Student-Centered Policy – REC Library

Updated 9/18/2024

The REC Foundation’s model of student-centered learning is aligned with the Foundation’s mission and vision, and provides effective educational benefits to students. This Student-Centered Policy should be reviewed by mentors throughout the season, and should be shared with students and their families.

This policy is intended to increase the awareness of the REC Foundation’s goal of student-centeredness, and to transparently communicate its expectations to students, mentors, and other program participants to maximize the learning opportunities offered by our competition programs. The overarching mandate is that students should use designs, code, and game strategies that are consistent with their abilities and knowledge, and not have an unfair advantage by using mentors' work. Student learning should always be the first priority with all mentor actions.

Students in REC Foundation programs should make all building, designing, and gameplay decisions, as well as doing all of the work of building and programming. If a mentor is making these types of decisions for the team, or is participating in the designing, building or programming in a way that results in designs, builds, or programming that are beyond the students’ independent abilities, they are in violation of this policy. Put more simply, the mentor should not be touching the robot or the code. When in doubt, remember: “Student Led, Student Success!” Additional guidelines are provided in this document.

The REC Foundation has also created a printable set of Behavior Guidelines for Team Adults that Coaches, Event Partners, and others in the community can share with adults associated with their teams and events.

Common Terms

Common terms have been defined below to simplify the language in the provided examples.

Student: An elementary school, middle school, high school, or university/college-age team member participating in REC Foundation events or activities. Please refer to the appropriate program game manual for program-specific age and grade levels.
Mentor: A teacher, parent, coach, or other non-student team member who provides guidance or support to students on one or more aspects of the competition. Students from other teams or programs who assist younger/other students would be considered “mentors” in this case (for example, a high school student mentoring a middle school team).
Event: A competition that is run under the jurisdiction of the REC Foundation, including qualifying events, event region championships, national championships, and signature events.

Note: Because REC Foundation programs include robotics-based competitions, drone-based competitions, and competitions that do not fall in either category, the terms “machine” or “mechanism” will be used as a universal term in place of “robot,” “drone,” and other similar terms.

REC Foundation Mission and Vision

The Robotics Education & Competition (REC) Foundation’s global mission is to provide every educator with competition, education, and workforce readiness programs to increase student engagement in science, technology, engineering, math, and computer science.

We see a future where every student designs and innovates as part of a team, overcomes failure, perseveres, and emerges confident in their ability to meet global challenges.

What is Student-Centered?

There are many definitions for the term “student-centered” in the educational community. The REC Foundation considers student-centeredness to be a framework that prioritizes student leadership and learning. We believe that persevering through challenges and learning from failures are important steps to building lifelong skills.

Student-centeredness is expressed in both the learning and application settings for REC Foundation events and activities.

Student-Centered Learning: Students are actively involved in learning opportunities to increase their knowledge and skills in the engineering design process, mechanical design, programming, and teamwork under the guidance of mentors. Student-centered teams are student-led, meaning that students take responsibility for all decisions and activities including building, programming, strategy, and communication.
Student-Centered Application: Students have agency/ownership and control of how their machine is designed, built, programmed, and utilized in gameplay with other teams and in skills matches. Students use what they have learned to advance, innovate, and improve their building, programming, gameplay strategies, and communication skills.

Why Is Student-Centered Important?

Ultimately, students learn the most when they are given opportunities to test their own ideas, learn from their successes and setbacks, and persevere through difficult problems and situations. In stressful or competitive situations it may be easier or faster for a mentor to solve a problem or fix a machine for a student. As a result, the student has missed a learning opportunity.

Instead, we encourage mentors to provide guidance when needed to help educate students on the thinking behind problem solving rather than solving the problem. Mentors can be a valuable resource to help students learn the skills they will need to work in a team and design machines. In the examples provided below, the role of the mentor is primarily a facilitator for learning so that the student may apply the knowledge to their own machine, documentation, game strategy, and communication with other teams.

