Scoutmaster Podcast 243

Hi, I'm Christopher Simone and I'm the Scoutmaster of Troop 71 in Plendome, New York. This edition of the Scoutmaster podcast is sponsored by backers like me.

And now to you, Scoutmaster. You've heard this saying before: where there's smoke, there's fire. Obviously, whoever said that was not a Scoutmaster.

Hey, this is podcast number 243.. Hey, Welcome back to the Scoutmaster podcast. This is Clarke Green. Let's take a look in the mailbag and see who we've heard from. Oh, this one is. This is pretty cool.

Shulingela Philippus got in touch with us And Shulingela is a scouter in Namibia. Where's Namibia, you ask?

Well, I had to check up. I know it's a country in Africa, but it's on the western coast of the southern part of Africa, near the nation of South Africa. But Shulingela got in touch to say we're all Scouters in the world movement and we share prayers for each other- And we certainly do. And thanks for getting in touch, Shulingela. You're the first Scouter from Namibia to say hello. Lyle Lindau is with Cub Scout Pack 56 in Bonn, Germany.

He wrote in to say thanks for your site and the weekly podcast. I started serving as Cub Master for Pack 56 here in Germany and found your articles and discussions very useful, especially to bring me up to speed on Scouting Today, having last been a Scout in the early 1980s, And Lyle went on to say that he was having a problem with the Scoutmaster CG app on iOS 8.. A number of you got in touch to say that you were having problems with the app on iOS 8..

Well, hopefully it's fixed and working flawlessly now. Make sure to update it or try reloading it, but we should be in good shape. If you continue to have problems, get in touch and we'll get it fixed. We're from Jerry Curry. He said your podcast on leadership elections was very timely.

It's been six or seven years since we have more than one candidate for Senior Patrol Leader. I worked with our Senior Patrol Leader to come up with a plan. The candidates gave a two-minute speech, He handed out ballots, We counted them and he announced the final results. It all worked perfectly. Jerry, that sounds great.

I'm glad we were able to help. I will say that we have agents everywhere and I try my best to time things for what's happening in each one of the troops out there. Heard from Dan Marner about last week's podcast. He said you told us on the podcast that the guidelines for the PAC Overnighter site approval form apply to Weeblers Den Camping. We discussed this at Bulu Training and the Cub Scout Outdoor Program guidelines make a pretty clear delineation between PAC Overnighters and Weeblers Den Camping. I differ with your conclusion that the site approval standards for PACs apply to Weeblers Den Camping.

I'm hoping the new Cub Program coming next year clarifies a lot of that language. I followed your blog for a long time but just started listening to the podcast. Keep up the great work. You provide an invaluable resource.

Well thanks, Dan. I appreciate your help with that. If anybody has the official verbiage that describes those differences, I'd be happy to alert everybody to where they can find them. If you were listening last week, hopefully I didn't add to anybody's confusion about this, And I'll take a moment to say I do my best to get questions of official policy right and I use the resources that are available to me. I would never recommend that you take my word as gospel. You always want to make sure that you back up your understanding of any of these policy-type questions by looking at all of the resources and the literature that's been provided for you Over on the blog.

This week I published the first and second chapters of a story that follows a new Scoutmaster- and I'm calling him Chuck Grant, who is attempting to use the patrol method in a troop. That's kind of forgotten how to do that.

Now I've based this work of fiction- and it is a work of fiction- on the stories that have been shared with me by readers and listeners and the questions they've asked and the advice I usually commonly share and reply. What I'm hoping is is that the kind of narrative format of a story will help you kind of get into the spirit of things and to understand and how to take the principles that we talk about and actually apply them.

And giving examples of conversations that go on and events and things like that I think maybe will help to illuminate how that works. And I've tried to avoid being unreasonably optimistic or overly pessimistic and being as realistic with some of the challenges and setbacks we're all going to encounter in being scouters.

So the plan is to publish a series of 12 chapters in this story and they're going to be published each Tuesday and Thursday at scoutmastercgcom- Look for the post titled A New Scoutmaster- And a lot of you got in touch about that series. Luke Koch commented there's really good stuff here.

