The Growing Gap in FIRST & on CD, and Our Responsibility to Fix It
 

*****This is a bit of a rant that may not flow perfectly, if you want it to flow perfectly I'll send you some of my Fluids homework, it's much prettier than this*****

***NOTE: this cover a broad range of problems I am noticing as an Alumni of the program, not any single problem***


I don't get it, and maybe i never will.

I've been a member of FIRST since 2002, I have been active on CD since 2004 and still regularly attend regionals when given the opportunity. 9 years in the FIRST community! 7 years as a member of our CD Community... What happened to us?

As a whole I see the system failing to achieve it's own goals. More and more teams are competing every year and every year we initiate thousands upon thousands of new students into our community. But at what cost? Many of these new teams are led by individuals who do not fully understand or recognize the true desire of FIRST as an organization, and see it only for the competition. These students are being sent out to a world that they do not fully understand or appreciate, which leaves them vulnerable to their own, or their mentors, misguidance and misinterpretation.

Before you read further, understand that I'm not saying growth is bad for the program, far from that in fact. I'm saying that the rate at which growth is occurring, and the way that expansion is achieved may very well be hurting these students more than helping. How many new teams were formed last year and still exist today? How many students were on those teams that were truly inspired by FIRST, yet lost the opportunity to compete due to inadequate funding? I understand that as a community we would like to see every student with some interest in science, technology, or engineering to have the opportunity to take part, but how realistic of a goal is that? Are we pushing expansion without looking at the consequences?

When I come back to these forums as a FIRST alumni, I see students with unclear understandings of the program complaining about something that has been a valuable aspect of FIRST for as long as I have been around. I have read posts by mentors who enter into FIRST with the wrong interpretation of the programs and the goals. Like any other competition and organization, FIRST has a reason behind every decision it makes. I'll surely be one of those people to speak out when I believe they have made a mistake. And as far as recent events on CD are concerned, 217 & 469 for example, I will certainly protect the teams and individuals I have come to respect and admire when they are slandered on these forums.

Don't get me wrong, I am disgusted with the amount of complaining and whining that takes place here. I am flabbergasted when I see some of the most important and respected members of our community have their posts (which are most likely civil and explain the situation from a more experienced point of view) ignored simply because an individual refuses to step back ad re-evaluate the situation. I do not like to see friends of mine discouraged when their hard work, and the hard work of their team, is defiled openly and in many cases cowardly.

I feel like this gap, this riff in our community is in dire need of a bridge. Mentors of newer teams, encourage your students to READ through the depths of CD, there is a lot of information, knowledge, and incite that they could never get from you hidden in the threads here. newer students, If I can encourage you to do one things while a member of our little CD community it would be this, when you feel like you've been wronged or you feel the need to post something controversial, PM one of these respected members of the community first. They will be more than willing to take the time out to either re-read your post and suggest less brash wording, or talk to you one-on-one in order to explain the situation. Mentors and students alike, If you have a problem with a team, the way it's run, or the way you were treated by a team member, take the time to talk to them personally before you attempt to defile them openly. Misunderstandings and a lack of communication is our major problem here, and it is time we fixed it.

Re: The Growing Gap in FIRST & on CD, and Our Responsibility to Fix It
 

Jay,
There are a lots of users here that are on the same page with you. We are all looking to elevate the discussion. The teams are losing the sense of community. Lets be positive and grow from this experience.

Re: The Growing Gap in FIRST & on CD, and Our Responsibility to Fix It
 

I agree Jay. I've been afraid of unguided growth for a while. I am a big fan of quality over quantity.

Re: The Growing Gap in FIRST & on CD, and Our Responsibility to Fix It
 

I think you'll find that many of the mentors who post here have expressed concerns over the way FIRST is growing. Instead of looking to sustainability, they are looking toward growth.

I can't remember who said it, but they said something like "I'd take 1 good, sustainable new team over 100 new ones any day".

Growth for the sake of growth is not progress. It is quantity at the expense of quality. FIRST's #1 goal should be working with new teams to reduce the incredible infant-mortality rate we're seeing among new teams. That doesn't mean handing them money, either, as is so often the "fix" in this day and age.

To me, it means putting certain very strict guidelines in place for starting new teams - guidelines that reinforce and confirm that the team has what it takes - especially in the mentor department - to get it off the ground.

Re: The Growing Gap in FIRST & on CD, and Our Responsibility to Fix It
 

So before o judge or say anything i'll tell my story/my team's story -
1578 was one of the first teams in israel, on the first regional in the 2005 season.
The team was active in 2005 and 2006 and then was closed.
All members and the teacher left school.
Last year, me and a couple of friends heard about a "robot competition" called FIRST. We had the WORST mentor and didnt have any adult more than that. During the build season i fell in love with robotics but still didnt have any idea about what FIRST really is.
In the comeptition, I saw all the other teams - helping each other and communication with other teams. Only then i finally realized what FIRST is.
Of course this year we continued for our second year.

So first, i have to say that i don't know how it was 6-7 or even more years ago.
But i think that two years of living FIRST every day and day is enough to know what you are talking about.

By now, i saw two sides of FIRST and you could truly see this in th Israel Regioal a week ago.
There were huge communication problem and almost all robots didnt work for the first two days. The teams were divided into two types:
The first - the teams who got upset. Most of the teams, especially the rookie teams. Many teams started a riot and made chaos everywhere.
But there were also teams who didnt lose hope, and just played the game as it is - like they should.
First is much more than a competition and whose robot is better.

Most teams are not taught by the values of FIRST and thats a shame. But I dont think its a reason that First is dying or something. It can be changed at any time - the teams just need to do that change :)

Re: The Growing Gap in FIRST & on CD, and Our Responsibility to Fix It
 

I agree that FIRST should focus on sustainability before growth. It is understandable that Dean and others want to see FIRST grow as quickly as possible - and the speed at which it has done so in recent years is truly remarkable - but we must ensure the core values and spirit of the program are not forgotten in the excitement.

On the bright side, the total number of teams participating continues to increase at a healthy rate. 2008 saw 1,508 teams competing, while 2009 saw 1,677. Given the poor economic conditions of those years, one might expect the number to have decreased this year. In fact, it increased to 1,811. I have posted a graph of total participation in the past fourteen years. The number has never decreased from one year to the next, and the graph is quite linear, implying a stable, steady rate of growth.

What is alarming is how quickly team numbers are increasing with respect to number of teams. A growth rate of 100-200 teams per year is fine. It would be nice if that was composed of 200 teams with a 90% success rate rather than 500 teams with a 40% success rate.

