About the Challenge: The AceCubing Essay Challenge invites students and young thinkers to explore the relationship between cubing, cognitive development, creativity, focus, problem-solving, and healthier engagement with the world around us. Participants are expected to present an original, thoughtful, and well-structured perspective supported by independent research, observations, and examples.
Format: 500–800 word essay
Individual Essay Prompts: Choose any one of the following: Why Cubing Is Beneficial for Young Minds Why Every Child Should Learn Cubing How Cubing Builds Focus, Patience, and Problem-Solving The Impact of Cubing on the Human Brain Cubing as a Better Alternative to Mindless Screen Time
Research Component: Participants are encouraged to conduct independent research and go beyond generic information available online. Relevant studies, statistics, personal observations, real-world examples, organizations, entrepreneurs, and initiatives may be used to strengthen the essay. Where relevant, participants are also encouraged to research AceCubing and may feature its work, journey, initiatives, or approach as a case study within the essay. References to AceCubing are required for participants claiming the Public Engagement Bonus. This helps the organizing team identify, retrieve, organize, and evaluate public entries associated with the competition. Any such reference should represent the participant's own research and analysis. Participants are not required to express a positive opinion or endorsement of AceCubing or any other person or organization discussed.
Submission Guidelines: Participation is individual. Participants must choose one of the five essay prompts. Essays must be between 500 and 800 words. The complete essay must be written or pasted directly into the designated submission field on Unstop. PDFs, Word documents, Google Drive links, or other document/file submissions will not be accepted as the primary essay submission. Only the essay submitted through the official Unstop form will be considered for the main evaluation. Essays should be original, relevant, well-structured, and easy to follow. Participants should use their own examples, observations, reasoning, and voice wherever possible. Only one valid submission per participant will be considered. Irrelevant, copied, incomplete, or low-effort submissions may be rejected. Plagiarism, impersonation, duplicate submissions, or unfair means may lead to disqualification. The organizers' decision regarding evaluation, rankings, bonus points, and prizes will be final.
Originality & AI Policy: AI tools may be used only for limited assistance such as grammar checks, spelling checks, proofreading, or similar support. The core ideas, examples, structure, arguments, and final substance of the essay must represent the participant's own work. Fully AI-generated or heavily AI-written essays are not permitted. Entries that appear generic, copied, or substantially machine-generated may be disqualified.
Optional Public Engagement Challenge: After submitting the essay on Unstop, participants may optionally publish: Their complete essay An adapted version of their essay A shorter summary containing its key ideas The content may be published on a public platform such as LinkedIn, Medium, or another suitable public publishing platform. Public posting is completely optional. Participants who choose not to publish publicly remain fully eligible for the main competition and will not lose any base evaluation points. How to Participate in the Public
Engagement Challenge: Participants who wish to be considered for the Public Engagement
Bonus should: Submit their complete essay through the official Unstop form. Publish their essay, adapted article, or summary on a suitable public platform. Mention AceCubing by name in the public post. Paste the direct URL of the public post into the optional Public Post Link field on Unstop.
Public Engagement Bonus: Participants entering the optional Public Engagement Challenge may receive up to +10 bonus points for exceptional and authentic engagement generated by their public post. Engagement may be evaluated using factors including: Views or impressions Likes/reactions Meaningful comments Shares/reposts Quality of discussion generated Overall reach Engagement relative to the participant's existing audience Follower count alone will not determine the bonus. A participant with a smaller audience who generates unusually strong or meaningful engagement may perform as well as or better than someone with a substantially larger existing following. Purchased engagement, bots, engagement exchanges, coordinated artificial activity, or any other manipulation of engagement statistics will not qualify and may result in the Public Engagement Bonus being withdrawn.
Judging Criteria: The main essay will be evaluated out of 100 points using the AceCubing Essay
Challenge judging framework: Relevance to Topic – 25