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

[Ben Mitchell]

Originally Posted by Amanda Morrison

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?

I concur.

I think that those fields are completely irrelevant to judging. My dad was a judge at the NJ regional for three years, and there were a few judges who wanted to hand out awards based on pity and background (and pretty uniforms, and shiny metal parts). They had to be gently reminded what the purpose of having awards are about. I asked my dad about this and he said that as of 2 years ago, he never saw TIMS information passed to judges, but that doesn't mean it does not happen now or at other regionals. He hasn't been a judge for a few years now, so things may have changed. The whole "All information is optional. However, you will stand a better chance at impressing the judges if you fill in all the information." doesn't sound good, as it is implied that the information will be passed on to judges.

This is what I told the students on my team: it's better to lose every single match, and earn every point, even in vain, than it is to win every award and match without earning it. I know it's a cliché, but awards should be earned, and not given. Even asking for that information goes beyond the scope of what judges need to know. Teams should be judged by their merits, not their demographics. I don't like playing the GP card, but a part of being a professional is being judged on the quality of your work and your ethical integrity. Race and free lunch vouchers shouldn't factor into it.

I think this information is entirely irrelevant to judging. Moreover, it puts the validity of the awards in question for ALL teams. How would we know if a team's ethnic makeup factored into an award. It puts the validity of the process in doubt.

Also, a team's budget is NOT a good tie-breaker for what team is more deserving of an award. Good design and engineering doesn't need to have a big price tag. However, doing something on a small budget should NOT be a part of the awards process, not because doing something on a budget is not difficult and deserving of recognition but because the term "budget" is so vague since high-cost fabrications, materials, and labor can be 'donated' by sponsors.

Two teams doing the same thing with different amounts of money cannot be properly measured due to the reasons stated above. As a result, the figure is meaningless, and serves no purpose but to have the potential to bias judges in favor the team that claims the smaller budget. The same holds true for socio-economic information. I would want a team to win an award because they earned it, not because they come from a neighborhood where people don't drive BMW's to the country club.

I'm going to talk with my Co-advisor as to how we want to fill this out - I want my team to be judged on their merits, not their make up. If FIRST needs to know that kind of information, they can find it through the US Census, outside of TIMS.

It's interesting. now that I am advisor of a team, I am the one going through a lot of the paperwork, and there are a few form fields here and there that give me pause. These are some of them.

[synth3tk]

I don't really see what the problem is here. Fill out the forms or not. There really is nothing about it. Don't fill in the optional sections. If there is a problem, take it up with FIRST officials.

[JaneYoung]

In my office where I work at a university - we submit a budget proposal each year. Part of our presentation/proposal breaks down into percentages of the pie in several areas. Ethnicity and income are just 2 of the percentages (pieces of the pie). One could ask, why do this, aren't you providing services to all currently enrolled students? Theoretically, yes. The pie helps give us and those who approve the budget, a look at the type(s) of students we have helped over the past year. It also helps us look to see that our office is providing the outreach needed to make sure we are reaching all the students that may need our services. It's a look at the big picture.

When I first started helping our team, there were some lively discussions regarding these questions, not everyone in agreement or on the same page - students or mentors. My stance was to answer the questions to the best of our ability. It provides FIRST with a view of 418 and it also provides an opportunity for the team to look at itself and see how it is developing/progressing in different areas.

The essay regarding the awards - again, I view this as an opportunity for the judging community to take a look at us through our lens and it also gives our team an opportunity to assess ourselves, looking at the different aspects of the competition and seeing how we feel we measure up in each area. Where we feel we are strong and where we think we need some work.

This said, I understand how there can be different thoughts and opinions regarding this topic. Our team has had those differences and the discussions that have occurred as a result, have deepened our understanding of ourselves as a team and our roles in our community.

Just a couple of thoughts -
Jane

[GaryVoshol]

The demographics of the school often have little to do with the demographics of the team. A poorer school with a rich sponsor will have better resources than a team with fewer sponsor resources, even if the second school is in the richest community in the state.

[Amanda Morrison]

Originally Posted by GaryVoshol

The demographics of the school often have little to do with the demographics of the team. A poorer school with a rich sponsor will have better resources than a team with fewer sponsor resources, even if the second school is in the richest community in the state.

So then why would I want a judge making their own assumptions about our team makeup, budget, etc., and using those for or against us as a factor for giving out an award?

It was posted above and it's true to an extent - fill it out or don't. My problem is that I shouldn't be asked to give information to the judges if it's going to bias an award decision in which my team may be involved... and it seems like I'm not the only one.

[Lil' Lavery]

Whether we like it or not, for now, we have to play by the rules of the "game". Even though I strongly disagree with the reality that these have and will be used as tie-breakers in certain situations, for now we should use them to the best advantage of our teams. If we do not submit the information, the judges may or may not make assumptions, and I'd rather not take that chance. Nothing is perfect, even the judges. The essay in particular, and the statistics if utilized and "spun" effectively during your face-time with the judges, can be critical to enhancing your chances at awards. Even if your essay is something along the lines of "we hope that we are competitive for all awards because we felt that in order to get the most out of the FIRST experience we needed a well-rounded team and focused on every FIRST criteria and aspect". Everything can be put forth in a positive manner, you just have to find a way to express it.
In my experience, years where my team has had less than favorable statistics in one area, we talk about how we are striving to fix them (ie, our active recruitment of girls). We show positive trends.