One thing I will say is that the spirit of FIRST, in my opinion, is still thriving. Maybe CD is getting a little too cranky. But at VCU last weekend, I still saw veteran representatives in every rookie pit, I still saw teams helping out their opponents, and I still saw victims of unfortunate circumstances on the field let it go and remember that the robots aren't important. This year, my team was both one of those that needed help, and provided help. We got 3361 up and running. And when we were frantically trying to pass inspection at lunch time on Friday, we must have had representatives from four or five teams surrounding us.

Gracious professionalism is alive and well. Such an amazing value system doesn't need perfect management to stay alive.

Re: The Growing Gap in FIRST & on CD, and Our Responsibility to Fix It
 

There is wisdom here and a lot to think about. Teams learn and develop at their own pace but the communities and regions that have established a strong network among the teams can help make the changes needed at a more efficient rate, helping to strengthen the teams, the region, and the competitions, deepening their understanding and their commitment.

I increased and deepened my understanding of what it means to be involved in FIRST - by traveling as an individual and volunteering at different events. By volunteering at different off season events: Mission Mayhem, IRI, and Brunswick Eruption, I learned a lot about the teams that compete at the events and about the host teams and the communities that they are a part of. I also learned about the importance and value of teams participating in off season events. By volunteering at different regionals: Lone Star, Florida, OKC - I learned about the different venues, the communities, and the teams that participated. By volunteering at the Championship, I learned even more, esp. as an FTC volunteer, gaining a perspective in that. What I try to do with those experiences is share them. I share them with the team I'm a member of and I share them with teams in our community. The goal is to help strengthen the area, making it more robust.

We can all find ways to deepen our experiences and understanding, but we have to make the effort. It takes effort, commitment, accountability, and patience. A great sense of humor comes in handy, too.

Jane

Re: The Growing Gap in FIRST & on CD, and Our Responsibility to Fix It
 

For the record, I didn't understand the values of FIRST until my first regional either. Then, after witnessing one competition, I was absolutely blown away by the level of cooperation and the sense of community. I immediately "got" gracious professionalism without ever being taught the formal definition of that term (in fact, I still couldn't recite the formal definition). The biggest "wow" for me was when I watched a team in the finals use their own timeout to go fix the robot of the opponent they were about to battle for the win. Just watching that was enough; no one needed to explain to me why it was occurring.

What I'm getting at is that it's the community (i.e. us), not the mentors of one specific team, who is responsible for spreading the real meaning of FIRST.

Re: The Growing Gap in FIRST & on CD, and Our Responsibility to Fix It
 

This is true but if new teams and even older teams can develop their program and strengthen it before the competition, that strengthens the competition. In some regionals recently, there have been many rookie teams participating. It is wonderful to see the veteran teams help the rookies and others, but it would also be helpful to have support in place during pre-build season and/or build season - not just at the competitions.

If you are at an event and there is a split of understanding, that is difficult to overcome. The division/split/misunderstandings can be eased through earlier training, off seasons, teams having fun together designing and implementing some team building exercises/workshops alongside the workshops in the technical side of things.

Jane

Re: The Growing Gap in FIRST & on CD, and Our Responsibility to Fix It
 

I'm not sure yet exactly why, but this thread confuses me and makes me uncomfortable.
As I read and re-read, trying to come to grips with what doesn't feel right about it (the whole thread that is), I noticed Jane Young's sig.
So far, this thread seems a little short on that kind of positive energy.
I suppose it's a requirement that, before we can start fixing things, we need to spend some time lamenting what needs to be fixed -- maybe even allow ourselves to feel melancholy about it for a while.
Increased numbers of new students increases the likelihood that some of them will exercise poor judgment and brashly display it here on these forums.
Uh, so what?
New teams will fail or succeed.
Again, so what?
Celebrate those that succeed.
I guess I'm just not seeing where this is headed.
I should probably just watch and see. :confused:

Re: The Growing Gap in FIRST & on CD, and Our Responsibility to Fix It
 

Jay I must agree with you.

Mark A. Ivey

Re: The Growing Gap in FIRST & on CD, and Our Responsibility to Fix It
 

I understand the concerns above but I keep thinking of something Dean Kamen said in NH at the regional, "Why doesn't every school do this?" I hate the thought of anyone not having the opportunities I have seen this year, my first year as a mentor.

Maybe it is a matter of training for rookie teams, perhaps pairing them up with a veteran team. Maybe a large effort into convincing administrators and potential sponsors that the money invested in the program is one of the most valuable they can make.

I agree that it is a bad thing to only have a 40% success rate and can't imagine the disappointment of a program ending after those involved have gotten a taste of First, but I would hope we could put the effort into making more teams succeed then limiting the number who start.

Re: The Growing Gap in FIRST & on CD, and Our Responsibility to Fix It
 

I think part of the problem is that we can't predict which teams will succeed without first allowing them to fail.

Three examples of recent rookies in Michigan that have succeeded immensely, by whatever measures you choose to use: 2337, 2834, 2771. These teams hit the road running and never looked back, and there are others like them all around the country and world.

Then there's another team that shall remain nameless to protect the innocent (and my mistaken impressions of them). In their rookie year, their robot had to be rebuilt at the regional (and RE-built is a generous wording of the process). I thought they were hopeless. The next year, I don't recall the details, but I still thought they were hopeless. Last year, they started coming into their own - maybe they're not hopeless. This year they should end up smack in the middle of the Michigan rankings and have a good chance of qualifying for State. Also somewhere along the line their teacher/mentor got a new job and they lost him. I would have given up on them as hopeless; I'm glad somewhere there was someone else that didn't give up on them. They also have great enthusiasm for volunteering.

Contrast those with teams that were formed last year or the year before and are no longer here. What happened? I'm sure every failure story is as unique as every success story for sustainability. But I have noticed one factor: You can't just throw money at a team and expect them to survive. There has to be leadership and there has to be enthusiasm in students and mentors alike. How do we get that enthusiasm and leadership? If we knew that, we would have the problem solved. One thing that definitely can help is established teams mentoring new teams. If your team has a history of at least several years, consider mentoring a new team next year. (Mentoring teams shouldn't be expected only to be those teams with low numbers; as an example look at 1114 and when they started mentoring others.) It couldn't hurt and might help. Even if you're struggling yourself to stay afloat, what you learn in helping a new team might just help your team as well.

Re: The Growing Gap in FIRST & on CD, and Our Responsibility to Fix It
 

Thank you. Thank you very much for this post. I would spotlight that if it was less dependent on context.

Re: The Growing Gap in FIRST & on CD, and Our Responsibility to Fix It
 

If I may be frank, I realize I am young by many standards and may not have much of an opinion in these matters. I walk the halls with many of my friends, and some of those are in robotics, though I do believe that one of the things that many in my generation are lacking, is initiative.

