Video Required for Chairmans

[Chris Fultz]

Originally Posted by Beth Sweet

Mike, I hate to call you old but this is going to be my 7th year in FIRST, and as long as I've been in FIRST, we've never submitted Chairman's videos...

In 2001 and 2002 you could still present in a video format, and it may have been a requirement. you also submitted by mail

As more teams began submitting, the format became a standard 4 text pages to make it easier on the judges to read, easier to submit on line, and made the content more important than the presentation format. Too many submissions could not be opened and read by the judges.

I think 2004 was the last time you could submit a "non-texted" paper.

[Andrew Schreiber]

Originally Posted by Beth Sweet

I respectfully disagree. There are a lot of teams with limited money who are doing some great things. Especially the innercity teams, the ones who are not getting STEM as much in school and really need FIRST, those teams are being put at a major disadvantage.

As a mentor on one of those inner city teams, I can second this notion. This year alone we, as a team,will be running Michigan's only Vex tournament, had 100% of our team working at the rookie regional, ended up being short mentor wise because we all worked Kettering Kickoff, and we also had 75% of our team and all but 2 mentor (who were unavailable) show up to help at the FLL tournament. But for all that work we don't own a video camera as a team. One of my fellow college students has brought in her personal camera to use. So, to say that just because a team is struggling and doesn't have the resources as some of the "higher caliber" and therefore shouldn't be considered for CA is outright wrong.

The above being said, I like this idea. I hope it will allow us to get some new kids out of interest in making videos.

[waialua359]

Originally Posted by OZ_341

I agree with many of the concerns addressed here. But also have an additional concern.

I would like to know what is the very specific purpose of the video. If it is not for the purpose of judging, then please let us know what it is being used for. This was not detailed for the teams.
How will this mandatory video be used (or not used) is very important. Are we going to make a video that will not be judged or viewed? Will it just go into storage somewhere? Will they display all of the Chairman's videos?

We are a team that is strong on video, but it boils down to resources and where they should be placed.

We were just getting ready to make a major update of our "Team in a Box" DVD. An update that will take months and the better portion of our media team, if we do it with care. Should we scale down a project that will help other teams and redirect resources to the Chairman's Video? We would have to do this to qualify.

Which ever way we decide to go, our kids are going to put their hearts into it. I guess I have a hard time directing kids to put their hearts into a project that may not have a defined purpose other than to guarantee entry into a contest. More than anything else, the student that make this video wants someone to watch and enjoy their work. (plain and simple)

So I would love to see some clarity on the purpose of the video. This clarity will help us to direct the energy of our most valuable resource, our students.

This is a great point. At this point, I hope the clarification comes soon as build season will take up the majority of a team's time. I am sure team's will be able to adjust to whatever the refined objectives are, but still, with more time to plan and prepare, the videos can only be better.
On an additional note, I am sure it will have a great impact on your program directives, which was evident as we stood side by side in the pits at CMP '08.

[ebarker]

My 2 cents on why the video....

Generally speaking, engineer types are very poor communicators. If you can't communicate, you can't make the business case for you project, you can't get funding, you can't sell the product, etc.

The inability to communicate effectively is but one of the reasons techie types have an 'image' problem, which not coincidentially FIRST is trying to solve.

The inability to communicate impacts team recruitment, team growth, and team sustainability. It impacts team funding, and slows our task of cultural and education change.

Applying for the awards, like the Chairman's, Woodie Flowers, and others, and the NASA grants, are exercises in communications.

Every year Dave will remark about how people cannot communicate and can't read the instructions for the NASA grants. Consequently they lose a bunch of money.

Teams potentially miss growth and sustainability opportunities because they cannot communicate the excitement, the importance, and the opportunities that participation in FIRST brings.

As I stated before, you don't need a video camera. It has been suggested by pros that beginning filmmakers start by using a pc and a series of static photos and voice over work to do their pieces. There is a lot of thought an creativity that can go into that.

I think the target audience should be primarly non-FIRST'ers. It is the type of thing you might show as a PSA, or during a presentation to a community group. Anyone that might be involved in starting or sustaining a team. The goal certainly should not be teams simply communicating to each other because that is of very limited value, relative to showing it to an outside audience.

Very simply, I think FIRST is nudging folks toward learning how to communicate, because when a team learns how to do that, a whole world of possibilities opens its doors.

lights, camera, <clap>, action

[Taylor]

I believe there will be a camera in the KOP this year. I've seen it on 1714's betatest bot.

Seriously, I do think they will include a DVD-capable video camera in the KOP. One of the requirements of the NASA grant is for each team to have a CA submission; I would think a rookie team has enough to do without going shopping for a video camera.

[JaneYoung]

Many times over the years, I have noticed teams working very hard at fundraisers, demos, and outreach events with very few people thinking to bring a camera. The work is being done but it is not being documented. When teams develop their list of important roles on the team, historian should be on this list as well as team photographer.

It is true that this is an added aspect that will have to be given thought, time, and resources - but it can be looked at as an opportunity to learn to document the team/activities on film.

[rees2001]

Originally Posted by JaneYoung

Many times over the years, I have noticed teams working very hard at fundraisers, demos, and outreach events with very few people thinking to bring a camera. The work is being done but it is not being documented. When teams develop their list of important roles on the team, historian should be on this list as well as team photographer.