When needed, mentors are encouraged to provide guidance in helping students understand the thought processes behind problem solving, rather than directly solving the problem for the Students. The role of the mentor is primarily a facilitator for learning so that the student may apply their own knowledge to their machine’s design, build, engineering notebook, game strategy, and communication with other teams.

In a student-centered competition environment, each team competes using the skills, abilities, and knowledge of its student team members. Because the designs, code, and strategies are developed by students, no team has an unfair competitive advantage over another. Students are the leaders, strategists, designers, programmers, and builders, and become their own ambassadors to other teams at a competition. Mentors support students by providing tools and resources to advance student learning.

Interpreting this Guide

The examples that follow are meant to illustrate and guide mentors’ involvement with students on a team. They are grouped into subject-matter categories, but are not an exhaustive list of topics or examples. The examples below categorize actions as either Student-Centered or Non-Student-Centered:

Student-Centered examples represent the goal for student-centered learning and application. Students and mentors should strive for these behaviors, although it is expected that students with developing skills may need some guidance from mentors to achieve these behaviors.
Non-Student-Centered examples represent guidance that is not aligned with the REC Foundation Student-Centered Policy, and which may be considered a violation of the Code of Conduct.

Because these lists do not encompass every possible scenario that may arise at an event or in an outside learning environment, participants will need to consider the spirit of these examples to help interpret situations not explicitly covered. Additionally, behaviors that are listed as student-centered may also be prohibited for students. This policy should be read with consideration to the game manual and practice common sense.

Mechanical Design, Physical Construction, and Inspection

Many designs exist for various mechanisms which utilize the same platforms as REC Foundation competitions. While these designs can be useful to illustrate how a mechanism works and broader points about general mechanical design, they should always serve as a starting point for students to build their own designs, and not be used verbatim in competition.

Note for Aerial Drone Competition teams: This program utilizes unmodified, stock drone designs and is exempt from the expectation that the drone design is developed by students. Other mechanical aspects, such as drone troubleshooting and repairs, do fall under the student-centered policy. The examples below encompass multiple RECF programs; ADC teams should apply the examples that are relevant to their program’s rules.

Student-Centered Examples

Students brainstorm and research mechanical design ideas, build and test prototypes, and assemble their mechanism.
Students learn basic building techniques or mechanical design concepts from mentors.
Design ideas that are found from other teams, videos, or other sources are credited in the engineering notebook and during team interviews with judges.
Students actively work on their mechanical design and investigate when it does not work as planned.
Mentors share troubleshooting strategies when students have questions.
Teams utilize a complete robot built from instructions provided by VEX Robotics or other approved sources only as a starting point. Students make modifications to improve the design or build an entirely original design to incorporate what they learn as the season progresses.
A team’s controller does not seem to turn on with a full battery, and the students do not know what to do. A mentor helps students find the online resources to solve the issue and walks them through the process of rebooting the controller so it works again. Students learn how to solve the issue if it comes up again.
Team members are about to add an illegal substance or illegal part to their machine. A mentor reminds students to check the Game Manual and the Inspection Checklist to see if what they are doing is allowed.
Young students need to cut down a metal axle, but cannot safely use the cutting equipment. An adult cuts the axle after students mark the desired length, and uses the opportunity to teach the students how to use the tool safely.

Non-Student-Centered Examples

Mentors provide students with pre-made instructions or a model to copy for competitive mechanical designs that were not provided by VEX Robotics or other approved sources only as a starting point.
Mentors build the mechanism with minimal student assistance.
Mentors build or design all, or portions of, a mechanism or mechanical system.
Mentors build or fix the mechanism with minimal or no student assistance.
A mentor fixes a broken machine while students watch because “the students might make a mistake."
Students wish to take apart their machine and try a different design strategy. Mentors disallow this because the new strategy might be less effective than the old one.
Students are capable of using a tool to legally modify a component, but a mentor steps in to do it themselves.
Mentors encourage or instruct students to use an illegal part or material on their machine.
Mentors create detailed CAD drawings to guide students’ build.

Programming / Coding

Teams should create code that reflects the capabilities of their team members.

