Please don't interpret this as an attack but I feel you have made many statements in this thread without fully supporting them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Racer26
So:
I've taken the 2008 OPR's for Maryland from this Excel file: http://www.chiefdelphi.com/media/papers/2761
and Compared them with the Median Household Income by ZIP code for each of the teams I could find OPR data for in Maryland in 2008 from here: http://www.psc.isr.umich.edu/dis/cen...zip/index.html
Since the OPR's in that Excel were normalized and many are negative, I added 2 to them so that they were all positive.
Attachment 16343
I can see no particular trend one way or the other that greater socioeconomic status of a team's location correlates to better on-field performance. This is assuming we agree that in 2008, OPR was a good metric for performance, and that the median household income of a team's ZIP is a good metric for the socioeconomic status of a region. |
Every teacher I've ever had would give you at most half credit for not labelling your axises. To the best of my interpretation your sample size is 26 teams in a single year. Why did you choose Maryland? Do you think factors like years of experience or that individuals on those teams might be completely masking any meaningful correlation? (We've seen what team Copioli made in 3 days using some drills and extrusion.) Would you mind sharing your data analysis experience?
I'm for this study to be completed seeing as it has the potential to effect actual funding.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by FIRST Robotics Canada
FIRST Canada is very fortunate to be working with Queen's University who is doing an arms length study for us on the effectiveness and benefits of the FIRST program . This study will be used to help with government and corporate funding submissions. In the past these funds have been used to support teams, events and scholarships. WE NEED YOUR HELP! http://queensu.fluidsurveys.com/surv...mentor-survey/ |
Quote:
Originally Posted by Racer26
The thing with this argument is that usually, people make it as a way of saying "Those teams that are always at the top? We could beat them if only we were given more time.", completely forgetting that the only way to give you more time fairly is to ALSO give the powerhouse teams more time. Those powerhouse teams? They're already making better use of the time they're given than the complaining teams, that's why they're powerhouses. Giving them more time will only serve to make the performance gap bigger, not smaller.
|
Do you not believe in diminishing returns? How much better do you expect 118 or 148 to get if the build season was lengthened?