Local Judges Guide Vex Robotics Competition 2

local-judges-guide-vex-robotics-competition-2

User Manual:

Open the PDF directly: View PDF .
Page Count: 8

Download
Open PDF In Browser	View PDF

Judge Guide

Team Conduct: The REC Foundation considers the positive, respectful, and ethical conduct of all
students and adults associated with a team to be an important and essential component of the
VEX Robotics Competition program. For this reason, Judges will consider all team conduct by students
and/or adults when determining award recognition at VEX Robotics Competitions.

New This Year
Major changes to the Judge Guide:
•
•
•
•
•
•

Removed pre-submission requirement for Excellence at VEX Robotics World Championship
Updated the Design Award process at local events to reflect the process used at VEX Worlds
Added Bonus in rubric for bound notebooks, further defined notebook content.
Removed pre-submission requirement for Design at VEX Worlds
Complete revision of Inspire Award including removal as a pre-submitted award for VEX Worlds
Remove pre-submission requirement for Innovate Award at worlds

Overview
Thank you for your willingness to help make the VEX Robotics Competition a success. This document
will serve as a guide to assist you during your time as a VRC Judge. Methods outlined in this guide are
consistent with the judging process used at VEX Worlds. This resource exists to serve as a guide to
Event Partners, Judge Advisors, and Judges. Official events may not change award criteria from
those listed below. Events not following the award criteria in this document will not qualify to
higher level events.
In this document, you will find:
•
•
•

Common Judge responsibilities
Judge Advisor position description
A detailed description of common awards

The Competition: Robot matches take place on the competition floor in a 12’ x 12’ competition field.
Rounds last 2 minutes, including a 15-second autonomous period, and are scored by referees. Teams
typically have one practice round, and then qualification rounds, followed by the elimination rounds. The
competition floor is a great place to see the teams in action and to evaluate how well their robots
perform. Judges who spend time viewing the competition have the opportunity to validate statements
made by teams during student interviews and discussions. Be certain to ask your Judge Advisor if there
is time allocated for this activity. In addition, you can get a great idea of a team’s sportsmanship, energy,
and enthusiasm while observing teams on the competition field. For robot game details, please visit:
roboticseducation.org/competition-teams/vex-robotics-competition/
The Judge Advisor: Adult volunteer who coordinates the event judging process.

Student-Centered Teams: The Robotics Education & Competition Foundation seeks to increase
student interest and involvement in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) by
engaging students in hands-on sustainable and affordable curriculum-based robotics engineering
programs across the U.S. and internationally. Judges play an important role in our efforts to ensure that
our program remains student-centered. Teachers/Mentors/Parents providing guidance and helping
students design, fix or program robots is accepted. Adults doing the majority of the work on a robot, or
working on a robot alone without students, is not acceptable, as there is obviously limited student
learning and ownership taking place in such a situation.
Judges have the opportunity though observation and interviews to identify teams, schools and clubs that
strive to keep their program student centered and that understand that the purpose of the program is to
enhance the learning process, not to win at all costs. Judges, with input from event staff, should identify
teams that are not student-centered. Examples of this may include:

•
•

It may be difficult to catch teams in their pit area due to tight competition schedules. Additionally, larger
teams may only have some of their team in the pit area, with the rest of the members congregating in
the stands. If at first you are unable to locate a team in their pit area, feel free to leave them a note to
inform them that the Judges are hoping to speak with them and/or check their pit area later. A standard
Judges note to missed teams is available at:
roboticseducation.org/event-partners/event-partner-resources-documents/

The Event Partner (EP): Adult volunteer who organizes and coordinates the event.

Key Concepts

•

The Pit Area: The area that teams use as their home base during the day is called the Pit Area. Teams
are usually provided with a table for their robot, laptop, batteries, and other VEX parts. The Pit is also
the work area for the teams. This is a great place to meet with teams in an informal setting and see
them in a more relaxed environment. Judges at VEX Worlds visit teams in their pit areas to conduct
student interviews for most judged awards. Judges at local events should help prepare teams for the
process at regional championship events and VEX Worlds by interviewing teams in the pit area.

Robots built entirely by adults or, in the case of younger students, mentors (High school students
building robots for middle school teams).
Identical robots on two or more teams (so called clone-bots).
Adults who criticize students from alliance teams for poor performance, failure to perform
optimally or who blame other teams for low scores rather than offering positive suggestions.

Judge Responsibilities
Judges are in a position of trust at VRC events. To ensure that the judging process is an effective,
equitable, and positive experience for all participants, it is important that Judges maintain:
•

•
•

•

Confidentiality: The judging process often includes frank discussions about teams. These
discussions must remain confidential and your judging team should take precautions to ensure
that these discussions are not shared with or overheard by teams or other event participants.
Impartiality: Advise the Judge Advisor or Event Partner of any possible conflict(s) of interest and
remove yourself from all discussions and decisions in which you may have a personal interest.
Engagement: Demonstrate your full interest and involvement in discussions with students and
your judging team by refraining from distractions such as phone usage or side conversations.
Your active participation in the judging process is invaluable and much appreciated.
Plan to not be alone with students. Work with at least one other Judge if you meet with teams in
separate spaces

Judges should not reward such teams that judges have clearly identified as not student centered with
any judged awards.

