Student Advisory Board

At least you can say that you made it to the final (only) round of candidates for the SAB on college apps.


Same and I haven’t gotten an email. Is there something about being late birds not getting the email?


From what I know, there are members from 8059A and X that applied for it. And my club chairman applied for it. So I do think they are as senior as you can get :stuck_out_tongue:

But that said, it is really not the end of the world for anyone.
This application is just one way of us trying to be more involved and giving back to the community.

My hope still stays the same - there will be a good rep for the international teams in the board.

And I do agree with some of the posts regarding more transparency in the criteria and selection process. The intention is not to stir up any controversy, but really to understand the how and the what.


does anyone actually know anybody that DID get in?
I’d be interested in what kind of people they were looking for.

read Dan Mantz’s post - he can not confirm who got in until parental consent has been verified.

This would also explain maybe why not all applicants got a rejection letter, as some buffer (like the global robot skills list for double qualified…) waiting to see if all slots are full.

I expect the list will have a wide range of qualifications to represent demographics of the VRC program. With 8 in the initial - it is 100% certain not all you would want on the board would be there.

Also note, “community” is most definitely not only kids who are on this board - the advisory board probably represents far more the teams in VRC.


Dang. I got given my denial, so it’s not like they’d reconsider me bc I got the email. That sucks but hopefully they find the right people.


I think you are drawing to conclusions that they are holding people back because someone simply said maybe. You should wait until it’s absolutely certain before you feel sad about your chances. But regardless there really isn’t a reason to be sad. Just because you won’t be fit in a student advisory board where 4-5% of all who applies can get in does not mean you have no chances in other places you can apply to with a 4-5% acceptance. And by the way, you’re viewing the cup half empty. Nobody is entitled any position, and you won’t lose anything if you get denied. It’s either gain or not gain.
(Hopefully what I said makes sense)


Honest question. Do you really have an issue with this purpose of the SAB?

1 Like

We received over 180 applicants. We removed team numbers and names to try and eliminate any biase. We did make a conscience effort for diversity so when reviewing the applicants, we did consider years in VEX Robotics, team size, location and gender. But then the RECF project team reviewed the applicants and selected students based on their responses to the application questions. Each applicant was reviewed by multiple RECF employees.

All of the applicants were excellent. We honestly couldn’t go wrong with whom we chose from all the applicants. But I feel we selected a group of students that represent all parts of the program.


Thank you Dan, I really appreciate that you’ve taken the time to provide further clarity on the selection process; I hope that this should clear up a couple of questions my team and I had.
While we still don’t know who our representatives are for the community yet, having taken a look at what has been disclosed about the selection process, I trust that the right choices have been made.

Once again, thank you for your co-operation.


I deleted my last response because I was still typing and accidentally posted by mistake.

Thank you so much for your time Dan! But the primary reason why I responded with what I did was because of what I said in my first response:

Sometimes it is hard for me to dissect the reason why organizations would push towards a specific action, so hearing the reason would provide a better understanding of the motive of the company as a whole.
That is why I think

Your motives
or what you call purpose

are perfect for a company that cares deeply about their teachers, students, and clients, but I did not get any reason that can connect to the motive (which the motive is to listen to the community, which requires an unbiased effort to be successful), until my assumption of

Trust for the company to be unbiased

was partially (not fully) concluded from your last post:

and brought me up with further speculation with:

I do not have any issue with the purpose of the SAB, but I need clarification that there are no propagandic-like actions in selecting the students (Or what some of us would like to call these types of people “Yes-Men”) considering that the 8 students in the SAB are representing 60,000 students in the entire VRC Program. Hopefully what I said makes sense, it was difficult for me to put this into text. And thank you so much for your time and efforts clarifying these questions!


Probably worth pointing out that the most optimistic estimates(the ones RECF says are true) of current students there are 120k students in VRC currently. Then if we wanted to get an accurate estimate cut that in half to around ~60k.

