FiM is NOT FIRST

[colin340]

Originally Posted by GaryVoshol

I can see the special category of you-can-come-without-your-robot for some teams who win one of the culture awards but don't do much on the field. They should be recognized just as much as the ones who build great robots. The recognition will be done in a different manner. The plan I heard was to have them put up displays in the entrance area at Ypsi. But it would be better still if they were allowed to compete because the culture-changing award they won generated enough points to get them entrance to the whole tournament. I'm afraid there might still be a team or two that wins some award(s) but wouldn't get enough points - in which case, they would truly be very lonely out there in that lobby with their display. I'm not sure how that can be resolved.

the students as well as the mentors on chairmans teams put in way to much time and energy to be reward with getting to set up a display.

on an other note i love the idea of chairmans teams getting a grade in points
but if you have ever judged a First comp(FLL FRC FTC) it's really hard to pick the best team let alone hand out a certain # of Points

[Andrew Schreiber]

FiM is still FIRST. While their current system may be a little flawed we have to realize, this is a trial run. Nothing about these rules is set in stone. As long as FiM runs as transparently as possible I have a feeling that things will work out. Their stated goal is,

To make Dean Kamen's vision of FIRST a reality in Michigan through the durable establishment of a FIRST Robotics Competition team in every high school.
To foster early interest in the FIRST Robotics Competition through FIRST Lego League in the middle schools.

FiM comes at a time when the economic hardships being felt by everyone are at their worst. This is an attempt at bringing down the high cost of entry to FIRST. I applaud their attempt and think that they do have FIRST's best interests in mind. I ask that we let this try to help because otherwise FIRST will become unsustainable in the smaller or poorer schools where it is needed most.

Beth, if someone from FiM told you that your comments would be ignored I am VERY glad you mentioned it.

[Herodotus]

I don't see how FiM changes the values of FIRST at all. Values aren't really dictated, they are created by everyone involved. If students are still being inspired and are inspiring others then the fundamental values of FIRST are still there, and so long as the older members of the teams are willing to pass those values down then GP will live forever. FIRST could become a battle competition and STILL retain GP if the the older members are willing to teach it.

The point system might make it a little bit tougher to encourage students to be GP, but that remains to be seen. If you don't want the values of FIRST to change then don't let them. Get your team together, go out there, compete your hearts out, and inspire people. Do that and GP will not die. Everyone makes the competitions what they are, so make them the best they can be.

[Akash Rastogi]

Originally Posted by Herodotus

I don't see how FiM changes the values of FIRST at all. Values aren't really dictated, they are created by everyone involved. If students are still being inspired and are inspiring others then the fundamental values of FIRST are still there, and so long as the older members of the teams are willing to pass those values down then GP will live forever. FIRST could become a battle competition and STILL retain GP if the the older members are willing to teach it.

YES! Thank you for saying what I meant in a clear way.

[Justin Montois]

Originally Posted by Herodotus

The point system might make it a little bit tougher to encourage students to be GP, but that remains to be seen. If you don't want the values of FIRST to change then don't let them. Get your team together, go out there, compete your hearts out, and inspire people. Do that and GP will not die. Everyone makes the competitions what they are, so make them the best they can be.

Why do anything to make it tougher to encourage students to be GP. The Chairman's Award, Engineering Inspiration Rookie Inspiration and Rookie All-Star shouldn't be 0 pts, 5 pts or 1,000. They should be an automatic ticket to the State Championship.

Under the current system, I could have a Robot that does not really function that well at all, but if my team wins the Chairman's Award or other Culture Changing Award, were going to the Championship. I don't see why FiM decided they should change that at all.

If a team wins the CA, EI, RA or RI they should be invited to the State Championship. Done Deal. I don't care what their robot does.

[EricH]

Originally Posted by Paul Copioli

For those of you not in favor of FiM, I just ask that you be careful with what you say. Unknowingly, some of you have called me, and many like me, not GP. I ask that you take a moment and think before you write.

