Why is FIRST moving backward?

[GoDaisy341]

OK so last year I was pretty ticked off that FIRST took video out of the Chairman's Award. This really limited my team to present what we do. I believe that the best way to explain something is through video; a pre-edited sequence of the perfect pictures, video and music. No way to screw it up. However, FIRST, the technology competition, is taking away the technology. And now FIRST is moving even further in the wrong direction by limiting us to Microsoft Word. Please, please FIRST, bring back video next year to the Chairman's Award for the sake of videographers like me all over the country who love their job and get pumped up to make a video that represents their team in an international competition.

[Jedi Padawan]

Let's take a look at this, if you are lucky enought to have a video team they say pictures equal 1,000 words, well for teams that don't have the ability (for lack of money mostly or for lack of mentors or even heaven forbit its students) this is quite an unfair advantage and one that would discourage new teams from even trying to acheive the ultimate goal of earning Chairmans Award. (By the way I am a sort of videographer on lets call it an extremely tight budgeted team this year and I know how much the software needed costs as well as how much time is needed for a good one and your not alone on the want but I see the reason.... plus you can always use your videos for promos in the community) :]

[Gabriel]

Personally, I thought that the Chairman's award was becoming more about the presentation and less about what the team had actually accomplished. Teams were putting huge amounts of time and money into getting that award, and thats fine, but there are plenty of teams that are just as worthy of the award but don't have the resources to compete on the same level and I think that because they didn't have the resources to do a major production they either ignored the chairman's award altogether. Something like the chairman's award, the highest honor in FIRST, and a representation of everything FIRST stands for HAS to be an even playing field, otherwise FIRST becomes hypocritical.

[ngreen]

Think about how you present yourself in the real world. Whether it be for a scholarship or for a job. Most will ask that you present a resume and then follow up with an interview. Most resumes are one to two pages, we get four. We also have interviews to present ourselves too. I think this way makes it easier for FIRST to make the best choice and not the flashiest on a tape. They take the team with the best credentials and personality for the award.

As for extra video footage. Last year my team created a thirty-minute i-movie which we ran parts of in our pit, we use it for promotions around my town and state, and we even put it onto dvd and sold some as a small fundraiser.

As for the move to MSWord. It has to deal with accessabilty. Most everyone can use MSWord or convert to it. And possibly that Microsoft is a big sponsor of FIRST influence their decision.

[Jedi Padawan]

Personally, I thought that the Chairman's award was becoming more about the presentation and less about what the team had actually accomplished. Teams were putting huge amounts of time and money into getting that award, and thats fine, but there are plenty of teams that are just as worthy of the award but don't have the resources to compete on the same level and I think that because they didn't have the resources to do a major production they either ignored the chairman's award altogether. Something like the chairman's award, the highest honor in FIRST, and a representation of everything FIRST stands for HAS to be an even playing field, otherwise FIRST becomes hypocritical.

Good example for this one a particular team last year was mentoring 7 other teams last year with at least 2 or 3 lego teams and worked thier butts off for the community, they had very little time after that due to the fact they were either working on the bot or presenting to another group and so they get the usuall notebook ready (limited in resources) and come to realize the judges don't even take hardly a glance at the notebook which includes statistics and other data showing that this team has taken leaps and bounds towards completing Chairmans prerequisites. Come to find out they used an outdated old website that the team didn't have time to update (seeing as thier webmaster was thier lead programmer and electrical guy (plus forum person etc..)) . so in video and other things it really limited teams who would work in the community and yet didn't have the time/resources to devote to things like videos etc. so they didn't have the extras and as a result that year lost chairmans and got shafted despite the fact both the winning team and a few of the losing teams definately deserved at least mention.
As far as the videos we do (when we have money) are produced usuallyto go towards doing stuff in the community like educating fundraising little stuff like that that helps the community understand... at least that's its point with us.

