Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

Having these celebrities help bring FIRST to people who've never seen it before is important for the growth of FIRST. How are we ever going to get new teams and supporters if we just keep pushing to our own crowd?

Dean wants to make FIRST a household name, just like Girl Scouts or 4H - just to use examples of 'kid programs' that people know of even without being in the program.

We're about culture change. If the people society is currently celebrating (pop stars, star athletes) come out talking about this crazy robotics thing they just saw?! Well, those are some new audiences exposed to FIRST. That's the culture change we're looking for. Every student in the world knowing that FIRST is an option for them, and celebrating scientists and engineers for the rockstars they are. This is just the first step in that larger movement towards culture change.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

I think we all get that, and believe it. However - it doesn't seem appropriate to do it at the competition. I get more excited seeing Woody's reading list than I do seeing Will.I.Am perform his new song. There has to be a way to draw in those wayward souls without boring the choir.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

FIRST is a very interesting and unique creature. It is entirely unlike any traditional after-school extracurricular (it's both year round and seasonal! It's a sport but a club! It has community service opportunities and competitions!) bears little resemblance to extra curriculars outside of the school system like 4-H or scouting (the programs share a loose set of goals, but unless combined have very different ways of gettign there) and FRC itself is a unique robotics opportunity that cannot be equated to FTC/VRC.

FIRST turned 25 this year, and like a lot of 25 year olds, it's collecting wisdom on top of smarts, it's finally starting to act like an adult (communicating and adapting to a changing landscape never seemed paramount the first 3 years I was in the program), and it's applying experiences and past mistakes to improve. However another trait it shares with most in their mid-twenties is not necessarily a lack of direction, but lack of a pinpoint endgame. It has skills, talents, and does its job very well, but where does the organization see itself in 25 years?

It's not fun to talk about, but when you think of FIRST in its next 25 years, it's hard to imagine a lot of key people around for its first 25 years will be sticking around. People get sick and/or old and then they die, and it's important that (as far as we know) the FIRST National Advisor and the Founder of FIRST are not immune to this phenomenon. No question that we as the FIRST community have a great thing going. Sure, there is always room to improve, but FIRST and FRC especially will be one of a kind for as long as it lasts. But in 25 years are we going to be telling ourselves we did a great job growing this program together, or are we going to kick stones on the road of regret because we lost focus after those who came before us left the program to us?

Dean talks a lot because he always has soemthing big to say. The last two years he has realized that FIRST has almost hit the ceiling on its niche success with its current sponsorship pool and mentorship draw. There are places in these categories where teams have room to grow, but on a greater organizational level it is time to figure out how to make this program a true mainstream success. How are we going to do this together? I honestly have no clue. I mean, even Dean barely knows how and he is far more intelligent than me. What I do know is that the old way of cozying up to x defense contractor and y branch of the army and z school of engineering is not going to do anything else but put FIRST on autopilot until it runs out of gas. I'm willing to try this new way of "convert the pop culture icon to FIRST, then water 3 times a week and watch it grow" and see where it takes us.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

I know there's the food allergies / physical limitations section in VIMS, but I'd love to see them expand that, to help VCs get a better handle on the number of vegetarian / lactose-intolerant / gluten-free folk, to make it easier for them to get the right amount of food for everyone.

That said, the worst vegetarian food situation I've seen was two meals with salad as my only option, at a 3-day event. It could be better, but it could certainly be worse.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

I agree with this sentiment. I think one potential growth path is to get school administrators to buy into the FIRST program as being consistent with their core educational mission. At least in California, they give it lip service, but little actual support for most teams. Michigan appears to be further along this path. Why not try to make FIRST as popular at football? It certainly is more relevant to today's world.

And I agree that FIRST needs to reach out through the pop culture. That might be done better outside of the competition venue, e.g., will.i.am releasing a video using FRC footage backed by his song.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

While getting too deep into the subject would derail the thread, I do think the teams and local organizations should be prioritizing making FIRST more mainstream now that it has been made viable in locations both predictable (Michigan, California, New England) and somewhat surprising (Minnesota, Oregon). Think of your team's operating budget without any registration fees. That is a reality in Michigan. Now think of that happening not just for you, but every other team in the states and beyond. Without having to worry about having enough money jsut to show up anymore, teams can really get to work on far more noble and exciting causes with the same amount of money available.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

I share similar feelings.

I think FIRST is trying to get literally everyone interested in FRC and in an FRC team, which I don't think is necessarily the best move. Pop Warner football is a huge part of our culture, and I sure don't think they literally want everyone to join one of their teams. No, they try to appeal to the kids that like running around, and who's dads like football. AYSO soccer is a much more inclusive organization, but even they don't seem to have endorsements from kids TV shows or musicians in order to get kids that wouldn't be otherwise interested to join. Instead, they try to be open positive, and fun, but not pushy about trying to get every kid to join.

FIRST should aspire to be like a high school sport: something that everyone knows about and generally has positive feelings towards, but that not everyone joins. We should be a niche thing (just like soccer or swimming or chess club or cheerleading...) where kids that are interested in building things or robots (or just want to try it out because it looks cool) do FRC. The rest of the school should have a general idea of what FRC is, but they don't necessarily have to join it in order for FIRST's mission to be accomplished.

The current push seems to revolve around painting FIRST as this huge pop culture phenomenon/cult thing when it really isn't. Using popular musicians to support FIRST is good and all, but I don't think it really gets that many new recruits, and I do know it alienates or appears silly to a good fraction of the FRC population. I think the best endorsers for FRC are people like Elon Musk, Jonny Ive or Dean himself, people who kids that might be interested in FRC look up to as cool leaders who have been successful through science and technology.