Maybe FiM won't work. Maybe it will. I can guarantee you that the numbers for point values probably should be tweaked. There is nothing stopping that.

It is funny to me that many of you complaining are not even from Michigan. Why can't you let it play out and we can debate then. While there may be many that will force the issue after the season, there are many more of us that will take a factual look at how it actually worked. Believe it or not, the evil FiM folks do care about GP (there are over 5 WFFA winners that are part of FiM) and about teams. Retention is at the top of the priority list.

Paul, if something is going to affect us, or has the potential to affect us, we want to know about it. We want to make it as good as it can be before it gets to us. I'm certain you would too.

Also, the guarantee that the point values should be tweaked-- is that supposed to read "We'll tweak them" or "We think they should be tweaked, but it's not going to happen this year"? Those are the two readings that I can see, and it could go a long way towards slowing down this thread if you clarified which you meant.

If the point values that Beth posted are the true, final ones, what does that say about FiM? If FIRST decided to copy the FiM structure for Championship qualifications, what would that say about FIRST? Actions speak louder than words.

Here is my honest opinion: FiM has the right idea with regards to competition structure and prices. I don't think anyone can argue that until after the season. However, here is what can be argued:

• The point structure to get to the State Championship. Right now, it says one thing. Most of FIRST would rather it said something different.
• The "secrecy" surrounding how the concept came up and was introduced. That's in the past now, but if this concept spreads, it'll be an open question once again.
• The apparent unresponsiveness of FiM. What would happen if FIRST chose to appear as unresponsive as FiM appears to be now? I bet that a lot of people would be very upset.

Now, I'm going to assume that the Michigan pilot works out and is continued. Right now, I think that's a reasonable assumption. AS OF NOW, I would like to see the point values change. I may see something later to change, but I hope not.

[Karthik]

Originally Posted by EricH

The point structure to get to the State Championship. Right now, it says one thing. Most of FIRST would rather it said something different.

Are you sure that "most" of FIRST would rather a different point system? The posts of a few angry CD users don't constitute a true random sampling of the community. I for one think the point system is by far the best change being created by FiM. For years I have lobbied for FIRST to move to a qualification only Championship Event, and I'm glad Michigan is piloting this point system.

People keep talking about how FiM doesn't value gracious professionalism because their point system only awards points for technical awards. If we're seriously in a position where we need to hand out points to encourage GP, I think we all need to step back and re-evaluate this entire program. I mean, are teams submitting for Chairman's only because it offers a spot in Atlanta? Are teams only being safe to get some tokens? Are teams only cheering loudly for a chance at a trophy?

I see FiM's point system as a way of making sure the best robots move on to the robot competition at the State Championship. Similarly, the best Chairman's submissions will move on to the Chairman's competition at the State Championship. It makes sense to me.

Just looking at the numbers and doing some simple analysis based on past trends among CA contenders, I would be shocked if all 7 district CA winners don't end up being among the 66 robot competitors at the MI State Championship. As Ike pointed out, you basically only need to just make the elims at both districts to move on to the State Championship. (I could make some more detailed comments and pointed analysis here, but I'm afraid of an angry mob of "It's not about the robot" fanatics showing up at my doorstep with flaming torches.)

I've been to many non-FIRST events, with a small minority of FIRSTers. It's amazing to see how quickly they can spread gracious professionalism to others in a short period of time. Amazingly enough, these events don't actually have points being awarded for being graciously professional!!! Shocking, I know...

As long as the participants in FiM continue to practice and embody gracious professionalism, there's no reason to expect the sky to fall on our program. A point system that is more focused on robot building is not going to make FIRST spontaneously combust.

[Beth Sweet]

When you're at work, how does your boss encourage certain behavior? If the known behavior to get a promotion or a bonus is to make the product the prettiest shade of green out there, will employees work to improve the product? No, they will make the product the prettiest shade of green, because that is where the benefits lie.

When you are raising a child, you praise them for the behavior that you want, and scold them for poor behavior. While they are growing, they need your praise to continue that good behavior, but when they are grown, they've learned the lesson that praise encouraged. You must provide the incentive for the action that you wish to be taken.

