Does Affirmative Action fit under the values of FIRST

[Andrew Schreiber]

Originally Posted by IKE

If all of my criteria are truly equal, what would be an acceptable differentiator to use? Should I have the two of you guys arm wrestle? Staring match? Generally the issue arises where the "discriminating factor" weighting allows for the otherwise most qualified candidate to be passed up.
For instance, bumping the "3rd" most qualified applicant up to #1 due to some other factor.

Personality? Punctuality? Best fit for the environment?

[JamesCH95]

Originally Posted by IKE

If all of my criteria are truly equal, what would be an acceptable differentiator to use? Should I have the two of you guys arm wrestle? Staring match? Generally the issue arises where the "discriminating factor" weighting allows for the otherwise most qualified candidate to be passed up.
For instance, bumping the "3rd" most qualified applicant up to #1 due to some other factor.

Originally Posted by Andrew Schreiber

Personality? Punctuality? Best fit for the environment?

This. Compatible personalities can make a less qualified or less skilled team more effective.

[Andrew Schreiber]

Originally Posted by JamesCH95

This. Compatible personalities can make a less qualified or less skilled team more effective.

Actually, while I was being interviewed for my current position I was not asked technical questions. The majority of the interview was personality type questions to see about the fit for the company. Tech skills can be taught, having a crap personality is harder to fix and more annoying to deal with.

[Molten]

The only "good" way to answer this question is on a per student basis. A student that is already skilled at the trade, but lacks people skills has a great need for the team. A student that is very outgoing and interested, but doesn't know a thing about technology has a great need for the team. A student who is here simply because their friends are, could benefit from the team in an unforeseen way but has no "great need" for the team. Take them student by student and check each one and think, what will this student get from the team? If you have a definite idea, add them automatically. After that, then it becomes tougher.

A little story that might make you think. A teacher of mine once told me of a time when he was in the military. He was in boot camp and there was one guy that always fell behind the others. He was a great guy that everyone was friends with, but never-the-less he was always dragging them down. After a while, it was decided that they weren't doing him any favors by dragging him along. Yes, he was making it to the finish line but he wasn't really getting anything from it because the military just wasn't for him. Sometimes, enthusiasm just isn't enough. Sometimes, ability does matter more then a willingness to learn even in a place like FIRST. I mean, student A has a natural talent and learns much about engineering practices from the team. Student B struggles with robotics but is dedicated and learns life skills in the process. Even though student B was more dedicated and such, there might have been a greater impact on student A. It is completely impossible to judge. I'm not suggesting there is a fool-proof way to. I'm just saying that you need to take the students into consideration one at a time and not set up a bureaucratic system.

I know my story may strike a nerve with some here, I mean no offense to the many who have overcome great obstacles. I just know the hardest working man I have ever met that struggles with the most basic problems from our shared classes(400 level undergraduate engineering courses). I work with him for most of the homework and am dedicated to helping him earn his degree, but I do wonder how he will actually do in the work place once he gets it. I whole-heartedly support him, but I'm sometimes unsure if I'm really doing him any favors in the process.

In short, |FIRST|=f(ability, dedication). Don't neglect either of your inputs if you want a reliability judgement.

[JamesCH95]

Originally Posted by Andrew Schreiber

Actually, while I was being interviewed for my current position I was not asked technical questions. The majority of the interview was personality type questions to see about the fit for the company. Tech skills can be taught, having a crap personality is harder to fix and more annoying to deal with.

Me too! Funny how that works.