are really all that happy about going to the same summer camp now for the 5th time in a row." Or: "I bought a canoe this past week and the Mrs. and I are thinking about taking on some of the rivers and lakes in the area next summer." Or: "I was on the internet last night and I found a summer camp out in the middle of Nowhere, USA that had some really different opportunities." It doesn't have to be anything earth-shattering, just a little nudge to let the boys know it's okay to stretch a bit.

 

I tossed out a flier from our Council that has two contingents going to Philmont in 2012. My boys picked it up, looked at it, made a phone call and although they didn't get the 2012 opportunity, they will be going in 2013. In the 50 years of this troop it has never gone to Philmont as a troop.

 

They spent last night looking for a new hiking opportunity in N. Wisconsin for next summer. I have no idea where they are going, but I'm thinking I'm going to find out sooner or later. They also want to do some spelunking. Well, I'm not a cave person and neither is my ASM. I hope they can find registered adults to take them.

 

I don't have boys stuck in a rut, I have boys coming up with too many new ideas that they aren't going to be able to do even a tenth of them. Yes, seriously!, I had a boy ask last night if the boys were to go sky-diving with backpacks and sleeping bags whether it could be counted as a scout activity. I had to inform the lad that was not something National allowed.

 

As for me? I'm doing all I can just to keep up.

 

Again, my apologies if it appeared I was distorting the point being made, it was not my intent to do that.

 

Stosh

[TroopGuy]

For years the BSA tried to get the troops to use a planning approach that revolved around program features. This approach evolved over the years until we had a 3 volume set of pre-planned meetings/outings that could be used/modified by the PLC as they wish and would take them through three years with a variety of monthly features or themes. Some troops may still use the one-volume version of the same program known as Woods Wisdom.

 

The whole planning process started with the Scoutmaster doing a lot of homework and working with the SPL and troop committee to develop a tentative calendar which the SPL would present to the boys at the yearly planning meeting. Then the process of the planning meeting was not starting from scratch but working from that as a template. Whatever calendar comes out the other end of the process, it has to meet certain troop goals, and the boys are expected to buy into it. The monthly PLC then becomes the job of planning to this calendar using the program features that were chosen at the beginning of the year.

 

You can still follow this process if you like even though apparently a lot of troops never put it into practice. The variety that this would introduce should hopefully get more interest from the boys. It would be a bit of a culture shift, but it would take a lot of work off the Scoutmaster and the boys to re-invent the wheel each month or year while trying to keep the program fresh.

[Thomas54]

 

We still do our PLC planning that way. We come in look at the next few campouts and service projects and the souts are asked what do we need to do to prepare our troop for these events. The SPL starts throwing out ideas and the rest jump in.

 

The Program features gets down into specific details of older scout do this and the games that can be played at each meeting. We don't use that level of the material, its looks a bit dated but we get stuck with what patrol game to do or when there is no campout that month.