Mentor/Student Involvement Philosophies

[Mike Schreiber]

On a rather unrelated note I would like to remind some of the senior CD users of a quote from the FAQ section here:

Negative reputation should be given if the person is posting something that detracts from the conversation. If the post is rude, inappropriate, breaks forum rules, is not gracious, etc; these are all good reasons to give negative reputation....Giving negative reputation because you don't agree with what was said is not an appropriate use of the reputation system.

Emphasis Mine.

I don't believe anything offensive was said in this thread. I know they're just dots, but sometimes I feel as though this forum is not accepting enough to newcomers with questions or opinions on previously discussed topics.

[faust1706]

Oh no! My magic internet points!

[PayneTrain]

Originally Posted by faust1706

Oh no! My magic internet points!

When members of the self appointed senior brain-trust neg rep bomb a new member, they heavily discourage the person from trying to understand the community and potentially grow because of future interactions with the community. I'm sure needlessly being a knob over a discussion topic just to get one's jollies off may seem harmless to some, but it's really unnecessary, damaging, and pathetic.

[EricH]

Originally Posted by PayneTrain

When members of the self appointed senior brain-trust neg rep bomb a new member, they heavily discourage the person from trying to understand the community and potentially grow because of future interactions with the community. I'm sure needlessly being a knob over a discussion topic just to get one's jollies off may seem harmless to some, but it's really unnecessary, damaging, and pathetic.

Just as an aside: If a new member is being a prick, then are we sure they're even trying to understand the community?

Yes, there's a reason I'm asking. No, I won't go any further into the matter.

And, for the record, I have never given out a single neg rep. Neutral, yes, on a couple of occasions. Negative, nope (not that I haven't wanted to... but usually by the time I get around to going for it 47 other people have done so already).

[PayneTrain]

Originally Posted by EricH

Just as an aside: If a new member is being a prick, then are we sure they're even trying to understand the community?

Yes, there's a reason I'm asking. No, I won't go any further into the matter.

And, for the record, I have never given out a single neg rep. Neutral, yes, on a couple of occasions. Negative, nope (not that I haven't wanted to... but usually by the time I get around to going for it 47 other people have done so already).

I'd agree with you if this was an open and shut case of a troll screwing around. As far as I know this is someone who has been in the program for a fraction of the time compared to a likely member of the rep-bombing cabal (or you or myself) and lacks perspective on what this program means. I learn something new about FIRST or get a new perspective on the programs almost every single day. I have not always had this perspective and at one time held opinions similar to ZackAlfakir.

I really don't understand why people with their actual name and team number attached to them choose to troll the board, and I find it even more bizarre that more senior members of the board take time out of their day to passively or actively dish back any level of vitriol to an opinion they disagree with.

I really don't want to touch this anymore either, since a) it's not necessarily on-topic and b) no one is really going to take any of this into account after we all break out the Competition Season Controversy Bingo cards in a couple weeks and any perceived slight that gets broadcasted onto the forums receives the predictable responses.

[JamesTerm]

[Abhishek R]

The funny thing is there was a thread recently about why we don't use reddit more. The use of negative reputation in this thread is similar to the qualms many people have about the downvote feature on reddit.

[philso]

Originally Posted by JamesCH95

Don't you students forget that us mentors might actually *like* building robots. Most of us are also volunteers. It's easy to keep volunteer mentors around when they get to do things that they enjoy. I pencil-whip problems and model things in CAD all freakin' day, and I really enjoy going to robotics and making parts, it's a great change of pace. Coaching would hold less appeal for me if I couldn't work with my students in the hands-on part of FRC (as well as designing).

In the past, I mentored a team where the teacher leading the team didn't want the mentors to do anything other than ensure the students didn't hurt themselves with the power tools. We were admonished for telling some of the students that they needed to read the rules after they suggested strategies or mechanisms that we knew would be ruled illegal. It was okay with her that many of the student leaders spent half their time at the build meetings sleeping or playing computer games. I don't think that the students learned very much, nor were they inspired. We were basically babysitters. That was no fun so I moved on to another team where the students actually listen when given advice. It is gratifying to see a student using some tool technique that I taught them the previous week. It is now worth it to me to drive about 18-20 miles one way (3 times as far as for the other team).

