Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex2614
I think FIRST is heading that direction, with the winners being required to record their presentation, and FIRST publically displaying essays, videos, and presentations for everyone to see. Granted, this is just the winners, but a step in that direction.
Also, I've noticed over the past couple years a change in the wording of the award criteria. IT has been hugely focused on "significant measurable impact" more and more. They want to see numbers and data more now than ever, and they will grill you for that information. I think FIRST is heading there, and I think there is more accountability now with the increased emphasis on numbers and also the increased emphasis on "the previous 3-5 years" instead of your team's whole history. I.e. we can't ride on stuff team members did many years ago.
|
I agree! Its gotten better, but as you pointed out, this happens retroactively it doesn't help filter and select the winners. Generally if you have a quality judge advisor they help make sure the best teams win and they challenge the judges to do follow up research as necessary.
I also think a similar process could be put into place for other awards like EI too.
True independent evidence of the activities completed would be a big plus, referencing local newspapers, or hard evidence such as thank you letters from organizations teams help out would be an asset to an audit. You can always stage a chairman's video or pictures.