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

[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.

[cadandcookies]

Originally Posted by 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.

It's funny that people are saying that middle school FTC can't compete with high school FTC, because I distinctly remember several of Michigan's FTC teams doing fantastically at North Super Regional against end of high school aged teams.

I think we're just running into the consequences of how FIRST expanded FLL and FTC-- they gave them to a regional partner and gave them a way to plug into Championships but otherwise let them run how they want. I know there's some friction in Minnesota about how we do judging versus how FIRST tells us we should be doing judging. Now that programs are maturing in many areas, FIRST is probably going to want to standardize things more. It'll be interesting to see how that works.

[Foster]

Originally Posted by 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?

So I think that it's age / ability. Since I'm in the alternative universe of VEX (Come to the Dark Side Luke, we have cookies) the two programs are VEXIQ and VEX. I've seen younger roboteers that would be VEXIQ are bored by it and so they can do VEX. You can always move up early.

One thing that may stop younger roboteers and FRC is liability for power tool usage. When I was doing direct teams the insurance underwriter was unhappy about roboteers less than 14 using power tools. We worked out a "they will go through training and we will have proof" and they agreed to that. (And for the 4 years I only had parent/mentor injuries

Originally Posted by Tom Line

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.

Right, start your own team and events. I tell parents all the time, it's cheap, start your own team. Unhappy with the events in your area, I can come with a field and game elements, run your own event. That is one of the things I love about FLL/FTC/VEXIQ/VEX, easy peasy events. There are NEVER enough competitions.

I don't live in Michigan, so I'm not going to throw rocks. But I follow the following: Don't like the rules/game?
-- Follow the rules.
-- Break the rules but be prepared
-- Make or change the game/rules and see if you can add followers

But there are a ton of really cool robotics things you can do, FIRST isn't the only robot game!

[tr6scott]

I came up to FRC through FLL in Michigan.

As far as I know, (Mainly through emails from FiM) all of the grant money provided from the state are funneled through the public schools.

When I coached and we competed in FLL, the team was funded by 3 families, although we were associated with the elementary school, the school and district did not provide any funding, or meeting space for the team.

Contrary to what Tom said, I am not sure we could have funded an FTC team, at that time. We were putting about a $1,000 per family in the budget to do FLL, travel and compete. Not sure how much more we could afford to put to robot materials, motors, gears, ect that the FTC required. (Back then FTC wasn't an option, it didn't exist)

Back then (2005-2008) there were many home schooled teams and community teams from 4-H and Girl Scouts that were doing FLL. Teams not associated with school districts, therefore not able to get any of the grant funding. (My take, not fact, just my impression.. citation needed)

Many times these non-school teams were some of the most competitive teams. I tried to look up the Michigan state champions in FLL, but could not find a listing. In the times we competed, I am pretty sure there were home school teams that were state champs. Seems like forcing these teams with no access to the grant money, to step up to FTC, or FRC, is counter productive to the mission of FIRST.

I know our team placed 2nd in 2008 in the Novi State Championship. (Michigan has two FLL state championships) I am pretty sure, (memory defective) we lost to a home schooled team. This year we had 3 middle schooled aged students on a team of 6. FLL is a progression, a process to go from a rookie, to almost a state champ, and it was a 4 year process for us. It was student focused, and the students solved the problems over the years. They were not bored, in fact they were more engaged the last year, because they understood the game (hint: It's all about cycle time) and what needed to be done to win.

(and in Michigan 2nd place in FLL, did not get you Championships)

[Abhishek R]

Excuse my ignorance, but does every student in Michigan who participates in FLL have the opportunity to easily become involved in the FTC program when they graduate to middle school?

[orangelight]

Originally Posted by Abhishek R

Excuse my ignorance, but does every student in Michigan who participates in FLL have the opportunity to easily become involved in the FTC program when they graduate to middle school?

When I was in middle school no.
But now I see a lot more schools that have expanded to FTC, so it may easier for students to find a team now.

[Christopher149]

On the topic of FTC in Michigan, here's something that may be interesting: there are zero FTC teams in the Upper Peninsula, and only 5? north of about Cadillac. In comparison, there are 2? VRC teams in the UP, 22 FRC teams, and something like a dozen FLL teams (several of which are middle school programs).

On one hand, I do appreciate that FLL is being pushed as an elementary program so that FLL and FTC don't try to conflict as a middle school programs. Several years ago, FIM was pushing FTC, but if it and FLL were going to be middle school programs, many northern schools would have ended up choosing one or the other.

On the less fortunate hand, pushing FLL into elementary may cause a temporary lack of good middle school robotics programs (at least FIRST ones, anyway) in the UP. This is partly because, say, for Houghton, the nearest FLL competition is 2 hours away, but the nearest FTC competition is 6+ hours away. (The nearest VRC events appear to be a similar distance away in WI and MN).

Originally Posted by Abhishek R

Excuse my ignorance, but does every student in Michigan who participates in FLL have the opportunity to easily become involved in the FTC program when they graduate to middle school?

In the UP? What is this FTC thing you speak of?

[MichaelMcQuinn]

I personally think FIRST should axe FTC, and make Jr. FLL expand to all of elementary, and FLL is all of middle school, and FRC is all of high school.

