01 / The problem is not a lack of knowledge
The problem is not a lack of knowledge
Universities already have knowledge, faculty, students, research, degree programmes and innovation initiatives.
The question is:
where do these capabilities meet when a problem cannot be solved by one discipline alone?
Mars Challenge creates that arena.
Agency becomes:
JUDGEMENT → DECISION → ACTION → RESPONSIBILITY
Agency is not declared.
It is practised.
02 / The real world is not organised by degree programme
The real world is not organised by degree programme
Engineering matters.
So do law, business, psychology, health, design, communication, education, social sciences and the humanities.
Mars Challenge does not erase disciplines.
It creates problems complex enough to need them together.
03 / What changes for students
What changes for students
Students do not watch innovation.
They work inside it.
They investigate.
Collaborate.
Choose.
Build.
Prototype.
Receive feedback.
Revise.
Present.
Defend.
Mars Challenge makes it possible to observe what students do with knowledge when the answer is no longer predetermined.
04 / Faculty stop supplying answers and start holding the learning process
Faculty stop supplying answers and start holding the learning process
Faculty preparation focuses on challenge-based learning, feedback, facilitation, applied research, responsible technology use and student authorship.
The objective is stronger pedagogical judgement.
And those capabilities can travel beyond Mars Challenge.
05 / Innovation without starting with a curriculum redesign
Innovation without starting with a curriculum redesign
Mars Challenge can be integrated without requiring the university to redesign its curriculum as a condition of entry.
It can connect with innovation, courses, extracurricular learning, research, extension, entrepreneurship, internationalisation and student experience.
Implementation is designed to be flexible and scalable.
06 / An institutional mission, not an isolated event
An institutional mission, not an isolated event
The 2026 route may connect:
Institutional activation → faculty preparation → student teams → institutional experience → National Playoffs → international stage → The Grand Jam
Progression depends on the selected institutional model and applicable rules.
07 / Mars is a tool, not the destination
Mars is a tool, not the destination
Extreme constraints force teams to question assumptions.
That is Earth-Back Thinking.
Design under pressure.
Then bring the learning back to Earth.
08 / In the age of AI, producing answers is no longer enough
In the age of AI, producing answers is no longer enough
AI can generate plausible answers.
People still have to:
frame the problem;
verify claims;
understand context;
combine disciplines;
decide;
and remain accountable for consequences.
Mars Challenge turns that requirement into experience.
09 / What a university actually activates
What a university actually activates
Experiential learning.
Cross-faculty collaboration.
Faculty development.
Visible projects.
National and international participation pathways.
Potential connections to research and extension.
Institutional innovation made observable through activity.
Mars Challenge does not promise ranking gains, increased enrolment or improved retention.
It creates an experiential infrastructure from which institutional differentiation can be built.
10 / Every faculty has a role
Every faculty has a role
Engineering.
Law.
Business.
Psychology.
Education.
International Relations.
Communication.
Design.
Health.
Science.
Social Sciences.
Humanities.
The point is not to blur disciplines.
It is to give them a problem that needs more than one.
11 / Make learning visible
Make learning visible
A project.
A prototype.
A presentation.
A revision.
A multidisciplinary team.
A decision that can be explained.
Mars Challenge turns abstract language about creativity, collaboration and critical thinking into observable activity.
12 / There is already documented work
There is already documented work
Across 2023–2025, programme documentation records:
2,000+ young people
240+ documented teams/projects
8 participating countries
730+ mentors and teachers
These figures demonstrate documented activity and participation, not causal educational impact.
13 / A level of participation that fits the institution
A level of participation that fits the institution
Different university participation models exist.
They differ in reach, support, faculty preparation and access to particular stages.
The right choice depends on institutional objectives, calendar, operating capacity and ambition.
Commercial details should always be confirmed against the current institutional proposal.
14 / 2026: Earth
2026: Earth
The 2026 Global Element is Earth.
Soil.
Water.
Food.
Habitats.
Resources.
Resilience.
Territory.
Living systems.
A sufficiently complex mission to require more than one faculty.
15 / The Grand Jam is not the beginning. It is the convergence point.
The Grand Jam is not the beginning. It is the convergence point.
The Grand Jam makes part of the learning process public.
Teams, projects, institutions and perspectives converge internationally.
The university does not arrive simply to watch the future.
It arrives after beginning to train for it.
16 / The question is not whether your students have talent
The question is not whether your students have talent
The question is whether they have an environment where they can:
decide;
cross disciplines;
build;
receive criticism;
revise;
and remain accountable for what they propose.
Mars Challenge creates that environment.
17 / Frequently asked questions
Frequently asked questions
Is Mars Challenge only for technical universities?
No. The institutional proposal starts from the need to integrate different areas of knowledge.
Do we have to change the curriculum?
No, this is not an entry requirement. The institutional architecture allows flexible integration that fits academic reality.
Can it be integrated into courses?
It can connect with courses, extracurricular experiences, cross-disciplinary projects, innovation, research, outreach or other contexts, depending on institutional implementation.
Can several faculties take part?
Yes. Working across disciplines is a central feature of the proposal.
What happens to faculty members?
They can participate as mentors and access the faculty preparation associated with the process.
Does the mentor develop the project?
No. Intellectual authorship and project development belong to the young participants. The mentor supports the process.
Is it simply a hackathon?
No. Challenges and intensive experiences may form part of the system, but Mars Challenge connects preparation, project development, evaluation and different stages within a broader architecture.
Do all students reach the international stage?
No. Access and progression depend on the institutional model, rules and evaluation and selection processes.
Do we have to involve the whole university?
Not necessarily. Participation models have different levels of reach. Availability and conditions must be confirmed in the current proposal.
Does Mars Challenge guarantee better rankings or enrolment?
No. Those outcomes are not presented as guaranteed or causally demonstrated. The institution can activate an international, multidisciplinary and observable learning and innovation experience.
What is the next step?
Define institutional objectives and intended reach, then assess which current participation model fits best.