Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Hachiban VIII
...
Do winning teams really exemplify the high standards of FIRST? Are the teams that win the most awards really those that best live up to FIRST's mission? Or do you feel that there are plenty of teams that deserve these awards just as much if not more? ..
|
we are dancing on the edge of THE DEBATE with this: there are teams that feel the best way to inspire the students is to lean heavily in the Mentor Designed direction - building a super machine that will wow the team, and everyone else who see it in action
and there are teams who lean more towards Student Designed / student built... with the mindset that having the students involved in every aspect, as much as possible, will inspire them the most.
The PC thing to say is that both methods are within the spirit of FIRST, there are advantages to both philosophies.
Without getting into THE DEBATE, I think its clear that two teams with equal resources, and equally skilled mentors, the one that takes the Mentor Designed path is most likely to show up with the state of the art, professional designed and manufactured robot - with the best odds of winning.
Do they deserve to win? That feels like a loaded question. There have been many discussions over the years on this: should we have different classes of competition? Student-only built robots and mentor built robots, mixed design, rookie vs rookie teams....
I cant answer that question, I can only offer my opinions. I can only tell you my preferences for the way I would want my team to function.
I guess the bottom line is that FIRST decides what the awards are. You get what you reward. Engineering is about striving for the best system possible, so it would be weird if FIRST was like T-ball, we all play the game but no body keeps score, then we all get a trophy at the end.
If FIRST didnt think winning the regional was something to be acknowledged and rewarded, then we would not have the type of competitions that FIRST created - they would come up with something different.
Quote:
|
So you're saying that with good planing and time management anything is possible?
|
good planning means you have a schedule and a path, and you know how you are going to get from start to finish. So, I guess yes, a good plan would have to be a real plan, a realistic sequence of steps that your team
can follow.
So if you can generate a good plan for it, then anything is possible.