Re: At what point does it become unacceptable for a mentor to design/build the robot
 

Yes, although exceedingly rare based on the people I've talked to that were on one. I would be willing to be there are a much larger proportion of teams where students feel disenfranchised by the amount of work done by mentors, and an even larger proportion of teams that get accused of being "just watch the mentors" when they are in fact a happy partnership. The first step is always to talk to them as if students are off gossiping in the corner most of the mentors I know are content to continue working without you -- but we'd like it even more if you'd help us! Plenty of adults would love to teach you, but are hesitant to tell kids to get back to work that they did not raise.

When 1276 won BAE in 2006 (my then HS team), we got accused of being mentor built on CD (I can't find the thread, it was an implication but clearly us)! I can assure you that we were in fact a happy 50/50 partnership, and as I begin the journey into being a mentor I find myself eternally grateful to my Dad, Keith, Joe, Phil, and others that volunteered their valuable time to teach me things I didn't even know I was learning until I have had to apply them later.

It is my opinion that teams should refer to their robot as "our" robot. It is not the "kid's" robot, and it is not the "mentor's" robot, it is "our" robot. Successful FRC teams build partnerships and people that many companies would pay good money for. Working at a big company I've taken classes and listen to plenty of talks about leadership, and have friends taking MBA classes. IFI and AM have figured this out...

I think a lot of companies give FIRST/FIRST teams money for not-quite-the-right reason. They consider it training for their future workforce, but they miss out on all the off-hours lessons their current employees could benefit from. I am 100% certain I would not be where I am today with FIRST.

Re: At what point does it become unacceptable for a mentor to design/build the robot
 

TL;DR skip to the 3rd paragraph...

I have been both a student and a mentor, and have seen the over bearing mentor archetype from both perspectives. I, as a student, fought frequently with the mentors on my FRC team to allow other students to become more involved with the robot, instead of relegating them to tasks like button making. As a sophomore, I gave away my own assigned jobs to two or three people and stood by and filled the role of mentor, so that they at least could go home and tell their parents that they did something that day. I used every approach known to man to confront the mentors, each time trying to limit as much damage to my fellow students as possible. It got to the point that, I was asked to leave the team by the mentors because other students were starting to take up arms as well. I was viewed as a troublemaker who was trying to instigate a hostile takeover of the team. The same team where it was common place for students to watch a group of mentors huddled in another room talking design. No attempt by the mentors to include the students; every so often a student would attempt to push their way in, but to only be treated like they didn't exists.

As an FLL mentor, I watched as other mentors and head coaches would simply change code or redesign the whole robot and not explain it to the students. When parents would enter the room, at the end of meetings to pick up their kids, these mentors would act quite differently. Any attempt to talk to these colleagues about their actions would end in their denial the events ever happened.

For me the line is right where those who are on the outside looking in think it should be. Where parents who are not involved, sponsors who hear a team's presentation, even just the innocent bystander on the street who wanders into a competition think it should be. While they may not understand all of the trials and tribulations of the process of "inspiration," they are the ones who ultimately judge the success or failure of the team. How would they view the team in its current state, if they could be a fly on the wall at meetings? How would they view FIRST at large if all they had was a snapshot of this one team?

Try and do this for something you're not even remotely involved in. Then come back and try and look at your team in the same way you did that thing. It can be quite eye opening...

Re: At what point does it become unacceptable for a mentor to design/build the robot
 

My dad's friend's cousin's neighbor said she knew a guy who woke up in NYC in a bathtub full of ice and missing a kidney.

There's a lot of conjecture based on hearsay, and I've yet to see any incontrovertible proof that purely adult teams exist (outside of DARPA challenges and the like).

Re: At what point does it become unacceptable for a mentor to design/build the robot
 

The good thing about FIRST is that you really only have to run one team: your own team. You don't have to worry about what other people are doing with their team or with how their team is organized. If it is really not about the robot, then why should anyone care about what another team does? The competition is merely the vehicle that is used to get student excited about science and technology.

