Our team is wondering what involvement mentors should have in writing the Chairman’s Award.
Any suggestions?
Our effort is a team effort, and each year it has moved more to being student dominated. 2003 was mostly mentor written, with some student input. 2004 was mostly student written with mentor editing and guideance. so far in 2005, the student team assigned to writing it has done all the work.
I am sure, just like with robot design, build and everything else, there will be teams on each end of the spectrum and each one can be successful. You just have to see what works for your team.
Some suggestions -
go to lots of web sites or to the white papers section and download Chairman’s entries to get a feel for styles and what types of things have been included.
be sure that your student presenters at the regional know what is in the paper. The best way to make sure of this is to have them write it or proof-read it.
Good Luck -
I mentor Team 173’s CA committee. For the last two years our submission has been student-written and the presentation student-given. There’s no “right or wrong” way to do this, just as there’s no ruling about engineers designing and building the robot. I proofread (as do several other people), give suggestions, and coach the students on giving presentations.
I feel that writing the CA submission and learning presentation skills are critical skills that you will need in college and/or the workplace, so it’s a good opportunity to test them out.
One of the things that bothers me about the CA process is that there is an emphasis on the submission/presentation that encourages teams to seek professional help in creating them, yet there is no set of rules for judging; it’s all very subjective. I would prefer that the emphasis is based on what the team has accomplished, and not how it is reported.
As it has been said, there are as many ways to approach the Chairman’s award process as there are to build a robot.
Two (or more) pieces of “mom” advice:
1)no matter who writes it, always get a proofreader or two. Better yet, have one proofread who is not at all familiar with FIRST and take their questions to heart. Don’t let the look confuse what you are really trying to say.
2)Help the judges and ALWAYS practice for the Chairman’s award interview. This process is such good practice for all those real life challenges, such as college, scholarship, internship and job interviews. Do an outline. Have each student practice their “elevator” speech and realize first hand how difficult it is to get their part of what they want to emphasize across in a minute or two. This will come in handy for any talks with any judges, in the pits or in the interview room, or for that matter, anywhere, anytime at a competition. You are always representing your team, and remarks made in the bathrooms, in the halls, etc are heard and are reported. Prioritize. Bring examples to illustrate your talk but don’t depend on them.They are background and the students are the real deal. It’s ok to be nervous. Bring index cards if they need it. But it’s not ok to just go in and “wing it.” Don’t chew gum. Have a backup plan in case one of your team is sick or your interview is scheduled at the same time your team is on the field and your driver is the same person as your lead talker. (B…-I’m talking to you here. You know what I’m talking about 
)
3) There is all sorts of debate on the process. Sometimes it seems like the entry drives it more than it should. The judging seems to vary. There have been mistakes made. That said, like all of FIRST, we, you, me, everyone, are all trying to make this better. It is truly about why your team should serve as a role model. Keep doing all the good stuff you are doing and you will make a difference.
4)yes, I realize I didn’t really answer your question. 
Good luck to all of you.
Just wanted to say:
-
I agree with everything RoboMom says (very well said!)
-
The degree to which Mentors should be involved with any activity of the team depends to a great deal on the team. That is to say, if you have a rookie team, mentors will probably end up doing more, if you have a veteran team with many returning members, you will do less.
The bottom line is to look at our role as mentors and try to fit our involvement into what is best for the kids. Personally, I feel that my role is to teach the kids everything that FIRST represents and, more importantly, to get them to ACT in accordance with the spirit of “gracious professionalism”.
As a mentor, I do not stress that the team must succeed. I try to stress the activities and actions that will help the team succeed.
Don’t know if that answers the question (probably not), just giving you the guidelines that I try to work within.
Good Luck!
All excellent points here. Remember to include students as much as possible. When I was with 103, we used to meet with the core student group that worked on the submission, looked at the previous year’s entry, mapped out the ideas/structure with them, and let the kids run. Then we’d check in periodically and provide guidance and editing help.
In my experience, an incredible thing happens over time with this entry and the students. Students become more acutely aware of the team and its community impact when they are involved in the CA process. This filters out to other students on the team, gives them all a stronger sense of the big picture, helps to drive team growth, and gets us all closer to achieving the true goals of FIRST. Now that’s what I call a “Champion” no matter what the outcome of the award entry is.