|
 
|
|
-
Early registration for
judges will be held on Friday, April 4 from 4:00 to 8:00 p.m. Judges may
pick up their packets at that time but will not be allowed to enter
the Exhibit Hall. Early registration will be held in the Lobby
Area of the Joseph A. Fidel Student Center.
-
Registration for all judges will be held in
the Lobby Area of the Joseph A. Fidel Student Center which is
located directly West of the Exhibit Hall.
-
All judges who interview a student must
initial on the form provided at each project. This is only to
insure that each project has been interviewed by the required amount
of judges.
-
The Chairpersons meeting for Grand Awards will
be held at 12:50 p.m. after category results have been submitted.
Junior Division Chairpersons Meeting—Cramer 101
Senior Division Chairpersons Meeting—Cramer 120
JUDGING
SCHEDULE:
-
|
Friday, April 4
4:00-8:00 p.m. |
|
Early Registration for All
Judges -Judges will not be permitted to enter
the Exhibit Hall on Friday. |
Front Lobby, Fidel Student
Center |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Saturday, April 5
7:15 - 7:45 a.m. |
|
Registration for Category
Judges - Pick up assignment Packets |
Front Lobby, Fidel Student
Center |
|
|
7:15 - 12:00
noon |
|
Registration for Special
Awards Judges |
Front Lobby, Fidel Student
Center |
|
|
8:00 - 8:15
a.m. |
|
Initial Briefings, Category
Judges |
Caucus Rooms |
|
|
8:00 - 10:00 a.m. |
|
Initial
Judging of Exhibits,
All Judges.
No exhibitors present |
Exhibit Hall, Gymnasium |
|
|
10:00 - 10:30 a.m. |
|
First Caucus, Category
Judges |
Caucus Rooms |
|
|
10:30 - 12:00 noon |
|
Interviewing the Exhibitors,
All Judges |
Exhibit Hall, Gymnasium |
|
|
12:00 noon |
|
Second Caucus, Regular
Judges |
Caucus Rooms |
|
| |
|
PLEASE DO NOT BREAK FOR
LUNCH UNTIL THE SECOND CAUCUS IS FINISHED |
|
|
|
11:00 - 2:00 p.m. |
|
Lunch-Tickets in
Registration Packets |
Lawn North of Fidel Student
Center |
|
|
12:00 - 1:30 p.m. |
|
Judging of
Exhibits,
All Judges.
No exhibitors present |
Exhibit Hall, Gymnasium |
|
|
12:50 |
|
Category Judge Chairpersons
Caucus |
|
|
| |
|
Junior Division |
Cramer Hall 120 |
|
| |
|
Senior Division |
Cramer Hall 101 |
|
|
1:30 - 3:30 p.m. |
|
Special Award and Grand
Award Judging. Exhibitors Present |
Exhibit Hall, Gymnasium |
|
|
3:30 p.m. |
|
Dismissal of All
Exhibitors |
|
|
|
6:00 p.m. |
|
Junior Division Awards
Assembly |
Macey Center, Auditorium |
|
|
7:30 p.m. |
|
Senior Division Awards
Assembly |
Macey Center, Auditorium |
|
GUIDELINES FOR JUDGES -
Judging involves four processes: registration, review
of projects, finalists' interviews and selection of award winners.
All judges must register at the Joseph Fidel Student Center either on
Friday evening between 4:00 and 8:00 p.m. or on Saturday morning between
7:15 and 7:45 a.m. Special Award judges may register until noon.
It is important that judges thoroughly understand
their duties and obligations. The following information can help help
you prepare for the 56th New Mexico Science and Engineering
Fair (NMSEF). Please read it carefully and contact our office if you
have any questions. We look forward to working with you in the
interest of encouraging young people and promoting the study of science
and engineering in the schools of New Mexico. Thank you for your help.
GENERAL INFORMATION
A science and engineering fair is a
competition in which students can exhibit, demonstrate and discuss their
projects with members of the scientific community and the public. It
serves three major purposes: it stimulates an active interest in science
and engineering; it provides an educational experience to students
through exposure to judges and to the public; and it provides a forum
for talented students to receive public recognition for their work.
Science Fairs begin at the local level
and can lead to competition at the international level. An estimated
1.5 million students participate each year throughout the United States
and in more than 40 countries worldwide.
New Mexico Science and Engineering Fair
(NMSEF) is a non-profit program hosted by New Mexico Tech, an equal
opportunity institution. NMSEF is a member of the New Mexico Activities
Association. Financial support for the State Science Fair comes from
New Mexico Tech, the State of New Mexico, registration fees, donations
from a number of foundations, and corporate and individual donors.
