When do mentors go too far?

[seanwitte]

Originally Posted by White_Orpheus

In my opinion, it is far more beneficial to the students to be 100% responsible for every aspect of the team, with adults merely present to make sure discipline is enforced, and offer advice when asked.

Thats a valid opinion, but you will have a hard time finding qualified adults who are willing to give up their free time to sit and watch and wait. I think the best environment is where the students and the mentors act as peers. I think there are more adults like me, who got involved because they like building robots, than the remarkable people who do it because they want to inspire today's youth. I consider myself just another member of the team. I think students AND mentors get more out of the program as peers, but every team is different. Why should the students have all the fun?

[vic burg]

Sometimes the mentors, and I'm talking in general, do seem to dominate over the teams. On the other hand, since it is only at the regionals where we witness what is going on with the individual teams, we can only assume somethings. but, I do agree, some teams seem to be powered by their mentors and/or sponsors. If I was to say how much that is unfair, I might get yelled at but, to the other teams, it is not fair. To be rational, you can use the machines at the place where you build but, there is an extent of whether or not the mentors should step in or just let the team itself work on the problem and try to correct it. I do recall seeing some teams where the robot looked a little too good to be made by majority students with some of the mentors helping. But, then again, that team could just be really advanced and be really good at what they do. Unless you are there the entire season with the team, you can't be entirely sure or unsure what goes on but, some teams don't seem to have a limit to where the mentors need to stop helping.
::Just my opinion::

[Mark Pettit]

An ex-mentor turned FIRST judge told me that, during a pre-regional judges meeting, FIRST told the judging staff that they were going to hear a whole lot of "our robot is 100% student built" as they made their rounds. This was followed by a directive that this does not matter and should not play into a team deserving any awards over a team that was 100% engineer built. He was surprised to hear that from FIRST and so was I when he told me about it.
Our team is in a constant state of change. 5 years ago when I first became my team's coach, we had a very overpowering mentor that designed, built, and programmed the robot. Our team more or less revolted against this and we had to make a really tough decision to get away from utilizing his knowledge and skills at all. For two years after that, we had students who were all of knowledgeable enough, interested enough, and capable enough that they could do everything themselves. All the while, we had a couple of underclassmen joining our "club" not team (see THIS THREAD) who were maybe into electrical and programming more than using tools and machining equipment. Today, these students are upperclassmen who require our mentor staff to do the majority of the build, at least the mast/arm portion of our machine, and then they (students) wire and program. Incidentally, we have some current Freshmen who are incredibly motivated and apt enough with tools and ready to take things over so we are planning now for a more student-built machine in the coming seasons. It's a constant evolution and whichever state we're in during any given season, the students who are in FIRST for the right reasons still take away knowledge, experience, and a desire to pursue engineering.
Basically, it just doesn't matter.

[Richard Wallace]

Back in graduate school, I bought a poster-size portrait of Einstein that features one of his most recognized quotations as a caption: "Imagination is more important that knowledge." [see my sig area below for the unabridged version of the quote and a link to an insightful essay on the subject]

That poster has been a fixture in my office for many years now. I never get tired of it.

This has been a great thread. I have been a mentor/sponsor/advisor for several kinds of technical competition over the years. I like FIRST better than the rest, and this thread has help me understand why. It's because FIRST is mostly about inspiration (and recognition), not education. Of course I am a big fan of education -- before taking my present job, I spent sixteen years either enrolled in or employed by institutions of higher learning. Knowledge is the foundation on which inspiration is built. But inspiration is the fountainhead of new knowledge, and of course old knowledge soon becomes as dry as dust without the new life that inspiration brings to every field of endeavor.

So I think it really does not matter whether an FRC team's robot is built by mentors or by students. All that matters is that everyone who participates in FIRST, or even just watches at an FRC event, gets inspired to imaginative participation in a world where science and technology become more important every day.

[KathieK]

Originally Posted by davelu

-Writing a program with me not included when i am the actuall programmer who is suppouse to do all this...i have waited for the entire year to program that bot and the mentors kindaof ruined it for me. I know they are trying to help out but they crossed the line when they do everything for you and leave you with no jobs to do. I thought the mentors were suppose to help out and teach the students how to do stuff but why are they doing it for us??? isn't it our job??
That was what really bothered me and espeically when you ask them for some help and they end up not helping you but ignoring your request for help.

