Cheating in FRC

[S.P.A.M.er 17]

Originally Posted by The_ShamWOW88

I apologize if I'm naive but I don't use Reddit often. The OP may have done it anonymously and there was no contact information.

The account can still be messaged to at least tell him that this is happening here. I unfortunately can't message him cause I don't know his reddit user name. If anyone else has or can get that info, please message him.

-Edit-
I messaged the Mods of r/frc. Maybe they will to get the message to him.

[Andrew Schreiber]

Originally Posted by bEdhEd

Although I am also curious as to how exactly they're breaking the 6 week timeline, I'm not as worried about the robot being worked on after stop build as I am worried about how the Chairman's Award process is allegedly lacking in integrity and student involvement. That completely defeats the purpose and spirit of the Chairman's Award and if this is indeed how their award is being put together, that is many times over a greater offense than adding robot parts after stop build on the competition bot.

To put it bluntly - lying to judges is more common than you'd expect.

On Chairmans:
Exaggerating in Chairman's is almost expected (we'll see how the new guidelines impact this) And I know that many teams rely on adults to work on Chairman's in the same way that they rely on adults in the design and fabrication process. I don't see this as a problem at all. We are there as mentors not as baby sitters, and we should be leveraging our knowledge and experience to make sure the team produces the best results it can. Now, I don't think a team where the adults do all the Chairman's prep work, students present it, and they win at the HoF level is a good result, I also don't think it's possible.

But I digress - To me, this is an anonymous poster venting about their perceptions. Reality may be VERY different. If anyone actually involved in the situation would like advice on resolving it: Sit down with the disgruntled party, discuss issues, figure out a plan moving forward. If the disgruntled party wants advice - contact your local Senior Mentor/RD and talk it out with them, they can probably help get you in contact with the right folks.

On Cheating:

Short term, they may win. Long term?

Winning is important. This is a competition. However, winning the right way and being proud of what you have accomplished and how you have accomplished it is more important - See more at: http://www.firstinspires.org/robotic....YYaa3nTz.dpuf

[MrJohnston]

Originally Posted by Andrew Schreiber

To put it bluntly - lying to judges is more common than you'd expect.

On Chairmans:
Exaggerating in Chairman's is almost expected (we'll see how the new guidelines impact this)

This bothers me. My team does not lie to judges at all... We also work hard to be accurate in our assessments of our work and deeds for our Chairman's presentations.... You make it sound like we are at a serious competitive disadvantage for being honest.... I thought FIRST was supposed to be better than this?

I recognize that, with 3000 teams and tens (hundreds?) of thousands of participants and mentors, some folks will be a bit misguided. But to think that it's the "norm" does not sit well with me.

[waialua359]

Originally Posted by KosmicKhaos

I don't believe this person is "airing out dirty laundry" at all. This person is clearly in a very difficult situation and is looking for advice. Yeah the obvious answer in this situation is to email FIRST and tell the of the rule violations, but I'm sure that is much easier said than done.

The student in question did not post it here on CD. Someone else did.

[bEdhEd]

Originally Posted by Andrew Schreiber

To put it bluntly - lying to judges is more common than you'd expect.

On Chairmans:
Exaggerating in Chairman's is almost expected (we'll see how the new guidelines impact this) And I know that many teams rely on adults to work on Chairman's in the same way that they rely on adults in the design and fabrication process. I don't see this as a problem at all. We are there as mentors not as baby sitters, and we should be leveraging our knowledge and experience to make sure the team produces the best results it can. Now, I don't think a team where the adults do all the Chairman's prep work, students present it, and they win at the HoF level is a good result, I also don't think it's possible.

My key word for what you quoted me is "allegedly." For all I know, the student could be interpreting the exaggeration of facts as lies, when they're just doing basic marketing to make their team look good. Also, the mentor involvement may be seen as excessive when it could indeed be appropriate. OP isn't a rookie, but still may be inexperienced in the nuances of award submissions and could be misinterpreting what is actually happening.

I was just giving OP the benefit of the doubt.

This is why the reporting is so important. This needs to be sorted out between that team and FIRST, not us. The furthest we should go is make that very suggestion.

I would like this to be my last contribution to this thread, which I hope is removed for the reasons I have stated in my previous reply.