Laziness and uncaring of students is the thing that is killing many teams in my eyes. At our regional I see new teams struggling through it... and old teams struggling through it. I am afraid of it preying on my team, this year and years to come.

A number of dedicated people can only do so much without driving themselves to exaustion. To have an effective and long living team, it really takes a small workforce to sustain.

There are so many people in our communities that love technology... but what a waste it is when they have no intention to improve or continue it!

Re: The Growing Gap in FIRST & on CD, and Our Responsibility to Fix It
 

Perhaps we as leaders (not necessarily the mentors) need to reach out to these teams during build season, and explain FIRST to the students more carefully. I see newer teams that have had no contact with another team until a Regional; that's almost criminal.

Perhaps I should make it a point next year to prepare my team the best I can, so they can build robots while I visit rookie teams in the area and offer my help. Not much, I know, but that's what comes to mind.

Re: The Growing Gap in FIRST & on CD, and Our Responsibility to Fix It
 

Before I discuss any particular issue I want to say thank you to Jay for bringing this topic up.

I will admit, I don't listen to Dean Kamen's speeches 100% of the time. Not sure why but I do distinctly recall him saying a couple (thousand) times that there needs to be an FRC team in every school. For the first time in several years I finally heard him talk about sustainability last year. Now, maybe I am just an ignorant fool but this seems to imply that FIRST would prefer to lower the quality of the program for an increase in quantity. This scares me. I am hoping I am wrong and would LOVE for someone to show me I am.

I'm gonna have to disagree with you Gary, we can predict what teams will succeed with some accuracy. While it won't be 100% we can usually tell if a team is going to be sustainable by how it goes about finding help. I can't speak specifically for 2834 and 2771 but I can tell you that 2337 has some serious FRC experience in its mentor force. Not only that but they have community and parental support. All too often people will view money as the main resource an FRC team needs. People look at me like I am crazy when I say that I can always find money but it is true, money is a very widely available resource if you are willing to work hard and be creative. Engineers are in much higher demand. Skilled engineers who are also effective mentors are rarer still. Community support is another major hurdle that many teams neglect. I recall 3 years ago when 2337 was first starting up a call for mentors went out through my company for help because one of the employees thought that someone there might be interested in getting involved. Before they even existed 2337 was searching for the help it needed. Additionally 2337 networked with teams in the area. They don't have the tool they need? Maybe 397 does, or 494, or 68, or 27... Obviously, I am quite familiar with 2337's story but I am sure that 2834 and 2771 share similar stories.

I guess I will just put a short list of things that imho a team requires to be sustainable:
1) Mentors (NEMO and Engineering, NEMO being most important)
2) Community Support
3) Network of regional FRC teams
4) Sponsors/Money

These don't assure success but they can't hurt. And yes, they are in order of importance.


What concerns me more, and these may be selfish concerns, is the death of old teams. How many teams are no longer with us or are no longer competing at a level accurate to their history? Those teams that are dying that slow painful death despite the best efforts of their mentors? To me it evokes images of the decay and ruin of Detroit, once majestic but now just sad to look at.

Re: The Growing Gap in FIRST & on CD, and Our Responsibility to Fix It
 

As always, I'm a few posts late to the tea party, and agree with just about everything that has been said. I'll still add my two cents, though, and also as always, I feel like I'm going off on a slight tangent that is not as on-topic or as well-organized as it could be (read: "well, it made sense in my head...").

As a freshman, I didn't really get FIRST until my first competition. I also did not understand how beneficial CD and the FIRST community are until I was almost done with my first year on the team. It takes some time for new people to get the picture - not everyone learns at the same rate.

This is only my 2nd full year on CD, and I have already noticed how different it has become. I outlined some of my concerns here. Though that post is specifically about the changes on the forums themselves, I still believe that a lot of it can be traced back to the team environments. FIRST can preach all they would like about their ideals, but if nobody carries those ideals home from Kickoff with them, then it is the team's fault for not doing their job as a FIRST team. After all, this program is about inspiration as much as it about recognition. You can recognize science and technology all you want through building a robot, but being able to inspire others takes confidence, passion, and a genuine desire to help others better themselves. Sometimes people fall short in their attempts, and some don't try enough. I can't speak from a mentoring standpoint, but as a student, I feel like inspiration naturally falls down the chain of command: it starts with Dean, Woodie, and FIRST, and trickles down through the existing mentors and students to the new mentors and students, and through the students to their friends and family. If mentors are coming into FIRST not knowing what they are supposed to be doing, it is their fault for not reading the fine print before signing themselves away. But even then, the problem will only worsen if nobody takes initiative to sit them down and explain what this program is all about. It may also be the fault of the students for not attempting to open their minds and embrace what others are trying to teach them. I'm not going to point fingers, because everyone shares some of the blame. It is also everybody's responsibility to help fix the problem that you have identified, and it may take several rebuilding years. They will be hard, but they will be successful if executed correctly.

I too am disgusted with the amount of complaining, whining, and stubbornness that I've seen lately. I've also been disgusted in the responses that I have seen to users who do not yet realize that these forums are not the place for "lol guys water game IT'S A TRAP," bashing others, and not thinking their responses through. I have also seen kind words pointing the lost travelers in the right direction, encouraging them to take part in the intelligent discussion that occurs here. I see inspiration on these forums every day, and I am still inspired daily by what I read. Seek, and you shall find.

Media and social influences should also get some of the blame - Hollywood and politics don't take the "stand-up-straight-and-respect-your-father-and-mother" attitude that many of the older members of CD were raised knowing. These forums have simply adapted to the newer generation. Respect and honesty are always going to be staples in the community, but everything else will change with the times, as much as some may try to stop it.

Re: The Growing Gap in FIRST & on CD, and Our Responsibility to Fix It
 

What a thread! It was only started at noon today and by the time I read through it I was logged off! Lots of great thoughts, loved it.

IMHO, there is not a master plan here from Dean, FIRST or anyone else. No more than Michael Dell had a master plan in his garage or Bill Gates had a master plan when he represented that he had an operating system ready to go!

FIRST started and I would think that if the NASH Equilibrium could be applied to it, it is predictable. It started with advocates of the initial principles and grew until it became statistically significant to real life. It now includes great people, competitive people, lazy people, people with apathy, people wanting something out of it only to their advantage, etc....real life huh!

Is the fact that teams are failing bad? Obviously I would like for every team to be sustainable but that will never happen. Does every business or organization survive? It can be a valuable experience because the students involved might learn why the team failed. In most cases that mirrors real life...poor leadership. Better to experience failure early, learn why and be able to see it coming the next time than to always be successful and not know how to deal with failure.

