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

[leon r]

Wow, just wow, this is first I am hearing of this issue in MI and am shocked by it! I can sort of see why they are doing this (mainly to accommodate FTC), but they are seriously shortchanging MI middle school kids from FLL experience! FLL is SO MUCH more than just robots! The project, the research, the core values and teamwork is invaluable!

I have coached FLL for 7 years and FRC for combined 5 years (97/98, 2014-2016) and I consider FLL as a vital step in STEM education. As a parent of three FLL kids, I wouldn’t trade FLL for any other level of FIRST activity (even FRC!).

Also consider that internationally, FLL goes up the age of 16 (as of Jan 1st of competition year), that means that kids will turn 17 during the year. Which means that they can be 18 years old by the time World Festival comes around! So, if you ever send any MI kids to that tournament, they are going to be up against 18 year old! Talk about stacking the game against them!

I do not know what I would do if Mass ever did something like this, perhaps traveling to one of the adjacent states to compete? But that is easy to do in a small New England state .

[cbale2000]

Originally Posted by leon r

Wow, just wow, this is first I am hearing of this issue in MI and am shocked by it! I can sort of see why they are doing this (mainly to accommodate FTC), but they are seriously shortchanging MI middle school kids from FLL experience! FLL is SO MUCH more than just robots! The project, the research, the core values and teamwork is invaluable!

The accomodating FTC part is the key thing here. Because of the prevalence of FRC in Michigan, there's no real place for FTC unless you move it to middle school. There were only a handful of FTC teams in Michigan prior to the switch and maybe one or two events, now both are much more common.

While pushing FLL back to lower grades may not be ideal, having FTC at the middle school level and making teams more prevelant helps students transition into FRC much more easily (speaking from first-hand experience as an FLL student who was totally lost when joining an FRC team in 9th grade). This may put FLL teams at a slight disadvantage for competitions, but maybe if the system works well it's something that can be standardized in the future.

[Hot_Copper_Frog]

Originally Posted by leon r

Wow, just wow, this is first I am hearing of this issue in MI and am shocked by it! I can sort of see why they are doing this (mainly to accommodate FTC), but they are seriously shortchanging MI middle school kids from FLL experience! FLL is SO MUCH more than just robots! The project, the research, the core values and teamwork is invaluable!

I have coached FLL for 7 years and FRC for combined 5 years (97/98, 2014-2016) and I consider FLL as a vital step in STEM education. As a parent of three FLL kids, I wouldn’t trade FLL for any other level of FIRST activity (even FRC!).

I couldn't agree more that FLL is a vital step in STEM education that offers a wide range of positive experiences for students. The transition to FLL in elementary school and FTC in middle school is, in part, to improve their FIRST experience overall. I'm a graduate of FLL/FRC myself, and I wish I had been able to experience FTC as a middle step between the two. By the time I aged out of FLL I was bored - the build and programming weren't challenging enough. But hopping right into FRC was overwhelming. FTC is a great middle step.

Originally Posted by leon r

Also consider that internationally, FLL goes up the age of 16 (as of Jan 1st of competition year), that means that kids will turn 17 during the year. Which means that they can be 18 years old by the time World Festival comes around! So, if you ever send any MI kids to that tournament, they are going to be up against 18 year old! Talk about stacking the game against them!

Well then I guess it's a good thing that winning at the world festival level isn't the focus when creating an overall stronger FIRST community.

I think people are seriously underestimating how capable elementary and middle school students are. Now that our program has matured (our first middle school FTC teams were founded in 2011) and we have students coming up to FRC that have been through the full progression of programs, I'm blown away by how prepared these freshman are. They've had 3-4 years of FIRST core values, and the more technically challenging FTC build has prepared them very well for FRC. I don't think I've spoken with a single student who has gone through this progression and had anything negative to say about it.

[kgzak]

Originally Posted by Hot_Copper_Frog

I think people are seriously underestimating how capable elementary and middle school students are.

I would just like to point out that the Ortberg division finalist alliance had 2 teams that where middle school teams. One of those teams was the captain of the alliance that moved on to the championship and placed 10th in the Edison division.

[gblake]

Originally Posted by cbale2000

The accomodating FTC part is the key thing here. Because of the prevalence of FRC in Michigan, there's no real place for FTC unless you move it to middle school. There were only a handful of FTC teams in Michigan prior to the switch and maybe one or two events, now both are much more common.

Respectfully - This isn't correct - FTC and FRC can coexist quite easily in a single "team". - There are great heaping piles of prima facie evidence that says they can, and that when they do the students benefit in several ways.