[Mike Soukup]

Good example for this one a particular team last year was mentoring 7 other teams last year with at least 2 or 3 lego teams and worked thier butts off for the community, they had very little time after that due to the fact they were either working on the bot or presenting to another group and so they get the usuall notebook ready (limited in resources that year too) and come to realize the judges don't even take hardly a glance at the notebook which includes statistics and other data showing that this team has taken leaps and bounds towards completing Chairmans prerequisites. Come to find out they used an outdated old website that the team didn't have time to update (seeing as thier webmaster was thier lead programmer and electrical guy (plus forum person etc..)) so a team with a kickbutt website and just a few things done won that regional not to mention they had a PR person on staff who's only job is to win chairmans. so in video and other things it really limited teams who would work in the community and yet didn't have the time/resources to devote to things like videos etc. plus the videos we've produced usually go to doing stuff in the community like educating fundraising little stuff like that that helps the community understand... at least that's its point with us.
Please never say that a team is not deserving of an award they won. You can say that another team got shafted and should have been recognized, but never say that the team that won it got it only because they had a flashy website or presentation or an adult that did all the work. Definitely not gracious.

[Jedi Padawan]

Please never say that a team is not deserving of an award they won. You can say that another team got shafted and should have been recognized, but never say that the team that won it got it only because they had a flashy website or presentation or an adult that did all the work. Definitely not gracious.

Reply sorry that was not the intent, the intent was that alot of good teams are competing and that some have more resources than others, and I know several teams have gotten shafted with lack of resources technologically. that was the intent, that particular team won it fair and square for that years rules as to what they could do and I say well done to them, in fact I would have loved it if they had won national chairmans. I'm sorry If I came off ungraciously that was not it's intent.

[Marygrace]

Moving backward? I dont believe FIRST is moving backward. There intent wasn't to deprive you of using the technology your team feels you excel at. I look at the whole thing as a good thing, one of the reasons they probably did this is because more and more teams were applying for the Chairman's Award meaning they dont have time to watch everyone's video,

*COUGH* *means FIRST is expanding* *COUGH*
Ahem, excuse me.

N-e ways, I also agree with what has been said, not all teams have the technology to make fantastic videos, so they dont have a chance to compete with the other teams trying to get the Chairmans Award. They dont look as professional and can't make it all flashy and pretty. I am all for the current 4pg way of judging the Chairmans award. Puts everyone at a level playing field. Now, just because it is 4 pages of information, doesn't mean you can't make it exciting.

2003 Beach Cities Robotics Chairman's Award Pages 1 (http://www.bcrobotics.org/2003/page1.jpg) 2 (http://www.bcrobotics.org/2003/page2.jpg) 3 (http://www.bcrobotics.org/2003/page3.jpg) 4 (http://www.bcrobotics.org/2003/page4.jpg)

You can still play around with your resources, and make an excellent entry, you dont need the music and narration. :)

PS The point of the CHairman's award is to show your contribution to awareness of FIRST in the community, not to impress people with your videographer skills.

[Schaffer]

I think that the Chairman's Award should be given based on the good work done by the team. However, In the "real world", presentation does carry a heavy weight on what is awarded; there is a reason why you wear a suit to a job interview. Creativity and professional presentation skills are important.

Does anyone have a suggestion how FIRST could still award Chairman's based on the team's efforts in their community, but still foster creativity by giving students that "go the extra mile" with video or other media an incentive to hone their communication skills?

[Koko Ed]

Perhaps the limiting of the use of tools in creating the Chairman's Award is a challange to the creator artistically to use the tool in a unique way. Word is not as limited as you think and the most creative minds will see that and put it to use. Complaining about the challange only sets up a barrier to the goal of success before you have even tried to achieve that success. FIRST loves to throw down the gauntlet and challange teams to creatively solve problems and this is just another challange to make the most out of a little. Perhaps they want to see just how resourceful your team truly is. Don't knock it til you've tried it.

[KenWittlief]

"we must move forwards, not backwards
upwards, not forwards
and always twirling, twirling towards the future" -Kronos from the simpsons

the only basis on which a team should be awarded the chairmans award is the content of the submission, not the way in which it is presented

If I serve you roadkill on gold and silver plates and utensiles on a silk tablecloth, its still roadkill

and salmon tastes just as good on a paper plate as it does on fine china.

Dont worry about the presentation for the chairmans award

and dont fret about your video skills - there are far more ways you can use them to promote FIRST besides a chairmans award submission.

