As requested by both cadandcookiesand JABot67, this has been moved to a new thread.
I’ve titled the thead as “How do I help my area move to districts?”, as that seems what the general question/topic discussion was about in the Districts 2017 thread. I also believe it would be beneficial to the readers of ChiefDelphi to have a discussion on how you can help your area move to districts. Who do you contact in your area to join the RPC or train in Key Volunteers? How do you become involved at the planning level and what are some best practices to do this?
I’ve also included the original comments below.
Sometimes trying to join the RPC or help train in key volunteers isn’t as easy as it should be.
I was pm’d this document by recent alumni in the state of Minnesota. I am told that it is given to all of the recent FIRST alumni attending a specific University by the RPC. I was also told that these students have all but stopped volunteering at FRC events in the state because they feel that they are not wanted/liked. The document seems fairly professional but I could understand how if it was presented in the wrong way it would burn some bridges.
As a Senior Volunteer Coordinator, I look for volunteers who are always willing to help. The people who arrive early to help set-up and who stay late to take-down the field often become great Key Volunteers later, because they are willing to help with the grunt work when there isn’t an audience to watch.
This year we are also doing a lot of training for roles. We have three different people training for FTAA roles by helping in various positions around the field.
I’ve noticed that sometimes Key Volunteers become possessive of their roles, feeling like they spent so many years volunteering that they earn the right to the position, and they don’t like when new people start training or moving their way up the ladder. It’s important to remember that almost every area needs more volunteers, and just because someone new is training or being moved up, doesn’t mean your key position is going away.
So, how do you help prepare your area for Districts?
Be willing to do the grunt work, like staying late and packing fields.
Be willing to train other people for roles, including your own.
This seems to be Minnesota’s biggest problem. They’re actively holding back districts by not training new key volunteers. There seems to be a major power struggle by MN FIRST and the volunteers that want to help. That document posted above basically proves that. I’m sure there are more volunteers that would want to help, but they are getting actively denied. It seems like CA has the same issue too, which is bad because MN and CA are the 2 regions that NEED to move to districts ASAP. Hearing stories from these areas that the Regional Committees are trying to implement gag orders on CD about those areas does not help either.
I would be interested (and likely saddened) by the number of alumni that received this document and subsequently decided to stop their involvement in FIRST.
While I find a hard time believing that is the intent of the document, I also find it hard to imagine I wouldn’t be turned off from continuing my involvement upon the receipt of this.
Collin would you give some advice to us, we want to follow the way Indiana went to districts we have 50 teams now and have growth potential but all schools see are the outrageous dollar signs. As for me I was the head of the planning committee for our off-season event and we realized that by training our seniors and alumni in volunteer roles as well as getting help from the local Air Force base we were able to fill the volunteer positions quickly but our biggest downfall is getting more teams in our area that will do FRC.
Regardless of the wording, this is saying at best, even with the benefit of the doubt, “We need meat to fill meat positions. Don’t expect to be meaningful meat, because you’re still just meat”.
Maybe this thread is trolling, but I honestly do not see the document in a negative light. Basically, I see it as setting reasonable expectations for volunteers.
Face it: You’re not going to be a LRI the first or second year you volunteer, particularly if you are under 21. But be an RI for 2 years, shadow the LRI one year, and then speak to your LRI and VC and see what they can do. If that’s what you want, you can do it.
For all who are complaining: Tell us your experience volunteering and if you have volunteered in VIMS (for what/where/when?) and not been asked to attend.
I am not as twitchy about anonymous user accounts, but please understand that it is highly frowned upon, and not a sign of courage. You want change, stand up and name yourself.
I don’t see anything disturbing or off-putting about that document. It seems quite reasonable to me. It basically says not to think that you “deserve” a Key Volunteer position before you’ve demonstrated yourself, and suggests how you can go about doing that. Unless there’s something else that people are being told beyond what it says, I do not understand why anyone would be upset by it.
As a college student, I am unbelievably lucky to live 2 blocks from an FRC team. However, not every student has that opportunity. Their only lasting connection to FIRST may be volunteering.
Like I said in my post, I am not saying that this post is blatantly saying “We don’t want you.”
HOWEVER, what this document does do is make a college student like me feel not welcome. The sheer tone of this is terribly off-putting.
A region (especially one that is hoping/should be hoping to move to districts) should always be actively seeking volunteers. Beyond the active seeking of volunteers, they should be actively training new people to fill new jobs, as more events will require more key volunteers.
Furthermore, I have countless friends my age, or just older than me, that ARE key volunteers in their areas (FTAs, Refs, planning committee members). There is no reason to discourage a student from seeking a position like this. While not every college student is as great as Dave Givens (New England FIRST’S future), we can still contribute and (apparently contrary to popular belief) be leaders with key positions.
The main interesting parts of this documents are the parts that explicitly lay out things that should be obvious.
DO live Gracious Professionalism. When at an event, volunteers should become a part of every team they interact with. If a team starts to frown while a volunteer is working with them, something needs to change! If there is particularly bad news or a difficult situation, get the appropriate Key Volunteer to help. When not at an event, be aware that everything you do reflects on FIRST. This is especially true with social media – Tweets, posts, or blogs can easily cause issues for volunteers. Stay positive, think about how your post will be perceived, and if there’s an issue you’re concerned about, look for the appropriate avenue to voice it – bring it up with the appropriate Key Volunteer or Volunteer Coordinator!
What is the reason for this paragraph? It seems to be a reference to specific events. It doesn’t seem likely to me that this is a repeated problem that needs to be addressed in a blanket statement to all FRC alumni at a university.
So you screwed up…
Most volunteers are very unlikely to “screw up”. Why bring this up with all college-aged volunteers? If you have a problem with only a few college-aged volunteers, perhaps it would be good to talk to them on an individual basis.
If you have a problem with more than a few of them, perhaps there is a bigger conflict.
It doesn’t seem like there’s good communication between the sides here. If this document has really left some alumni with a bad taste in their mouths, perhaps it would be good to make amends and create a culture of understanding.
This document is extremely appalling and not in the spirit of FIRST.
As a region struggling to get volunteers, Minnesota should not discourage young adults from contributing.
In fact, young adults just out of FIRST are some of the most passionate and empathetic to the needs and challenges facing teams.
Volunteering as a college student and getting into those key roles is a great way to maintain FIRST alumni’s connection with the community.
I’m two years out of high school and have key positions within FIRST California. I am honored to have those positions based on hard work, but the fact that my fellow alumni in Minnesota don’t have the opportunity is disturbing.
With Minnesota moving to districts soon, the board should look into encouraging college students to become key volunteers.
I have friends from all over the country in college that are FTA’s in Michigan, head refs in Canada, regional committee members in NE, and more.
These regions are doing well in the eyes of inspiring and maintaining teams, Minnesota should strive to do the same.
I honestly don’t see anything there that gives a “not welcome” tone. On the contrary, it starts with the command DO volunteer often and energetically.
A region (especially one that is hoping/should be hoping to move to districts) should always be actively seeking volunteers. Beyond the active seeking of volunteers, they should be actively training new people to fill new jobs, as more events will require more key volunteers.
Isn’t that what the document is about? It is a guide for how you should work toward becoming whatever kind of volunteer you want. It makes that explicit in the first paragraph.
Furthermore, I have countless friends my age, or just older than me, that ARE key volunteers in their areas (FTAs, Refs, planning committee members). There is no reason to discourage a student from seeking a position like this. While not every college student is a Dave Givens, we can (apparently contrary to popular belief) be good leaders and hold important positions.
Seriously, what’s going on that I am not seeing? Every Key Volunteer I know was a “regular” volunteer for at least a couple of years first. That’s what the document is saying. It isn’t telling anyone not to aspire to a Key Volunteer position. What it’s telling people is how to become a Key Volunteer.
I have to ask, how many volunteers see teams only when they are smiling?
As an inspector and ref (and a CSA, but I am unsure if the intended audience of the document would be eligible for that position) I have had to tell teams things that were at the very least disappointing. Things like “You received a foul because your robot extended too high in that match” or “Your bumpers do not meet the 8 inch requirement, you need to make them larger or build new ones”. According to the document something needed to change after I made those statements because someone on the team frowned. I guess that means I screwed up and that puts my quest to be a LRI or Head Ref back one or two years of volunteering in a lower profile position. As important as the safety glasses table position is, to move someone there from inspecting will probably make them frown.
I know I am applying the document somewhat harshly, but for someone who has never been a volunteer, I would be scared to tell a team any bad news.
Volunteer #1: I am a volunteer who has been trained in a key position and served as a diligent volunteer spending hundreds of dollars in hotel costs who is now told I can only run safety glasses and the practice field. Without anyone telling me what changed or why I can’t serve in my key position.
Volunteer #2: I’m an alumni that can run and coordinate a district event when I’m at college but when I travel home I can only run safety glasses.
Volunteer #3: I’m a graduate from a FRC team in Minnesota who has volunteered as field reset for four years after graduating but still isn’t given any other field position no matter how many times I ask.
Volunteer #4: I’m a volunteer who registered to help queue but I’m told there are not any positions available, followed by an email to coaches the next day requesting more queuers to volunteer.
Volunteer #5: I am a volunteer who has been a robot inspector since graduating high school 6 years ago. In Minnesota I have expressed interest in FTAing, CSAing and score keeping but have never been assigned. I then am offered spots as a FTA or CSA in other areas around the United States.
Volunteer #6: As a student, I was spoken to about my social media posts, as they were showing MN FIRST in a bad light and told to delete what I posted. Now I’ve only been offered spots as Field Reset.
This is a small sampling of volunteer stories from the Minnesota Regionals.
It’s a combination of what this document says and what is actually happening with the intended audience of this document (which I assume is the GOFIRST group at the University of Minnesota).
There’s been friction between the alumni of MN FIRST and the RPC. A big point of contention here is the current double-regional event format of Minnesota. The young alumni want to switch to districts, and want to get involved and start the conversation and the planning required to get there. Everyone is aware this is a big undertaking that requires several years to implement right. However, the leadership in MN is very attached to their double regional format, knowing they run the “biggest and best” regionals in the country. The alumni want to get their teams more bang for their buck, but the RPC doesn’t want to lose the media attention for FIRST that these events gain. Of course, on top of this, there are the normal concerns that everyone has with transitioning to districts (finding venues, volunteers, etc). Due to all of these factors, it appears that the RPC believes their current system to be superior, and therefore does not want to pursue transitioning to districts at all.
Like Bailey said, one of the few ways that college students can reasonably stay involved in FRC is volunteering. However, students who sign up to volunteer are repeatedly being assigned to more menial, untrained roles or just being told that they’re not needed. A dear friend of mine (who already had previous experience volunteering as an inspector in New England), was assigned to the practice field. When she showed up to the regional, the volunteer desk was empty. After tracking one of the event staff down, she was told they had enough volunteers for that day, and she should come back tomorrow.
Honestly, the purpose of this document seems to be to deter any of these alumni from believing that they could make a real difference in the direction Minnesota is heading. The overall message seems to be this; “Play by our rules, listen to everything we say, and don’t say anything about it.”
Now this may sound cynical, but this is how I’m reading this document given the situation. Each number refers to the subsequent DO and DONT in the letter.
If you really care about FRC, you’ll do whatever volunteer position we assign you to, regardless of what you aspire to be.
This seems to be specifically targeting the fact that college students will often have class on Wednesday and Thursday.
Do whatever the RPC and existing KVs tell you to do.
Don’t talk about any of this publicly, no matter how discontent you are.
If you do volunteer, always do what your Key Volunteer superior says.
Don’t expect to get a more important volunteering position anytime soon.
Re 6: Probably at least 6+ years before you’re a key volunteer.
Now this is the real kicker. Many of these disgruntled alumni have been switching to volunteering for FLL and FTC events, and have been much happier since. A different nonprofit organization, High Tech Kids, is the FIRST partner for FLL and FTC in Minnesota. Many young alumni agree this group is more effectively run. There have been talks of HTH and MN FIRST merging, as MN FIRST does not have nonprofit status necessary for MN to switch to districts. However, there’s rumors that this merger is halted due to conflicting opinions over who would actually be in charge after the merger. This paragraph is basically saying “Don’t expect MN FIRST to be like High Tech Kids.”
Most of the kids who want to continue supporting FRC are enthusiastic about the program. This is basically telling these kids that they need to tone down their enthusiasm if they want to volunteer?
So you screwed up…
This seems pretty clear to me. If you don’t play by the rules, you’re not getting any volunteer positions past field reset or practice field.
Yes, a lot of what is in this document is generally good advice for new volunteers. However, given the scenario, this basically seems like a letter from the dictatorship telling the people to not challenge their authority.