Quote:
Originally Posted by billbo911
As far as the difficulty, are you saying FIRST needs to dumb down the challenges? Seriously?
Why lower the bar? If you don't set it high, how can you possibly expect these kids to give their best. Even if they don't reach the bar, they make huge stride trying to do so. Additionally, why not reward the more skilled teams for doing the hard work?
|
No, not dumb it down. Providing vision targets and software to help with it is great, and it gives teams a chance to try to work with those and raise themselves and their teams to a new level. However, do we have to raise the bar even higher when a majority of teams haven't even hit it as it currently stands?
What would be the point of setting a goal in a competition that no one could reasonably reach (or in your case, and with my team in Lunacy, you got it to work, only to find out that manual was more reliable)? It gives a wrong impression and discourages students. Once we get to a point where half the teams can successfully work with the vision targets, then its time to raise the bar and make it more difficult. Until then, you would only be increasing the gap between those teams that can and those that can't.