[Tom Bottiglieri]

Originally Posted by The_ShamWOW88

You're correct in that we do not know how they are actively breaking the rules other than they are "going over the 6 week limit" and it shouldn't be shamed.

However, this still represents a serious problem, not just for FIRST, but for high school programs as a whole. If adults are willingly and knowingly breaking a rule(s) and the students feel threatened enough to not speak up outside of anonymously posting on a public forum, there's an issue.
.

I agree that some sort of mediation may required if everything explained in the original post were in fact legitimate grievances and not a misunderstanding. However, I implore you to be a bit more objective while looking at this situation.

We do not know which rules, if any, were broken. We do not know anything about the relationship between this student and the mentor, or the student and her or his peers. We do not know about the culture of the team, or what would qualify a student to become part of the leadership structure. It's very hard to make an assessment of the situation before knowing these things.

I would recommend the student in question try again to speak to the mentor in question. If you believe a rule was broken, politely ask for clarification on the rule and why your team worked in the manner it did. If you were not selected for leadership, ask about which skills and qualities you can work to improve for next season. Remember, your mentors are there to help you. Instead of being hostile, be as polite as possible and make it impossible for them to leave you behind. If by the end of this conversation you are convinced they are still "out to get you", try to have a discussion with your peers or other mentors about how to remedy this situation.

[Jon Stratis]

Reporting something like this can be scary. It's easy to worry about possible repercussions - if the team is negatively impacted the student may be treated badly by mentors or Fellow students, and here "badly" is a relative term - it could be anything from shunning to physical assault, depending on the individuals involved.

So I'll offer up an alternative solution. Find a mentor or volunteer on here from an area different from yours. One that doesn't interact with your team or your events, and one that doesn't work for FIRST. Private message them (from a new anonymous account if you feel it necessary) and ask if they would be willing to advise you. Bring the problem to them, go back and forth filling in the details that have been mentioned in this thread, and see what they say. Let them mentor you through the situation. I would willing volunteer for this role for any student who needs it, and help them as best I can, without making anything public or reporting it to FIRST without the students agreement. Of course, if you attend one of the Minnesota events that may not help, as my role of LRI at those events puts cheating like this under my purview... But that may also make someone like me a great resource for anyone going through this, as I can look at the situation from both sides (as a mentor and as someone having to enforce the rules).

In short, please reach out and talk to someone. It doesn't have to be public, and at least in this situation it sounds like being public isn't really an option. But all the same, Talk to someone who will listen, and listen to their advise!. Perhaps the best thing about the internet, when it comes to something like this, is the anonymity... If you don't provide a name or team number, then it can't flow back on you!

[Monochron]

Originally Posted by Tom Bottiglieri

On top of this, even if the team in question was blatantly breaking a rule, public shaming is hardly the best way to remedy the situation.

I don't think the intention of posting this story on CD was to publicly shame anyone, it was more to get the story to a broader audience and to make an effort to help report the team to FIRST officials. If another member of the team, or the reddit OP, sees this post they might be urged into reporting. Or if someone recognizes the story they could look into the team a bit and help move things forward.

[Michael Corsetto]

Originally Posted by MrJohnston

This bothers me. My team does not lie to judges at all... We also work hard to be accurate in our assessments of our work and deeds for our Chairman's presentations.... You make it sound like we are at a serious competitive disadvantage for being honest.... I thought FIRST was supposed to be better than this?

I recognize that, with 3000 teams and tens (hundreds?) of thousands of participants and mentors, some folks will be a bit misguided. But to think that it's the "norm" does not sit well with me.

It doesn't sit well with me either, but it is the reality of the "Chairman's game".

We're relatively new to Chairman's (only submitted twice). My advice to our Chairman's team (students and mentors) is be proud of our actual accomplishments and "stick to our guns".

You, no doubt, also have much to be proud of with your team's accomplishments.

Although it is hard, and often doesn't feel fair, I like Chairman's to focus more positive energy internally to our team, rather than bring in potentially negative energy from outside the team.

That is our way to cope, YMMV.

-Mike

[The_ShamWOW88]

Originally Posted by Michael Corsetto

It doesn't sit well with me either, but it is the reality of the "Chairman's game".