Originally Posted by JamesTerm

It is very tempting to leave a copy of this picture on my Boss' desk.

[Chinske4296]

In my opinion, I find it really frustrating to walk by a pit and see students standing there while the mentors do all the work. It is also frustrating to see teams videos of them working and you see more mentors working on the robot than students, or a Chairmans video with 1 student shown the whole time and about 15-20 different mentors.

[Akash Rastogi]

Originally Posted by Chinske4296

In my opinion, I find it really frustrating to walk by a pit and see students standing there while the mentors do all the work. It is also frustrating to see teams videos of them working and you see more mentors working on the robot than students, or a Chairmans video with 1 student shown the whole time and about 15-20 different mentors.

Why is it frustrating?
Is it because you think in this "mentor-based competition" that maybe someone with mentors is at an advantage?

Oh wow...sounds like maybe they want you to use mentors?

Also, I've seen plenty of terrible "mentor built" robots, and plenty of awesome "student built" robots...whatever those even mean to you.

[BenjaminWard]

Originally Posted by Chinske4296

In my opinion, I find it really frustrating to walk by a pit and see students standing there while the mentors do all the work. It is also frustrating to see teams videos of them working and you see more mentors working on the robot than students, or a Chairmans video with 1 student shown the whole time and about 15-20 different mentors.

Exactly, this is what ZackAlfakir and I were talking about. It is all well and good if the students are being "inspired" by the success of the mentors, but it is important that they learn what they are doing, which they can only do by actually doing it. As in a Chairman's video with only one student shown vs a large amount of mentors, the achievements recorded there should not reflect the work of the mentors but rather what the students have achieved.

[Akash Rastogi]

Originally Posted by BenjaminWard

Exactly, this is what ZackAlfakir and I were talking about. It is all well and good if the students are being "inspired" by the success of the mentors, but it is important that they learn what they are doing, which they can only do by actually doing it. As in a Chairman's video with only one student shown vs a large amount of mentors, the achievements recorded there should not reflect the work of the mentors but rather what the students have achieved.

This mission of this program is to inspire students to pursue an education or career in STEM, it is not to teach them. Teaching already happens in school; teaching happens during the process of inspiration; it is a byproduct of this program, but it is not one of the goals.

[Libby K]

Just a real-quick note on the red dots thing - it's not just the 'senior brain trust' handing out the red dots here. I got some for my post in this thread with just the caption 'No' or 'Wrong' from people who apparently disagree with me.

Considering this is an opinion discussion, that's basically the equivalent of reaching across the table and slapping the person you're debating, instead of actually responding to their point.

FWIW, I use red very sparingly - people outright breaking forum rules, rudeness, trolling hard, or just generally being the antithesis of the community. If I don't agree with a post, I'll neutral it with some sort of comment/question as a way to take my individual thought to a PM with them if they so choose.

That said, I'll speak again to the initial point of this thread:

The following is actually from the 'Quest for Einstein' thread, but I think it works here.

Originally Posted by wesbass23

I have never been to Einstein myself so I cannot really speak from experience but there are a few things I think it takes to compete consistently at an elite level. The first thing is good mentors that come back every year. You need mentors who understand FIRST and who are able to devote their time each year to the team. Alongside this you need the full support of your school/community. You cannot constantly be dealing with roadblocks set by your school administration concerning things like fundraising or the number of days of school a student can miss.

When I was a student, 1923 did not have consistent mentors. At all. Some of us were proud of that. (I'll chalk that up to being young and stupid - I was administrating our rookie FRC team at 14 without any help.) We spent every build season in varying states of 'oh god we're lost', and never fielded competitive robots.

Not only were we terrible, but it was absolutely exhausting as a student leader, to have to teach my fellow students everything and then also have to work with the school's roadblocks, and advocate for us to the community and our sponsors. I don't recommend complete student leadership to absolutely anyone, not even my worst enemy. I'd end build season sick, exhausted, and usually alienated from my teammates since I so frequently had to be the 'bad guy' (I could take a tangent on to why this also applies to first-year university students coming back to mentor their old team, but I'm sure a thread will come up on that later.)

