High School Kids Beat MIT at Robotics Competition

An anonymous writer submitted a story saying "A bunch of bright high school kids from Carl Hayden Highschool beat out MIT in a Marine Technology Center's Robotics competition. Here are additional details of the competition."

Comments

Doesn't say much for education

[Mr. Underbridge]

must attend high school somewhere. Right?

Even granting that, it would indicate that said MIT education didn't make them any better. And think, all those student loans for nothing? ;)

Obviously the entire story is somewhat facetious.

Re:Doesn't say much for education

[John Seminal]

Even granting that, it would indicate that said MIT education didn't make them any better. And think, all those student loans for nothing? ;)

This reminds me of Good Will Hunting. LOL. "You could have got your Harvard education for 10 cents in library late fee's".

I agree, I have met many people from the MIT's of the world, and they don't really impress me as better human beings than I've met elsewhere. In some cases, they were complete asshats. The problem is, everyone in highschool knows the next best secret to getting in MIT, besides being rich. Get the best scores on tests, any way you can. Often, this means no social life, and people who have not developed fully as human beings. They think they know more about Humanity because they have read Hawthorn, although they have never done anything really stupid, for no reason, just because friends were doing it too.

Re:Doesn't say much for education

[Sj0]

It looks to me like this is a case of some ridiculously talented high school kids. They had some really good ideas and put them to use. The physics nerd really came in handy. :P

On the other hand, it's also possible that there was a lower standard for a bunch of high school kids, whether intentionally or not. Let's face it, seeing some ghetto mexican kid spouting off about fluid dynamics and phase shift of helium aargon lasers is damned impressive -- much more so than a couple college students speaking at the same level, and that could certainly have been a factor.

Anyway, considering that the MIT kids probably didn't start college as physics prodigies like christian or skilled in mechanics like the guy I'm too lazy to check the article for the name of, they certainly got their money's worth -- I know how to program reasonably well, does that mean that people who get compSci degrees are wasting their money? Others are great at electrical without schooling, does that mean that I'm wasting my money in EE? No. If it did, then we wouldn't have schools.

Re:Doesn't say much for education

[wan-fu]

I think you have it quite backwards and this is due to the current folklore surrounding colleges such as Harvard, Stanford, MIT, etc. The common folklore is pretty much what you stated: professors don't teach classes, TAs do, and that it's all about 'the name' of attending the school.

I attend one of these 'highly ranked' institutions and it has been a great experience. I've never had a class taught by a TA. In fact, all of my classes are taught by the professor. The big name professors are even willing to teach small seminars. For example, at Stanford, Osheroff (physics Nobel) teaches a small seminar that's related to optics and photography (one of his hobbies). Outside of lecture, one may deal with the TAs more, but most of the questions one would ask are adequately answered by the TAs. If one requires the professor's assistance, it might take some effort to setup a meeting time, but I've always seen them try hard to make time for students.

Here's how I view the difference between a 'top' institution and your typical state school: one will get the same education at both schools. There's a huge caveat to this, that being at a state school, one will probably have to expend a good amount of effort to ensure that he receives the same education. For example, at Caltech, the math core that all students must take is far beyond any typical math requirement at a state school, and if one attended a state school, he would have to spend more effort to find the correct difficult courses to take.

So, why pay the exorbitant amount of money to attend a so-called prestigious university? One word: opportunity. The opportunities afforded at a top university are exponentially greater than other schools. The top professors within the field have lots of knowledge to share; there is a great chance to network with both the faculty and one's peers. Definitely, as you mentioned, atmosphere is key, because everyone at these schools went there as "overachievers" (not that they are all overachievers, but they all share some type of 'drive' - if you get my gist) and being in such an environment, simple conversations can lead to interesting studies. I feel that the big difference in the opportunities available at a big-name school is research at the frontier with lots of available resources. At a small state school, if one wishes to do research in any field, the odds of finding a professor with a similar interest who is at the cutting edge and has resources to share is significantly smaller than at a top university where there are more research dollars coming in and cutting edge work happening every day. In addition, having the most current research being conducted at one's school allows more opportunities to see the frontier and learn about it in class. Finally, there is a great opportunity to listen and learn from others that one could not do at a state school. Big-name schools can draw people like Howard Dean or Bill Clinton or [insert visionary/scientist/social mover/etc. here] to speak at the school. While it's possible for a small state university to do so, I doubt you'll see Fresno State or whoever pull in more than one or two of such speakers a year whereas at Harvard, such people would be coming in year-round.

