[XaulZan11]

Originally Posted by richardyun

You have raised a good point. On the one hand, the origin of FIRST, and continuing vision as expressed in this strategic plan, is to foster the development of technical innovation in the USA to "benefit the nation's economic competitiveness" and to address the concern that "the United States consistently ranks in the middle of the pack, or lower, in student performance in science and mathematics when compared with other developed nations". On the other hand, FIRST takes pride in having grown beyond the USA and says "Although our primary emphasis is on North America, we operate in more than 60 countries."

Even when talking about North America, there are at least two countries, that are not the USA, with active FIRST programs. This strategic plan talks at times about just the US and at other times includes Canada so it is not clear if the vision is for one nation, two nations or all of North America.

I guess the question is: “If we raise the level and interest in STEM significantly in all those 60 plus countries, but the USA is still in the middle of the pack, is this success?” To what extent is it okay to help other countries build their technical capability?

Bottom line - In the big picture, are we still talking Coopertition or is it Competition?

Another aspect is getting governmental funding and some sponsorships. FIRST is probably more likely to gain funding by stressing the idea of investing in the future of America opposed to having the money go help those in Canada, Mexico, Isreal and so on.