![]() |
It is about the robots (OpEd)
The following is my opinion, and I shouldn't have to say that. Anything anyone says is an opionion. <hippy> Perception is reality man! </hippy>
Reading the spotlight, it seems the stance of most CDers is that FIRST "isn't about the robots." I must say I disagree ferverently. Sure, FIRST should inspire kids to look into engineering careers, but it shouldn't end at inspiration. FIRST should be about satisfaction in having applied your intellect to creating a working device, and developing your "people skills" to boot, and providing a means to this end should be the highest priority of FIRST. I consider the highest honor in FIRST to be winning at nationals, certainly not the Chairman's Award. This post was triggered by discussion of selling gearboxes as a way to raise funds. I see this as the exact opposite of what FIRST should be about. My team probably could have purchased a gearbox this season, and certainly had a better bot as a result. But we went with a ghetto direct drive and made a lot of mistakes even in doing that. In making these mistakes we developed a healthy desire to do better, and we're excited about what we can do this year. I have no problem with a team reading a whitepaper by Andy Baker about how to optimize a gearbox and then using his guide to design and order components. I don't care about whether they actually machine the parts, but they should be forced into thinking about why they are doing what they are doing. There pride should be on the line and failure/mediocrity should be a grim prospect motivating them. The rationalization has been made that in "the real world" engineers spend a lot of time making purchasing descions and altering OEM products to meet a specifc need. This is not what FIRST should be about because its far less fun/educational. FIRST is an inherently artificial microcosm of the real world, which gives us the benefit of picking and choosing what we want to include. If you can't spend the time about thinking what your bot needs gearbox wise and opt to buy one instead, you shouldn't get that gearbox. Buying is a shortcut around thinking! Sorry about the rambling, and I look foward to counter-flaming |
Re: It is about the robots (OpEd)
Quote:
Quote:
If you think buying these gearboxes is going to hurt the inspiration level on your team, then don't buy them. I think they're a brilliant idea, and I plan on advertising them very heavily to the rookie teams I'll be mentoring in the upcoming season. Quote:
|
Re: It is about the robots (OpEd)
Quote:
And either the championship or chairman's is a high honor, one that takes a LOT of work from a lot of people. I will say, Chairman's trumps the championship any day of the week. However, if 1293 goes all the way through Einstein Field next year, I'll pop the sparkling grape juice all the same. Pick your award(s), go for it with everything you've got, and don't sweat where yours falls within the spectrum of FIRSTdom. Whether your version of the I is all about the robots or has very little to do with the robot, you'll do fine. |
Re: It is about the robots (OpEd)
Personally, I like FIRST just the way it is. On the topic of "is about the robots or not?" let's look at it this way. Would we all really be here on these boards and filled in arenas to build our people skills or become gracious professionallists? No. Can you honestly say you would have joined FIRST for the sole purpose of becoming a more productive citizen? Most likely not.The robots are the attracting force, the common interest that brings us all together. Once we are together, (by force of the robots), we develop all these other great things like gracious professionallism. Today FIRST might sustain itself if the robots were no more because we have been converted into great people who see the value beyond the 'bots, but there would be no attraction for new outsiders. After being involved with a team for three years and now going on to mentor that team for year #4 for me, I can honestly say that it I am just as happy seeing a robot fail miserably as long as the kids still enjoyed the program and got something out of it and there is insight for future improvement. Now, for really totally awesome robots themselves, that's just an added bonus that some teams are very fortunate to achieve. See, building a really great robot is just a pseudo challenge for the concept of the whole FIRST program. It is just a phony way to bring people together to reach one common goal. What we don't know until we have been with FIRST for a while, is that we have subconciously been becoming better people in the process of building this robot.