Can't wait for the next chapter, Michael Lody's said I seriously think you should put this together as an audio play, and so did Michael Meninger. He said I could see this acted out.

It's well written. Well, it'll be written for now, folks, but maybe you know in the future, who knows? Heard from Andy Denunzio about it. He said: as a unit commissioner, I'm sharing the story with a new scoutmaster. Thank you for this. It's a big help.

Mark Nable got in touch to say I am taking on a new role as scoutmaster and I'm looking to getting the troop to a youth led level. Bill Daniel wrote in to say: Clark, I love the story. We just did a restart in my troop and I'm going to use this with the assistant scoutmasters to kind of draw them into the Baden Powell fold. I will let you and the blog do some of the heavy lifting and take a break.

Well, we live to serve Bill. I hope it all helps. John Nelson said good luck to Chuck, the scoutmaster in the story, who will be giving a better experience to their scouts. And Mark Edwards wrote in to say it was a great read.

So do check that out at scoutmastercgcom. It's called a new scoutmaster. Like I said, we plan on 12 installments to the story published every Tuesday and Thursday.

So if you're a regular reader and listener and if the resources we've created have helped you, you can return the favor by becoming a scoutmastercgcom backer, And the funds we get from backers go towards the expenses of producing and publishing the blog posts and the podcasts and everything else that are resources available to scouts all over the world. Hey, I heard from Namibia this week and from Bonn, Germany, So it does get out there. It's easy to become a backer. Go to scoutmastercgcom. Look for the support link in the menu at the very top of the page. You can choose any level of support and they're all appreciated.

Some of them entitle you to premiums, like autograph copies of my book And this week let me take a moment to personally thank Jackie Reese, who became a backer since our last podcast. Go to scoutmastercgcom, Become a backer this week and I'll be sure to thank you on our next podcast.

So in this podcast we've got tons of email questions to answer And I have some thoughts about the context of scouting in scoutmastership in seven minutes or less, And that will take up the remainder of the podcast. So let's get started, shall we? Scoutmastership in seven minutes or less.

I want to talk about two types of questions that I get quite often, because they really share a common answer, and that is, you know, the context of scouting. Let me see if I can explain what I mean.

I'll get a question like this: What if our patrol leaders council decided to cancel all the troop meetings for the next two months? I mean that is boy-led, right.

Or what if our patrol leaders council voted and they decide that the next six months of trips we're going to take are all going to be visits to the local amusement parks? I mean we are a boy-led.

If they make the decision, we should follow it, right? However, our patrol leaders council decided that, instead of having elections, the adults should appoint the senior patrol leader.

I mean they are making the decision and we are youth-led, so we should accept that decision, right? I think the first point I want to make- and I don't want to be really pedantic about this, but let me observe that we don't work with boys, We work with scouts, right? I know it sounds like I'm splitting hairs, but there's actually a really important distinction there that answers this question. We don't have boys leading anything. We don't have boys in our patrol leaders council, We only have scouts, And I say this because it's important to consistently express and reinforce the message that scouts lead themselves within the context of the scouting program.

That's why I think it's important to think of them as scouts rather than boys. I mentioned this kind of thing in a recent podcast, but I think it bears repeating. The kind of recursive loop of logic that says anything that the boys decide is therefore youth leadership. It's missing a few important foundational concepts. By now.

You've probably grown tired of my frequent sports analogies, but I think it really works here. Does a basketball team get to vote on the rules or the constraints of the game?

Well, no, they don't have a vote on that. You have the rules and constraints and the context of the game and you play the game with basketball.

So the purpose and achievement that we get out of scouting doesn't come from simple, unfettered freedom that we can make any decision that we want to make. There are constraints and contexts that define the types of decisions that scouts make. In scouting. Our defining constraint is the nature of the program and the policies and procedures that help define the nature of the program. And these constraints aren't negative, not by a long shot. They're actually very positive and they're inspiring.