VRC Judge Guide

8/10/2017

VRC Judge Guide

2

8/10/2017

•

Before the Event
To prepare for the event, Judges should:
•
•

•
•
•

Review this Judges Guide, including the attached Design Award rubric.
Review the Game Video, Game Description and/or the Game Manual at:
roboticseducation.org/competition-teams/vex-robotics-competition/
o Knowing the tasks that teams will be trying to complete is essential to evaluating their robots
on a technical level.
Review the event location, schedule, team list, and awards to be offered on the event posting at:
robotevents.com.
Plan to wear comfortable closed-toed shoes and business casual clothing that is team-neutral.
Inform the Judge Advisor of any potential conflict of interest. Judges who are associated with a
team at the event are not disqualified from judging. However, they should not wear team shirts or
other items associated with their teams, they should avoid interviewing their own teams, and
they should recuse themselves from deliberations involving their teams.

During the Event
During the event, Judges should:
•
•
•
•
•

•
•

•
•

Review the Engineering Notebooks that were submitted by the teams. Use the attached Design
Award rubric to evaluate the Engineering Notebooks and your discussions with teams.
For large events that offer one or more Technical Awards or Other Judged Awards, use the
VEX Awards Scoring Sheet to evaluate your discussions with teams.
Conduct student interviews and discussions with teams in the appropriate area. This is usually
done in the Team Pit Area. Please ask your Judge Advisor for additional information.
If, after several visits to the team’s pit area, you are unable to locate the team, leave a “Judge
note to missed teams” form on their pit table. Your Judge Advisor should have these forms.
Ask questions that encourage the students to explain their answers using a conversation that
shows that you are interested in what they have to say. “How” and “why” questions work well as
leading questions. Use the sample questions listed at the end of this document.
Take notes to support your team evaluations and judge deliberations. Ensure that your notes are
not included on the rubric forms and are returned to the Judge Advisor after deliberations.
Rank each team you have met with for awards consideration after meeting each team. Simply
keep your completed rubrics or notes in order of the teams’ rankings. Typically, rankings for the
top 25% of the teams that you visited are needed during the deliberation process, but rankings
for more teams are sometimes needed for Design Award.
Attend and participate in the Opening and Awards Ceremonies, if possible.
Share all questions or concerns with your Judge Advisor.

During Deliberations
During judging deliberations, Judges should:
•

•

Post or share your top-ranked teams for each award, as instructed by the Judge Advisor.
Typically, each judge team will initially post the top five teams for each award or one quarter of
the judged teams, whichever is greater. A white board, flip charts or Post-It notes may be used to
post the top-ranked team numbers on a wall so that they are visible to all judges.
Work collaboratively with other judges to achieve consensus on the award recipients.

VRC Judge Guide

3

8/10/2017

•
•
•

Remember that the deliberation process often includes frank discussions about teams.
Therefore, the deliberation process is a confidential process. Judges’ discussions should not
leave the Judges room. Only Judges are allowed in the Judges’ room.
Remove yourself from discussions involving teams that present a conflict of interest.
Share all questions or concerns with your Judge Advisor.
Return all rubrics, judging notes, and materials to the Judge Advisor at the end of deliberations.

Judges should plan on attending and participating in the Opening and Awards Ceremonies. Remember
to wear comfortable attire and shoes. Business casual is appropriate attire. Any Judge who is
associated with a team at the event must ensure that the Judge Advisor is aware of the potential conflict
of interest. Judges with conflicts are not disqualified from judging. However, they should avoid
interviewing their own teams if possible, and they should recuse themselves from deliberations involving
their teams and should not wear team shirts or other items associated with their teams.

Judge Training
The Judge Advisor or Event Partner (EP) will arrange for some form of Judge training. Typically, this
training will involve reviewing this guide, the current game, and the judging rubrics. This training may
take place prior to the event and/or on the morning of the event. Check with your Judge Advisor or EP
for details.
Online REC Foundation Judge training materials are available to all Judges, Judge Advisors, and Event
Partners. For the judge training materials, please visit: roboticseducation.org/volunteers/volunteer-resources/.
If you have specific questions regarding the
judging process please send an email to:
tarek@roboticseducation.org.

Sample Schedule

Judging Schedule
The entire judging process will take place during
the competition. When scheduling teams of
Judges, it is recommended that each judging
team visit one team every 10-15 minutes. Judges
should meet with a wide enough selection of
teams to get a good basis of comparison. The
Judge Advisor will provide a list of teams that
each judging team is responsible for interviewing,
and the match schedules when these become
available.
The sample schedule to the right is for a
tournament with 24-36 teams. The Event Partner
and Judge Advisor consider the number of
participating teams when recruiting judges and
setting the schedule.
Please note: Scripts are now generated by
Tournament Manager. Judges simply need to fill
in the team number on the awards tab in
Tournament Manager and use the program to
print out completed scripts for the awards
ceremony.

