Keep FIRST in Michigan (FiM) from killing FIRST Lego League

[Nemo]

FIRST should create an actual middle school program.

It's super awkward to use FTC as a middle school program, because then you have 12 year olds competing with 18 year olds. Making FTC middle school across the board is a bad option because that would remove access to FIRST at thousands of high schools.

As for FiM, they're at least trying to adjust the middle school issue in a way that they have available. I think their solutions is among the best options available to them. It helps that MI has funding for FRC registration fees, so the access issue is not as bad as in most places.

Leaving middle school kids hanging like this is a big mistake. While FIRST drops off the earth in middle school, athletics and fine arts are continuing right along, and kids get established in those activities instead. FIRST programs are competing with those activities for peoples' energy.

[gblake]

Originally Posted by Nemo

FIRST should create an actual middle school program.

It's super awkward to use FTC as a middle school program, because then you have 12 year olds competing with 18 year olds. Making FTC middle school across the board is a bad option because that would remove access to FIRST at thousands of high schools.

As for FiM, they're at least trying to adjust the middle school issue in a way that they have available. I think their solutions is among the best options available to them. It helps that MI has funding for FRC registration fees, so the access issue is not as bad as in most places.

Leaving middle school kids hanging like this is a big mistake. While FIRST drops off the earth in middle school, athletics and fine arts are continuing right along, and kids get established in those activities instead. FIRST programs are competing with those activities for peoples' energy.

You make it sound as if FIRST is the only STEM option on the planet. Students need a variety of STEM options and a variety of Arts options, and ...

The STEM choices aren't (had better not be) FIRST or nothing. If they are, FIRST and its participants and supporters have failed.

Blake

[cadandcookies]

While I won't hold it against Michigan for running things their own way, I'm very much opposed to extending their rules for the progression of FIRST programs across every program in the states or outside of them. Telling everyone, everywhere, that FRC is the only high school robotics program available to them in the FIRST progression isn't a sensible approach for many areas of the United States, much less the world. There are many communities for which FRC is prohibitively expensive-- telling them the only FIRST program they can do is leaving high school students in those areas with fewer options than they had before, which isn't good for anyone.

Michigan may be able to afford this model because of their state grants, but most everywhere else that's simply impractical. If I have a group of high schoolers in a town that has less than 500 people living in it, it's ridiculous to expect them to pony up for an FRC team. Yes, I'm aware that VEX or BEST are out there, but I don't think it aligns with FIRST's goals to say "Sorry, but you don't fit into our model, go somewhere else." FIRST has and is being run as a very inclusive and flexible organization. Regional partners have a good deal of freedom to run programs in their areas how they see fit, and I see no reason to change that at this point.

[Nemo]

Originally Posted by gblake

You make it sound as if FIRST is the only STEM option on the planet. Students need a variety of STEM options and a variety of Arts options, and ...

The STEM choices aren't (had better not be) FIRST or nothing. If they are, FIRST and its participants and supporters have failed.

Blake

I agree with that, but it doesn't change my opinion that FIRST should create a middle school program.

[dtengineering]

If FiM has raised/found/scrounged/etc. funds, then it is reasonable that they should be able to distribute them as they see fit. If you want FiM support, then you have to play by FiM's rules.

If they are holding FIRST events, however, they have to follow FIRST's rules. If FIRST doesn't enforce their rules in Michigan, then they lose the moral authority (if not the legal authority) to enforce those rules in other areas.

Personally I believe that FTC is very appropriate for high school students, and, like VEX, is arguably educationally more sound than FRC in many respects.

And I will point out that VEX and VEX IQ are just two of the many excellent alternatives to FIRST branded programs. If you don't like FiM's approach, the best way to vote is with your feet. Nothing gets an event organizer to pay attention more quickly than having half of their teams walk away....

Jason

[Gregor]

I'm saving a longer post for later, but anyone who thinks that 13 and 14 year olds are beyond FLL at this point are not approaching FLL from a competative angle. There are so many things still to learn, and every year I'm floored with the new stuff the kids on my team come up with. I'm even more floored when I dare to go on Youtube and see what some of the top teams have done.

Remember that 14 is only the age cap in North America due to the prevalence of FTC and FRC teams, it's 16 globally. If I had the choice I would have absolutely continued with FLL for another two years (in addition to FRC mind you), and I like to think of myself as a fairly competent mechanical student.

I'd be interested in seeing some of the FLL student and alumni testimonials FiM gathered before approaching this new model.

Originally Posted by dtengineering

If they are holding FIRST events, however, they have to follow FIRST's rules. If FIRST doesn't enforce their rules in Michigan, then they lose the moral authority (if not the legal authority) to enforce those rules in other areas.

FLL events are very much run by how their organizers want, unlike FRC.

In the Toronto region, there are 3 events only open to Toronto District School Board teams. Community teams ect. have to go to other events, even though they payed to be a team and follow all the same rules as the TDSB teams.

[dtengineering]

Originally Posted by Gregor

FLL events are very much run by how their organizers want, unlike FRC.

