![]() |
Re: Texas Registration 2015
NOTE: This is not an official TX FIRST communication. Emails regarding District committee involvement will be sent out in advance of Regionals to team contacts.
Since last summer, a group of us TX FIRST (not to be confused with FIRST in Texas) organizers have been working on laying the foundation for planning Districts in Texas. As many of you had pointed out, Texas presents a lot of challenges and we want to make sure that we're able to make decisions that will work out best for our teams. Many mentors attended District meetings at off-season events this year and shared their thoughts and ideas. From the information we gleaned and lots of number crunching, we've been working out possibilities for how things will look in Texas. Moving forward, we'll be seeking more help from Texas teams and volunteers. Communications will be going out in advance of Regionals with details about upcoming meetings and how people can potentially get involved in the process. I'd like to share with anyone who is interested some data and statistics I've compiled while working through the Districts planning process: http://goo.gl/39WDnh This "Texas Team Stats" spreadsheet includes both "Present" (2011 to 2015) and "Historic" (1995 to 2015) information in tabs. In the "Present" spreadsheet, I broke teams down by "Region" (Alamo, Dallas, Hub City, Lone Star). There are no official Region boundaries, so I've assigned teams to regions based on distance of their city to the Region's main city (San Antonio, Dallas, Lubbock, Houston). I also added a tab that shows the distances between teams and the different Regions in Texas. I compiled data (through http://www.usfirst.org/whats-going-on, just required a TON of work...) on teams' years of existence. At the bottom of each tab are a variety of calculations that help to illuminate team loss and growth. The state has lost many teams over the years, but overall things are moving in the right direction. With great Texas veteran teams, mentors, volunteers, and organizers working together, we're in an excellent position to support and sustain our teams and strengthen and manageably grow the program. |
Re: Texas Registration 2015
Quote:
The thing that strikes me about these numbers is the reliance in conversations with Texas FIRST folks on the gross yearly team numbers which include newly incubated Rookies (usually spun-up with easy 1st/2nd year seed money). It makes it look like things are okay because the overall team levels stays pretty constant year to year--Veteran Teams + Current Year Rookies = Okay Numbers But, IMHO this only _masks_ a deeper problem that will undermine the march to team levels needed to move to the Texas District Model. The real shocker in these numbers is the LOST teams numbers... the net-loss of previously active teams. As an example... in Alamo Region (our region): 2012 - LOST 6 teams of 47 2011 teams--a 12.77% LOSS 2013 - LOST 8 teams of 51 2012 teams--a 15.69% LOSS 2014 - LOST 8 teams of 51 2013 teams--a 15.69% LOSS 2015 - LOST 7 teams of 48 2014 teams--a 14.58% LOSS But, here's the _staggering_ number... in the Alamo Region of 47 registered 2011 teams, ONLY 27 remain registered today in 2015... that's a _crazy_ 42.55% LOSS of 2011 teams in Alamo Region. HOW do we get to the District Model with these net-loss numbers from a substantial portion of the state? For those of us that want Districts here, it's time to talk about the elephant in the room IMHO. --Michael Blake |
Re: Texas Registration 2015
Quote:
When Texas eventually goes to districts , these numbers will be very important for planning potential events and regions. |
Re: Texas Registration 2015
Micheal, isn't that what this thread has been about? Team loss is an enormous problem. If anyone has new and creative ways to fix it please let me know. We're doing everything we can to make it easy for rookie and young teams to compete but sadly I don't have a magic money tree or know of anyway to give every team a dedicated leader to help keep them going.
