Scoutmaster Podcast 51

Comments

1. Walter Underwood says

   January 15, 2011 at 7:54 pm

   First, the only time we’ve had a problem with patrol makeup is when the adults got involved.
   Second, the “ambushed” Scout should change troops immediately. He does not have enough time to work this out and he’s likely to be re-ambushed when it is time for signoffs for Scout spirit and the Scoutmaster conference.
   Call the district executive, explain the problem and ask them to recommend a troop.
   Clarke, I disagree that the district, council, and national should stay out of it. This is the BSA program, and this behavior is wrong and gives the whole program a bad name. This behavior is far too common and is a cancer on the BSA.
   If the COR doesn’t understand that it is wrong, the commissioner needs to step in. A uniformed commissioner is going to carry more weight than a complaining parent.
   Doesn’t the Council have to approve the charter renewal? If so, this is a good reason to withhold that approval. Other organizations do not allow local units to do whatever they want and use the national name. McDonald’s won’t let you do that and the BSA shouldn’t either.
   One of the duties of the council is “To insure that each Local Unit (i.e. a Boy Scout Troop or Cub Pack) within its territorial area carries out the general principles of advancement in Scouting.” The council cannot dodge this responsibility.
   http://usscouts.org/aboutbsa/bsaorg.asp

2. Mark in Sandy Eggo says

   January 13, 2011 at 1:17 am

   Clarke,
   The arbitrary Eagle requirement issue is not a new one. I recall back about 40 years when I was a scout, and my father was Scoutmaster, that a similar issue came up. There was a scout that was prevented from attaining Eagle by some arbitrary rule of some other troop. I recall hearing my father on the phone talking to the boy’s previous scoutmaster (notice the small “s”) and I remember my father getting angry because not only did the other guy not agree to the importance of following the real requirements for Eagle, but also the other scoutmaster refused to verify any information on the boy so my father could take the ball within our troop. My father made sure the troop leadership got behind this boy, who was a stranger to all the boys in the troop (went to different schools) to support his Eagle project and obtain his award. I do not know what the previous troop’s issue was. I do know that all of a sudden my father would receive a couple calls a week from the Council office asking for his participation in Council matters (which he did). It seems that others in the Council adult leadership appreciated and respected my father’s actions.
   He was a great man, in whose footsteps I try to walk.
   Mark in Sandy Eggo

3. Clarke Green says

   January 12, 2011 at 10:33 am

   It’s okay Larry – you’ll hear the 1001 strings again! Don’t blow a gasket brother!
   I have two or three different versions of taps (maybe four!)

4. Larry Geiger says

   January 12, 2011 at 11:42 am

   Hi Ray
   Mixed age patrols up to about Star rank.
   There is a fine line, sometimes, between the Scoutmaster running the program and the Scoutmaster implementing the Scouting program. Historically, in almost everything I have read, patrols should be permanent and Scouts should transition up through the ranks in their patrol. This is something that I think that the SM should work towards all the time. Push the work of the Troop down into the patrols. Just like this is how we do First Class, this is how we do Scouting.
   My opinion only, YMMV: New Scout patrols were implemented mostly because troops were not doing their job training the Scouts as leaders and fully implementing the Scouting program. Too many Scouts think that leadership and Positions of Responsibility are places where they hang out with their buds and goof off. But that’s the reality of 14 year old boys. That’s not going to change much.
   The Scouts themselves should be organizing their patrols. In a troop with a strong history of permanent patrols, this is probably not a problem. Younger Scouts just flow into a patrol and then mostly stay there. It’s getting to that point that’s a problem. I think that the “New Scout Patrol” undermines this process.
   A new Scout patrol is started when the new Webelos come in. It works pretty good for about a year, then attendance begins to fall off. Eventually you have a patrol that is too small. What now? Split up the guys who are doing what Scouting intended? Keep them together in a new patrol that might get too large? I don’t know what the answer is, but sometimes it’s messy.

5. Larry Geiger says

   January 12, 2011 at 10:19 am

   I LOVE the music. Don’t listen to Mark!! Pay NO attention to anyone under 40 🙂
   RE: Eagle Scout leadership problem:
   1. Doesn’t remember the Scout’s leadership positions? Huh???
   2. Take a look at “Ask Andy”. He, like you, is pretty pointed on this matter.
   3. Switch troops right now!! I’ll take him. Where does he live.
   4. It’s the SM problem, not the Scout’s! Good answer.
   5. Scouts should be given certificates for each of their positions of responsibility. It’s interesting to note that the certificates for POR say “has been elected to serve the troop membership in this leadership capacity” and there’s a date at the bottom. I know, I know, most of us give these out at the end of a leaderhsip term. But it’s clearly intended to be given out at the beginning of a term. Normally, it can’t be cancelled unless the Scouts cancel it (unelect or unappoint a leader). Scouts that don’t have these types of records are usually in troops with the problem leaders that this dad is dealing with. The dad probably doesn’t even realize that his son has not had the full benefit of the Scouting program all along because of this Scout leader.
   6. The Scouts elect and appoint their leadership. It’s not up to the Scoutmaster to decide that.
   Arrrrrrrrrrrrrrgh! Change is bad. It just didn’t seem like THE SCOUTMASTER PODCAST with that new music at the end!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I DON’T want hope and change. I just want my 101 Strings back 🙂

6. Ray Brittain says

   January 11, 2011 at 8:04 pm

   Another excellent Podcast! It was also very timely. As we enter the season of Webelos crossing over to Boy Scouts, I have been considering our patrols. Over the past few years we have had a new scout patrol. After a year, these scouts get integrated into the other patrols. We have also had a tendency to shift scouts around to balance the patrols as the older scouts move on.
   In considering this habit recently, I have been considering the merits distributing new scouts into the existing patrols as they join as oppose to forming a new scout patrol. I will not revisit the pros and cons of each method, but I am interested in your thoughts about two items.
   First, I thought I had read that the (original) intent was that the patrol would form and be a “permanent” patrol. That is that it would not be changed, at least too frequently to allow the patrol to fully develop. New scouts would flow into the patrol and older scouts would flow out. The patrol makeup would change through the aging process, but not by shuffling the members. I’m interested in your thoughts about the changes in patrol makeup and how those changes affect the patrol performance (and goals of scouting).
   The second item I’m interested in hearing from you about is maintenance of patrols. I understand you leave the patrol organization up to your PLC. Regardless of whether you integrate new scouts into existing patrols right away or wait for a year, unless that becomes a permanent patrol those scouts must be mixed with others. Here are my questions.
   Do you give some guidance to the PLC about the outcome (patrols should have some balance either patrol size or age distribution)?
   Do you move older scouts out of a regular patrol to a Venture Patrol? What is the criteria for making that transition?
   As always, I appreciate your input.