Awards & Judging Tami Kirkland / Lori Lazuk July 20-21, 2017

BEST Philosophy The students will get the most from the process if they do the work Mentors and Teachers should help the students realize the students’ ideas The six-week development process is more important than the game-day competition BEST does not stand for “Beat Every Single Team” BEAT EVERY SINGLE TEAM

2017 Awards Overview National Mandatory Awards Optional Awards by Hub Robot Competition “Game” requires Engineering Notebook Founders Award For Creative Design Most Robust Machine Software / Simulation Optional Awards by Hub Sportsmanship (RM/FR/PP) Best Rookie Team (RM/FR/PP) Craftsmanship (RM) Engineering Notebook (RM/PP) Outreach (FR) Most Creative Exhibit (FR) Marketing Presentation (FR) BEST Award – Team Participation is Optional Engineering Notebook 30 pts Marketing Presentation 25 pts Team Exhibit and Interview 20 pts Spirit and Sportsmanship 10 pts Robot Performance 15 pts For your team to compete in the BEST Award, you must notify us by 2 weeks after Kickoff

Hints to Improve Scores Use last year’s Awards & Judging Policies: BEST Robotics File Manager- 2016 Awards and Judging Use the score sheets and rubrics in your TMI Notebook to improve your performance & scores Know what the judges are expecting to see Schedule students & time into the plan to do the Engineering Notebook – starting with day 1 of work Schedule time into your plan to practice driving your robot and review scoresheets!!

Every team MUST submit a Engineering Notebook NO EXCEPTIONS The Engineering Notebook (EN) Its Importance & Judging Every team MUST submit a Engineering Notebook NO EXCEPTIONS This is a Notebook! (some assembly required)

Purpose of the Notebook Documents the process the team uses to design, build and test the team’s robot. An opportunity to tell the story of your robot Documentation is a critical aspect of the Engineering Process. It provides… A crucial record of the process Critical info to be shared among different subteams A checklist against requirements Essential information for new teammates Page 6

A Notebook is Required to Compete Engineering Notebooks are due on Practice Day If a notebook is not turned in on Practice Day, your team will NOT be able to compete on Game Day Engineering notebook scoresheets will be returned to teams per their hub procedures Page 7

KEEP IN MIND that the EN is A ticket to the Wild Card Match Just in case your robot had ‘one of those moments’ 30% of the BEST Award score A significant % of Best Rookie Team score Impacts the Founders Award results A vital record of your team’s work May also be useful in portfolios, applications, etc.

Judging the Notebook ALL notebooks are judged using the BRI score sheet & rubrics Use the score sheet to assist you in writing / organizing your notebook The Table of Contents should have a listing for each section on the score sheet section. This helps the Team and the Judges! Reference amplifying information in the appendix. Scoring process - each judge scores the same section on every team’s notebook Page 9

How to Begin: For rookie teams, a template is available to organize the EN – and the Teachers / Mentors will use a part of the template to write their own mini-EN at TMI for the mini-competition! The EN section of the TMI notebook has some good suggestions.

Notebook Examples Think like a judge in preparing the EN! Review two sample notebook Table of Contents 2009 Wichita Homeschool 2012 STEM Academy Notice the different styles. But the students MUST decide what will be best for 2017 considering the changes over the years Added in 2015: Software Design and Simulation scoresheet part of EN scoresheet

Table of Contents Examples EXAMPLE 1 – Wichita Homeschool 2009 Introduction Research Paper Implementation of the Engineering Process Stage 1 – Gather Requirements Stage 3 – Preliminary Design Stage 3 – Final Design and Construction Stage 4 – Test and Evaluation Brainstorming Approaches Analytical Evaluation of Design Alternatives Offensive and Defensive Evaluation Software Design and Simulation – new in 2015 Design Creativity Summary Support Documentation – Appendices EXAMPLE 2 – STEM Academy 2012 1. Executive Summary 2. Design Process 2.1 Problem Statement 2.2 Overview of Engineering Design Process 2.3 Brainstorming 2.4 Strategy Evaluation 2.5 Robot Design 2.6 Mathematical Analysis 2.7 Programming 2.8 Simulation – new in 2015 2.9 Robot Integration &Testing 3. Team Organization & Meeting Minutes 4. Safety 5. Research Paper 6. Appendix

Help is in the TMI Notebook… In Section 8 of the TMI Notebook you will find a copy of the 2016 EN Score Sheet with rubrics. The following 5 slides show the EN and Software Design & Simulation Score Sheets from 2016.

