I do see an issue here.
It's not that the student was replaced. That's a mentor's call.
It's who the student was replaced with.
Quote:
|
One of the presenters was the new person I mentioned. She has never shown up at a meeting, knows very little about the team, or what we've done, and, hasn't shown up since. In fact, she wasn't at the second day of competition either.
|
Somebody who shows up at exactly one breakout meeting and and one day of an event, and isn't part of the team before then should not be treated as a member of the team for the presentation. This is made worse when said person, who knows little to nothing about the team, replaces one of the persons who wrote the RCA essay, who knows more and can expand on the presentation if asked.
I also see that a mentor is having an offsite activity for students who want to present the RCA. I don't see a problem with that. I think that's a good thing, actually. I also don't see that there's a problem with saying that if you aren't there, you can't present (unless extenuating circumstances are not accounted for).
Where I do see an issue is the refusal of reverse transportation, and then saying, "If you're not there, you can't present." In this case, that was worked around quite well. I'd suggest making the latter statement first.
I also see the timing as an issue. 2 days after this happens, the morning of the presentation, is when the announcement is made. Bad call. If the mentor was going to pull the OP off the presenters, it should have been done at least the day before, if at all possible.
What I would suggest: Talk to another mentor or two about this. Explain how you felt, etc. Then ask them to come with you to talk to (not confront) the mentor who was in charge of the RCA submission. Find out what his reasons were, and let the mentors explain why it's a bad idea to do that if they feel that it is necessary to do so. (Note: it may be a good idea to have a mentor--preferably the lead mentor--who hasn't heard either side to moderate if needed.)
In addition to the structure suggestions above, of course. Maybe set a ground rule that any student who wants to do certain tasks (drive, present, pit crew, you get the picture) has to have been at [a reasonable minimum number of] meetings in order to be considered, barring extenuating circumstances. Having that alone in the team handbook could save a lot of frustration in the future.