Clash of Objectives.

[faust1706]

With the recent announcement of the change in structure of higher level FRC events, it has become blatant at the disparity between the objectives that FIRST is trying to achieve as compared to the objectives individual teams are trying to achieve.

Ask yourself, what makes a FRC team successful?

[waialua359]

Originally Posted by faust1706

With the recent announcement of the change in structure of higher level FRC events, it has become blatant at the disparity between the objectives that FIRST is trying to achieve as compared to the objectives individual teams are trying to achieve.

Ask yourself, what makes a FRC team successful?

FRC=FIRST Robotics Competition
FIRST=For Inspiration and Recognition of Science and Technology

Since our inception in 1999, the FRC competition and FIRST objectives have served as a vehicle in meeting Waialua High & Intermediate School's objectives in providing a STEM learning experience for a small, rural community where STEM is pretty much non-existent.

[mklinker]

[quote=waialua359;1469475]FRC=FIRST Robotics Competition
FIRST=For Inspiration and Recognition of Science and Technology

First objectives as stated above align with the newly announced 2 championship model. The competition is the vehicle to Inspire. I can assure you that my students are VERY inspired and we have not ever been to championships (we had to decline a spot this year).

Change is hard but I am certain that the members of the FIRST community will come together to make this work.

[faust1706]

Yes, the competition is the driving force behind achieving the what FIRST hopes to accomplish. It's the act of competing, not the act of winning, that should inspire. If you want to see for yourself what I mean, ask your studenys what makes a team successful. The answers you'll get more than likely won't align with first's mission in the slightest. (Obtaining trophies vs inspiring) With the addition of another championship, it lowers the perceived value of making it to worlds as well as including more teams. It is attempting to fix the wrong goals of teams while at the same time allowing for the inclusion of more teams (and thus kids).

[dodar]

Originally Posted by faust1706

Yes, the competition is the driving force behind achieving the what FIRST hopes to accomplish. It's the act of competing, not the act of winning, that should inspire. If you want to see for yourself what I mean, ask your studenys what makes a team successful. The answers you'll get more than likely won't align with first's mission in the slightest. (Obtaining trophies vs inspiring) With the addition of another championship, it lowers the perceived value of making it to worlds as well as including more teams. It is attempting to fix the wrong goals of teams while at the same time allowing for the inclusion of more teams (and thus kids).

Of course the kids are going to say the trophies/winning is why they are there; they arent they to inspire, they are there to be inspired. And if the inspiration is working, you shouldnt actually see it. Its a behind the scenes thing that takes effect over time.

[faust1706]

Just look at nearly every person's signature, including yours. People take more pride in winning than anything else. It's more than just the kids of FRC that have the wrong mindset.

[Siri]

Originally Posted by faust1706

Just look at nearly every person's signature, including yours. People take more pride in winning than anything else. It's more than just the kids of FRC that have the wrong mindset.

Why is a mindset "wrong"? Am I less interested in inspiration simply because I take pride in winning?

[JeremyLansing]

Originally Posted by faust1706

Just look at nearly every person's signature, including yours. People take more pride in winning than anything else. It's more than just the kids of FRC that have the wrong mindset.

You seem to be implying that the goal of winning is detrimental to the goal of inspiring students.

Originally Posted by faust1706

It's the act of competing, not the act of winning, that should inspire.

Winning in my book is the ultimate method of inspiration, it is a culmination and validation of everything that students have worked towards. Not winning should never be taken as a sign of failure, but saying that the pursuit of victory is the wrong mindset to have is, in my opinion, incorrect. For myself, and I believe this applies to many others, winning is not an end in itself, but a means to an end, and that is inspiration.

[Steven Smith]

Ask yourself, what makes a FRC team successful?

http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...d.php?t=128680

If you want to see for yourself what I mean, ask your studenys what makes a team successful. The answers you'll get more than likely won't align with first's mission in the slightest.

I did, as the wrap-up of our 2014-2015 season last week. They pointed to the two chairman's winners videos we saw at our two events (987/2468). They talked about wanting to increase our meeting times through the year to become more competitive, as well as do a better job recruiting and training new students (including student volunteerism with FLL at feeder schools).

Just look at nearly every person's signature, including yours. People take more pride in winning than anything else. It's more than just the kids of FRC that have the wrong mindset.