VRC Judge Guide

4

7:30 –
8:00

Judge Advisor reviews training materials, makes assignments

8:00 –
9:45

Judges arrive, receive training, review Engineering Notebooks,
and begin interviews for assigned teams

9:45 –
10:00

Attend Opening Ceremonies

10:00 –
11:30

Teams of Judges complete initial interview of assigned

11:30 –
12:00

Return to judging room and each panel of Judges identifies their
top candidates for each award. (Use post-it notes to list teams)

12:00 –
1:00

Lunch Break -Initial deliberation on top candidates for awards

1:00 –
2:00

Judges observe teams in pit area and on field, and return to
competition field to do follow up interviews and observation as
necessary to complete rank ordering for each award category. If
possible, all Judges should have an opportunity to visit with top
contenders for each award

2:00 –
3:00

Judges return to Judge room to conduct final deliberations and
determine award winners.

3:00 –
3:30

Enter team numbers for all award winners into Tournament
Manager. This should be completed no later than quarter-finals.

3:30 –
6:00

Attend finals and award ceremony (speak to your Judge Advisor if
you have other obligations that require you to leave).

8/10/2017

The following trophy packs may be purchased by the Event Partner for use at events:

Judge Advisor Responsibilities
The Judge Advisor is an adult, who works with the Event Partner (EP) to plan and coordinate an
efficient, effective, and equitable event judging process. Judge Advisor responsibilities may include the
recruitment and training Judges for the event. Judges in VRC are to be adults. Good sources of judges
include local school administrators, local businessmen with interests in technology or engineering, VEX
U college students and local service organizations.
The Judge Advisor manages time and resources, potential conflicts of interest, and a deliberative
decision-making process that determines the event award recipients. The Judge Advisor is responsible
for ensuring that award winners are entered into Tournament Manager and that award scripts are
printed from Tournament Manager for presentation at the awards ceremony. This will also assure that
the award winners are ready for posting to the event listing on robotevents.com. The Judge Advisor is
responsible for ensuring that the trophies or other awards are ready for the awards ceremony.
The Judge Advisor and/or the Event Partner should not share the completed Design Award rubrics with
teams after the event. The rubrics are intended to be used by judges to narrow down the field of
contenders for each award. Multiple teams often score “perfect” 3’s on a rubric. While the rubric is
quantitative in nature, judges are expected to apply their qualitative judgement when making a final
decision on all awards. Teams with a perfect rubric score often do not understand why they were not
selected for an award. Judges should also be aware that they must be very careful in discussing these
awards with teams after an event. A judge’s best intentions are often misinterpreted by teams resulting
in students with hurt feelings. The Judge Advisor and/or the Event Partner must properly dispose of
these and all other judging materials at the conclusion of the event.

Judging Materials
The following is a list of suggested materials for the Judge Advisor and Judges to use on event day.
Judging documents are available at: roboticseducation.org/event-partners/event-partner-resources-documents/
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

•
•
•

Judge Guide (this document)
Awards Appendix D
Design Award Rubrics (one per team)
VEX Awards Scoring Sheet (one per team
if Other Judged Awards are offered)
Student Interview and Discussion Tips –
one copy per judge (attached)
List of Judges
List of awards to be offered at the event
List of teams (provided by EP)
Judge name tags or ID badges
Match list by team # (provided by EP)

•
•
•
•
•
•

Map of the event/pit area(if available)
Event Program (if available)
Awards Ceremony Scripts (these can be
printed from Tournament Manager).
Standard Award Descriptions for the
Judges Room to be posted
Clipboards and pens
Post-it notes, marking pens & highlighters
Transparent tape and/or painter’s tape
Tables for Judge Advisor, judging
materials, and judge deliberation
Colored Dots to mark pit signs

VRC Trophy Packs
Qualifying Event Trophy Pack

Additional Trophy Pack

Championship Event Trophy
Pack

Trophies Included: (7) 10" Trophies

Trophies Included: (5) 10" Trophies

Trophies Included: (7) 12" Trophies

Award Plates Included:
(1) Excellence
(3) Tournament Champion
(1) Design
(1) Judges
(1) Robot Skills Champion
(1) Volunteer of the Year
(8) Date Plate

Award Plates Included:
(3) Tournament Finalist
(1) Amaze
(1) Think
(5) Date Plate

Award Plates Included:
(1) Excellence
(3) Tournament Champion
(1) Design
(1) Judges
(1) Robot Skills Champion
(1) Volunteer of the Year
(8) Date Plate

Note: Event Partners receive this
trophy pack free as part of the
VRC Event Support Bundle.