GP seems to be analogous to employee involvement, team building, focus groups and all the other buzz words you hear in the corporate environment. You are in competition with your co-worker for rankings, etc. and yet asked to work together in a team. Real life!

To me the bottom line is that FIRST is a program that offers opportunities galore. Not only for my son who is learning valuable lessons (mostly through the failure mode but that's OK) but also for me to be involved with him and to have the most fun of my life volunteering and enjoying all the great people involved with FIRST. And CD mirrors all that I said, again and lastly IMHO.

Re: The Growing Gap in FIRST & on CD, and Our Responsibility to Fix It
 

So many great points in this thread.

On the other hand - This is my first year although my team has been around 5 years so I cannot compare with past years. I am incredibly impressed with what I have seen all season long. As a person who has worked building and designing custom automation for over 20 years I can only wish that the attitudes of almost everyone I have met involved in First were more common in the workplace. This forum is amazing - informative, entertaining, was it really developed by an FRC team? The Granite State Regional ran smoothly and was the most fun I've had in a long time (can't wait for Boston). And I really think that the many varied skills will be extremly helpful to the students as they move on to the workplace, whatever career they chose.

I guess my point is that whatever it takes to make it succeed is worth it.

Re: The Growing Gap in FIRST & on CD, and Our Responsibility to Fix It
 

Oh, you need to learn how CD was started and you need to learn about the team(s) now. :) You will be amazed, that's for sure.

Take time to read through CD as Jay suggested in his original post. You can do that by reading one of the quotes at the top of the page and clicking on the page icon in it. That will lead you to the thread that the quote is taken from. Spend time reading CD threads and absorbing the wisdom, knowledge, humor, and community that lifts off the pages. I've never failed to be inspired when doing so.

And... you make an excellent point.

Jane

Re: The Growing Gap in FIRST & on CD, and Our Responsibility to Fix It
 

That's the problem - third night in a row on CD after midniht when I have to get up early for work, but I look forward to learning more about it, but not tonight.

Re: The Growing Gap in FIRST & on CD, and Our Responsibility to Fix It
 

In the words of JVN, "Design is an iterative process".

As is perfection.

We as a community, both here on CD and in FIRST must strive for perfection. This doesn't mean winning every regional, as it is in our human nature to be competitive, it means constantly improving. Making sure that for every result, there is a certain cognition and open attempt at self improvement.

It isn't teaching people that FIRST means 'Coopertition' or 'Gracious Professionalism', I believe it should be instead that FIRST means the pursuit of perfection through iteration of not only yourself, but your peers. Those things must be taught, true, but it is the constant reflection on the true nature of those phrases and their applications that truly teaches a person how to be better. In the end, that is our aim, is it not? To make ourselves and those around us better. Because it really is true: the better the parts, the more perfect the whole.

I have faith in the ideal of persistence, tempered by the recognition that perfection is a process, and I try to apply this to myself and those around me (when convenient ;) ).

Of course, all this spewing from a 17 year old aside.

Re: The Growing Gap in FIRST & on CD, and Our Responsibility to Fix It
 

There are so many great points on this thread, and yet I feel it will go mostly unnoticed by most of the community. I myself am usually more of a casual observer, ever more so since I graduated in 2008, but I feel compelled to share my observations going back to when I started in FIRST in 2005 as a Freshman.

I too have noticed a rather large downfall, if you will, from the CD and FIRST communities, in the way teams are treated on the Forums. When I started in FIRST I honestly did not know what on earth I was doing, but I was guided by a wise man, my Team Leader/Teacher to consult CD about anything I was unsure about. To let me learn from the community whether what I was doing was correct or not. I must say that I was reluctant to have to spend the time and effort to research my idea, I just wanted a straight up answer not caring at how I got it. This conditioned me to seek the knowledge and not just expect an answer, much like teaching someone to fish instead of fishing for them. Not only did I receive the knowledge of the community but I gained the drive, the initiative that I needed to continue with the team.

As someone said before me, it seems that current society has evolved to the point where very few students are finding the initiative to overcome the obstacles facing a rookie team. They just expect everything to be handed to them on a silver platter. It seems that we as mentors have failed the community, we have failed to instill the drive that keeps teams moving forward. The amount of negativity on the forms is outstanding, if I were a new student now I would be scared to post anything on here. I feel that it boils down to a lack of respect for everyone's ideas, and actions.

What has happened to being civil even at the silliest ideas? What has happened to accepting the game for what it is and discussing the best strategy to accomplish it, instead of complaining about it and discussing how we should change it. What has happened to the portal containing mostly threads about real engineering and programing problems, not just empty threads about nothing important. What happened to staying to the end of the day on Saturday, to cheering on the teams in the Eliminations and to celebrate the team who is awarded the Chairman's award, and their extra-ordinary accomplishment. It pains me to see teams leave before the chairman's award is given out, even at nationals.

If FIRST is going to succeed in its goals, then we need to help it. We need to take this community back in time to a place where no-one is ashamed to ask a question, or post a picture of a mechanism they designed. To help instill that drive back in to society that respects the elder more experience mentors and to a place where the chairman's award is once again the most revered award in FIRST. This post is probably to long and mostly a bit of a rant, but I feel compelled to speak out.

Thanks,
Jonathan

Re: The Growing Gap in FIRST & on CD, and Our Responsibility to Fix It
 

Certainly these are all factors which contribute to the sustainability success of the team. Without them it is nearly impossible to keep the team going. My point was that when teams are registering for FRC and seeking grants, there is no way to verify whether those success factors are in place or not. Even if part of the registration process was to ask, "Do you have mentors? Do you have parent support? Are there enthusiastic student leaders?" - there's still no way to monitor it.

When a team does not have things like that, it is imperitive for a mentoring team to teach the team these values, and help them to attain them. Existing teams sharing their expertise is one of the best ways to do this. Teams have to step up and help. I wouldn't want to see a rule making it mandatory, not allowing a new team to register without a sponsoring veteran team.

Re: The Growing Gap in FIRST & on CD, and Our Responsibility to Fix It
 

With respect only to the matter of _helping_ ensure the viability of new FRC teams, and not in response to any particular post in this thread...

Perhaps a decentralization is in order?
Maybe FIRST has reached critical mass and it's time to think in terms of establishing regional counsels -- composed of members from multiple veteran teams.
They would (and should) have no specific authority over individual teams.
Just a willingness and ability to help rookie teams understand and embody the guiding principles of FIRST while also helping them survive and thrive as a competing entity?.

This seems more sustainable than individual veterans striking out alone and unsupported.
While the willingness of any one person to take on that burden is laudable, it just might not be realistic. The demands on that one person's time might easily become too much.