I could see where that could be an issue - I would hope that you could feel comfortable bringing up issues like this in your team meetings. If not, perhaps speaking with your team leader privately about your concerns might help - you may not be the only one this has affected. Or perhaps you and the mentor have personality conflicts (that may or may not be able to be resolved). These situations often occur in the workplace. Learning how to deal with them can be a great learning experience now. Does your team have an end-of-year assessment program? If not, I recommend that you implement one this year. It gives the team members a way to step back and say, Ok, this is what I did this year, this is what I wasn't able to do, this is what I had hoped to do. One of the questions we ask is, "How did the team help you be successful this year?" and another, "What could the team do better?"

[the_short1]

team 1596's bot is built and maintained MOSTLY by students.. we have some engineers and adults helping us and such.. but . . for instance.. 95% of our arm was designed by a student jon tribanal.. and a lot of students worked on it..

from the start we heard about student built bots and adult built bots.. and at our first meeting we said. . .this is going to be a STUDENT bot.. i think more teams ought to have that kind of philosophy in my opinion

[Paul H]

Ok, I've read this whole thread, and I've been thinking about this for awhile because there's a mentor on my team who thinks the robot should be 100% student designed and built, so here are the thoughts that I've been playing with in my head for some time now....

Not to sound like a jerk or anything, but I have one question for all of you advocating "student designed and built" bots. Did you use this year's kit chassis and transmissions? If so, you used something designed by engineers and built by professionals, likely with no student input. How is that any better than an engineer designing a chassis, probably with more student help than the kit chassis, and helping the students build it?

How about those of you that come to Cheif Delphi and read the whitepapers and use the designs you see, even if you do make modifications? I could even go as far as to say that looking at other "powerhouse" robots and using their ideas/designs is the same way. Guess What? An engineer came up with something that is on your robot.

Even if you brag that you have no engineering support, or that your robot is 100% student designed and built, the fact is that unless you totally started from scratch, it's not.


Now onto my old team....

I'm speaking for Team 33 on this one, because 1504 doesn't have any engineers yet (but we rely on other team's engineers and ideas). Every year, the Killer Bees turn out beautiful and highly competitive robots. Guess what....their robots are built almost entirely by students. Emphasis on almost. How could you expect a high school student to spend hours calculating gear ratios, torque curves, and anything else like that? Granted, some can and do, and that's great, but I'd say that's the exception, not the rule. What about the material thickness required, or complex machined parts? Most high school students join the team to build something really cool, not sit at a desk for hours doing math.

The first time I saw Jim's drawings for the four speed transmission, I was in awe. I thought "I wish I could have thought of that!" Would I have thought of it? Not a chance. Is it bad that he designed it? I don't see how it would be.

I like to classify 33 as a 50/50 team, where engineers and students work in a partnership to build great robots. In my eyes, this is what FIRST is all about, working WITH professional engineers to build the best possible robot. This is how I was "brought up" in FIRST, it's how I was inspired, and it's how I will strive to conduct any team that I am on in the future, including 1504. Do I believe that engineers should do the work for the students? Absolutely not, but I also believe that teams with no engineering support are at a disadvantage, and that's where this turns into a robot building contest. How can students be inspired to pursue careers in science and technology when they don't interact with anyone in those fields?

[Spikey]

Originally Posted by Paul H

Not to sound like a jerk or anything, but I have one question for all of you advocating "student designed and built" bots. Did you use this year's kit chassis and transmissions? If so, you used something designed by engineers and built by professionals, likely with no student input. How is that any better than an engineer designing a chassis, probably with more student help than the kit chassis, and helping the students build it?

There is nothing wrong with using engineer built and designed parts, I completely understand that somethings are out of the range of what a student can do. What I say when it comes to being a student designed and built robot is more of a harmony between engineers, mentors, and students. There is nothing wrong with mentors helping students build a robot, but when they take over the process and students get left out, that is when I think there is a problem. All of our robots have had engineer built parts, thats fine, what is nice is that the engineer showed us how and why their part works.

What I have been trying to state is that collaboration is fine, but domination is not. I understand that nothing is truly 100% student built, thats fine. The point of this post, and the thread as a whole is really trying to build an understanding between mentors and students that working together is fine, but when the mentors take over, students should ask themselves how much are they really getting out of FIRST when all they get to do is drive their robot.