Note: This pack is available for
state/provincial/regional/national
championship events.

Trophies may also be ordered individually at http://www.vexrobotics.com/event-partners/vrc-trophy.html.

Awards Overview
Awards are to be spread as equitably as possible among the teams, with no team winning more than
one judged award, if possible. A team should only win additional awards if they are for robot
performance (Tournament and/or Robot Skills awards) or if there are no other qualified teams. Individual
awards given to coaches and mentors do not affect a team’s eligibility for a judged award.
A complete listing of all awards and their descriptions is included in the Awards Appendix on:
roboticseducation.org/event-partners/event-partner-resources-documents/.
Not all awards are available at all events. Check with your Event Partner or Judge Advisor to confirm the
awards to be offered at your event and which awards qualify tams to move to either state/regional
events or VEX Worlds.
Please Note: Events may not change the awards criteria outlined in this Guide and in the Awards
Appendix. Events not following the award criteria in this document will not qualify to higher level events.
Standard Awards. Following are the awards commonly offered at local events:

Award Name

Award Description

Excellence Award
Tournament Champion
Award
Design Award

Top All Around Team (Robot Performance & Judged)
Each Team on Winning Alliance (2 or 3 teams) (Robot Performance)

Robot Skills Champion
Award

Team with a professional design approach
Top Combined Programming & Driving Skills Challenge Team
(Robot Performance)

Judges Award

Recognition from Judges for special accomplishments

The Tournament Manager software supports the creation of both Individual and Team Service Award
certificates. These certificates provide great recognition for outstanding teams and volunteers.

VRC Judge Guide

5

8/10/2017
VRC Judge Guide

6

8/10/2017

Excellence Award

How to Use the Calculator

The Excellence Award is the highest award presented in the VEX Robotics Competition. This award is
presented to a team that exemplifies overall excellence in building a high quality VEX robotics program.
This team is a strong contender in numerous award categories. Excellence winners must have an
Engineering Notebook. Key criteria:

Team numbers of the top 5 candidates for the Design Award (or top 25% of teams with Engineering
Notebooks, if greater than 5) are entered in the first column. Teams are then assigned points using the
categories below based upon their performance. The total points for each team are then added to
determine the top 2-3 teams.

•
•
•
•
•

Design Award ranking
Tournament Qualification Matches ranking
Robot Skills Challenge ranking
Other Judged Award rankings
High quality VEX robotics program

Some events may offer two Excellence Awards, one for the top overall Middle School team and one for
the top overall High School team, if they have at least ten (10) teams in each group.
A team does not have to win the competition to receive the Excellence Award, but must at least be
competitive in the Judge’s rankings.

Excellence Award at Small Events
Many small events may not have skills challenges or may only offer a couple of Judged awards to
teams. In this case, the Judges should consider each team’s Engineering Notebook, field performance,
and team dynamics in determining the Excellence Award winner. The top 5 teams identified for the
Design Awards should be considered candidates for the Excellence Award at small events.

Excellence Award at Large Events
The Judge Advisor is to use the following method at larger events:
Teams are given points towards the Excellence Award in the following categories:
•
•
•
•

Design Award (up to 1 point possible)
Tournament Qualification Matches Ranking (up to 1 point possible)
Robot Skills Challenge Ranking (up to 1 point possible)
Judged performance in all other award categories (up to 4 points possible)

Design Award Ranking (1)
ONE point possible

QR Ranking (2)
ONE point possible

RS Ranking (3)
ONE point possible

An Excel-based Excellence calculator is located at:
roboticseducation.org/event-partners/event-partner-resources-documents/.
Top contenders for Excellence will be found using the Excellence calculator. Once this calculation is
completed, Judges will use their best judgment to choose the team they feel best exemplifies the
best overall robotics program. The Judges’ final decision on the Excellence Award should include a
team’s behavior, sportsmanship, and professionalism at the event. A team is composed of students,
mentors, and adults at the competition. Judges may wish to use the “Field Note to Judges” form to help
collect information on team sportsmanship. Teams must have an Engineering Notebook to be eligible for
the Excellence Award.

Excellence Award at VEX Worlds

Using this wide range of criteria, the Excellence Award will be presented to the team who excels in all
areas of VEX Robotics. With many tournaments offering a state or regional championship qualifying
spot to the Excellence Award winner during the current season, we recommend the following
calculations be used to narrow down the field of Excellence Award contenders at larger local events:
Team #

1. A Design Award Ranking point is earned for finishing in top 5 Design Award finalists (one point
available)
2. A QR Ranking point is earned for finishing in top 8 of qualifying matches (one point available)
3. A RS Ranking point is earned for finishing in the top 10 of the Robot Skills challenge. Each
team’s top score from the Programming Skills and Driving Skills challenges will be added
together to determine Robot Skills Score. Events with less than 15 teams participating in the
robot skills challenge should only award a RS Ranking point to teams finishing in the top 5 of the
robot skills contest (one point available)
4. Judge Ranking points awarded for every Judged award for which team is finalist (up to 4 points
available, one point given for each Judged award for which a team is considered finalist)