The same situation is here: you will get what you ask for. If FiM asks for nothing but robots, then they will get nothing but robots. Does that mean that people will work their rear ends off just for a trophy? You betcha. But as they do it, will they pick it up as a lifestyle which they will continue long after the quest for the trophy is over? Of course they will. We are human beings. We are encouraged by an end, and learn from the means.

In order to encourage the means, we must provide an end. This is not being done adequately.

Does this mean that some teams will be doing Chairman's style activities just for a trophy? I believe that if you talk to any team that has won the Chairman's award, they will likely tell you that the original reason that they started doing Chairman's actions because there was the incentive of an award, which promoted those activities.

[EricH]

Karthik, Beth answered for me. It's not the technical awards and the nontechnical, non-culture change awards that are the problem, it's the culture change awards in relation to the other awards. If the way to cause an action is to create an award for it, so be it. If you take away the benefits of an action, will some people still do the action? Sure. But how many will now start?

[Karthik]

Originally Posted by Beth Sweet

I believe that if you talk to any team that has won the Chairman's award, they will likely tell you that the original reason that they started doing Chairman's actions because there was the incentive of an award, which promoted those activities.

Team 1114 most definitely did not start doing Chairman's type activities to win the award. We started new teams in our area because we loved FIRST, and wanted to spread it in our region. We provide resources to the community because we like helping people. We would have done these things with or without the award. The only things we do solely because of the award is prepare an essay and presentation.

Originally Posted by EricH

It's not the technical awards and the nontechnical, non-culture change awards that are the problem, it's the culture change awards in relation to the other awards. If the way to cause an action is to create an award for it, so be it. If you take away the benefits of an action, will some people still do the action? Sure. But how many will now start?

I hear what you're saying Eric, and it does make sense. But the culture change awards still exist. Yes, they aren't worth as much when it comes to the point system, but they are still recognized and valued by the community. (As this thread clearly shows) My point is that the lack of points directed towards those awards, is not going to make people stop valuing those awards. As it stands in the non MI-FRC world, RAS, CA, EI are all rewarded with a Championship spot. Has this diminished the value of the Quality or Entrepreneurship Award? Have we seen Team Spirit disappear because there was no added bonus to the award?

People keep making it seem like Michigan as scrapped the Chairman's Award. This is not the case at all. The award exists, and will send three deserving teams to the World Championship in Michigan. For those who do need the incentive of an award to pursue this goal, plenty of incentive still exists.

[EricH]

Originally Posted by Karthik

I hear what you're saying Eric, and it does make sense. But the culture change awards still exist. Yes, they aren't worth as much when it comes to the point system, but they are still recognized and valued by the community. (As this thread clearly shows) My point is that the lack of points directed towards those awards, is not going to make people stop valuing those awards. As it stands in the non MI-FRC world, RAS, CA, EI are all rewarded with a Championship spot. Has this diminished the value of the Quality or Entrepreneurship Award? Have we seen Team Spirit disappear because there was no added bonus to the award?

Correct. They exist--but does the Regional CA (as opposed to the district CA) send a team to the Championship without the robot? Yes, if the team chooses not to send the robot. That doesn't happen. Does the District CA do that? Not necessarily.

Back in about 2003-2004, FRC had a points system to go to the Championship. Each award had a given point value. If you had more than x points, you could go. I might suggest that FiM look at those for an example. I don't remember complaints about the system, but I wasn't paying much attention at the time.

Karthik, the competitors value the awards. Does FiM? I assume so, because all the awards have a point value. Does FiM's valuation match the FRC valuation, or the competitors' valuation? It appears that the latter is not true. I don't know about the former. I would hope that I'm wrong, but as I said before, actions speak louder than words.

[Steve W]

I would like to disagree with a few points given here. If FIRST becomes a robot competition without the GP based awards, it will slowly become like Robot Wars and lose many of the teams competing. If it becomes a GP oriented program then were is the competition that enlightens the individual or the competitive spark.

