|
Students
Teachers
Judges
Volunteers
Registration
Fair Schedules
Travel/Lodging
Map & Directions
Types of
Awards
Awards Ceremony
Lists of
Winners
Form & Schedules
2008 Rules
Contact Us
Sponsor/Donate
About Us
Home
|
 |
 |
Judging Guidelines & Evaluation Criteria
For Middle School and Senior High Projects
Main Category Grand Awards Judging is conducted
using a 100 point scale with points assigned to creative ability,
scientific thought or engineering goals (II a and b, respectively),
thoroughness, skill, and clarity. Team projects have a slightly
different balance of points that includes points for teamwork.
Following is a list of questions for each criteria that can assist
you in interviewing the finalists and aid in your evaluation of the
finalists' projects.
- Creative Ability
(Individual - 30, Team - 25)
- Does the project show
creative ability and originality in the questions asked?
- The approach to
solving the problem, the analysis of the
data, the interpretation of
the data?
- the use of equipment, the construction or
design of new equipment?
-
Creative research should support an investigation and help
answer a question in an original way.
- A creative contribution
promotes an efficient and reliable method for solving a
problem. When evaluating projects, it is important to
distinguish between gadgeteering and ingenuity.
- a) Scientific Thought (Individual - 30, Team - 25)
If an engineering project, the
more appropriate questions are those found in II.b. Engineering
Goals.
-
Is the problem stated clearly and unambiguously?
-
Was the problem sufficiently limited to allow plausible
approach? Good scientists can identify important problems
capable of solutions.
-
Was there a procedural plan for obtaining a solution?
-
Are the variables clearly recognized and defined?
-
If controls were necessary, did the student recognize their
need and were they correctly used?
-
Are there adequate data to support the conclusions?
-
Does the finalist or team recognize the data’s limitations?
-
Does the finalist/team understand the project’s ties to
related research?
-
Does the finalist/team have an idea of what further research
is warranted?
-
Did the finalist/team cite scientific literature, or only
popular literature (such as local newspapers, Reader’s
Digest)?
- b) Engineering Goals
(Individual - 30, Team - 25)
-
Does the project have a clear objective?
-
Is the objective relevant to the potential user’s needs?
-
Is the solution workable, acceptable to the potential user,
economically feasible?
-
Could the solution be utilized successfully in design or
construction of an end product?
-
Is the solution a significant improvement over previous
alternatives?
-
Has the solution been tested for performance under the
conditions of use?
- Thoroughness (Individual - 15,
Team - 12)
-
Was the purpose carried out to completion within the scope
of the original intent?
-
How completely was the problem covered?
-
Are the conclusions based on a single experiment or
replication?
-
How complete are the project notes?
-
Is the finalist/team aware of other approaches or theories?
-
How much time did the finalist or team spend on the project?
-
Is the finalist/team familiar with scientific literature in
the studied field?
- Skill (Individual - 15, Team -
12)
-
Does the finalist/team have the required laboratory,
computation, observational and design skills to obtain
supporting data?
-
Where was the project performed (for example, home, school
laboratory, university laboratory)? Did the student or team
receive assistance from parents, teachers, scientists, or
engineers?
-
Was the project completed under adult supervision, or did
the finalist/team work largely alone?
-
Where did the equipment come from? Was it built
independently by the finalist or team? Was it obtained on
loan? Was it part of a laboratory where the finalist or team
worked?
- Clarity (Individual - 10, Team
- 10)
-
How clearly does the finalist discuss the project and
explain the purpose, procedure, and conclusions? Watch out
for memorized speeches that reflect little understanding of
principles.
-
Does the written material reflect the finalist or team's
understanding of the research?
-
Are the important phases of the project presented in an
orderly manner?
-
How clearly are the data presented?
-
How clearly are the results presented?
-
How well does the project display explain the project?
-
Was the presentation done in a forthright manner, without
tricks or gadgets?
-
Did the finalist/team perform all the project work, or did
someone help?
- Teamwork (Team Projects only-
16)
-
Are the tasks and contributions of each team member clearly
outlined?
-
Was each team member fully involved with the project, and is
each member familiar with all aspects?
-
Does the final work reflect the coordinated efforts of all
team members?
Back to top
|
|
 |
 |
Home |
|
©2008
The Alaska Science & Engineering Fair.
This site is maintained by the Alaska Chapter
of the Society for Technical Communication,
www.stcalaska.org. |
The Alaska Science &
Engineering Fair is made possible by generous support from BP
and
many other fabulous sponsors. Read our
list of sponsors. |