Judge Ranking (4)
UP TO FOUR points possible

Total
Points

At VEX Worlds, only teams that have submitted at least two different VEX Online Challenges, have won
an Excellence Award at an official qualifying event during the current competition year, and have
submitted their Engineering Notebook will be considered for the Excellence Award. The Online
Challenges may be found at: roboticseducation.org/online-challenges/
If an individual team from a school or organization receives the Excellence Award at VEX Worlds, then
the award is given to the entire organization, not just the single team. Each qualified team will be given a
single Excellence Award Interview slot. Schools or organizations with more than one eligible team will
be given one Excellence Interview slot with the score from the interview shared by all eligible teams
from the school or organization. Team interview schedules will be forwarded to eligible teams the week
of VEX Worlds. Teams should be sure to list a contact email they may access at the event.

Design Award
The Design Award is presented to a team that demonstrates an organized and professional approach
to the design process, project and time management and team organization. Only teams that submit
Engineering Notebooks are eligible for the Design Award.
Key criteria:
•
•
•
•
VRC Judge Guide

7

8/10/2017

Engineering Notebook is a clear, complete document of the team’s design process
Team is able to explain their design and strategy throughout the season
Team demonstrates personnel, time and resource management throughout the season
Teamwork, interview quality, and team professionalism

VRC Judge Guide

8

8/10/2017

VRC Design Award Rubric

Design Award at VEX Worlds

Judges will use the Design Award Rubric to evaluate the teams’ performance on the award criteria.
Judging should be broken down to a two-step process. The first step identifies top contenders for the
award and the second step determines the award winner. Using this process, it is not necessary for
judges to interview every team that submits an Engineering Notebook.

At VEX Worlds, only teams that have previously won an Excellence or Design Award at an official
qualifying event will be eligible to submit an Engineering Notebook for review by the Judges. Eligible
teams will be asked in advance to submit their Engineering Notebooks at check in. The notebooks will
be reviewed using the first page of the Design Award Rubric. Teams with high quality Engineering
Notebooks will be selected for follow up student interviews and discussions in the Team Pit Areas.
Judges will complete the second page of the Design Award Rubric following each interview. Judges will
use the completed Rubrics to help determine the design Award winners. Teams are not given scheduled
sit down interviews for the Design Award at VEX Worlds.

The first step is to collect all team notebooks during team check in. Judges should then use the first
page of the Design Award Rubric to evaluate the quality of a team’s Engineering Notebook. Notebooks
should be separated into several categories based on this evaluation. The categories may include
beginning, intermediate and outstanding. This process allows judges to identify teams that should be
considered for follow up pit interviews using the second page of the rubric. The intent of this process is
to allow judges to identify top contenders for the Design Award efficiently. It allows judges to identify the
top 3-5 contenders for the design award based on their notebook.
The second step of the Design Award judging process is to use the second page of the rubric to
evaluate the students’ understanding and application of an effective robot design process, as
demonstrated in a team pit interview with Judges. The Design Award Rubric is found below.
Rubrics are confidential judging documents and should not be returned to the team, coach, or EP.
Rubrics should be destroyed immediately after the Judge Advisor has recorded the winning team.

Engineering Notebooks
One of the primary missions of the VEX Robotics Competition is to help students acquire real world life
skills that will benefit them in their academic and professional future. The Engineering Notebook is a
way for teams to document how the VEX Robotics Competition experience has helped them to better
understand the engineering design process while also practicing a variety of critical life skills including
project management, time management, brainstorming, and teamwork. Bound notebooks are preferred
by judges and are given a 3-point bonus on the Design Rubric. Teams receive a bound Engineering
Notebook when they register. Instructions and examples are included in the front of the notebook.
Each notebook is created through a concerted effort by a team to document their design decisions.
Large events may send a Design Award winner as well as the Excellence Award winner to a state or
regional championship, so teams should start their notebooks early and update them often. Engineering
is an iterative process whereby students recognize and define a problem, brainstorm and work through
various stages of the design process, test their designs, continue to improve their designs, and continue
the process until a solution has been identified. During this process, students will come across
obstacles, encounter instances of success and failure, and learn many lessons. It is this iterative
process that students should document in their Engineering Notebook.
The Engineering Notebook is an opportunity to document everything a team does throughout the design
process. Students should include a number of items in their Engineering Notebook including: a table of
contents, team meeting notes as they relate to the design process, design concepts and sketches,
pictures, notes from competitions regarding observations that should be considered in the next iteration
of their design, team members’ observations and thoughts on their design, team organization practices
as they relate to their design process, and any other documentation that a team finds useful as related
to their robots design. The team should also document their project management practices including
their use of personnel, financial, and time resources. A bound quad-ruled notebook is the preferred
format. Teams are provided a notebook by the REC Foundation or may purchase their own bound
notebook from online sources. The notebook should never be edited. The team number should be on
the cover. The notebook should be written in ink with errors crossed out using a single line. Pages
should be numbered and entries should be dated in chronological order with each page signed or
initialed by the students. Additional materials such as computer code or CAD drawings should be glued
or taped into the notebook. Pages should never be removed from the Notebook even if they contain
errors. Judges will not accept electronic notebooks on lap tops, thumb drives, or cloud based servers.

