[FRC Blog] Software Downloads and Administrative Manual Release

[ehochstein]

http://www.usfirst.org/roboticsprogr...Manual-Release

We want to tell you about some software downloads that are available to you right now that can help you be ready for Kickoff.

First, in an effort to help you get up and running after Kickoff as quickly as possible, here are instructions to on how to download and install the programming environments for 2015 in LabVIEW and C++/Java.

As a reminder, these downloads are only for the general programming environments. The 2015 FRC specific plug-ins will be made available, encrypted, prior to Kickoff. Watch the blog for more!

Second, this year we’ve moved in a different direction with the way we distribute the Manual to teams. Along with the FIRST Lego League, we’ve partnered with Adobe to use their Digital Publishing Suite to create and distribute the Manual. For now, there are two ways you can get the 2015 Administrative Manual, by downloading the PDF or by downloading the “FIRST Official” app available on both iOS and Android. We'll roll out the iPad app first to confirm functionality, then the Android and iPhone versions. We’re also working with Adobe to implement a content viewer to replace the online viewing option of the frc-manual.usfirst.org page used for the last few years.

Some Key Changes in the Administrative Manual

I’ll admit that normally the Admin Manual isn’t exactly a page turner, but we’ve got some new stuff this year, some changes more serious, some more intended to get rid of nuisances for teams.

On the serious side –

Please see Section 6.4. Chairman’s Award presentations may now be up to seven minutes long, but total time with the judges will still max out at 10 minutes, so please keep in mind a longer presentation likely means less time for direct judge interaction. Also, we are eliminating the Chairman’s feedback form. We’ve heard from teams that many do not find them helpful – some teams even complaining that they addressed all the issues the judges raised on their last feedback form, but still were not selected. This suggests a ‘checkbox’ approach to the award, which is not what we are looking for at all. You will find a subtle change in the manual that is an attempt to start addressing this – instead of saying teams ‘win’ the award, we now say teams ‘earn’ the award, which is closer in spirit to our beliefs about this most prestigious of all FRC awards.

We recognize, though, that it is still valuable for teams to understand how they did in comparison to others. So, for the first time, we are asking teams that earn the Chairman’s Award at events to later share their Chairman’s video, along with a video of a practice presentation, with FIRST, so we may post it publicly. In addition to these videos, we will be posting the written submissions these teams made. We know we have not asked teams to record their presentations before, but we hope teams earning this award would be eager to share their presentations with others, so all can benefit. The practice presentation videos do not need to be edited to add titles or any other embellishments – a straight single camera shot capturing the practice presentation is fine. Teams should plan to capture their practice presentation before or after the presentation they make to the judges, not during. Taken together, these three elements – Chairman’s video, presentation video, and written submission - should give aspiring teams a good idea of ‘what it takes’.

Also please take a look at Section 6.6. We are taking a related approach to Dean’s List interviews this year as we are with Chairman’s. Interview time is being extended to be up to seven minutes long, up from five minutes maximum last year. Also, Judges will not be providing written feedback. In place of written feedback from judges, a mentor of the student will be allowed to be present to silently witness the interview. The mentor can then provide feedback on the interview skills of the student at a later time. As mentors know the student better than the judges do, we feel this feedback is potentially more valuable.

On the less serious side –

Team banners. Check out Section 4.12.4. We’re removing the restriction - which honestly had been sometimes loosely enforced, depending on event - preventing you from hanging them in the arena. Have fun, show your pride, but be safe and respectful.

And my personal favorite on the less serious side- check out Section 4.2.2 about robot carts, specifically this bullet point:

Do not add music or other sound-generating devices to the cart, with the exception of devices of reasonable volume intended to be activated occasionally to make others in the direct vicinity aware that a robot is on the move for safety purposes

Reading between the lines – you can stop yelling ‘Robot’ to let others know you have a robot on the move. Please. And you can go nuts with adding sounds to your carts for safety purposes. As long as you go nuts in a controlled, responsible way.*

Frank

*Please think less air raid siren, more cowbell. We don’t want this change to lead to new nuisances. Any sounds you add should be just loud enough to get the job done, without being annoying.

Noteable items:

• Teams will no longer recieve Chairman's or Dean's List Feedback forms
• One mentor is able to watch Dean's List interview
• Chairman's award winners are asked to record and post their interview presentation
• You no longer 'win' awards, you 'earn' them.

[kjohnson]

Originally Posted by FRC Blog

Reading between the lines – you can stop yelling ‘Robot’ to let others know you have a robot on the move. Please.

This makes me happy.

[AllenGregoryIV]

Originally Posted by nukemknight

This makes me happy.