The personnel of the New Mexico Science
and Engineering Fair are:
Fair Director is responsible for
organizing and overseeing all aspects of the Science Fair as well as
recruiting and assigning regular and special award judges and organizing
the judging committees.
Fair Coordinator is responsible for the
student exhibitor aspect of the fair as well as providing assistance to
the Fair Director. Contact Information: (575) 835-5678,
sciencefair@admin.nmt.edu.
Committee Chairpersons are responsible
for overseeing their judging committees. A committee is the group of
judges responsible for judging exhibits in one category of one division
(e.g., Senior Botany). The Committee is responsible for regular
category awards and possibly any special awards which fall into that
category.
CLASSIFICATION OF EXHIBITS
There are two divisions of exhibitors:
Junior (grades 6 through 9) and Senior (grades 9 through 12). The
divisions are further subdivided into categories:
|
Behavioral and Social
Sciences
Biochemistry (Senior
Division Only)
Botany/Plant
Sciences
Cellular and Molecular
Biology
Chemistry
Computer
Science
Earth & Planetary
Sciences
Energy and Transportation
|
Engineering
Environmental Sciences
Mathematical Sciences
Medicine and Health Sciences
Microbiology
Physics and Astronomy
Team Projects
Zoology (Animal Sciences) |
JUDGES
There are two different categories of
judges at the New Mexico Science and Engineering Fair: Category
Awards judges and Special Awards judges. Each use different
methods of evaluation and therefore require separate guidelines.
Category awards
judges interview the finalists in each of the disciplines to determine
the winners for these awards. Category awards include the place winners
and honorable mention exhibits in each of the above categories, as well
as the overall grand award winners. The top four exhibits in the Senior
Division are chosen to represent New Mexico at the Intel International
Science and Engineering Fair.
Special awards
are sponsored by governmental agencies, the Armed Forces, professional
societies, and industrial organizations, and are based upon criteria
established by the sponsor. Judges for special awards may also serve as
category award judges.
IMPORTANT POINTS FOR ALL JUDGES
1.
Judges should
keep in mind that NMSEF is not only a competition, but an educational
and motivating experience for students. The high point of the Science
Fair experience for the majority of students is their interviews with
the judges. Please be positive and gentle with suggestions of
improvements. Give encouragement and constructive criticism for the
work accomplished. Remember the age and delicate self-esteem of the
students with whom you are working.
2.
Judges may not ask student
exhibitors for their name, their school name, or where they're from.
All Student Exhibitors should only be referred to by Exhibit Number.
3.
Students may have worked on a
research project for more than one year. However, for the purpose of
judging, only research conducted within the current year is to be
evaluated. Although previous work is important, it should not be
considered as part of this year’s project.
4.
Examine the quality of the
finalist’s work, and how well the finalist understands his or her
project and area of study. The physical display is secondary to the
student’s knowledge of the subject. As mentioned earlier, if the
project is a multi-year effort, the Student Exhibitor is required to
have a Continuation Form (Intel ISEF Form 7) visible at the project.
Please be aware of the fact that the only work being judged should be
that completed in the year prior to this Science Fair (2007).
5.
When research is conducted in an
industrial or institutional setting, the student is required to have
documentation (Intel ISEF Form 1C), that provides a forum for the mentor
or supervisor to discuss the project. Judges should review this
information in detail when evaluating research.
6.
Look for evidence of laboratory,
field or theoretical work, not just library research or gadgeteering.
7.
Compare projects only with those
in the same competition and not with projects seen elsewhere under other
circumstances.
8.
As a general rule, judges
represent professional authority to finalists. For this reason, judges
should use an encouraging tone when asking questions, offering
suggestions or giving constructive criticism. Judges should not
criticize, treat lightly, or display boredom toward projects they
personally consider unimportant. Always give credit to the finalist
for completing a challenging task and/or for their success in previous
competitions.
9.
Keep in mind that projects are
middle-high and high-school level, not Ph.D. or professional levels.
Sometimes judges tend to go to extremes, giving students either far more
credit than they deserve or not enough because it is not in the Nobel
Prize category.
10.
Please be discreet when
discussing winners or making critical comments about judging, as
students or adult escorts might overhear them. All results are
confidential until announced at the awards ceremonies.
11.