2016 Engineering Notebook Score Sheet (1 of 3) Purpose: To document the process used to design, build, and test the robot (30 Points) Possible Points Score Research Paper (4 Points) Correlation between game and how the science/technology is being used at a company/industry/research lab in the team’s state or region 10   Comments:  Any related information of game theme, such as history, famous inventor(s), or major milestones. Comments: Creativity in linking game theme to appropriately related science content Proper use of grammar and composition throughout paper, citations of sources used to gather information for paper, stayed within 2-5 page limit DESIGN PROCESS (17 Points) Implementation of the Engineering Design Process Evidence that the engineering process was effectively used. 25 Brainstorming Approaches How well organized and productive was the brainstorming approach? How well was the brainstorming approach documented? Analytical Evaluation of Design Alternatives Use of analytical and mathematical skills in deciding upon and implementing design alternatives

2016 Engineering Notebook Score Sheet (2 of 3) DESIGN PROCESS continued (17 Points) Offensive and Defensive Evaluation Analysis of gaming strategies and design elements to achieve goals 25   Comments:  Software Design and Simulation (from additional scoresheet on next section) Evidence of custom software design vs default program; Evidence of software design process; Evidence of advanced test and debugging techniques used in the verification of robot program (e.g., simulation, 3D world, etc.); Consideration of good software design practices (e.g., comments, naming conventions, design simplicity, modularity, portability, etc.) Comments Safety Evidence that safety training occurred and safe practices were followed to prevent students’ misuse of tools and other devices/equipment that may result in personal injury or damage to property 20 Support Documentation CAD/other drawings, photos, team organization, meeting minutes, test results, etc. that support the main document (max 20 double-sided pages) Comments:

2016 Engineering Notebook Score Sheet (3 of 3) Overall Quality and Completeness of Notebook (9 Points) Organization and appearance: Table of contents, summary, page numbers, discussion of evaluation points, linkage to appendices. 30   Adherence to specifications: Business font no smaller than 12 pt., double-spaced (single spaced ok in tables and outlines), 1” margins, 32 one-sided page limit for main section, 20 double-sided page limit for appendices, Cover sheet and/or title page that identifies the school team name, teacher contact information, and team number Quality of content : Well written descriptions, clear photo labels, lack of extraneous material such as community or promotional efforts, spirit development, team building, etc. Total 300 ÷10 ÷ 10 Final score:

2016 Software Design & Simulation Score Sheet (1 of 2) Purpose: To document the software design process and practices used for creating and testing the robot program. (25 Points) Possible Points Score SOFTWARE DESIGN PROCESS (85 points)) Evidence that a software design process was followed Identifying the required operations (e.g., locomotion/drive, chassis rotate, arm lift/bend/rotate/extend, claw rotate/open, ...) Designing each required operation (e.g., flow charting the steps involved, consideration of user interface, etc) Coding and Verification (how correct operation of the robot program is validated) Release and Maintenance (version control, managing changes/updates) 30   Comments:  Evidence of custom software design versus using the default robot program 15 Comments: Evidence that advanced simulation techniques were utilized to verify the correct program operation (e.g., Simulink, virtual world, external mode, etc.) 20 Evidence that test and debug techniques were considered (e.g., debug terminal, print to screen, real-time debugger, external mode/in-the-loop, etc.) 10 Evidence that the program functionality is connected to the teams’ scoring objectives/strategies.

2016 Software Design & Simulation Score Sheet (2 of 2) SOFTWARE DESIGN PRACTICES (30 points) Consideration of good software design practices (e.g., commenting, naming conventions, code simplicity, modularity) 15   Comments:  Consideration of error conditions and response actions. (e.g., illegal operations, invalid states, motor/servo stop limits, out of bounds values, etc.) Comments: CLARITY OF DESIGN AND DESCRIPTION (10 points) Clarity of design and description (well written, easy to follow, no excess material/information) 10 Total 125 ÷5 ÷ 10 Final score: 25

EN Judging Exercise Review the Brainstorming Approaches from the 2009 Engineering Notebook submitted by Wichita Home School Take 5 minutes and use the 2016 EN Score Sheet Section for Brainstorming Approaches on the next slide to score the section. What do you think? Briefly discuss as a group: Why did you give the work the score that you did? Is everyone thinking along the same lines? Page 19

Scoring Brainstorming Approaches 2016 Notebook Score Sheet: How well organized and productive was the brainstorming approach used and documented? 2016 Suggested Rubric: 21 - 25: Approach is explicitly identified. Organization and productivity are obvious. Explanation is thorough. 16 - 20: Approach is identified. Organization and productivity are discernible. There is some explanation. 11 - 15: Approach is not identified. There is some discussion of brainstorming. 6 - 10: Discussion of approach is minimal. 1 - 5: You can tell there were ideas generated. 0: No discernible brainstorming.

Optional Award: The BEST Award Teams may choose to do this award or not. The BEST Award competition is evaluated by judges using score sheets using the following distribution of points: Engineering Notebook * 30 pts Marketing Presentation 25 pts Team Exhibit and Interview 20 pts Spirit and Sportsmanship 10 pts Robot Performance 15 pts TOTAL 100 pts * and Software Design and Simulation Scoresheet

The BEST Award… Presented to the team that best embodies the concept of Boosting Engineering, Science and Technology Inclusiveness, Diversity of participation Use of the Engineering Process, Creativity Sportsmanship, Teamwork Positive attitude & enthusiasm School and community involvement

Teaches Business Related Skills The BEST Award… Teaches Business Related Skills Project Management Documentation Public Speaking Strategic Planning Leadership Marketing Time Management Technical Writing Critical Thinking

Important Deadline Participation in the BEST Award Competition is optional… Sign up for BEST Award approximately 2 weeks after Kickoff Details will be provided at your hub’s Kickoff