FIRST Youth Protection Program

[magnets]

Perhaps I'm missing something, but why is this considered a violation?

Engaging in personal exchanges such as phone calls,
e-mail, texting, social networking, etc., with a child
outside the context of team activities, educational
matters, or career concerns.

When I went through the FIRST program, I knew my head mentor really well. I saw him for 30 hours a week for about 10 weeks for FIRST, and usually had multiple classes with him each year for four years. We got to know each other really well, and he was a massive influence on my life. He was way more than a "robotics" mentor to me. I would consider him a life mentor and a life long friend. Our team encouraged getting to know the mentors better, and openly recommended in doing things with mentors "not related to the FIRST program, educational matters, or career concerns"

Don't get me wrong, I understand where they're coming for, but it would be a big change for my old team.

[Foster]

Welcome to the post "Sandusky" / "Catholic Church priest" world. People we trusted couldn't be trusted. So rather than define your own trust, we have swung the other way to a default of "no trust". I agree its a sad state of affairs, but we all code software for "this could never happen, but ...." and this is a real world case.

[Tungrus]

don't want to turn this into political or religious fight....

just that even with YPP, these people (that you have listed) could not be stopped. We as civilized society must remember that bad elements exists and we need to be proactive in protecting our kids. Yes FIRST has taken this major step and sure many schools had some sort of background check done. Also I want to remind myself that I cannot rest with YPP in place, I need to educate our students and make sure that they are not in harm's way.

[magnets]

Originally Posted by Foster

Welcome to the post "Sandusky" / "Catholic Church priest" world. People we trusted couldn't be trusted. So rather than define your own trust, we have swung the other way to a default of "no trust". I agree its a sad state of affairs, but we all code software for "this could never happen, but ...." and this is a real world case.

It's sad to realize that people might join FIRST in order to get to kids. Two local teachers got in trouble for something like this. One teacher (a 70 year old woman) paid a kid $20 to clean the outside of his house, and the other became facebook friends with a student. It seems to me like common sense that a 70 year old librarian who worked at the school for the past 30 years and is respected and known by the town wouldn't try to harm a 18 year old kid, but common sense isn't that common .

Originally Posted by Tungrus

don't want to turn this into political or religious fight....

just that even with YPP, these people (that you have listed) could not be stopped.

True. IMHO, the reason that part was added was to help protect FIRST if something bad were to happen.

[Cory]

Originally Posted by magnets

It's sad to realize that people might join FIRST in order to get to kids. Two local teachers got in trouble for something like this. One teacher (a 70 year old woman) paid a kid $20 to clean the outside of his house, and the other became facebook friends with a student. It seems to me like common sense that a 70 year old librarian who worked at the school for the past 30 years and is respected and known by the town wouldn't try to harm a 18 year old kid, but common sense isn't that common .

Change "woman" to "man" and you've just described Jerry Sandusky. Highly respected, nobody suspected a thing, until they found out he was a serial child molester.

Obviously I'm not trying to say the woman in your story was a likely child molester, but it certainly does happen.

[magnets]

Originally Posted by Cory

Change "woman" to "man" and you've just described Jerry Sandusky. Highly respected, nobody suspected a thing, until they found out he was a serial child molester.

Obviously I'm not trying to say the woman in your story was a likely child molester, but it certainly does happen.

I understand completely what you are saying, and I think it is very important to be careful and have common sense when you're dealing with people to avoid bad situations.

It's just my opinion that it's not worth it to live your life in fear of something like this happening. Sure, you should be careful and make smart decisions, but I don't believe we need people making decisions for us about who we should and shouldn't be friends with.


If you start thinking like this, you have to consider everybody you know from the FIRST program as being a potential threat. People who you've known for the past ten years of your life that you care about are a threat. This is a dangerous line of thinking, and it leads to a really sad and boring team, and eventually life. There are people on my team who I trust.

Here's a quick story-
A student on my team who is a big FIRST enthusiast was having a hard time fitting in, both on CD and on the team. A very well respected mentor reached out to him over private messages on Chief Delphi, and helped show him how he needed to behave. After the conversation, the student became a much better team member, and I'm thankful for what that mentor did. If I follow YPP, I am required to report that "incident" to FIRST. I won't, but you get the idea.

[Steven Smith]

A student on my team who is a big FIRST enthusiast was having a hard time fitting in, both on CD and on the team. A very well respected mentor reached out to him over private messages on Chief Delphi, and helped show him how he needed to behave. After the conversation, the student became a much better team member, and I'm thankful for what that mentor did. If I follow YPP, I am required to report that "incident" to FIRST. I won't, but you get the idea.

I went ahead and spent a few minutes reading through the YPP, and I don't see what you described as being an issue. I feel like the YPP actually leaves a little grey area for interpretation.

CD is a forum that is certainly used for "team activities and educational purposes". The mentor was not trying to keep anything a secret, just to protect the feelings of the student. The context of the conversation would likely be clearly interpreted by anyone reading it as appropriate.

You would only be required to report this interaction if you believed that abuse occurred, or if you simply had a question... clearly you don't.

Let's tweak the scenario. Same thing happened, but a less well intentioned adult sends a PM with a few choice expletives about a person's behavior on CD. The student feels threatened by it. The YPP simply provides a tool to report such interactions.

