Exploring The 'We're All Winners' Concept

[Mr. Pockets]

I think that a lot of this hinges on whether succeeding is the same thing as winning? If the two are synonymous then everyone who completed their goals (personal or team) for the season is a winner. If winning is limited to getting a trophy, or highest seed, or being a finalist then there are significantly fewer winners.

On a related note, I also feel that telling people that everyone's a winner is totally unnecessary in the vast majority of circumstances. Quite frankly, the teams who don't win in the traditional sense, but meet or surpass their personal/team goals don't need to be told that they are winners. They already know it. Conversely, the teams who don't fare well, and are thoroughly discouraged over their performance are not going to be convinced that "everyone's a winner" whether it's true or not.

[Rick TYler]

Originally Posted by Madison

Were someone to ask about your participation medals, you might say, "Everyone gets them," or you might say, "I build robots. Do you?" One of these responses is the right one.

"You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Madison again."

[Molten]

I think winning is like GP, its for each to decide on their own.

If at the end of the day, I feel like I won...I did. If I feel like I lost, I did. If this is true, what is the point in winning? Why don't we set really low goals just to feel like we won? Because, if we set goals too low, it doesn't matter if we achieve them. Most of us will still feel like losers.

If I 'win' a trophy through an underhanded move, I lost. But if I 'lose' for doing the right thing, I won.

Winning can only be accessed by the individual. Some may choose to use trophies as a measurement tool. Others choose learning. While some of us just choose to go with the moral goals.

The notion of "we're all winners" is largely flawed because it places one person judging the success or failure of another without regards to the individuals goal.

And for those of you who may wonder, my goals in FIRST are simple:

1. Teach
2. Motivate
3. Watch
4. Have fun
5. Be a role model

If I feel I accomplished one of these goals in a season, I succeeded. If I accomplish all 5, I win.

[sgreco]

You can't learn half the lessons FIRST has to teach if you aren't competing. In my mind, telling everyone they are "winners" takes away a lot from the competition and the fun.

Everyone learns, everyone benefits, everyone has a good overall experience, but it doesn't mean everone "wins." When I am playing a sport and I'm told by an adult that "everybody wins," I'm inclined to belive that everybody lost. Nobody learned about healthy, gracious and proffessional competition and nobody had the joy of winning.

FIRST kids aren't dumb, as a matter of fact, they're pretty smart. If you tell them "hey you missed eliminations and didn't get any awards, but you're still a winner," not only will they not believe you, but it won't help them in any way. Saying everybody wins doesn't help the actual loser, and it only makes the winners feel like they didn't truly accomplish anything.

Frankly, my team was terrible at the Boston regional this year, I was not a happy camper. I certainly wasn't a "winner," but that doesn't mean I didn't learn any thing, or have fun during the build season. Not everything has to be coated in fluff, if you lose, lose and you have to deal with it.

FIRST is great because even if you lose at the competition, you still learn a lot and it's really fun.

[Wayne TenBrink]

I think it is helpful to consider the distinctions between "accomplishment", "success", and "winning".

In FIRST, everybody that participates in good faith has accomplished somthing important. If they met their personal and team goals, they were successful. Only a few of these accomplished, successful participants will be winners. In my opinion, the accomplishment and success are more valuable than winning, but winning should always remain a goal.

Nobody would say that all graduating students are valedictorians. By the same token, it would be wrong to imply that non-valedictorians are losers. Don't diminish "accomplishment" by limiting the definition of "success" to "winning".

Regarding the participation medals vs. pins (another thread): I would rather have a pin or something to commemorate my "accomplishment" in each specific game, than a generic medal that pretended to make me feel like a "winner". Actually, I would like to have a cool game T-shirt that I could wear any time. That would also be a good advertising, too.

[nlknauss]

I really think this is a great idea for discussion. It's really is sometimes interesting to walk by and hear someone say "we're all winners because _______" and wonder what the scope is that they are measuring their success on. We can all certainly agree that this is personally measurable and it's tough for anyone on the outside to understand what they may be feeling.