[Rachel Lim]

Originally Posted by MichaelMcQuinn

I personally think FIRST should axe FTC, and make Jr. FLL expand to all of elementary, and FLL is all of middle school, and FRC is all of high school.

I hope they won't, for a couple of reasons:

1. FLL is a good challenge for elementary school kids. I've been mentoring an FLL team of 4th and 5th graders, and although they tend to need someone to keep them focused, they're definitely more than able to understand what they're doing, and they enjoy it. I don't know a lot about Jr FLL, but from what I've seen, I don't think they'll be getting the same thing out of it.

2. FRC is not affordable in all areas. It's just too expensive. FTC can reach students that otherwise won't have the ability to participate in FIRST.

It's definitely not an easy problem though. I did FLL in 7th grade and found it both challenging and enjoyable (although we had almost no adult help, so it was more difficult because of that). I also see the issue with having 4th graders competing against 8th graders.

Having different competitions for age groups within FLL (e.g. 4-6th grade and 7-8th grade compete separately) might be one way to do it, but then there would be a problem for mixed age teams...

[FTC7584]

Originally Posted by MichaelMcQuinn

I personally think FIRST should axe FTC, and make Jr. FLL expand to all of elementary, and FLL is all of middle school, and FRC is all of high school.

What do you propose happens to the hundreds of highschools that can't afford an FRC teams?

I know there is a slight tone of elitism that comes into play when FTC is talked about as a highschool program (see post here for a much longer thread on that), however, in most cases, FTC presents an equal, if not better, alternative to FRC for schools or organizations that cannot form a FRC team for whatever reason.

In the end, all the FIRST programs as they are, are effective in their specific roles. FIRST, as an international organization has put lots of consideration into these roles. In my opinion, it isn't reasonable for a state to overrule the national standard.

[tr6scott]

Originally Posted by Abhishek R

Excuse my ignorance, but does every student in Michigan who participates in FLL have the opportunity to easily become involved in the FTC program when they graduate to middle school?

Based on FiM own data, http://firstinmichigan.org/ftc/mi_ftc_teams.html

400+ FLL teams with max capacity of 10 per team, and 203 FTC teams with a max capacity of 15.

There is a huge push to start more FTC teams in Michigan, but clearly, there are kids being left behind as they transition between elementary to middle school.

And as Christopher149 pointed out there is a huge geographic hurdle to overcome if you live in the UP or upper LP.

[Daniel_LaFleur]

Originally Posted by Tom Line

The usage of school-grades as a metric is an exceedingly poor one, and it should be done by ages.

Tom,

While I agree with the 1st half of your statement, I disagree with the 2nd half. Ability is far more important than age/grade and that's the issue I have with bureaucratic entities and the arbitrary metrics they use.

I've been a FRC mentor for 15 years. I've seen 7th graders that were ready for FRC and I've seen 10th graders that weren't.

My question to FiM is: Why must the programs be separated? Why should they not be allowed to overlap?

My question to the Michigan community is: is the program you run a FiM program or a FIRST program? The answer to that should dictate which set of rules you'd want to follow.

FiM has done a lot of good for the FIRST community, thus I am very willing to give them the benefit of the doubt. But I would be interested to see the data that they based this decision on.

[cbale2000]

Originally Posted by Daniel_LaFleur

My question to FiM is: Why must the programs be separated? Why should they not be allowed to overlap?

My question to the Michigan community is: is the program you run a FiM program or a FIRST program? The answer to that should dictate which set of rules you'd want to follow.

I don't speak for FiM, however, I suspect part of the reason for the lack of overlap is this: FTC has often been pegged as a low-cost alternative to FRC for schools where funding is limited, however, because in Michigan funding for rookie FRC teams is basically covered by state grants, the feeling seems to be that having overlap with FTC at the high school level simply detracts from potential FRC teams as the vast majority of schools are unlikely to be willing to have both programs.

To an extent, this also holds true when you compare FTC to FLL, FLL is cheaper and thus more appealing, but since FTC is also largely paid for by state grants in Michigan, making FTC the only Middle School program helps promote FTC at that level and expand the number of teams (which the data posted earlier in this thread has shown).

JrFLL and FLL are then delegated to their own grade ranges giving a very clear progression in the FIRST program.

The real question that needs to be asked is not whether or not this change has benefited team growth (arguably the data shows that it has), but has it benefited students. This is a much harder metric to gauge but it will be an important one going forwards.


Speaking as a student who participated in FLL in 7th and 8th grades; when I moved into high school, I was totally unprepared to join an FRC team, I went to a few meetings in the fall and maintained a "deer in the headlights" mentality the entire time. Needless to say, I dropped out of the team my 9th grade year (something I regret to this day) and ended up joining back the following year. Had I had exposure to a program like FTC in Middle School I think I would have been much more prepared for FRC when I got into high school.


Now to answer your second question: I don't know. The jurisdiction that FiM has over Michigan teams has been one of these confusing grey areas since it was implemented. On one side, I've yet to see any instances where FiM has directly contradicted FIRST, but on the other hand, there are policies that FiM implements that differ substantially from FIRST. In some ways you could think of it like how our government works, the Federal government can create rules that apply to everyone, then states can create non-conflicting rules that are tailored specifically to their needs. If you wanted to take the analogy further, you could compare individual competitions to local governments, where you can again make rules (in FIRSTs case, mostly procedural) for the municipality so long as they don't conflict with state or federal rules.