Within your own team, you must have a discussion among all team members and determine what is right for you. Find out what your team wants to do. Remember that mentors are an integral part of what FIRST is about; it's what makes this different from something like a science fair or a math team. Students and mentors are supposed to work TOGETHER to have a meaningful experience and to have a successful season. Open communication is truly the best way to solve most of the problems that exist in any relationship, not just mentor/student.

Does anyone disagree with this? How so? Please let me know, because this is how I've thought of the program my entire FIRST career.

Re: At what point does it become unacceptable for a mentor to design/build the robot
 

I have also seen this at FLL competitions and rumbles. Although comparing FLL mentor involvement and FRC mentor involvement is like comparing apples to oranges. In FLL mentors are supposed to, I don't have my handbook in front of me to actually quote it, step back and let the students do the work but help them work through issues and challenges. Just look at one of their core values "We do the work to find solutions with guidance from our coaches and mentors." It doesn't happen often but in our region we actually disqualify FLL team if we see mentors/coaches doing the work for the students.

FRC mentor involvement, as everyone has said, is a fine line. These students are working with tools and parts that can be dangerous if not used properly and sometimes there is a need for a mentor to do some of the work. Each team is different find the balance that fits your team and keeps every single one of the students engaged in the program. If we don't allow students to learn anything or be inspired we have not met what FIRST strives to do. We want to promote STEM fields and teach life/career/business skills. How can we achieve this by shutting students completely out of the process?

Re: At what point does it become unacceptable for a mentor to design/build the robot
 

Yeah, what Don said !!

This is an old thread in a new bottle. Teams ( student/mentors ) need to have an understanding of what success looks like. Having a winning robot is fun, but not necessarily success.

Teams need to have an understanding of what the off-season accomplishes in order to be ready for the on-season.

Knowing what success looks like, what you are trying to accomplish and focusing on that will help a lot. Solving team dynamics problems (forming, storming, norming, performing) before the on-season before kickoff helps a lot.

Team goals just collided with team dynamics !!

This is my 8th year doing this and we have had years with maybe 75% mentor involvement, 50%, 25%, and now about 1%. Next year will be maybe 33%. If we can keep it to 20 or 30% over the long haul I will be happy with that.

It is really nice getting things to the place to where the mentors can step forward or backward into the process as necessary.

Re: At what point does it become unacceptable for a mentor to design/build the robot
 

Speaking from my team's experience, the students are the ones who design, build, and test everything. What we as mentors try to do is help the students better understand why somethings work and others don't. We help them with learning the fundamentals of how things are created. As a former team member and now a mentor I feel like it is the students who should be doing the work and the mentor is there to guide them. If mentors were to take the aspect of robotics that students enjoy the most we would be missing the whole idea of FIRST, which is to inspire students in the fields of math and science through application

Re: At what point does it become unacceptable for a mentor to design/build the robot
 

I wanted to come back with a great example from my team last night, and to reiterate that the tipping point really is when the mentors stop listening to the students. If the students say "you design it", then go for it - that's what they want. But if they want to design it, step back and let them!

Two nights ago, we realized there was a problem with our climbing mechanism. Without going into too many design details, we realized that reaching for the next bar was geometrically impossible given the current setup and all of the parts we had constructed so far.

Yesterday, the build mentors spent time thinking and e-mailing, trying to come up with a good solution. We ended up going to the meeting with 3 possible solutions in our back pocket, all of which we didn't really like.

So, we started the meeting by gathering everyone around the robot, and having the student leading that portion of the construction explain the problem. She went on to list two possible solutions she had thought of (both of which we had discussed over e-mail and had ready for the team if needed), and why she really didn't like one of them. One of the students in charge of another part of the robot then explained why she really didn't like the other one, as it would have significantly impacted what she was trying to accomplish.

