The guidelines in this article and the larger set of Judging articles are for VIQC, VRC, and VEX U competitions sanctioned by the REC Foundation, including the VEX Robotics World Championship.

The Judging articles describe the judged award criteria and inform the Judges, Judge Advisor, and Event Partner on their roles and responsibilities in the judging process. Additionally, this information helps coaches and teams understand the judged award criteria and processes so they may improve their performance on judged awards.

Local qualifying events, and events that qualify teams directly to the VEX Robotics World Championship must follow the criteria and processes in these documents or those events will not qualify teams to higher level events. Should anything in these documents contradict the Game Manuals or Team Qualification Process, the Game Manuals and/or Team Qualification Process will take precedence. All qualifying events must use the award descriptions, rubrics, and scoring sheets outlined in these articles and may not use substitutes. 

In the VEX Robotics Competitions, teams of students showcase their knowledge and skills in designing, building, and programming a robot. Students demonstrate their knowledge of the engineering design process by documenting their design process in an Engineering Notebook.

Student drive teams exhibit their driving skills and game strategy during match play and skills challenges. All these activities are to be completed by the students with minimal adult assistance. Students must make the decisions, complete the work, and demonstrate their learning and knowledge for their team to qualify for judged awards.

Event Judging Formats

  • In-Person Event Judging: Judges review physically submitted Engineering Notebooks and interview teams in an in-person setting. This has been the traditional format used at past REC Foundation competitions.
  • Remote Event Judging: Remote Judging allows for Engineering Notebook reviews and Team Interviews to be conducted remotely. Engineering Notebooks are submitted digitally and/or team interviews are conducted remotely via video calls. Both Engineering Notebooks and Team Interviews can be completed ahead of the day of the event when remote judging is utilized at an event. 

Event Partners will determine which judging model they will use and will post this information in their event posting on RobotEvents.com. Event Partners are responsible for communicating with teams regarding the judging model used and any related details (e.g., submission deadlines and judging format). 

If an event must change to a different judging format the Event Partner should contact their REC Foundation Manager to discuss options. Converting an event to a different judging format is allowed but consideration must be given to the amount of time necessary for teams to comply with the submission requirements (e.g., if converting from in-person event judging to remote event judging, teams must be provided sufficient time to prepare the Engineering Notebook for Digital submission).

Interviews & Notebooks 

This chart shows the acceptable Engineering Notebook and Team Interview formats for each event and judging format combination.

In Person Event

Remote Event

In Person Engineering Notebook Judging

Remote Engineering Notebook Judging

Remote Engineering Notebook Judging

Notebook

Format

Physical/Paper

Yes

N/A

N/A

Uploaded from Physical/Paper

N/A

Yes (link)

Yes (link)

Digital

N/A

Yes (link)

Yes (link)

Printed from Digital

Yes (paper)

N/A

N/A

Interview Format

In-Person Interviews

Yes

Yes

N/A

Remote Interviews

Yes

Yes

Yes

Judging at Skills Only Events

  • Skills-Only Events may include Judged Awards, but those awards will not qualify teams to a Regional Championship.
  • The Excellence Award criteria for Skills-Only events will not include the qualification match ranking criteria.

Judge Advisor Role

  • Must be an adult
  • Organizes and oversees the judging process at an event
  • Solicits, assigns, and trains the Judges to prepare them for an event
  • Uses the judging processes and related content for reference and to help train the Judges
  • Ensures judging is done in compliance with the judging processes and related content
  • Ensures every team at an event has an opportunity to be interviewed by Judges, regardless of their status for a judged award
  • Ensures correct award winners are uploaded to Tournament Manager and manages presentation of awards in coordination with the Event Partner
  • Protects the confidentiality of the judging process

Judge Role

Judges can play multiple roles depending on their specific assignment.

  • Reviews Engineering Notebooks using the Engineering Notebook Rubric
  • Observes teams on the competition floor to assess team behavior and student-centeredness
  • Interviews teams (the primary Judge role)
  • Deliberates over awards selection as outlined in the judging processes
  • Presents awards as needed

Event Partner Role

  • Oversees the operation of the entire event and provides support for the Judges and Judge Advisor
  • Ensures every team at an event has an opportunity to be interviewed by the Judges, regardless of their status for a judged award
  • Recruits a qualified Judge Advisor
  • Knows and understands the roles of Judge and Judge Advisor
  • Performs a final check to ensure no team is being given more than one judged award; Note: teams can earn performance-based awards in addition to a judged award at an event, but if a team was assigned two judged awards the EP should consult with the Judge Advisor to rectify the situation
  • May not recommend or assign judged awards to any team