[popnbrown]

First off, congratulations on getting through your first season! I hope it wasn't too exhausting and your team is excited for a second season!

I want to preface this by saying, I've never been a judge for FRC so I don't know the process. I have been both a student and a mentor. I do have extensive experience with judging for FLL and FTC, so I'll try to draw that in as well.

Consistency in subjectivity is really really hard. Unfortunately, the awards are subjective. I base that on the description of the awards themselves, the competition for that award (ie. The teams at the event), and most importantly the ever changing human component. Not only the judges as the human component, but the students and mentors also involved.

I understand the students are upset and that you see that there should be more consistency. But even if we were able to get over the logistical nightmare of having judges noted be communicated across events, there's still subjectivity of the event itself. And I think it would not be in the program's interest to ask judges to value other notes over their own observations.

I hope I'm not coming off aggressively. I think you're being very calm and collected so I want to approach the same way.

The problem you present is basically this, how can we turn something inherently subjective into something more objective? It's something I've been interested in for a long time, especially as a participant. But what I've come to realize is to solve that problem we really have to ask why does the answer matter?

That's been a question for me for the past two years as I've transitioned into becoming a Lead Mentor...the lead "guidance" for a bunch of teenagers. And what I've discovered is that while my students may be motivated to win awards, it's my responsibility to ensure they stay motivated, if they win and award, if they don't win, if they get screwed out of one. Rather than trying to figure out what is the fairest way to give the award, my highest priority is ensuring my students continue to learn, work hard and be proud of their failures and successes.

This isn't to say that I don't entertain the thought of how to continue to improve the award system. I think a program that doesn't self analyze and seek to improve will stagnate. But my priorities are not on figuring out awards.


Anyways, sort of back on subject I highly suggest you give a whirl with judging if you have not already to see how you can improve consistency.