[FRC Blog] Two Championship Survey Results and Path Forward

[hunterteam3476]

Another thing to think about is your volunteers...... Your not going to have the same man power for 3 weeks back to back.....

[Foster]

Originally Posted by JesseK

Heavy Sigh.
....
My Decision Theory Professor would put heavy red marks all across this blog post and give it a 'D' as a paper. She might not have even accepted the original survey for turn-in. '5' cannot be 'neutral' if there are 4 options below it representing 'against' and 5 options above it representing 'for'. There is also no analysis given for whether or not the survey represents statistical significance, but I applaud the effort to analyze on a per-team basis (just keep in mind that 5.2 isn't "in favor"...).

Super, you are the guy we are looking for. Put together a poll with similar questions, but the correct range of possible answers. Then post it on survey monkey and put the link here. Take results for 10 days and report back your findings!!

[Citrus Dad]

Originally Posted by marshall

For the first time I can ever recall in the team's history (since 2002), and I've been around for a lot of it (since 2003), we are seriously considering taking the energies/focus/resources off of FRC and putting them into something else. There are a lot of reasons for this but believe me when I tell you that this notion of a split championship has been a catalyst for having these conversations. Striving to be the best in the world at something is a huge driver for us. Removing that goal (or adding more if you prefer looking at it that way) is demotivating.

If a team like 900 is this far down the road to operationalize a response to championsplit, then a lot of other teams may not be far behind. FIRST HQ claimed a primary purpose was to give more teams exposure to elite teams. What if those elite teams no longer want to bother to attend?

[gblake]

Originally Posted by Citrus Dad

If a team like 900 is this far down the road to operationalize a response to championsplit, then a lot of other teams may not be far behind. FIRST HQ claimed a primary purpose was to give more teams exposure to elite teams. What if those elite teams no longer want to bother to attend?

What the person from Team 900 posted is glowing evidence of FIRST's success.

According what we read here, they are considering graduating from having their FRC blinders on, and are now thinking about all STEM programs, and specifically about which one(s) is best for the students and the community they serve.

What, pray tell, could be better for them than doing that????

Blake

[Citrus Dad]

Originally Posted by efoote868

Also since FIRST is paying attention to our solutions, as a community we have the ability to propose and debate the merits of new ideas. Apart from the two locations, FIRST has made it fairly clear that details still need to be worked out. While there may be pains right now, I believe ultimately it will work out for the best.

FIRST HQ appears to be pretty much ignoring any proposals from the FRC community up to this point other than "we might bring together the championsplit winners at a later date..."

[Citrus Dad]

Originally Posted by gblake

What the person from Team 900 posted is glowing evidence of FIRST's success.

According what we read here, they are considering graduating from having their FRC blinders on, and are now thinking about all STEM programs, and specifically about which one(s) is best for the students and the community they serve.

What, pray tell, could be better for them than doing that????

Blake

So the aim of FIRST is to make FRC obsolete? That's an odd goal.

[gblake]

Originally Posted by Citrus Dad

So the aim of FIRST is to make FRC obsolete? That's an odd goal.

No, the aim of FIRST is adequately (IMO) summarized as inspiring students to pursue STEM careers.

[Citrus Dad]

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

So you're not going to try and win just because there are two championships? Having to share the championship title with 7 other teams instead of 3 other teams will change your motivations as a team? You'll no longer have any drive towards success if you can only win in Houston and not Detroit?

This question has been asked answered on a number of threads over the last month. And the answer is always the same: the difference in incentives results in differences in outcomes, even if that difference isn't obvious to you.

[Citrus Dad]

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

I don't have anything of statistical significance, no. I did text a few members of my senior class on 116 if they remember who won in 2007, and none of them did (with the exception of me, if that counts). One of them had even returned to mentor 116 afterwards.

I can safely say that the majority of the members on our team remember who won champs a number of years back. When I started mentoring in 2012, our team had only been to champs once, but I was impressed at how many students knew who the alliance captains and top teams had been back for a number of years. And our alumni members appear to retain much of that knowledge.

Of course now my sample is biased, but I've developed substantial contacts with both students and mentors across Northern California. The knowledge of the students I talk with about the competitive history is impressive.

And I'll give the counterexample from my own sports experience. I used to follow track & field closely (and still compete after 40+ years.) I may not have been able to immediately recall who won a particular championship 2 years before, but I could with just a little prompting. And regardless, I cared a great deal about the competition as it happened. Kamen's reasoning is faulty if he's using recall ability as a standard for caring about the competition. It's a false metric.

[AlexanderTheOK]

Originally Posted by JesseK

I suspect there is very LITTLE progression from FTC to FRC

Heck, I don't even think my area HAS any FTC teams. Progression around here is generally FLL -> VEX -> FRC.

[grstex]

Originally Posted by Citrus Dad

So the aim of FIRST is to make FRC obsolete? That's an odd goal.

In a word, yes. My hunch is that FIRST would like to become obsolete the same way the Susan G. Komen Foundation would like to become obsolete.

Honestly, if Marshall and his team feels their students are ready for a bigger challenge that FRC, they should be commended. Especially if it leaves them more interested in STEM fields and more prepared for college and a career.

[cadandcookies]

Originally Posted by Citrus Dad

So the aim of FIRST is to make FRC obsolete? That's an odd goal.

While I disagree somewhat with how Blake phrases it, I'm all for teams serving their communities the best they possibly can, whether that's via FIRST or not. In my community, I know that splitting Championships has little to no effect on our considerations for how well we're serving our community. In other areas that might not be the case, and certainly any team that feels that there is a better program out there for their communities unique set of needs (inspiration, building technical skills, building life skills, etc) shouldn't be blinded by some illusion that they need to do FRC to be a "serious" robotics team. It's all about where your priorities are.

It's less a matter of making FRC obsolete, and more a matter of creating mature STEM-based learning initiatives that can make informed decisions based on their community's needs.

[Citrus Dad]

Originally Posted by grstex

In a word, yes. My hunch is that FIRST would like to become obsolete the same way the Susan G. Komen Foundation would like to become obsolete.

Honestly, if Marshall and his team feels their students are ready for a bigger challenge that FRC, they should be commended. Especially if it leaves them more interested in STEM fields and more prepared for college and a career.

I don't think that's true. SGK is trying to eliminate breast cancer. Younger students who wouldn't consider a STEM career will always need to be inspired. And working solely in your community is not the same as changing the culture.

And it's an odd way to push teams out of FRC--take away the competitive incentive by splitting the championship. That seem very passive aggressive. I would expect a more thoughtful way of encouraging "up and out."

[efoote868]

Originally Posted by Citrus Dad

FIRST HQ appears to be pretty much ignoring any proposals from the FRC community up to this point other than "we might bring together the championsplit winners at a later date..."

I would be very surprised if they were to respond directly to any idea on Chief Delphi, let alone every single post. Best thing they can do now is keep discussions internal, then release a complete and polished presentation of what is happening in the future. Simple reason is that rampant speculation would make the situation worse than it already is.

[dodar]

Originally Posted by efoote868

I would be very surprised if they were to respond directly to any idea on Chief Delphi, let alone every single post. Best thing they can do now is keep discussions internal, then release a complete and polished presentation of what is happening in the future. Simple reason is that rampant speculation would make the situation worse than it already is.

Is not rampant speculation what we already have?