In the Toronto region, there are 3 events only open to Toronto District School Board teams. Community teams ect. have to go to other events, even though they payed to be a team and follow all the same rules as the TDSB teams.

Didn't know that, thanks. FLL and FTC pretty much died off here in BC a few years back, so I'm not up on that part of the rules. I know that FIRST did like to enforce the "no showing other cool robot competitions at our events" rule when their last event partner invited a few VEX teams to present at an FLL event. Come to think of it, that's part of the reason that FLL shut down. They lost their event partner.

VEX is going great, though!

Jason

[philso]

FiM is dictating to all FLL teams in their "territory" what the rules will be and that they are re-aligning the age group boundaries to suit a school-based bureaucracy. This may be a good thing or it may be a bad thing. Unfortunately, or fortunately, they have no jurisdiction in other territories. Their change will create more disparity in the age ranges seen when teams from their territory go to the World Festival or any of the Invitationals not under their control. My understanding of why FIRST allows 16 year-olds outside of North America to participate in FLL because, until recently, they did not offer FTC and FRC events in most of the Rest of the World.

Originally Posted by Gregor

I'm saving a longer post for later, but anyone who thinks that 13 and 14 year olds are beyond FLL at this point are not approaching FLL from a competative angle. There are so many things still to learn, and every year I'm floored with the new stuff the kids on my team come up with. I'm even more floored when I dare to go on Youtube and see what some of the top teams have done.

Remember that 14 is only the age cap in North America due to the prevalence of FTC and FRC teams, it's 16 globally. If I had the choice I would have absolutely continued with FLL for another two years (in addition to FRC mind you), and I like to think of myself as a fairly competent mechanical student.

I feel that the lower age cap on FLL (and FTC) will lead to participants getting less out of the programs in terms of learning, growth and inspiration and work against the vision of FIRST of getting more students to pursue STEM. Most of the FLL teams build fairly rudimentary robots compared to the more competitive teams that Gregor is referring to. This is either due to a lack of training (coaching/mentoring) and/or the participants do not yet have the maturity necessary to work with more complex mechanisms and software. If they did, you would see calculus taught in elementary school. Many of those teams that did the inspiring stuff that Gregor refers to have competed in FLL for many years, probably more time than the age range FiM would allow. I believe that this will lead to a situation where the "rich get richer". The kids who are already "mechanical geniuses" will do well but the majority of the participants will not be able to struggle long enough to achieve the personal growth possible and FLL will become something that "they did once or twice and didn't get much out of it" so they went to do something else.

Originally Posted by Gregor

FLL events are very much run by how their organizers want, unlike FRC.

In the Toronto region, there are 3 events only open to Toronto District School Board teams. Community teams ect. have to go to other events, even though they payed to be a team and follow all the same rules as the TDSB teams.

For many years, one of the FLL Qualifying Tournaments in South Texas Region was only open to teams from that school District.

Historically, about 60-70% of the teams in the South Texas Region are affiliated with a school in some way. The balance were community teams, Girl/Boy Scout teams, church group teams, homeschool group teams, family based teams and teams based at for-profit robotics education companies. Would all these other teams be excluded from participating in FiM run FLL events? Would these teams be able to participate in FLL events outside of FiM's territory? I believe that in Texas, teams are only allowed to register for events in their geographic region. I somehow don't think that it is in FIRST's interest to exclude so many participants.

[Allison K]

Originally Posted by Andrew Schreiber

So, what you're saying is that this issue cannot be quantified or proved to be an issue using anything other than anecdotes and opinions?

Disclaimer - I've always thought the FLL age going through 14 was wrong, an 8 yr old cannot compete against a 14 yr old. FTC has always felt weird to me getting shoe horned in a space that directly competes with two programs. If I were to be granted unlimited power to make decisions on these programs I'd probably have FLL (8-12), FTC (11-15) FRC (14-18) as the suggested ranges which closely matches what FiM is doing from the sounds of it.

I think that it can be, but I alone am not in a position to compile that information. I'm particularly interested in...

• how does disallowing middle school students from FLL impact the depth of experience students are able to get from that program?
• does the impact (if any) on depth of experience negatively impact the value in the FLL for individuals?
• what percent of coaches feel like their 10 year old/5th grade grade students have mastered FLL?
• do coaches feel that the opportunity to master one level of program before moving on is important?
• what percent of coaches feel like their 11-12 year old/6th-7th grade students have grown out of/become bored with FLL?
• what percent of coaches feel like their 11-12 year old/6th-7th grade students are ready to handle the challenges of FTC?
• what is the impact of forcing students up a level if they aren't emotionally and socially mature enough?

If 13-14 year olds were at the center of the debate I wouldn't feel nearly as strongly about the changes (we'd switch them to FTC/VRC and call it a day), but most of my kids affected by this change are 11. Around 25% of them are still 10 (turning 11 sometime between June-October) but they'll be in 6th grade in the fall, so FLL isn't an option. Have most 11 year olds really grown out of FLL? My anecdotal perspective on this is that my 11 year old 6th graders are finally hitting the point where they can be successful in the FLL robot game and more or less navigate the research project independently without major frustration.