[Not2B]

When I first joined FIRST, I was bothered that it seemed some robots were engineer built blah blah blah...

I got over that. It gives the other teams something to strive for. AND who am I to judge how each team should best inspire THIER students. We all come from different backgrounds. My students KNOW about mills, lathes, water jet cutters, etc... but might never have touched a tool in their lives. Other students may have helped fix the house or rebuilt a car, but never knew that math could help build something, or that you can use WATER to cut METAL. (How cool is that...) It's all good.

But I do wonder about a team when I see 3 engineers fixing a broken robot in the pits with NO (zero) students even in range. How can that be good? (I'm serious - is that good? A working, dominating robot makes the team feel good or what?)

[ChrisCook]

I agree that more and more teams are being dominated by mentors, Im from the San jose Area and in the radius of 10 miles we have Team 254, team 115, team 114, team 8, team 1072, 581... its just crazy. Team 254 does have a really good program, but every time I go to look at their web site i always see the same guy in the green vest working on the robot.
Also lest look at it from a students perspective, who has become a mentor. They never really graduated they're just going another year of FIRST. So I think that there are two sides to the situation.

[Seekthematrix]

Originally Posted by ChrisCook

I agree that more and more teams are being dominated by mentors, Im from the San jose Area and in the radius of 10 miles we have Team 254, team 115, team 114, team 8, team 1072, 581... its just crazy. Team 254 does have a really good program, but every time I go to look at their web site i always see the same guy in the green vest working on the robot.
Also lest look at it from a students perspective, who has become a mentor. They never really graduated they're just going another year of FIRST. So I think that there are two sides to the situation.

I am a freshman on team 1257. This was my first year in robotics and it was quit the expirence. What made me most proud of my team is we had virtually 0 mentor influence. Other then a little advice by a team mates father (who is an engineer) on the design we did EVERYTHING ourselves. In our work area there were usually one adult (a teacher due to legal reasons) and maybe a mentor who usually just did scrap work like cut metal or something. We find much pride in the fact that engineering wise we have only two seniors, are thrid in command is a sophmore, and we only have on junior. If you were in hte Eurie division u may remmber ares it had the arm with the two neumatic hooks. Next year should be intresting since we are going to have no seniors, and the rest is juniors through freshman.

[Jack Jones]

There is another side to the “When do mentors go too far?” coin. Please read the following excerpt that I Googled and copy pasted here. Names have been changed so as not to embarrass this teacher, who IMO, is a much more common example of a mentor that has gone too far.

Originally Posted by Anonymous FIRST web page

Read this page daily for Important announcements for US FIRST Robotics:

Last updated by Coach SMITH:

Friday and Saturday, Feb 13 and 15, 2004 -
1) Attending were -- NOBODY (except Coach SMITH). Both days. I was there from 3:30 until 8 pm (non-stop, no breaks, no food, no drink) on Friday and from 9 am until 6 pm (non-stop, no breaks, no food, and I wimped out and had a bottle of juice). Having a great time, doing a lot of work, learning a lot of things I wish you were learning, too. Wish you were here!
2) Xxx Xxxxx is closed on Sunday (otherwise I would be there) and is closed on Monday (will be at Science Olympiad at school from 9 am until 3 pm). MH will be open on Tuesday through Friday from 3:30 pm until 9 pm and on Saturday from 9 am until 6 pm. I am committed to work with Science Olympiad on Tuesday and Thursday, but I will go to MH after we are finished on those days which will be about 5 pm.
3) We made a committment to Mr. Cxxxxxxxx and to NASA to spend the $6000 grant well. That means, build a robot and compete. If we do not compete, we will have a hard time getting the second year grant. No grant, no robot, no robotics team.
4) I am going to my daughter's Junior Parent Weekend at college and will not be able to work Saturday the 21st. I will lose about 9 hours of working time. I am hoping to get someone to step up and fill in for me.
5) The robot must be picked up by FedEx by 5 pm on Thursday, February 26, or we are disqualified from all tournaments and the robotics competition season is over. I can work at most maybe 3 hours Tuesday (Feb 17) , 5 hours Wednesday (Feb 18), 3 hours Thursday (Feb 19), 5 hours Friday maybe (Feb 20), none Saturday, 5 hours next Monday (Feb 23), 3 hours Tuesday (Feb 24), 5 hours Wednesday (Feb 25). Part of that will be building the shipping crate and getting the robot ready to ship on Thursday afternoon. In other words, unless we can get some folks (teacher(s) or parent(s)) to fill in for me, we don't have much time left. If we can get some folks in on Saturday in shifts, we can pick up an extra 9 hours on top of these 29 hours I can possibly attend. That gives us a potential of almost 38 hours. From what I have accomplished myself in the last 14.5 hours, we should be OK. Of course, this assumes I drop everything else in the rest of my life for the next 10 days.

