[mathking]

I though long and hard about posting on another of these threads. Every team is different, and even one team changes from year to year. I think that one of the worst reactions to have when looking at how another team operates is to believe that you are better than they are because you do things differently. I strongly believe that the most important bond that gets formed in FRC is the bond between mentors and students. I understand and agree with Dean's position about FIRST not being an educational institution. But as a teacher I also think I would not be doing my job if I allowed FRC not to be an educational experience for the students. A big part of that educational experience is collaboration between students and mentors. Collaboration means that we discuss, and listen to everyone's input, and discuss, sometimes argue, and discuss (by now you should be seeing why we sometimes have trouble getting the robot done by ship/stop build date) some more. When problems arise we go back and forth for solutions.

This year's ball gathering device started with a basic design I advanced. Then a student (and a new one at that) suggested a simple change which made the design much better. We worked on it some more and a mentor and student pointed out a couple simple flaws, which testing of the prototype confirmed. And they suggested a fix. Which worked. Then a parent and another student suggested another change. Which distinctly improved the robot. Then we found an annoying but not fatal problem, for a which a mentor found an excellent, easy to implement solution. Finally the student who made the first revision suggested a final solution that actually made the whole thing work better using one less motor. And now we have a very nice gathering device which is simple, easy to remove and inexpensive. That wouldn't have happened if we had proscribed roles for mentors and students.

On our team we have had a strong tradition of the mentors teaching the kids how to do things. Mentors do a lot, and not just high level management. We cut things and drill things. But we try to show the kids how to do it, so they will learn. As a general goal, by the end of the season we want to be in a position where the kids can diagnose and fix any problems that occur with the robot. We also have a strong tradition of the mentors working really closely with the students. Occasionally we argue. We try to always be respectful with it. Arguments are not bad if everyone is being respectful and listening to the other side. More often than not, each party to the argument has a valid point to make. Sometimes that is a point the other people haven't yet considered. More than once I have let kids pursue an idea I *knew* would not work, because I felt they needed to see it not work in order to understand why it wouldn't work. Partly this is because I am a teacher and I think it is the right thing to do. Partly is because a few of those times I *knew* something wouldn't work I was wrong, because I didn't understand the situation well enough.

Our team does NOT have a magic formula. We have something that works pretty well for us. Find something that works for you.

That said, I would plead with all of the teachers out there running teams not to let the mentors design and build everything. You are missing the chance for your kids to learn a lot. (And frankly, you are fooling yourself if you think that kids who watch someone else build a robot are just as inspired as kids who participate in the building.) Teachers, I would also implore you not to have the students do everything. You are missing the chance for your kids to learn a lot. (And frankly, you are fooling yourself if you think that kids who work on their own building a robot are going to be as inspired as kids who work side by side with adults they look up to.)