Wow… I really didn’t know you have such a negative opinion of me…
In this thread, I have merely asked about if anything is mentioned about how the additional spots are being distributed and my comment about hoping that some form of performance matrix is being introduced.
Did I say anything about singapore be given more spots in this thread?
I have never question about the current formula of allocating spots by growth or number of teams. It is plain common sense - the more registered teams, the more spots should be given.
There are a few things that I lobbied for… but definitely nothing against this.
Common topics that I have talked abt -
- having multi-pathway to worlds, instead of just going by number of teams.
You can argue that signature events is just doing that now. But I would say that signature events is a good platform to experience mini-worlds, but it is not a fair or good way as an alternative avenue to get a spot to worlds. It is really a case of if you can afford it, you will get more opportunities. I don’t think anyone will say that this is considered as equitable or fair approach.
And of course, this multi-pathway issue will naturally leads to the removal of worlds qualifications via global skills ranking.
And this is not just affecting the small regions, NZ is affected too… which means it is affecting mid-size region as well?
- having too little spots for a region is a vicious cycle, it will not encourage growth.
This is where I Hope recf will try to have a better understanding of the unique local context that are not allowing the region to growth.
As someone mentioned in this thread, there is no one size fits all solution… and I admit, it is unlikely that they can do much over this area.
There is a sweet (number of) spot to find… which is difficult - not too little to discourage growth, but yet not too much that it won’t be fair to other regions.
This is difficult, in fact, almost impossible.
Have I complained about why only 3 HS spots for my region ？ No.
but yes, I talked a lot abt the removal of alternative pathway to worlds.
I have never asked recf to tear their formula away.
- and this lead to the 3rd issue…
so far, I have always asked that the formula to be reviewed.
But I really don’t think it is wrong of me to say that. Unless we are saying that the formula is perfect and it is a sacred cow and untouchable (and I always thought that it is part of engineering to keep reviewing the current practice and try to make it better. No? )
And this is the area that I am talking about - hoping that a form of performance matrix be factored in (especially now there is no more worlds qualifications via global skills ranking).
Some time back, I mentioned about looking at region ranking during worlds, eg. Top 5 regions get maybe 2;spots more and then the next 5 get maybe 1 spot more for the coming year. (The number of teams and rankings are just examples).
Of course, these bonus spots will be reset the following year.
This will give teams that additional sense of fighting and representing the region, and not just their team of school.
@Dave_Flowerday - I would really like to know how have anything that I mentioned are being unfair or negative or how have it agitated you?