You think you are building robots, but you are really building yourselves. |
Re: It is about the robots (OpEd)
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
But then again, that's just my opinion. |
Re: It is about the robots (OpEd)
Quote:
This is right on. I can't agree more with Karthik. Last season we decided we were going to build the T-kats 2003 transmission. We did all the drawings in inventor, spent a lot of money on parts, and tons of time machining. I can't even count how many hours myself, a professional machinist, a parent from our school, and another student spent making the thing, and we still didnt finish it on time for a number of reasons. I can't even tell you how happy I would've been if these were available for sale last year. We could've paid essentially the same monetary price, maybe slightly more, and had to do next to no work on it ourselves. A drivetrain is the integral part of any robot. Just think of how much less pressure you would be under throughout build if you could say to yourself "Hey, I bought that transmission from that Andy Baker guy, and man does it work great. And the best part is, we didnt have to spend any time to design it or build it, instead we got to focus all our effort into making a killer arm/whatever" It's a fact that many teams lack the engineering resources to make anything approaching the level of sophistication of a Technokats gearbox. This is something that could truly level the playing field, and allow students to feel MORE inspired when they create a killer function for their robot because they didnt have to work out drive problems for six straight week.s $0.02 Cory |
Re: It is about the robots (OpEd)
I also agree that without robots there would be a lot less people in FIRST. The robots provide the excitement. Most of my goals are met the day we ship the robot. The learning, cooperation, compromise and communication provide the strength for the team and individuals.
As for buying gearboxes........I build custom assembly machines for a living. Being able to buy an assembly for these machines saves countless hours of design and testing and allows us to deliver a machine in a reasonable timeframe at an acceptable price. So let us take a look at this gearbox I purchased for my latest machine. It took many hours of design, test, refine, re-test before it was offerred for sale. The company manufacturing it does not want to spend money on field failures, service calls and returned product. And since they make more than the one I need, there is data on its life and I get a proven product. But this gearbox was not built with smoke and mirrors. It was produced on machinary that was most likely purchased. That machinary was designed, tested...... The argument of buy versus build is a healthy one. The Mars Rover has many custom assemblies because none existed to meet its specs. The Globe motor with gearbox that we receive in our kit has been reported here to be in both Ford and GM vehicles. The principles of engineering needed to build a gearbox can be learned on other mechanisms. Some teams need to allocate their resources to the game playing portions of the robot. Choices are a part of life. What we learn in building these robots is more important than which part we bought. Look at other designs and at the world around you. Borrow from others and make it better, simpler or even just unique. |
Re: It is about the robots (OpEd)
Here I am again. On the opposite side of the wall. Were would we be if people only used rebuilt parts? Were does the design and thought process come in to play? The inspiration comes from the mind not the field. When you build your first gearbox. When you understand why and how it works. I have seen the light in students and mentors eyes when something that they designed and built succeeded. The people in FIRST are the best. They have ideas. They can look inside and outside of the box. Why get in a habit of buying this transmission or that arm?
I understand why some people would rather buy than build. I still feel that to build what you can is better than buying everything. This has nothing to do with mentor bots or student built bots. I also understand that stand (still think your wrong Karthik but what else is new) and the pros and cons. Inventions are not built using premade parts. People come up with new ideas, from different angles and with renewed enthusiasm. Playing the game is fun, building and designing is inspirational. My $0.02 cdn. |
Re: It is about the robots (OpEd)
Quote:
The goal of FIRST is to "Inspire" people. However, without the robots, what exactly would we be doing... If it was all about the community work, then we're just a bunch of co-ed Boy/Girl Scouts. (No offence to any boy/girl scouts out there.) What would be left if we took out the 6 week build time, official competitions, off-season competitions, preparation time for the build time, fund raising for the robot, and showings of the robot at community events? You need to the robot to be able to have those things. FIRST is very much about the robot, because that's what makes it different than different than a large community service project. I hope my point is made. |
Re: It is about the robots (OpEd)
Quote:
|
Re: It is about the robots (OpEd)
Quote:
"Oh man, can we really afford the weight/time of building this CVT? Will we be able to have it AND that [insert other component here] we wanted? " - (Actual Internal dialog going on in my head right now) On a totally unrelated note: You have to coolest, name, ever. |
Re: It is about the robots (OpEd)
Quote:
1. Are you sure it is less fun? I imagine the students on team 47 had a pretty fun season this year, even though they bought commoditty DeWalt drill transmissions for their robot, rather than creating custom ones. 2. Are you sure it is less educational? I'm fairly sure that any mentor worth half a dang can turn anything into an educationall, and inspirational experience for the students. Reverse engineering can be fun lesson to teach. Even with a stock gearbox solution, optimization still needs to be done (final sprocket-chain ratios, wheel size). Even with a stock input-output transmission, there is a SIGNIFICANT amount of engineering that goes into mounting/utilizing it on a robot in any effective fashion. 3. Why is it shameful to adapt a working product to my needs? You said, essentially: "If I can't build it, I don't deserve to have it." Okay... interesting. Where is the line? My team can't mold rubber or plastic. Does that mean we're not allowed to use Skyway wheels? Let's say... I'm on the "arm" subteam for our design group. My kids and I calculate we need a 367:1 reduction off the Chip motor for our application. We realize, that... (hypothetically) DeWalt makes a transmission to just about fit our needs. Rather than spend $200 and countless design-hours on a custom tranny, we pick up DeWalt's solution. My kids go nuts working with me to make it dance to our tune. What exactly is wrong with this? My kids didn't learn anything? SURE they did. It's not that tough to make it a positive experience for them. My kids didn't have fun? SURE they did. You'd be surprised how satisfying it is to "engineer" a solution for a problem, even if that solution involves off the shelf parts. (My team can't cut/cast gears, does that mean we shouldn't be allowed to buy from Boston?) 4. Am I really taking a shortcut around thinking by buying something? Heck no! It shows that I'm thinking MORE. I'm doing the smart thing. S-M-R-T, smart. Overall I would argue: My kids would still have a strong positive experience, even if we built our robot out of "Industrial Erector Set" and prebuilt mechanical solutions. It's still OUR robot. It is easier on mentors this way, and allows them to spend MUCH more time mentoring. If I don't have to worry about designing a custom transmission, and working the bugs out of it, I can focus 200% on making sure the kids have fun, and get a lot out of the process (another way around this, is to do the development/debug in the fall, then redesign/tweak/rebuild during the 6 weeks, but this is another story). Plus, mentor burnout sucks. Making things easier for mentors in this competition (while allowing them to provide the SAME positive experience) is a definite good thing. There are so many people busting their butts for this program, and for these kids... why make their lives harder? Okay... I guess I wasn't so brief. I feel strongly on this subject. I guess, it all comes down to mentor quality. With good mentors, anything can be good for the kids. $.20 (10x over my limit here) John |
Re: It is about the robots (OpEd)
Quote:
Thanks for elucidating! |
Re: It is about the robots (OpEd)
Quote:
A team can choose or not choose to buy/use a stock gearbox. I won't argue over philosophical views on which one a team should do - that's up to the team and I respect all views/decisions that are well thought out. I will tell you what inspires me about the selling of one awesome gearbox. A team is willing to take their own invention and share it with other teams at the risk of getting beaten with their own design. This elevates the level of competition and pushes all teams to "do it that much better" while encouraging teams to share more at the same time. I say horray for any team willing to make such a bold move. They've just increased their own workload, made it easier on others, and taken a step toward more highly functional machines at all regionals which will attract more sponsors and media. The end result is a huge win for FIRST and it's participants. I'm quite sure Phil Jackson never took his coaching staff to other cities to teach the fabled triangle offense to help elevate the level of competition in the NBA. This is a culture changing activity we engage in for the betterment of society as a whole. I guess I wasn't brief either ...... oops :) |
Re: It is about the robots (OpEd)
Quote:
Instead of getting a plop-it-in-and-go TechnoKats gearbox, you received the gearbox with some assembly required. You've still got to learn how to put it together--you just don't have to worry about puzzle pieces not fitting. Teaching how to assemble off-the-shelf parts can be fun, I swear. <storymode> This past year, I was in Teacher Cadets at my school. And we had to teach a minimum of one lesson...of course, I had to teach this to about twenty fourth-graders in front of the teacher I was paired with and the TC teacher who determines my grade. So during my full day at the school (oddly enough, the day before Palmetto), I taught how to design, build, and test a communication device: radio-controlled cars. I explained the components, how the drivetrain works, the radio...the whole schimaymay. And then I turned the kids loose on their own kit of parts--a mostly-disassembled car. It didn't matter to them that the trucks were all off-the-shelf components. It didn't matter to them that they didn't get to do any high-end machining. It didn't even matter to them that none of the groups managed to finish by the end of the school day (mostly due to bad planning on my part). These kids were inspired anyway...and I hope when they hit high school in about five years, they'll join 1293. </storymode> Moral of the story? You can inspire kids with a lot of things--including twelve-buck R/C cars. |
