init

Archive/Fair Review.md

@@ -0,0 +1,27 @@
+The fair sucks. There's no wheat to glean, it's just chaff. Let's not fool ourselves. But how is it we are here, and how do we get out?
+
+As I'm sitting here and judging this project, the questions and criteria in the rubrics are strange. They are utterly nonsensical. I'm judging a Lego robot dance on a mat, and this rubric is asking me if it is an appropriate use of technology. It hits me what the whole problem is.
+
+These projects do not have a context. They are contrived. They are like drummed-up school projects that are here for the sake of learning, and the learning is for the sake of getting a job, and the job is for the sake of money, and the money is for the sake of purchasing something.
+
+You hear this said of school sports as justification for practically employing students full-time: "But they're developing life skills, they're building character!" Yeah. But they could do that by actually doing something worthwhile. Kids know the difference between make-work and real work. They'll do things that are 'fun' or 'cool' that catch their whimsy. But they may not have the sticktuitiveness. And they certainly won't develop a well-rooted sense of meaning from it. You can be a farm kid your whole life, but the footballer who didn't make the NFL is just wallowing in the glory days. The same goes for the 4-H projects.
+
+Okay, so what might a better program than 4-H, or a reform of 4-H, look like? Here are some ideas - not all are right, and most definitely incomplete.
+
+Projects should be for the sake of some productive end, and judged on the merits of how well they achieve this. They should be judged _in context_. It is nice that you're able to make a pop tab representation of Michaelangelo's David. _Where are you putting that, exactly?_ I see this especially in robotics. Show me how you automated some process of your family business, or made a better alarm clock that actually gets you up, or something that really improves quality of someone's life.
+
+It doesn't have to be big. In fact, those little un-sexy incremental things can be more helpful. And in engineering and technology, showing that you can choose the thrifty simple option shows far more wisdom and actual problem-solving capability. Maybe it really is a servo motor on a timer that does the trick. It's far less fake - more rooted - to show the dumb simple thing than the flashy waste of time.
+
+Business should be involved. Not in the sense of corporate sponsorship. But in the sense of "hey, I built a toolbox for my dad's auto shop" or "I wove tablecloths for the restaurant across the street".
+
+This truly brings out the 4-H pledge: for my club, my community, my country, my world. Why build all this stuff? Not for personal development. For the benefit of others.
+
+Technical prowess is one thing. Being able to actually make it matter to your neighbor? Incredibly valuable. Incredibly rewarding. Incredibly rich relationships.
+
+The fair is just a culmination, of course. It's the place where we show off all this stuff we did throughout the year. A sort of display the likes of the Ox-Cart Man going to town and selling his excess. As soon as the projects are just "projects", rather than outflows of what is really necessary in a household, they become fake make-work.
+
+Maybe to work towards this we will have to expect that projects be brought in "used" condition - not pristine and scratch-free, but actually gritty and beat up from incidental use in the past few months.
+
+Judging rubrics may need some revisiting to reflect this: putting 'economical' as a line in judging; was an appropriate amount of time used on this?
+
+Maybe not everything needs to be subject to this economizing logic. There is a case for art, for really "impractical" objects. And perhaps they should have their own standards. But for the practical arts - for welding, for robotics, for aerospace, for crops, graphic design, and more - the "bottom line" (even if not truly monetary), the utility, should be the framing context.