Like I said, we had solutions, but we really didn't like any of them.

So, then another student chimed in. Basically, she reversed the way the arm worked (only requiring software updates, the construction would stay exactly the same), and suddenly the problem was solved.

We never even pulled out the third solution we had in reserve. There was no need. In fact, as mentors we didn't propose any solutions to this critical issue (although at other points in the build we have proposed solutions when needed).

So, the moral of the story is... Listen to your students! They'll have ideas, and some of them will be great ideas. They'll tell you if you're doing too much, or if they need more help. There's nothing wrong with doing some prep work and coming to the meeting prepared to spoon-feed them. But listen to them first, and determine if its really needed!

Re: At what point does it become unacceptable for a mentor to design/build the robot
 

Here's a personal example of a little too much mentor involvement, by myself, on my own team. Student designed gearbox plates -- very nicely done. I needed to make a couple minor changes/additions, broke his CAD model, and ended up re-doing it from scratch. When we go to look at the final plates (all 12 of them), oops, they're too big, and will drag on the ground. Now we need to go in and rework them. Moral of the story here? Students, trust your mentors, but only so far. Check their work. Even those of this who have been in it over a decade can still make mistakes.

Re: At what point does it become unacceptable for a mentor to design/build the robot
 

The argument seems to frequently stem from the appearance of some of those top tier robots.

"It looks professionally built, there's no way high school students built that."

I've heard it dozens of times, mostly aimed at 1114 and 2056, since the Canadian regionals are my stomping grounds.

I know because I've dealt with these teams many times, that the students are no less involved in the process, its just that their process is different to the average team.

In many cases, the competition robot appears professionally built, because it is. I know that several of the more recent 1114 machines (starting in 2009, IIRC), the production of many parts for the final machine happened at their sponsor's facility by a machine. Those parts look professional, because a machine produced them from a CAD drawing. Often though, the students DID assemble the final product.

The difference is in the focus of their program compared to the argued "student-built" machine. The "professionally-built" teams focus more on the prototyping and design and engineering process, often outsourcing the manufacture of the final product parts to a sponsor, while the "student-built" teams focus on manufacturing the robot. Both have merit, they're just different.

Re: At what point does it become unacceptable for a mentor to design/build the robot
 

So what we need is for the KOP to include a mill, laser jet, lathe, and 3D printer (all CnC, of course), so that everyone can do everything exactly the same way! Yay, uniformity!

Re: At what point does it become unacceptable for a mentor to design/build the robot
 

I do.

Sometimes my students just watch me while I'm trying to debug a particularly hard problem. The process is more important than the actual details of solving the problem.

What makes this program awesome is that more often I sit back and watch them.

Maybe instead of basing judgements on who they see doing the work people should not be so quick to judge.

Re: At what point does it become unacceptable for a mentor to design/build the robot
 

Including all that in the KOP wouldn't make any difference to the high-caliber teams. They probably wouldn't even open it, all their manufacturing is outsourced anyway. Like 1075guy said, their emphasis is on the design and engineering, not the manufacturing. If you can do the engineering, there's thousands of machine shops that can do the manufacturing for you.

Re: At what point does it become unacceptable for a mentor to design/build the robot
 

Our process closely resembles what actually happens in engineering design shops. We prototype, design, prototype, design, building the final product from the parts that was designed, with many parts produced in a fab shop. Just like the real world deal.

Our robot may or may not be effective, I hope it is. It looks like it was professionally designed and produced, with a lot of mentor support.

We will probably get blistered this year with criticism because of how it looks and not how it really happened. I don't really know how to counter that and I don't want to waste the time.

We are also working with a low experience, low resource team and we are working to create a robot to see how effective it can be. Using limited talent and training, and hand tools and a hacksaw. It will be interesting.

Re: At what point does it become unacceptable for a mentor to design/build the robot
 

[Irony]Sorry, should have used these.[/Irony]