3 ms·

Since this seems like it's going to morph into a thread about FRC... I started and mentored a FIRST team at our local high school this year. It was a great ex

Since this seems like it's going to morph into a thread about FRC... I started and mentored a FIRST team at our local high school this year. It was a great experience, but the thing I keep wondering is if an equivalent experience could be offered for less money? I can already see that this is going to turn into a yearly scramble for money.

epalmer 10y ago
FTC is significantly cheaper. http://www.firstinspires.org/robotics/ftc http://www.firstinspires.org/robotics/ftc I do fundraising for a team that is 13 or 14 years old. We raise a lot of money each year and it is always hard. Plus the parents put in a lot of money. Or at least some do. The less affluent schools have a harder time. That said I have seem some great robots come out off underserved schools. I do have to say that after 6 years of mentoring this FRC team (my last child is aging out), I am looking forward to going back to being a FLL, FTC and FRC volunteer and no longer doing team mentoring. I started volunteering 11 years ago.
- vyrotek 10y ago
  I'm looking forward to getting involved in these other programs. My oldest is excited to join her school's team next year. She'll be entering the 3rd grade. I'm not familiar with how anything outside of FRC works. But I'm probably going to be busy finding time to help her team and my FRC team.
  - epalmer 10y ago
    FLL is the best program to start with at 9 years old. The balance between robots, research, presentations and core values gives students of all sorts a chance to grow. I coached FLL 4 years and I stay in touch with most of the students. They grew and continue to grow from FLL. The ones that go on to FTC or FRC are amazing young adults. The FIRST program is a cornerstone of what I spend my outside of work time on. I will continue as a volunteer now that we are aging out.
vyrotek 10y ago
Same here. I started our team back in 2001. I just returned this year to mentor that same team. I love the program and attribute a lot of my career choice to it. WOW have things grown and changed. Some for the better but some were... disappointing. The biggest issues are always about money and team size. The program constantly reemphasizes that it's not about winning or the trophies. But that's kind of hard to do when so much attention is placed on aggressive competition and it's the same well-endorsed teams winning every year. Especially with this year's challenge. I've also discovered this questionable practice of teams flying in from far away to participate in a regional where they think they have a better chance. Our team won it's first regional EVER this year. It took us 15 years. We just never had the funds or man hours to build any of the amazing ideas the students had. I'm proud of our students. But I wish there was a way to even the playing field and let students focus on the innovation rather than if their bot will literally fall apart on the field. I think FIRST should stick to full cooperative game modes and ones that don't require lots of refs to determine points. This year is a mess and full of people complaining about points that the refs completely failed to give. For a organization that encourages automation there sure are a lot of things handled by error-prone humans. :)
Jun8 10y ago
I mentored a Chicago South Side school for four FRC competitions. During the last two two years I was trying to persuade them not to join. This year they didn't participate, but not because of my wisdom, the physics teacher who was driving it left the school. Participating in FRC has many benefits, which has been discussed and pushed at great length. What's not usually discussed is the huge opportunity cost, especially for poorer schools with severely limited resources, like the school I mentored at. Here are a few observations from four years of FRC mentoring with Team 1850: 1) MONEY. Participation is $5k. To this, add the extra money teachers get for their mentorship, travel costs to the competition, pizza, etc. for the kids during the days of competition. For our school I think this added up to approximately $10k conservatively. For larger teams, the cost could be many times this amount. 2) TIME. Due to the very tight schedule (why the schedule is so tight is a whole another discussion) the teachers who oversee team development have to relentless focus on pushing the build further, rather than teach kids good practices, foster teamworks, etc. At our school a typical season was meeting for 1-1.5 hrs off season (~September - December) then 3-4 hours during the day plus 6-7 hours on Saturdays during build season. Adding in the competition, conservatively that is 70-80 hours of team time. Our team was about 10 regulars (a small team, good teams, e.g. 101 Wildstang has more than 50 students actively working). That's conservatively 700-800 hours of student time alone. Adding teacher time (2 teachers generally present), this was near 1000 hours for one season. 