Chairman's Award -- is the bar too high now?

[IKE]

Originally Posted by rmyoung

Is it worth suggesting some way to recognize the next tier teams, the 'almost there, keep going'? Not adding more awards or taking away from Chairman's, but sending the message that you're on the right track, or that you reached a milestone? Judge's feedback is nice but very brief and a bit vague, and ours has almost always been the same - nice job, keep it up, start some new teams.

Let me hop back on my FiM soapbox for a minute. With the 7 district awards, finally there is some recognition for the "almost there teams". In my opinion, FIRST does an absolutely lowsy job of recognizing really good efforts that aren't "the best". Who gets awards, the winners.
I wish they would take a lesson from 4-H and/or SAE design comp series. 4-H May only award 1 Grand-Champion, and 1 reserve Grand Champion, but they also award several "honorable mentions". While striving for the grand champion, it felt good to get one of these "honorable mentions".
For FiM, I have been suggesting giving of season seeding points for Chairman's. X points for applying, and Y points for being nearly there or "Honorable Mentions". I was told this makes the judges job tougher, but having judged many other competitions, I personally believe this makes it easier as you don't feel so bad leaving Team 4444 out in the cold because they were only 99.99% as good as team Winners. With 10 points this year going to the District chairman's winner, I would give 2 points for applying, and 4-6 for an honorable mention (judges discretion on number).

Just like FRC is not solely about the robots, and the robots are the hook, the Chairman's award really isn't about the award, but the award is the hook. Without the award, many would still do the work, but would they document it and share it they way they do now? I know our team wouldn't. In fact most of the stuff we have done the last 2 years, we have been doing for the last 6 years I have been on the team. The biggest difference the last 2 years is the documentation, and the fact that once the students won a District, they believed they had the ability to do more. Altruism is a lot to ask of most teenagers. Childrens brains are hardwired to be self-serving. This is for preservation of the species. That is why we work on sharing at a young age and continue to work on it into adulthood. We have a hard enough time making the freshmen save a piece of pizza for a mentor arriving late from a hard days work. By Seniors, most of them "get it".

[artdutra04]

Don't gauge the success of your team against others, gauge it against how well your team does with the resources available.

Keep aiming for 110% output each and every season, and eventually you'll become a team capable of HOF-style outreach efforts.

[Lil' Lavery]

I forgot one thing I had planned to put in my previous post, which basically echoes the post before this.

What another team accomplished doesn't change what you've accomplished. Just because another team did something incredible and outstanding, it doesn't mean what you did isn't incredible or outstanding. Even if you don't win the Chairman's, it doesn't mean what you did is any less impressive. You shouldn't be any less proud of the effort you put in because of what another team did.

[Rich Kressly]

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

I forgot one thing I had planned to put in my previous post, which basically echoes the post before this.

What another team accomplished doesn't change what you've accomplished. Just because another team did something incredible and outstanding, it doesn't mean what you did isn't incredible or outstanding. Even if you don't win the Chairman's, it doesn't mean what you did is any less impressive. You shouldn't be any less proud of the effort you put in because of what another team did.

Sean brings up a great point here. Although it seems obvious, it isn't always internalized. When I was with FRC103 I was fortunate enough to play a role that helped lead to a Championship Chairman's Award. When I left Palisades HS for Lower Merion and founded FRC1712, in no way, shape or form did I say anything to anyone about the desire to "win" a Chairman's Award.

HOWEVER, I have stated from the beginning that my one non-negotiable item, as long as I'm a part of FRC1712, is that the team must always document, submit a CA entry, participate in the interview process, and make earnest efforts to improve year-to-year based on feedback. That effort has led to much growth and many accomplishments in Lower Merion and, in different ways, I'm just as proud of our students, mentors and overall team here as I was the day this photo was taken of 103. (yikes, did I really have that much hair?)

