Quote:
Originally Posted by dlavery
...before you answer, I would urge you to carefully research the entire referenced statement, and the context in which it was delivered. Don't rely on second-hand abstractions or someone else's recollection of what was said. Look into it for yourself, and get some direct knowledge of exactly what was being advocated before you form your opinion (he asked innocently, with a pebble resting in an extended palm).
|
I went into the usfirst website and loaded the kickoff video. I have below the applicable portion.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Dave Lavery at Kickoff
The real message I’ve got is for those teams that have chosen to not have mentors participating in your teams. I want to ask you to think about it again. If you have chosen to do this problem without mentors on your teams, technically yes you are probably going to be able to compete and play the game. It’s going to be tough, it’s going to be harder but you can probably do it. It’s certainly reasonable. But if you have chosen to not have mentors on your team and to do this by yourselves, you’re missing an opportunity to work side by side with some of the best engineers in the world. You’re missing an opportunity to learn from some of those creative and innovative designers that are out there. You’re missing an opportunity to be inspired by some of the best problem solvers in the world. Realistically, you’re missing the point. What we want you to do instead, to all those teams and all the teams that already get it and understand the role of the mentor we want you to instead to dare to try to do something different. Dare to try to learn about problem solving and doing things in a different way. Get outside of your comfort zone. Let the mentors show you something that you’re not used to doing. We want you to dare to be exposed to new ways to think we basically want to dare you to be inspired. That’s what we want you to take away from this program.
|
Ok, the two bold parts are the parts I want to reference. The first part suggests that teams choose to not have mentors participate. To this, I'd like to meet the team that doesn't allow their mentors to participate. From my experience, it seems like the teams that can get a mentor choose to use them. They might not allow to participate in the way that you mean, but they make use of them in some way. The teams I've been on avoid having mentors work on the parts, heading the design, or out on the field. Does this mean they aren't participating? I don't think so. I avoid doing work for the students. I help them figure out dimensions, I open their mind to new ideas, I am a resource of information, I am there for motivation if they need some confidence, I am a mentor(as dictionary.com describes it). I am not drafting up the bot for them, I am not going out on the field, I am not designing the robot, I am not building a part, I
am not a student. But honestly, that whole debate doesn't bother me too much.
The second bold part is where your real question comes in.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dlavery
I would be quite interested in learning how I, or Dean, or Woodie, am all wrong and missing the point of FIRST.
|
In short: "How could the creators not know the point of their creation?"
I want to go with the definition of the word 'point', because that is probably where are confusion lies. According to dictionary.com, the word 'point' has 91 definitions. The definitions that are relevant are 23 through 25 which I've quoted below.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by dictionary.com
23.the important or essential thing: the point of the matter.
24.the salient feature of a story, epigram, joke, etc.: to miss the point.
25.a particular aim, end, or purpose: He carried his point.
|
The creators would definitely know the point by definition 25, however that is not the definition that I was originally meaning. I am referring to definition 23. This leads to the question of what is "the important or essential thing" of FIRST. Winning is the most important thing in the competition for some, so that is the 'point' of FIRST for them. For others, the 'point' is inspiration. For me, the 'point' is learning. The whole 'point'(using definition 25) I am trying to make is that there is no singular 'point'(using definition 23) for something as big as FIRST.
This is the only case that I sincerely feel you are wrong. Anyone that suggests there is one-size-fits-all 'point' for FIRST, is wrong in my opinion. There are just too many people involved in the program for all of us to agree upon what is important.
I apologize for my harsh wording in my previous post(especially to Dean for the mistaken identity quote), I honestly am not accusing the creators of any ignorance. I feel that each of the creators are quite intelligent, I just think you need to realize that FIRST has numerous benefits outside of your original intention. It went from having a specific point to having numerous.
All I really ask is that you allow us to define the point ourselves rather then telling us what it is supposed to be.