I appreciate that FIRST provides official awards to recognize more than the the "Winning Robot". Most signature lists highlight these awards side-by-side. An ad hominem attack on a person's value system because they list the awards their team won in their signature makes it easy to dismiss the rest of your posts. However, I'm sure there is a grain of truth, where people do sometimes get a bit carried away with the importance of specific awards and forget the big picture... but I don't see it as an endemic problem in the FIRST/CD community. I can't even think of a single team I've met that has a shown a history of a "win at all costs attitude", and is blatantly at odds with FIRST ideals as you suggested.

I do sometimes feel like there is a disconnect between the "already heavily inspired" crowd on CD, that cares about FIRST enough to draft and respond to these sorts of posts... and the FIRST community at large. There are a huge number of teams that could benefit from the increased exposure to championships, with a "watered down" version they can attend being better than an amazing experience they will never see. Likewise, there are a huge number of teams that could benefit from greater integration into their local communities and online resources. I wish I knew the secret answer to get them more involved, more competitive, and hopefully more inspired.

I'm fortunate to be able to personally attend champs as a representative for my company, and I enjoy watching robots from around the world compete. I will know what our team is missing by not getting to see half (or more) of the best robots of the world. I'll know what we are missing, when watching the final Einstein match in Houston is no longer the final official match of the season. There will also be people we miss seeing, former teams of some of our mentors, teams that have visited Texas for events, that we might not have a reason to see again. For these reasons, I'm a bit disappointed personally... but I can understand the argument for the expansion to 800+ teams. I can understand that for the extra 300-400 teams that are constantly on the bubble of attending champs and might now be able to... seeing half of the best robots in the world... seeing an almost as amazing finish to the season... might be inspirational enough to push them higher.

Please don't over-simplify the complex reasons why people are questioning the dual championship model as "they care more about winning than FIRST ideals". We all get something a little different out of this program, and we all give a lot back to it.

[waialua359]

I'm going to share my PM to the OP but with more detail.

Honestly, I dont personally view it as a black and white issue here. I think the pursuit of winning positively impacts lives and drives students to be better.
I never ever kid my students. Life is full of competitions for jobs, good grades vs your peers, and other pursuits in life. Tell it like it is.

FIRST makes it easy for our own personal selfish goals. To create a platform where I can inspire kids who like STEM, where we dont have to reinvent the wheel or create our own projects/programs to achieve this.

We have lots of data on current and former students who have gone through our program for all 16 years. It doesnt necessarily mean that keeping track/celebrating our successes keeps us from focusing on our overall goals/objectives.
In our community, we lose in all sports and never get any recognition vs. all of the private and Honolulu schools. Experiencing success in FIRST competitions provides our kids a sense of pride and happiness that they hardly ever get. Of the 35 students in our program, only 8 of them live with both parents. The rest come from either broken homes, single parents, live in with guardians, grandparents, or in some extreme cases this year neglection from parents who sometimes never see their child for days at a time.

-Glenn

[AdamHeard]

Separate from all other arguments, where does it say that team's goals and ideals should match those of FIRST exactly (And who enforces this?)?

Don't be so condescending about team's goals. Everyone has their own unique team and circumstances.

[Citrus Dad]

Our greatest success last year was being recognized for gracious professionalism on Newton. That seems consistent with FIRST's goals. And I see many teams at Regionals that are not focused on winning as their measure of success and source of inspiration.

[Siri]

Originally Posted by Citrus Dad

Our greatest success last year was being recognized for gracious professionalism on Newton. That seems consistent with FIRST's goals. And I see many teams at Regionals that are not focused on winning as their measure of success and source of inspiration.

To be clear, this ^^ is from the team that captained their alliance all the way to a Finals rubber match on Einstein that year. They won Inland Empire, Sacramento, Newton, and Chezy Champs.

I'd say "consistent with FIRST's goals" is a pretty big understatement.

[SoulianPride]

Our team is all about: “Excelling in the building of better people in a better community by becoming leaders in building a foundation for STEM education and careers.”

Our mission statement since we first created our business plan has not changed because our views on the program have not.

[chapman1]

1) If "winning" is the primary goal of a team, then that is at odds with "co-opertition", because such a team will most likely only aid those teams not capable of beating them.

2) I have seen way too many mentors from other teams who not only bully and berate their students for what they consider poor performance, but who also who try to bully other student driver teams into roles that will not benefit a Qualification Alliance - but rather, roles that will showcase their team to the detriment of that Alliance. Those mentors should be relegated to other roles that do not involve building character in young people.

I applaud and support any Championship configuration that is not modeled on winning at any cost over that which rewards and applauds the stated values of FIRST.