Our process looks something like this:
- Offseasons: With the exception of IRI, we have students who are motivated and have expressed interest in driving, drive coaching, or human playering (is human playering a word?) operate the robot, as long as they attend one of our robot operation and driving training sessions (where we go over controls and SOPs). This lets these students get enough training to feel comfortable with driving prior evaluation. One of our mentors works on a rotation schedule to ensure that everyone has an equal opportunity to be in all of the positions that they want while working with a variety of other students.
- Rules Test: All prospective drive team members (driver, operator, coach, and human player) must take a multiple-choice rules test developed by our drive team mentor.
- Drive Coach Essay: Drive coaches also are given a few essay questions that present different scenarios, and ask how the candidate would respond.
- Tryouts: Drive coaches come up with drills, and coach permutations of operators, drivers, and human players through them. Not only does this help evaluate everyone individually, but this allows our drive coach mentor to see how people work together -- the whole is more than simply the sum of the parts.
One of the things we tend do differently from other teams is that we select our drivers during the build season. This is a large factor into why offseason events are so critical for us in getting drivers to have experience. Other teams often select the drive team before offseason events, and stick with this static combination for the following game/season.
We also strive to have a student drive coach. There has been a lot of discussion* regarding whether it's best to have a student drive coach (as the rules allow a mentor to fill this role too). While I have no idea what the best choice would be for your team, it's the happy medium our team has come to.
*Relevant threads and blogs: