Quote:
Originally Posted by Avernelle8
1. It imparts to the students that they don't have the ability to be analysts.
2. It deprives some student of a position on the drive team.
3. If, in fact, coaches/mentors have better judgement than students, it gives an unfair advantage to a team that has an adult on the drive team when other teams don't.
4. It just seems contrary to the FIRST principal that this is a competition of students, by students and for students.
|
I've got an honest question related to point 4 that's been plaguing me for a while now. In regard to just putting students on the drive team*, how inspired do students get by rotating through and/or taking a position they're really not ready for? I'm honestly curious, as I spent 3 years as a driver but the impact was definitively long-term. It was also heavily based on adult coaching (see Paul and Andy's posts), but anyway.
How do you spot students that need 'just being on the field' or 'just rotating through' inspiration? (This seems like a skill I should develop if they exist) What does it actually do for them afterward? Any cool stories?
*I am
certainly not saying that's the sole point of student coaches--I served as one (and continue as a mentor)--but if the point is simply "depriving some student of a position", I'd like to address the trade-off between getting more students on the field and impacting a long-term drive team.
Comment on point #1: Honestly, if I had a student who was capable of being a good coach but team philosophy prevented us from using them, they'd by definition be mature enough to understand why. Primary reason being because the actual coach's name is Raul, Brian, Derek, Paul, Andy, John...