[Joe Ross]

First of all, I don't think that by limiting your submission to Word, FIRST has really limited you more then last year. If you want to do your chairman's award submission in something else, there are multiple ways of importing that into word. If all else fails, take a screenshot and import that graphic to word.

However, FIRST may be shooting themselves in the foot with the e-mail submission. Last year, due to a bug in word, team 330's chairman's award submission was 88 megabytes. When zipped, it was only slightly smaller. I don't know of a single e-mail system that will send or receive 88 megabyte attachments correctly.

[GoDaisy341]

I do have to say that after reading all of the responses that I am a little dissapointed. I am well aware that some teams don't have the capability of video and my statement was not to require the use of video in the submission. What I was stating is that we should not be held back from using it. The only thing that I could think of that would keep FIRST from letting us use video is that they couldn't handle the file size or the frame size of the videos that many teams put together. There are easy ways around such a problem (like if a team opts to do video they could mandate that it be on a VHS or a DVD), but apparantly FIRST doesn't want to deal with it at all. I just find it strange that they could find a very easy solution but they decide not to.

[KenWittlief]

I would guess that maybe FIRST wants teams to spend their limited time and energy on things that earn you a chairmans award, instead of spending many hours putting together a video about why you think you have earned a chairmans award

maybe?

the submission is really just talking about what you have done

this might be their way of saying, spend more time doing, less time talking about it?

or I could be full of beans! :^)

[IMDWalrus]

I would guess that maybe FIRST wants teams to spend their limited time and energy on things that earn you a chairmans award, instead of spending many hours putting together a video about why you think you have earned a chairmans award

maybe?

the submission is really just talking about what you have done

this might be their way of saying, spend more time doing, less time talking about it?

or I could be full of beans! :^)
I think Ken's got it perfectly. Focus on actually DOING the things that win you the Chairman's Award...not on the presentation.

Just a reminder: winning the Chairman's Award isn't very important. What really matters is getting out there and improving your community. Helping others should always come first...the Chairman's Award is just one way of recognizing the fact that you've done that.

[OneAngryDaisy]

I see all of your points, however, I have to admit that I myself am a bit dissapointed as well with FIRST's decision. To some video/graphic guys this is like making the builders use lego pieces or the programmers use something outdated.. Before bashing anyone over their statement please try to step in their shoes and see their perspective..

I also realize that FIRST does not have the time to watch 40 or so 10 minute videos, but just a 2 minute video coupled with 2 pages of word would be feasible. However, I do realize that we'll probably have to accept this modification as 'permanent'

[Kyle Fenton]

There is a way to embed video into a .doc file. However I don't think FIRST would approve.

[Chris Fultz]

You can use video as part of your Chairman's submission.

Every team has an interview, and you can bring in any display materials that you want to the interview session. You just need to have a way to play / display it = FIRST will not supply all of the equipment.

In 2003, Cyber Blue used a short video as part of our interview -
the students ran it as a video clip on a laptop. It worked well.

[Cumulonimbus57]

It makes a lot of sense what FIRST has done. This summer i had to sort old chairmans awards at FIRST Place (it took me a week with three other people helping me) , and the sheer volume of them was amazing. With the amount of teams in FIRST today, it would be unrealistic for each team to send the Chairman's presentations they did in the past. By limiting it to the four pages, it gives the judges the content in a much more concise form.

[Rich Kressly]

On the surface, this appears to inhibit the abilities/creativity of those creating the submission and I understand how this may disappoint some people.

However, let's also look at these positives. Submissions are four pages in Word format and consistent across every submission. This will most certainly help put these documents in the hands of judges earlier than ever before. The consistency also allows a judge to be much more efficient (let's remember these are volunteers who have rearranged their lives for the events). This means more available time for the judges to provide the full ten minutes for each interview. It also will get those Chairman's judges out of that "room in the back" and allow them more time than ever before to see the teams in action.

In addition, as others have stated, video can easily be used as part of the presentation. Video production is labor intensive, thus the purposes of creating a team oriented video should also be to inform the community, spread the message of FIRST, solicit for more sponsorship, and highlight team achievements. All of those purposes go directly to what the Chairman's Award is about.

In the end teams with all kinds of budgets and expertise can submit on a level playing field and those who are skillful at video production still have a whole lot of wonderful reasons to go forward and produce a quality product utilizing the skills they have acquired.