[dhitchco]

Dear students,
I didn't go back to the beginning of this thread, but did re-read the postings from the past few days and I totally agree with what you all have to say about mentor over-involvement.

But....at the same time, it is also your responsibility to really talk to your mentors and PUSH THEM OUT OF THE WAY (not literally....)

In the corporate world, the leadership roles go to those employees who positively ASK FOR THE JOB. If you sit back and do nothing, the mentors will take over. But, if you step up to the plate, almost any mentor should (and must) back-away and let you succeed or fail on your own.

Carpe Diem....go for it! Especially in the off-season.

[Joe Matt]

I want to throw something out to everyone, mentors don't necessarily go to far when they do everything themselves, sometimes that is needed. What everyone should watch out for is when mentors start rigging the team to where they control everything in a student run team. The students have no say, but this is hidden as the "mentors" throw the students out into sea, have them drown, then show that this is a student run team because there is student failure, along with student "success". They forget to mention the students have no say in that success nor do the students have any choice or input into their failure too. The extreme differences in ideas of how to run a team disguises what is actually going on. I've seen this happen in a team, it's not pretty at ALL.

What we should be looking for are mentors who MENTOR. WOW! RADICAL CONCEPT! Mentors who show the students what to do, let them do work, have them follow them, but still give them enough rope to hang themselves are true mentors. Mentors who call all the shots, use the students as pawns, and hide behind the students aren't mentors, they are control freaks, cowards, and insecure people who must use a robotics team to achieve their personal ego boost, with or without the kids. Doing all the work and not mentoring the kids is just lazy.

[Lisa Rodriguez]

Many teams function different ways, I'll just say that first. As for who builds and designs the robot, it's up to the team, for mentors to take everything away from the students and do everything is WRONG, whether is be in terms or building the robot, running meetings or making travel plans, it's wrong. A mentor is there to MENTOR, not do all the work. Talk to your team leader or if it's the leader that's taking over robotics, and a group of students believe the same thing as you, talk to your parents. Parents are amazing people, they tend to have a lot of influence, not just on you. Things can always be resolved.
In terms of robots, I'll describe my team (173) to you as best I can. We have one head engineer on our team, Mr Hockaday (AMAZING MAN) who basically coordinates everything engineering. He's completely open to any suggestion you have. When the season begins, he fully encourages students to design and prototype anything that could be used for the robot, and some have in the past, but not this year. Adult mentors and other engineers do the same thing. He also presents his designs to the other engineers and other people (mainly students) who want to hear about it, waiting for a critque or even if you just want to hear it. This year, we have Mr Hockaday designing the drive train, another engineer designing the arm, a gripper designed and perfected by many. Another engineer did the pneumatics. This just HAPPENS to be the way things turn out. No students asked to design anything, he continually asked.
As someone stated before, students can't always sit down and do all the math and such to the designing process ( i am one of those kids) Not all kids that come into the program have the desire or determination to design things. Our engineers designed everything, everyone was open to critque.
Being one of the students heavily involved with build, he explained his design before, while and after we put it together. A few interested students even learned a bit about designing things.
Our robot was build by both students and mentors, by student's choice. I know that robot and how it works like the back of my hand. Ask our engineers. Just because Ididn't design it doesn't mean that my mentors over took it, it means I didn't want to design anything, and there's nothing wrong with that.

This is just my team.

Also, adults have over taken things in the past, and we (my class imparticular ) have fought for it back. And we've gotten it. We're about 50% student run, although we have a set-up to be completely student run, we don't have the student power for that yet.

As for mentors that go too far, sometimes you just need to talk to them. Our mentors constantly ask if they're taking over or doing too much. Most mentors WANT you be involved. Sometimes mentors just don't realize they're doing so much and that you wanted to do it.