Or, a student becomes "friends" with a Chief Delphi adult. Can they exchange PMs... sure. However, a smart mentor might consider forwarding the PM to the listed adult for that team, especially if it is a repeated thing. Also, watch out for "out of bounds requests". A student might say something like "I'd like to meet up with you at competition." This is an innocent request in most cases, but you would be wise to let another adult know (such as their team's lead mentor) that a student on their team would like to say hello at competition. Then the other team's mentor can at least be aware of the situation, and tag along if they have any reason to suspect an issue. This of course assumes you're meeting them at their team's pit, the inspection station, something clearly in public view.

The purpose of this doesn't appear to be to severely change any behaviors, but to take an appropriate amount of precautions to be able to definitively say that "everything is ok"... instead of just assuming it is.

[magnets]

Originally Posted by Steven Smith

I went ahead and spent a few minutes reading through the YPP, and I don't see what you described as being an issue. I feel like the YPP actually leaves a little grey area for interpretation.

Any adult working with a FIRST team who is aware
of a violation of this Code, or who is in doubt about
whether or not a behavior is appropriate, is required
to immediately consult a team Lead Coach/Mentor (if a
team Lead Coach/Mentor is not the potential violator), or
the hosting school or organization, and if satisfied with
the guidance provided, to act in accordance with it.

and

Engaging in personal exchanges such as phone calls,
e-mail, texting, social networking, etc., with a child
outside the context of team activities, educational
matters, or career concerns.

The content of the messages had nothing to do with education, FIRST, our team, or a career. It was written as a response to a view a student had on something unrelated to robots.

[Jon Stratis]

Originally Posted by magnets

Any adult working with a FIRST team who is aware
of a violation of this Code, or who is in doubt about
whether or not a behavior is appropriate, is required
to immediately consult a team Lead Coach/Mentor (if a
team Lead Coach/Mentor is not the potential violator), or
the hosting school or organization, and if satisfied with
the guidance provided, to act in accordance with it.

and

Engaging in personal exchanges such as phone calls,
e-mail, texting, social networking, etc., with a child
outside the context of team activities, educational
matters, or career concerns.

The content of the messages had nothing to do with education, FIRST, our team, or a career. It was written as a response to a view a student had on something unrelated to robots.

As you said, the mentor used the PM to show the student how they should behave. I, personally, would classify that both career concerns (you need to know how to behave appropriately) and as a team concern, as the student is a representative of the team.

[sanddrag]

For Team Main Contacts (and I'm assuming Alternate Contacts), when you log into TIMS, you are forced to watch the video before it will continue to the next page. Just a heads up.

[sanddrag]

So I'm going through the process, and was not pleased by Pages 3 and 4 of the Privacy Policy (PDF) on the Verified Volunteers website.

I will most certainly be sending an opt-out e-mail and I recommend every else do the same. Pretty shady to involuntarily be opted-in to selling your information to advertizing companies and debt collection agencies.

Okay FIRST, can we now get a Mentor Protection Program that protects us from having our personal information sold by your volunteer verification company?

Also, it doesn't work in FireFox. Chrome seems ok.

[Gregor]

Originally Posted by sanddrag

So I'm going through the process, and was not pleased by Pages 3 and 4 of the Privacy Policy (PDF) on the Verified Volunteers website.

I will most certainly be sending an opt-out e-mail and I recommend every else do the same. Pretty shady to involuntarily be opted-in to selling your information to advertizing companies and debt collection agencies.

Okay FIRST, can we now get a Mentor Protection Program that protects us from having our personal information sold by your volunteer verification company?

Also, it doesn't work in FireFox. Chrome seems ok.

From page 4.

If you wish to opt-out of sharing your Personal Information with third party marketers for their own and third party direct marketing purposes, please send an email with your name and address to TheAdvocates@verifiedvolunteers.com.Information Security.

If I'm reading that correctly, by default people's information is being forwarded to third party marketers.

[donkehote]

Originally Posted by sanddrag

So I'm going through the process, and was not pleased by Pages 3 and 4 of the Privacy Policy (PDF) on the Verified Volunteers website.

I will most certainly be sending an opt-out e-mail and I recommend every else do the same. Pretty shady to involuntarily be opted-in to selling your information to advertizing companies and debt collection agencies.

Okay FIRST, can we now get a Mentor Protection Program that protects us from having our personal information sold by your volunteer verification company?

Also, it doesn't work in FireFox. Chrome seems ok.

Has there been any update on the opt out process? It seems totally wrong to have to opt out of having your information sold to third parties. Has first changed anything? Im curious, and after having conversations on the YPP recently, i thought id bring this up again.

[Jon Stratis]

Nothing in this says you have to think of people as threats... just keep your eyes open and follow common-sense guidelines. Two or more mentors at every meeting. Meet in public places. Keep communications as public as possible, and on-topic. You make it habit, and its something you don't think of anymore. The team still has fun and you still get to know the students and other mentors very well (after all, you see them more than your own family!). You're just more aware of how things might look to an impartial third party, and make decisions to make things more open and more public.

As an example, at the MN State Championship last year, myself and another mentor were the last to leave, along with two of our students. We walked them to their cars together (which weren't all that close to each other), and then both took the long hike to a different parking lot in the other direction to get to our cars. It wasn't a question of trust - I have complete and total faith in the mentor I was with, and know both of the students well enough to know nothing bad would happen. Despite that, we maintained the "two mentor" rule. It protects the students, and it protects us. Doing it with people you completely trust also makes it easier/more natural to do it with people you don't know as well or have a weird feeling about.

[who716]

does anyone thing this will make some mentors walk and frankly step away from FIRST.. I know at-least one Mentor is