The "FIRST" experience?

[Adam Y.]

Originally Posted by Cody Carey

I am torn with how to interpret this: FRC 306 was allowed to flourish in my school environment only because the school knew that it was teaching kids valuable information. If the school had thought for one minute that the main point of FIRST was to convince children to follow the path of the engineer, the team may not have even been founded. Instead the money could have been used to buy materials to aid students in their career choice of any type, rather than to try to funnel them all into one.

One career choice? How is trying to persuade people into becoming engineers trying to funnel them into one career choice. Saying you want to become an engineer is exactly like saying you want to become a scientist. You have now just narrowed down your career path 20,000 choices. There are five or six major branches of engineering depending on whether or not you consider computer engineering seperate enough from electrical. These field are electrical, mechanical, industrial, civil, computer, and chemical. Those are subdivied down into even more seperate fields.

[Bertman]

Cody,
sounds like you had a wonderful experience that worked for you. Had you been on an engineer driven team you most certainly would have had a different experience. Keep in mind that you don't know what you don't know. When anybody joins a team they come in with certain preconceived notions that almost never completely match that reality. That is fine. The process is a filter and, I believe, each finds his/her own path. Take what you have learned, build on it and share it. Others will do the same. Enjoy the journey.

[Chris Hibner]

Wow, that was an extremely thoughtful post. Coming to meaningful insights and being able to express those thoughts in a clear manner is a pretty great skill to have, and one that isn't really taught very easily.

I just want to make one comment about those that think the competition aspect is important. I am a big proponent of FIRST as a competition. I embrace the competitiveness. However, I (and I'm sure most others involved in FIRST that embrace the competitive aspect), don't do it simply because it's a competition. Like you said, just go buy a basketball.

Those of us that embrace the competition do so because being competitive enhances the learning and the inspiration. Think about it: how hard are you going to try and how much are you going to learn if you don't care? On the other hand, if you just want to beat Wildstang really really badly, how much extra time and effort are you going to put in. Furthermore, do you think you'll learn more after putting in all of that extra time? I think the answer is "yes".

Anyway, I am involved in FIRST because I think it's important to help inspire the students to achieve more than they might have without FIRST. That being said, I think the role that the competition plays is an important one, and we all wouldn't get nearly as excited without it.

[Chris is me]

This post is going to pale in comparison to the OPs, but I kind of approach the "FIRST is about Inspiration" line in a different way.

Personally, I've been much more inspired to pursue engineering because of the hands on learning experience I've had with it. I don't really even get how FIRST can only be about inspiring engineering, where nothing else matters... Honestly, I'd probably be more inspired by Battlebots than by watching my mentors build a robot. Battlebots is more exciting

Obviously, FIRST experiences are different for everyone. Ultimately, FIRST is about inspiring, and nothing else is more important. Perhaps this is just crafty logic to get at what I think FIRST should be, but I've always been of the opinion that you're much more inspired if it's your work on the field.



Thus for me, teaching and inspiring are basically the same thing. You can be inspired without learning anything, but then how would that be different than just watching matches on Nasa TV, or Battlebots? Watching Battlebots as a kid made me go "I wanna do that!", but I wasn't really motivated to pursue it very much other than thinking "wow, that is cool". But when working with mentors, teaching me engineering, leadership, and problem solving skills, the whole experience changes. When you see a net result that you can say is yours succeeding in competition, you look at yourself and your hard work and go "Look at what I can accomplish!".

I can say that if I didn't learn basic fabrication and design skills, and if I didn't have input on the robots I've helped build, I probably wouldn't be an engineer.

Basically, I agree with the OP. I don't see how FIRST works without the learning, but it obviously does.

[EricH]

I would have to say that FIRST is not totally about the engineer training. I'd have to agree with the "goal is to inspire students to want to learn" point of view.

It's not completely about inspiring students to be engineers. There are a number of things to do on the team that are not about the robots at all. They aren't technical. They aren't necessarily something that you can only learn in FIRST. I know of an FRC student who is not going for engineering. He's going for marketing, if I remember correctly--a field he'd have been introduces to by "selling" the robot to other teams. Others go into graphic arts, animation, web design, and similar fields.

It's not that they can't be engineers or that FIRST has missed its mark with them. On the contrary, FIRST hit a bullseye. They now want to learn more about their chosen field, to go in-depth, to pursue a career in whatever they choose. FIRST competitions simply provided an outlet for them to find that place they fit and a means for them to try it out and see if this is something they really want to do.

Cody, it's good to see you back making posts like this. We all need to think a bit about where we are and where, who, and what we want to be from time to time.

[,4lex S.]

I get where you are coming from. I think that as long as students have the opportunity to explore their own ambitions (within reason and practical constraints) they will be more likely to become inspired by the program though. I was lucky throughout my FIRST career to have a few good mentors who were able to teach without completely taking over the project, and I think my teamates and I are better for it. We know we've made mistakes, but the journey of building our robot has led us in general to pursue engineering on our own ambition, which I think is stronger than anything another person could have inspired in us. I am biased of course, because I am self-motivated. In general I think that engineering teams probably inspired more students, while student run teams can inspire students who are more ambitious. Perhaps an equilibrium could be called for???

Why is FIRST valuable to society? Because it inspires kids to be Engineers, not Basketball players.

