Why is Engineering Inspiration viewed as second place to the Chairman's Award?

[Broboraider]

In no way does this post reflect my opinion of my team, the judges, or even FIRST as a whole. This is simply an observation that I thought I would share and hopefully get some feedback from the community and in no way am I trying to slander any team is affiliated with the topic below as I have so much respect for the teams within in FIRST that are making it loud within their community.

Since 2014, when FIRST began allocating judged awards at the division level except for Chairman's I have noticed a significant trend in how FIRST awards the Engineering Inspiration award. In the last three years, 10 out of the 12 teams that won Engineering Inspiration at a subdivision level also won were honored as regional Chairman's Award Winners earlier in the year at another regional. Many of these same RCA teams also won Engineering Inspiration at another regional within the same year they won Engineering Inspiration within a subdivision. For those who do not know, unlike the Chairman’s award winners, regional Engineering Inspiration winners do not give a formal presentation at champs as judging for this award at a subdivision level is mainly done within the pits which qualifies any team to win Engineering Inspiration despite not winning it at regional. For many teams, it is quite an accomplishment to win an Engineering Inspiration at a regional but it is in my opinion, the same teams do not have the equal opportunity as RCA teams because they are not provided a chance to give a formal presentation. While a lot of information can be relayed to judges within the pits I do not feel that it is sufficient or personal enough to talk about the team’s initiatives and outreach efforts. In the current system at champs I believe that it does not favor teams to win Engineering Inspiration despite them being awarded the same award at a regional. This makes it seem that FIRST sees Engineering Inspiration as a “second place CA”. I have the utmost respect for Chairman Award Winning Teams and completely understand the level of caliber required to become a CA team. I also understand, how prestigious it is to win CA at Champs. But It seems that many teams that qualify for champs by winning Engineering Inspiration have to compete with the CA for the same award which qualfied them for champs in the first place.

Now this post would not be of any use if I did not mention how to fix this issue and while I am not certain any of these options would be a perfect solution it might be a combination of ideas to change this.

• I am not sure if this occurs at other District Champs but at MAR Champs, the Engineering Inspiration winners from each district receive a 10 minute Q & A session regardless if they also won Chairman's at a district. Provide this opportunity to just the Engineering Inspiration winners from each regional at Champs or a similar presentation opportunity.

• Only judge Engineering Inspiration in the pits based off the teams that qualified for Champs by winning Engineering Inspiration at a regional

• Exclude RCA from winning subdivision Engineering Inspiration awards

I look forward to the hopefully healthy and productive discussion that will take place in this thread and to understand the opinions of others.

TL;DR

Many times, within FIRST it is possible for EI to be seen as a second place Chairman’s Award, while EI is prestigious for its own reasons, I believe that teams that win Engineering Inspiration at a regional deserve that same opportunity to win that award at a subdivision level.

[hrench]

I'm surprised, because I've always thought that the Gracious Professionalism award was 'Chairman's runner up'.

I'm with a team that's won eight RCA's, but never won an Engineering Inspiration. But the last two years, no RCA and two regional GP's. In 2012, an Einstein GP. Really honored, but not as much as Chairman's. But you can see how we associate GP with not winning RCA.

It's my impression that the criteria to win Engineering Inspiration is the creation of engineering classes and engineering curriculum in your school, to encourages future engineers.

Chairman's criteria is much harder to put into one sentence. But it does involve inspiring engineers and gracious professionalism too.

Probably a venn diagram would intersect these two at 'chairmans'.

[itsjustjon]

Originally Posted by hrench

I'm surprised, because I've always thought that the Gracious Professionalism award was 'Chairman's runner up'.

A team that receives the GP Award is nominated by other teams via a form handed out in the pits, I believe.

Could be wrong, though. I just remember a form being handed out for the GP Award at the pits for the OC Regional.

[Broboraider]

Originally Posted by hrench

Chairman's criteria is much harder to put into one sentence. But it does involve inspiring engineers and gracious professionalism too.

Probably a venn diagram would intersect these two at 'chairmans'.

I would agree with what you said that because Chairman's team need to incorporate not only inspiring engineers but making an impact in their community as well as practising GP. While EI and GP are a part of Chairmans, I just do not think it is always a two-way street in terms of EI

[Tottanka]

As far as it goes in the championship, there is nothing to do between EI and CA.
The judges are an entirely different panel, and they do not even communicate regarding what team's they see as potential winners of an award.

In theory, it is even possible to win the EI at a sub division and also win the CA on Einstein.
This goes to prove that the EI is not a second place of the CA. It's judges with different criteria.

The EI judges talk to all the teams at the divisions they are in. The teams only get the pit talk, and have to make it as good as they can. The 12 min CA interview has nothing to do with that.

