Interesting reads, this paper and the original "Spanking the Children".
This year I was a rookie FTC coach with a rookie team. FIRST FTC is a tremendously valuable and important STEM opportunity for my students. There is nothing to compare. I am an "all in" FIRST Evangelist. I was a bit overwhelmed by the FTC rules and procedures but we worked our way through them.
My administration is encouraging me to "think big" and not rule out an FRC team in the future. Last month I spent a day observing and walking the pits at the Dallas FRC Regionals. Very exciting. Had no clue what was going on.
My biggest reluctance to dive into FRC has stemmed from the funding and infrastructure hurdle I sense exists. Having now read these two papers only confirms my reluctance to get into FRC. Rookie teams can easily get chewed up and spit out by this entire process. What would my students learn from that?
Rookie teams have few resources, spares, or fabrication capability. Every part, every component is precious to us and the kids. To see their robots destroyed or broken on the field of play is a harsh lesson to learn for a kid trying to nurture their dream to become a STEM professional. "Get tough" is schoolyard bullying. "Losing makes you stronger" is bad Little League. As educators, we are better than this.
Struggling with a online encyclopedia of build and games rules --- written by a collection of professional engineers and lawyers --- creates a confused thicket of confusion and substitute logic in the minds of a student. In response, they come up with and do all kinds of stuff no "sensible" adult ever imagines. If you want designs and game play to make sense, write them for the kids, not the adults.
Just a rookie outsider's thoughts. As I said, I'm "all in" with FIRST.