VRC Judge Guide

9

8/10/2017

Other Judged Awards

Quick Reference Guide
for Other Judged Awards

For descriptions and criteria on all awards, please
see VRC Awards Appendix D at:
roboticseducation.org/competition-teams/vexrobotics-competition/
For an understanding of judging at VEX Worlds,
please reference the VEX Worlds Judge
Handbook at roboticseducation.org/event-partners/eventpartner-resources-documents/
Not all awards will be offered at all events. Please
check the event listing on robotevents.com or
consult your tournament organizer or Judge Advisor
to confirm which awards will be offered at your
event. The following is a list of awards commonly
offered at local qualifying events.

Amaze

Team with an amazing, well rounded and top
performing robot

Build

Team with a well-crafted robot

Create

Robot with a creative engineering solution

Energy

Team with extraordinary enthusiasm

Innovate

Team that exemplifies thinking outside of the
box and innovative engineering design

Inspire

Team that inspires judges with their
approach to competitive robotics

Judges

Team that deserves special recognition for
efforts leading up to, and during, the event

Sportsmanship

Team that is extremely courteous and most
enthusiastic throughout the event

Think
Most of these awards are Judged using the VEX
Awards Scoring Sheet, which is available at
roboticseducation.org/competition-teams/vex-robotics-competition/.

Team with an impressive and effective
autonomous programming

Award Description and Criteria for Other Judged Awards
The Amaze Award is presented to a team that has built an amazing, high-scoring and competitive robot
that clearly demonstrates overall quality.
Key criteria:
•
•
•
•

Robot design is consistently high-scoring and competitive
Robot demonstrates a solid mechanical design and is robustly constructed to fulfill designed task
Robot programming and autonomous mode are consistently effective and successful
o Integration of sensors for use in both autonomous and tele-operated mode
Teamwork, interview quality, and team professionalism

The Build Award is given to a team that has built a well-crafted and constructed robot that also shows a
clear dedication to safety and attention to detail.

VRC Judge Guide

10

8/10/2017

Key criteria:
•

•
•
•
•

The Judges Award is presented to a team that the Judges determine is deserving of special
recognition. Judges consider a number of possible criteria for this award, such as team displays of
special attributes, exemplary effort and perseverance at the event, or team accomplishments or
endeavors throughout the season that may not fit under existing awards, but are nonetheless deserving
of special recognition.

Robot construction is of professional quality; robust, clean and elegant use of materials
o Solid construction (robot doesn’t “wobble”)
o Robust drive train and mechanisms
o Subsystems cleanly integrated, thought out and purposeful
Robot efficiently uses mechanical and electrical components
Robot is designed with a clear dedication to safety and attention to detail
Robot demonstrates reliability on the field and holds up under competition conditions
Teamwork, interview quality, and team professionalism

The Sportsmanship Award is presented to a team that has earned the respect and admiration of the
volunteers and other teams at the event. VEX Worlds uses ballots for this award.
Key criteria:

The Create Award is earned by a team that has a robot design that incorporates a creative engineering
solution to the design challenges of this season’s game.
Key criteria:
•
•
•
•

Robot is a well-crafted, unique design solution, demonstrating creative thinking
Team has demonstrated a highly creative engineering design process and methodology
Team has committed to ambitious and creative approaches to playing the game
Teamwork, interview quality, and team professionalism.

The Energy Award is based on team enthusiasm displayed at the event. The winning team will
demonstrate boundless passion and energy throughout the competition – in the pit area, on the field,
and in the audience, even when their robot is not playing.

•
•
•
•

Team maintains a high level of excitement and energy throughout the event
Team’s passion for competition and robotics enriches the event experience for others
Teamwork, interview quality, and team professionalism

Key criteria:
•
•
•
•

•

The Innovate Award is presented to a team that has demonstrated a strong combination of ingenuity
and innovation in designing their VEX robot. This award will typically recognize a specific, unique piece
of engineering that exemplifies thinking outside of the box and innovative engineering design. This robot
feature should also be a part of the engineering design solution that solves the complex problems
presented by the VRC game.

is courteous, helpful, and respectful to everyone at the event, on and off the field
treats others on the playing field in the spirit of friendly competition and cooperation
demonstrates respect and willingness to help to event staff and spectators
demonstrates excitement and enthusiasm throughout the event

The Think Award is presented to a team that has successfully utilized autonomous programming
modes during competition.

