Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Philip W.
These are definitely truthful points. Understanding how to orientate a washer and experiencing the business and leadership aspects of a FIRST team are very important parts of the FIRST program, but they're not the main objective. FIRST was created to solve the problem that there were not enough youths starting careers in science, technology, engineering and math. The questions in this thread are a crude method to investigate the degree of engineering inspiration on differently run teams. How effective does your team achieve FIRST's main goal in the current way it is run?
While I'm at it, here's my two cents and tangent to the topic. The business and leadership aspects of a FIRST team seem to be neglected by the FIRST vision. Both aspects are very important in running an efficient team, and leadership can easily be applied to later in life (not that business can't). The most recognition FIRST has for these aspects is the Entrepreneurship Award. I suppose it's underrated because FIRST is focusing on quantity over quality, we don't really hear any success stories about a FIRST alumnus that is extremely successful from joining FIRST. This is understandable, but still a shame. (If you want to go off topic by continuing this tangent, please do the very least and answer some of the questions if you haven't already)
|
Phil, you've only addressed the last sentence of Cory's quoted statement, a statement I have to say is very true. You in fact imply that it is possible to measure who has been "inspired" by what they do later in life. You try to show a correlation between FIRST and going into engineering later, and further try to show causation. This does not exist. Tristan, for example, would have likely said he'd want to be an engineer before FIRST. Jeff, for example, has surely benefitted from the engineering side of FIRST despite the fact that he's going into business. FIRST has changed people in ways they don't realize, and mostly for the better. The range is broad; from improving work ethic, to improving self-confidence, to making someone want to go to university, to keeping people out of gangs, to making an arts student want to work for an engineering firms. The possibilities of inspiration are not only endless, but immeasurable, and this
measure of inspiration being used here does not give everyone credit.
For Inspiration and Recognition of Science and Technology; there's that word again. But beside inspiration is another word: recognition. One of the main goals Dean Kamen set out to achieve was to raise awareness of science and technology in the culture. If someone graduates from high school and his FIRST team and goes on to become a construction worker, he might not go and do great things. That doesn't mean he wasn't inspired. We may think less of him, but that is not related to how "inspired" he was. Heck, maybe FIRST made him want to be a construction worker instead of a janitor.*
Having said that, I certainly understand the credential and quantifiable aspect of inspiration that this thread is about. I don't reject the fact that a team that has 100% university students is sure to have inspired more than a team with 50%. I just think a lot is being overlooked by looking at inspiration soleley in this manner. Using your standards however, it's true not everyone is inspired by FIRST, but a lot more people have been inspired a lot more than you show. On our team alone, I can name far more than 2 recent alumni of 188 that are taking science, math, engineering, or technology courses (they are all in college or university, including numerous Ivy Leagues), so even here your premise about our team going downhill is faulty.
Just sayin'.
*No disrespect to either of these occupations but perception is a powerful thing.