Will 1712 ever "win" a Chairman's Award? I have no idea. Will 1712 ever stop trying to better the community and students through the CA process? Not while I'm a part of this team it won't. I've seen too much growth in two totally different communities to ever say "we're not doing that anymore." I refuse to part of a team that "only" builds a robot and tries to win a game on the field (although standing on Einstein someday with that trophy would be cool, too ).

In my estimation if a team chooses not to "do this" because it doesn't think it can win, it's TOTALLY missing the point and value in the process. I've been wrong lots before, but that's the way I see it.

[JesseK]

Something tells me the source of concern regarding CA is not the fact that the 'bar has been raised' for the national CA award. I have a feeling that it's FIRST's lack of feedback to those who submit CA at the regional level, and lack of genuine thankfulness to the teams for their efforts year after year even though they didn't win any awards for it. The feedback form for CA is a joke some years -- in 2 of the 4 years we were eligible for CA, the feedback form simply regurgitated what the students presented.

If FIRST really wanted to turn CA into a less competitive vehicle to further spread the message, they could send CA-submitting teams letters that explain how to further the specific efforts that teams have already put forth so that those efforts are more inline with FIRST's overall mission. The purpose of such a letter wouldn't be to aid a team or tell a team what they did wrong at competition to not win CA, but rather to begin providing teams with constructive feedback in a more focused manner. I also believe it would open up communicative channels so that the actual award is administered more evenly across regionals.

Statistically, if nationwide 50% of teams do outreach and then present it at a regional, then as it stands currently only 11% of them are even recognized for it (50 regionals * 2 awards / 900 teams, with some rounding and estimation).

[Alan Anderson]

Originally Posted by JesseK

If FIRST really wanted to turn CA into a less competitive vehicle to further spread the message, they could send CA-submitting teams letters that explain how to further the specific efforts that teams have already put forth so that those efforts are more inline with FIRST's overall mission.

I think the activities and accomplishments of the Chairman's Award winners ought to be a valid indication of the efforts FIRST is looking for. If you want to be recognized as the best model for teams to emulate, emulating the teams that have already been so recognized seems a good way to start.

[JesseK]

Originally Posted by Alan Anderson

I think the activities and accomplishments of the Chairman's Award winners ought to be a valid indication of the efforts FIRST is looking for. If you want to be recognized as the best model for teams to emulate, emulating the teams that have already been so recognized seems a good way to start.

I never stated I wanted my team to be the best for FIRST teams to emulate. I simply implied that CA is as abstract as it is competitive an thus most teams' efforts go unrecognized. If FIRST truly wants more impact sooner, they could provide quality feedback that enables teams to fully expedite their efforts.

[Foster]

Rich wrote: In my estimation if a team chooses not to "do this" because it doesn't think it can win, it's TOTALLY missing the point and value in the process.

Cynette wrote: (in a personal email) Robots Rock! Kids Rock! Why wouldn't you do it?

So my team isn't solving world hunger, none of our mentors on are in-line for sainthood, we don't raise $3.2 million a year for charity. But we have done two years of CA submissions and we will keep doing it. It's a way for us to say "we are changing the world" (one kid at a time and sometimes in bulk .. dlavery) It is not about the award, it's about the mission.

I would like FIRST to display the names of each team at each event that submitted for the Chairmans Award. Celebrate that those teams made the effort to document what they do to make a difference.

And I'd like to see the essays posted. Show all of us what they did to make a difference. Show us the projects they have chosen. Maybe rather than starting my own project I can jump on theirs (thats the old 1+1=3).

The bar is high, just look at the HOF teams. But their robot puts its wheels on one at a time just like ours, so we can be a HOF winner too!

[Carolyn_Grace]

Originally Posted by Foster

And I'd like to see the essays posted. Show all of us what they did to make a difference. Show us the projects they have chosen. Maybe rather than starting my own project I can jump on theirs (thats the old 1+1=3).

YES! 100% agree.

The Killer Bees are trying to do this. Every project that we do, we want other people to do as well, and we want them to invite us to participate in theirs!