Re: It is about the robots (OpEd)
As several people have mentioned, I think one of the best parts of FIRST is how FIRST can cover so much ground and not be the worst for it. Chairman's or Championship, whatever you choose, there is a great community and great organization there for you. Both would inarguably be great accomplishments. FIRST brings the often very different people who find each of those goals most important together. It isn't just For Inspiration and Recognition of Science and Technology, its also For Inspiration and Recognition of Community Service and Selfless People (FIRCSSP? I need to work on that a bit more...)
As for purchasing, I think the rules are excellent as they are now. In fact, I would remove some restrictions on components (like pneumatics and motors). The reason buying components is fine and still provides opportunity for students to do stuff is because of two rules in FIRST 1) The low cap on spending, and 2) the restriction on buying goods that are not available to any team. Combined, they make it impossible to find a component that can make up a significant part of your robot. Unless FIRST robots start being mass produced, there is no way 3500 will buy any major part. Either the part is too specific to FIRST and costs a lot, or its too general and then you need to add work to make it functional (Andy's gearbox has got to cost more than a DeWalt transmission, but it will be a lot easier to drop in and use.) Because we all compete with these same rules and because many teams reach their budget cap, or would if they acutally had the need to, the rest of the competition is left up to the work put into robots. Consider this: What is a conservative estimate for the time that goes into a robot (Don't forget all the time you spend outside of your designated build hours)? 8 hours/week * 10 people * 6 weeks = 480 hours. Assuming these people would be averaging a meager $8/hour and that a rough estimate for a non manufacturing job is that it costs a company twice the employee's wages to employ him/her. That comes to 480 * 8 * 2 or 7680, or more than twice the allowed maximum spent a robot. What I'm trying to say is that you can't realistically purchase a significant part of your robot. |
Re: It is about the robots (OpEd)
Quote:
|
Re: It is about the robots (OpEd)
Quote:
Quote:
I didn't help Marconi invent the radio, or Da Vinci paint the Mona Lisa, I guess what they did wasn't very inspirational for me. While we're at it, why don't we get rid of the KOP entirely, and force all the teams to build their robots from scratch. I mean after all, "inventions aren't built using pre-made parts". You and I have had many an argument on topics similar to this one before. I guess were just coming from two totally different perspectives. I see what you're saying, but I just see multiple paths on the road to inspiration. --- Another reason why I am so behind these gearboxes, it's going to raise the level of competition. Say I'm a mentor on a team who has mastered the art of building two speed gearboxes. Right now I'm thinking, "That Andy Baker has done it again, now everyone is going to have a 2 speed tranny, how am I going to give my team an edge, better head back to the drawing board..." The elite teams are going innovate to gain a competitive advantage. Expect to see all sorts of cool new drive systems this year, as a result of the availability of these gearboxes. Cooler robots = Impressed sponsors = More money for FIRST = Easier expansion = Easier culture change Isn't this what we want? |
Re: It is about the robots (OpEd)
Quote:
If your team is not yet "old/mature" enough to handle that level of problem solving/stress, then use the assembled gearbox and concentrate on appendages, etc. It's all about knowing your personnel and where they are on the learning/pain tolerance curve. |
Re: It is about the robots (OpEd)
Quote:
I would argue that no "solution" is necessary. Teams will always do their own thing. I feel a ruling from FIRST or a "compromise" as has been suggested is silly. Again, we've already got other design constraints, and FIRST could just be limiting a good thing. Let's face it, a team of bad mentors is still going to put the gearboxes together by themselves with no student involvement. Has your rule changed anything? Not really. What Rich has said about being a "jerk" certainly applies here. ;) I would do something very similar. (Yeah... I'm a jerk). In fact (thinking back) we DID do that this year. On this year's robot we used the "rookie drivetrain" provided in the kit to power our arm. We took the (note: all premade) gearboxes and components, laid them down in a big pile in front of the kids, and said "go to it". They went to it. In retrospect, it was one of the coolest meetings we had. Nothing like a bunch of kids elbowing the college mentors out of the way, and working together to make that huge mountain of stuff into something moving. JV |