Good luck to all CA submitting teams in 2004.

[robolemur1236]

I agree and disagree :P. Winning the chairmans award is a good accomplishment, and it would get you into the nationals, but that doesnt mean obsess over this to the point of not having a good robot. If necessary, put one group on the chairmans award and one on the 'bot. simple solution.
:rolleyes:

[Collin Fultz]

there is no rule that one cannot use video in the presentation...we had about a minute video clip that we used in our presentation that (in my opinion: and i was a presenter) was a huge help to us in winning the AZ Regional Chairman's

[Amanda Morrison]

Although I know I'm a little biased... :)

All the video editing and filming doesn't mean a whole lot if your whole team is illiterate. Maybe this is a good chance for FIRST to help students bone up on their grammar and composition?

[Jedi Padawan]

At least to me I think they were trying to equalize the field, there's an old saying that says "a picture is worth a thousand words" or something like that, well 1,000 words might fit on the 4 pages you have but it depends on whether or not readability is an issue, I don't think there is anything wrong with a short 1 minute video it is just that not every team can do it so why make it the "main" form of presentation?? it would basically eliminate alot of teams from competing both old teams and new teams. (I am a video guy outside of my team but my team lacks the resources right now to do video so I feel your pain at not being able to submit but also feel the peoples pain who even if it were allowed would not be able to submit.)

[Wayne C.]

I do have to say that after reading all of the responses that I am a little dissapointed. I am well aware that some teams don't have the capability of video and my statement was not to require the use of video in the submission. What I was stating is that we should not be held back from using it. The only thing that I could think of that would keep FIRST from letting us use video is that they couldn't handle the file size or the frame size of the videos that many teams put together. There are easy ways around such a problem (like if a team opts to do video they could mandate that it be on a VHS or a DVD), but apparantly FIRST doesn't want to deal with it at all. I just find it strange that they could find a very easy solution but they decide not to.


If you are so hot on a video use it for your 5 minute presentation to the judges. The rules say you can do anything in the first 5 of the 10 minute interview. That way you can bring in the AV equipment and such and it isn't FIRST's problem.

But I totally agree with FIRST's ruling on the submission to the committee. The winner of the CA should qualify on their merits and not their ability to make a flashy presentation. Heck, it be in favor of leaving out anything but text in the submission but I know that wouldn't happen. Save the creative competition for the Autodesk events.

WC :cool:

[Ryan Dognaux]

FIRST is definately not moving backwards at all, I would think the decision to move to a common submission requirement would make it obvious. With FIRST growing more and more every year, the time that would be spent watching Chairman's Awards videos would grow too. It was probably getting to the point where it was just taking too long... but the 4 paper submission still gives you the opportunity to easily tell everything your team does. That's what Chairmans is all about, helping people... not making flashy videos.

And if the video thing is important, because making cool videos are fun... you can always include live video in your animation. Or make a promo video for your team, or make a video that shows what you guys are doing so far in the build season at your school. Those are just a few ideas... :]

[GoDaisy341]

I thank all of those who have participated in the thread however you are still not talking about what my original post was commenting on. My comment was that the submission format should still be allowed to be a video. That has nothing to do with what you did to win the award. It has nothing to do with what a team does off the field or what makes the team unique. All it is is a way of presenting that. I'm not saying that it should be all about "flashy videos" as it has been put. All I'm saying is that teams should not be limited to using just Microsoft Word. Obviously it is too late to change anything for this year's competition however, I was looking for a possible change next year

[Bharat Nain]

I do have to say that after reading all of the responses that I am a little dissapointed. I am well aware that some teams don't have the capability of video and my statement was not to require the use of video in the submission. What I was stating is that we should not be held back from using it. The only thing that I could think of that would keep FIRST from letting us use video is that they couldn't handle the file size or the frame size of the videos that many teams put together. There are easy ways around such a problem (like if a team opts to do video they could mandate that it be on a VHS or a DVD), but apparantly FIRST doesn't want to deal with it at all. I just find it strange that they could find a very easy solution but they decide not to.


You could still promote FIRST with your videos at events held at your school. Even though it may not count, it still shows you guys love FIRST :D