The mentor-built student-built debate reminds me of the struggle I had getting my mind around my change in roles in moving to FRC after coaching FLL. In FLL, coaches are admonished that 'kids do the work'. FIRST clearly spells out the role of a coach in the coach's handbook which says "the team must design and build the robot, not you or any other adult", and in the FLL Core Values which reads "We do the work to find solutions with guidance from our coaches and mentors". Even with those reasonably clear statements there is still an endless debate in FLL over what level of "guidance" a coach should provide.
Reading discussion here on Chief Delphi, the mentor/student relationship seems to be regarded as one of the central foci of FRC. Dave Lavery is quoted as saying that you've missed the point without it. Also, it appears to be a component unique to FRC. But, as a new mentor coming into FRC and looking into the mentor resource materials I found nothing to indicate that the FRC mentor/student relationship is any different than that in FLL or any other similar program.
I do admit I don't see anything in the FRC Mentoring Guide saying that mentors should not design or build part or even all of their team's robot -- "It doesn't say you can't...", to borrow an often-used FIRST phrase.
But...
I don't find it surprising that some -- even many -- are not aware of a special mentor/student relationship that is unique to FRC where mentors do some or a lot of "The Work".
I learned about my role as an FRC mentor by watching and listening to other mentors on my team. Had I talked to mentors from other teams I probably would have a heard different stories about the role of a mentor.
It seems to me that since the FRC mentor/student relationship is special and unique it should be featured and explained prominently in the official mentor resource materials, along with specific examples of how it is implemented by various teams. People shouldn't have to search for a speech made by Dave Lavery that's buried somewhere on Chief Delphi or have to read between the lines in the FRC Mentoring Guide. There should be a FRC Mentor-Student Relationship chapter, or even a book.
Reading about "I Do, You Watch, ... You Do, I Watch" in the mentoring guide leaves me with lots of questions about what exactly should I do and when should I do it. I admit I'm one of those Aspergers-types that often has to be hit over the head with an idea spelled out to me, but it would really help if I could see something official -- even a paragraph -- letting me know if it's OK for a mentor to dirty his/her hands with 50% building, 100% building, a subsystem, the software, or nothing at all. I've had conversations with FRC leaders who I respect who opine on opposite sides of this debate.
Maybe there could be a mentor rule book.
It could be very short with an entry like:
<M0> Anything goes -- you and your team decide
Or:
<M0> Mentors shall keep their hands behind their backs always.
Or a bit longer with entries like:
<M2482> Each student on the electrical team will be responsible for insertion of at least one power wire into the power distribution board. If there are more students than power wires, enough wires will be removed for reconnection so that each student is able to experience the insertion of at least one wire, as long as said wires comply with the rules set forth in the robot manual, and as long as the aforementioned students are of pre-college age. Post high-school age team members should refer to rule <M6855>.
However, unless the rule is <M0>, I think there will always be a debate similar to the one over what level of "guidance" is legal in FLL.
This mentor/student relationship stuff seems to me headline material right up there with Inspiration, It's More Fun To Create A Video Game Than Play One, and Gracious Professionalism. That is why I believe it's important that it be thoroughly and officially explained **and endorsed** in the FIRST mentor resources.