From: smith.13@nd.edu
Date: Wed Oct 23 2002 - 15:16:48 CDT
I want to thank everyone for their input. I did a few private replies, but
I will respond to this one from John for everyone's benefit.
First the scheduling problem. This event, sponsored by our O.A. Lodge, is
an annual Council event that our troop attends because we have very active
troop OA members. The event is called the Iron Horse Hike and is offered
for scouts of all ages from Tiger Cubs to seasoned troops. The OA members
worked the registration and food stands in the morning, then the Philmont
Crew set out in the afternoon for a hike in backpacks. This was then our
regular monthly campout with the Philmont Crew doing its own thing, and the
rest of the troop, who will doing a different backpacking excursion while
the crew is at Philmont, doing is own practice hike.
The practice hikes went extremely well with each of the different crews
being fully youth led in choosing the trails, organizing the time of the
hike, and running the event. The missing boys were not mentioned until the
meeting the next Monday. He may be a bit upset at the two scouts and was
most concerned about missing his first chance to see how they will interact
in the team situation.
We chose the dates for our trek around adult schedules. The crew leader
almost decided *not* to go to Philmont for two reasons. First, he thought
he was going to have problems with two scouts...the two who just happened
to be missing. Second, to go to Philmont, this crew leader will be missing
the 4H Fair where he would have gotten a 10 year pin for 10 consecutive
years of participation. He had been looking forward to this for 9 years,
but decided that Philmont was now or never. He would have been expected to
win one or more of the horse riding events at the both the county and state
level...events which he will be missing. (We chose the dates for our trek
around adult schedules.) It was a very difficult decision for him. He
committed to Philmont when I convinced him that the adults will help him
with any issues that come up with the two scouts. Now the scouts were not
there for the first big test. I do not blame him for being disappointed.
Yes, he does expect a lot from himself and more from the other
scouts. There is the air of his trying to whip the crew into shape, but he
was elected crew leader, and the rest of the scouts seem to be respecting
his leadership and style and working with him.
After I was informed of the issue he was having of the two scouts missing
the event, I talked with both of the missing scouts. They are well aware
of the new expectations that will be placed on them. They have said they
will attend all future events. We do know that sometimes good intentions
do not mean actions, so we will monitor the schedule and work with the
scouts and their parents to see that they do attend except for real
unavoidable conflicts.
No one but the crew leader and his mother said a work about the two missing
crew members. One additional crew member was missing, but nothing was said
about that issue. The other crew member is a Notre Dame student who is an
ASM, and will be a youth member in the crew (he will be 20 years old while
at Philmont). We are letting him go as a youth member as this will be his
first trip. Notre Dame students were on break and he was at home in
Massachusetts.
I plan on leaving the issue alone and seeing what happens over the next few
months. We will make sure that future events are well known ahead of time,
and that everyone understands what is expected of them. There are other
issues with other scouts that also need to be worked out to make this
entire team a crew, but it will come with time.
At 10/23/2002 01:52 PM -0400, you wrote:
>In a message dated 10/23/2002 8:53:39 AM Central Daylight Time,
>smith.13@nd.edu writes:
>
>
>>. He want to set required practices with the
>>stipulation that if you miss, you can not go on the trip. His mother, who
>>is also going as an adult, is backing him big time. His mother missed the
>>hike too
>
>
>You have a lot more problems than two Scouts missing a training hike. You
>have leadership problems. Good leadership would have breezed right
>through this "problem" as though it were not a problem......which it
>isn't. It's a fact. Two Scouts weren't there. That is all it is. What
>is the problem with that
>
>Right now the crew needs to focus on leadership, not required hikes.
>
>As it stands now, you have an overly demanding field colonel and his general.
>
>Their actions go hand in hand. Like mother, like son. Two class A
>personalities.
>
>Left untreated, expect a rebellion at some point in time and probably
>rightfully so.. Probably on day three on the trail.
>
>Spend more time working on the ways leaders accomplish goals and less on
>compliance with rules.
>
>Goals? Rules? Are there any of these even established? Has the crew set
>any goals? Or is the colonel and the general acting out the role of a
>dictator.
>
>Did either of these even poll the crew to see if all were even planning to
>attend?