Success is measured on different scales, and as educators we're constantly taught to grant praise to students when they have achieved even the basic criteria for "success" (I'm not referring to 'A++'s). This is a tough task for many of educators/mentors because we know what lies ahead for our students once they have left the padded realm within our reach. Regardless, all students are different and many of them need to hear "success!" in order to have a sense of accomplishment or to remain motivated.

As an educator, I'm personally OK with that within the limits of praising personal effort. Really a team's effort can be measured by a trophy, medal, or performance on the field but it really is important to get individuals on our teams to feel like "winners" despite what really happens. Throughout the "FIRST" experience we're all taught that if we try hard we'll achieve some level of success down the road; it hits everyone differently!

Now how do we get students to be able to good personal critics of themselves without being overly punitive? The late Randy Pausch, author of "The Last Lecture", provides a great model for helping and really enabling the dreams of others. "The Last Lecture" has been discussed here, I highly recommend the book for anyone who would like to really dive in deep with this. But to summarize the section I'm referring to, he discusses his experiences in trying to get students to realize their abilities and to really become good critics of themselves. If we are able to figure out how to really make students great critics of themselves, we may not have to say to them "we're all winners" because they'll just know. That may be a tool that could be useful in any experience where they will see the benefits of their efforts without needing a measurable criterion for success.

[NorviewsVeteran]

Originally Posted by sgreco

Not everything has to be coated in fluff, if you lose, lose and you have to deal with it.

I hate fluff.

[Stormnnormn]

"My philosophy of life is that if we make up our mind what we are going to make of our lives, then work hard toward that goal, we never lose - somehow we win out." - Ronald Reagan

"Winning isn't everything, but wanting to win is." - Vince Lombardi

"There is no happiness except in the realization that we have accomplished something." - Henry Ford
------------

I, personally, prefer to get told things straight. I do not like getting told an answer that clearly does not make sense. However, I have strange attraction to dissecting sorts of philosophical sayings.

That's my opinion, not yours.

[Robert Cawthon]

I think, like many quotes, "We (You) are all winners here" is over used and has lost much of its meaning. I think that the only time a mentor should use that is:
1. When his team has just won a competition or other award and is speaking to the other team(s) who have not fared as well. Be prepared to back up your statement with your beliefs as to why they are winners also.

2. To their own team only if they then explain why they think so and give concrete examples of what the team did to make themselves winners.

The kids can tell, usually, when you are blowing smoke and when you really believe what you say. Better to not say it (even though it may be true) than to come off as glib or just trying to make some people feel better about themselves.

Better to be thought of as a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt! One must be very careful when talking to the students. They are the reason we are here, after all.

[BPetry234]

To say that "we are all winners" is an out right lie. Teams just can't show up and expect to get something out of it. I'm not saying that losing is a bad thing, though. That's just a statistic. It helps to win but there are more important things.

FIRST was set up to inspire students to learn more about science and technology. Not to win awards, not to win matches, to inspire. If your team is inspired to work hard, learn more, and push the edge then the awards and wins will come. If a FIRST alumni cures cancer or gets us off of oil or coal, that will matter more than having a great FRC season.

Mentors are supposed to do just that, mentor. That's what makes this program different from any other I've ever seen.

"We are all winners" if we buy into the system how it is set up and push for excellence not to win today but to win tomorrow.

[Bharat Nain]

I’ll dive in. Thank you for bringing up such an important topic Jane. I
am glad everyone acknowledges that success has different meanings
for everyone and misusing concepts like “Gracious Professionalism”
and “We’re all winners” is not the right thing to do. I find these to
be very important because 4 years of participating in FIRST in your
early teens can severely shape your ideas to lead you to either
success with correct concepts of failure with fluffy concepts.

FIRST is a “microcosm of the real engineering experience” a famous
educator once said (Woodie Flowers). This program has certain “key
values” which I have always felt were overused and abused by the
majority. Couple years ago it would almost be taboo to say that “Gracious
Professionalism” is not what FIRST is governed by and the bitter truth is it
takes a little more than words to actually be winners. This is because
nobody wants to think of themselves as losers regardless of whether they
worked hard and failed or did not even try. This is also regardless of
whether they know what it takes to win. Obviously, there is a difference
between teams who seem to consistently product wins (even if it is
different areas of FIRST) year and after and those who don’t. In my years
in FIRST, I have noticed some teams “feel” that they should automatically
“win” because they are “winners” because they are “told so”. When that
does not happen, they turn bitter and express resentment towards teams
who do win. This only serves to hurt the self-image of the students (and
maybe mentors) on the team. The lesson there is wins don’t always come
easy.