Being able to do cutting edge work while learning in an atmosphere geared toward higher education and having the interaction with great professors and people is the difference. Whether or not one thinks it's worth it to pay big bucks to get that difference is an individual choice.

Re:Doesn't say much for education

[stuktongue]

I like your post; I think it hits the nail fairly squarely on the head. I'll add my slight spin on things....

I went to Camelback High School (Boo, Carl Hayden!) and then MIT. I was valedictorian of my high school but, like many, only a member of the rank and file at MIT. My point is, like Dirty Harry once said, "A man's got to know his limitations." I certainly learned mine at MIT; I wonder if I would have at ASU.

Continuing in that direction, I'll recall the firehose analogy. Getting an education at MIT has been described as being like drinking from a firehose (I'm sure this has been used at other schools, too). One can drink as much from a water fountain, I suppose, but with a firehose, you can't help but get wet in the process. I think "getting wet", in an academic sense, can be counted as a plus. For better or for worse, you certainly walk away feeling impacted.

My MIT experience was my own, and I am reluctant to assume that anyone else's was at all similar; we each get different things out of such circumstances. I think parents would be wise to counsel their kids on what to expect from their college experiences, but I wonder how many really do. My overall experience was 60/40 good/bad, but I'm glad I went, anyway.

To each his own.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Sad

[dos_dude]

Really sad. Not that some high school kids can build better robots than the MIT. But that they beat the MIT in the 'Technical Report' category is really sad.

I also find it amusing that the MIT would enter a competition that seems to be targeted towards high schools. Or should I find that sad too?

Re:These are not Future MIT students

[KillerDeathRobot]

So, why is it they can't apply for citizenship?

Seriously, if they were legal citizens, I know there are lots of scholarships out there for hispanics particularly, and probably particularly for engineering too. MIT would be well within reach if they were legal citizens.

Educate Crimaliens

[spicydragonz]

The radio talk show hosts usually use the term crimaliens when ever talking about illegal aliens. This story puts a face on those "immigrants who are stealing my white child's spot in state college." Personally, I think that smart people should get the most help to succeed. Think about the loss that our economy/society is suffering by having this young man put up dry wall instead of engineering.

Re:Scholarships?

[caldaan]

Apparently, they should. But thats part of the problem with schools like MIT anyway.

However, those MIT engineering students just learned the most important lesson any engineering student can learn. Engineering is about making the best, most cost effective solution to get the job done. In short it is about making money.

The MIT students were behaving a lot more like scientists than engineers, and is likely why they lost. $800 vs $11,000 is a big difference.

Re:These are not Future MIT students

[DarkSarin]

This is very true.

Additionally, and on topic, I think that there should be one set of rules concerning those who immigrate as adults under their own volition, and those who came as minors with their families and are trying to be productive.

As far as I'm concerned, these kids deserve a chance--as do any others. I think they should be allowed to become citizens with a minimum of hassle--as long as they aren't in trouble for breaking other laws. Here's what I would suggest be the criteria:

1. Be employed or in school with a 2.5+ GPA.
2. No criminal record (other than illegal immigration) in the past three years.
3. English Fluency (spoken and written).
4. Immigrated as a minor with family (eg--not just to run away or something).
5. No affiliations with terrorist/anti-US groups (sorry I can't see letting future mad-bombers into the country).

If a kid can meet those criteria, then they should be allowed "conditional citizenship" for a period of time. If they can stay employed or in school with a good GPA, pay taxes, and stay out of trouble for a grace period (say 5 years), then they are granted full citizenship. During the conditional perioud, they would be eligible for federal student aid and similar help, thus giving them the benefit of going to school.

