I'm definitely a fan of the multiple submission rule this year. I'll share 1675's experience with it.
We tend to make "fun" presentations, skits almost. This year was our 10th year so we came up with the theme of the UPS 10th anniversary party which would be crashed by our villain from last year's presentation, Dr. Ignorance (the team is superhero themed). Choice quote from the intro: "Fools! I was but a junior in high school last year. You haven't had a taste of my true power!" Dr ignorance topples our cake prop off the table and while presenting the students build the cake up, each piece represents a part of the team (Pictures and words are on the inside of each cake piece). The foundation is sponsors and mentors, the middle layer is outreach, helping others, and GP, and the goals we reach at the top of the cake are impact on our team members and the community. I will post a pic of the prop to CD Media shortly.
Our first competition was the Wisconsin regional (WIMI). A number of years ago we decided to stop submitting Chairman's at WIMI for a number of reasons, general team disorganization at our home regional, the Chairman's "metagame", and it's usual position in our season are only a few of them.
This year FOURTY (40) teams submitted Chairman's at WI, and by my estimation of previous history of teams I knew anywhere between 12-18 of them could have won it, and there were a lot of teams I didn't know.
Here's our feedback from WI (1 = strongly disagree, 7 = strongly agree)
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by WIMI Feedback
WIMI
1. Team demonstrates significant impact of FIRST on the team members 7
2. Team demonstrates significant impact of FIRST on the team community 7
3. Team uses innovative methods to spread the FIRST message 7
4. Team displays role model characteristics fpr pther teams to emulate 7
5. Team describes strong initiatives to help start or form other FRC teams 5
6. Team describes strong initiatives to help start or form other FIRST teams 6
7. Team assists other teams through the progression of FIRST programs 5
8. Team demonstrates mentorship for less experienced FIRST teams 7
9. Team has strong sponsors and lasting business relationships 7
10. Team can effectively convey the FIRST mission to others 7
11. Team has strong itnerest in STEM education and careers 7
12. Team shows continual improvement each year 6
13. Team exhibits numerous examples of gracious professionalism 7
14. The written submission effectively communicates the team's message 7
15. The Chairman's Award Interview was effective and informative 7
What do the Judges see as the team's main strengths?
We are so proud of your efforts -> great presentation
Continue all the great efforts
What areas could the team focus on for improvement?
You're doing all the right things!
Focus efforts on sustainability
Continue FLL involvement
Judges' final thoughts and comments?
Presentation was FUN - WONDERFUL & really got message across
|
The kids noted that the judges were very receptive to the presentation, and that the interview seemed to go very well.
We didn't win, but were ready to improve for Midwest Regional (ILCH) in week 6. Both of our RCA wins have come from Chicago (2011 and 2013). We didn't change much, just tweaked a few lines to highlight some points and events that we forgot about in the original. Here's our feedback from ILCH:
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ILCH Feedback
ILCH
1. Team demonstrates significant impact of FIRST on the team members 7
2. Team demonstrates significant impact of FIRST on the team community 6
3. Team uses innovative methods to spread the FIRST message 7
4. Team displays role model characteristics fpr pther teams to emulate 7
5. Team describes strong initiatives to help start or form other FRC teams 5
6. Team describes strong initiatives to help start or form other FIRST teams 5
7. Team assists other teams through the progression of FIRST programs 6
8. Team demonstrates mentorship for less experienced FIRST teams 7
9. Team has strong sponsors and lasting business relationships 7
10. Team can effectively convey the FIRST mission to others 7
11. Team has strong itnerest in STEM education and careers 7
12. Team shows continual improvement each year 7
13. Team exhibits numerous examples of gracious professionalism 7
14. The written submission effectively communicates the team's message 7
15. The Chairman's Award Interview was effective and informative 7
What do the Judges see as the team's main strengths?
Great presentation skills
Great outreach
TEDx
What areas could the team focus on for improvement?
More promotion of FIRST teams at all levels
Judges' final thoughts and comments?
Impressive team. Keep up the good work
|
We were initially a little worried about Chicago since we won RCA there in 2013 and our presentation was a tad bit similar (involved a giant comic book instead of a cake, but did have the 2 heroes vs Dr. Ignorance theme). The kids noted that the judges were more stern than the WIMI judges, but that might also be because they were tired (we got the final timeslot). In the end they said the judges still liked the presentation. They noted that they felt the Q&A went well but not as well as WIMI. The scores fluctuated a little bit, 2 or 3 sections down a point and 1 section up a point. We also did not win in ILCH.
Overall we had a great experience with the multiple submissions (though it sure was great only stressing out about RCA at 1 competition a year
).
I do agree that in different regions it appears to be judged a lot differently. Over the years our feedback forms have looked very similar - mostly top, -1, or -2 marks, with sparse or vague written feedback "good work, continue involvement, you're going all the right things, keep it up" (and to be fair to the WIMI judges they had to watch presentations from 8:15-5:30 Friday and 8:15-lunch Saturday). These were all almost the same no matter if it was a year we won or if it was a year we didn't win since about 2010 or 2011 (when I started really getting into helping the Chairman's group). I wish we got as much as what was on Spectrum's Dallas form!
(No comments in this post were meant to take any jabs. Just sharing my view of our experiences as a team with the Chairman's Award)