The Event Coordinator's Dilemma

[dholdgreve]

Looking for some suggestions...
We have all seen it...
* The overly cautious mom or dad that carries the carefully packed tower box into the competition and unpacks it for the son or daughter
* The child that sits impatiently, gently, mindlessly tapping the side of the tower like a drummer, cracking every glue joint on it, then can't figure out how all of the braces got broke
* The Team that can't answer even a single question about the design or progression of it...
* The coach that stands in the background flinching every time the kids make a sudden move...
* The tower that is symmetrically impeccable, yet the kids show absolutely no pride or excitement about testing it.

All telltale signs that maybe the kids had a little "too much help" building that tower... Is it fair to the other 29 teams that truly did build their tower to allow a coach or parent built tower to represent a school? Certainly, no one wants to inaccurately accuse any teams of malfeasance, but come on... Sometimes it is just really obvious!

I'd be very interested in hearing from other Event Coordinators or competitors as to how you have dealt with these types of issues, and, as a competitor, what you guys think our limits are as E/Cs... Just how hard should we push when we think something is just not right?

[cool hand luke]

This is only my second year as a coach, but towers is the event I'm most passionate about. I can tell you that many of the issues you listed were applicable to us. But the reason is at our regional we didn't get the schedule till 1 week before the event, and then they changed the towers time slot the night before.

This meant that we were really scrambling to get kids into the events. Of our 4 kids that went into towers, only 1 of them actually built any towers. But we new we could explain how to load it and what to do to the other three, but they wouldn't have been able to answer any questions.

Not saying that you don't have a valid problem, but there may be some pretty innocent reasons why this happens. The builds for us are kind of a "who's available" based on the other events.

[dholdgreve]

"Luke,"
I fully understand the need occasionally to have other team members test towers they had nothing to with on the build. Coming at it from an E/C standpoint, the best avenue here for the kids to be totally up front. and explain to the E/C that they have thrown into the event and don't know much about it... That other team members actually built the tower, not coaches or parents. This event is stressful enough when the builders do the testing. To be sent in without knowing much about it, is sometimes over the top... For kids like this, I'd gladly go the extra distance, thank them for explaining their plight, and do everything I could to reduce the stress, not add to it...

It is not difficult at all to tell the difference between the kids that got thrown in, and teams that received too much assistance from coach or parent. In this case, when I ask if they built it, I always get a yes or positive head shake, but if I ask them anything about the design, they have no clue, and will usually shoot a quick glance at the coach or parent for reinforcement. These are the kids I'm concerned about.

The kids that I coach can't wait for a question about design! They love to discuss the intricacies of Euler's theory, the inverse square relationship, densities and thicknesses trade offs... I actually felt a little sorry for the judges at State last year... He had no idea the can of worms he was opening... He couldn't hardly get the kids to shut up!

But back to the question at hand... How to deal with the team that you are 90 to 95% sure the tower was built by "others" and what to do with them... how to deal with them... Any thoughts would be appreciated.

[cool hand luke]

Thanks for the pointers on how kids thrown on stuff should respond. We are having more of that this year, we have 2 events that are show up and build something (naked egg drop, mystery architecture) that are pulling in our more engineering minded kids, leaving the others to pick up the slack.

[chalker]

Some tournaments (and states) are having competitors sign a physical piece of paper at the time of impound or competition attesting that they built/designed the device in compliance with the building policy. You'd be surprised how many competitors are unwilling to actually sign something like that because it really drives home the question and seriousness of the policy. You might consider doing something like that to help weed out some of these situations.

[kinghong1970]

have all schools and participants sign waiver and get a recording set up.

allocate 10 ~ 20% of score to be at discretion of EC interview with students.
but do this with EC and a witness... record and have EC and witness fill out score sheet signed.

yea, more work... but puts more power to EC to allow them to question students and the students have burden of proof to convince their level of commitment.

else, EC have burden of proof and yea... feces will hit the fan...

well, maybe it'll hit the fan either way...

[cool hand luke]

have all schools and participants sign waiver and get a recording set up.

allocate 10 ~ 20% of score to be at discretion of EC interview with students.
but do this with EC and a witness... record and have EC and witness fill out score sheet signed.

yea, more work... but puts more power to EC to allow them to question students and the students have burden of proof to convince their level of commitment.

else, EC have burden of proof and yea... feces will hit the fan...

well, maybe it'll hit the fan either way...

that' seems really sketchy to change the scoring system now. If the rules were written that way, fine. Id rather you just DQ my kids because they didn't abide by the rules.

[kinghong1970]

Oh no... not now...
Too late once rules are published... and too far into the “season”

In future years to come...

Better clarity in rules would be nice
And would like to see some form of check for the projects too as OP stated

[DarthBuilder]

I did have an ES make me sign a paper saying I built it.

[dholdgreve]

Some tournaments (and states) are having competitors sign a physical piece of paper at the time of impound or competition attesting that they built/designed the device in compliance with the building policy. You'd be surprised how many competitors are unwilling to actually sign something like that because it really drives home the question and seriousness of the policy. You might consider doing something like that to help weed out some of these situations.

GREAT IDEA... So simple yet effective! Thanks!