I would say that creativity and innovation comes from, in part, the constraints of the question, don't they? So we work within a set of constraints and in a context called scouting. We're not led by boys, we're led by scouts. The decisions that they make have to be based on the context and the constraints. That's just the rules of the game. I said there were two questions that I get frequently that have the same answer.

So, along the same lines, I'm frequently asked how I'd react if, as I suggest, scouts are having, say, and how they make up their own patrols. What if there's a scout that nobody wants in their patrol?

And the answer is always the same: As scouts were constrained, right to act within the oath and law in everything, No other rules are required. We don't want to make other rules.

All we need to do is be champions of the scout oath and law. Scouts follow the oath and law. They're not concerned with popularity or who they like and who they don't like. They're concerned with serving their fellow scouts.

Now, sometimes boys need to think through what it means to be a scout. So let's say that a boy tells us: I don't want to be in a patrol with that guy. He's just kind of a pain.

So your answer would be: well, what part of the scout oath and law describes rejecting a fellow scout because you think he's a pain? So every boy, no matter how painful or unpopular, gets to be a scout. We accept him as he is when we practice the scout oath and law.

Now I understand that there are friendships between scouts and those friendships are very important. But there's also something broader that happens when we practice the scout oath and law: that a scout is a friend to every other scout. That certainly doesn't mean that every other scout is their favorite. But if the oath and law is to mean anything at all, no scout certainly is an enemy of another scout And no scout is thereby going to be deemed unpopular.

Now this all sounds kind of glib and unrealistic, but I know, just as you do, that boys sometimes find it challenging to be scouts. So that's where it's our responsibility: to champion the oath and law as the basis of everything that we do and all the decisions that they make. If you work at this, there's no questions about popularity. There's no room for marginalizing a scout based on whether other boys like him or not. Boys may do that, but scouts never would.

So we champion the scout oath and law. We speak about it all the time. We talk with our patrol leaders council. We discuss how the oath and law applies to everything that they do and all the decisions that they make. We work through some scenarios.

I would sit down and ask my patrol leaders council and I have frequently what if nobody wants a scout in their patrol? How are you going to deal with that And the ensuing discussion? We're able to talk about the oath and law. We're able to talk about the difference just being a boy somewhere and being a scout, and I'm able to encourage them to make it a point of pride in their troop that everyone is accepted and treated as a friend And that way there's never a question of leaving anybody out when it comes time to reorganize patrols or to elect leaders or something like that. We create a culture of the scout oath and law.

So two questions with a common answer. We work within the context of scouting and that disallows these theoretically kind of nutty decisions that a group of boys might make, but scouts never would. And we work within the context of the scout oath and law. It describes our attitude and how we do things.

So, within the context of the oath and law, it's possible for a scout to be unpopular, to have no friends, And that's what we aspire to. There's bumps, setbacks and challenges along the way, to be sure, But if we champion the scout oath and law and we constantly remind our scouts of the context that they're playing the game in, things will go well and you'll create a culture of scouting in your troop where these questions find automatic answers. Oh, I'm in love with the man who loves to camp. He camps when it's sunny. He camps when it's damp. All he needs is a tent, a sleeping roll, a package of hot dogs and a sack of charcoal.

He camps in the desert. He camps in the snow. He says, baby, come with me, Find me a letter, Send it by name. Email. That is, folks.

And here's an answer to one of your emails.

So we're going to see if we can crowd five answers to email questions into this podcast. The first question comes from Kathy Montana in Colorado. She said last night I had the honor of being a member of an Eagle border review. Being asked to serve in this role got me thinking about other young men who will be having their Eagle boards in the next few months. It occurred to me I had helped out for a few hours with one of their service projects and perhaps that I shouldn't serve on their board. However, last evening, two members of the border review had assisted the scout who was being reviewed with his Eagle project.

I've not been able to find any guidance on the matter in the guide to advancement, So maybe I'm seeing a conflict of interest where there really is none. Well, first of all, Kathy, here's a gold star for checking the guide to advancement 2013.. Good for you. Everybody should do that. Everybody should have a copy. Everybody should read it.