For example: We're participating in a Walk for Hunger in Pontiac, MI this Saturday, and we want as many teams around our area to come walk with us and raise some money for the local very needy community.

Other example: We're collecting science, technology, car (etc) magazines, applying a cool sticker on them about FIRST, and donating them to doctor's and dentist's offices and hospitals! We'd LOVE if other teams all over the country (world!) did this as well.

So, let's all share our ideas somehow.

[Mr MOE]

Originally Posted by Foster

The bar is high, just look at the HOF teams. But their robot puts its wheels on one at a time just like ours, so we can be a HOF winner too!

During our rookie year in 2000, MOE 365 was sitting in the FIRST Epcot ampitheater during the Nationals Awards ceremonies (it was called "Nationals" at that time), we listened intently to the description of the team that won the Chairman's Award that year. We were in awe of all that this team had done to spread the message of FIRST and to change the culture in their area of the world. That team was Team 16, The Baxter Bomb Squad. Our team members watched and saw how excited and overjoyed they were to have been recognized this way.

In the back of my mind, I was saying to myself, "Wow. What a team. I can't imagine all the work and effort that went into all they did." To me, personally, at that time, BBS was tops. Winning the top award in all of FIRST. Amazing.

Over time, with that memory in the back of my mind, I saw our team of green take FIRST's message to heart and do things in our local community that aligned with FIRST's mission. I remember Woodie Flowers telling all the students in attendance at that National Championship that each one should feel special, because only a very small percentage of students their age participated in FIRST. He was absolutely right. There were so many others that had yet to be inspired by FIRST. Opportunity was there.

Seven years later, after being so proud of students and mentors alike for starting local programs, growing interest in FIRST and science and technology in our area, and helping peers in many ways, it was our team who was on that stage accepting the (now) Championship Chairman's Award.

In the back of my mind, I recalled my sense of awe in Florida in 2000 and said to myself, " there is some team out there in the crowd, who will hear what our team has done, and will be inspired like we were." And I fully expect that team to be on a different Chairman's Award stage in the future.

We are all part of the legacy that FIRST has created. By doing what we can to connect more students to FIRST programs and have them experience the excitement of what science and technology can be, we are all part of "raising the bar" for our society. Thank you to all the teams that do this (and it truly is everyone). Special thanks to those who document it and share it with others.

Bring it on!

[waialua359]

Simply put, there are more teams then there were 10 years ago. Thus, the bar keeps climbing............
Teams that are deserving year in and year out, will eventually get their due. 341 was due for a while now, and I can think of a few others where its only a matter of time.

Our team has applied 7 times in our history and have won it 4 times now. In 2002 SJ, 2006 LV, 2007 NJ we didnt win. We won in 2003, 2008, 09, and 10 in SJ, HI, HI, and AZ respectively. In 2003, we felt we had a well-rounded program, but was rather limited in our outreach and sustainability plan at the time. Currently, we are very proud of how far we have come, considering the challenge of being from Hawaii. To be able to meet many teams year after year and compete in multiple events throughout the year, it has been a great opportunity for our students!
My job is to ensure that these opportunities continue, learning from the best of teams. If you cant walk away from any tournament with at least 3 new innovative and impressive things teams are doing, then you've missed a great opportunity!

[Rich Kressly]

No offense intended, so I won't quote folks above, but ...

Looks like some are focused solely on extrinsic motivators and not looking at the intrinsic. It's pretty easy to look at this as "what FIRST wants" and "they need to provide more feedback to get people to do this" but, if that's where the conversation ends it all seems kind of cheesy to me.

I firmly believe that FIRST "wants" us to do this because it's important to work at positive culture change. Why aren't more teams looking "inside themselves" in this pursuit? I mean, I'll flat out tell you, I personally feel no different in these efforts with 1712 than I did when I was a Hall of Fame member with 103 performing outreach and working hard at the same thing. Yes, the recognition is very nice and other people view it as a credibility thing on occasion, but when I go to bed at night, how I feel about myself and the efforts 1712 has made without the award itself feels EXACTLY the same way it did when I was at Palisades.

