Sippin' on the haterade

[ratdude747]

I'll post my take.

** this is only my opinion**

To the OP:

It is poor taste and not GP to make comments as you described. Shame on those who said those things.

On the topic of student involvement:

While I agree that there is no "e" in FIRST and mentor-driven programs do inspire students, I disagree that mentor driven programs are equally good for students. As a veteran of 2 student-driven teams (1747 9-11th grade, 2783 12th grade), I preferred doing things to watching things. Most students who I knew agreed. If I had been on a mentor driven team, I probably would have been bored during build season.

In addition, I belive it is critical to team spirit and morale for students to feel a sense of "ownership; students need to be able to have something on the robot or team that that they can say "that's MY work" or "I built/designed that". I know first hand that that feeling is among the best I ever felt, perhaps on par with when my team won a regional (Buckeye 2009) or when I was nominated for dean's list.

Student's are not stupid by default either. Given the correct initial training and a little Inspiration, students are very capable of building robots and running a team.

Last, I believe that mentors do have a role. I often refer back to my experiences on 1747 as a model of good balance; both mentors and students are involved, but students make all final decisions and do the majority of the actual work and mentors would help out as needed, supervise, and train students when needed.

On a side note, I will comment that good looking bots can be student-built to any degree; likewise, "less pretty" robots can also be mentor built to any degree (I have seen both). Please do not judge a robot's build history solely on its looks.