Key criteria:
•
•
•

Team
Team
Team
Team

All programming is cleanly written, well documented, and easy to understand
Team has explained a clear programming strategy to solve the game challenge
Team demonstrates their programming management process, including version history
Team’s autonomous code is consistent and reliable
o Use of advanced programming techniques and/or sensors to control motion
o Multiple autonomous modes
o A simple mode which works consistently is preferred over a jaw dropping mode which
only works occasionally
Teamwork, interview quality, and team professionalism

The Volunteer of the Year Award is presented to an individual who demonstrates a commitment and
devotion to their community, putting in many hours of hard work with persistence and passion to help
make the event happen. In most cases, the local organizing committee or the event partner will choose
the winner of this award.

Key criteria:
•
•
•
•

•

Robot design demonstrates an ingenious and innovative piece of engineering
Innovative feature is soundly crafted and is an effective solution to a design problem
Innovative solution is integrated as a part of an overall well-crafted robot
Students understand and explain why the innovative feature was necessary
o The award is not meant to recognize innovation for the sake of innovation, rather
innovation for the sake of excellence
Teamwork, interview quality, and team professionalism

The Inspire Award is presented to a team that has inspired judges with their approach to competitive
robotics. This team will effectively communicate their passion for the VRC program and maintain a
positive attitude throughout the event. The team will have a clear vision for their future and will
participate with both a high level of integrity and good sportsmanship. This team demonstrates that they
believe they can achieve what they set out to achieve through their diligence.

VRC Judge Guide

11

8/10/2017

VRC Judge Guide

12

8/10/2017

Judge Sign in Sheet

Student Interview and Discussion Tips and
Sample Questions for Judges

Note to Judge Advisor:
Please use this sheet to check in your judges. Record each judge’s name, email (in the event you want
a follow up contact), cell # (to reach judges during the event), and team affiliation (to avoid potential
conflict of interest issues).

Name

Please give a cell
Phone # that you may
be contacted at during
the event

Please provide your
email

Please list any team #s
you are affiliated with

Student Interview and Discussion Tips
•
•
•
•
•

•
•
•

•
•
•

Review the Engineering Notebooks and complete the appropriate section of the Design Award
Rubric before meeting with teams.
Be prepared to re-word your questions if you find that the team is struggling to understand or
answer.
Try not to ask questions that allow the teams to answer with a yes or no, and encourage the
teams to elaborate on their answers.
The students may be nervous. A tournament can be a stressful experience. Asking them
questions about their robot can help to put them at ease.
Judges need to talk to students, not adults. Occasionally enthusiastic adults will want to answer
a Judge’s questions. In this case, the Judge should politely remind the adult that Judges are
there to talk with the students and that input from adults is not considered.
When talking to young children, take a knee and smile. This will get you on the students’ level
and help make them comfortable.
Try to include as many student team members in your interview as possible.
Being a Judge gives you a unique opportunity to impact students. They will be looking to you for
positive reinforcement. Just a few words of encouragement can make their day. Try to leave
each team with a positive feeling about their performance at the event.
Taking a digital photo of each team with their robot oriented so that the license place is visible
will help you identify teams and robots during deliberations.
Use the provided “sorry we missed you” note in the pit area for teams that you have trouble
locating.
Placing a colored adhesive dot on the team sign each time you meet with a team in the pit area
will help you identify teams that have been spoken to by Judges.

Sample Questions
Getting the students talking is sometimes a harder task than it may seem. Here are some standard
questions that are typically effective in helping to get students to express themselves:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

VRC Judge Guide

13

8/10/2017

Tell me about what your robot does and how?
What part of your robot are you most proud of? Why?
What were the challenges of this year’s game that you considered before designing your robot?
How did you design your robot to meet those challenges?
Has your approach to the game been effective? Why do you think your approach to the game
has been effective?
What does your robot do in autonomous mode? Who programed it?
What makes your robot effective at playing this year’s game?
Did you use any sensors? What are they used for? How do they operate in your autonomous
mode? How do they operate in your teleoperated mode?
Based on your robot’s performance so far, what would you like to improve?
Were there any other robots that inspired your robot design?
How many subsystems does your robot have? Who was responsible for integrating them?

VRC Judge Guide

8/10/2017

Team # ________

Design Award Rubric

Team # ________

Design Award Rubric

Judges ______________________________________________
Evaluator 2___________________

Evaluator 2___________________

Directions: Mark the descriptor that best describes the team’s performance for each criterion. Write the best features of the team’s Engineering
Notebook and Student Interview and Discussion on the back of this page.

Engineering Notebook: The notebook...

Judges ______________________________________________

Student Interview and Discussion: During the interview...
Criteria

See Engineering Notebook Criteria on Previous Page

Expert (3 points)

Proficient (2 points)

Emerging (1 point)

Design Process

Students describe the goals of the design process and how the team
accomplished the challenge.

Students provide possible goals of the
design process but do not clearly identify
how team accomplished the challenge.

Students neglect to identify any goals of the
design process and cannot describe how the
team accomplishes the challenge.

