**FIRST EMAIL**/Judges Information for the Team Yearbook

[Mark McLeod]

Greetings Teams:

The Judge's Information Section in TIMS is your opportunity to share valuable information about your team with FIRST. The data collected helps FIRST track important statistics such as how much it cost your team to participate in the competition, the population of the team (e.g., male/female students, number of teachers on the team) and class breakdown (freshmen, sophomore, etc..,) to name a few. This information is helpful in FIRST's efforts to procure funding.

This information (in particular the Team Essays section information) is also used by the Judges at the Regional and Championship events to learn about your team's history, goals, strengths and challenges it may have overcome. Judges take this information into consideration when making decisions about team awards, so we encourage you all to submit input! Please note we may use the robot photos you submit for the Awards Ceremonies.

To enter this data, please go to TIMS at https://my.usfirst.org/frc/tims/. Once logged in, go to the "Judge's Information" area, at the bottom of the Team Summary page, and complete the Additional Team Info, Team School Demographics, and Team Essays sections.

The Judges Information Deadline is: 11:59 pm EST February 19th. This area will be locked down at 12:00 am EST February 20th.

TIP! Your team may be working up to the last minute completing robot build, and therefore may not be able to take its robot photo until late February 19. If you complete all other parts of the Judges Information section, this will be the only item left to input!

Thank you all in advance.

Go Teams!

[Vikesrock]

I seem to remember from last year there was a word limit on the essay responses, but when I asked our Mentor in charge of TIMS he said there was no mention of a limit.

Am I recalling incorrectly, is there still a limit this year or has it changed since last year?

[Mark McLeod]

From TIMS:

Please be brief. If some answers are longer than 8 lines (40 chars/line), please make sure others are shorter, or the total text of all essay answers may not fit on your printed yearbook page the Judges will see.
...
Only 255 characters (including punctuation and carriage returns) are allowed in each box.

[Madison]

Wow. An 'essay' about "Most Competitive for Which Awards" strikes me as being tactless and tasteless.

Not a fan.

[Vikesrock]

Originally Posted by M. Krass

Wow. An 'essay' about "Most Competitive for Which Awards" strikes me as being tactless and tasteless.

Not a fan.

I would think that you would use this space to highlight robot and team components that correlate well to award criteria. IF your team has put a lot of effort into an area related o one of the awards (not necessarily because there is an award) this may also be a place to highlight that (e.g. a team focuses on developing a consistent image, they may mention that this relates to the Imagery award)

As humble as we would like to be, sometimes bragging is necessary. This is no different than a college application or resume/job application where one must talk about their qualifications and strengths.

EDIT: I'm also not a huge fan of this category and I hope that judges do not dwell too long on what is contained here or ignore the potential for a team to compete for an award not highlighted here.

P.S. Thanks for the answer Mark!

[Madison]

Originally Posted by Vikesrock

I would think that you would use this space to highlight robot components that correlate well to award criteria.

As humble as we would like to be, sometimes bragging is necessary. This is no different than a college application or resume/job application where one must talk about their qualifications and strengths.

P.S. Thanks for the answer Mark!

Last season, I would never have imagined our team would win the Engineering Inspiration Award at the Silicon Valley Regional, and had I similarly been asked to identify which awards we were in contention for, I would have omitted it. This question, thus, gives me pause that if I had done so, judges would've spent less time speaking with our students and evaluating our program and its suitability for that award. It leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

The judges are meant to have a complete understanding of the awards they must present and really ought to be capable of identifying and investigating teams that meet the criteria for each award. I see that this might be a way to make their job easier -- but having judged FLL events -- I don't think their job should be easy. It should be the hardest job at the event and I'd hate to think that a great part of someone's robot or team goes overlooked because they didn't realize it was something special.

[Rosiebotboss]

[quote=Vikesrock;694693]

As humble as we would like to be, sometimes bragging is necessary. This is no different than a college application or resume/job application where one must talk about their qualifications and strengths.

QUOTE]

If you don't "blow your own horn" once in a while, who will?


Shameless promotion: Watch our (mine and John Burns' presentation of "Dean's Homework: Charting a Political Course" for the above quoted reference.

[Vikesrock]

Originally Posted by M. Krass

Last season, I would never have imagined our team would win the Engineering Inspiration Award at the Silicon Valley Regional, and had I similarly been asked to identify which awards we were in contention for, I would have omitted it. This question, thus, gives me pause that if I had done so, judges would've spent less time speaking with our students and evaluating our program and its suitability for that award. It leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

The judges are meant to have a complete understanding of the awards they must present and really ought to be capable of identifying and investigating teams that meet the criteria for each award. I see that this might be a way to make their job easier -- but having judged FLL events -- I don't think their job should be easy. It should be the hardest job at the event and I'd hate to think that a great part of someone's robot or team goes overlooked because they didn't realize it was something special.

Well stated!

Ideally this category would allow the judges to make sure that they ask about a particular robot or team element that the team believes to be special without causing them to narrow their vision down to only elements highlighted here. Team members should already be aware of these elements and be able to talk about them without being asked directly so I think your concern regarding the use of the answers to this question is a very valid one.

I will definitely be talking to my team about what we want to put in this box, if we want to fill it at all. Unfortunately, with the existence of the box it makes me wonder what kind of attention we will get (or lack thereof) from judges by leaving it blank.

