Sweet! See you at worlds. We were first place in Utah.
What kids, mentors, and coaches need to understand is although we have been mainly focused on the topic of adults showing the solution vs āinspirationā of the actual build of the robot which has of course arguments on both sides which has been already noted, part of the challenge for the kids is also figuring out the optimal route for the robot. This is part of the challenge in vexiq.
The team I mentor right now are still route planning to figure out the best route for their design for worlds still since their design is very different than the design in question in this topic. Interestingly, itās this route planning that the team has ran into the most conflict during the season between members and they are learning a lot from the scientific method in proving which route they will be ultimately be using. And as the mentor, I try to step back during these conflicts and not tell them which route is more efficient but instead remind them to test out their theories by just timing the route and seeing if it is repeatable. They are also learning a lot about working with each other to manage conflicting ideas.
Having that said, seeing a video of a robot that maxes score with stop time and the exact route is without question giving the kids with a 4 ball catapult the solution. An adult driven solution. Could there be a more efficient route than the video for this ātypeā of bot? Possibly but since the route already maxes score, there probably isnāt an incentive for kids to come out and test other routes. So I truly believe this takes away from this aspect of the VexIQ program.
I think if vex designs challenges that are much more difficult to max score, this would be less of an issue since all teams throughout the season would be shooting for higher and higher scores instead of knowing a solution that will max.
Again, we as coaches and adult mentors, need to take a step back and allow the kids to figure out this themselves and remind them even with route planning the engineering process.
Cheers.
(long post alert, sorry, lol. Iām not trying to start 100 replies to this, just trying to get a general thought out there)
I donāt know that answer, thatās likely some forum post of its own. For example, in sports leagues, rules are changing to make play more competitive as trends come as long or fans/ players want change to make things better. In the business world, when covid hit, business had to evolve to the environmental change to survive. And that brings us to the evolution of the Vex universe.
In the last few years, social media seems to have become a bigger part of kids lifeās, that not only the Lippers, but others have increased their use of social media to post their ideas of VEX, whether to learn, promote, or educate. Given the popularity of the Lipperverse, that tells us there is a gap that needs filled thatās not being done so today with the current VEX universe. What might have worked 5 years ago doesnāt necessarily work today and this is proof of it.
In the last 5 years, how has education of vex changed (Iāve only been around for 3 years)? Seems like there is a subpar performing herobot every year, how has that evolved over the last 5 years to get better? (An in depth series going over each fundamental concepts in the hero bot, intake, choo-choo, catapult would have been great, explain other relevant concepts. Have a second design thatās more advanced for middle school, ext.). What kind of curriculum has been put out there for kids to keep learning ideas and build off of over years? (That gear ratio video is going on what, 8 years. There should an online library/videos of like 20-30 plus random build components concepts just like code block has like 30 plus sample code blocks to start from) What about teaching resources? If we had a dollar for everytime there was a post for āIām a new teacher, what do I doā. The type of kids coming into programs today might be more on the competitive side and a little less on learning side then they were years ago. Thus why we there might be more peg hole bots than ever before. To that point, the amount of kids is growing greatly, itās not always the future engineer kids, itās now kids playing sports or band, because robotics looks fun and is competitive.
The point Iām trying to make is, things change over time and so should the vex universe to some degree to keep up. But it doesnāt really seem like it has enough. There are gaps in the what VEX puts out vs what kids want and someone is evolving on their own and filling in those gaps that kids want. We may or may not like that, but the fact that kids are gravitating to them heavily, tells us as adults there may need to be some changes to adapt to the evolving world. The Lipperverse isnāt going anywhere. The second they stop, the next inspired kid will take up the mantle and keep the torch going until something better comes along. And thatās where Vex has to come in and fill these gaps.
I hope you donāt mean VEX should make a high-performing robot with instructions for kids to copy. I heard about one year the Herobot was so competitive, many teams used nothing else, and one team didnāt even know you were allowed to build your own robot. I believe it was Stretch, and I think Stretch was for Ringmaster, but I wasnāt around back then so I donāt know. Isnāt the main purpose of robotics to build robots, though, not to copy Ben Lipper?
Maybe we should call RECF and ask them to explain the Student-Centered Policy to him better, and tell him to stop sending pictures to anyone who asks. Just because it is doesnāt mean we want it.
From my experience people who tried to copy the lipper robot were not successful. Also I saw the new images of the robot and you canāt even see the gear ratio they use for the high hang. Its just basically the same bot as spitfire 1. Just with a 1 motor high hang. Not a big deal. Spitfires 1 is really hard to make if youāre a rookie but if youāre a pro then it wonāt be hard. Ask all the pros around me, we only copied his gear ratio of the catapult noting else. If you think I am incorrect correct me but he does not show a really close up picture where you can copy the entire robot.
I had three teams try and one was successful. The one who succeeded have redesigned nearly everything on the robot since the initial build for one reason or another. A cursory look may not notice that.
I have seen at least 3 more at competitions and none of them performed better than a push bot.
I have a 4th team trying now, I told them it would be a difficult task and good luck. I suggested they continue to improve the robot that got them to worldās and not put all their eggs in a new basket.
Successful or not, all of these teams learned new concepts and principles from the effort.
Yes, even at my regionās middle school championship there were several teams who flat told us judges that they were unable to get a catapult design (referring to spitfire) to work, so they went back to a pushbot.
Should Adults build high-preforming competition robots in any context?
- Yes
- No
- Unsure / depends on context
0
voters
I always assumed the videos by Ben Lipper was simply about monetizing YouTube videos and making money.
On a side note. If they arenāt already, the āBen Lipperā videos should be marked for being targeted toward kids.
If adults wanna build robots let them build robots
THe hero bots, but those arent too high performing.
I am not sure if you have posted it here yet, but go to Worlds team
And post all your teamās names, where, and MS/HS. I am making a list to come around and meet on May 3-5.
Yeah, if adults want to build robots, they can build robots. Just donāt give a tutorial on how to build it/ step by step mechanisms.
Their website is also targeted at coaches ($200 for lessons). They host competitions for VEX IQ but thatās not a real money maker. Maybe they do camps? If they donāt they should. 
Iām sure there are lots of ways to monetize their influence.
So I can build a competition robot for my students? Or I can build one for them to copy? What is your line as to what is appropriate or inappropriate?
No, that is against the rules I believe. And my line as appropriate, is you gave give suggestions, and make basic parts, but not build it for them.
You are correct. We run annual winter and summer camps as well as off-season competitions for teams who didnāt qualify for worlds to just have fun, and for teams who did to practice.
In all of my experiences in Vex IQ, even in camps, our Mentor never gave us any build instructions, he told us where the parts were, told us not to update vex code until the comp, showed us the challenge video, and then went on his computer. The only other time he helped us was when we were prototyping our Omni Wheel H Drive and I coded it fully and the when left Joystick moved was not working, and the only thing he told me with that is, yeah, that does not work, that was kind of a waste of time.
And here are the rules.
https://www.roboticseducation.org/documents/2019/08/student-centered-policy-rec-foundation.pdf/
And hereās a snippet, but I would encourage you to read through the whole thing.
Again, it is OK for students to use the ideas they have seen. Itās not OK for the adults to produce the fully functional models. (At least, according to the REC Foundationās student centered policy.) The key word in the yellow column which dictates what adults are allowed to do is āprimitive.ā