Things we have tried - Mentor Workshops - Boot Camp Build Days (Bumper build days, anything I can to get teams help during the season, we've had 10 teams in our shop already this year) - We've added off-season events and workshops - Weekly conference calls for teams to call in and ask questions. (Did it two years ago with little success) - Mock Kickoffs Every year (including giving teams a binder full of resources when they come) - End of build scrimmages (we have teams in our shop for 3+ days straight finishing up their robots) - Giving parts, game pieces, etc away to teams Is there something we're missing in Texas to keep teams around? I'm running out of ideas. |
Re: Texas Registration 2015
Quote:
While you provided Alamo as an example, the large loss of teams is happening across the entire state and has been for a very long time, as you will note in the "Historic" data tab. Texas teams who fold last about 3 years, on average, before folding. It's definitely a "Texas" issue that is going to take people across the state working together to solve. As Allen mentioned, there have been many different programs and opportunities provided both by TX organizers and teams to try to support teams. However, it's still been really difficult retain teams. FIRST in Texas, with the help of RDs, has been helping to try and solve the money issue, which hasn't been easy when you have state entities so concerned about funding rookie/2nd year teams and not sustaining returning teams. But, our teams also face problems like losing the champion of a program (teacher, mentor, administrator, etc.) and it's often really difficult to find someone else to step up if there already isn't a backup in place. When you factor in that many teams are also isolated from resources (companies, mentors, veteran teams, TX organizers, etc.), the difficulty of sustaining teams rises substantially. Then add to that all the other circumstances faced by teams that have been mentioned in this thread... It's quite a challenge. I don't think anyone has a fix-all solution. But I think with everyone collaborating and working together as a team we certainly stand a better chance at finding solutions. |
Re: Texas Registration 2015
Quote:
My take, at the most basic-level, and I can be full of crap and totally wrong... is that what's missing is enough legit game play opportunities for 200+ teams (min. needed for District?) to play in elims at least semi-regularly. And there needs to be a real sustained effort where Tier-1 and Tier-2 teams mentor and shepherd Tier-4 teams and Rookies into Tier-3 performance so they have that plausible chance to be a 2nd pick. I believe, that making the elims at in-season competitions and substantial off-season competitions changes the "chemistry" of teams and creates an atmosphere of interest, excitement, expectations, passion, dedication... that then leads to teams' adults/students acting proactively acquiring the things they need to sustain a capable team. Just my opinion from a barely Tier-2 garage-team still waiting for our powder-coated metal... yep. --Michael Blake |
Re: Texas Registration 2015
Quote:
Anyway, I want to ADD that I'm a BIG FAN of off-season competitions that are limited to 32 teams and have 4 team alliances in the elims... this way everyone plays because the alliances are required to use all robots within the first two matches of each bracket as they ascend through the brackets. --Michael Blake |
Re: Texas Registration 2015
Jess and others,
Do we have any information on the Texas team that are no longer in existence as they pertain to the rookie team criteria? During the team’s rookie year, were they rookies according to criteria 1 or 2-6? Once the criteria is established we can help assist new rookie teams especially those like us that started as a criteria 1 team. We didn’t have a single person involved with our team that had ever heard of FIRST. Mr. B. 2015 Rookie Team Criteria The formation of new FIRST Robotics Competition (FRC) teams is critical to FIRST Founder Dean Kamen's vision of changing the culture, and creating the spirit of Gracious Professionalism® that is open and friendly to new participants. We recognize the commitment teams and mentors must make to get a first year team "off the ground" and for this reason FIRST grants qualifying first-year teams "Rookie" team status, which comes with specific incentives and recognition including: 1. Rookie All-Star Award - to recognize outstanding achievement by a first year team; 2. Rookie Grants - to help first year teams get financially off the ground. Some examples of past Rookie grants are NASA, SRT-Nypro, and Community Foundation of Texas. As FIRST continues to grow and teams expand in existing FIRST areas, it is important for us to have guidelines for qualifying as a "Rookie" team. For the 2015 season, these guidelines are: 1. A new team that starts in a school/organization/alliance that has never run an FRC team before would be considered a Rookie (note: most teams are formed within a single school, but some comprise two or more schools, or are organizations such as Scouts, Boys & Girls Clubs, home schools, etc.). 