Re: It is about the robots (OpEd)
Quote:
I just think that if you have the time and man power to make a good transmission then great, if not, there has ALWAYS been one there for you IN THE KIT to use if you attached a servo motor to the bosch transmission.... that is why ppl started making custom trannys in the first place, to outdo the stuff that came in the kit. Now if you think you can do better than the technokats, good luck. If you figure out some new revolutionary thing well then that is what this is all about now isn't it? You wouldn't spend hours on making a hook if you could go to home depot and pick one out? I hope not cause I will be a few steps ahead of you time wise! Anything i can buy off the shelf and use that can save me some time in that six weeks I will probably buy it instead of making it. I'm not gonna reinvent the wheel cause I can already buy it :) |
Re: It is about the robots (OpEd)
Quote:
1. Visit Al Ostrow and Team 341. The've won a division at the Championship and would love to win it all I'm sure, but they've also won two Regional Chairman's Awards and were named a Chairman's Honorable Mention in 04 in Atlanta. Ever sit and talk with these kids and Alums? They're all fired up about their futures, FIRST, and sharing with others. NBC10 Tech Fest, Ramp Riot, Food Drives, mentoring, helping the disabled, visiting sponsors, demos, presentations to young kids promoting science and technology, on and on. These are people, very young people, who know every day that they do this they are positively affecting the future, creating limitless opportunities for themselves, and are seeing tangible changes for the better in their school, community, all of society, and most importantly in themselves. Make a visit and see if you come away remembering their robots. 2. Chesapeake Regional 2003 - 357 Royal Assault wins the Regional CA. Tears, joy, excitement. The students of 103 spent some time with them afterward. All they could say to me was, "We want to feel like that." Visit 357 and you'll see a huge LEGO effort and hundreds of young - REALLY YOUNG - kids fired up about learning, sharing, and the future. Joy Troy and his crew are nothing short of remarkable for what they do for kids and for FIRST. Robots? Really? 3. 2004 SC Regional - Team 433 submits their first ever CA entry. They don't win, but they do win a Sat Judge's Award and come away with the respect of thousands. Small team with limited resources has impacted a community and the future in amazing ways. I suggest you talk with Meredith Rice about what she has learned in FIRST and what excites her. 4. Team 103 in 2003: I can write a book here, but let me just say that all of our lives are richer today, we have friends across the country, students and adults have had educational, professional, and job opportunities they wouldn't otherwise have, a town with more cows than stoplights is known for technology of all things, and after winning the CA, we all began to work harder to help others because it was our responsibility. Every time I write a letter of recommendation for one of these students and list their accomplishments, contributions, and the people they have encountered (Kamen, Lavery, Abele, Flowers, Wosniak, CEO's, Astronauts, ...) I think, "Holy $%&#! These kids are so far ahead and have so many opportunities because of this." Man would I love to celebrate on Einstein someday, but there's no way it'll have the profound impact this has had. Get out there among these teams and spend time with them away from the craziness of the six weeks and find out what's important. They're all over the country and I could list dozens more team numbers here. When you find a person (rare) or a group (much more rare) that is fully aware of the positive impact their efforts are having, believe that they really do make a difference in the world, and sense their own part in it as it is happening, the energy that is created is boundless and infectious. Some people spend their whole professional and personal lives in search of this feeling and they never experience it. From what I have seen, this occurs in FIRST more than anywhere else in our society and it is because of the CA and Gracious Professionalism, not because of the competition and who wins it. |
Re: It is about the robots (OpEd)
Rich, you are dead on. I love competition, love winning and love the challenge. The reason that I am involved as much as I am in FIRST is NOT because of these things. It IS because of the positive impact that I see with the students, mentors, teachers and those that they come in contact with. I have said many times that it was the students that drew me into FIRST. The excitement that I saw on everyones faces in Cleveland. The willingness to help out each other even if it meant that you might lose because of it. The impact that can be made by individuals and teams is huge. If I was given the choice of Chairmans or championship winners I would take Chairmans every time. To win at a regional or Championships is to win a battle but to win Chairmans is to win the war.
