Skip to content
The Impact Award·Lesson 23 of 30

The 'List of Activities' Trap and How to Escape It

Diagnose the most common failure mode — a flat catalog of events with no impact, story, or measurement — and rewrite it into evidence of change.

Sign in to track progress, earn XP, and save lessons.

Symptom: Your essay reads like a resume — 'We did X. We also did Y. We also did Z.' — and judges' eyes glaze. You list what you did but never what changed because you did it.

Why it loses: The Impact Award measures impact, not activity. One executive summary asks point-blank what impact your team has seen from its efforts and 'How does your team measure impact?' A submission that only catalogs events answers the wrong question. Judges read dozens of submissions; a list blurs into every other list.

Diagnosis — run the 'so what?' test. Take any sentence in your draft and append 'so what?'. If you can't answer with a measurable outcome, the sentence is a list item, not impact.

  • 'We ran 10 STEM demos.' → so what? (no outcome) — WEAK
  • 'We ran 10 STEM demos reaching 600 students; 45 joined our new FLL teams, 4 of which are still active two years later.' → outcome + durability — STRONG

The fix — the Activity-Impact-Evidence (A-I-E) pattern. Rewrite every claim as three linked parts:

  1. Activity: what you did, with a definition term and a count.
  2. Impact: the measurable change in people or community.
  3. Evidence: the proof (a number, a quote, a Doc ID).

Compare to how 5985 writes it: not 'we run classes' but '2,751 students gain robotics and life skills in PB classes,' and not 'we do Unified Robotics' but 'growing global participation by 593% to 563 youth!' Each is activity + measured impact in one breath.

The story layer. Lists are forgettable; stories are not. Pair your aggregate numbers with one human story. 5985's essay anchors a whole section on a single student: 'How does a student with Autism and legal blindness access robotics? Hamza and PB discovered together... He now assists students with vision-loss in international robotics teams.' The number proves scale; the story proves meaning. Use both. (Note: FIRST 'encourage[s] submissions to focus on activities as a team, rather than the efforts of a single individual' — so use the named story to illustrate team impact, not to spotlight one hero.)

Troubleshooting checklist for this trap:

  • Count your sentences with a number in them. Aim for the majority.
  • Highlight every official definition term. If a paragraph has none, it's probably a list.
  • Find your essay's one named human story. If there isn't one, add it.
  • Delete any activity you can't tie to an outcome — unmeasured filler dilutes your strong claims.

Rule of thumb: if a sentence would still be true for a team half your size, it isn't impact yet. Make it specific enough that only your team could have written it.

Key takeaways

  • Judges score impact, not activity; a flat list of events answers the wrong question and blurs into every other submission.
  • Rewrite every claim with the Activity-Impact-Evidence pattern: a term+count, a measured change, and proof (number, quote, or Doc ID).
  • Pair aggregate numbers with one human story to show team impact — and cut any activity you can't tie to an outcome.

Lesson quiz

Required

Answer all 3 questions correctly to complete this lesson.

1.According to the FIRST judging guidelines, what is the core thing judges evaluate in an Impact Award submission?

2.A team's essay lists 25 outreach events but gives no outcomes or numbers for any of them. Per FIRST guidance, why does this hurt the submission?

3.Which approach best escapes the 'list of activities' trap in an Impact Award essay?

Answer every question to submit.