I don't view it as a tragedy that teams fail -- some must.
I _would_ view as a tragedy (just about) any effort to make it more difficult than it already is for new teams to form.
I believe being denied the opportunity to fail is far more disappointing than failure itself -- because an opportunity to fail is equally an opportunity to succeed.

Re: The Growing Gap in FIRST & on CD, and Our Responsibility to Fix It
 

Don, this point really spoke to me.

Due to the nature of our team's structure, we were like this up until a few years ago. We knew of the existence of other teams in our area, and they knew of us but there was never any sort of communication or sharing between any of us. We had a narrow minded idea of what FIRST really was, and many of us, myself included, though that it was just a robotics competition. We always seemed to be one of those "nobody" teams at every competition we went to because of this.

After a while, there was a shift in thinking. As we grew through High School we began to learn more and more about what FIRST was all about. The biggest asset to us was Chief Delphi. Some of us spent hours reading posts and talking to people and learning . This change was reflected in our Robots, but more importantly in the bonds we built with other teams.

In retrospect, I realize the reason we didn't know what FIRST was, was because we didn't have anyone to teach us. Our mentors didn't really put much worth in networking and meeting teams and getting out in the community and learning new things. I think the best way for us as a community to move forward is to make sure that we teach each team what FIRST is all about.

Re: The Growing Gap in FIRST & on CD, and Our Responsibility to Fix It
 

I have sooo many thoughts on this thread... and agree with a lot of points here. While I don't disagree with some of the issues, I want to offer a completely different perspective.

Look at FIRST from 30,000 Feet. The number of teams is growing, the number of students coming out of the programs is growing, the number of students entering engineering/STEM field is increasing! That certainly sounds like success to me.

If you pile some of the observations here together, FIRST may be looking at it more in a way that we teach our students. So many students today are AFRAID to fail. What I like about most FIRST teams & mentors, is that they try to show the kids that it is OK to fail. The guy who made the Dyson failed what, 500 times? Edison supposedly failed making the lightbulb hundreds of times as well. In order to have amazing success, you are very very likely to fail first. Maybe Dean has considered this. Maybe it is part of FIRST's plan. Before we can get a FIRST team in every school, we will hit failures along the way. And while it would be great to have a success rate of 95%, its not realistic. And we have seen that some teams that fail go away and come back. Some teams that begin to fail merge. Others have different stories.

We helped a city school rookie team last year, and really gave it our all. I spent hours a week on the phone with their mentor, we met with them 4 times a week (they came to our place, we went to theirs), their kids had a great time. Unfortunately, they didnt make it back this year, but a student & parent that came to help/shadow during that time went off to start another rookie team that is alive and well and I believe has all the drivers to succeed. So out of one "failure" came success. Its really hard to measure things by just looking at team numbers.

The big picture and the GOAL of FIRST is to inspire students. And my answer to the question of are we meeting our goals is YES.

Is CD Cranky at times? yes. Should all of us do everything we can to help teams sustain? Of course. But are there some times where is ok to fail? Yup. Could all of this have been considered by FIRST? Of course.

I'm not saying things are necessarily perfect the way they are, but sometimes it helps to look at things from a different perspective.

Re: The Growing Gap in FIRST & on CD, and Our Responsibility to Fix It
 

Good thought. I would only add, 'and explore the possibilities, together.' :)

By teaching, we learn. By sharing, we grow. By exploring, we discover. Individual teams can do that and have done that since the beginning of FRC. There have been teams (MOE comes to mind), that have learned how to share early on and have had a huge impact.

We are seeing a remarkable occurrence with Team IFI working with each other. They began learning to share their resources and talent a while back. Now we are seeing the products of that sharing and exploration - and are consistently wowed.

When teams only think about the robot, they are not open to other opportunities. When teams don't understand the importance of the build and competition with the robot, then they aren't getting the full picture. The FRC program is a smart program. The only other program that I like as much if not more, is FLL - and for all the reasons that I love FRC: for the value and opportunities that abound for people to learn to work together and develop in areas of math, science, technology, outreach, self-worth, self-esteem, community recognition and support. It's endless. But... if we only think about the robot or ... we don't do everything we can to build a robust team and compete well - then we are cheating ourselves, our teams, our communities, and the opportunities become limited and sometimes disappear.

Sustainability is no small thing. Achieving a consistent level of sustainability is no small thing. A community of teams achieving consistent sustainability is no small thing. A region of teams achieving consistent sustainability is no small thing.

Jane

Re: The Growing Gap in FIRST & on CD, and Our Responsibility to Fix It
 

Could not agree more. Its a GAME! Lets have fun, take everything with a grain of salt and learn from it!

Re: The Growing Gap in FIRST & on CD, and Our Responsibility to Fix It
 

So many students today are AFRAID to fail !!

I love this video

Re: The Growing Gap in FIRST & on CD, and Our Responsibility to Fix It
 

Reading, studying, absorbing, understanding, and being totally blown away by posts and sometimes even - whole threads - is something that is good during times of stress, down times (holidays), a lazy weekend morning, or a sick day when pillows and quilts make it better. That is a good time to use the quotes to help you gain a sense of something good that you are a part of and that you are contributing to.

I just looked in the quotes and noticed for the first time, that they've put the page icon next to each of the quotes there. I don't know if that is a new addition or not, but it makes it so easy for you to browse, study, read.

Another favorite thing that I've learned to do is pick out a couple of my favorite usernames who have inspired me or made me think or dig deeper. I look for more of their posts. By doing so, I have found gold, pure gold.

A cup of tea or hot chocolate goes well with delving into the wisdom of CD and helping your self grow.

Jane

Re: The Growing Gap in FIRST & on CD, and Our Responsibility to Fix It
 

This has been there for a little while now. I will definitely second Jane's recommendation to spend some free time just wandering through the depths of CD. There is a lot of knowledge and insight contained in the posts on this forum and the spotlights are great doorway to that content.

Re: The Growing Gap in FIRST & on CD, and Our Responsibility to Fix It
 

Jay,

You are certainly not alone in your thoughts and feelings. The more the community grows, they more we bring in folks from "mainstream" society who, quite frankly, carry with them the very pathologies and mentalities that we are supposed to be addressing and changing in our culture through FIRST.

As exhausting as this sounds, I think it's a matter of educating. In some cases over and over and over and over again ... being pleasantly persistent.