Except now we get beeps and things. I am not sure this is any better.

Also I liked the Chairman's feedback form, it helped us from our first event to our second. If done well I believe those forms could really help teams figure out what they are missing.

[Tom Line]

Originally Posted by AllenGregoryIV

Except now we get beeps and things. I am not sure this is any better.

Also I liked the Chairman's feedback form, it helped us from our first event to our second. If done well I believe those forms could really help teams figure out what they are missing.

I will personally strangle the first team that adds one of those backup beepers to their cart and then gets stuck outside my pit while we're in the middle of a harried repair job between matches.

[AllenGregoryIV]

Originally Posted by Tom Line

I will personally strangle the first team that adds one of those backup beepers to their cart and then gets stuck outside my pit while we're in the middle of a harried repair job between matches.

I won't go that far. I will say, that there will be a "special" discussion during our pick list meeting about teams with beeping carts.

[Tom Line]

Originally Posted by AllenGregoryIV

I won't go that far. I will say, that there will be a "special" discussion during our pick list meeting about teams with beeping carts.

What can I say - I prefer the more direct approach.

[Travis Schuh]

I think the yelling robot/cart noise change will be a net positive. I have seen the robot yelling mostly propagated by volunteers insisting that teams do so. This new directive should result in different training and fix that. I also think that most teams don't read the administrative manual/are lazy in general when it comes to things like this, so I doubt we will see many teams doing this.

[Laaba 80]

This is coming from someone who is not part of our chairmans/awards team, but I don't see why everyone is so upset. What feedback could possibly be better than seeing the submission from the winning team? This now allows teams to review their entire program against many of the top teams, rather than focus on a few specific points from a feedback form. I think this is a great change.

[wilsonmw04]

Originally Posted by Laaba 80

This is coming from someone who is not part of our chairmans/awards team, but I don't see why everyone is so upset. What feedback could possibly be better than seeing the submission from the winning team? This now allows teams to review their entire program against many of the top teams, rather than focus on a few specific points from a feedback form. I think this is a great change.

Some regionals give great feed back. for Example: X outreach is really innovative!! or you need to focus in Y and Z. These are the things that teams need in order to improve. The release of videos and what not are only of limited value.

[Electronica1]

Wait, can the cart use music to make others aware? For example, could I loop the 1960's batman theme to make others aware?

[cadandcookies]

Originally Posted by Electronica1

Wait, can the cart use music to make others aware? For example, could I loop the 1960's batman theme to make others aware?

If you're interested in irritating the entire regional, sure.

[Kevin Sheridan]

Originally Posted by wilsonmw04

Some regionals give great feed back. for Example: X outreach is really innovative!! or you need to focus in Y and Z. These are the things that teams need in order to improve. The release of videos and what not are only of limited value.

I dont like the current feedback form because of exactly this reason. It implies that there is a "formula" to win Chairman's when that couldn't be farther from the truth. General presentation and essay feedback are great but I'm on the fence about judges telling teams specifics about what they need to "fix" for Chairman's. It puts an emphasis on "winning" the award which FIRST is trying to steer away from. Rather than teams leaving a regional thinking they might have won if they started just mentored a few more FLL teams or called more politicians about STEM in the classroom, FIRST probably wants teams to leave inspired by the award "winner" to do more stuff for their community.

[Alan Anderson]

Originally Posted by mman1506

The only thing that stands out for me is that Canadians don't typically stand facing the flag. It caught me way off guard when everyone did it at IRI. I'm assuming its a traditional American thing?

The United States national anthem "The Star-Spangled Banner" is all about the flag.

[MrBasse]

Originally Posted by Laaba 80

This is coming from someone who is not part of our chairmans/awards team, but I don't see why everyone is so upset. What feedback could possibly be better than seeing the submission from the winning team? This now allows teams to review their entire program against many of the top teams, rather than focus on a few specific points from a feedback form. I think this is a great change.

When you watch their video you don't get to see what their presentation was, just the non-judged video that was created.

Coming from a team that has only participated in chairmans twice, we really enjoyed the feedback. We got notes about presentation ideas, information about who spoke clearly or not, who's pacing was too fast or just right, and what content was good and where they felt we could use work compared anonymously to other presenters they had viewed.

Of course at our other event we got a near blank form...

[sanddrag]

Reading this blog from Frank makes me feel like my 2014 FRC end of the year feedback survey responses were really read in detail, taken seriously, and given a lot of individual thought, and not just aggregated into a pie chart. It's nice for an individual to feel as if he or she has influenced an organization's policies and procedures on a national level.

I agree with the changes made to the Chairman's Award process for 2015, and I hope to see good things come from these changes.