Also, keep in mind the smart kids demographic is far from tapped out. There are still tons of smart kids at my school who might be interested in FRC through a "FIRST is an awesome place where you build cool things" or a "FIRST makes what you're learning at school not boring" based marketing push rather than the "Science is rock and roll" thing they seemed to concentrate on so far.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

I agree with DampRobot. FRC has always been a sort of "varsity" robotics sport, that doesn't make the game smaller to get more people involved, like Vex and FTC do. I was way more excited to watch the Cheesy Poof's autonomous mode than I was to watch will.i.am or that other singer person. Instead of trying to gain popularity by adding famous pop culture people to the program, they should focus on making the robotics/competition part of FIRST more exciting to the public. Associating the program with famous people may get some people to find out about the program, but it won't get the general public interested and invested in FIRST.

i also agree with PayneTrain, that FIRST is having some growing pains, and are working out some details with the organization.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

A few thoughts on the topics at hand:

If you want world-wide recognition, you are going to have to reach out to world-wide brands and get them to feature FIRST on their products. Cocoa Cola, McDonalds, the Global Fortune 500. Let's hope everyone is as curious as will.i.am.

Do any FRC students play sports (three-sport, varsity athletes) or are the students in band? Who is FRC really targeting? Are they targeting students who play neither a sport or instrument or are they targeting everyone? Is FRC exciting enough for a student to give up a game or competition to participate in a District meet or Regional?

We have lost ~72 FRC Teams in Florida since 2003. I can't sustain what I have; therefore, how am I going to grow it? If we can't sustain our FRC Teams, where are we going to be in 25 years? Granted, some of the loss was due to the J.C. Penney Grants going away and some of it was due to lack of Mentors. I also know that at least two of these 72 teams became FTC Teams. If I won a good-sized lotto, I'd ask each of them if they wanted to restart their team and give them each 50k to do it.

Yeah, food issues. I'm right there with you. I am 'sensitive' to sodium bisulfite (anti-browning agent on lettuce, shrimp, dried fruit, processed meats, pickled onions, sauerkraut, and rooster chili sauce) and sucralose (Splenda). Eating these things is completely out of the question for me. I'll take all the meat I can get between the gluten-free and regular table, but a nice gluten-free pasta, vegetable curry, meatless chili, fruit platter, vegetable platter, baked potato, falafel, hummus, beans/rice buffet, cooked vegetables, with cheese on the side for my vegetarian, lactose intolerant, and gluten allergy FRC, FTC, and FLL friends would be wonderful.

No coffee?! What?! In Northern MN? It's a staple food. I would never make it through the day! That must have been torture/cruel and unusual punishment.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

In my experience, yes and yes. At my school, something like a third of the FRC team was also part of the marching band at any one time during my 4 years. While we didn't have any "3-sport, varsity athletes"(possibly because they are a dying breed), we had various team members that played baseball, basketball, tennis, football, soccer or were on the ski team at some point in high school.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

How did that work out? Any conflicts?

There were 7 people in my university design team group and 5 of them played university sports on scholarship. Many times, the sport conflicted with our design project (and we didn't even have to build anything in 6 weeks).

On our team, we have people who participate in all kinds of other extracurriculars. The way we handle build season is we have five work days a week, and members have to meet a certain number of hours to go on the trip to competition (it varies year to year depending on a lot of things and is ultimately set by the captain, but the last two years it's been 80 hours). Most team members have a variety of conflicts, but the flexible structure of our team allows them to work around those conflicts.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

For the band, we would lose 1 or two build season nights because most of the important members were at a band thing, and there was always a certain competition season week that we wouldn't compete because of a yearly band trip. The sports were usually not in season during build season, but if people had a game or something it wasn't a big deal. My team had a "you get what you put in" model. If you didn't have a specific responsibility for a robotics meeting or event, missing it was your loss.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

At our ~450 student high school, a large percentage (>50%) of the kids are in band. Always a good idea to keep the band directors up to date on competition dates. Found out the hard way that band directors do not appreciate it when two sections (percussion and French horn) are almost totally missing during a concert! (Choir director doesn't like it when his soloists come back from competition two days before Spring concert with no voice, but thankfully the sound guy is also our programmer/electrician so he can work some magic there . . . )

WRT athletics, we have had a number of two sport athletes, including several state qualifiers. Only a few have participated in Winter sports, however. We have had students opt out of attending competition due to athletics and others give up their sport in favor of robotics. These decisions were made carefully and thoughtfully. The toughest are the kids (and parents) who end up unable to attend competition because they tried to "do it all" and missed team requirements as a result. (We've also had kids opt out of the semi-annual Spring break band trip because it conflicted with competition.)

In all seriousness, we work with the AD, principal and superintendent to ensure they are all aware of dates and schedules. Our parents are also proactive at parent-teacher conference time and remind individual teachers of upcoming dates and even which students are involved in the current year. But with a small school, robotics has about the same % student body involvement as most of the varsity sports which helps.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

Having consistent judging, by being in Week 2 and 3 Regionals then watching the Champs, the way the judging and calls were made compared to each other I thought wasn't fair. We lost matches because of unclear calls and even waiting for a Volunteer to get a ball that went out of the field back to the human player. Not that it actually was based off of this observation, but after Week 3 they added a rule about violent ramming into other robots, which I think was brought in after Woodie Flowers came and watched KC where some teams were hitting others pretty hard when they didn't need to for any necessary reasons that I could say. So the volunteers and judges having a handle on how to rule the game early on could be improved somehow.