Learning a new skill or concept should begin with the fundamentals to build a solid foundation so the student can understand and apply this knowledge. Students with novice programming skills should use learning resources that emphasize developing and applying foundational knowledge, and should not incorporate programming concepts that are beyond their current ability level. This general guideline supports appropriate learning progressions and fair play at competitions.

Teams that utilize example code or custom libraries from outside sources should use caution. The program used should represent the students’ efforts and abilities. Blindly using code without understanding the code functionality is not consistent with the educational goals of this program. Students should be able to understand and explain the code, and students should be able to demonstrate that they can program on a level equivalent to the code used in their mechanism.

Student-Centered Examples

Students program their own machine and develop an autonomous strategy.
Students learn programming fundamentals from mentors or other sources, and apply those to create custom programs for their machines.
Students use comments in their code and in their engineering notebook (VEX teams) or competition logbook (ADC teams) to credit how programming concepts were derived.
Mentors assist students in development of their program flow using pseudocode, flowcharts, or other visual representations.
Students use the pre-installed programs as a starting point to build more developed programs.
Students create and revise their own programs and explain code functionality and development over the season.
Students demonstrate application of programming concepts contained within their code.
Mentors share troubleshooting tips when students encounter a complex programming task.
Mentors describe programming concepts and debugging techniques that may be useful for solving an issue that the team has encountered.
Students devise solutions and make any necessary code changes.
Students that use custom libraries or functions are also capable of creating their own custom libraries and functions.

Non-Student-Centered Examples

Mentors develop an autonomous program or strategy for students to use.
Mentors program the machine.
Students copy/paste all or portions of custom code developed by mentors or other sources.
Students utilize custom code that they did not create and they cannot explain.
Mentors “clean up” or revise student code.
Students are unable to explain the code functionality or development without a mentor’s assistance.
Students cannot demonstrate application of programming concepts contained within their code.
Students use a custom library developed by another team, but cannot create their own custom libraries.

Game Strategy and Match Play

Teams should create strategies that reflect the capabilities of their machine and team members. No team should have strategies that are provided by a mentor.

Student-Centered Examples

Students watch the game video and read the game manual to understand scoring criteria and develop scoring strategies.
Mentors use games from prior seasons to model how to analyze a game and its constraints to brainstorm design decisions.
Students agree on game strategies to influence design and match play.
At events, students collaborate and discuss game strategy with their student alliance partners at the practice field, team pits, and queuing areas.
Mentors offer cheerful and positive encouragement as spectators during matches and help students reflect after a match is complete.
Mentors explain how an event is run. They help their own teams create a system to ensure they get to their matches on time, and to find alliance partners in the pits to discuss strategy for upcoming matches.
Students advocate for themselves when they disagree with a match outcome or Head Referee call.
A mentor reminds a team to help reset the practice field before leaving it.

Non-Student-Centered Examples

Mentors tell students which scoring strategies to use when determining design.
Mentors give student team members or alliance partners match play instructions prior to or during a match (driver or autonomous).
Mentors specify which teams to select for alliance selection or unduly influence student decisions for alliance selection.
Mentors encourage students to play less than their best with certain alliance partners.
After a match, mentors argue a match call with the Head Referee.
On the practice field, a mentor instructs their team and/or other teams on what to practice, including step-by-step instructions.
Mentors collect detailed scouting information on other teams to guide students’ gameplay decisions.

Pit Interviews, Engineering Notebooks, and Judging

It’s okay for teams to practice interviewing using the rubric, which can develop confidence and communication skills. It’s not okay for students to use scripted statements that are provided by mentors.

Student-Centered Examples

Students and mentors review the Team Interview and Engineering Notebook rubrics and sample judge questions.
Mentors are respectful of the interview process and allow students to represent themselves independently.
Students collaborate with one another to discuss possible interview topics and responses.
Students can describe in detail the development of their design across the season, the functionality of the mechanisms created, and the functionality of the program(s) utilized at the event.
Student team members take turns contributing to the engineering notebook. The content of their notebook is a reflection of their work as a team using their own voices.
Students practice interviewing using the rubric in order to develop confidence and communication skills.

