Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Bill Gold
This doesn't necessarily follow. However, it does seem to imply that either you don’t have much faith in the ability of your fellow students (high school and college) on teams in this program or you believe that all teams’ actions are already dictated by adults and that there’s no such thing as a student run team. I believe that no matter what the rules are regarding parts of robots will say that the vast majority of teams will have the majority of their robot designed and built by students. This isn’t to say that I abhor professional input, design, or manufacturing. I actually love and am very thankful for what all these amazing engineering role models put into this program year in and year out.
My $0.02 after not having posted anything significant in months.
|
Yeah, I didn't explain that too well. I have tons of faith in our students. With that said, every years challenge is not a piece of cake. The existing restrictions make it difficult enough to create a functional robot in 6 weeks. When you add more and more restrictions, the ideas generated by the students one by one become unusable one by one for the team. Mentors/Adults then have to step in and lend more advice(sometimes advice can be the same as building a robot for a student). Our team tries to use the mentors/adults/engineers as last resort materials, because when we suggest ideas it becomes less and less theirs.(Please try to take that to what I mean, and don't argue that lending advice is what we should be doing -- you know what I mean)
Anyway, cause and effect, more restrictions -- keeping the 6 week build period constant - will lead to more adult created concepts.