On a rainy Saturday in April 2025, a high school gym in Ohio resembles a mini Silicon Valley lab. One corner buzzes with student-built drones navigating an obstacle course, while another team huddles around a laptop, tweaking code for their robot to recognize and sort recyclables. A side room hosts a group presenting a prototype water-filtration system to a panel of engineers joining both in-person and via livestream from three continents.
This isn’t science fiction; it’s the reality of engineering competitions in 2025. From FIRST Robotics and VEX to Science Olympiad, TSA TEAMS, and regional design challenges, competitions have evolved into global, hybrid, technology-rich experiences. This article explores the latest trends, what’s stabilizing, and what’s emerging in the engineering competition landscape this year.
Engineering competitions have moved from fluctuations between virtual and in-person formats to a “hybrid-default” model. Organizers now balance physical build experiences with digital participation.
Most major competitions have returned to in-person events, particularly for hands-on challenges like robot battles and on-site design sprints. The excitement of a FIRST Robotics regional or TSA engineering design presentation is hard to replicate online.
However, events now incorporate technology more than ever. For instance, a middle school team builds their prototype in their lab and competes on-site, while one recovering teammate joins via video call and judges access digital portfolios uploaded weeks earlier. This blend ensures that more students can participate.
Virtual competition tracks have stabilized into permanent components. Many competitions now offer:
In one instance, a high school in a rural area participates in a remote challenge by designing a renewable energy system, presenting virtually to judges, and only traveling if they qualify for a national showcase. This structure enhances accessibility while maintaining in-person event excitement.
For a deeper dive, see the companion article “Virtual vs In-Person Engineering Competitions”.
The trend has shifted from single-day events to multi-stage “seasons.” Teams now move through:
This season-based approach allows students more time to improve and adapt, mirroring real-world engineering cycles better than one-off contests.
In 2025, competitions now emphasize sustainability, ethics, and social impact in addition to technical performance, driven by the rise of AI and data-driven design.
Sustainability challenges are integrated into scoring rubrics and design constraints. Teams might design a bridge model using minimal material while maximizing strength or build robots from recycled components. For example, in a water purification challenge, students must consider:
Judges increasingly expect teams to consider long-term impacts, pushing students to think like practicing engineers.
AI-powered tools are now integral to competitions, helping students with generative design, computer vision, and data analytics. For example, a robotics team might train a computer vision model to recognize field elements, with judges probing their approach to bias and model performance. Competitions reward not only clever AI use but also a sound understanding of its limitations.
A notable trend is a focus on community-impact projects. Competitions often require teams to address local issues, such as creating accessible playground equipment or disaster response apps. For instance, a middle school team develops a modular bike rack system to alleviate safety hazards. Their final report resembles a professional engineering proposal, highlighting user feedback and practical considerations.
The question “Who gets to be an engineer?” is pivotal in competition spaces. Although participation has increased overall, access remains uneven, influenced by geography, funding, mentorship, and school policies.
Hybrid models and online tools have expanded participation in rural and under-resourced communities. Schools can now engage in virtual qualifiers and submit prototypes for remote judging. Some competitions provide kits with standardized components for those lacking resources.
Nonetheless, disparities persist. Suburban teams might have access to advanced tools, while small town teams work with limited materials. However, constraints can spark creativity, as seen when a Midwest team excels in a bridge-building competition using wood scraps. Their focus on structural efficiency propelled them above more polished builds.
In 2025, competitions actively integrate equity into their structures through sliding-scale fees, travel grants, and targeted recruitment. Participation from girls and nonbinary students has notably increased due to outreach programs and girls’ engineering clubs. High school competitions now require teams to describe how they foster inclusive team cultures, tying equity to scoring.
As competitions grow in complexity, the strain on educators and coaches has become pronounced. In 2025, competitions are recognizing this by offering:
A teacher might opt for a shorter engineering challenge incorporated into their science class, making participation manageable.
Engineering competitions prioritize a blend of technical, cognitive, and interpersonal skills. The skill profile has shifted, emphasizing engineering thinking over merely building impressive devices.
Judges prioritize process over product, with criteria like:
Teams that articulate their design decisions and show valuable insights from challenges score highly, aligning with deep learning rather than just performance on the day.
Challenges frequently cross disciplines. Teams are rewarded for systems thinking that integrates multiple fields. For example, a smart greenhouse project requires knowledge of sensor networks, control algorithms, and energy usage. Judges probe how teams anticipate system failures and adapt to variables.
Strong communication is now central. Teams produce:
One team’s presentation initially relied on jargon but improved post-feedback by adding visuals and relatable explanations, giving them a competitive edge.
Competitions now require considering ethics and safety in project development. For instance, a drone delivery team must address airspace regulations and privacy issues as safeguards are built into their designs.
Understanding the state of competitions is crucial for informed decisions. Whether you’re a student, parent, or educator, these insights can guide you.
With numerous competition options, align choices with interests and goals. A student passionate about coding may gravitate towards robotics, while another with a knack for storytelling may excel in design-heavy contests. Parents can ask their children about their preferences and time commitments, while educators might begin with shorter, low-cost challenges.
Students benefit from viewing preparation as an ongoing journey. Successful teams often:
Students can leverage hybrid structures by creating digital portfolios, practicing virtual presentations, and applying for virtual-only tracks when necessary.
As competitions grow, there’s a risk of burnout. Students should set goals beyond rankings, while parents can emphasize effort over results. Educators should integrate competitions into the regular curriculum and advocate for boundaries around time commitments.
Engineering competitions in 2025 are more accessible and socially aware than ever. AI and advanced tools challenge organizers to foster authentic learning. While participation is broader, equity still needs improvement. The skills most rewarded—systems thinking, communication, ethics, and resilience—align closely with real-world engineering. This environment offers an opportunity for students, parents, and educators to shape the next generation of innovators and engineers.
As this “Engineering Competition Trends” series continues, we’ll delve deeper into specific forces shaping the landscape. For now, if you’re ready to explore resources and find the right challenge for your 2025 season, check out ScholarComp.
Helpful?