I can understand that the "there is no real place for FTC" [because high schools have FRC teams] can sound reasonable if you say it fast, or if that idea is woven into a PowerPoint slide deck describing a plan to constrain what students are offered; but it's just not correct.

We can discuss the benefits of complementary FTC/FRC participation by a single "team" if you like. I'll be glad to share my opinions, along with pointers to real-world examples.

Originally Posted by Hot_Copper_Frog

I couldn't agree more that FLL is a vital step in STEM education that offers a wide range of positive experiences for students. The transition to FLL in elementary school and FTC in middle school is, in part, to improve their FIRST experience overall. I'm a graduate of FLL/FRC myself, and I wish I had been able to experience FTC as a middle step between the two. By the time I aged out of FLL I was bored - the build and programming weren't challenging enough. But hopping right into FRC was overwhelming. FTC is a great middle step.
...
I don't think I've spoken with a single student who has gone through this progression and had anything negative to say about it.

I agree with everything I have explicitly quoted here, and with your post in general; but ...
(IMO) It is irrelevant.

The topic being discussed isn't whether FTC prepares students for FRC, nor is the topic whether FTC is a good intermediate program to experience between FLL and FRC.

The topic is whether anyone should actively discourage and/or put barriers in the way of students, schools, 4H Clubs, Scouting troops, whoever who want to participate in FLL after they are out of elementary school, or participate in FTC after they are out of middle school.

In my opinion, no one should discourage them and/or erect any barriers.

There are plenty of reasons why I think this. The most fundamental is this. If an undecided/tentative student or group wants to try (for the first time) a hands-on STEM activity during their middle school or high school years; FRC can be good for them, but to get honest-to-goodness, hands-on, hardware and software, design/construction/integration/testing/operating/speaking experience in a lower-pressure, lower-cost, less-time commitment, simpler environment; forming or joining an FLL or an FTC team is the way to go. Forming or joining an FLL or FTC team that is associated with (mentored by) an FRC team is even better.

So, in my opinion, the OP, and the person who resurrected this thread yesterday both are on the right track. Encouraging the Michigan school systems to offer FLL/FTC/FRC in elementary/middle/high school respectively is a good idea. Discouraging the Michigan school systems, and/or anyone else, from offering FLL/FTC to older students is not a good idea. The cons far outweigh the pros.

When is it ever a good idea to tell a pre-college student of any age that because of someone else's opinion, their only viable FIRST STEM robotics option is FRC?

Blake
PS: The VEX VRC and VIQ programs, and a few other STEM programs are obvious alternatives to FIRST's programs - For the purposes of this discussion, I'm focusing only on the FIRST programs.

[cbale2000]

Originally Posted by gblake

Respectfully - This isn't correct - FTC and FRC can coexist quite easily in a single "team". - There are great heaping piles of prima facie evidence that says they can, and that when they do the students benefit in several ways

I agree that there are examples of this being the case, but in Michigan it was more of the exception than the rule. Consider that prior to the switch to middle school there were like 20 FTC teams and like 300 FRC teams, clearly the vast majority of teams did not have FTC teams.

[gblake]

Originally Posted by cbale2000

I agree that there are examples of this being the case, but in Michigan it was more of the exception than the rule. Consider that prior to the switch to middle school there were like 20 FTC teams and like 300 FRC teams, clearly the vast majority of teams did not have FTC teams.

That is interesting, but again - Whether or not examples existed in Michigan isn't the topic of this thread.

The topic of this thread is about whether FiM or any other entity should be putting up barriers to, or explicitly discouraging people from, or recommending that any organization explicitly prevent, forming FLL (or FTC) teams for the benefit of older students.

I wrote about the abundant entities/groups that participate in and benefit from both the FTC and FRC programs simply to keep the discussion rooted in easily examined, real world facts (instead of me only asserting an opinion).

I'll grant you that for any number of reasons, it might not have ever been common in Michigan, but that might simply mean that the good people of Michigan were missing out on some really good STEM opportunities.

Blake

[leon r]

Michigan is certainly a special case, because of how well they have integrated FIRST into their school curriculum and I understand that there was (is?) a tremendous imbalance between their FRC and FTC teams. But… do you ruin kid’s FLL experience in order to boost FTC participation? Forcing kids to move up into FTC in 6th grade is just not right!

I agree that they could suggest it, but do not force it! Current system allows 10th graders on FLL teams (in 49 states), but students are encouraged to move up to FRC/FTC in 9th grade! The point is, they have a choice!

BTW, this is a pilot program, which means that if they like it, they might apply it to the other states and/or the world…