When at events you will not see me in the pits (not much anyway) with our team. I visit other teams and spend my time helping were I can and the on game days I announce. I do this because I believe in the principles behind FIRST more than the competition. Karthik as per your quote "Another reason why I am so behind these gearboxes, it's going to raise the level of competition." I have to agree fully BUT is it all about the competition. Note - Karthik and I disagree and argue lots. I believe that we are good friends and that there is no animosity held before, during or after one of our "discussions". I just wish that he would see the light. ;) |
Re: It is about the robots (OpEd)
"I could be wrong, but I'm not." - Victims of Love (The Eagles ) ;)
|
Re: It is about the robots (OpEd)
Its all so much like Legos.
Back when I was roughly five or six, I got my second Lego set. My first set was a large tub of simple, basic bricks. It was, needless to say, not flashy enough for me. So my second set was the original Space Shuttle. And the third set was something equally flashy. I built set #2 and #3 exactly according to instructions, as I barely knew how Legos worked. I was very proud of #2 and #3. But what happened for my fourth creation? I could have built another set. But the instructions were so tedious and long, and I had such a short attention span, and I used to build outside, amidst melted crayons (Crayons can melt in the summer heat, the resulting puddle has glittery stuff in it). My fourth creation, when I was 7, was the Mercury/Redstone complex. Lego has never made one, and I doubt it ever will. I was so happy with that tiny contraption. I guess what I am trying to say is that when you have no idea what you are doing or have no wherewithal to work with it, following preexisting routes/guides is not a bad thing. Einstein didn't need to invent classical physics, he built upon a framework that already existed. It is a humble thing to acknowledge that you have built upon, "The shoulders of giants". At the same time, there is no pride or honor in taking designs of others and calling them your own. When it was suggested to Daniel Webster that he take partial credit for a compromise between the South and North, it was sarcastically said, "And I, with the help of Moses and some others, wrote the Ten Commandments." The real problem that I see with selling gearboxes has to do with sending a message. Like it or not, there are people in FIRST who do think that teams that have more money/resources/contacts/political affiliations/importance/insert of factor here do have a far better robot, since they have professionals build it. I am not addressing that issue right now, it has been talked and talked to death in the past. What I am saying is that the selling of mechanisms reinforces that stereotype/image. This is not the first time teams have sold parts. I remember something about Team 120 a long long time ago (in a far far away galaxy) selling boards for use with their clone of the First RX. How did other teams react back then, in a time so few remember? Maybe a few ancients will enlighten us? |
Re: It is about the robots (OpEd)
Quote:
But the key thing was that they were intended for off-season use only. Remember that back in those days we had to ship the electronics back every year after the competition. You could either leave the control system at your last competition or pay a deposit and keep it until September or so when it had to be returned. So without something to take its place, your robot was a pile of spare parts. There was great rejoicing when they announced that we would be allowed to keep the control systems, but it kind of killed 120's market. ChrisH |
Re: It is about the robots (OpEd)
"We say it's about the robots, its not. It's about people, and things, and ideas."
