|
|
|
![]() |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Correlation, Causation, and the Isolation of variables in FiM District Structure
Sean, thank you for looking into this. Great Thread
I am going to look at this slightly different. If you look at the top of the curve, you won't see a ton of difference. Hot is still Hot and The Chickens are still the Chickens. The are both awesome and will likely continue to be that way as long as they keep putting in the great efforts that they do (keep it up guys). One of the most important parts of the curve though is the bottom end. By this I mean the teams that only do 1 event and then dissappear or continually only do 1 event and never seem to improve. You won't hear a lot fo saber rattling from these guys as typically they are too busy trying to get a bot to drive straight. It has been brought up many times that FRC has a horrible attrition rate. This I have been told is one of the main goals of FiM. Teams that have trouble at the first event have 12 matches to get their stuff sorted out, and then most importantly another event to go to where they can try again. One solid metric you will find is that those that play more do better. What is meant by that is there are few that continuously play at the Championship level (elims at Championship) that only go to 1 regional. Most of the teams competing in the elims go to 2 events and some even do 3 before Nationals. Line up the usual suspects and check. 71, 1114, 2056, 217, 33, 67, 254, 233, ..... You will see that one common thread is multiple events (there are other threads). This is more than just the extra stick time (that does help), it is the opportunity to try different things, learn, and grow. I just got off the phone with a Rookie team that most years would have done 1 event. They didn't get their auto mode going until the 5th match at their first event (death this year), but once they got going, they were good enough to get picked and played in the elims. They also made it to the State Championship. Because of their success, they are going to do off season events! This team most years would have had very little success and then folded into another high number dissappearing statistic. Instead, I have high hopes for their future. To those focusing on the top of the curve, listen to Lil' Lavery, there is nothing new there. Spotting Champions is easy. They have big shiny metals around their necks and are grinning from ear to ear while standing on podiums. Focus in on the other parts of the curve. I saw a lot more smiles and success from Rookies and young teams that hadn't quite figured out how to turn an OK season into a great one. I saw teams that have been mid pack really blosom when given the same chance at doing multiple events that bigger budget teams have. I am not sure how to measure this other than number of matches and looking at possibly OPR shifts between events, and awards records. The other "evidence" I have is purely anecdotal which does have value, but often is skewed. In a couple of years, retention data should have statistical significance (though the economy would likely skew some of that too), but I can't see the rest of FRC being happy with a FiM Only Pilot that goes on for several years.... ======================================= I did have an interesting idea of measuring some of this. I am just not good enough at programming. If someone could go on TBA or FIRST records and show the amount of matches and Elim matches for teams over the last 3 years in MI, I think this might show some good data. It should show a big birth of new teams getting to play in Elims and getting more matches. Personally I feel that is a good thing towards sustainable growth. Last edited by IKE : 25-04-2009 at 19:24. |
|
#2
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Correlation, Causation, and the Isolation of variables in FiM District Structure
At the risk of sounding like a broken record...
If it's not about the robots™, how can examining the success of teams on the field -- at any end of the curve -- be used as an accurate, meaningful metric of the program's success? |
|
#3
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Correlation, Causation, and the Isolation of variables in FiM District Structure
Quote:
Thinking about it though, there are some things that could be measured. Some great, "not entirely about the robot" metrics. 7 teams were recognized as District Chairman's award recipients instead of 3 from the regionals before. 3 went on from the State Championship to "The Championship" A ton of Woody Flower Nominees were recognized at every event (regionals could do this too). I don't know the official count, but I believe it to be on the order of 30 or more mentors that got recognized (it could have been a lot more). 7 - Imagery, Spirit, Rookie Allstars...... These were pretty good "not about the robot" boosts for FiM. While not everything can be measured with Lucite or Medals, many things can be. For those that can't, please talk with those teams. Most that I have talked to really like the additional playing time, and the closer events. The second event was a huge thing to a lot of teams I talked to. |
|
#4
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Correlation, Causation, and the Isolation of variables in FiM District Structure
Quote:
|
|
#5
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Correlation, Causation, and the Isolation of variables in FiM District Structure
Quote:
|
|
#6
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Correlation, Causation, and the Isolation of variables in FiM District Structure
Yes, I attended Traverse City and the Troy districts, i was saying this was the 1st time that in my 8 years that i have seen a regional show everyone that was nominated. If they had called everyone down it would have taken forever, seeing as it was at a sports arena and not a high school gymnasium, so they didn't get the "honor" of standing in front of the crowd but it was still cool to see them all recognized.
|
|
#7
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Correlation, Causation, and the Isolation of variables in FiM District Structure
Aspects of the FiM model that were successful and could be implemented to FIRST in general include:
1) Two day events – lots of positive feedback from mentors taking less time off work. 2) Bagging of robots – no shipping. 3) Volunteer run events – huge cost savings. 4) Events at High Schools – more exposure to teachers and non FIRST students, lower cost for venue. 5) Events that run later on Friday so teams don’t have to try to figure out what to do Friday night, they are doing what they came to do. 6) More matches per event. 7) A point system to rank teams could be implemented eliminating the issue of crossing state lines to compete. |
|
#8
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Correlation, Causation, and the Isolation of variables in FiM District Structure
Quote:
The FIRST Robotics Competition...is all about the robots... The inspiration is the result... And, I'm willing to say that a successful robot, more rounds, more time with the robot, all of the things mentioned above (that all have to do with the robot) makes the inspiration more successful... And that makes the FIRST organization or program a success... |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| chassis isolation, contrary to UL1740? | grambo | Electrical | 10 | 18-10-2008 20:18 |
| Signed and unsigned variables | dmlawrence | Programming | 4 | 05-01-2008 23:03 |
| Your team's structure and organization | Bharat Nain | Team Organization | 19 | 16-10-2005 22:26 |
| Math.h and Functions and Variables | amateurrobotguy | Programming | 1 | 26-02-2005 03:19 |
| HELP!!! Counters, global variables, and the like | danielkitchener | Programming | 2 | 23-02-2004 23:53 |