3) MENTOR TIME. For schools like the one I worked with mentors are a very precious resource, because no one wants to drive from the city or suburbs 45mins to the school on Saturdays. That's why almost all good FRC Teams I observed are in from the suburbs. Again due to the cut throat schedule, I wasn't able to interact much with the students but just worked on the C++ code. Now, you have to ask yourself if the the benefits from FRC, which are substantial, are worth the immense costs associated with it, or if these can be diverted to other efforts instead. For example, I had the school but 10 rPis and started to teach kids programming using Python and pygame, they loved it! Unfortunately, most of the students that came were also on the robotics team so we had to stop when FRC work started. Our team didn't make it to the finals in the 4 years I mentored. The cause was the same: A poorly designed hardware component failing. Pitted against us were teams that had retired aerospace and mechanical engineers from Boeing and other such companies who developed their designs using CAD and sometimes tested their designs using their old company resources. We had NO CHANCE! This was the "torture of hope": each year we started with great motivation and told the students that if they worked hard they can get a good standing, where in reality they had nearly zero chance of that happening.
jonkiddy 10y ago
This is my third year as a volunteer mentor for a local FRC team since the team's founding. Also, it is our third year headed to St. Louis (FIRST Championships). Our team is run out of an elite private school. We participate in multiple regionals and money has never been a problem. I'm sure the easy access to money is a contributing factor for our continued success. I'm aware of another local team which is setup as a 501c3 and physically runs out of a public school. This particular team is heavily supported by a local mechanical engineering firm with both money and a team of mechanical engineering mentors.
- epalmer 10y ago
  Our team is from a public school. We have a manufacturer that sponsor's us with space and tools but not money. We have a variety of sponsors that provide funds and we raise our own money as well. All funds go into a 501c3 that is a "boosters club". Our public school is somewhat affluent but not like a private school might be. We took first place in two district events this year and entered the quarterfinals in the district championship but only won one match. Our robot was good one other year since 2010. Our teams primary focus is outreach, helping disadvantaged / underserved students with STEM. We just had a big success with writing a state senate bill to help fund STEM competition teams at schools that have 40% of the students that qualify for the free lunch. The bill went into law this weekend. We had three students actually write the bill and a state senator promoted the bill under his name. The senator lives about 100 miles form our team. So really a state effort. We won Chairman's at the District Championship for our outreach. That gets us to Worlds in St. Louis. Without the Chairman's win and without the robot I love that we do outreach. My daughter is going to do a gap year this year before college and do a Americorps VISTA job for FIRST robotics helping the underserved start and fund teams. This is the best part of what FIRST creates for young adults.
  - epalmer 10y ago
    I was reading my reply and this does not sound right: >We have a manufacturer that sponsor's us with space and tools but not money. We love our primary sponsor. Without space and tools we could not do our work. While we need to raise funds also the space is big and the tools amazing (CNC, welding, grinding, bandsaw, lathe and a lot more). https://www.powertraincontrolsolutions.com/ https://www.powertraincontrolsolutions.com/ Powertrain Control Solution has been and we hope will continue to be the primary sponsor of choice for us.
chambo622 10y ago
VEX is arguably the manifestation of this philosophy. The team I mentor has multiple VEX teams along with a flagship FRC team. VEX offers a good deal of the excitement, learning opportunities, and more student autonomy for a small fraction of the cost. I'll always be loyal to FRC but for schools that currently run a struggling FRC program, it's almost certainly true that they could be running multiple VEX teams and involving more students for less money.
- epalmer 10y ago
  I don't have any VEX experience but I hear great things about that program and I have heard from many that the costs are lower.
davidf560 10y ago
Just wanted to chime in and echo the recommendations for VEX. VEX Robotics Competition (VRC) is an order of magnitude less expensive than FRC and having been heavily involved in both I can tell you that the students get just as much, if not more, out of VRC. The smaller team size means that the kids can be much more hands-on as well versus FRC where you have huge teams of 50-100 kids but only 10-20 who are really involved in the engineering part. For less money in VRC, 50 kids could be split into 8-10 teams and every kid could be working on the robot. Also, for the younger kids, VEX IQ Challenge is a great alternative to FIRST Lego League. It's even less expensive than VEX and the kids actually get to drive the robot (unlike FLL) - which is a huge plus for many kids. Coincidentally, the VEX World Championships are coming up next week. Anyone thinking about getting into robotics competitions should check it out. They do a great live webcast of the events. Friday and Saturday (April 22-23) are the best days to watch. Webcasts and other details should be available here: http://www.robotevents.com/championship/ http://www.robotevents.com/championship/

epalmer 10y ago

FTC is significantly cheaper. http://www.firstinspires.org/robotics/ftc http://www.firstinspires.org/robotics/ftc I do fundraising for a team that is 13 or 14 years old. We raise a lot of money each year and it is always hard. Plus the parents put in a lot of money. Or at least some do. The less affluent schools have a harder time. That said I have seem some great robots come out off underserved schools. I do have to say that after 6 years of mentoring this FRC team (my last child is aging out), I am looking forward to going back to being a FLL, FTC and FRC volunteer and no longer doing team mentoring. I started volunteering 11 years ago.

vyrotek 10y ago
I'm looking forward to getting involved in these other programs. My oldest is excited to join her school's team next year. She'll be entering the 3rd grade. I'm not familiar with how anything outside of FRC works. But I'm probably going to be busy finding time to help her team and my FRC team.
- epalmer 10y ago
  FLL is the best program to start with at 9 years old. The balance between robots, research, presentations and core values gives students of all sorts a chance to grow. I coached FLL 4 years and I stay in touch with most of the students. They grew and continue to grow from FLL. The ones that go on to FTC or FRC are amazing young adults. The FIRST program is a cornerstone of what I spend my outside of work time on. I will continue as a volunteer now that we are aging out.

vyrotek 10y ago

Same here. I started our team back in 2001. I just returned this year to mentor that same team. I love the program and attribute a lot of my career choice to it. WOW have things grown and changed. Some for the better but some were... disappointing. The biggest issues are always about money and team size. The program constantly reemphasizes that it's not about winning or the trophies. But that's kind of hard to do when so much attention is placed on aggressive competition and it's the same well-endorsed teams winning every year. Especially with this year's challenge. I've also discovered this questionable practice of teams flying in from far away to participate in a regional where they think they have a better chance. Our team won it's first regional EVER this year. It took us 15 years. We just never had the funds or man hours to build any of the amazing ideas the students had. I'm proud of our students. But I wish there was a way to even the playing field and let students focus on the innovation rather than if their bot will literally fall apart on the field. I think FIRST should stick to full cooperative game modes and ones that don't require lots of refs to determine points. This year is a mess and full of people complaining about points that the refs completely failed to give. For a organization that encourages automation there sure are a lot of things handled by error-prone humans. :)

Jun8 10y ago

I mentored a Chicago South Side school for four FRC competitions. During the last two two years I was trying to persuade them not to join. This year they didn't participate, but not because of my wisdom, the physics teacher who was driving it left the school. Participating in FRC has many benefits, which has been discussed and pushed at great length. What's not usually discussed is the huge opportunity cost, especially for poorer schools with severely limited resources, like the school I mentored at. Here are a few observations from four years of FRC mentoring with Team 1850: 1) MONEY. Participation is $5k. To this, add the extra money teachers get for their mentorship, travel costs to the competition, pizza, etc. for the kids during the days of competition. For our school I think this added up to approximately $10k conservatively. For larger teams, the cost could be many times this amount. 2) TIME. Due to the very tight schedule (why the schedule is so tight is a whole another discussion) the teachers who oversee team development have to relentless focus on pushing the build further, rather than teach kids good practices, foster teamworks, etc. At our school a typical season was meeting for 1-1.5 hrs off season (~September - December) then 3-4 hours during the day plus 6-7 hours on Saturdays during build season. Adding in the competition, conservatively that is 70-80 hours of team time. Our team was about 10 regulars (a small team, good teams, e.g. 101 Wildstang has more than 50 students actively working). That's conservatively 700-800 hours of student time alone. Adding teacher time (2 teachers generally present), this was near 1000 hours for one season. 3) MENTOR TIME. For schools like the one I worked with mentors are a very precious resource, because no one wants to drive from the city or suburbs 45mins to the school on Saturdays. That's why almost all good FRC Teams I observed are in from the suburbs. Again due to the cut throat schedule, I wasn't able to interact much with the students but just worked on the C++ code. Now, you have to ask yourself if the the benefits from FRC, which are substantial, are worth the immense costs associated with it, or if these can be diverted to other efforts instead. For example, I had the school but 10 rPis and started to teach kids programming using Python and pygame, they loved it! Unfortunately, most of the students that came were also on the robotics team so we had to stop when FRC work started. Our team didn't make it to the finals in the 4 years I mentored. The cause was the same: A poorly designed hardware component failing. Pitted against us were teams that had retired aerospace and mechanical engineers from Boeing and other such companies who developed their designs using CAD and sometimes tested their designs using their old company resources. We had NO CHANCE! This was the "torture of hope": each year we started with great motivation and told the students that if they worked hard they can get a good standing, where in reality they had nearly zero chance of that happening.

jonkiddy 10y ago

This is my third year as a volunteer mentor for a local FRC team since the team's founding. Also, it is our third year headed to St. Louis (FIRST Championships). Our team is run out of an elite private school. We participate in multiple regionals and money has never been a problem. I'm sure the easy access to money is a contributing factor for our continued success. I'm aware of another local team which is setup as a 501c3 and physically runs out of a public school. This particular team is heavily supported by a local mechanical engineering firm with both money and a team of mechanical engineering mentors.

epalmer 10y ago
Our team is from a public school. We have a manufacturer that sponsor's us with space and tools but not money. We have a variety of sponsors that provide funds and we raise our own money as well. All funds go into a 501c3 that is a "boosters club". Our public school is somewhat affluent but not like a private school might be. We took first place in two district events this year and entered the quarterfinals in the district championship but only won one match. Our robot was good one other year since 2010. Our teams primary focus is outreach, helping disadvantaged / underserved students with STEM. We just had a big success with writing a state senate bill to help fund STEM competition teams at schools that have 40% of the students that qualify for the free lunch. The bill went into law this weekend. We had three students actually write the bill and a state senator promoted the bill under his name. The senator lives about 100 miles form our team. So really a state effort. We won Chairman's at the District Championship for our outreach. That gets us to Worlds in St. Louis. Without the Chairman's win and without the robot I love that we do outreach. My daughter is going to do a gap year this year before college and do a Americorps VISTA job for FIRST robotics helping the underserved start and fund teams. This is the best part of what FIRST creates for young adults.
- epalmer 10y ago
  I was reading my reply and this does not sound right: >We have a manufacturer that sponsor's us with space and tools but not money. We love our primary sponsor. Without space and tools we could not do our work. While we need to raise funds also the space is big and the tools amazing (CNC, welding, grinding, bandsaw, lathe and a lot more). https://www.powertraincontrolsolutions.com/ https://www.powertraincontrolsolutions.com/ Powertrain Control Solution has been and we hope will continue to be the primary sponsor of choice for us.

chambo622 10y ago

VEX is arguably the manifestation of this philosophy. The team I mentor has multiple VEX teams along with a flagship FRC team. VEX offers a good deal of the excitement, learning opportunities, and more student autonomy for a small fraction of the cost. I'll always be loyal to FRC but for schools that currently run a struggling FRC program, it's almost certainly true that they could be running multiple VEX teams and involving more students for less money.

epalmer 10y ago
I don't have any VEX experience but I hear great things about that program and I have heard from many that the costs are lower.

davidf560 10y ago

Just wanted to chime in and echo the recommendations for VEX. VEX Robotics Competition (VRC) is an order of magnitude less expensive than FRC and having been heavily involved in both I can tell you that the students get just as much, if not more, out of VRC. The smaller team size means that the kids can be much more hands-on as well versus FRC where you have huge teams of 50-100 kids but only 10-20 who are really involved in the engineering part. For less money in VRC, 50 kids could be split into 8-10 teams and every kid could be working on the robot. Also, for the younger kids, VEX IQ Challenge is a great alternative to FIRST Lego League. It's even less expensive than VEX and the kids actually get to drive the robot (unlike FLL) - which is a huge plus for many kids. Coincidentally, the VEX World Championships are coming up next week. Anyone thinking about getting into robotics competitions should check it out. They do a great live webcast of the events. Friday and Saturday (April 22-23) are the best days to watch. Webcasts and other details should be available here: http://www.robotevents.com/championship/ http://www.robotevents.com/championship/