Quote:
Originally Posted by jwfoss
While I think it's awesome to see what the new rules allow for, and this robot is definitely impressive and a clear indicator of what can be done, I fear that it may result in a resource race that separates the haves from the have not further. One of the cool things I really liked about FTC/FLL is that the teams are required to all build from the exact same parts.
|
On the contrary, I believe the FTC rules allow more creativity while trading the TETRIX money sink for a Tools money sink where materials are concerned. This is due to the fact that TETRIX metal (and even VEX metal, to an extent) is so much more expensive than plain metal purchased in bulk. That's a better investment for long-term sustainability of both the team and the program, IMO.
Student learning in FTC/FVC has always been about "which team(s) can do the most for a set of problems". Teams who actively seek thousands of dollars in sponsorship for the robot are, and will always be, at a clear advantage to those which accept whatever sponsorship comes their way, regardless of whether a strict set of materials are used instead of open-ended materials.
Additionally, the open-ended materials will better encourage industry mentorship. (Anecdotal) I very much disliked mentoring VEX/FTC in '07/'08-'08/'09 due to the 'puzzle piece' nature of the competitions (yes I mentored both those years). The kids didn't know any better -- but I did, and having to learn ways to bang/cut/twist the puzzle pieces into submission was like pulling teeth when compared to the ability to design from scratch.
The Syzygy Bot exemplifies it all, and with great success it seems. I love the passive grip mechanism; the consultations with my FTC students have been somewhat fruitless in this regard. Perhaps the pictures/videos will push them over the edge to do it (because their complex designs still aren't finished 2 weeks before competition...).