Re: [FRC Blog] Chairman’s Award Feedback
 

It was an online quiz. I'm not comfortable sharing the link; I got the distinct feeling that it is not for public consumption.
I think the single sentence I quoted from the judge manual was stretching things as it is. As the manual isn't posted publicly (to my knowledge) I'll choose to keep it that way.
With the disclaimer that I believe that if HQ is indeed not allowing feedback, the judge manuals really ought to be available to teams. But that's not my call to make, and they have their reasons.
FTC teams are encouraged to use the Self Reflection Sheet; I haven't seen a version for FRC.

Re: [FRC Blog] Chairman’s Award Feedback
 

I know, fortunately both I and the MN partner disagrees with that.

Having been at a few meetings where feedback (for FTC) was discussed, there are a few partners that are very adamant that feedback is not given to teams because teams then complain to them (the partner) about it. We don't experience that in Minnesota but other areas do. My theory is that it has to do with the different cultures in different areas of the US.

Re: [FRC Blog] Chairman’s Award Feedback
 

We do the same in Washington.

Re: [FRC Blog] Chairman’s Award Feedback
 

So with the admin update today, it looks like the mentor can be in addition to the 3 students. That should help some of the issues of not having feedback.

http://www.usfirst.org/sites/default...Bundle0123.pdf

Re: [FRC Blog] Chairman’s Award Feedback
 

I realize that judge feedback is not always perfect, and can be upsetting. But good gracious, it is far better to be upset by something that you know, than to be upset with what your imagination is fabricating inside your skull. Doesn't FIRST teach us that knowledge is power? I just don’t see how this decision is in the best interests of students trying to learn and improve. It seems like a decision that causes less trouble at an administrative level.

As a project judge for FLL, I can admit that providing fair, constructive feedback for every team was a challenge. It’s time consuming during and already time crunched day, and sometimes I've just been at a loss for words. But to a degree, it keeps you honest and fair, and gives you a solid place to “negotiate” with other judges. By taking away all feedback, FIRST is turning the Chairman’s Award into a blackbox that allows for an uncomfortably low level of transparency.

Normally I can at least see the merits of both sides of a controversial FIRST policy change. But the more I think about this and discuss it with other mentors, the more I’m convinced that it’s not in the best interests of the students.

Re: [FRC Blog] Chairman’s Award Feedback
 

This is correct. THIS makes me more okay with the change. Allowing the mentor in the room IN ADDITION TO THE 3 presenters is key. Having gone through the chairman's interview process several times, both as a student, and now as a mentor, I have seen the highs and lows of the feedback forms. 99% of the time, they were NOT helpful at all. They never told the kids what could have been done or demonstrated better, and they were never constructive. And half the time, we were docked for things that were clearly demonstrated, communicated, and explained in the room, binder, video, essay, etc. Still docked for it. There were some events that we never actually got our feedback in the first place. Having the mentor in the room, and receiving comments from HoF, other teams, and other judges will help a lot.

We shall see. FIRST is trying something out. FIRST has changed their minds "after the fact" before due to overwhelming complaints from teams. It's not unprecedented, and if this doesn't work in the way FIRST hopes it will, it can be changed back.

Re: [FRC Blog] Chairman’s Award Feedback
 

As someone who presented Week 1, having the mentor in the room was somewhat helpful.

It's better than not getting any feedback at all, but he wasn't able to offer more than 'they really liked you and were very interested in that thing' because he can't read their minds.

We won Chairman's at that event, and we don't really know what could be improved for District Champs, since we didn't get any direct feedback from the judges. Sure, having the mentor in there is better than no feedback whatsoever, but it's not very helpful in terms of improving the presentation for subsequent events. I think the feedback form should come back next year - a mentor, as wonderful as they are, doesn't know what the judges were thinking, and it's way harder to improve without it.

Re: [FRC Blog] Chairman’s Award Feedback
 

I can't wait for this pilot year to be over. the lack of any feedback boggles my mind.

Re: [FRC Blog] Chairman’s Award Feedback
 

Hopefully the judges will at least let a mentor in for VA so if y'all don't win you have something for Chesapeake. We don't have squat :/

Re: [FRC Blog] Chairman’s Award Feedback
 

I think if it does come back, it needs to be overhauled from what it was before. You couldn't really tell what the judges were thinking with the old system either. I think it should be more qualitative than quantitative. There should be a comment section for each "category" for the judges to explain WHY they think what they do. Before it was just a ranking from 1-10, but no way of knowing why a judge chose the number that they did. Because, again, we've had it happen several times where they dock us for something, even though it is explained in every part of the submission.

So, in closing. If it comes back, t should be mostly qualitative comments on why the judges chose the way that they did, and actually talk about things that could be improved, rather than an arbitrary numerical ranking that can completely mislead and can change from team to team as the day goes along, included with only a couple lines for random comments. It should be completely opposite.

Re: [FRC Blog] Chairman’s Award Feedback
 

Also, I really look forward to hearing from other teams with this new presentation video we are supposed to submit, and more importantly I look forward to seeing all of the other winning presentations from this year. Honestly seeing what all the other presentations look like will be more valuable than any judge feedback form would ever be. The feedback forms usually left us more frustrated and confused than enlightened. By actually seeing what the other teams did will be inspiring and educational. So whatever happens, THAT needs to stay. The presentation video is a change that I welcome wholeheartedly.

Re: [FRC Blog] Chairman’s Award Feedback
 

The FTC program specifically asked that judges not give feedback this year. FTC also publishes the Judges Manual on a site available to everyone.

http://www.usfirst.org/roboticsprogr...teer-resources

Re: [FRC Blog] Chairman’s Award Feedback
 

Take a look at the feedback form I posted earlier (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/media/papers/3095). Having judged feedback is nice but I think having a third party (perhaps an English teacher at your school) fill out some sort of feedback (to avoid bias) will likely help you iterate.

And I still agree with you, lack of feedback is terrible.

Re: [FRC Blog] Chairman’s Award Feedback
 

Even the flawed sheet we have received in the past is better than nothing at all. I am sensitive to the judges time. The tool should be take less than 5 minutes to complete per team. That should be more than enough time to give constructive feedback.

Re: [FRC Blog] Chairman’s Award Feedback
 

Interesting. I strongly dislike how having a mentor takes away from having 3 student presenters. In this case, I feel that it is best to have 3 student presenters. Your students are ideally what have made you worthy for the CA, and therefore you should have as many students as possible to showcase your accomplishments.