USA Today Article: "FIRST thing: Robotics in every school"

[Travis Hoffman]

http://www.usatoday.com/news/educati...tm?csp=usat.me

Be sure to read the comments as well.

[JesseK]

Toohey says he is crafting legislation that could secure $100 million over five years, a figure he describes as "modest." The money would go toward travel expenses, robot-building equipment and possibly a stipend to teachers who lead the program.

This is indeed modest. After the shops and machineries are in place, I'd imagine the money could support those schools for years to come. We have to find mentors to go along with it though. Great find!

It doesn't mention how we can get behind Toohey. Sure, teams write their congressmen & congresswomen all the time, but if we have someone in DC who we can rally behind and who can help us be more effective in our own communications, I think we could move things along alot faster. Timing is critical too, since the competitions just ended and the school year is about to let out. Anyone know what team he mentors, or has mentored?

[neoshaakti]

Very cool article...I wonder if this will actually make it through congress.
Maybe we can claim this is stimulating the economy (which it is?). I'm guessing that most teams spend their cash.
How do you think 100 mill would be split up between teams/ regionals? Would teams with corporate sponsors still get an equal portion of the 100 mill (which means they still have more $$$ than their fellow teams)?

[Andrew Schreiber]

Originally Posted by neoshaakti

Very cool article...I wonder if this will actually make it through congress.
Maybe we can claim this is stimulating the economy (which it is?). I'm guessing that most teams spend their cash.
How do you think 100 mill would be split up between teams/ regionals? Would teams with corporate sponsors still get an equal portion of the 100 mill (which means they still have more $$$ than their fellow teams)?

To answer your question, just a raw 100,000,000 divided by 1700 teams would come out to roughly 58,000. Now the real question, would this be a one-time payment or an item in the budget every year? Divide the number in half and make it an annual thing and Id be ecstatic.

Now, for the downside (because someone has to say it) This will encourage growth, if schools think they can get more funding (because what school doesnt want more funding?) by starting an FRC team they could start a team, grab the money and let the team flounder. In addition, growth at this point may turn out to be a strain on the mentor force. I know of several teams in the Michigan area who are hurting for mentors, well known, large teams. Also, the approach that most people take to mentoring a team at this moment seems to be, "FIRST is like a pizza, we all think different toppings should be on it" Clearly this would go out the window should we become a part of the educational institution.

Ironically, getting government monetary support would, in my opinion, cause more problems than it solves. Without more details about the legislature I cannot determine if this is a good or a bad thing, does anyone have a copy of what hes drafted?

[David Brinza]

Originally Posted by JesseK

This is indeed modest. After the shops and machineries are in place, I'd imagine the money could support those schools for years to come. We have to find mentors to go along with it though. Great find!

It doesn't mention how we can get behind Toohey. Sure, teams write their congressmen & congresswomen all the time, but if we have someone in DC who we can rally behind and who can help us be more effective in our own communications, I think we could move things along alot faster. Timing is critical too, since the competitions just ended and the school year is about to let out. Anyone know what team he mentors, or has mentored?

According to Zoominfo.com, Brian Toohey is currently the Sr VP for International Affairs at PhRMA and he held the positions of Sr VP and VP for Regulatory and International Affairs for Segway, Corp.

Can't find any info about his involvement with FIRST teams, though...

[Travis Hoffman]

The person does not intend the money to go to ALL existing FIRST teams - he specifically wishes to target inner city schools.

I do not like earmarking the money for a certain sector of schools, presuming that they *need it the most*. If we're going that route, many rural schools have far less access to resources and funding than inner city schools do. I should know - I attended a rural high school. And as we know, there are plenty of inner city school districts with (very successful) FIRST teams already. How many rural, farm country schools can claim the same?

If you're going to target a specific sector for growth, I'd prefer you reach out to rural areas. But then, there aren't as many voters there. HMM, wonder if that has anything to do with it..... Why don't we just permit equivalent access to the funding to schools of ALL forms, and call it a day, eh?

By the way - I do agree with some of the commenters - I find it rather *interesting* that a private sector individual seemingly has so much influence with Congress as to have legislation drafted up in two shakes of a lamb's tail. I'd rather have such influential people on FIRST's side, but it seems just a weeee bit odd......

[Daniel_LaFleur]

Originally Posted by Travis Hoffman

The person does not intend the money to go to ALL existing FIRST teams - he specifically wishes to target inner city schools.

I do not like earmarking the money for a certain sector of schools, presuming that they *need it the most*. If we're going that route, many rural schools have far less access to resources and funding than inner city schools do. I should know - I attended a rural high school. And as we know, there are plenty of inner city school districts with (very successful) FIRST teams already. How many rural, farm country schools can claim the same?

If you're going to target a specific sector for growth, I'd prefer you reach out to rural areas. But then, there aren't as many voters there. HMM, wonder if that has anything to do with it..... Why don't we just permit equivalent access to the funding to schools of ALL forms, and call it a day, eh?

By the way - I do agree with some of the commenters - I find it rather *interesting* that a private sector individual seemingly has so much influence with Congress as to have legislation drafted up in two shakes of a lamb's tail. I'd rather have such influential people on FIRST's side, but it seems just a weeee bit odd......

Bingo.

While I believe that the money is a good thing, I cringe at the (appearance of) politicizing of FIRST.

[Nate Edwards]

When the NASA Robotics Academy in 2007 went to lobby congress for funding we calculated somewhere in 70 Million range for the entry fee for one team at each high school. We didn't consider multiple regionals or sponsoring regionals or other fees because our goal was to get funding for all high schools. We primarily worked with former representative Nick Lampson (TX).

Similar legislation was in the works for stipends for teachers by Rep. Langevin (RI) and Rep McCarthy (NY), but I haven't seen much traction on that issue lately. If we weren't in the crisis we are in now we probably could see several million dollars being allocated to robotics because the support base is there from many angles because of the hard work many individuals and teams have put in over the past few years. I hope that in the next 10 years we see some real money put in from these efforts for schools nationwide but we will see.

[Molten]

Originally Posted by Travis Hoffman

If you're going to target a specific sector for growth, I'd prefer you reach out to rural areas. But then, there aren't as many voters there.

That is how Obama turned Indiana blue. Look at the map below. All those red counties and yet the few blue ones win because they have vastly more people. Perhaps he is focusing the money where the people are focused. I'm not saying I agree with this decision, just trying to give a bit of understanding.