Quote:
Originally Posted by bEdhEd
Although I am also curious as to how exactly they're breaking the 6 week timeline, I'm not as worried about the robot being worked on after stop build as I am worried about how the Chairman's Award process is allegedly lacking in integrity and student involvement. That completely defeats the purpose and spirit of the Chairman's Award and if this is indeed how their award is being put together, that is many times over a greater offense than adding robot parts after stop build on the competition bot.
|
To put it bluntly - lying to judges is more common than you'd expect.
On Chairmans:
Exaggerating in Chairman's is almost expected (we'll see how the new guidelines impact this) And I know that many teams rely on adults to work on Chairman's in the same way that they rely on adults in the design and fabrication process. I don't see this as a problem at all. We are there as mentors not as baby sitters, and we should be leveraging our knowledge and experience to make sure the team produces the best results it can. Now, I don't think a team where the adults do all the Chairman's prep work, students present it, and they win at the HoF level is a good result, I also don't think it's possible.
But I digress - To me, this is an anonymous poster venting about their perceptions. Reality may be VERY different. If anyone actually involved in the situation would like advice on resolving it: Sit down with the disgruntled party, discuss issues, figure out a plan moving forward. If the disgruntled party wants advice - contact your local Senior Mentor/RD and talk it out with them, they can probably help get you in contact with the right folks.
On Cheating:
Short term, they may win. Long term?