[waialua359]

Originally Posted by Tottanka

As far as it goes in the championship, there is nothing to do between EI and CA.
The judges are an entirely different panel, and they do not even communicate regarding what team's they see as potential winners of an award.

In theory, it is even possible to win the EI at a sub division and also win the CA on Einstein.
This goes to prove that the EI is not a second place of the CA. It's judges with different criteria.

The EI judges talk to all the teams at the divisions they are in. The teams only get the pit talk, and have to make it as good as they can. The 12 min CA interview has nothing to do with that.

In my opinion, this isnt necessarily true.
I have seen teams that try for the CA, win EI a lot of the times, but never both awards.
I can also tell you from 1st hand knowledge from judges in the past that they indeed communicate with each other.

In my opinion, a lot of teams trying for the RCA or CCA have a better chance of winning EI, because as they try for the Chairman's Award, an interview takes place, giving that team an additional formal opportunity to showcase their program. This provides an advantage that a non-participating RCA team does not have.
EI-RCA/CCA goes hand in hand, even if indirectly.

Regardless of whether or not it is said explicitly or not, awards are spread around given to as many different teams as possible. Fact according to.....

[Broboraider]

Originally Posted by waialua359

In my opinion, this isnt necessarily true.

In my opinion, a lot of teams trying for the RCA or CCA have a better chance of winning EI, because as they try for the Chairman's Award, an interview takes place, giving that team an additional formal opportunity to showcase their program. This provides an advantage that a non-participating RCA team does not have.
EI-RCA/CCA goes hand in hand, even if indirectly.

This is what I am trying to convey. That non RCA and even REI winners are at disadvantage to win that award. For me it seems a little backwards that a team who might have only won a RCA can win EI at Champs. It's like saying a veteran team should be able to be chosen as RAS because they were a rookie once too

[waialua359]

Originally Posted by Broboraider

This is what I am trying to convey. That non RCA and even REI winners are at disadvantage to win that award. For me it seems a little backwards that a team who might have only won a RCA can win EI at Champs. It's like saying a veteran team should be able to be chosen as RAS because they were a rookie once too

You can look at our history as an example.
In 2008, we won the Hawaii RCA.
At Championships that year, we won EI (only 1 given to the entire event).
Our program has never won a regional EI ever in over 30+ regional events attended.

[Broboraider]

Originally Posted by Tottanka

As far as it goes in the championship, there is nothing to do between EI and CA.
The judges are an entirely different panel, and they do not even communicate regarding what team's they see as potential winners of an award.

I am going to have to disagree with you on this because atleast one third of the teams that have won Champs EI were solely RCA before they came to champs

[FrankJ]

Originally Posted by Broboraider

I am going to have to disagree with you on this because atleast one third of the teams that have won Champs EI were solely RCA before they came to champs

If you look at the judging criteria, EI is a little more short term IE current year is more heavily weighted. Has a specific encourage engineering field component. Other than that their are a lot of similarities.

Judges that pick the EI are not the same as judges picking chairman's, but the teams are presenting the same material to both. You cannot when Chairmans without presenting, But if you are good enough to win Chairmans, chances are you have a good story for EI as well.

[Red2486]

I think that a lot of this comes from EI and CA genuinely having a lot of overlap. EI focuses on strength of partnership within the team, school, and community. Sustainability and measurable reach are the primary components of EI, but they are also components of the Chairman's Award. A good CA team will most likely be a good EI team as well.

As far as competing at the Championship, I believe the teams that best embody each award should win the award. Maybe these teams, who don't win EI at the their qualifying events, win at the Championship because they are the best EI teams, but were awarded the Chairman's Award because they were also the best at that, and that award is more prestigious.

As far as judging goes, I think EI teams are actually at an advantage. Chairman's Award teams have an extremely limited time with the judges and their interactions are very restricted. Judged awards give teams more time with the judges and the ability to talk about their work with multiple panels of judges.

On a final note, one of the teams that best embodied Engineering Inspiration to me is GaCo 1629. They have an excellent program that is geared toward Engineering Inspiration and won multiple Championship EI's back when only one was given. While they have earned Chairman's Awards since then, I would look to them as an outstanding EI team.

[MechEng83]

http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...7&postcount=14

[Broboraider]

Originally Posted by MechEng83

http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...7&postcount=14

I know this can be usually the case when going for Chairman's doesn't guarantee a team to be in the running for EI. but at least from experience within the district model. the teams that usually win EI are from the chairman's pool. In fact at least in MAR, many teams have won both EI and DCAin the same season entering the district championship

[MechEng83]

Originally Posted by Broboraider

I know this can be usually the case when going for Chairman's doesn't guarantee a team to be in the running for EI. but at least from experience within the district model. the teams that usually win EI are from the chairman's pool. In fact at least in MAR, many teams have won both EI and DCAin the same season entering the district championship

2015 Indiana DCA - 135, 234, 4272
2015 Indiana DEI - 461, 1501, 1741

2016 Indiana DCA - 868, 1741, 1747
2016 Indiana DEI - 135, 461, 2197

[Broboraider]

Originally Posted by MechEng83

2015 Indiana DCA - 135, 234, 4272
2015 Indiana DEI - 461, 1501, 1741

2016 Indiana DCA - 868, 1741, 1747
2016 Indiana DEI - 135, 461, 2197

MAR
-----
2012
DCA:1218, 433, 11, 2590, 75
DEI: 1923, 321, 75, 433, 3142

2013
DCA:1218, 2590, 433, 75, 11, 2729
DEI: 1403, 3142, 321, 1676, 75, 321

2014
DCA: 1676, 1218, 433, 303, 2590, 75
DEI: 75, 25, 365, 3142, 4575, 1676

2015
DCA: 1647, 303, 708, 1218, 1676, 321, 1923
DEI: 11, 1676, 1218, 2729, 75, 365, 3314

2016
DCA: 1923, 708, 1647, 321, 869, 1218, 1403
DEI: 303, 1218, 2590, 11, 1676, 272, 4575

PNW
-----
2014
DCA: 2046, 4488, 2522, 1983, 3219, 4057, 1318, 948, 4125, 1540
DEI: 3786, 4057, 4911, 4125, 2980, 4043, 2903, 4060, 2910, 2990

2015
DCA: 1540, 2557, 4125, 2930, 3574, 2980, 3588, 4911, 1983, 3219
DEI: 3673, 3588, 4980, 4915, 1540, 2930, 1595, 488, 3024, 3574

2016
DCA: 2257, 4125, 1540, 4911, 1983, 3574, 1510, 2471, 2980
DEI: 3786, 4061, 1510, 2522, 4125, 4911, 3574, 2635, 2046

NE
-----
2014
DCA: 811, 3467, 78, 2648, 1100, 558, 1058, 2067, 125
DEI: 2648, 4546, 228, 3930, 1519, 1735, 3467, 178, 3525

2015
DCA: 467, 195, 178, 4905, 2877, 2648, 558, 1058, 1519
DEI: 811, 228, 176, 1735, 5512, 3930, 78, 2648, 172

2016*
DCA: 230, 4905, 4761, 2648, 4176, 166, 125, 558, 467
DEI: 4557, 5422, 4909, 172, 246, 1519, 190, 2067, 1058

FIM
-----
2009*
DCA: 247, 33, 280, 66, 27, 503, 217
DEI: 85, 68, 2673, 440, 1023, 1718, 815

2010
DCA: 548, DATA NOT LISTED IN TBA, 226, 503, 27, 1718, 33
DEI: 2834, DATA NOT LISTED IN TBA, 217, 247, 1, 141, 503

2011
DCA: 2604, 66, 548, 1, 1718, 503, 2337, 33, 1023
DEI: 2834, 141, 862, 503, 27, 141, 830, 68, 2137

2012
DCA: 1711, 85, 66, 503, 123, 1718, 27, 548, 33, 2137
DEI: 2337, 123, 830, 2834, 1023, 2771, 94, 68, 1718, 27

2013
DCA: 68, 2771, 3641, 548, 2834, 27, 1718, 141, 503, 2337, 1023
DEI: 862, 1711, 141, 2834, 314, 4325, 2604, 862, 3641, 217, 226

2014
DCA: 1718, 33, 2771, 503, 1023, 548, 2137, 1711, 1506, 280, 2337, 68, 2834, 314, 2604
DEI: 1023, 470, 4377, 2337, 3602, 27, 302, 857, 2771, 548, 141, 1, 3547, 503, 4130

2015
DCA: 141, 1023, 503, 4967, 2604, 2137, 280, 3641, 245, 3618, 3547, 1718, 68, 1322, 548, 862, 1502, 33
DEI: 3322, 1701, 3770, 3620, 1711, 1718, 2611, 2834, 94, 2619, 2767, 226, 123, 2771, 217, 2137, 5084, 2337

2016
DCA: 1322, 1025, 3618, 33, 2604, 2834, 66, 503, 3767, 2619, 68, 548, 2137, 85, 4776, 2771, 2959, 1718, 3641, 5090, 1711
DEI: 1, 573, 3602, 1023, 2337, 85, 4967, 3175, 2586, 226, 1502, 3641, 4130, 4956, 68, 2767, 503, 2337, 3322, 3175, 5505

Surprisingly enough between MAR, PNW, FiM, NE, and IN; IN is the only district top never have a team win DCA and DEI in the same and it has happened at least once in the four other districts every year except for FiM (2009) and NE (2016).