That being said, none of these factors should ever weigh into an award process. The fact that they do is haunting.
Money IS an engineering design constraint, and it should be treated as one, a constraint, not as a handicap. As long as the team designed within their constraints, they should be applauded, not biased against because their constraint wasn't as tight as another team's.
I get where they're trying to go with the ethnicity and free/reduced lunch aspect (ie you're reaching out to those who might not be already exposed to such programs), but they shouldn't force the issue, or use it against the teams from less diverse areas (financially and racially).

[Libby K]

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

I get where they're trying to go with the ethnicity and free/reduced lunch aspect (ie you're reaching out to those who might not be already exposed to such programs), but they shouldn't force the issue, or use it against the teams from less diverse areas (financially and racially).

I'm pretty sure that part is only for FIRST's statistics (like you said, finding out exactly who they're reaching out to.) Considering it asks the free/reduced lunch information about the entire school and not just the team, I doubt that's used for anything but putting information together on what communities FIRST is reaching.

[dlavery]

Originally Posted by Libby K

I'm pretty sure that part is only for FIRST's statistics (like you said, finding out exactly who they're reaching out to.) Considering it asks the free/reduced lunch information about the entire school and not just the team, I doubt that's used for anything but putting information together on what communities FIRST is reaching.

If the information was just provided to, and retained by, FIRST then it would not be a problem. But the demographic and statistical information is provided to all the judges in addition to FIRST. Some (albeit certainly not all) of the judges have indicated that they have considered that information when making award decisions in the past. And that is the concern that many of us are having with providing this information.

[Tom Bottiglieri]

Originally Posted by Libby K

Considering it asks the free/reduced lunch information about the entire school and not just the team, I doubt that's used for anything but putting information together on what communities FIRST is reaching.

Isn't this already available though?

[MoeMom]

I see the problem. The info is useful to funders and planners when its aggregated, but may not tell the whole story to judges looking at one team or another. Our students come from 16 different schools and homeschools, so there really isn't an answer to school questions for us. If your budget incs. hosting regional events, public demos, travel for all students and adult mentors, it doesn't mean its easy to build a rockin' robot...of course not. It's hard work, alot of fundraising, and alot of green paint... then you still sweat out every match and admire the teams that out-score and out-play you. (We really do, BTW.)

On another note, judging is hard. I appreciate that they show up to do it anyway. Maybe there's better, more meaningful info to help them--

[Anne Shade]

More so than ever, the FIRST organization has been stressing the fact that we are out to change the culture, that this is not just about building robots. The problem is that the judges brought in to judge us on our progress in that goal of changing the culture are from the general public and therefore have very little understanding of what FIRST is all about (with a few exceptions, but they are few and very far between). The judges should not be using some of the statistics found in the yearbook page to make their decisions but many of them do because it is available to them. Many judging decisions at competitions are made based on the wrong criteria and it isn't really the judges' faults. How can we expect someone to come in for a day and a half and understand what FIRST really is as well as judge all the teams at their events based on those principles? How can these judges who don't understand even the most basic of principles of what FIRST is judge one team versus another? They do the best they can with what they know. Some look at the numbers they see on the yearbook page. Some choose the team with the coolest giveaway. Some pick based on a catchy name or logo.

What should be changed is how these judges are trained. If they have the proper resources available to them to make their difficult decisions based on the proper information, we'd all be better off.

[Chris Fultz]

Lots of good dicussion here.

I would be concerned about judges using the demographic data in their criteria, because for the most part, the students cannot influence that statistic - most of them go to school where they live and their neighborhood is their neighborhood. The students can influence what they do with the resources they have access to (plenty or minimal).

I will add that it is incredibly difficult to be a judge, even with FIRST experience. There are many teams to talk to, lots of information to process, and lots of debate. The info you provide thru TIMS can help the judges get to know you a little in advance, and then they can focus on more detailed questions when they come to your pit. If things were perfect, they would have an hour with each team - but they don't - they haev 5 minutes at the most.

Also regarding judges, the judge advisor is charged with the task of making sure judges make the right decisions and use the right criteria. A good judge advisor keeps the judging team working effectively.

And fianlly, regarding "what awards you are most competitive for" - a judge once told me "If a team does not know what awards they are competitive for, how can they expect me to figure it out?" I think the point was, you should be aware of the awards and criteria and be able to speak to them, and know what ones might apply to your team. Know your strengths and talk about them.

[Kims Robot]

Has anyone stopped to think... "Its just plastic"?

Maybe its just me, and trust me, I am so proud of my team for the awards that they have won, but I would be proud of them no matter what. Our students are learning and growing, and we are inspiring them, and to me thats far more important than if some CEO denied us a piece of plastic because we didnt have enough reduced lunches or our budget was larger than another teams.

And maybe its just me, but LIFE ISNT FAIR. There is bias and political moves everywhere. I work in an engineering company, if you piss off the wrong person, you wont climb the ladder. Its a fact of life, and as much as I want to shield my kids from it, its true. But in the end, I would hope that being happy doing what we do, doing your job in the end is more important than a title on your office door or money falling out of your pockets. FIRST is much the same for me. I care less what a judge thinks about our team than what we think of ourselves.

Take a step back and realize that its really not that big of a deal. FIRST is just trying to give some background info to the judges. If a judge walked up to your pit and asked a student what award they thought their team most wanted to win, would you duct tape their mouth shut?? If a judge was local and knew a team was from a city school and pulled their robot together on a shoestring budget, but saw in the paper that Harris spends 8 bajillion dollars on their team, would you want them to consider both teams on exactly the same level? I certainly don't. Another example is that I try to get each of my students to rise to their own capabilities. If I know they are capable of more, I push them, even if they are already doing 3 times what the next student is. I'm going to challenge them on their own levels. And I want our teams to be the same. I dont want the judges to compare our team on an equal level to a high school non sponsored team that barely scraped together $6k. I want the judges to expect that team's best out of them, just like I want the judges to expect our best out of us. Its all different levels and Im not at all offended or ashamed to give any answers asked.

I do admit when I first looked at those questions I did wonder why it mattered, but then I realized, it doesn't matter to us. If everyone is honest, I trust that the judges will make the best decisions possible. Saying that these CEO's, VP's and Marketing Directors cant be trusted to make unbiased decisions just isnt fair. We dont know them, we have no idea what they are going to base their decisions on, and we can hope that they are going to go by the criteria of the award and make the best decisions they possibly can.

Again... maybe its just me...

[Amanda Morrison]

Kim,

Having been at both ends of the team spectrum myself, I've seen bias go both ways. FIRST works very hard to provide versatile, informative materials to train a variety of volunteers. Unfortunately, FIRST cannot control one of the major factors of judging - the personality and biases of judges themselves. I, as well as many of the people who have responded in the thread outside of the MF, do realize this. What they are claiming, however, is that the information that is included in the demographics normally collected by FIRST should not go to the judges to further fuel this bias. I've seen a wide variety of judges and played that part, too; I know what a difficult decision it can be to decide between two teams. If there is an appropriate time to discuss ethnicity in the judges' room, I'd love to hear about it.

But I guess what I really feel that you've got all wrong is the notion that 'it's just a trophy'. If that is the philosophy that you truly believe, and if that selfless sentiment was shared by every team, why not get rid of the awards process (aside from the competition) altogether? Why bother having a Chairman's Award?

The truth is that the awards, much like the competition itself and especially the Chairman's, give each team something to strive towards. It is a physical embodiment of what they have worked hard to achieve. THIS is why we are competitive, this is what the kids can see that they've gotten from this program. It may take them years to realize the potential and self-confidence that they've gained, but having a trophy in front of them shows the importance of those characteristics. Simply having the ambiguous 'mission of FIRST' as your proponent for participation will only go so far. Nobody's there to half-inspire students. Nobody's there to half-engineer a robot.

To have a trophy and title to strive for is natural in FIRST - try to tell the kids who are so proud of their teams, who have their accomplishments in signatures here on ChiefDelphi and proudly wear their medals at competition, to throw them away.

Now if we're all competitive, and FIRST offers the opportunity for us to not only further their mission but also AWARDS us for doing the best job of it, why should we provide information that could potentially hurt us from receiving one of those awards? If it is truly just a trophy, ask your team to give theirs away and no longer celebrate what they've won. Even further, tell them never to strive to receive one again.

There's a reason why some of the most recognized, influential, and oft-emulated teams in FIRST (and by FIRST) have a full trophy rack in their school.

For everyone out there - don't be ashamed of your trophies. You worked hard for them. They are YOURS. They are your hard work, your lessons learned, your enthusiasm and spirit. They are coveted by many and received by few. Strive to earn them. Work hard to get them honestly. Put your accomplishments in the signatures of this forum and show everyone what you're made of. But even more, don't let the disappointment of not having one get to you, work that much harder to get it.

And if a judge comes into your pit and asks you what award you feel you should get, show them what sets you apart - but tell them the awards are for them to decide.

[Carol]

I think this thread is moving away from the original question and into the
area of judge bashing. Judges are volunteers, using their vacation time and
paying their own way to events. They aren't perfect, but they are trying
to do the best job they can. And it is a difficult job. Statements such as
"Many judging decisions at competitions are made based on the wrong
criteria" aren't based on fact and certainly don't show the spirit of
GP.

If you feel that your team was unfairly denied an award, remember that you probably don't know enough about all the teams to make that judgment, congratulate the winners, move on to the next challenge, and try harder next time. But don't badmouth the judges.