[Hot_Copper_Frog]

I have so many conflicting feelings about the topics surrounding STEM education and FIRST. I went all the way up through the progression of programs -- starting in FLL, moving through FRC, graduated with a STEM degree, and now serve as an FRC mentor while working as a STEM professional.

To be honest, I've never had much interest in the robot end of things. I've always been a Chairman's and scouting/strategy student through and through, and that's mainly what I mentor now. The skills that I learned through these activities were incredibly important to my academic success while in college, and serve me well now in my career. I learned how to speak eloquently, write clearly, work with groups of very different and/or difficult people, and keep an upbeat attitude in the face of frustration.

FIRST proclaims that the Chairman's Award is the most important award in FIRST -- because it teaches us that it isn't all about the robots. In order to earn this award, the team is required to apply technical and persuasive writing skills, effective public speaking skills, the ability to improvise, marketing and imagery design, video editing skills, etc. All of these are what many people might categorize as "soft skills", but they're things that as an engineering consultant I use all the time.

I think the question we should be asking ourselves is not "are we emphasizing STEM too much?", but rather "Do we include the right subjects and skills in STEM education?".