It is true that this is an added aspect that will have to be given thought, time, and resources - but it can be looked at as an opportunity to learn to document the team/activities on film.

This is the exact reason they should have hinted to teams that this may be coming a long time ago. (At Championship) Not all teams think to document & shouldn't be graded on something they didn't know they were going to be tested on. I know FIRST has indicated that it is a requirement but not being assessed. But that doesn't mean that the judges will see it that way.

[Andrew Schreiber]

Originally Posted by JaneYoung

Many times over the years, I have noticed teams working very hard at fundraisers, demos, and outreach events with very few people thinking to bring a camera. The work is being done but it is not being documented. When teams develop their list of important roles on the team, historian should be on this list as well as team photographer.

It is true that this is an added aspect that will have to be given thought, time, and resources - but it can be looked at as an opportunity to learn to document the team/activities on film.

Sometimes the man power isnt there, I know at Kettering Kickoff this year we had to recruit a student from the university just so we had someone to take pictures. The upside to this, we gained a new college student out of the deal.

[Alivia]

Originally Posted by JaneYoung

When teams develop their list of important roles on the team, historian should be on this list as well as team photographer.

I couldn't agree with you more on that one.
I've never been much of an engineer or science person...I don't program or drive robots.
But I am absolutely infatuated with the FIRST program.
How is that possible? I came from a team that had an outstanding foundation of mentors working on film crew and documentation. I found my niche taking pictures and videos, making slideshows and other videos for the team throughout my tenure.
Now, I'm at Ball State University majoring in photojournalism. I would NEVER have even thought of this major if it weren't for Team Hammond having a film crew. I also brought my skills to Team 1720 (my current team), who didn't have a film crew, getting more students interested as they learn exactly what documentation of a team entails.
Perhaps this is FIRST's attempt to bring even more people into the program who might not have been interested before.
Having a film crew is extraordinarily important. You not only get to see how your team has grown over the years, but you also get to preserve memories that will last a lifetime.

[Madison]

Originally Posted by Rich Kressly

Alright, I've been reading and rereading this for a few days now and ...

...color me totally stupid on this one. I think corresponding video is a GREAT idea for any team that has this inclination and/or has the time and resources to provide such a product, but making this a requirement is totally nonsense IMHO. Unless I'm reading this wrong, and I totally hope and pray I am, this will ultimately decrease the number of judged/completed CA entries submitted from FRC teams. If I'm not reading this wrong, my team will not be eligible to win a Chairman's Award unless we submit a video in wide screen format on DVD, correct?

I'm interested in seeing how this plays out, if the rule remains unchanged.

We are fortunate to have been awarded a RCA last season. The students that were involved in making that happen spent far too much time and energy doing so -- and so did I -- and adding to that workload will put them over the edge. Some of those students have come to the mentors on our team and told us that they're completed disinterested in participating in the RCA process again. They'd rather just build a good robot and have fun on the field. I'm inclined to agree with them.

[waialua359]

Putting in an effort to compete for a CA does indeed take time. More like a committee of students, teachers and mentors that focus on documenting all phases of a team. But like you said, at some point, it takes away from the focus on construction and engineering learning experiences, especially if a team is small.
I think the effort is worth it though, especially if a group of judges recognize you for your efforts with the RCA.

[RIT_FIRST_LH]

I would say it was a little wrong of FIRST to wait until now to announce this new addition to such a major award, because teams could have documented a lot more of what they did.

However that is the short term, In the long term it will be a great way for FIRST to expand it's reach into getting a more diverse group of students to get involved with the program.

Movements like this drives both right brain and left brain people to work side by side a lot closer resulting in a much better end product.

[Renee Becker-Blau]

To some extent the video could make documenting the team's history a lot easier. For new members they could watch the video and get a feel of what their team is all about, for old members you can easily remember each year's achievements. Sense the video is required but not used in the judging process for chairmans, is FIRST using this to see how it's teams are running and how to help them or just for documentation purposes?

-On a side note, YAY for all the crazy media people!

[Rich Kressly]

Originally Posted by Libby K

Videos were a long while back. Before the teams were re-numbered.

I know this because at FIRST Place this summer, I was working as a camp counselor, and took on a separate project of my own- since I was living in NH for a month without knowing too many people in the area, I had free time.

That project was looking through all the old Chairman's videos that were stored at FIRST Place and numbering them to the correct teams so that FIRST can make copies, contact the teams, and see if they wanted them back for their own team history. Unfortunately, a great number of them were damaged from flooding a few years back, and a lot of great FIRST history was destroyed, but there are still a few '03 totes full to the brim with Chairman's Award videos.

03? Really? That was the first year that the submission was four pages and nothing else. I was with 103 that year and was fortunate enough to be with the winning team. We produced no (chairman's) video that year. Maybe they were from teams that did the video as an "extra" and left it with judges?

[Wetzel]

Originally Posted by Libby K

Videos were a long while back. Before the teams were re-numbered.

I'm with Bike Mike. 116 submitted a video chairmans award sometime from 2000-2002. I don't have a copy with me anymore though. I do have the snazzy pdf from 2003 with pictures in the text.

Telling us we need a video is one thing, it's another to tell us that we have to turn one in, but it doesn't count. That will just result in a rush job on a low priority, check the box project.

Wetzel

Edit: Rich, I think she meant that they loaded the 2003 totes (as in game pieces) with older videos after flooding.