Unfortunately it's true.

I guide our Chairman's team and I set it from the outset with the students. I'm just there to help them put everything together. They write the paper, they make the video, they prepare and practice their presentation.

I still believe that the majority of teams do the same.

[aldaeron]

Originally Posted by waialua359

Every uncomfortable situation has 2 sides to a story.

I saw this post on Reddit too and remember there being a great comment about perceived cheating that was not actually cheating (since the Reddit OP was a first year). The Reddit reply had mentioned things like working on a practice bot, working on code or working on a mechanism within the WITHHOLDING ALLOWANCE. To a new member these may appear to be "cheating" though are allowed by last year's rules. I did not see any replies and the thread is now deleted.

Over the years I have heard a number of things called "cheating" by students, parents and spectators who did not understand the rules well enough (let's face it, sometimes I feel like a lawyer reading all the Q&A and rules updates all the time).

-matto-

[rich2202]

Originally Posted by waialua359

Every uncomfortable situation has 2 sides to a story.

There are ways to cheat, and there are ways to cheat.

Not bagging on stop build day is a clear violation. Bagging the robot, and continuing to work on a component within the hold back limitation is fine. Kids who do not understand that rule sometimes think the team is cheating. We build a 2nd robot for that explicit purpose. Continuing to refine the design after stop build, and bring the new component (within the hold back allowance) to the competition.

In the grand scheme of things, for a well performing team, there is limited value of not bagging on time vs. continuing to work on the hold back. For a rookie team that doesn't even have a functioning robot, the cheating could be huge. For the rookie team, I can see "looking the other way" so that they can compete. Rookie teams tend not to do very well, so the giving them a handicap advantage is not so bad.

Then there is cheating. The competition is for the students to learn. A mentor built robot, while not technically "cheating", takes away from the experience for the kids. The mentors need to remember "gracious professionalism", and take a step back for the benefit of the students.

[MamaSpoldi]

Originally Posted by Jon Stratis

Reporting something like this can be scary. It's easy to worry about possible repercussions - if the team is negatively impacted the student may be treated badly by mentors or Fellow students, and here "badly" is a relative term - it could be anything from shunning to physical assault, depending on the individuals involved.

So I'll offer up an alternative solution. Find a mentor or volunteer on here from an area different from yours. One that doesn't interact with your team or your events, and one that doesn't work for FIRST. Private message them (from a new anonymous account if you feel it necessary) and ask if they would be willing to advise you. Bring the problem to them, go back and forth filling in the details that have been mentioned in this thread, and see what they say. Let them mentor you through the situation. I would willing volunteer for this role for any student who needs it, and help them as best I can, without making anything public or reporting it to FIRST without the students agreement. Of course, if you attend one of the Minnesota events that may not help, as my role of LRI at those events puts cheating like this under my purview... But that may also make someone like me a great resource for anyone going through this, as I can look at the situation from both sides (as a mentor and as someone having to enforce the rules).

In short, please reach out and talk to someone. It doesn't have to be public, and at least in this situation it sounds like being public isn't really an option. But all the same, Talk to someone who will listen, and listen to their advise!. Perhaps the best thing about the internet, when it comes to something like this, is the anonymity... If you don't provide a name or team number, then it can't flow back on you!

This is great advice. Some of the judgement here seems to be going back on the reddit OP... that is upsetting. This is a student looking for guidance without shaming his teammates. If Minnesota is not an option perhaps Connecticut is. I have been a team mentor for 10 years and have been a sounding board for several students who were trying to navigate difficult situations. I would be happy to help talk through the situation up to and including helping you talk to FIRST if that is the right option.... with complete anonymity. Feel free to pm me if I can help.

[XaulZan11]

For those suggesting the student should report to issue directly to FIRST, what do you think FIRST will do with that information?

I'm not sure FIRST is capable of launching investigations or have the desire to take away previous awards or removing 'guilty' mentors/students for every report of cheating. (The 2012 championship was very different than this). I like John's suggestion of reaching out privately to respective members of the community.

[KosmicKhaos]

Originally Posted by waialua359

The student in question did not post it here on CD. Someone else did.

I understand but it still took a lot of courage to bring this to the communities attention and ask for advice on the FRC Sub Reddit