Mentor/Student Involvement Philosophies

[artK]

This thread should be locked. The discussion about mentors v students should be maintained just as a point of reference for the inevitable future discussions.

[Jared Russell]

[Navid Shafa]

Originally Posted by Jared Russell

[Image]

[marshall]

Originally Posted by Jared Russell

QFT.

[Karthik]

This thread has been split from the CheesyVision thread.

[Jon Stratis]

This discussion has been beaten to death over the years, but I think it's still a good thing to bring it up occasionally, and for everyone to take a few moments of introspection to understand how it is they work with their team, and how it could be better.

Personally, I don't care how other teams are run, so long as one thing happens: the students are inspired. The only success that matters out there, in my mind, is the percentage of students from a team that go on to major in something relevant and related to their job on the team. If a team has this happening at near 100%, then they don't need to change a thing. If, on the other hand, they find they are driving away kids, then something needs to change.

I can't count the number of students I've seen who have left our team when they graduate and are on a completely different career path than they imagined when they started high school. That's all the success you need.

[Andrew Schreiber]

Originally Posted by Jon Stratis

The only success that matters out there, in my mind, is the percentage of students from a team that go on to major in something relevant and related to their job on the team. If a team has this happening at near 100%, then they don't need to change a thing. If, on the other hand, they find they are driving away kids, then something needs to change.

I'm going to disagree again If a student designs parts all their years on the team and decides they don't like it and instead go into theatre arts I don't consider this a failing. In fact, I consider this a success. Yeah, we need engineers and it's a great profession for some folks. But if the only thing a student gets out of 4 years on the team is a list of things they don't want to do I'm happy with that. Mission Accomplished, they still have a better understanding of what it takes to be an engineer and hopefully some better problem solving skills.

[Nate Laverdure]

Originally Posted by Andrew Schreiber

I'm going to disagree again If a student designs parts all their years on the team and decides they don't like it and instead go into theatre arts I don't consider this a failing. In fact, I consider this a success. Yeah, we need engineers and it's a great profession for some folks. But if the only thing a student gets out of 4 years on the team is a list of things they don't want to do I'm happy with that. Mission Accomplished, they still have a better understanding of what it takes to be an engineer and hopefully some better problem solving skills.

Strongly agree. An experience that allows you to discover what you don't like is just as valuable as one that allows you to discover what you do like.

[BenjaminWard]

Originally Posted by JesseK

If tech firms were 100% run by teenagers, 99% of them would fail within their first 6 weeks. The world markets are too competitive and unforgiving.

This isn't a tech firm, it's a non-profit robotics competition. Many of these teams have low to minimal mentor involvement, and they do perfectly fine. There's a certain extent of mentor involvement that both works well and allows the students to enjoy themselves and be inspired. There's a difference between helping a struggling team and taking over from the students.

[Zebra_Fact_Man]

Hey look! Another one of these threads. Is this like an annual gag or something?

In all seriousness though, you run your team how you want to, and we'll run our team how we want to. If you want to imitate our processes, we'd be glad to have a friendly discussion of how/what we do, but I am SO sick and tired of the "Mentor Build Robot" threads. My team doesn't do it, and I don't care if your team does.

[Jon Stratis]

Originally Posted by Andrew Schreiber

I'm going to disagree again If a student designs parts all their years on the team and decides they don't like it and instead go into theatre arts I don't consider this a failing. In fact, I consider this a success. Yeah, we need engineers and it's a great profession for some folks. But if the only thing a student gets out of 4 years on the team is a list of things they don't want to do I'm happy with that. Mission Accomplished, they still have a better understanding of what it takes to be an engineer and hopefully some better problem solving skills.

I would think a student like this would have found a different path or position on the team... Why would they keep doing something they don't like for 4 years?. Someone who goes on to major in theatre arts may have spent their time in the team preparing the chairman's presentation (which is basically a short skit acted out by 2-3 people in front of judges), doing pit presentations to judges (similar in some respects to improv), or working on things like the Safety animation, chairman's video, or a season release video (directing, editing footage, writing scripts, etc). There is certainly room on an FRC team for someone who wants to go into theatre arts. This isn't all about the robot, the robot is just the vehicle you use to create the inspiration and environment to help the kids succeed.

Frankly, if I had a student that spent their entire fine with the team doing robot build activities and then decided she wanted to go into theatre, I would feel like I failed that student. It's not my job to turn every student into an engineer. Rather, it's my job to show them the options and nurture their interests so they can be successful in their career path. Honestly, there are very few career paths out there that can't have a start with a well organised FIRST team.

[notmattlythgoe]

Originally Posted by Jon Stratis

I would think a student like this would have found a different path or position on the team... Why would they keep doing something they don't like for 4 years?. Someone who goes on to major in theatre arts may have spent their time in the team preparing the chairman's presentation (which is basically a short skit acted out by 2-3 people in front of judges), doing pit presentations to judges (similar in some respects to improv), or working on things like the Safety animation, chairman's video, or a season release video (directing, editing footage, writing scripts, etc). There is certainly room on an FRC team for someone who wants to go into theatre arts. This isn't all about the robot, the robot is just the vehicle you use to create the inspiration and environment to help the kids succeed.

Frankly, if I had a student that spent their entire fine with the team doing robot build activities and then decided she wanted to go into theatre, I would feel like I failed that student. It's not my job to turn every student into an engineer. Rather, it's my job to show them the options and nurture their interests so they can be successful in their career path. Honestly, there are very few career paths out there that can't have a start with a well organised FIRST team.

What if that student enjoyed building and machining but it wasn't what they wanted to do with their life. They did it on the team because they enjoyed doing it and probably wouldn't get to do much it later on. Would that make a difference in your opinion?

[marshall]

Originally Posted by Jon Stratis

Frankly, if I had a student that spent their entire fine with the team doing robot build activities and then decided she wanted to go into theatre, I would feel like I failed that student.

I'm not trying to tell anyone how to feel but I don't think you should feel that way. Part of being a complete person is having a multifaceted personality and many passions. Some of the students I work with are not driven to become engineers. They join our team because the passion of other students and our passions as mentors is infectious and that is what drives them. Talented and driven people like to work with other talented and driven people. I'm just as proud of the liberal arts majors as I am of the material science majors that I've helped to inspire.

[JesseK]

Originally Posted by BenjaminWard

This isn't a tech firm, it's a non-profit robotics competition. Many of these teams have low to minimal mentor involvement, and they do perfectly fine. There's a certain extent of mentor involvement that both works well and allows the students to enjoy themselves and be inspired. There's a difference between helping a struggling team and taking over from the students.

The point was that for sustainability reasons each individual team should be run like a small tech firm. I agree that the philosophy doesn't mean the mentors make all decisions and do all of the work*. Mentors are definitely needed at the critical decisions in order to prevent a single group of students from dictating or ruining every other students' experience in a season. Sometimes this has to happen forcefully, depending on the culture of the community & the students in a given season.

The level of how much involvement is an art - we certainly have been overly-involved in the past - but as a team gains experience they'll find the right balance for themselves.

*Except leading the fundraising team ... I have yet to meet a student who successfully solicits a large business for fundraising without significant mentor involvement...

[Andrew Schreiber]

Originally Posted by Jon Stratis

I would think a student like this would have found a different path or position on the team... Why would they keep doing something they don't like for 4 years?. Someone who goes on to major in theatre arts may have spent their time in the team preparing the chairman's presentation (which is basically a short skit acted out by 2-3 people in front of judges), doing pit presentations to judges (similar in some respects to improv), or working on things like the Safety animation, chairman's video, or a season release video (directing, editing footage, writing scripts, etc). There is certainly room on an FRC team for someone who wants to go into theatre arts. This isn't all about the robot, the robot is just the vehicle you use to create the inspiration and environment to help the kids succeed.

Frankly, if I had a student that spent their entire fine with the team doing robot build activities and then decided she wanted to go into theatre, I would feel like I failed that student. It's not my job to turn every student into an engineer. Rather, it's my job to show them the options and nurture their interests so they can be successful in their career path. Honestly, there are very few career paths out there that can't have a start with a well organised FIRST team.

Who said they didn't like it? Or maybe they liked doing it because they connected with a mentor or another student there. Or because they were there because the alternative was being at home that was bad for them. If they were happy and learning something about engineering or about themselves I'd view this as a success. Could they have gotten more out of the program? Maybe. But maybe what they needed out of it was just social interaction.

This isn't a hypothetical situation, I've had multiple students over the years who were at robotics because it was either there or be at home alone while their parents worked. One that sticks out in my mind clearly had 0 interest in building robots. He thought they were cool, but he just wanted somewhere to interact with people. He'd help build or wire if we asked him to. But you could tell his heart just wasn't in it. But he was the first to every meeting and one of the last to leave every meeting. He WANTED to be there. But it wasn't the robot he was interested in. I don't feel like I failed him at all. I don't know where he ended up (I moved across the country the next year). But I at least hope he got something out of the program, and I know that being there made him happier. Definitely not a failure.