>
>If not, then they have a bit lofty expectations.
>
>Also the fact that a training hike was planned at the same time as
>homecomming activities is a bit testy.
>
>Maybe they wanted to stroke their own egos when Scouts choose the hike
>over homecomming. Well, I guess the action of two of the Scouts answers
>that question.
>
>There are always going to be conflicts. How they are handled will
>determine the success of the crew.
>
>The negative view is that they are a bit demanding and want to "runn off"
>Scouts who don't agree with their viewpoint. The positive part is at
>least they are having practice hikes and having them early on in the game.
>
>I went with one of these "father son" teams last summer. They were a pain
>in the neck. The bad thing is we NEVER even had a shakedown or practice
>hike before going to Philmont.
>
>Notice Scouting doesn't have any office of "colonel" or "general" and
>rightfully so.
>
>Oh yes, another word for a dictator is "bully".
>
>As Scoutmaster, you are in the drivers seat to sidetrack this early
>on. Personally, I'd tell mommy in no uncertain terms, adult to adult and
>out of earshot of the kids, that she is expecting a bit too much and that
>I would not expect, ask or demand anything from the Scouts that I did not
>expect from myself and that includes perfect attendance. I'd tell her
>that is the way I operate and she needs to consider operating in a similar
>manner simply because it's proven that it works and works well.
>
>If she were not receptive to that suggestion, then I'd sign her up for
>several of the excellent leadership courses BSA offers and tell her
>attendance is mandatory. See how she likes that shoe shoved on her foot
>whether it fits or not.
>
>There are many ways to do this, but I'm not one to pull punches or be
>politically correct when dealing with adults who are dealing misery out to
>children not their own.
>
>Another way she might understand since she is a Veternarian is to suggest
>she take a horse pill. "You know, a little something to take the "edge" off".
>
>The sooner you open mommys eyes to the real world, the fewer problems you
>will have or I should say the crew will have. If not addressed, this is
>going to be the source of misery for quite a few Scouts who have a right
>to not be miserable due to the action of an adult.
>
>Sometimes I think my old Scoutmaster handled those situations best. He
>simply told them NO and walked away leaving the adult to think about their
>stupidity alone for a while. If this did not work, he simply informed
>them who would be takig their place on the crew.
>
>The other side of that coin is that this experience is good for kids to
>help them work through the real troubles in life. Somehow I am one who
>believes we don't need to add gasoline to a cooking fire.
>
>Hindsight can often be 20/20. My only regret at interveining in a problem
>the lead advisor had last summer is the I was too patient and I should
>have acted sooner. Actually I had more faith in the lead advisor's
>ability than I should have had. Given a similar situation today, I'd act
>sooner.
>
>The bad part is you have a lot of work cut out for you, but the good part
>is you have plenty of time to get it done.
>
>Sort through the problem, accentuate the good points of the mother - son
>duo and address the bad points. That is polish up the rough spots and you
>may have a successful trek. May have, there are no guarantees.
>
>One thing for sure is it doesn't appear like they will just sit back and
>whatever happens is whatever happens. That isn't good either.
>
>Good luck. Solving the problem will be worth the effort.
>
>Remember the rest of the crew suffers under their overbearingness also.
>
>John LeBlanc
>Eagle Class of 1959
>Phirst Phil Ptrek 1959
>PhilTrek 2002 630H2 Trek 16
>My latest adventure was yesterday,
>Today is not over yet!
>
-------------------------------------------------------
Scouting E-mail Discussion Lists @ usscouts.org
Subscribe/Unsubscribe at http://usscouts.org/lists/
Listserv Commands at http://usscouts.org/lists/lc.asp
-------------------------------------------------------
Send listserv commands to: listserv@troop47.com
Send postings to: philmont@troop47.com
List FAQ found at: http://usscouts.org/lists/faq.asp
List Administrator: philmont_owner@troop47.com
-------------------------------------------------------
As you gather around this virtual campfire with fellow
Scouts and Scouters, do your best to be trustworthy,
loyal, helpful, friendly, courteous, kind, obedient,
cheerful, thrifty, brave, clean and reverent.
-------------------------------------------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Thu Mar 13 2003 - 10:38:43 CST