Lower Merion is a very different community and we've developed a very different approach to outreach, etc but at the end of the day the positive change is palpable and the satisfaction of a positively changed community is where it's at.

I'm frightened by the thought that someone wants to reduce all of this to a point system somewhere, in fact, it really makes me feel sick. I like the fact that its somewhat open ended and I don't want any judge checking boxes in this case instead of talking, reading, learning, understanding.

As for students being "wired" differently and the implication that they can't/won't/shouldn't be altruistic ... I just don't buy it at all. I just spent a weekend in Dallas with some incredible 20-somethings (along with many older folks as well) who were all there on their own dime, giving back to an effort they first learned as FRC team members. I also see it every day in the students we work with and I see it in their actions and decisions they make on their own long after they leave us. Is it hard? You bet. Is it frustrating? You bet. Does it run completely counter to what modern American selfish culture teaches them? Oh yes.

Kinda like the unfairly difficult nature of the robot thingy part of what we do, maybe we need to do this because the most meaningful efforts we can make in life are the most misunderstood, unrecognized, and thankless - but oh so incredibly necessary.

[JaneYoung]

Originally Posted by Rich Kressly

I'm frightened by the thought that someone wants to reduce all of this to a point system somewhere, in fact, it really makes me feel sick. I like the fact that its somewhat open ended and I don't want any judge checking boxes in this case instead of talking, reading, learning, understanding.

Agreed, Kres. Some things don't need to be nailed down, pigeon-holed, or boxed in. The Chairman's is one of those.

Working with students and mentors who are extremely analytical by nature has been an interesting challenge for me over the years. They've helped me grow in that area and I hope that I've helped or contributed to the areas of the team where outreach is important, sharing knowledge and expertise is important, and helping the communities around us understand who we are and what we do/stand for is important. To assign numbers and check boxes to that and force the team into constantly grading itself, would just make these personalities more analytical and data driven. The Chairman's Award and the Woodie Flowers Award and now the Dean's List Award - need more freedom to develop than that. This opinion may not be in the comfort zone of those who sigh with pleasure when surrounded by numbers, data, and whirring machines, true - but there is great wisdom in having the robotics competition and awards recognizing that aspect of FRC. There is also great wisdom in recognizing the accomplishments and growth of the FRC teams in areas of impact, development, and celebration. You have to look no further than MOE to understand this.

Jane

[ebarker]

Originally Posted by Rich Kressly

I'm frightened by the thought that someone wants to reduce all of this to a point system somewhere, in fact, it really makes me feel sick. I like the fact that its somewhat open ended and I don't want any judge checking boxes in this case instead of talking, reading, learning, understanding.

Agreed again, 2nd the motion.

Every team has to have an intrinsic motivator. Every team has to determine their mission and how to best operate in their 'space'. That team has to determine their mission, and explain to the judges how their results align and complement the FIRST vision and mission.

The day that Chairman's judges starts box checking and point scoring is the day that innovation and entrepreneurship in pushing the mission of FIRST ends!

IMHO

Ed

[IKE]

I take no offense. These are excellent points. I do need some help with questions.

1. How do you motivate your newest members to take on a noble cause? The kids we have worked with for 2-4 years seem to get it (some quicker than others). How should we be motivating the newbies?
2. How do you switch a team driven for the win over to driven for the goal? Especially when you are external to that team. As the number of teams increase, how do we plant the seed of altruism into an ever growing population. While this may not be Team 33's responsibility, it is the responsibility of FIRST as a whole and more specifcally how it applies to FRC.

3. Should someone that truly understands what Chairman's is about even re-submit? I am ok with a reactionary answer to this question, but I would much prefer some in-depth thought as this one has been bugging me since the Michigan State Championship.