-Woody Flowers I fully feel FIRST is about meeting mentors, people from other teams, and people like Dean Kamen, Woody Flowers, and Dave Lavery. This is why all teams have buttons and identities, and why teams get to pick other teams to go with them to the finals. My team also made many mistakes with the robot and the drive train by having a direct drive. Our robot never ran for our regional, and still doesn't run today. Even without a robot, I feel I have gotten more out of FIRST than I have with anything I have ever participated in, and that is because of meeting a long list of people I wouldn't have gotten to otherwise, which includes members on this board to great people like my and other mentors, to Jeb Bush, to Kamen/Flowers/Lavery. |
Re: It is about the robots (OpEd)
Quote:
Not saying it's all about the robots or anything, but in my oppinion, it's at least 50/50. |
Re: It is about the robots (OpEd)
Quote:
|
Re: It is about the robots (OpEd)
I've been thinking about this post quite a bit over the last couple days and I see a few separate issues here. (sorry this is long)
1) The majority of real-world projects are being driven by COTS products. COTS is an acronym for Commercial Off The Shelf. That means I can go to some supplier that provides exactly what I need and not have to deal with the added time and expense of custom orders and re-development of the needed equipment. Engineers in the real world don't reinvent anything they don't have to. There isn't enough time, not enough money and too many other things to do. (sound familiar?) Teams should have the capability to buy any off-the-shelf parts they can from available suppliers. If people want to start a company to provide parts to team, go for it. Innovation FIRST did it, so why not someone else? 2) More importantly, the vast majority of the students I have mentored have not gone into and stuck with engineering programs. This is due to a number of factors, but the greatest factor is that my teams have been reasonably well balanced in terms of what kind of interests people have outside of FIRST. Some of the students, mentors and other team members I value most are those that have less of an interest in engineering. Instead they have a desire to express themselves in art, music, business, and everything else. However, I can still do my best at being an effective mentor to the entire team because everyone uses a set of "transferable skills" in the real world. Transferable skills include things like networking, time management, teamwork, research, creativity, and problem solving. The mentors/friends/people/students that have affected my life the most are the ones who continue to help me improve my transferable skills verses my technical skills. I am a better person today because of many people who I have met through this program over the last six years. My goal as a mentor is to make every student a successful member of the team. And when the student graduates, I hope they have a better understanding of themselves and will strive to succeed in whatever path their life takes them. FIRST teams are very unique in that they require a very diverse set of skills depending on the goals of your team. The idea behind all the awards are to highlight which teams have gone above and beyond in certain areas of this competition. Each team must determine which awards it wants to strive toward. If that is Chairman's, Winning it all on Einstein, or fielding a moving robot, each team must determine what goals will benefit the students, the school, the mentors, and the sponsors the most. The Chairman's Award celebrates people and how people are part of a team and how that team has made an impact. Without many people and this award, many teams wouldn't exist as they do now, the CD website would not be what it is now, and FIRST would not have the personal impact that it has now for every participant. Steve Shade |
Re: It is about the robots (OpEd)
I would like to complement (not compliment) Steve's great remarks. He mentions transferrable skills as an important part of what is being demonstrated and passed on in FIRST. I totally agree.
The technical skills are important, too. The problem-solving skills, the creative design effort, the I'm-not-willing-to-give-up-just-yet-lets-make-it-a-little-bit-better mentality are huge parts of what makes great engineers and scientists. These are the types of technical professionals that are going to make this a better place. Not only following in someone's footsteps but making some tracks of their own. So, go ahead and buy stuff if you want. You can still get a great technical experience as JVN has described. But don't forget that overcoming the challenge of making something new will be some GREAT training. Something you can explain to a job recruiter that WILL get their attention. Ken |
Re: It is about the robots (OpEd)
Quote:
Quote:
|
Re: It is about the robots (OpEd)
Quote:
Finally in 1944, the Supreme Court overturned Marconi's patent and re-awarded it to Tesla. The issue of who the "true" inventor of radio is something that is still debated vigourously by many academics. But it is safe to say there is no "cut and dry" answer. /end tangent... |
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 15:52. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi