I understand that this thread isn't a poll, but if it were, I would be quick to join the side that the college environment isn't suitable for the ideals of FIRST. FIRST as an organization has continued to define itself by far more than the practice of innovation and engineering and that is what makes it inspiring; at least from my perspective. In almost a cheesy way, FIRST has introduced the ideas time and time again that the most important foundations of this specific organization are the building of a community with a shared interest and passion in science and technology. Far more than the practice of these skills in FIRST is the introduction of a new sort of education policy, from a tributary: FIRST to secondary school curricula--this is to integrate this idea of mentorship or apprenticeship: informal, more accessible and more practical math and science education into this setting. Far more than the actual study and practice of engineering, FIRST aims to create that spark and that enthusiasm for these fields that is found in FIRST which is why many college students become disinterested. What I have come to understand as a FIRST student, volunteer and frequenter of CD on a regular basis is that FIRST is "first" and foremost an educational organization. The medium and nothing more is competition. By introducing FIRST into the collegiate plane, an example is created for those secondary school participants to further define the goal of FIRST- one that many find obscure to begin-as an organization whose aim is not for them to learn in a new way to find that enthusiasm but to compete, win and feel that FIRST is primarily a sport. The way I see it, FIRST builds the interest and creates an incomparable educational experience. Once the student graduates FIRST, his job more than to become an engineer and continue to compete is to educate, to mentor and to share both his experience and his enthusiasm.
Quote:
Originally Posted by popnbrown
So instead of Chairman's being the highest award, it should like Engineering Design, the actual report of the team, how well the presentation is, and how well they applied the principles. Although, that might be a bit tough on the judges. .
|
Sravan's statement exemplifies the logic of my argument. If for what this new game strives is anything other than the concept of what the Chairman's award rewards, is it still a FIRST competition? There is nothing wrong with this direction, I don't mean to say that at all, but for discussion's sake, is that FIRST or something else entirely?
If the students are already formally and effectively studying to earn a degree in this discipline, what becomes the purpose of the FIRST competition?
When "the robot is only an instrument", when FIRST is so much more than a science and technology competition, how is Chris' point anything but valid? Before a game is designed, this idea should definitely continue to be evaluated.
I disagree that the main purpose of FIRST is to guide students to pursue careers in science and engineering. Is that invalid?
Sam Alexander
Columbia University Class of '13
Alumni Team 341- Miss Daisy