View Single Post
  #15   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 11-02-2008, 01:19
Lil' Lavery Lil' Lavery is offline
TSIMFD
AKA: Sean Lavery
FRC #1712 (DAWGMA)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Rookie Year: 2003
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 6,616
Lil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to Lil' Lavery
Re: **FIRST EMAIL**/Judges Information for the Team Yearbook

Whether we like it or not, for now, we have to play by the rules of the "game". Even though I strongly disagree with the reality that these have and will be used as tie-breakers in certain situations, for now we should use them to the best advantage of our teams. If we do not submit the information, the judges may or may not make assumptions, and I'd rather not take that chance. Nothing is perfect, even the judges. The essay in particular, and the statistics if utilized and "spun" effectively during your face-time with the judges, can be critical to enhancing your chances at awards. Even if your essay is something along the lines of "we hope that we are competitive for all awards because we felt that in order to get the most out of the FIRST experience we needed a well-rounded team and focused on every FIRST criteria and aspect". Everything can be put forth in a positive manner, you just have to find a way to express it.
In my experience, years where my team has had less than favorable statistics in one area, we talk about how we are striving to fix them (ie, our active recruitment of girls). We show positive trends.

That being said, none of these factors should ever weigh into an award process. The fact that they do is haunting.
Money IS an engineering design constraint, and it should be treated as one, a constraint, not as a handicap. As long as the team designed within their constraints, they should be applauded, not biased against because their constraint wasn't as tight as another team's.
I get where they're trying to go with the ethnicity and free/reduced lunch aspect (ie you're reaching out to those who might not be already exposed to such programs), but they shouldn't force the issue, or use it against the teams from less diverse areas (financially and racially).
__________________
Being correct doesn't mean you don't have to explain yourself.
Reply With Quote