I've been concerned about these growing trends for a few years now and have posted similar ideas elsewhere. Some of it may be pertinent reading, so here's two for starters (I know I've spouted more about this stuff elsewhere, but can't find it all right now):
http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...ad.php?t=60430
http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...ad.php?t=79517

We need LOTS of folks to step up and educate. I believe FIRST is well past finding many more of those "early adopters" who intuitively "get it" - most of the Andy Baker's on the planet have already been beaten out of the bushes. The new folks coming in now to run teams frequently need much more education (let's face it. TRULY trusting in GP and Coopertition is no easy thing given what we're led to believe most of our lives in American culture).

there's work to be done ... namaste

Re: The Growing Gap in FIRST & on CD, and Our Responsibility to Fix It
 

Thanks for the advice. For now keeping up with the current threads is keeping me busy but I am sure I will do a lot of browsing once the competitions are over. We will be in Boston tomorrow and who knows after that. I am sure that CD will help with the withdrawals that are coming when this season is over.

And sorry for straying from this thread's topic.

Re: The Growing Gap in FIRST & on CD, and Our Responsibility to Fix It
 

Rich is better at saying it subtly, my more blunt way to cut to the chase is:

Congratulations! You have been successful! You got what you wished for! Now get to work.

In other words, "The coffee break is over, it's time to get back on your heads".

Blake
PS: Google the last sentence if you don't recognize it.

Re: The Growing Gap in FIRST & on CD, and Our Responsibility to Fix It
 

I think it all goes back to what Dean has been saying, "We get what we celebrate." As long as one of the main rubrics for Chairman's is how many FRC, FTC & FLL programs a team starts this trend will continue. Sometimes I wonder how much mentoring really went into a team started this way and how much of it was, "Hey, here's this thing called FRC and its really cool and here's some money, have fun and we'll see you at the regional." I know that the majority of teams only know why a CA team won by the introduction at the awards ceremony. How can we expect to have teams not go out in droves and start teams without the proper guidance and support when all they hear is starting teams = Chairman's?

I was excited when the kickoff speeches were finally geared towards sustainability. I was less than impressed that the tone didn't seem to make it past Saturday afternoon.

Some thought provoking questions:

1. Do you know the name and contact information for your regional director?
2. Do you know the name and contact information for any team within a hour of your location?
3. Can you point out the adult leader for each team at your local regional?
4. Do you know at least two people on your local regional planning committee that aren't your regional director?

I don't think that FIRST is going to get better with a top down solution alone, it is going to take a grass roots effort to strengthen teams. That starts by teams getting off their "islands", self imposed or otherwise.

Re: The Growing Gap in FIRST & on CD, and Our Responsibility to Fix It
 

I have to agree with there seeming to be a lack of focus upon the core principles of FIRST, especially with GP. I am currently in my forth year in FIRST, and am a founding member of my team. In our infancy, T.A.T. was a team which tried to promote FIRST as an educational experience where students could come in and learn to appreciate how to use science and technology to solve a problem. In our first two years (somehow) we won first and second place at VCU, respectively. In our third year, we fell apart. There has been much debate amongst our team as to why we were not able to perform at our best for lunacy, and why we did so badly. It has taken me this long to finally realize that its because we, as a team, forgot about the true purpose of FIRST.
Now, in this forth year, we are still struggling with what it means to be a part of FIRST. I was one of the candidates selected by my team for the Dean Kamen Award, and one of the things I was asked by the individuals writing the essay was to "define Gracious Professionalism". I responded:
It has taken me 4 years to have it sink in, but FIRST is not about being first at competition, it isn't about winning. FIRST glorifies the fact that by having completed the build season, and by showing up at competition, you have already won. I am currently faced with the task of getting this point across to the rest of my team.
The thing that I find most ironic about this whole thing, though, is that in the opening video to kickoff last year, there was a quote being said, I believe by Dean, that "FIRST is much more than just building robots"... I don't know how many other teams are willing to admit to the fact that they have lost sight of what FIRST is about, but I will firmly state that I prefer FIRST as it is meant to be, focusing on inspiring students to be creative, and to approach a difficult problem using their innovation, as well as the resources technology provides for us today; while at the same time being conscious of everyone else around us, and being willing to help everyone else get to the point of being able to accomplish this difficult task.

I feel that some of this may not come through as I had intended it. If you would like to make comments on this, or if you would like to offer advice, I am open to suggestions and criticism - I would ask that you PM me over posting to this thread, though. I am still learning what FIRST is, but I feel that it is my duty as a highly involved student on my team to try to remind my team what we should be focusing on.

Rob.

Re: The Growing Gap in FIRST & on CD, and Our Responsibility to Fix It
 

*****Another Rant, it's a little harsh*****


Just to bring this topic back to light because of something mentioned during Kickoff, here's a quick pop-quiz for all you FIRST-a-holics.

How many teams are actively participating in LOGOMOTION, 4 years later?

Answer: Just over 2000

In what year did FRC reach it's 2000th team?

Answer: 2007

How many rookies are there for the 2011 season?

Answer: Approximately 400


For those of you stumped on the point of this, 1/5 of all teams competing this season are rookies!!!!! STOP the unchecked growth and look towards sustainability for a change.

If you want to put an FRC team in every American high school, more power to you. If you think that it's going to happen in the next 10 years, you're simply being ignorant. Don't get me wrong, I would love to see this program expand. But at what cost are we expanding? Just because school X has FRC team 3### for 1-2 years doesn't count as putting a team in that school.

It seems that by trying to reach Dean's goal as quickly as possible we're really just leaving students behind.

Re: The Growing Gap in FIRST & on CD, and Our Responsibility to Fix It
 

It's my personal opinion that we are not reaching Dean's goal as quickly as we should be. If you look at FIRST as an investible business it actually looks fairly poor. The # of teams added every year is fairly static, and in an organization that should benefit from social growth rates, it doesn't.

I think you feel a close connection to FIRST and I do to, but it was a game of numbers. I think there is a small percentage of people who will be impacted by first, and I don't believe that the # of teams has any impact on that %. I actually love to see FIRST separating itself from an agenda, realizing that the less of an agenda it has, the greater impact it will have. Some schools will embrace FIRST, and some won't, but by getting a team into a school for a year or two, you give them the chance.

If FIRST was to check its growth as you are implying it would fall into the chasm(see moore's book crossing the chasm). Right now you see first trying to expand from the early adopters to the early majority. It knows that it will have to abandon some of the early adopters and innovators in order to achieve the goals it wants.

I believe you feel the way you do about FIRST because it had an impact on you, but again it think it was just a #s game and you were one of the few. Growth will allow for more cases like you. I feel that a lot of people get caught up in the religion of FIRST because of the impact it had on them, and believe that's the right impact. I disagree and argue that we should approach FIRST with open eyes and let it have any impact it can, rather than a strong specific impact on a few. The marketing, business, and legal lessons that can be learned from FIRST can shape individuals just as much as the STEM.