We finally fielded a consistent mentor who not only taught us the basics of FRC, but brought in connections from other industries who could teach us about the things even they didn't know. Some of the students from the original few years were upset that we even had an adult working with the team. They were mad. Why is this adult taking our work away from us? How come we don't get to run everything anymore?

It took one of the kickoff speeches many years ago (I think it was Dave?) to remind them why this was a good thing. I couldn't tell you what year it was, or even find a transcript, but the line that hit me was something like this. "There are teams who are proud they don't have engineers on your team. Guess what? You've failed. That's not the point of this." He went on, but he was completely right.

Having someone to teach, to advocate, to bring legitimacy to your organization is not a bad thing. Without mentors, are you really doing FIRST? For Inspiration & Recognition of Science & Technology?

How are you, a student with basically the same knowledge base, inspiring someone to go into the career path they choose - are you lending them your industry experience? No. Giving them advice on university & internships? I sure hope not, you haven't been through it. You need some sort of partnership, even if it's just a little bit. Mentors are more than just Wiring101 teachers. There should be a connection there, helping foster something new in the students throughout the FIRST process.

1923 has reached a really comfortable balance now, where a team of several mentors works alongside our co-captains to get things done. It's brought us greater success in all the goals we set, and it's made for a really great relationship between mentors and students.

As an example, let's say we want to approach a new company for sponsorship.

1. Our Finance Co-Captain comes up with the idea and starts to write a presentation.
2. Our advisor reaches out to the company with the initial communication, to set up a time to meet. (The letter she sends is one that was collaborated on by students and mentors to make sure it's attention-getting and effective.)
3. I take a look through the presentation to make sure that it's all correct, that our branding is consistent, and spend the time practicing with the student(s) that will be meeting.
4. Students who are interested will join our Finance Co-Captain on that presentation to demo the robot, answer questions, and represent the team
5. At least one or two mentors accompanies them, to lend credibility to the organization.

It's about a partnership. The balance is something the team decides on as a whole, to make sure we run efficiently and meet our goals. There are some roles that are a better fit for adults than students, and that's okay.

Another example we're working through right now - we're having a programming problem, and I want it fixed yesterday so our drivers can practice. One of our mentors knows how to fix it, so am I just going to let the students flounder around the issue and waste precious build season time? Of course not - that doesn't help anyone. We fix the issue immediately, and then the mentor who knew the solution spends the time to teach the students how he got around it (after the robot's functional, because ain't nobody got time for that right now).

If that doesn't work for your team, then that's fine. I can speak to the fact that it works for our team because I know that the next time an issue like that comes around, I'll have at least 5 programming students who can go "Oh! I know! Mr. P taught me how to fix that".

It's about balance. My team's balance is not your team's balance, and that's okay.
Our team decided on how we run things as a group, and everyone agrees to it. We're all happy with it. It works for us.

Above all, teams should do what works for them, and not worry about what other teams are doing.

TLDR: 1) 1923's philosophy, which works pretty well for us. 2) How another team inspires their students is not anyone else's business.

[Libby K]

Originally Posted by BenjaminWard

As in a Chairman's video with only one student shown vs a large amount of mentors, the achievements recorded there should not reflect the work of the mentors but rather what the students have achieved.

How is it that you know what the students did vs. what the mentors did on that team? If you're not on the team, you don't know them or what they do. Maybe interviews with their mentors were the point of the video, to show how proud those people were of what their students could accomplish. Then again, I'm only guessing, because it's not my team and I don't know the answer.

My best advice on this topic, as always, is to stay in your own lane & worry about your own team. You can't possibly have everything figured out to the point where you have free time to pick apart other teams.

[James1902]

Originally Posted by BenjaminWard

Exactly, this is what ZackAlfakir and I were talking about. It is all well and good if the students are being "inspired" by the success of the mentors, but it is important that they learn what they are doing, which they can only do by actually doing it. As in a Chairman's video with only one student shown vs a large amount of mentors, the achievements recorded there should not reflect the work of the mentors but rather what the students have achieved.

This interview with Dean Kamen might help make a point that some have brought up in this thread: FIRST is not in the business of education.

If your team values the educational aspect of the program (as i'm sure most teams do) that's great! But whether or not other teams, in your opinion, value it as much as you do is not something that FIRST seems to be concerned with.

It's not just well and good that students are being inspired, it's the whole dang point.