On your teams how do you decided who goes to the regionals or championship? Last year we took over 40 students and parents to Atlanta with us and found out it was just too many people. I’m looking to try to figure out ideas what members are needed for the events. Thanks for the help.
Depending on how far away your regional is, one thing to consider is how my team in high school handled this problem. We sent the drive team and a couple mentors(usually from the sponsor) down on Thursday for unpacking and practice. The rest of the team came down on Friday for the actual competition.
The championship is another matter, however. Depending on how your team tracks participation, I have seen teams set a minimum number of hours that a student must participate in order to be able to attend the championship. If your team members have to pay part of their way to Atlanta, that may do some of the filtering for you, as some may not be able to afford the expense. I would recommend, however, that you provide some sort of individual fundraiser to help team members offset the amount they have to pay…
Well in our team you have to remain 80% attendance and also have to pay your dues and the set amount for travel/hotel fees which depends on how much you make on fund raising.
On our team we use a Star Chart for students to earn the right to attend regionals and the championship.
The star chart measures attendance, grades (not just the grades alone but they cannot have bad comments on their report card either), community service, speaking in front of the team and writing journal entries amongst other things.
I have a question along these lines,
Our team is small and so everyone gets to go to a regional (providing they pay/raise enough money), and everyone does go. I was wondering if the students, on bigger teams, that do not go to regionals/championship, are they inspired? Or are these the kids that are just doing it to have an extracurricular activity on their college application?
For me, a major part of FIRST is what you learn from the competition, and feel that everyone should be able to experience the aura of a competition.
Also, if a team member doesn’t go, they only know about their one team, not the multitudes of other amazing ones out there.
I am just curious
-Anna
Going to competition is a privilege not a right. If the kids do not follow the guidelines and rules we set they should not be rewarded. Because if they are rewarded for doing nothing what kind of message are you exactly giving them?
That makes sense.
Thanks for clearing that up
-Anna
The requirement to travel to Chesapeake with the team last year was attendance at 70% of weekday meetings, 60% of Saturday meetings, and $100 to cover food for the 4.5 days we were out of town. (The percentages might be off a smidge–it’s been a minute since then.)
The food money was not required in 2007, since our regional was in town that year, but the attendance requirement remained in the ballpark. That year, we brought eight kids and three mentors to Palmetto and did just fine.
I enjoy scouts and a cheering section and all that, but you go to war with the army you have. In our case, it’s the army that earned their spots.
Why do you feel it was too many people? Because of the cost, or the organization needed once you got to Atlanta? Our team takes that many or more and we use everyone of them while we are there.
i agree completely and theres always people on the team who want to be apart of it be more bad than good or are never there and expect to go on trips. i too i’m part of a small team and we still have an attendence rule but people meet the requirement (sometimes)
Set out rules clearly at the beginning of the season; make sure all students have read them. Attendance, money requirements (I personally have a major distaste for a “pay-to-play” style program; require them to raise funds with the team’s help instead. When we discourage members based on money, we fail horribly.), behavior and grades…make sure it is all very clear.
Work your hardest to design a system that does not exclude anyone, though. I cannot speak for others, but FIRST took on a whole new meaning when I got to witness the sights and sounds of a competition. Don’t take that away!
My $0.02.
JBot
Our team is relatively small (last year I believe we ran 12 or so students strong, and about half only came to occasional practices), and has taken all of the students who have wanted to come both years (we are going to be a third year team this year).
We had the maximum number of students in the pit most of the time, and the “excess” students were in the stands ing, or walking around scouting. Who was in the pit was determined by who needed to be in it (ex. the programmers were there quite often, the captain was always there, our mentors were there, key drive train people were there, etc.). This year we have more people, and if everyone comes again, it will probably be about the same. If, for example, we have a subsection that deals with funds and publicity, they probably wont be in the pit with the bot very much.
Although this thread does bring up some points I should bring up. We really haven’t been able to leave students behind yet, simply because we haven’t been big enough, but this year we may have to.
I know on RUSH if you didn’t make your dues or didn’t have the grades you couldnt travel. If you are concerned about students on the verge of academic failure traveling make sure they realize that they will be forced to study instead of any free time they may have.
About academic requirements, students grades should NEVER suffer due to involvement in FRC. The moment grades drop the students need to be informed that they need to get them up or risk not traveling or even losing build privileges. I know senior students who spent the week before ship not allowed to touch a tool because they didnt have the grades.
Students, don’t forget school is MORE important than FRC.
man i remeber i was failing a class and the mentors told me i had to start bringing my book bag in with me and make shure i study and do homework before i do anything else
thanks Chris noble:D
well, on our team we have a tier system that allows students to decide what they can do. we usually have about 55 - 60 kids on the team but only about 40 travel to all events. all travel has GPA and behavior policies as decided by our school board. all members must complete team “community service project” to travel anywhere. we also have team fundraisers and documented hours that decide who goes where. it’s worked out pretty well so far
When faced with a question like this, I suspect that many of us will tend to envison a set of rules and conditions to deterministically select the “best” students to make the trip. There is, after all, great value in making decisions using an evidence-based approach.
I just worry that in our empiristic haste, we might overlook the possibility that sometimes, the “best” person isn’t the one who needs it the most. We’ve all met students who have issues (for any of a multitude of reasons), and I can distinctly picture a subset of them who would benefit from the competition experience as a source of inspiration, as a diversion from life’s miseries, or as an opportunity to build confidence and skill.
This is a competition, so presumably there’s an advantage to selecting the most competent, most experienced and most successful. But as an educational endeavour, it’s necessary to realize that you can’t systematically grant every advantage to the same people all the time.
Consider what policies will do the most good in the long run. Promoting service and good grades are certainly admirable, but that doesn’t mean it’s always the right way to go about things.
I’m not picking on you specifically, but I do feel compelled to suggest that there are students who are not planning to attend an engineering school, and for whom the grades cannot be the top priority. Consider the ones with significant psychological issues (e.g. behaviour, social skills, etc.). If they need a place where they can get a chance to learn interpersonal skills (like a team), it might just help them to become well-adjusted adults, as opposed to pathologically antisocial engineers (who got good grades).
“Never” is a strong sentiment: we should use it with caution.
While I understand where you are coming from I must disagree. FIRST is not about the competitions, it is about inspiring kids, if we have two students who are equal in everything except student a is passing their classes whereas student b is failing 2 classes is it proper to give student b the same privileges as student b? What message is that sending? To me it is sending the message that doing the bare minimum is no longer required. In this age where standards are being lowered so more people can pass can we really encourage that? I am not saying that only students with straight A’s can travel, I am saying students that are PASSING can travel. Also, this standard does not have to be set in stone, if a student fails a test and that is the only grade it is unreasonable to penalize them this strongly, let them travel with the caveat that they must study during free time. Ultimately it is up to the mentors to decide if the student and the team would benefit from having that student along.
Students on FIRST teams who are not going into engineering are important but grades should be maintained, the notion that an arts major (as an example) is somehow less challenging than engineering is very irritating to me. Just because they are not going into engineering does not mean their classes are somehow less important to them.
Psychological issues, this comes down to the mentors, the student, and the parents. The teachers may also be involved. If the mentors feel that the student is trying his/her best to do well there would be nothing wrong with making an exception with the parents and teacher’s permission of course.
Essentially my point is that FRC means you miss a lot of school, if you cannot handle missing that much school you should not. If this means you don’t travel Thursdays or can only come on Saturdays then that is what it takes.
All students in good standing are allowed to travel with the team. This includes no behavior problems, passing grades, any fees have been paid, haven’t been slacking off in attendance, etc.
Since I’ve never been associated with a team of more than 30 students, I’m not sure why you think 40 is too many. Obviously they can’t all be in the pit! But there should be enough for all of them to do - scouting, visibility, promoting the team, etc. Although I recall going to lunch in the CNN and seeing several members of a team who was in the divisional finals just lounging about on the plaza. Thursday noon I can understand - but Saturday? Why weren’t they cheering their team on?
I can certainly appreciate that having passing marks is a pretty reasonable expectation; more so when, as you suggested, exceptions can be made based on other circumstances. I was addressing the idea that “the moment grades drop” students must choose schoolwork over extracurricular activity, no matter the circumstances. If your grades drop 5% from 92% because of FRC, does that mean you should be excluded? (You’ve clarified your position, and it doesn’t look like you meant to suggest this.)
To borrow the Student A/Student B example, I’m more concerned about a case where A has good marks, a stable personal life, and no social issues, while B has none of the above, but both have made similar contributions to the team and would likely benefit the team equally at a competition. I think we ought to be assessing the benefits to the student as part of the equation.
I only chose engineering as a specific example that’s relevant to the interests of a lot of people in FIRST. I have similar appreciation for the value of other academic fields.
But again, I’m thinking of a different set of students: the ones who might not be going to university at all. (I could have been more specific about that.) While I realize that my example was a bit of a false dichotomy, my point was that for some of them, it would be more beneficial to focus on interpersonal skills, rather than academic ones.
Of course not, all I mean when I say that grades shouldnt suffer is that you shouldnt fail a class because you were spending all of your time at FIRST. Learning to manage one’s time is an important lesson that many of us have learned from FIRST.
Going back to the Student A and B example, Student A is university bound and Student B is not, they do the same thing on the team, Student B is an Introvert and A is not. They are both failing Honors English 11. Do you think it is appropriate to accept failure from one of them and not from the other? Yes it would benefit B to go, and it might inspire him but what message would it send to A? Is it a message we want to send?
The difficulty in these questions is the fairness. The reason for such rigid rules is partially to protect mentors from accusations of favoritism. The real important thing is to allow an appeals process in which the mentors (or a board of them) meet with the teacher, the student, and the student’s parents and discuss steps that must be completed in order to regain the right of traveling. Make sure that students and parents are made aware that the appeals process will be handled individually and privately on a case by case basis.