[Devon27]

In my opinion, not only does each team teach its members different things, but each member, even on the same team will get something different out of FIRST depending on the roles they take and the amount of time and effort they put in (the more one puts in the more they will get out). Some students may not even touch a tool or the robot while others will spend countless hours in the shop prototyping and building. The students who aren't working specifically on the robot all of the time will however learn other things, they will learn business and marketing skills, they may learn different programs like 3D Studio Max, Final Cut Pro, Illustrator, or In Design (those are a few of the programs my team uses for marketing etc.). They may learn public speaking skills, how to write a speech, or how to write essays for awards and grants. Some students may take the role of team captain or president, those students are going to learn an immense amount about leadership. The members of any team are going to learn time management, there is no way not to when juggling a time consuming activity like FIRST with school. I guess my point is that although some aspects may be the same, the experience one person gets out of FIRST is different than the experience any other person will have. All that matters is that students are learning and getting something out of their participation on the team and quite honestly, I don't think anyone would spend so much time participating in something like FIRST if they weren't getting something out of it.

[Taylor]

For Inspiration and Recognition of Science and Technology.
Nowhere in there does it say anything about Learning - else we might be in FLIRT Robotics.

To say FIRST is an engineer factory is to seriously underestimate the devotion and influence of hundreds of NEMs. The program is the brainchild of an MIT professor and a WPI dropout.

I'm not convinced that FIRST is about changing career paths of the world's youth. The phrase that keeps repeating itself to me is "it's about changing the culture, it's about celebrating brains instead of brawn." Whether a teenager is inspired to become an engineer, mechanic, surgeon, OSHA advisor, or journalist, he or she can use skills honed by being involved in FIRST. That teen also has a much greater chance of reaching that goal than the one who wants to be the next NBA, WWE, or R&B star.

As I spend more time with the FIRST community, I realize that every team is different; there's no right way to do things, and I'm not sure there's a wrong way. As Mr. Kressly said, there's just the way that is best suited to each team and its situation. Recall the vignette of a man robbing a bank with 20 customers inside. The police got 20 different accounts of the same robbery.

College is a place for minds to mature. Part of that maturation process is leaving the cozy, comfortable nest of your adolescence and exploring the world and viewpoints outside your own. As part of the maturation journey, there will be moments where you will be forced to question your deeply held values and beliefs; even if these change, you will find your convictions will be stronger. Good luck on your journey, and remember that just because you question something, that doesn't make it wrong.

[Cody Carey]

Originally Posted by Adam Y.

One career choice? How is trying to persuade people into becoming engineers trying to funnel them into one career choice. Saying you want to become an engineer is exactly like saying you want to become a scientist. You have now just narrowed down your career path 20,000 choices. There are five or six major branches of engineering depending on whether or not you consider computer engineering seperate enough from electrical. These field are electrical, mechanical, industrial, civil, computer, and chemical. Those are subdivied down into even more seperate fields.

I actually researched a bit before lumping "Engineers" all into one career choice for the purpose of illustration in my initial post. According to the US bureau of labor and statistics, Engineering is one career with 18 possible specialties. I'd also like to point out that most FRC students won't have any exposure to anything outside of mechanical, electrical, and computer engineers. I am certain that some teams have other engineers as mentors, such as industrial or materials engineers, but I think that this doesn't apply to the majority.

[RyanCahoon]

I believe FIRST's meaning is closely related to what Mr. Kamen says at this university commencement, and FIRST is just another way to recruit people, or maybe call it a way to help prepare people to be able to help the world.

--Ryan

[Adam Y.]

Originally Posted by Cody Carey

I actually researched a bit before lumping "Engineers" all into one career choice for the purpose of illustration in my initial post. According to the US bureau of labor and statistics, Engineering is one career with 18 possible specialties.

I do not like those definitions at all. There are more specialties than that websites gives. No wonder we have an engineering problem. 3/4 of my professors aren't on that list.

[ebarker]

US bureau of labor and statistics tends to lower the definition of most jobs to its base level.

It does nothing to to relate engineering to the art of engineering, or to business or social relevance, or communications, or economics.

Engineering is much more complex and much richer than is commonly perceived.

Dean touched on it in his speech above, and Woodie spoke to the point in his address at Olin.

[JaneYoung]

Originally Posted by ebarker

US bureau of labor and statistics tends to lower the definition of most jobs to its base level.

It does nothing to to relate engineering to the art of engineering, or to business or social relevance, or communications, or economics.

Engineering is much more complex and much richer than is commonly perceived.

Dean touched on it in his speech above, and Woodie spoke to the point in his address at Olin.

Well, but isn't this the point?
In working with future scientists, technologists, and engineers, isn't working to help develop thinking and effectiveness in areas of business plans, formal presentations, communications, social relevance, and delivering a finished product of quality by the end of a hard deadline, all part of the FIRST/FRC package that is sold? Engineering fields and attitudes don't have to be set in stone. They can continue to evolve, develop, and maintain flexibility for present and future goals/needs as they present themselves or are discovered.

[Adam Y.]

Originally Posted by ebarker

US bureau of labor and statistics tends to lower the definition of most jobs to its base level.

Base level? Im doing base level electrical engineering. Their definition leaves out elctromagnetics which for all intents purposes excludes a lot of people. I wonder what we get classified as.

[emersont49]

Inspiration is a precursor to any real learning. On an FRC team, that inspiration could range from business and marketing to electrical/mechanical engineering and computer science.

I'm sometimes tempted to be critical of teams I view as being adult run but I have to remind myself that I'm only seeing or hearing small aspects of those teams. The only team I really know is my team.

One of the main reasons I mentor is to share the passion I have for robotics with students. It has been gratifying to see this passion picked up by students in technical and non-technical parts of the team. I'm certain they won't all remember the concepts of a closed loop steering system. I am, however, certain most of them will remember how much fun it was to solve a really tough problem.