It seems to me that there is a disconnect between what FLL
states and what happens at the tournament. In reading the challenge this
year the team was suppose to identify a local change in climate and find
possible solutions. The materials provided from FLL suggest that the team’s
project would represent the largest part of their score and that the robot and
its performance were of secondary importance.
The tournament however is clearly focused on the robot.
The team scores appeared to based mostly on robot design, programming, and
table performance. The team’s project seemed not to really count
for much. Of the times the team met with the judges; one was for the
robot programming and design, three were the robot challenge at the table, one for
a team building exercise, and one two minute segment was for the presentation
of their project.
Maybe there should be two types of tournaments where one is
based on the project and the other on the robot.
George Dodd
************************************************************************************************************************************************************** This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended
solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
are addressed. If the recipient or reader of this message is not the intended
recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or
copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this
e-mail communication in error, please notify us immediately by sending a reply
e-mail message to the sender. Thank you.. This
footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned for the
presence of computer viruses. Appraise-Virginia
**************************************************************************************************************************************************************