If, at any time, they break those conditions (excepting, of course, breif gaps in employment or minor violations, such as a speeding ticket), the time starts over and they get one or more points against them. If they ever accumulate more than, say, 50 points, then they are deported and told to apply for citizenship the hard way.

The upshot of this is that those who want to make it all work would be able to, and the US would gain. The only downside? Mexico (or whatever other country) would lose a lot of bright young folks.

Oh, and BTW, the parents would need to given resident alien status, with the agreement that they leave if their kid screws up. They then have to keep INS informed of their whereabouts every quarter, without fail.

I can't condone ripping the families away, but nor should they be allowed to stay without penalty. The parents, should they desire to stay past the point where the kid leaves home, would have to pay back taxes (prohibitive for most), and demonstrate a good work history. Otherwise, for better or worse, they have to leave, but are allowed to return if they want to apply for citizenship the normal way.

The goal is to give kids a chance without making it a burden on the US or kids whose parents are legal citizens. In no case should a student be edged out because someone needs to "make room" for an illegal alien. Merit alone, boys and girls, merit alone.

Re:The kids' future

[zentinal]

Why the emphasis on hand wringing on their inability to get into MIT (or Cal Tech, or Harvey Mudd or...). Those are all great schools, but are they necessarily the best in the world? Now, IMHO, If we as a nation can't see fit to somehow get them into such schools, perhaps we don't deserve to have them in our schools, and don't deserve to profit from their services when they are working engineers. There are engineering schools all over the globe. Hopefully they'll be snatched up by one of them.

Re:I want to go to college too!

[Duhavid]

I know how you feel.

Junior College, and get a better paying job. I worked in bike shops, then moved up to a computer system operator job ( initially, it was not a move up in pay, but later, it was... ).
Save like mad.

I made it thru Mesa ( junior college here in San Diego ), then transfered to UCSD for my "junior" and "senior" years ( I had to go part time, as I had to continue to work "thanks, Pete Wilson, for the tuition spike just as I entered UCSD", so those "years" were about 4 in total... ).

It is possible. Do the Junior college thing first, and keep looking for a better job.

Stop looking for assistance. Doesnt look like it is coming. Get up and start moving. I know, easier said than done.

If you are considering JC as "not good enough", I would suggest that what you learn is much more dependant on you than on the college. You can transfer to something more prestigious later and save a bundle. I wasted a lot of time thinking the same thing myself. Dont let yourself get caught up in it.

Also, while I am rambling, it will take a while to get thru college on the "pay as you go" system. I did not graduate college until I was 30. Just keep things moving forward, dont give up. You can make it.

Good luck.

I read this in Wired

[ifwm]

And came away with the same feeling I had when I read the headline. That is, that it's a great feelgood story, but they didn't really "beat" MIT. They were handed the competition because they scored better in the subjective parts. I KNOW part of that was because they were underprivileged kids who weren't expected to do anything. They essentially rose so far above expectations that they were given the competition as a result.

But it's still a great story.

As an aside, shouldn't someone with some money to throw around help these kids pay for college? As illegals, they aren't eligible for financial aid (nor should they be, but wouldn't this be a great situtation for someone like Mark Cuban?

Re:Typical of Engineers

[amabbi]

Mission Task: Carl Hayden: 32 MIT: 48

So the real story is, MIT beat the high school kids by 50% in the only objective scoring category of the competition. Why is this news?

WaPo weighs in

[starrsoft]

I read about this the other day in the Washington Post. They have an interesting perspective. Basically, despite their winning, they still can't get any real success in life (not their fault). Read it (Get a un/pw):

Their moment of triumph was sweet but short-lived.

Vazquez and Aranda graduated from Hayden last spring, but they're not in college now, Davis writes, because they're illegal immigrants and thus ineligible for student loans or cheap in-state tuition. Vazquez is hanging drywall and Aranda is filing papers at a Social Security office. Santillan and Arcega are still at Hayden, Davis says, but their prospects for college also look dubious.