Sometimes we get direction from what isn't said in the policies as much as from what is said, And the guide to advancement is very specific and doesn't explicitly prohibit people who've helped with an Eagle project in sitting on the Eagle border review, So there's no policy preventing those persons from being part of a border review. If there was a possible issue there, I can about guarantee you that it would be specifically addressed in the guide to advancement, Because when you read about the composition of boards of review in general and Eagle boards of review in particular, the only real prohibition on who can't and can't serve on them is parents of the scout unit leaders and their assistants. These are demonstrable conflicts of interest.

Now, all that being said, I understand what you're concerned about. I would say that probably 95 out of 100 Eagle boards of review are uncontested approvals of the scout's work and care. It's a pretty easy decision to make. What would really concern me, if there's a conflict of negative interest or somebody who is dead set against the scout becoming an Eagle sitting on their border review- and yes, that does happen- I'd be a little suspect of anyone who requested specifically they be included in Eagle border review. It would cause me to ask why they wanted to do that and see if there was some kind of hidden agenda anywhere. Your own conscience comes into play too.

I mean, if you worked on a particular project that positively or negatively affected your opinion of the scout unreasonably. You know, maybe he was just kind of insufferable in the way that teenagers can be, sometimes No real problem, but you just really didn't kind of like the scout. You can certainly recuse yourself from serving on his board if you were invited to do so.

Otherwise, I don't see any automatic conflict of interest and I think if it was, it would be mentioned specifically in the Guide to Advancement. Mark is the Scoutmaster of Troop 18 in the cross, Wisconsin. He said: I am a Scoutmaster trying to get our troop applying the patrol method. I don't want to direct the scouts, but guide, like you recommend.

How can I best tell when I should offer advice and when I am intruding? Well, Mark, that is a great question, and the first step is understanding that it's possible. What you may have to say or advise is interfering with your youth leadership.

So that you understand that that's even possible puts you way ahead of a lot of Scoutmasters. My best advice is that when you are telling scouts something or giving directions, you're in danger of running over them a little bit and you're not really using the opportunity optimally to inspire their thought process as an initiative. If you ask questions, though, you're encouraging them to find answers. If you get good at asking questions that help them find the way, you'll have less chance of interfering. All that being said, you're working with individual scouts who have individual abilities. Right, some are going to require being told at times.

Some will do a lot better with going through a series of questions. Some will need little or no input from you at all. They'll figure it out on their own, and some will need a whole lot of help getting there. It's a very inexact science. You have to be patient with yourself and with your scouts. If you get frustrated, share those frustrations with them and ask for some help.

And while we're doing serious work with our scouts, on one hand, you have to carry it out in a spirit of fun and good humor. We never actually arrive at a resting place as scout leaders where we can proclaim that we've done it and everything is working perfectly.

We have our moments to be sure, but it's all about the process and the journey. Mark got back to say: this really helps and reinforces what I'm already doing. I'm committed to letting our scouts go about their process of finding things out, but I'm going to be fighting parents all the way because, myself included, we really cleave to the notion that things should run smoothly. I certainly understand that. But Mark went on to say: I embraced the chaos when I was a teenager and I can do it again. And thank you for the four part essays you have on the patrol method and the adult role.

They're awesome. Well, Mark, I'm really glad that we're able to help you there.

The next question comes from Conquista Bush, who asks: if a scout earns a merit badge that has the exact same requirements as a rank requirement, has the scout met the requirement for both the badge and the rank? As an example, my son earned the first aid merit badge. The first aid merit badge, requirement number one, says: show what to do for hurry cases of stock breathing and internal poisoning, which is the same as second class requirements 7a. If the scout earned the merit badge, the work that he did for the merit badge be considered a completion of the rank requirement. My son Scoutmaster is requesting that he demonstrate these things again and I don't understand why.

Welcome Conquista, let's see if we can unwrap this a little bit. The first requirement for first aid merit badge reads, quote: satisfy your counselor. You have current knowledge of all first aid requirements for tender foot, second class and first class ranks.