Re: The Growing Gap in FIRST & on CD, and Our Responsibility to Fix It
 

To this day, I have never met a student that felt that FIRST was a complete waste of his/her time. I am not saying they don't exist. I just have never met one. I have met a couple thousand students from a couple hundred teams that got something more out of the program than they would playing a video game at home with their friends. I have met teams that only ran for one year. I have met teams that continue to struggle. I have helped with teams that eventually went under (249 Robodawgs).
If you are truly concerned about things. Find some of those 1 year wonders and talk to them about their experience. Was it leadership, was it money, was it ??? Better yet, do a large sample (100+) that way anecdote may actually be considered data, and see what you can do about fixing the conditions that lead to these teams demise.
Even your worst case hypothetical "win at all cost" team, is still likely better (when measured against FIRST ideals of GP, and Inspiriation towards Science and Technology" than they were the year before they had a team.

It is good to be aware of possible issues in the community, but some of it may also be a change in the way you are seeing things.

When you are little and you go to the carnival, everything is magical. All the games look winnable. And the rides look fun. Get a little bit older, and you start to learn that the relativley simple games are actually much more difficult than they seemed, and the rides just don't have the same thrill. Go to the Carnival after getting your ME degree, and you begin to get scared for the people riding "the bullet" as you know that thing has been taken apart and put back together more times than intended and currently has 50% of its original fasteners. Guess what, the carnival didn't change.

Same is often true of your first "real" job, your FIRST Robotics team, or even relationships. Its difficult to see the faults early on. After a while, it is difficult not to focus on the faults.

Re: The Growing Gap in FIRST & on CD, and Our Responsibility to Fix It
 

For the past couple of years, I have been involved with the Central Ohio Robotics Initiative in an attempt to increase the number of teams in Central Ohio involved in FIRST. I have been a mentor for (here you go Dean:) FIRST team 1014 since 2003. I also coach cross-country and track & field. All of these experiences have given some insights on why it is hard to grow FIRST (I don't think we have anything like unchecked growth, more like growth just barely larger than required to maintain health) and why it is hard to sustain a team.

#1 - The most obvious: It's expensive to run a FIRST team. It is relatively easy to get funding to start a team, but sustaining one past the first year or two gets harder. In the current economy (the one we had for the past few seasons) it is even harder. Though I will say that my own anecdotal evidence suggest that the record corporate profits for the past year or so is starting to turn that around a little bit. We actually got some sizable money from new corporate donors this year. Thanks largely to a large, motivated group of parents and members of our local business community. If you can get about 5 years (plus or minus) into the program you can develop some more sustainable funding. And hopefully enough cash to bridge the gap in tougher times.

#2 - It is intimidating to start a FIRST team. Even for trained engineers the technical aspects can be intimidating. For a lot of teachers it can be downright scary. For a lot of engineers the thought of working with a couple of dozen teenagers is pretty scary. For the most part, it is VERY hard to start a school based team without a teacher being responsible for it. When you do get a teacher over the initial fear, you have to work to keep that teacher involved, because replacements are hard to find. One of the most important things we have been trying to do with CORI is to help support new mentors. I know that if I resign as the track coach, they will find a replacement for me. If my co-adviser and I both resigned from coaching FIRST in the same year, the program might well die.

#3 - Finding mentors can be difficult. Particularly for a teacher already struggling with the thousand and one things needed to get a new team rolling. Once you find mentors, you have to be able to find people with whom you can work. If the adults don't get along things can go downhill quickly. (See #2: If the adult interactions get too stressful it is really hard to convince a teacher that all of the added work, responsibilities and stress are worth it.)

#4 - When the administration of a school or district changes, you never know how much support you are going to get. These kinds of changes happen every few years in most districts. The average tenure of a high school principal is fairly short and the average tenure of a superintendent is only a few years. When the support level changes it is really easy for a program to die.


I think that "team in every school" goal is the right one. In order to make sure that as many kids as possible have the opportunity to participate if they want to, we need to make FIRST ubiquitous. When we get to the point that starting a new school means "I need to hire a football coach, a track coach, a band director, a theater director, a robotics coach, ..." then we will be in the right position. But getting there is a long, hard road.

Re: The Growing Gap in FIRST & on CD, and Our Responsibility to Fix It
 

I think teams have a bit of a different opinion on what exactly defines sustainability.

While I've argued against unchecked growth in the past, I've also questioned my beliefs on the issue and come up with some questions that I can't satisfactorily answer.

I think people need to ask themselves: do I believe it's FIRST's responsibility to partially finance teams? In general I'd argue pretty heavily against it. However, when most people say that FIRST needs to help teams be more sustainable, they mean that FIRST needs to either support the teams financially or to lower the entry costs (which amount to the same thing).

That is the crux of the argument for me right now. FIRST offers enough incentives to join the program. If the learning and real world experience isn't enough, and the excitement and competition isn't enough, the scholarships and friendships certainly should be.

FIRST promotes sustainability by sustaining themselves - the parent organization. If someone can suggest a way to promote sustainability among teams that doesn't require FIRST to hand out more money in some way, then I suspect they'd jump onboard.

When FIRST says they want a team in every school, they mean it. If they had funding to make that happen overnight they would. They don't, so it's up to teams to do it themselves. I can't think of any other sport where the parent organization funds the teams. Even in highschool sports, the schools end up financially supporting the parent body, not the other way around.

Re: The Growing Gap in FIRST & on CD, and Our Responsibility to Fix It
 

it is a numbers game, so I don't understand how you can say this. Just running through the numbers, every single year a new group of students enters every high school. every year another group of students leaves for college. impacting one set of students at a single school will never have the necessary outcome of changing the social norm,

And as far as FIRST helping to "fund" sustainability, why keep writing to our representatives to help us start more teams when we could be lobbying for state funding of regional competitions. We could be working to cut down the cost of registration, not by having first 'give' teams more money, but by having our states continually invested in our program at a level that reaches all students.

Re: The Growing Gap in FIRST & on CD, and Our Responsibility to Fix It
 

I think its both a problem with FIRST and with its teams. FIRST, I think, depends heavily on FRC teams to keep other teams going, and if they don't they should.

The best resource for teams is other teams. You see some teams bragging about their team raising $50,000 for one season (this has happened several times at competitions during discussions), but they do little or no out reach to other FRC teams.

Im not trying to point the finger by any means, and I have seen teams effectively 'rescue' other team from going under. I do think though its easier for teams to interact and help each other then it is to try to change the way FIRST approaches the way they run the program.

Re: The Growing Gap in FIRST & on CD, and Our Responsibility to Fix It
 

This is a big thread to read for two reasons. First it's sheer size and second by the importance of the topic.