[Ryan Dognaux]

Originally Posted by M. Krass

It should be the hardest job at the event and I'd hate to think that a great part of someone's robot or team goes overlooked because they didn't realize it was something special.

I agree completely here. I thought that section is a little strange, as in if you don't put the awards down you think you should contend with, then will you even have a chance?

I guess you could just put "all of them" and be done with it.

[EricH]

Originally Posted by Ryan Dognaux

I guess you could just put "all of them" and be done with it.

That's what I was thinking. Or "whatever you think we should be in the running for."

[Amanda Morrison]

I'm with Maddy - I hesitated in answering that for our team. What do you really say without limiting the judges, even unintentionally?

What really struck a chord with me was the variety of things passed off as 'Judges' Information'. I really fail to see how many, if not most, of the questions included should matter to the judges when making their choice. A few of them even offended me, to be honest. Come on, take your pick: asking about the free/reduced lunch statistic of our schools and asking about the ethnicity and gender of our students REALLY turned my head. What could the judges possibly be using these for? What decision would be made by these criteria?

At least those are optional. Making 'team budget' a required field offended me quite a bit. Maybe I'm really off this time, but that should make no difference whatsoever for the judges. I've been on teams on both ends of the spectrum, and I don't want our finances - for whatever reason - to be a part of the process. I don't want a pity award given to my team because we struggled with our fundraising, and I don't want some judge discriminating against us because we're a little better off than another team up for the award. Like a lot of FIRST vets, I've been around the judges that are discriminatory or biased and don't want this information to factor into their decisions.

I know FIRST doesn't have it easy training the judges, and I know HQ does a pretty fantastic job considering the number of regionals and individuals involved. But it sure strikes me that someone is looking for demographic information about our team and billing it under the 'Judges' Information' headline, and that bothers me - especially if it means that the judges are seeing the results.

[Beth Sweet]

Yeah, that question has been on the list for a few years now and has always struck me funny. I always list all of the awards, except for the ones which require submitting something we didn't submit. I know what their intent is, but I do tend to wonder how the judges take it...

[synth3tk]

"I've got a million dollars and built this crappy robot"
"We only had $500,000 and built this really nice winning robot"

I'm only assuming that's what the financial information is for.

[Pat Arnold]

This explanation is on TIMS about why FIRST collects Team Demographics:

FIRST judges use demographics to evaluate teams during a competition and to support the maintenance of grants which allow FIRST to put on competitions around the world..

Note: All information is optional. However, you will stand a better chance at impressing the judges if you fill in all the information.

Note also, the terms used on this page are from the United States Census and required by some of our grantors.

I understand why the info is needed, but it seems likely to influence judges according to their personal biases. Asking teams to identify awards they feel they are most competitive for does not bother me. Selling oneself and one's achievements is often necessary, even mandatory, to garner attention for a unique approach or a job well done (As long as the information is factual).

[Libby K]

Okay. I talked to my dad about this. He is a judge at the NJ regional and Championships, and has been a part of FIRST for many years. He's been judging since the beginning, so I for one trust his opinion.

The information is strictly for statistics, and to give the judges a little bit more information on where the team comes from. At least at the events he judges, this information is used mostly to understand the resources and the area the teams come from.

Example: A team that doesn't have as many resources (i.e. no machine shop, no engineers) but still creates a robot that is a strong, robust competitor may have a better shot at, say, the "Delphi Driving Tomorrow's Technology Award". Maybe they didn't have the money to buy aluminum, so they used some other material. However they did it, they used their limited budget to create an elegant machine- on their terms. Meanwhile, another team has just as strong of a robot, but has a team of engineers design and manufacture most of the machine. They have a blank-check sponsorship from some company, and can buy whatever their heart desires (within the rules) to buy parts.

If the judges didn't know that the first team had a limited budget and no sponsors, (and possibly come from an area - say, an inner city- where science and technology are not as celebrated as we want them to be), then they would probably have picked the second team, because of their outstanding engineering and uniqueness.

However, once they see that the first team is making an equally strong and unique robot on such a limited budget, while the second team is basically having the robot made for them....They have a whole new decision to make.

That is my dad's explanation, in his words. It doesn't mean they decide the less fortunate team automatically gets it, but it makes their decision a lot harder. Also, as Pat A said, FIRST needs to put some of that information back into reports to their grantors. It also helps them to know where they need to focus some of their impact for the next year, and how they can get FIRST out to even more people. (They do their own homework, too.)

About the "Awards" section:

If you will notice, the team essay section of TIMS is optional. Teams do not have to do this. If they do not want to, they don't have to. It is a way for the judges to see how the team evaluates itself. If they consider a part of their design especially unique, we will make sure not to pass over that part of their design. However, we listen to everything they have to say at the events about their team, robot, and design.

Also, the judges never EVER act on personal bias. They have to sign a form that says they won't. For example, I'm on a team, my dad's a judge, and 1923 has not won anything (yet?). If we do win, it's because we truly deserve it, not because my dad feels bad for me. Please do not get the wrong idea about judges- they are completely impartial.

I hope this helps calm things down. I didn't like those questions when I saw them either, but after hearing the reasons explained, they didn't really bother me anymore.


EDIT::
I've been told "never say never", and that is correct. They are never supposed to, and while most do not, there are likely to be some that don't take their position as seriously as they should. I am only speaking on behalf of my father in this post.