Quote:
Originally Posted by cbale2000
The accomodating FTC part is the key thing here. Because of the prevalence of FRC in Michigan, there's no real place for FTC unless you move it to middle school. There were only a handful of FTC teams in Michigan prior to the switch and maybe one or two events, now both are much more common.
|
Respectfully - This isn't correct - FTC and FRC can coexist quite easily in a single "team". - There are great heaping piles of prima facie evidence that says they can, and that when they do the students benefit in several ways.
I can understand that the "there is no real place for FTC" [because high schools have FRC teams] can sound reasonable if you say it fast, or if that idea is woven into a PowerPoint slide deck describing a plan to constrain what students are offered; but it's just not correct.
We can discuss the benefits of complementary FTC/FRC participation by a single "team" if you like. I'll be glad to share my opinions, along with pointers to real-world examples.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hot_Copper_Frog
I couldn't agree more that FLL is a vital step in STEM education that offers a wide range of positive experiences for students. The transition to FLL in elementary school and FTC in middle school is, in part, to improve their FIRST experience overall. I'm a graduate of FLL/FRC myself, and I wish I had been able to experience FTC as a middle step between the two. By the time I aged out of FLL I was bored - the build and programming weren't challenging enough. But hopping right into FRC was overwhelming. FTC is a great middle step.
...
I don't think I've spoken with a single student who has gone through this progression and had anything negative to say about it.
|
I agree with everything I have explicitly quoted here, and with your post in general; but ...
(IMO) It is irrelevant.
The topic being discussed isn't whether FTC prepares students for FRC, nor is the topic whether FTC is a good intermediate program to experience between FLL and FRC.
The topic is whether anyone should actively discourage and/or put barriers in the way of students, schools, 4H Clubs, Scouting troops, whoever who want to participate in FLL after they are out of elementary school, or participate in FTC after they are out of middle school.
In my opinion, no one should discourage them and/or erect any barriers.
There are plenty of reasons why I think this. The most fundamental is this. If an undecided/tentative student or group wants to try (for the first time) a hands-on STEM activity during their middle school or high school years; FRC can be good for them, but to get honest-to-goodness, hands-on, hardware and software, design/construction/integration/testing/operating/speaking experience in a lower-pressure, lower-cost, less-time commitment, simpler environment; forming or joining an FLL or an FTC team is the way to go. Forming or joining an FLL or FTC team that is associated with (mentored by) an FRC team is even better.
So, in my opinion, the OP, and the person who resurrected this thread yesterday both are on the right track. Encouraging the Michigan school systems to offer FLL/FTC/FRC in elementary/middle/high school respectively is a good idea. Discouraging the Michigan school systems, and/or anyone else, from offering FLL/FTC to older students is not a good idea. The cons far outweigh the pros.
When is it ever a good idea to tell a pre-college student of any age that because of someone else's opinion, their only viable FIRST STEM robotics option is FRC?
Blake
PS: The VEX VRC and VIQ programs, and a few other STEM programs are obvious alternatives to FIRST's programs - For the purposes of this discussion, I'm focusing only on the FIRST programs.