1 Like

I am going to step in as someone who does listen to a lot of people who want the best for student learning experience. The notion of “community” depends on context. For example, am I looking for only feedback from teams that won at Worlds? or teams that did not make it too Worlds? or teams that are independent teams? or teas from France (maybe there is one!)? the list goes on. The RECF has a tremendous input from EPs (we complain about a lot), connects with teams that won at worlds - congrats STEM Hall of Fame! Teams from around the globe - their are many! So I would not be too worried about the :community that is already heard on this and many other mediums. Part of the challenge is getting input from parts of the region whose voice are not heard n VEXforum, discord, Facebook, twitter, … as well as those who are well known here and elsewhere.

I trust the RECF on this one.


Thank you, I changed and edited what I said to be more accurate

I do trust the RECF as well, but there is a difference in trusting that the RECF will ensure that the community (Or as I am referring to, all VEX students in the world) has their opinions brought up to the table for RECF, and being certain about RECF ensuring the community having their opinions brought up to the table. I do not believe that all of the students here trust RECF, so the only way to gain trust is through certainty and proof. By not just providing proof, it removes all doubts and reaches the entire audience of the students. Many students, such as me, like to seek proof rather than focusing on instincts.


Thank you for the candid clarification. Trust is earned. To this day Dan Mantz has been frank and owned up to areas the organization needs improvement. Hence my feeling overall the RECF is Trust Worthy. Moreover Dan Mantz created the SAB in response to developing connections to the whole VRC community, not just those on vex or other social media, but rather reaching outwards to get a broad brush of input that was not present in the past. My understanding is the Student Advisory board will growth over time…


It does make sense, but I already received the email which is why I’m not sad at all about it, but rather at hopeful that whoever was selected represents the student body as a whole well.

1 Like

Thank you for your response. But honestly, why would I propose and announce the SAB and then try to select a set of students to tell me what I want to hear? If I didn’t want to get real input, I would never be on this forum and I wouldn’t ask for feedback or ever respond to forum posts. Additionally, the RECF selection committee would have to actually know the (student) opinions on any controversial topic and only select students that would always agree with the REC Foundation thought process. You applied so you know there were no questions that asked pointed questions. The purpose of the SAB was to give students the opportunity to communicate issues that students feel are important. This is a direct result of the students on this forum stating the RECF did not listen to them with respect to Bo1, DQ process, judging feedback, etc. There is no hidden agendas.

I do think it is very important to state again that we selected students that will provide representation across the entire demographics of the VEX Robotics programs (rural & suburban, public and private, international and US, male and female, etc.). The RECF VEX Robotics program is much larger than just the passionate posters on this forum.




We estimate that we had 240,000 students in the REC Foundation VEX Robotics programs last year. That includes students on the 24,200 registered teams, but we also have thousands of classroom teams and another 4,000 to 5,000 teams that did leagues only. We know there are teams with 1 student and teams with 30 students. I feel comfortable with our 240,000 estimate but even if you want to state we are exaggerating, ~60k is not even close to an accurate estimate. We had well over 10,000 registered students just at VEX Worlds and that was from only 1680 of the 24,200 registered teams.

I hope that helps.


Ya the difference between my 120k and your 240k is including IQ. I was paring it down the VRC only because my understanding was that is who could sign up for the board. Ill be honest though, I think I just assumed that and it was never stated?

The RECF has historically used 10 students per team when estimating student count. My 60k was then assuming an average of 5 students per team instead of 10, but I would be willing to meet halfway on that and say its 90k.

And yes, students who do not compete in the larger vex competitions is not something I was counting. I trust you when you say that its considerable.

I think we mostly agree in the end? The point of the original comment was to disagree with the “millions” stated previously. The RECF website estimates 1 million students total of all time. Compared to “millions” the difference between my number and yours is pretty minor.


I agree with Dan, if I understand what he said, then if we were to only take people from well established teams who can already have their opinions heard, then why would we have a SAB in the first place?
The purpose of the SAB is to bring in the voices of smaller teams, or disadvantaged people so that there can be a better understanding of them.