Non-Student-Centered Examples

Mentors give students scripts or instructions of what to say in their pit interview.
Mentors actively prompt students during pit interviews or are a distraction during the interview process.
Mentors answer interview questions or approach judges after an interview to attempt to add information.
Mentors attempt to record team interviews for later analysis.
Mentors do not allow a team to submit their engineering notebook or participate in a team interview with judges.
Mentors provide content for a team’s engineering notebook, or provide a detailed outline of how to document the design process that students just need to fill in.

Online Challenges

Student-Centered Actions

Students select challenges and create submissions
Students and mentors review the project/challenge requirements.
Submissions represent the product of the students’ ideas and work.
Mentors upload student-created entries.
Mentors review the project/challenge requirements with students.

Non-Student-Centered Actions

Mentors choose topics and/or challenges with no input from the students
Mentors create all or a portion of a project/challenge product.
Mentors’ feedback actively steers the direction of the project.

Citation

Advances in ideas and technology are often built on the knowledge of others and it is important to give credit to those contributions. Teams that use or adapt mechanical design ideas and code developed by someone other than the students on the team should cite these sources in their program specific notebook and code. During team interviews, students should describe how these contributions were utilized in the development of their machine. Teams may select their preferred format of citation, which should generally include the following information:

Title of resource or source code
Author(s)
Date of publication or release
Version (if applicable)
Location (where to find the source)

Many online resources are available to learn more about the importance of citation, what to cite, and how to cite sources. Teams that use or adapt outside sources are encouraged to research more about citation.

Communicating and Enforcing

Within Your Organization

The REC Foundation highly recommends that organizations carefully review the student-centered policy and share this policy with all students, teachers, and other adults associated with the team at the beginning of each season. Each registered team on RobotEvents is required to provide a Primary Coach, and for VIQRC and V5RC, this contact must be an adult (18+ who has graduated high school). The Primary Coach is typically the person who accompanies the team to events and is responsible for ensuring all team members, including parents associated with the team, comply with the student-centered policy. If the Primary Coach cannot attend the event, another adult accompanying the team should be trained prior to the event to fulfill this role. Below are a few suggested methods to communicate and enforce the student-centered policy within your organization:

Host a team meeting at the beginning of the season to review the student-centered guide with students and adults associated with the team. Create clear expectations for adults who are mentoring teams and attending events.
Model student-centered learning activities for adults to show the educational benefits.
Encourage parents to volunteer at events—this provides a valuable resource for event partners.
Team activities outside of events should be supervised by an adult familiar with the student-centered policy.
Teach students how to advocate for themselves, and give positive reinforcement for student-centered learning.
Develop definitions of success within your team structure that value individual team goals and growth throughout the season.

REC Foundation Enforcement

The goal of this guide is to communicate expectations to organizations and encourage an alignment of best practices within the community. The REC Foundation will evaluate concerns related to behaviors inconsistent with this policy per the Code of Conduct. Although it is never the desire to punish students for adult behaviors, it is imperative that organizations are held accountable to ensure fairness and increase the learning opportunities for students.

Championship Events

Teams should expect increased scrutiny of student-centered behaviors at Championship events. The REC Foundation reserves the right to individually interview teams to determine compliance with the student-centered policy. In general, team behaviors at Championship events should be gravitating towards behaviors in the “Student-Centered” examples in this Student-Centered guide.

Student team members should be prepared for the following if called into an interview by an approved REC Foundation committee during a Championship event:

Describe in detail the development and functionality of the machine design and program(s) utilized on the machine being used at the event.
Provide an electronic copy of all programs used in matches and gameplay upon demand.
Demonstrate programming concepts on a level equal to the concepts included in their code without adult assistance.

If a student team member who has expertise on a specific portion of the machine design or programming cannot attend the Championship event, the other attending team members should be prepared to share the knowledge and demonstrate functionality.