CA 3 student reps

[Anne Shade]

As I read through the manual I noticed the following:

Interviews are limited to ten (10) minutes with not more than three (3) student team members to best represent them. The team selects these representatives.

I'm surprised that this has not been discussed yet so I decided to bring the topic up. What do you think? Is this a good/bad change?

[Ellery]

Hi Anne,

Our team position has always been to have the students represent the team since they are ultimately the outcome of the program they experienced. If the program has met its goals then the students should ultimately reflect the team as a whole.

The representatives would be up your focus, seniority, diversity, etc.

My 2 cents

[Dan Zollman]

I'm on a rookie team, so I haven't done this before...what was the change from last year?

Should the three reps all be people who did technical work with the robot? Should they each have a different role on the team, such as building, public relations, and CAD?

[Beth Sweet]

Originally Posted by worldbringer

I'm on a rookie team, so I haven't done this before...what was the change from last year?

Should the three reps all be people who did technical work with the robot? Should they each have a different role on the team, such as building, public relations, and CAD?

In the past it has been 3 team members which could include any combination of students and adults. Thank you for pointing this out Anne, now I really will have to require the last student to be on the Chairman's team.

As to the people in there, if you don't already, I would suggest that you form a Chairmans team world. These are going to be your people who write the submission and know the information researched like the back of thier hands. The judges in Chairmans aren't going to care that your robot is being held together by a so-and-so weld, but they are going to care how your team is spreading the word of FIRST throughout your community.

As a rookie team, you will not be given the opportunity for presentation for another year, however putting together a submission and handing it to the judges would be a fantastic idea. You can find information on the CA in section 9 of the manual, I want to say pages 16 and onward.

[J Flex 188]

I am not sure I fully agree with this rule, mostly owing to the fact that our team has been around for quite some time now and has graduated a considerable number of alumni that have come back and helped out. In particular, our on-field coach went on to found his own company (which acutally employed me this past summer) bringing the FIRST experience full circle. In the past he has done award presentations with our team, but we always chose to have him in a supporting role, answer questions as opposed to presenting significant ideas. I think any team that submits a chairmans award understands that the emphasis should be on the development of the team and of the students that are currently on the team. Having an adult member present during the presentation does not take away from this if they understand what the nature of their presence should be in this sense.

I understand the motivation behind the rule and I do think that it is a good thing to place greater power and emphasis in the hands of the students for the chairmans award, but I believe this was the wrong way to go about it.

[EricRobodox]

I think its great. I think that it should be restricted to only kids as well, as FIRST is designed for us. If an engineer or any adult for that matter knows the robot more than the students do, i think thats a problem and the message of FIRST is not being spread.

But interviewing is great, just i think it should not have a time limit.

[Beth Sweet]

Originally Posted by EricRobodox

I think its great. I think that it should be restricted to only kids as well, as FIRST is designed for us. If an engineer or any adult for that matter knows the robot more than the students do, i think thats a problem and the message of FIRST is not being spread.

But interviewing is great, just i think it should not have a time limit.

Once again I would like to refresh that the Chairman's Award is not about the robot at all, but rather about your team and why it is the team every other team in the competition should emulate. This also includes the word continued a lot. We would hope that each student only stays in high school for 4 years and thus only has firsthand knowledge of 4 years worth of work, maximum. This is why mentors have been allowed in the past, most groups that I know that sent in a mentor sent them solely for a historical reference. This reference is now denied and hopefully the judges place their questions accordingly.

[lilszek24]

we've always only used students in chairmans interview, when i first came in as a freshman, i took hold of the teams chairmans submission, and although they said you could have adults go in the interview, i always thought it would look better if you choose 3 noligable students to go in.

but i think this change is for the better...students should be the one in meeting. so they have a chance to lead, instead of a teacher going in and walking them thru the interview

[phrontist]

I'm appalled that non-students could have done it in the past... I was completely unaware of this.

[Mike Schroeder]

I think that this is a good change, FIRST has gotten to the point where it is almost real world preperation, and since FIRST is about the students, teachers or other mentors do not need to prepare for a life of presentations.... (except maybe for me, i have no public speaking abilites) Kudos FIRST i like it

[Lil' Lavery]

I'm indifferent on this rule. I can see both sides of the picture.
My freshman year I was one of the three students that presented the award. Last year, I did not present, but we used two students and an adult.
Adults and mentors are very much a part of a FIRST team, and the depth of their involvement is set on a team's individual priorities and structure. Just about every model is acceptable, from where the students are essentially apprentices to where the engineers just keep the students from killing themselves. While 116 has chosen to be somewhere in the middle all 11 years, I can respect either end of the spectrum.
On the other hand, FIRST is ment to inspire students and create a new breed of people interested in science and technology.

[J Flex 188]

All it takes is reading of the rules Not knowing that is better than not knowing there was a 30 point penalty for loading zone interference last year though

Originally Posted by phrontist

I'm appalled that non-students could have done it in the past... I was completely unaware of this.

[Not2B]

I didn't know that non-students could go in to the interview in the past. So I guess it doesn't matter to us.

Besides, I'd be too busy eating nachos and watching matches to remember to go to the interview... That's for students to worry about.

[aallen88]

I think that rule is a good change for FIRST. Mentors know the history better than anyone on the team, but what's stopping the student's from learning about the history too?

I know my mentor has drilled in to my head...

We started 9 (10 now) years ago, in the back of a woodshop with no heat, etc. etc. ...

[ctshirk7]

for us its always been students the judges seem to like that more and it gives us a chance to experience a grilling interview