It also had a pretty funny part:

mmediately, they had a problem: When Aranda lowered Stinky into the pool, they realized they had a leak. Not only did they have to re-solder every wire in the machine overnight, Vazquez told his teammates, but they also had to find something absorbent to keep moisture away from the circuitry.

"Absorbent?" Santillan asked, recalling countless TV ads. "Like a tampon?"

Soon, Santillan was in the nearest supermarket, trying to work up the courage to ask a young woman for advice on which brand of tampons might work best in an underwater robot.

The woman laughed and made her recommendation. "I hope you win," she said.

Re:Best Quote from the Article

[Anonymous Coward]

Hello My name is Richard and am currently attending Carl Hayden High school as we all have read the article it is pretty sweet and some exageration but we wont get in to that, right now besides our rov team we won our regional FIRST robotics chairmans award the highest in the competition and are now trying for the national title. We have the first and longest running electric vehicle program in the nation where we build electric cars. Its preety sweet. We also compete in a high school pumpkin throwing catapult competition. We've helped the city of scottsdale design and build a electric train based on our electric vehicles. This train carries hundreds of kids over a one mile course around McCormick-Stillman space park. We host the state lego robotics championships and mentor 6 teams from the community in that competition. We do over 30 presentations to different organizations yearly. Also with that comment about the gangs and the fights is not accurate it may have been in the past but has cleaned up these past few years.

Great quote...

[dantheman82]

"You're very comfortable with the metric system," Swean observed.

"I grew up in Mexico, sir," Oscar said.

Swean nodded. He eyed their rudimentary flip chart.

"Why don't you have a PowerPoint display?" he asked.

"PowerPoint is a distraction," Cristian replied. "People use it when they don't know what to say."

"And you know what to say?"

"Yes, sir."

These guys would be a huge asset in any good college because they have more desire to learn this stuff than many students I've seen combined together. I seriously doubt they'd waste their time playing CounterStrike if given the chance at a good Engineering school. Maybe I'll mention their names to my school.

Very interesting story...

Academics != education != real world effectiveness

[EmbeddedJanitor]

I pity the MIT students in any comparison because they face a tide of academic overheads that they must swim against.Unforntunately, most university education is about nbeing a good academic, not necessarily a good engineer etc. Writing up a good report with references, footnotes etc (correctly formatted references are worth 10% of the term paper) is more important than practical output.

I see the results in the people I deal with in industry. As a generalisation, most of the PhDs I deal with are less productive than their non-PhD collegues because they approach problems as academic problems instead of practical problems. As a result, a lot of effort gets spent investigating stuff that does not matter in the real world, or making impractical assumptions.

What about MIT's engineering failures?

[geekoid]

"MIT's ROV motored smoothly down and quickly located the 5-gallon drum inside the plastic submarine mock-up at the bottom of the pool. But as the robot approached the container, its protruding mechanical arm hit a piece of the submarine frame, blocking it from going farther. They tried a different angle but still couldn't reach the drum. The bot wasn't small enough to slip past the gap in the frame, making their pump system useless. There was nothing they could do - they had to move on to the next assignment."

Thats BAD engineering.

AND

"Engineering Eval:
Carl Hayden: 53.17
MIT: 44.67"

That over 8 points right there.
Don't use that "We lost for subjective reasons " crap here, bucko.

Sounds to me they probably got so much money(11,000), they got carried away with features.
As an engineer, I would say thats a typipical Jr. Engineer mistake.
Of course, that's speculation on my part.
It owuld be truly interesting if the teams wrote a 'lessons learned' paper. I would love to see what the MIT team thinks of their design and the contest in hind-sight.

Re:Typical of Engineers

[Qwerty0]

I spoke to one of the girls on MIT's team -- she pointed out that getting 15 students and a robot from Massachusetts to California and renting hotel rooms for the duration doesn't come cheaply, so the lion's share of this $11000 budget disappeared there, leaving the team with a bot budget in the same order of magnitude as the Hayden team...