May I suggest a slight wording change to the goal of having an FRC program in every high school? The goal should be to have an FRC program available to every school. We may be overly influenced by the attractiveness of the school system facilities and the already assembled student bodies when considering team formation. Much has already been said here and elsewhere about the volatility of political support. If some of that dependency on the support of elected or appointed officials were to be lessened, I'm sure the sustainability statistics will improve.

Another factor mentioned is team-to-team mentoring. I cannot expand on it here, but I've been thinking for some time that FRC expansion should be a sort of amoeba-like process. By that I mean a new team should have its earliest development while still able to make use of the resources of an already functioning team. Then split off when the "time" is right. This growth model has been working for our planet for a billion years or so. We may be trying to change the culture of celebrating technical success, but we should take the cue for how to do it from Mother Nature, right? I may start a new thread. . - - After build season. :cool: :)

Re: The Growing Gap in FIRST & on CD, and Our Responsibility to Fix It
 

I'm so glad to hear feedback and serious criticism from alumni, like Jay. This being the 20th year of FIRST, the seeds have been planted and are really taking some deep roots in many of you. Personally, this is our team's 11th year and I had the most alumni participating than ever, not just last year's graduates, but even those going back to 9 years. They are now engineers, starting their own families and are thinking about how to give back. They were in New Hampshire, with their own team, and with us. This is really important!! Recruiting new blood is one way to change our culture, but as FIRST students grow up, they will expect that the school their kid will go to should have a robotics team. If it doesn't they will know what it takes to get one started. This way of starting teams has much more power than forcing some new teacher (or unwilling parent) to take it on.

From a different perspective, many of the schools in the country, do not have a robotics team. Many have commented, that this is OK, quality over quantity. Hogwash!! Every school should have a robotics team (hopefully FIRST or Vex). Afterall we expect schools to have sports and music programs - the same should be expected for competitive STEM outlets. If this doesn't happen - then I really worry about how our country will survive in the global economy.

Why enlist the political folks? Because this mission, needs a kickstart! Will some teams not survive - unfortunately in this economy, yes. They probably should have started with VEX or FTC - much easier programs to sustain. But I don't think that should deter those efforts. I think the push for FTC is more than ever this year (even though I don't like it). Maybe you could just say it's the 20th anniversary, but I bet it makes for much more sustainable program for many school based teams that can't do FRC.

I hope in the next 20 years, at least half of the schools in the country offer a competitive STEM opportunity for students. I hope they include the ideals of FIRST. I see FRC being a bit elitist, like division 1 sports teams. FTC/VEX being like division 2 sports teams.

Please don't give in to the notion of slowing down growth. Be critical, sure. But take the next step as well.... Be a guest speaker to a team and talk about the ideals you worry are going to get missed. Go to regional planning meetings. Make the next 20 years great.

Re: The Growing Gap in FIRST & on CD, and Our Responsibility to Fix It
 

I agree with this to an extent. I think its much easier to sustain a team rather than create a new one. Sponsors, teachers, school administration, mentors... at least one of these groups of people would be constant. if your creating a new rookie team, there is a chance your starting from scratch, with no experience from any of the four resources listed above.

You have new groups of students every four years. Just like in College Football. how is Ohio State able to sustain their program and continue to grow while a school like the University of South Florida isn't? (No offense to any fans of the USF Bulls). your going to inspire the same amount of kids in the short and long term. But if you fail to sustain a team and rather create a new team. your discouraging the current students on the veteran team. Take it from me, I've been on two teams that have folded. I was in the very small minority that actually decided to go work with another team.

Okay, how about this idea. What if FIRST was to charge a "stockpile" fee of $1500 for each rookie team when they register for thei rookie season. That money would become available to teams after their third year and would only be used for paying off a portion of registration. Some sort of system like this would take care of financial duties.

I also think the frcteams@usfirst.org account should send out a mass e-mail to teams that have yet to register two weeks before the registration deadline for veteran teams, and again the day after registration is supposed to close. In the e-mail, urge the teams to contact FIRST if they are having any non-monitary issues, such as finding mentors, sponsors, etc. FIRST can then pass the information down to the teams respective regional director and the operation can resume from there.

I think these ideas make the most sense and wouldn't be that hard to implement.

just my $0.02

Re: The Growing Gap in FIRST & on CD, and Our Responsibility to Fix It
 

This sounds suspiciously like the nonprofit I have founded...

Re: The Growing Gap in FIRST & on CD, and Our Responsibility to Fix It
 

Another bit of advice that might help; when anyone new joins robotics, spend an hour or two explaining what first is about, use Kamen's speeches, examples from other years, and how they can be further inspiration, and as always stay graciously professional.

Re: The Growing Gap in FIRST & on CD, and Our Responsibility to Fix It
 

I'm going to use a team 422 has competed against in the last two years at the NJ Regional: Team Overdrive (2753). They are a very stacked, talented, and large team, that went toe-to-toe and beat Veterans in Lunacy and Breakaway, winning in '09 and reaching the semi's in '10. As the emcee reiterated, this team's rookie year was not their first "FIRST" rodeo (heh). This team built upon their success in the Tech Challenge level, then became a very powerful team in FRC.

I don't know about their financial situation, but let's assume they had the drive to be in FIRST, but no money. They wiped the floor in Tech Challenge, building their drive to make a great team, and in that, getting enough sponsorships and memberships to upgrade to FRC.

I think FIRST doesn't push FTC like it should, especially in this shaky financial world. FTC is both a great independent program, and a good gateway into the FRC realm.

Re: The Growing Gap in FIRST & on CD, and Our Responsibility to Fix It
 

Here in the Dallas area, they do exactly that. So we, a rookie team, dutifully told them "sure, we could use mentors and a veteran team to help." Silence. Absolutely nothing.

Of course, at this point it's rather late to send help. We have fortunately been able to find some very good mentors. We were also fortunate to have a veteran team offer to help us during build day (shoutout to Waxahachie Global HS!), but we never really did receive any non-monetary assistance.

Hear what? The response rate here is certainly faster (and apparently more informative) than requesting a rules clarification via the "official" forum.

Re: The Growing Gap in FIRST & on CD, and Our Responsibility to Fix It
 

I can't believe that none of the teams in Dallas can spare the time. My first suggestion would be to directly contact teams if you can via phone. Many times a personal request goes further.

We're helping two rookie teams - one is building at our build site and another joins us 1 day a week and we send some of more knowledgable students to them on another day. They're teaching us as much as we're teaching them I think.

In addition, Team 27 (RUSH) and several others run a near-weekly email and call-in where they help rookies with numerous issues that come up.

While I agree about the response time here, that's a direct result of the quality of answer you're likely to get. Q&A have 1/1000th of the people CD does, and Q&A have to research and cross-check every answer they give. Many CD answers are off the cuff, and all of them are non-official, so be careful!