Now I suppose ideally what would happen is that the rank requirements would have been signed off to begin with before your son started first aid merit badge. But apparently he's doing the merit badge first and that is absolutely fine. By the way, there's nothing that says he has to have those requirements first, because if you look at the wording of the requirement. It says: satisfy your counselor that you have current knowledge of these requirements- not that they're signed off, but that you have current knowledge of them.

Now, when it comes to whether or not the work he did for the merit badge automatically counts towards the rank requirement or vice versa it doesn't- he's earning two separate badges and the requirements are being tested by two different people. It's really the choice of the person who is testing your son on the rank requirement whether or not they'll accept the work done for the merit badge and vice versa rank requirements. It would be up to the merit badge counselor whether they would accept that work and he would have to do exactly what the requirements said. He would have to satisfy the counselor that he has current knowledge of those rank requirements. And how the counselor chose do that is basically up to the counselor. Testing and requirements for scouting is more than you know.

I did that once a long time ago. Or I did it for a rank or I did it for a merit badge. It's based on the knowledge that the scout demonstrates at the time he's tested. Think of it this way: some of the courses that you'll take in college will cover the same subject you studied in high school. Some college professors may accept your high school work, some may not. It's up to them to be sure that they've done their due diligence to assure themselves you have the knowledge before you pass their course correct.

And I think that's an apt parallel to what we're talking about here. You have two different badges, two different people applying the test to the requirements and it's up to them to do their due diligence to make sure that the requirements fulfilled. And any scout with the merit badge should be able to demonstrate the knowledge for the rank requirements pretty easily.

So it shouldn't be a big deal for all that time consuming and I would also say I think it's great practice, right. So next question comes from Stu Jackson, who is with troop 212 in North Glen Colorado, and Stu wrote in to say I've thoroughly enjoyed the resources you put together and I've come to look at scoutmastercgcom as a trusted old friend who's ready to talk scouting whenever I am. I've been given the opportunity to become the next Scoutmaster of our troop. Without your insight and ideas I'd probably be sitting in a corner rocking back and forth and mumbling to myself about knots.

You know that's a pick. That's this pretty strong picture right there in my mind.

I've- I think I've felt that way several times as a Scoutmaster myself. Anyway, Stu goes on to say our troop has adopted that dreaded, nice and neat idea of balanced patrols.

I've asked why, and the answer's been: well, that's the way we've always done it. After looking at a troop from a scouts perspective and doing an enormous amount of research, I presented the idea to our parents and committee that we should have the scouts creating their own patrols. Most seem to accept the idea but, as you'd expect, there's a few that seem to waver a little bit and to me it's something completely understandable since changing the way we've become accustomed to. As I work with the youth leadership to make our patrol change as possible, a couple of questions has come up and I was wondering if I could get your thoughts. The current ideas is that we will let the boys meet together to work to form their own patrols without any sort of assistance in the form of an adult or the senior patrol leader, unless a problem or a question arises. My concern is what happens if a scout doesn't naturally fit into patrol during that process.

I want to avoid hurting the feelings of scouts in that situation and there will be a Scoutmaster minute with some point on including everybody. Additionally, I'm also planning on a few strategic discussions with the scouts identified as natural leaders to help facilitate avoiding the alienation of any of the boys.

Have you faced instances like that and in those cases, what have you done? I found on your site some different resources for forming a patrol, using a form to indicate three of your friends and having the senior patrol leader put the patrols together. Based on that info, that seems to differ with some of your other material that gives the idea that boys should get a shot at creating their own patrols.

Is this just another option? Have your opinions of patrol formation changed during your experience as Scoutmaster? I touched on some of this a little bit earlier

In Scoutmaster ship in seven minutes or less, but there's no really one right way to get this done. There's just lots of good ways, like making coffee, right.

You know some people will say that you have to do it exactly this way and some people say you do it another way, but at the end you have a cup of coffee. That's what's important. Your scouts elected their senior patrol leader and that means that they have a measure of trust and respect for him.

So he's the lead man on who goes and what patrol. Your role as Scoutmaster is helping him figure out how that works.

So does he thinks things should be changed? On what does he base this opinion?

