[EricH]

Originally Posted by 1885.Blake

Folks,

Whether the original author realized it or not, making a point about students vs mentors in the pits (and extrapolating backwards from that point into the build season) was the core of the original comment. Let's please temporarily forget that the author muddied up the water by extrapolating forward from the pit situation to winning/losing on the field.

With that in mind, would someone please explain to me which of the two possibilities I list below describes the "better" FIRST scenario.

• Option 1) Mentors draw on experience to do X; and students learn by watching and asking questions.
• Option 2) Mentors teach students how to do X; students do X with support and guidance from mentors.

[...]
PS: If someone wants to point out a significantly different third option, I'm listening. Don't let me fall into the trap of viewing this through the lens of a false dichotomy.

Option 3): Students do all the work with little to no mentor input.

Personally, option 2 is better and best. Working with my college-level Aero Design team, this is what we use to teach freshmen. The older students show the younger once or twice. They then check to see if the job is done right. If not, they explain why.

I can see why the OP didn't like what he saw, but what we don't know is:
a) Did he talk to the students on those teams?
b) Was their pit the way it was described for the entire competition (i.e. was this only temporary)?
c) (muddy water zone) Did those teams win awards, do well in matches, etc?

Consider a) and b) a direct question to the OP. I will explain why I asked upon an answer.