2. A returning team that has not been in a competition for three years would be considered a Rookie; that is, going into the 2015 season, the team cannot have competed in seasons 2014, 2013 or 2012. Teams, whose last competition season was 2011 or earlier, can return during the 2015 season as a Rookie with a 2015 Rookie team number, OR, they can continue as a veteran with their original team number. Teams that choose to register as a veteran are not eligible for the above listed Rookie incentives and recognition. 3. Where multiple schools were combined into a single team, and that team now wants to separate into different teams, or any single team wants to separate into different teams, the new teams do not qualify as Rookies unless the requirements set forth above in 2 are met. These teams will need to register as a "New" team in the Team Information Management System (TIMS) by following the Create/Re-establish a Team link, and follow all steps accordingly. See 2015 Team Combines and Separations for additional details. 4. Where multiple existing teams want to combine into one team, the new team does not qualify as a Rookie unless the requirements set forth above in 2 are met. The team will need to register as a "New" team in TIMS by following the Create/Re-establish a Team link, and follow all steps accordingly. See 2015 Team Combines and Separations for additional details. 5. If a mentor, or teacher, from an existing team leaves and starts a team at a new school, that team does qualify as a Rookie team. 6. If individual students who have been involved in a team leave that school and start a team in their new school that team also is generally considered a Rookie providing it meets condition 1, and does not involve sufficient students to be considered a version of condition 3. As a maximum, the number of students in the new team that have competed in prior teams must not exceed 5. |
Re: Texas Registration 2015
Quote:
--Michael Blake |
Re: Texas Registration 2015
Quote:
Quote:
Thanks for the data! There are lots of ways to spin it, but I agree with Michael. Saying that numbers are "moving in the right direction" is very inaccurate. How about that elephant... :rolleyes: Quote:
|
Re: Texas Registration 2015
Quote:
In my opinion we have to find a way to get districts started with the number of teams we have. If it means some teams are going to 4 or 5 district events to make that work, then so be it. Once we get events a little bit closer to teams and we get more matches and elimination matches for the $, we'll be in a much better position to get the VEX and FTC teams to move up to a varsity level program. |
Re: Texas Registration 2015
Quote:
--Michael |
Re: Texas Registration 2015
Quote:
As it stands, we have 4 regionals, with 24 teams reaching quarterfinals at each. That means that each year, 96 QF bracket slots will be filled. That's not 96 unique teams, but there are 96 opportunities to get into eliminations. If we expect our district events to be about 40 teams each and we need 280 total slots (that's 2x the total number of 2015 teams per Jess's spreadsheet), then we need 7 events. Let's assume we need 8 in practice to deal with scheduling problems, distances, etc. That then doubles the number of QF slots, but each team is also playing twice. That strikes me as a net neutral, if not a net negative. The reason I say it could be negative is that by the time we are at week 3 or so and substantial numbers of teams are on their second event, we could be seeing a lot of repeat appearances in the elimination tournament. I do suppose the restriction that all of the teams are from Texas would add to the likelihood that a given Texas team gets into the elimination tournament. And, while I can see it from the team's perspective that they are getting a second chance to get into elims, at a state-wide statistical level, the opportunities don't really double just because there are twice as many events. |
Re: Texas Registration 2015
Quote:
|
Re: Texas Registration 2015
Just got this link in my inbox, as I'm sure many of the people on this thread did, as well:
http://firstintexas.org/uil/ |
Re: Texas Registration 2015
Quote:
|
Re: Texas Registration 2015
Quote:
|
Re: Texas Registration 2015
Quote:
Quote:
ONE _perfect_ solution though, would be for Texas off-season competitions be limited to 32 teams with 4 team alliances for elims... and ALL 4 robots must play at least once within the first 2 matches of each ascending bracket. I truly believe the worst thing that can happen to competition robotics teams struggling to sustain is packing their pit early and going to sit in the stands while others play... _especially_ during off-season. --Michael Blake |
Re: Texas Registration 2015
Another issue for Tier-4 and Rookie teams is the problems with paying for things that are required during the build period that they didn't know they needed till they started prototyping/building.