[Sperkowsky]

Originally Posted by Allison K

I think that it can be, but I alone am not in a position to compile that information. I'm particularly interested in...

• how does disallowing middle school students from FLL impact the depth of experience students are able to get from that program?
• does the impact (if any) on depth of experience negatively impact the value in the FLL for individuals?
• what percent of coaches feel like their 10 year old/5th grade grade students have mastered FLL?
• do coaches feel that the opportunity to master one level of program before moving on is important?
• what percent of coaches feel like their 11-12 year old/6th-7th grade students have grown out of/become bored with FLL?
• what percent of coaches feel like their 11-12 year old/6th-7th grade students are ready to handle the challenges of FTC?
• what is the impact of forcing students up a level if they aren't emotionally and socially mature enough?

If 13-14 year olds were at the center of the debate I wouldn't feel nearly as strongly about the changes (we'd switch them to FTC/VRC and call it a day), but most of my kids affected by this change are 11. Around 25% of them are still 10 (turning 11 sometime between June-October) but they'll be in 6th grade in the fall, so FLL isn't an option. Have most 11 year olds really grown out of FLL? My anecdotal perspective on this is that my 11 year old 6th graders are finally hitting the point where they can be successful in the FLL robot game and more or less navigate the research project independently without major frustration.

I dont know about michigan but I know here a lot of middle schools start at 7th grade either 7th and 8th or 7th through 9th

And FTC is also only 7th grade up so you wouldnt be dealing with 11 year olds. You would be dealing with 12/13 year olds.

When I was 12 or 13 I would have want the harder challange but thats me.

[cbale2000]

Originally Posted by Sperkowsky

I dont know about michigan but I know here a lot of middle schools start at 7th grade either 7th and 8th or 7th through 9th

And FTC is also only 7th grade up so you wouldnt be dealing with 11 year olds. You would be dealing with 12/13 year olds.

When I was 12 or 13 I would have want the harder challange but thats me.

The majority of middle schools (that I'm familiar with anyways) in Michigan are 6-8th grades. There are, of course always exceptions, our school district has even considered moving 8th grade into the high schools as part of a building consolidation plan (Though that idea got shot down pretty quickly).

[Allison K]

Originally Posted by Sperkowsky

I dont know about michigan but I know here a lot of middle schools start at 7th grade either 7th and 8th or 7th through 9th

And FTC is also only 7th grade up so you wouldnt be dealing with 11 year olds. You would be dealing with 12/13 year olds.

When I was 12 or 13 I would have want the harder challange but thats me.

The FiM age ranges for FLL are here and for FTC are here.

The exact language for the FLL age range is "Students in 4th grade through the end of elementary school." and since most of our school districts are divided as elementary school K-5, middle school 6-8, high school 9-12 that means that most 11 year old 6th graders are being funneled into FTC and not allowed to participate in FLL.

Spreadsheet here showing all 28 school districts in Oakland county, MI and the manner in which they divide their progression from elementary to middle school to high school. 18 districts define middle school as 6th-8th grade, 7 districts define middle school as starting in 7th grade (going through 8th or 9th), 1 defines middle school as starting in 5th grade (or rather, it seems like 5th-8th is housed in the same building, I can't tell beyond that), and 2 weren't immediately obvious.

Edit: Oops. In the time it took me to make a spreadsheet cbale beat me to it.

[Dave Campbell]

How does FiM deal with home school or parochial school teams? Are there schools that don't delineate students by grade level or age? Is it mandated by FiM that teams have a public institution and grade level or age affiliation? I know several individuals who were 15 year-old high school graduates who've moved on to a very successful collegiate and professional careers. They began HS classes as 10 year-olds. Will future students like them be excluded from FRC?

[Alex2614]

I hear that this is the model that a lot of areas are looking into. Here in WV, we have seen tremendous growth in FLL, and a bit of FTC growth, too.

One thing we are noticing is that as a kid starts FLL in 3rd grade, by the time they are in 8th grade, they've done it for 6 seasons or more, and start to get burned out. FTC is a great model for middle schools, but I disagree that it should be *only* middle school. We are looking at bringing FTC to more middle schools (in the past, we only looked at FLL for middle school), but also for our high schools.

I guess what I'm saying is that it isn't really a bad thing to have FLL end at 5th grade.

[Tom Line]

The usage of school-grades as a metric is an exceedingly poor one, and it should be done by ages. At the same time, why deny high schools that may not be able to participate in FRC the opportunity to participate in FTC if they want?

Parents can afford to run an FTC team. Few could financial fund an FRC team. So you've just denied ANY participation to students whose high school/area doesn't support an FRC team.

FRC, not FiM, needs to take the initiative and clean this all up. At the same time, they need to normalize the age around the world. Split FLL into two age groups at the Festival. 8-12 and 12-16. Mandate that qualifications be done the same way. Split FTC into two age groups as well.

Become more inclusive but at the same time make sure you aren't having 8 year olds competing against 16 year olds. And yes, it's a competition.