Quote:
Originally Posted by Akash Rastogi
Do you hope to contribute to the discussion or just $@#$@#$@#$@# on things other people post?
You state what is wrong and what is not the correct metric. What are the correct metrics then?
What are the two kinds of people in the world?
Sorry these amazing mentors want the FIRST Robotics Competition to be built around the notion of competition.
|
Take a breath Askash.
I try to take my cues from some amazing mentors named Woodie, Dean, and Dave. Furthermore, I try to listen carefully beyond the slogans and catch phrases. They purposefully created a program containing compromises, in which the desire to focus on competing is in tension with other goals, and they plainly asked all participants to avoid being seduced too much by the competition tool the program uses.
When I began in FRC, I was 100% focused on the competition. What I learned from Woodie, Dean, and Dave in my first year, taught me a different motivation.
Other people's experiences and thoughtful consideration of the same things I heard from W, D, and D, gave/give them their own motivations.
Joe's post said the paper is a home run. I said it isn't. I also offered that opinion without rehashing the still valid and invalid arguments on both sides of the topic. My reasons are already a matter of public record, and I hoped you would remember them. You were around when I wrote them.
I would delight in spending a day, face-to-face with respected CD friends, including Jim and Joe, untangling the hype that surrounds this subject, and subsequently putting together a funded plan that would separate symptoms from causes, would separate fact from fiction, and would recommend one path for improving FRC. Discussion threads aren't very useful for accomplishing that. They are a step along the path, but are nowhere near the finish.
Blake
What is the metric? Something along the lines of introducing students to enough positive STEM experiences to open their eyes to the possibility that they might enjoy a STEM career. To do that you don't even need to have competitions. You might choose to use competitions, but they aren't required.
Who are the two kinds of people? Those who agree with the motivations and conclusions of Jim's write-up, and those who don't. It's by no means a slam dunk that the paper's methods, conclusions, or recommendations are irrefutable or best. Reasonable people can and do disagree (see some other posts in this thread). Jim is reasonable. I think I am too.