FIRST is as good as it is because of the marriage of the two ideals. One without the other lowers the quality of the teams and the events. I was drawn to FIRST because when I went through the pit area students reached out and brought me to their robot. Some of these robots did not work well BUT the kids were enthused. In those same pits were students from other teams helping the less fortunate. If GP was not encouraged (for awards or not) I would have seen students making their robot the best it could be to beat all on-comers.

If FIRST deteriorates to a robot competition I am sure that there will be many who will reconsider their time commitments. I know that I would rather spend my time helping others with their needs than just join another game to see if I can be better than others.

People you must consider the reasoning behind the action. FiM may be an extension of FIRST or it might be an offshoot of FIRST were some want a robots only competition. Time will tell.

I know that most if not all Chairmans Award winners did a lot of their work because of the award. They started something for one reason and yet continued for another. You see once the ideals of FIRST are implanted in a team it then becomes a natural way of life. The award isn't everything but it is something, otherwise why do the teams spend so much time and energy on it when that time could be used somewhere else?

[Rich Kressly]

Indeed, FiM is not FIRST, FRC isn't all of FIRST either...

For the life of me, in all of this discussion in multiple threads, one thing on both sides of the coin bothers me a little ... ok it bothers me a lot. Why do so many people here equate FIRST with the FRC program only and use these two terms like they are interchangeable?

Yes, FRC is the flagship program, yes the big robot challenge not only excites the students, but gets the adults to notice more too. Yes, there are elements of it that will most likely always captivate me. However, FRC (even in the MI district model), is still by far the most expensive robotics competition any high school can ever get involved in. Why, oh why, is so much energy being put toward something that will be so hard to sustain over time and is most likely not feasible in 49 other states any time soon?

I will remain skeptical about the REAL goal here. Creating as many FRC teams as possible is NOT exactly the same thing as growing FIRST and seeing FIRST in as many schools as possible, thereby addressing critical needs in STEM in our great nation and others.

Once upon a time, when Dean Kamen founded FIRST, there was only FRC to promote and grow. I suppose there are those folks, who have been on board that long, that still think the same way - but why?

If you REALLY want to affect lasting culture change, you need to start with FIRST's youngest program - Jr. FLL and grow these kids up in the notion. A senior on my team organized and executed an entire Jr. FLL Expo, complete with 15 brand new teams. I ran another one using all of her information, etc for another twelve teams. Do any of you have any idea how comparatively EASY and INEXPENSIVE this is to do? It's easier than developing even one FRC team and involves many, many more students. Some of our new recruits are already on board for ramping up to FLL.

If you REALLY want an affordable, accessible entry point for high schools then you need to utilize intermediate programs like FTC and VEX - where you can not only grow teams more efficiently, but you can integrate meaningful STEM curricula in schools that will reach many more students than just the few on a competition team. And please, spare me the thought that FRC is the ONLY way to "inspire" students. Remember that senior that created 15 Jr. FLL teams and an event out of nowhere? She's never been on our FRC roster nor has she ever touched or operated an FRC robot. She's spent three years on our FTC/VEX team and has participated in our TSA chapter. There are MANY ways to inspire and reach a student and every student is different. Every time I've asked for input from MI folks on these boards how the FTC/intermediate program fits into their FIRST growth plan the conversation goes dead silent - why?

If you REALLY are concerned about our future and our culture and positively affecting as many students as possible, it's time for many of us to take off the blinders and stop worrying about any single logo or program - only.

Paul, I'm very happy for your team and many like yours in MI who are saving money this year, I really am. And I honestly applaud the Jim Zondag's of the world who have poured their heart and soul into an effort that makes sense for them. However, in the grand scheme of things, I'm concerned about the aggregate "drain" on some of our best volunteers and teams and I'm concerned that when the FiM venture is a success (because on some levels I'm entirely sure it will be) what becomes of the rest of our teams, states, and regions.

As always, I could be dead wrong, but I feel strongly enough that I would urge all of us to think about this globally; especially those who read here and have a chance to affect policy.

namaste,
Rich