Quote:
Originally Posted by Allison K
I love data as much as the next person on CD, but the key problem in this instance is that growth statistics will be heavily skewed by the state grant money that's been thrown at FRC and FTC the last two years.
In any case, the narrow eligibility for FTC has been a point of frustration for me for years now, and lowering the FLL cutoff age is also a disappointment. I feel like 5th graders won't be able to get the full depth of experience out of FLL at 10 years old with just one prior year of competition, especially given the breadth of strategy involved in both the robot game and the research project.
|
I understand that FRC and FTC have benefited significantly from the State Grant money. Is there a possibility this grant money was rewarded due to the effectiveness and potential that the State saw in FiM's structure for the FIRST Progression of Programs? (This is an honest question, as I do not know the details surrounding the grant. I just don't want to write off the possibility that the growth is fueled by a grant that was rewarded, in part, by the advantageous competition structure established by FiM. The two could be related.)
Regardless, FIRST Programs in Michigan have been under FiM's leadership for 7 years now. Growth Numbers over 7 years (as compared to the rest of the country) will give insight into whether or not FiM has proven to be an effective steering committee for either the entire progression of FIRST Programs, only some of them, or none of at all.
This data would in no way discount the experiences and trends each Coach/Mentor has seen in their teams/regions/spheres of influence. I'm simply interested in the macro-level data that can provide a different perspective.
-Mike