On the other hand, some teams use questionable means to achieve a win. I
have seen this. In the end, however, this only hurts the team who “won”
because they did not really “win”. This only taught the students that it is
ok to use cheat. This also hurts their self-image.


And then there are obviously teams who will work to excel in every area of
their team. This is the type of team every team strives to be, as it should
be. I think it is important to learn from these teams as this is what “truly
makes us all winners”. As many of you have rightly pointed out earlier in
this thread that there is a lot of “win” in the learning process itself.


It is important to realize that not all of us have the resources and
opportunity to win (in FIRST). All we have is the hope that through hard
work, determination, and [insert positive qualities here], we will be able to,
someday. Growing every individuals self image, self worth and character will
result in a rewarding experience for everyone and truly create a setup for
success in the real world. Using truthful means that promote honestly,
integrity, authenticity and good values is what is important.


Perhaps a better way to “promote” the “we’re all winners” idea is by
rewarding the positive aspects of your team. On my team, we know that
we can only control our robot in an alliance. If our alliance loses, we make
sure (or strive to) our team/robot is not the reason. When it is, we learn
from it. When it is not, we reward ourselves with the satisfaction and
happiness. When we win, we celebrate. But without honesty, we would
never learn from our mistakes as we would be living in the delusion of “we’re
all winners anyway”. This sends the correct message to the students.
Once again, thank you Jane for bringing this up. If there is one thing that
will help improve the quality of the competition, this is it. So, we are not all
winners, but we can be. We must strive to be. We must learn from our
mistakes and celebrate our success, even if it is little success.


Cheers.

[Tetraman]

If we all really believed that 'we are all winners', it makes us a bunch of sappy reach-for-the-star losers.

There is a reason why we call this a Competition, a reason why FIRST was modeled after sports (I so listen to Dean's speaches), and a reason why we give out trophies: Some will be victorious, and everyone else will go home with a humiliating showing and/or defeat.

But here is the thing - FIRST is not just a competition, not just a sport and not just a trophy case. When I hear "We are all winners", I always try to believe that they are talking about the people-side of FIRST. Because in that side, yes, we are all winners.

And the small text in my signature can be applied to this too.

[Barry Bonzack]

"I'm not going to tell you all that you all are winners. At this point you are smart enough to know whether you are or you aren't."

-Woodie Flowers during the Closing Ceremonies at the FTC World Championship 2009.

[Daniel_LaFleur]

First off, Great topic Jane.

To me "we're all winners" is a cop out and says it's OK to fail and not look to improve. Failure is a part of nature, we all fail at some point, and it's how we deal with these failures that will ultimately determine how well we will do in the endevors of our lives.

With my team we celebrate our successes and review our failures to see where we can improve. Basically putting the negative energy of 'failure' into a positive action 'improving'. Saying "we are all winners" removes the need to improve.

In the end, I believe that "we're all winners" does a disservice to those it's told to, because it lets people 'feel good' at the expense of bettering themselves.

The above is, as usual, JMHO.

[Molten]

Originally Posted by Daniel_LaFleur

Failure is a part of nature, we all fail at some point, and it's how we deal with these failures that will ultimately determine how well we will do in the endevors of our lives.

I've always thought its how we deal with both success and failure that decides how we do. I guess if I decide that if I get an A for this class, I won't work as hard on the next one...your logic is true. But I find this to simply not be the case in people who truly succeed. People who succeed in life keep trying hard regardless of whether or not they win. I look at success as more of a desire in this scenario. Give a kid a taste of success and they usually work harder. In any case, they don't give up.

I've heard your argument several times in this thread and I've never witnessed it happening in life. Perhaps I don't have enough data to say that nobody works that way, but I can certainly say alot of people don't.