It appears most are hampered by the onerous PO (Purchase Order) process. One of the Rookie teams I'm mentoring this season are _stuck_ in place because the seed monies they received were deposited with their school and they can _only_ get access to those dollars through a PO which takes a week or two. How do they get things they _immediately_ need when they have to wait days/weeks for a PO? Talk about another experience that can be _degrading_ to a team's success and sustainability... Perhaps, there should be a central entity, a non-profit, that can take dollars on behalf of teams and then allow these teams to submit for reimbursement _after_ an adult leader charges needed items to their personal credit card? --Michael Blake |
Re: Texas Registration 2015
Quote:
Frankly we had no idea what we needed until we started, and advice from veteran teams can only help so much with that, especially because a lot of it depends on the design and game. At least for me, a complete rookie when it comes to anything electrical/mechanical, these last few weeks have been a series of realizations of "oh, I remember other teams telling me about this" or "wait, I remember reading something about this on Chief Delphi or in the manual". Although I have to say we're probably in a much better position than other rookie teams - 3847 and 624 have been absolutely amazing in terms of helping us figure out what we need/what would be legal to order before we waste too much time and effort as well as with procuring items from non-approved vendors (the district approval process simply to order takes weeks and comes with a $100 markup). It's amazing what some of our mentors have sitting around in their garages that we've been able to use, and it's not too onerous for a mentor or even me to run out to a store to pick up something and be reimbursed in a few months from the booster club account. But I think it's pretty sad that highlights of my build season include seeing an order on a $1000 PO come up to $999.06 and finding out that we somehow received Spikes in FIRST Choice even though none of us (or at least me) had a clue what they were for until we realized we needed one a few days ago and were starting to work out how we were going to get it in time. |
Re: Texas Registration 2015
Quote:
It's a pretty stark contrast compared to how life is at 1477. The way that team runs is the best example I know of how important experience is in running a team. 1477 has a pretty small number of mentors compared to a lot of other teams, but they're very experienced and everybody knows what to expect going in, and there are already systems in place for getting things done. It makes me feel like we're constantly a week or two behind on any other team. |
Re: Texas Registration 2015
MariO
Due to PO issues with my district a few dedicated parents helped us start a parent booster club last year. Getting our 501c.3. approved took six months. So hopefully you are somewhere in that process. I will caution that while it alleviates some concerns others can definitely arise. For instance, according to the district rules we operate under (may be TEA/UIL rules as well I am not sure) as a school employee and the team coach I cannot touch the booster club bank account. They have helped us purchase many things and are working diligently to raise money. My main concern is that they put robot spending before buying other items. Under the wrong leadership they could well do that and make those choices without team consent (we actually saw it happen with our football booster club a couple of years ago). Michael: As a side note these PO issues are just some of the difficulties many teams affiliated with schools face. We have faced all of them and throw in just for giggles and grins the fact that our accounting dept stomps their feet at the idea of expedited shipping (they will not approve shipping that is > 25% of the total bill). I am not sure that the solution is as simple as a single entity that can serve all of us. I believe that there would be many concerns on behalf of sponsors who want to ensure that 'their' team is the only one who benefits from 'their' funding. Also, would this be legal in the state of Texas? :confused: |
Re: Texas Registration 2015
[quote=Paul Richardson;1440430]This is something we still feel the effects of at 3320. Parts can only be purchased on Thursdays, and administration routinely leaves parts out of orders because they can't keep track of their paperwork. They just aren't prepared for being a quick turnaround system. In this competition teams need their own accounts to manage on their own schedules./QUOTE]
We have a 501(c)(3) booster club and so these types of problems mostly go away. But let me share a clever approach used by another team in our area, FRC 3310. They place "open purchase orders" well in advance of the season with key vendors. This expedites the process considerably. HTH |
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 16:12. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi