Should Chairman's Winners Be Required to Publicly Post Essays?

FIRST General Forum
1

This is a discussion I’ve been having with a few friends for the past few months, and they’ve been asking me to post a thread on the topic for a while.

So, should District and Regional Chairman’s winners (as well as HOF teams, but they usually do anyway) be mandated to make their winning essays publicly available? Many teams already do this, and others willingly do if asked, but what about a team who does not wish to or refuses to share an essay?

I have several of my own opinions on this matter, but I’d like to hear what others think before I post them. Some of my reasons might sound controversial, but I think this will be a good discussion to hold.

What do you think on the matter and what is your reasoning?

-Akash

2

I think the best answer is: it should be up to the team.

I’ve found that a large number of them do, but I entirely respect those who don’t.

3

As stated, please include some thorough reasoning for your opinion, if you can.

I always like to see the thought process behind someone’s opinion, as it may help me modify mine. :slight_smile:

4

I think it’s important that Chairman’s teams do this. Creating better chairman’s teams that spread the word of FIRST like they do is the the very spirit of the Chairman’s award.

5

As a Chairman’s Award submitting team, I can say I would have no problem posting our finished essay online. We are proud of our accomplishments and we would love to have anyone who wants to read about it do just that.

As far as it being ‘required’ i’m not sure I agree with that. Teams should have the right to choose for themselves.

I think it would be a good idea for FIRST to have a location on their website for all winning teams (Or all submitting teams) to post essays if they choose. I feel like they may have talked about this in the past actually.

I know Bomb Squad wanted all RCA winners one year to submit their essays for inclusion in 16’s HoF display. Not sure if they still do it.

Bottom line, should teams do it? Probably. Should it be required? Probably not.

6

I’m all for sharing but I also don’t think sharing should ever be mandatory. Once you make something mandatory you can only make people upset. The people that want to do it willingly will do it anyway.

I do however think there are lots of ways that we as a community can encourage more sharing of all the things that teams do including the Chairman’s award.

FRC-Designs has been a great resource for getting teams to share the CAD files for their robots. Why don’t we have something similar for Chairman’s teams? (It’s been on my list of things to do for about a year, but I am awful at web programming and haven’t had a student who is good at the back end part of it either) Having a central database would not only help encourage people to share but would make them far easier for people to view. It’s hard to find all the ones that are posted. I have a pretty large collection that I give to students who write the essay every year so they can look through them without having to hunt them down there selves. The website could also have the executive summaries, photos, presentation scripts, videos, slides, and everything else that goes into a Chairman’s Award winning submission.

7

Teams who submit Chairmans pour hundreds of hours into their outreach and their submissions.

While the video is specifically designed to be an outreach tool, both for the winning team’s to be displayed at the competition and other teams to use it as a method to promote their team, the essays are a ‘direct line’ to the judges. Therefore, I think it is personally acceptable for teams to maintain their ‘secret sauce’ while sharing details about their outreach and team activities and inspiring others through different channels. I also equally respect (and appreciate) teams who are willing to share their submissions, as, to an extent, they can be used to see what works, and what doesn’t (or what might stand out more than the next essay).

8

I personally do not feel the Chairman’s Award teams should be required to post their essays.

One of the reasons I feel this way is because Chairman’s is a competition. It’s a more brutal competition than the actual game in a sense that teams who win it devote time and effort into it that transcends our six week build window. Now, while I do find it important for teams to draw inspiration from the Hall of Fame teams, but it’s something that each time must find their own path to.

When I was a student on 1126 writing the Chairman’s Award for 2010 and 2011, it shouldn’t surprise anyone familiar with the Finger Lakes region that I studied 340’s submission essays as much as possible. I didn’t want to steal their ideas for winning the award, but I wanted to see what a winning essay looks like. My biggest fear is that, by releasing the winning essays, teams will be compelled to mimic the team’s actions. Maybe not by building a special demo robot that they can use to make balloon animals or by designing a smartphone app, but I fear it will become a game of who can mimic 1114’s or 67’s or 254’s (etc.) submission the best.

Maybe I’m just paranoid in believing that that would happen. But I think that a team’s submission essay should be kept private, at the discretion of the team. Besides, a Chairman’s Award winning team is likely to want to help the FIRST community anyway, and post their essay in that regard.

(If you find my explanation lacking, because I do have difficulty explaining things like this, you could just say that I don’t think there is enough of a gain in posting the essay to FORCE teams to make it public.)

9

Working with a team who has spent 3 years re-dedicating to work towards their first RCA and a team now beginning the long haul to a CCA (mostly in outreach/marketing/awards submission areas) I’m stuck. On one hand, a lot of team already post their award submissions because it falls in line with their mission to improve the program on a regional/state/national/international level outside of their team number. On the other hand, if the teams really believe in that mission and FIRST receives the submissions in plaintext anyway, why not release them?

Yet, maybe some teams consider themselves to be role model teams by what they do and not what they submit for awards, so basically I’m flip flopping while typing and will probably change my opinion a few times more even after this thread dies.

EDIT: I’m all for compromises, so maybe submissions could include a check-box for something like “FIRST can publish and reproduce this awards submission for purposes of furthering the mission of the Chairman’s Award”

10

We would have love to display our Chairman’s winning design (I was told it was in the form of a board game) from back in '92 but I am sad to inform the masses that it was lost forever many moves ago.

11

I find this discussion to be remarkably stimulating. I read through earlier today, and dismissed it, but then couldnt help but to think about the topic several hours later. So this is what I came up with…

The Chairman’s essay could probably best be compared to an essay submission for a scholarship or application for a university or grant, in that it’s purpose is to outline through effective communication skills in an innovative way that stands out from the crowd those factors which make a team a good role model to others.

Within FIRST Gracious Professionalism and Coopertition exist as the two core FIRST values, which guide many teams actions including basic respect, sportsmanship, and even strategic alliances between teams. Many have extrapolated this concept to the basic mantra that FIRST is an open source competition with complete transparency between teams, with many examples of this on display here on Chief Delphi.

As a mentor who leads my teams strategy towards the Chairman’s Award each year, I would suggest that teams should not be required to share their award winning essays. I would even go as far as to suggest that those that do share them reconsider.

On the other hand I do encourage all teams whether they have won an RCA or not to share their outreach efforts through videos and articles on their team websites and social media pages.

I believe through this publicity teams will be able to continue to inspire each other to develop new innovative means by which to share the FIRST message, and serve to benefit themselves within their own community as a means of publicizing their efforts and raising awareness for sponsors.

If teams wish to share theme ideas for their presentation, or the videos, or their slides, pamplets, etc, that is fine. However, the actual essay, a piece of raw text, represents the writing effort of a single or group of students on each team, which serves as a valuable resource in itself, and an educational opportunity for that student or group to work with a mentor to develop their own writing style.

So Conclusion: Share Essay (NO) Share Activities (YES) But on either account making it mandatory would be sort of strange. The closest thing I can see is having the video have to be publicly available through a youtube playlist or something.

12

When I made the move from 103 to start my own team (which became 1712 in 2005-06), I made the decision that everything we did (robot, awards, etc) would be shared publicly “as it was happening” or as close to that as reasonably possible. For our Chairman’s efforts that meant publishing our entry in a whitepaper here as soon as it was submitted - and, for the time I was involved (through 2010), we usually had it published about a week before the deadline in an attempt to encourage more teams to submit “same season”. We would also share our outreach activities and documentation during the course of the year as well.

My rationale? More sharing = stronger community.

However, by 2004, I had the benefit of already having a piece of nearly all the FIRST banners, medals, and trophies one could ever dream for (save an on field world title) so in that sense it was very easy to proceed with this type of philosophy.

However, requiring the publishing of CA entries is something I used to feel very strongly about, but now I’m more or less indifferent about it. I’m fine with it if it happens, I’m fine with it if it doesn’t. If a team decides not to share a CA entry, but conducts workshops, published models of outreach activities, mentors rookies, FLL, VEX, seaperch, whatever … is that any less valuable? There are soooooooo many ways for an exemplary team to share, model, strengthen the community that it’s really hard for me to say these entries must be published.

While, from a “telling an incredible story” standpoint, I’d love to see a ton of these entries archived for public access in a single place, I also see the potential negative to it as well … negative scrutiny… If team X presented their CA at the same event as team Y who won the award and team X decides they were better, team Y “lied”, blah, blah … then a whole lot of people will start spending time justifying why they should have won as opposed to taking the model, learning lessons, and moving forward to grow.

To me, I’ve always believed this. There are FAR more Chairman’s worthy teams than there are Chairman’s Awards to go around every year. Just like I wrote in that “this is the year” post so many years ago about “gracious professionalism” not being a “gauge to judge others…” the Chairman’s Award is a logical extension of that. The entry should be used to measure and monitor a team’s own growth and drive the team’s decision making about planning for the future. Documenting and presenting “the story” is a vital part of that process and, blue banner or no blue banner, it’s the most important endeavor your team can undertake.

As long as there is a choice to publish or not, then there is no “wrong” choice.

13

This is precisely what the Chairman’s award is about! From the description of the award we hear every year as the winners are announced:

(emphasis mine)

Chairman’s award winning teams set the standard for all FIRST teams, on and off the field. Whether or not they share the essay is relatively unimportant. How they impact their community and promote the goals and purpose of FIRST is. I would hope a winning team has a strong enough community presence where an essay isn’t the only way to know what they do. Marketing and publicity are just as important as anything else a team does- accomplishments should be listed on the team’s website, in local media, displayed in their pit, and spoken of through casual conversation. I can’t imagine a winning team keeping the FIRST community in the dark as to what they’ve been up to outside of competition.

14

Marc. P beat me to the post…

If you are submitting for Chairman’s, the you are publicly declaring your team to be a role model. What you do, how you act, how you accomplish your work should be visible to all.

That is what a role model is.

Someone please correct me but I vaguely remember a statement from FIRST last spring stating that starting in 2013 all winning Regional Chairman’s teams essays would be published. But I don’t remember and need to research it.

We do not have a problem publishing the essay and it is posted on ChiefDelphi white papers.

15

I can think of only one potential negative result of sharing a Chairman’s Award essay:

Some people will publicly critique, nitpick, or otherwise complain about what a team says it does. This could include accusations of exaggerating or even inventing details. Even if such accusations are without merit, they would still cast shadows over the process.

Though I doubt that would be enough to detract from all the potential positives, I’m still leaning toward leaving things as they are. It seems to me that the teams that truly deserve to be emulated already share their essays.

16

You bring up an interesting point, Alan!

I haven’t written my opinion yet, but this is a big part of it, so I’ll throw in another question:

Would the thought of making essays publicly available discourage teams from bending the truth, reduce exaggerations, or in general, create a system of checks & balances? I read a thread on here a while ago about a team discussing something similar to this that made me think about this type of situation. Do people in FRC think that teams who win/submit Chairman’s already have the decency to avoid things like this? What about if a student is submitting/writing an award and just doesn’t know all aspects of the type of work their team has done in the community? How can it be ensured a student doesn’t pass along false information/exaggerations to the judges? (In general, this is the tougher part of the question, in my opinion). Should teams have to present visual evidence of all events/services to judges?

Would teams reading these essays be rude and harass a team about something that is written in an essay, or would they calmly ask questions in private?

Ed, I think I almost totally agree with your first point, with some small exceptions maybe.

As per your second point - if you find a statement regarding this, please do share.

As I said before, some of the questions I raise may sound controversial, so please keep the discussion as civil as it has been!

17

Maybe I am naive or ignorant, but I have never witnessed any Chairman’s Essay that would suggest an exaggeration of truth or a discussion on the veracity of a submission.

Does this actually happen frequently and I have no idea of it?

18

Wil, to clarify, the threads that prompted me to think about this type of stuff were these two, posted by a mentor of 1912. The questions they posted made my think about how far some teams may intentionally or unintentionally stretch details of services to their community. I thought they were two great questions.

http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=107995&highlight=Chairman%27s

http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=107986&highlight=Chairman's

In these cases, for example, if a team claims to have mentored or started another team, would judges confirm this type of information with the team that was mentored? Do they ask how involved the mentee (is that a word?) team was? I’ve just always wondered how judges may go about this.

If anyone here is a Chairman’s judge at the district, regional, or CMP level, I’d really love to hear about this process as it seems extremely difficult.

And, as always, my remarks are not accusatory, so don’t wonder if these questions were prompted because of a team from my area. They are just questions that a few friends from all over and I had and were wondering about. My remarks are also mine and mine alone, and in no way reflect associated teams.

19

A long time ago, for me, Chairman’s was a battle… it was “how to win it” it was “how do we beat XYZ team”. And I’d be lying if I said even in more recent years that I didn’t research “the competition.”

But something in me changed around 2007. Just prior to 1511’s first CA, it dawned on me that all of the competition, all of the secrecy, was counter-intuitive to what the whole point of the Chairman’s Award was.

Chairman’s teams are Role Models for the rest of the community. If we want to rise above having our kids emulate basketball players, actresses and singers… we NEED to get to a point where our Role Models are accessible. Holywood has loads of books published on them, magazines documenting their every move, websites dedicated to everything they do. I can probably go online and tell you what Justin Bieber ate for breakfast yesterday, and I could find out that this basketball player just dumped this actress… yet for many teams applying for the Chairman’s award, I couldn’t tell you that they just published a childrens book, or they just did a demo for 4,000 people at an event, or they just ran a training session for five local teams. I only find this out if the judges put it into their awards summary.

While some teams are good at publishing what they do online, that is not the case for sooo many teams. In fact if you go on most team websites, its hard to tell that build season has started.

The thing that’s nice about seeing other’s essays is that the essay is the most concise summary of everything that the team has done. You don’t have to dig through hundreds of blog posts, chief delphi threads, photos, videos, etc. The videos are nice, but often don’t convey all that the essay does. They are a handful of interviews, or some funny skit and some voiceovers of pictures. All great, but it doesn’t always tell you everything special about that team. In order to be a role model and in order for teams to be able to emulate their role models, they need to know what their role models do.

Yes at the lower levels people might just copy the simphone app, or write a sustainability plan like Team 359, or try to create a Girls in Gear program like 341, etc etc… But there are two sides to that. With more resources and programs like that, FIRST and the world WILL be a better place. Even if its just emulation. The other side is that one of the big criteria of the CA is what makes you UNIQUE. Teams won’t get to Championship Chairman’s status without that. They will have to do something that sets them apart. So honestly, if 50 teams emulate Daisy’s Team in a Box - awesome! If 100 teams try and run their own FLL competition… cool! Something good will come out of it.

Personally, I don’t get the point in secrecy. I usually say to each their own, but I don’t think I would be up in arms about the requirement to publish your essay/video/etc. I could get behind the question of timing (which has been discussed before) ie don’t post until after championships for the teams that want the “edge” in their presentations and talking to the judges. But I think once Championships is over, all of the teams that are or wanted to be Chairman’s teams shouldn’t be hiding what they do or what made them stand out. Role models don’t have “secret” sauce. Role models are examples for others to emulate.

Are you more inspired if I tell you I’m a Systems Engineer, or if I tell you that I am a Systems Engineer and walking to the other building yesterday I watched one of the robots my company builds get tested driving across ice? See how the details make a difference?

A perfect example is the year that 842 won Chairman’s - they published their essay BEFORE the essays were even due! Any team looking to “get a leg up on them” had plenty of time to do it. They could add to their essay, modify their presentations, prep judge materials. Yet 842 still won. If you want to win, BE AWESOME. Be UNIQUE. But if you want to start heading in the direction of a Chairman’s team, emulate them, try out one or two of their programs, see if you can put a spin on their unique style of essay. But if you want to be Championship material… that’s when you need to go the step further and do your own thing.

I get it… for many teams, a trip to Championships is on the line. But frankly, it’s in the other 300 days of the year that you become a Chairman’s team. It doesn’t matter if the team down the road knows that you built a microrobot cat toy, or spent 400 hours volunteering at a children’s hospital. You need to convey to the judges why your team is truly deserving of the award, and then and only then will you be a real Chairman’s team.

20

As someone who is currently in the process (almost done!) of writing 157’s Chairman’s Award essay, having examples that another team has done to look at has helped a lot. We’ve never submitted for the award before so this is a learning process for not just myself but also my mentors. One of the very questions asked and the main points of the essay and executive summary is along the lines of “What are characteristics that your team has that other teams should emulate”, therefore I think in the very spirit of the Chairman’s Award, it should be public.

Also, I don’t think that there really is any ‘special sauce’ a team could have. I’m not sure about other teams, but many teams in my area, 467 for example, and my own team included… We’re all very public and open with our outreach and operations. We don’t really have anything to hide.

Lastly, I think in the very spirit of Gracious Professionalism, a team should be doing outreach to help people or inspire people, not to win an award. Then again, if you’re only doing outreach to win an award, I suppose the good that comes from it comes either way?