Why do teams voluntarily do FIRST without adult technical mentors?

[KathieK]

Originally Posted by Katie Reynolds

The "best" way to run a team isn't by having it all student run, or all mentor run. It's not splitting the "power" 50/50 and having students do their half and mentors do theirs. It's about finding what works best for the team - finding what inspires team members and having the ability to realize that you may have to change the way your team is run slightly, from year to year.

As soon as you can do that, you've truly found the best way to run a team.

I agree. Team dynamics change so much from year to year that I think it's critical that teams meet in the pre-season for teambuilding exercises to learn what will work and won't for them. As the FIRST website states. "The FIRST Robotics Competition is an exciting, multinational competition that teams professionals and young people to solve an engineering design problem in an intense and competitive way."

[Andy A.]

OK. I'll post this quote one last time, and then I'm never bringing it up again. I've done it to many times. It's someone else's turn.

Portions of Speech by Dean Kamen

1998 FIRST Competition Kickoff Workshop, January 10, 1998

The Center for New Hampshire, Manchester, NH

[imperfectly transcribed from a videotape]

copyright 1998 PNHS and GMPT

I don’t know how many ways to try and continue to say it. . . What this organization is about is not education per se. I heard a lot of people, even last night, and I think they mean well, and I understand what you’re saying, there needs to be a balance, but I heard people saying "well sure that other team did great, but thats because the engineers did all the work. The kids didn’t build the robot." I have to tell you, FIRST is not an educational institution. Its okay if the kids build the whole robot, its okay if they don’t touch it. FIRST ought to be to education what the NFL or the World Series is to little league.

Just do the mental experiment in which there is no professional football, there is no little league. Do you think that little kids at the age of six, seven, and eight are going to get up and spend hours exercising, striving to get better and better at what would become a cardiovascular exercise running up and down a field? Imagine how many kids would spend those kinds of hours practicing basketball if there was no Michael Jordan.

The harsh reality is this country doesn’t have an NCAA of smarts or Olympic Committee of brains. We don’t have people as well known as Michael Jordan doing little things like inventing CAT scanners, curing diseases, putting a man on the moon. You and your companies are those people.

Bottom line? It really does you no good to wring your hands over how much your students are learning. What they are learning making a few parts a year is pretty minor compared to what they will learn in collage and on the job. I came out of 3 years on 95 as a student thinking I had soaked up every little detail there was on robotics. The reality was that I had soaked up a bunch of details on how to make a FIRST robot. Theres a difference.

Our job as mentors isn't to teach them how to make a robot. Or to hand them a box of parts and say "Go". It's to teach them that there is value in technology and being among the people who create it. This isn't an easy thing to teach someone who wants nothing more then to get out of school. But you can do it. Just stay focused on whats important.

If I find a student on my team who came through FIRST having learned nothing more then he wanted to go to MIT, I'll give my self a pat on the back and start counting down to kickoff.

-Andy A.

[DB213parent]

As a brand, spanking-new entry to this group,I want to thank ChiefDelphi for providing such a valuable resource to FIRST "lifers." As I ready through all the responses to Andy's question, I became more aware of the fact that team-related issues are not the sole property of our team. Since I joined up in 1998, our team has gone from mentor-heavy and student-poor, to mentor-light and student rich, to the current situation - about 20 students and no mentors. The sorry details aren't important here, but I want to emphasize that RESPECT is a key component that is too often lacking among team members. If mentors don't respect the students' desire to learn and take an active role in the construction, they're missing the point of FIRST. If students refuse to accept the knowledge and experience of the mentors, that's not independence - it's arrogance.

Here's the place where I put out my call for help. With our mentor forces depleted, our parents' group is trying to step in and do what we can to help. However, we don't want to overstep our bounds and become intrusive. I already read "101 Ways Parents Can Help a FIRST Team," and there were many good ideas (but forget about me making luggage pom-poms - #48). Can I hear from some teams that have active parent organizations so we can find out if we're on the right track. Thanks to all of your for a truly thought-provoking thread.

Originally Posted by Andy Baker

We need to talk. Please sit down.

Let's discuss something that defines FIRST. Sometimes, this is the big white elephant in the corner that everyone wants to ignore... but it needs to be talked about. There are many opinions on this subject.

Why do FIRST teams start with the intention of this being a "student design competition"? Many teams operate this way. We see teams who are proud about having a "100% designed and built robot". These teams get awards for their student involvement.

I can respect this. They worked hard. They learned much. However, more likely than not, they performed not so well at a regional. These teams saw other teams come in with 4-5 engineering mentors and compete better. These other teams, with more adult involvement, may have engineers working in the pits, along side the students. They may have skilled trades machinists making parts for their team during the build season. They may have professional machine designers creating gearboxes or writing code.

Are both teams learning? yes.

Dare I ask... Which "team" is better? What defines "better"?

FIRST was founded on "Inspiration". It still is the cornerstone. Dean, Woodie, and the FIRST Board of Directors are involved because of this idea. It is a thrill to inspire someone to be great. It is a thrill to be inspired by others.

I contend that the best "team" is an equal balance of student involvement, teacher involvement, and engineer involvement. In my mind, can a engineer design something on a robot and be proud of that design? You bet. Some teams frown on this. Some teams, mentors, and students preach that this is wrong. What do you think? Why is that?

So... there is it is. This will be a debate. Opinions will be given, and people will disagree. That is ok. Let is out. It will be healthy.

Andy B.

[JVN]

Originally Posted by DB213parent

...I want to emphasize that RESPECT is a key component that is too often lacking among team members. If mentors don't respect the students' desire to learn and take an active role in the construction, they're missing the point of FIRST. If students refuse to accept the knowledge and experience of the mentors, that's not independence - it's arrogance.

Thanks to all of your for a truly thought-provoking thread.

Thanks to YOU for a truly thought-provoking post. One of the best views of the issue I've seen. It definitely summarizes things in a good way.

Welcome to Chief Delphi!
(Certainly an excellent first post, here's to many more...)

[DB213parent]

Thanks for the warm welcome - what a terrific venue for opinions from everyone involved with FIRST.

Originally Posted by JVN

Thanks to YOU for a truly thought-provoking post. One of the best views of the issue I've seen. It definitely summarizes things in a good way.

Welcome to Chief Delphi!
(Certainly an excellent first post, here's to many more...)

[mechanicalbrain]

Arrrggggh I really don't like the name of this thread. Its a little provocative in some ways (no offense Andy i think our chat was great!). OK so Ive decided to amend my view a little. I still believe everything i posted before but Ive come to realize that it doesn't matter. My opinions and everyone else's only really apply to our perspective teams. While these posts are good in showing how other teams are run no team plan is better than any other. I don't think anyone should be shot down for their opinion ghansel and i hope nobaody did. The only reason a teams organization is wrong is if it no longer provides a fun and educational environment for the students or if it hampers a team from exemplifying FIRST goals. I think ultimately a team that is completely student run or mentor run (or a mix) is no better than any other (unless of course the reasons provided occur). I think a good part of the posts here supporting student run teams need to be specific. Honestly their is nothing wrong with mentors on teams but most of the posts here aren't talking about that. What there talking about are teams where mentors strong arm the students. This is something i think almost everyone(and some who agree probably do it without realizing it) here agrees should be avoided unless its absolutely dire. I personally hate it when a mentor OR student strong arms other students by suppressing their ideas. I think a good thing to keep in mind is that their truly is no such thing as right or wrong to this because a specific team will work better to certain leadership methods. The only real tragedy is when a team becomes so static that it can't adapt.

[funstuff]

I think that this topic is one that will never have a definate answer. I will however, post my own opinion, as I am a 3rd year veteran on 624.

Some adults may forget that we, as teenagers, feel a need to prove something to the world. To prove we are adults and adequate in the world. THIS is why teams knowingly participate in FIRST without adults to guide them. The students are in part blind to the fact that they do not know everything, as they might hope, and also in part, they are just as stubborn and controlling as some mentors.

Some students fail to realize that thirty-some-odd years ago, when the adults that are now assisting them in their endeavours, were students themselves. But unlike now, thirty years ago, there was no FIRST. There was no organized outlet for their creativity. They had no big and fancy toys to play with during their high school years, such as we have today. So, just as parents want to do their child's science projects for them, the mentors want to build the robot for the students. When they build the science project, of course that project will get first prize in the science fair. But is this fair? Hardly. It is not fair to the students. It is not fair to the other teams. It is most certainly not fair to the mentors themselves.

The best team is comprised of both students and mentors. And by mentors, I mean adults that help guide the students through the building process. There should never, ever be "mentors" building the robots, while the students of the team play cards. In that instance, they cease to be mentors and are simply engineers.

The mentors should be the people who ensure that things are getting done, but are not doing said things. The students who design and build the robot should, by all means go to their mentors with their problems, as the mentors are the ones with college degrees in engineering and physics. I have many an instance when even the adults learned something from the students.

Our school sponsor this year and last year, as opposed to previous years' sponsors, is not a physics teacher, or a calculus teacher. She teaches Spanish. When we first got her involved, she had absolutely no idea what she was doing, except supporting some students who were in dire need of assistance. Now, she has learned so much from the students and the other mentors. She is, in truth, a FIRST fanatic at times. But this is what happens when the spirit of FIRST inspires people. I have seen it inspire not only students and mentors, but parents as well.

There must always be a balance, and, as posted above, a sense of respect between the adults and the students. Both sides need to understand that most of the time, students have minds and ideas with an abundance of creativity, just like most of the time, mentors have minds and ideas with an good deal of knowledge and experience. These two entities can not, despite many beliefs, survive without one another. The best way to survive is to thrive, and to do so by working with one another, rather than against one another, that is truely success, whether or not the competition is won.

As a team, we have realized that only under extremely lucky conditions will we ever win a championship, being primarily student built robot. I think no one is devestated by this fact because there is so much more to FIRST than winning. We realize that many times, the teams whose robots win or are almost perfect are not built by students, by any length of the imagination. Our team, to the best of my knowledge, would rather do OUR best, with mentors working alongside students, than be THE best with great sacrifices in who builds the robot. We are not a machine. We are a team. We make mistakes and we learn from them. That is a fact of life. Any team that can not make a small mistake without great consequence is more machine than human. And all teams are primarily human, with one very important machine. But I digress...

Simply, the mentors are a necessary factor in a FIRST team, but they will almost always tread the fine line between mentoring, and doing. Keep in mind that students are the core of every team, a necessary evil. Without the students, there would be no FIRST, just a bunch of old men sitting around playing with their hi-tech toys, losing their creativity. The mentors are not a necessity, but a great and valued component to any team.

[mechanicalbrain]

So obviously you are for mentor run teams but i think some of your statements are a little askew.

Originally Posted by funstuff

The mentors should be the people who ensure that things are getting done, but are not doing said things.

Okay its sounds to me like your talking about a team where mentors tell students how to build a robot which is contradicted by saying the students design the robot. What type of things should mentors insure in your opinion?

Originally Posted by funstuff

The students who design and build the robot should, by all means go to their mentors with their problems, as the mentors are the ones with college degrees in engineering and physics.

Uhh im not sure i agree with this fully. Speaking strictly from actual experience being a engineer gives a mentor no advantage over a student when it come to building robotics. As mentioned in other threads robotics is rarely covered in college. In fact i know a mentor who has designed xray systems for submarine inspection yet has no clue when it came to our robots specific abilities. He was knowledgable about electrics but in plenty of cases it just didn't carry over.

Originally Posted by funstuff

There must always be a balance, and, as posted above, a sense of respect between the adults and the students. Both sides need to understand that most of the time, students have minds and ideas with an abundance of creativity, just like most of the time, mentors have minds and ideas with an good deal of knowledge and experience. These two entities can not, despite many beliefs, survive without one another. The best way to survive is to thrive, and to do so by working with one another, rather than against one another, that is truely success, whether or not the competition is won.

I think that the knowledge of the students is underplayed in this part. Frankly
your last sentence is completely contradictory to the next section.

Originally Posted by funstuff

As a team, we have realized that only under extremely lucky conditions will we ever win a championship, being primarily student built robot. I think no one is devestated by this fact because there is so much more to FIRST than winning. We realize that many times, the teams whose robots win or are almost perfect are not built by students, by any length of the imagination.

THIS is what i have a problem with. I think this is hardly true for reasons mentioned before and because a student with experience can design amazing pieces. Two great examples are Tytus and Arefin (the first to come to mind. hope you guys don't mind) who both did great work while in college. Even Engineers with knowledge in a specific area can have trouble because they can design a otherwise amazing system but find that unless they have experience in robotics that their system just isn't practical (inappropriately weighted systems and a lack of understanding of parts limits is a primary problem) Again mentor run teams are not bad but its the generalizations that get to me. I know I'm a hypocrite in making this post and if any of you figure out why don't bother posting.

[sure_smile]

I think the most important thing is to find a balance- at Championships, I went out scouting for a little while, and at some teams' pit areas you were directed straight to the mentors when you had technical questions, because there would not be a single student who could answer; I don't think that is right.

Last year was our rookie year (tho two out of our three co-captains had been on a FIRST team before), and we had a 'mentor hands-off' policy. Our team was interesting because we were 9 people, and most didn't have any pertaining experience at all, myself included. We were really lucky in that our mentors were understanding, because they taught us everything, without taking over, and now I fully appreciate how difficult that must have been for them; this last saturday, I was with our LEGO team, and it took all my willpower not to just grab the legos and run away cackling madly; i mean, i LOVE legos ! and i bet our mentors felt that way all build season, but for the most part they wouldn't actually pick up something and start working at it unless we asked them- once we asked, they were free to help. And as a result, we learned a LOT. we knew from that start that if we built it on our own, our robot may not be one of the 'winning' ones, the ones that everyone wants in their alliance. but we made a conscious decision that having a 'winning' robot didnt matter as much to us, we just wanted to have fun and learn. as it was, we had tons of fun and learned a lot, and our robot did fine. it is part of a mentor's responsibility to know when to back off (and to do so if asked), but eqaully it is the student's responsibility to willing stick their nose to the grindstone when that time comes; a mentor cannot be blamed for doing it themselves if the students are slacking off.

finding the balance is the most important thing for a team to be successful- i don't mean top 8 seed successful, i mean 'everyone is inspired, happy, and has learned so much that they have forgotten what their house looks like' successful...

just my 2 cents (aaaaaaaa where did the cents sign go? ....can't...find....)

[Andy Baker]

Originally Posted by mechanicalbrain

Uhh im not sure i agree with this fully. Speaking strictly from actual experience being a engineer gives a mentor no advantage over a student when it come to building robotics. As mentioned in other threads robotics is rarely covered in college. In fact i know a mentor who has designed xray systems for submarine inspection yet has no clue when it came to our robots specific abilities. He was knowledgable about electrics but in plenty of cases it just didn't carry over.

This generalization is wrong and essentially insulting to engineers.

1. Being an engineer is advantageous for building successful robots. There are thousands of companies around the world who design and build robots (automated industrial systems, consumer robotics, and robotic toys, just to name a few markets). Who does the majority of the designing and developing of these robots? Engineers. Companies in these markets who want to hire someone to help them build their next 6-axis, servo-driven, wafer-insertion robot or their next robotic lawn mower mostly hire people with engineering degrees to do engineering. Usually, these companies wait until a student gets out of college to offer them a full-time position.

2. Colleges do teach their students to design, debug, test, and produce robots. Where was this mentioned that these were rarely covered, and by whom? Sure, there are many engineers who have not specifically studied machine design and they might not know FIRST game play, but they still are engineers. If these people are willing to help, students should show enough respect to at least hear them out. They might not be able to discuss the intricacies of a swerve drive, but at least they can teach V=IR, F=MA, and the basics of C programming.

Originally Posted by mechanicalbrain

THIS is what i have a problem with. I think this is hardly true for reasons mentioned before and because a student with experience can design amazing pieces. Two great examples are Tytus and Arefin (the first to come to mind. hope you guys don't mind) who both did great work while in college. Even Engineers with knowledge in a specific area can have trouble because they can design a otherwise amazing system but find that unless they have experience in robotics that their system just isn't practical (inappropriately weighted systems and a lack of understanding of parts limits is a primary problem) Again mentor run teams are not bad but its the generalizations that get to me. I know I'm a hypocrite in making this post and if any of you figure out why don't bother posting.

(One a side note, it's good to see that Tytus and Arefin have been leading double lives as college students. Also... ask either of them how they have learned to do some good designing. My guess is that they will say that knowledgeable engineers helped to show them how it is done.)

I am going to go out on a limb to make an assumption and offer a suggestion.

My assumption that there are engineers who are deemed "unhelpful" because they are thrown a FIRST-related technical challege during week 2 or 3 of the build season. They come up with a solution without really knowing the details of the game and after not shown a FIRST match. When these un-informed engineers give a sub-par design that might not be advantageous, students shake their heads and think "oh, he's just a engineer who doesn't know anything about robotics".

Here is my suggestion: instead of simply going to an engineer during week 2, actually bring them into your team now. Let them become part of your team. Take them to an off-season event. Invite them to your fund raising events, your bowling nights, and your fall planning sessions. Believe it or not, these engineers will probably come up with better input come build season. They might even show you something and possibly even inspire someone on your team.

Call me crazy, but this just might help your team.

Andy B.

[Al Skierkiewicz]

Oz,
I have to agree with Andy on this one. My son just graduated from Bradley with an ME degree. I can tell you that not only did he have classes in robotics, but there was an entire section of the floor dedicated to robotic design and function. Manufacturing, particularly automobile building, makes extensive use of robotic devices from material handling to painting.

To DB213 Parent, listening and observing are two very real ways to judge how much to get involved. Your students will show and tell when they need help, are frustrated, tired or out of ideas. If you run into a situation where you need assistance please come here to CD to get your questions answered. I will help on anything electrical, and the other mentors who write here will help with mechanical, software, even team dynamics. You can't get a better source for info than right here. Be assured that when you are at competition, you can turn to us for help as well. Just ask.

[Alexander McGee]

Originally Posted by mechanicalbrain

Uhh im not sure i agree with this fully. Speaking strictly from actual experience being a engineer gives a mentor no advantage over a student when it come to building robotics. As mentioned in other threads robotics is rarely covered in college. In fact i know a mentor who has designed xray systems for submarine inspection yet has no clue when it came to our robots specific abilities. He was knowledgable about electrics but in plenty of cases it just didn't carry over.

I think that you need some more exposure. Engineers do nothing but this, some may just work in a different, less technical area. Engineers solve problems, that is all. We are the world's problem solvers and there are many different problems to be solved, just as there are many different kinds of engineers.

As an engineer, I work with and build robots daily. I know many many others who do too. Think about any company that sells products in the USA. These products, whatever they might be, need to be tested / packaged / organized / repaired / reconditioned / redesigned. Who do you think does all this? Certainly engineers, but they can't do every little thing 24-7. We build robots to do it for us. Take a look at this:



That is what I am talking about. This robot runs 24-7-365 in the Test Lab of R&D where I work, Stryker Instruments. We make Medical products and are required by the FDA to test and ensure that they can sustain long life. This is a life-cycle tester which automates and monitors an Autoclave (hospital sterilization) with a variety of parts in it. I can only show this to you because I made it as a freshman. I wish i could show you some of the amazing things that other people whom I work with have created.

I am not sure what you are talking about when you say that robotics is not taught in College. Which aspect of robotics are you referring to? I have had classes in machining, design, drive train, electrical, pneumatic control, and programming, (gotta love Statics, Solids, Thermo, & Heat Trans!) and I am not even a Junior yet! Maybe it is different at your school, but and engineering degree touches so many facets of robotics, that one can't begin to learn them all.

I also disagree with you about engineering mentors and their ability to help a team significantly. Look at, oh, every team that has ever been in the top 4 at Nationals. Do you think that a majority of these robots had minimal engineer involvement? Of course they had help. It is the engineers in this program who make it what it is. Without them and their ideas, it would have taken teams much longer to come up with things such as swivel drive, a 4-speed transmission, autonomous programming (before 03, if you would believe it), and everything else that has left you in awe. The students are, of course, vital to the program as well, but engineers and their ideas have made this program grow exponentially fast.

I'm not attacking you personally, I just felt that your post had some things that need to be addressed for everyone. Feel free to IM me or email me and we can chat. Also, please re-read Andy's last post. I couldn't agree with him more.

-Alex

[Arefin Bari]

Originally Posted by mechanicalbrain

Two great examples are Tytus and Arefin (the first to come to mind. hope you guys don't mind) who both did great work while in college.

Thank you Chris for pointing us out. I have a long way to go. But I haven't accomplished nothing close to what a lot have. I can't speak for Tytus, we may have worked together, traveled together, but we come from our own different background. We learn stuff our own way.

I just started college. I haven't accomplished nothing compared to many. I wouldn't be where I am right now if it wasn't because of my mentors. Team 108 mentors has always been there for me. Even though these two engineers weren't from my team, they took the mentor role in my life... Andy and John. Do give credit to the mentors, because they make you who you are. Maybe you won't realize it now (just like I didn't back in my sophomore year in high school), but you will realize it the night you sit down and design a transmission and you face a lot of problems. You will be able to solve them just because your mentors were there to teach you how to solve it.

There are still teams in FIRST I know, who don't have any mentors. Do you know how bad they crave for one? I do, because I know I wouldn't even bother to sit infront of the laptop with inventor open and try to design cool things. In order to design the cool thing, you need to know how to design it. Thats when an Engineer/mentor comes in. As a teenager (ya, I was pretty dumb) I used to not listen to anyone or not pay attention. But as time passed by, I learned to listen, to pay attention, to learn. It helps.

Yes, lectures can be boring... actually very boring (I go through 4 lectures, 3 days a week for college, I would know) but I do learn things from this.

Now I am sitting here thinking, 4 years back if I was reading this post made by some college student, I would say something like "why is he posting it... why is he even bothering to tell me stuff like this. I know enough."

From Tytus and I: We learned how to manufacture parts because our mentors were there for us and helped us learn how to use all the machinery. We learned how to design a transmission by looking at many different transmission that were posted right here on chiefdelphi by the mentors and the engineers. You think we came up with those idea? Nope... it was all designed and built... all we did was took the idea... modified it a bit and make it work. All the dog shifters in FIRST has the basic concept? are they all same? no...

What are we both trying to point out...

We are trying to tell everyone that we are Arefin and Tytus because of the mentors. We like to thank every single one of you mentors for being there for us. In 4/5 years, we will be still here with our degree on our hand helping as many teams out as possible.

P.s. - While I was posting this, Tytus was talking to me on Teamspeak. We both shared our opinion.

[Tytus Gerrish]

Originally Posted by Arefin Bari

Thank you Chris for pointing us out. I have a long way to go. But I haven't accomplished nothing close to what a lot have. I can't speak for Tytus, we may have worked together, traveled together, but we come from our own different background. We learn stuff our own way.

I just started college. I haven't accomplished nothing compared to many. I wouldn't be where I am right now if it wasn't because of my mentors. Team 108 mentors has always been there for me. Even though these two engineers weren't from my team, they took the mentor role in my life... Andy and John. Do give credit to the mentors, because they make you who you are. Maybe you won't realize it now (just like I didn't back in my sophomore year in high school), but you will realize it the night you sit down and design a transmission and you face a lot of problems. You will be able to solve them just because your mentors were there to teach you how to solve it.

There are still teams in FIRST I know, who don't have any mentors. Do you know how bad they crave for one? I do, because I know I wouldn't even bother to sit infront of the laptop with inventor open and try to design cool things. In order to design the cool thing, you need to know how to design it. Thats when an Engineer/mentor comes in. As a teenager (ya, I was pretty dumb) I used to not listen to anyone or not pay attention. But as time passed by, I learned to listen, to pay attention, to learn. It helps.

Yes, lectures can be boring... actually very boring (I go through 4 lectures, 3 days a week for college, I would know) but I do learn things from this.

Now I am sitting here thinking, 4 years back if I was reading this post made by some college student, I would say something like "why is he posting it... why is he even bothering to tell me stuff like this. I know enough."

From Tytus and I: We learned how to manufacture parts because our mentors were there for us and helped us learn how to use all the machinery. We learned how to design a transmission by looking at many different transmission that were posted right here on chiefdelphi by the mentors and the engineers. You think we came up with those idea? Nope... it was all designed and built... all we did was took the idea... modified it a bit and make it work. All the dog shifters in FIRST has the basic concept? are they all same? no...

What are we both trying to point out...

We are trying to tell everyone that we are Arefin and Tytus because of the mentors. We like to thank every single one of you mentors for being there for us. In 4/5 years, we will be still here with our degree on our hand helping as many teams out as possible.

P.s. - While I was posting this, Tytus was talking to me on Teamspeak. We both shared our opinion.

Can i get and Amen!!!!

seriously i just started college, and i wouldn't know the stuff or have Done anything i have done if it wasn't for the mentors like Chet and Dan letting me take the parts home and mess around with them. and get me a copy of autocad, and actually put me behind the glass As a freshman driver. it's all thanks to them. and when everything expanded with chiefdelphi all the mentors on here were there for me too pushing me along even more. Now that CD media is up i searched all the things i have uploaded and everything i see i see some element that wouldn't be there without a mentor. the fact is that i have been very fortunate being on 179 and Being here on chiefdelphi. Many teams Don't Even Have one mentor Just a teacher and no experience in first and honestly its not fair. mentors are very important and no this Rarly can't be done without them.

[KathieK]

Originally Posted by DB213parent

Here's the place where I put out my call for help. With our mentor forces depleted, our parents' group is trying to step in and do what we can to help. However, we don't want to overstep our bounds and become intrusive. I already read "101 Ways Parents Can Help a FIRST Team," and there were many good ideas (but forget about me making luggage pom-poms - #48). Can I hear from some teams that have active parent organizations so we can find out if we're on the right track. Thanks to all of your for a truly thought-provoking thread.

LOL, Elaine, you've come to the right place! (and the luggage pom-poms also make great sneaker accessories!) So I won't bore the rest of you, I will PM you with details of NEMO. We can help!