As he asked the patrol leaders and the other scouts about what they think? Will he ask scouts what patrol they like to be in?

How will we ask him? How important does he think it is to know about those things?

Once he's asked the scouts, well, what exactly happened next? Will he make up patrols on his own?

Will he want some help from people? How is he going to administer that process?

What happens if we have a scout nobody wants in their patrol? And, like I said, it talked about this earlier in the podcast- all of this has to be conducted according to the scout oath and law right and the senior patrol leader has to consider how to make this happen in the spirit of friendliness, kindness and courtesy to all the scouts.

So how, step by step, does he think he wants to accomplishment? And as you and the senior patrol leader discuss the answers to all these questions, the strategy begins to form. You're helping him figure things out, not really directing him to do anything specific. You're just asking questions and when it's all done, it's basically his idea.

What the other adults think about it, you know I'm going to say, is kind of peripherally important and in a way it's kind of none in their business. These are decisions that the scout should be able to work with and to make with your oversight and your advice. The scouts elected their senior patrol leader, ought to be able to lead and he needs to lead within the context, in the spirit of scouting as we've talked about. Your job is going to be supplying that context. And you also ask the question about the idea where scouts write down three of the guys they want to be in a patrol with as a way to help the senior patrol leader make those decisions. The other advice that you mentioned that I give about letting them work it out- it doesn't really conflict with that.

It's just several different, equal approaches to sorting out patrols. In a small troop of 10, 12, 15 scouts, sorting out patrols probably only takes a few minutes. In a much larger troop, you may want to use the other method that I suggest about getting the scouts to write down three guys they want to be in a patrol with.

You know, or you're going to come up with a totally different method, but the principles are all the same, are they that this should be a youth led decision and they should be heavily invested in making these decisions, because this is their troop and their patrols. Rob Landquist is with troop 4 in Waukesha, Wisconsin, and he wrote in to say this.

When a scout finishes the requirements for a rank in our troop normally comes to me for a Scoutmaster conference and then they go to this committee chair, who are really there at about every single meeting and and are able to hold boards of review, basically right after the scout is done with a conference, unless it's too late in the meeting, and then if the scout hasn't asked them for a border review, they'll ask at the next meeting. So in the scenario that I described there, the scouts not required to ask for a border review. They just have the option to ask for it before they're asked, because they're going to the advancement chairman directly after they're done with me and they're asking for their board. I'm a little concerned about this because of the discussion that's been going on about the policy and the guide to advancement as it concerns scouts requesting a border review.

Well, Rob, I think I think crossing the room to ask the advancement chair for a border review doesn't sound like a roadblock to me. Right, it sounds like what happens when I finish a Scoutmaster conference.

Most of the time, you know, I tell the scout to go see Mrs so and so, over there, let her know that you're ready for a border review- pretty simple. Unfortunately, some troops are in the habit of making that simple process much more difficult and complicated, making it into some kind of roadblock or additional challenge that constitutes an addition to the requirements for the rank. It sounds to me like you guys get it that you understand the spirit of the whole thing, that this aspect of advancement, of expecting scouts to go request a border review in some official manner, fill out a form or something like that, it's simply not their responsibility to do so. The advancement chair should be active and involved and they should be monitoring the advancement of scouts and they should know when they need a border review.

But you know, crossing the room to talk to the advancement chair, that doesn't constitute an additional requirement and it doesn't constitute a roadblock, from what I can see. I hope the answers to those questions have helped you.

I want to reiterate something is very, very important: what you're hearing, especially when it comes to specific policy questions and rules, is my best take on exactly what's going on. I back this up by checking the references and resources that are available to us, but never, ever, just take my word for it. Go to the resources, go to the materials that are provided to us and make sure that I've got it right.

I'm capable of being just as wrong as anybody else, so if there's any point to any of this at all, it should be that we're always questioning, we're always asking about what we assume is the right way to do things, and we're backing that up by going to the resources and the literature that's provided to us and making sure that we've got the right end of the stick. Now, if you've got a question for me, I would love to have you get in touch, and you're going to find out how to do that in just a moment.

music,