Design: Methods
& Strategies

Students describe multiple design methods and strategies considered;
explaining both how and why the current design strategy was selected

Students only describe their current design
methods and strategy; explaining only one
of either how or why the current design
strategy was selected

Students do not describe any of the design
methods or strategies considered; do not
explain why or how the current design strategy
was selected

See Student Interview and Discussion Criteria on Next Page

Criteria

Expert (3 points)

Proficient (2 points)

Emerging (1 point)

Design Process:
Challenge

Describes the challenge at the beginning of the notebook with words and pictures
and states the teams’ goals toward accomplishing that challenge.

Identifies the challenge at the beginning of the
notebook.

Neglects to clearly identify the challenge.

Design Process:
Brainstorming

Generates an extensive list of possible approaches to the challenge with labeled
diagrams.

Provides an extensive list of possible approaches
to the challenge.

Contains a very short list or does not list the results
of the brainstorming sessions.

Design Process:
Select Approach

Explains why the selected approach was chosen and why the other alternatives
were not chosen.

Explains why the selected approach was chosen.

Does not document why the team selected the
approach they did.

Team Work:
Contributions

Students explain how each team member contributed to the design and
strategy.

Students explain how some team members
contributed to the design and strategy.

Students only explain how 1-2 members
contributed to the design and strategy.

Design Process:
Build & Program

Records the building and programming process in such detail that someone
outside the team could recreate the robot by following the steps in the notebook.

Documents the key steps in the process of
building and programming.

Seems to skip some important steps in the process
of building and programming the robot.

Students support each other as needed to
answer the Judges’ questions.

Students rely on one or two members to
answer all the questions.

Describes in great detail the process of troubleshooting, testing, and redesigning
through all iterations (cycles) of the process.

Captures the key results of the troubleshooting,
testing, and redesign cycle.

Leaves out important information about the
troubleshooting, testing and redesign cycle.

Interview:
Individual
Contributions

All students independently answer the Judges' questions.

Test &
Redesign

Usefulness

Is such a detailed account of the team’s design process that the reader could
recreate the project’s history. It is a useful engineering tool. It contains evidence
that team made decisions about design process based on previous entries. The
team can explain why the notebook is organized the way it is.

Is a complete record of the process, documenting
the key events of each work session. It is
organized in a way that any team member can
locate needed information.

Is missing, or lacks the detail needed for the reader
to understand the team’s history, and/or is not
organized in a way that an outsider can make
sense of it.

Interview:
Professionalism

Students present their answers in a respectful and courteous manner to
the Judges and other team members, making sure each team member
has a chance to contribute and waiting to speak until the other person
has finished.

Students present their answers in a
respectful and courteous manner to either
the team members or the Judges.

Students do not present themselves in a
respectful and courteous manner.

Resources

Shows the team’s efficient use of time with an overall project timeline. The team
uses checkpoints to help them know how well they are staying on schedule and
readjusts their schedule as needed. The notebook illustrates the good use of
human resources by assigning members roles based on their strengths.

Documents the team’s efficient use of time with
planning and goal-setting for each day’s session. It Does not provide evidence of the team’s wise use
shows that the team used its human resources
of the team’s time or talents.
wisely by assigning members specific tasks.

Teamwork

Provides evidence that all team members were consistently involved in the
process, that individual team members were self-directed enough to finish what
needed to be done, and that all team members consistently shared ideas and
respectfully considered each other’s input.

Shows that all team members’ were involved in
the process, that members could be counted on
because they did what they were supposed to,
and that the whole team shared ideas and
supported ideas of others.

Points

Suggests that perhaps some team members did
most or all the work, that one or more individuals
had to be nagged or reminded to do their work,
and/or that some team members did not contribute
ideas or that their ideas were not considered.

Points

Total the number of points earned from Student Interview and Discussion:
Total the number of points earned from Notebook:
(including bonus for bound notebook)
Total the number of points combined:
The REC Foundation thanks Northeastern State University, Oklahoma teacher training program for developing this rubric.

Comments:

Total the number of points earned from Notebook (Add 3 pts for a bound notebook & enter the number on page 2 of this rubric):
Rubrics are confidential judging documents and should not be returned to the team, coach, or Event Partner. Rubrics should be destroyed immediately after the Judge Advisor
has recorded the winning team.

VRC Design Award Rubric

8/10/2017

Rubrics are confidential judging documents and should not be returned to the team, coach, or Event Partner. Rubrics should be destroyed immediately after the Judge Advisor
has recorded the winning team.

VRC Design Award Rubric

2

8/10/2017



---

Source Exif Data:

File Type                       : PDF
File Type Extension             : pdf
MIME Type                       : application/pdf
PDF Version                     : 1.7
Linearized                      : No
Page Count                      : 8
Create Date                     : 2019:02:12 13:56:20
Creator                         : PDFium
Producer                        : PDFium

EXIF Metadata provided by EXIF.tools