Harassment refers to behavior
that is personally offensive, impairs morale, or interferes with the
ability of exhibitors to perform well. Any harassment of a Student
Exhibitor will not be tolerated. This policy refers to harassment due
to age, race, color, national origin, ancestry, religion, sex, physical
or mental disability. Harassment includes unsolicited remarks,
gestures, or physical contact. Sexual harassment includes sexual
advances, request for sexual favors, and other conduct which is sexual
and offensive. We ask that you be aware of any conduct that might be
interpreted as inappropriate.
12.
Please keep
in mind that the only people allowed in the Exhibit Hall during judging
will be judges. If you bring any additional guests, please remind
them that they will not be allowed in the Exhibit Halls except during
Public Viewing.
JUDGING PROCEDURES—CATEGORY AWARDS
Category awards are based on the
recognition of excellence in the conception and realization of a science
or engineering project. Senior division awards recognize student
capabilities leading to careers in science or engineering, and they may
include college scholarships. Junior division awards encourage the
student to make further efforts in the study of science and engineering.
A list of all of the exhibits is
provided in the judge's packet. Exhibits are grouped by division and
category. Student exhibitors select the category in which they wish
their exhibit to be judged. Only under very exceptional circumstances
do NMSEF officials move an exhibit from one category to another.
The judging is based on a two-step
evaluation process. Initially, the exhibits are judged in the absence
of the exhibitors. After the committees caucus, interviews are
conducted, followed by final evaluations by committees.
Initial Briefing
Judging Assignments and Caucus Rooms are
listed in judging packets. Judges must report to their assigned
caucus room for initial briefing by the committee chairperson before
going to the Exhibit Hall.
Initial Rating of Exhibits
At each of their assigned exhibits
judges rate the exhibit on the basis of the five criteria described
below. Scores are recorded on the Judging Forms provided.
Ratings should be done individually and judges should initially judge
all the exhibits assigned to them. All of this ensures that initially
each exhibit will receive three independent evaluations. After the
initial rating of exhibits, if judges have time, they are urged to
survey the other exhibits in their category so that they can enter into
later committee discussions regarding projects in the category.
Judging Criteria
Five judging criteria (six for team
projects) are used to rank the exhibits within each category. Each
exhibit will receive a numerical score from each judge. The five
criteria (six for team projects) and the point value range assigned each
of the criteria is listed below. The questions listed under the various
criteria suggest the line of thought for evaluation purposes. Please
remember that each criterion must stand on its own merits for rating and
should therefore be judged independently of the others.
Scientific
Thought and Engineering Goals are separated into
IIa. and IIb. to be used appropriately by
category. There are also added questions for
team projects.
I. 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.
II a.
Scientific Thought (Individual - 30, Team - 25)
For an
engineering project, or some projects in
categories such as computer science and
mathematical sciences, the more appropriate
questions are those found in IIb. 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
(i.e., local newspapers, Reader’s Digest).
II 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?
III.
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?
IV. 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? (i.e.,
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 student/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?
V. Clarity
(Individual - 10, Team - 10)
- How clearly does the finalist discuss
his/her 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’s or team’s understanding of the
research?
- Are the important phases of the project
presented in an orderly manner?
- How clearly is 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?
VI. 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?
|
First Caucus: Preliminary Scoring
Judges within each group or category
meet in caucus at 10:00 a.m. to discuss the merits of individual
exhibits. At that time, preliminary scoring totals will be available.
These scores are used to determine potentially outstanding exhibits and
make interviewing assignments. Judges should freely discuss both the
merits and shortcomings of the exhibits in their category.
Interviewing the Exhibitors
The exhibitors will be at their exhibits
from 10:30 a.m.-12:00 noon. Judges will interview the students whose
exhibits they judged earlier in the morning. In addition, top
contenders should be interviewed by as many judges as possible. The
committee chairperson may want to make specific interviewing
assignments.
The importance of this portion of the
judge's function cannot be overemphasized. The interview is perhaps the
most educational aspect of the Science Fair experience. The interview
provides a means for the judge to evaluate the exhibit more accurately
and should also serve to stimulate the student's thinking, to suggest
means of improving the work and working habits, to point out errors, and
to provide feedback for the student from the judge, who is most likely a
specialist in a given field. Science education within the State can
only benefit from this practice, so be encouraging and supportive to the
student.
Special care must be taken, especially
in the Junior Division, not to intimidate the exhibitors. For many
students, the interview is an extremely traumatic experience. Judges
should go out of their way to make the exhibitors feel comfortable. A
positive experience with a judge during the interview may encourage the
student to pursue further scientific investigation, possibly leading to
a career in science or engineering, whereas, an unpleasant, frightening
experience may turn the student away from these disciplines
indefinitely. Judges should not criticize, treat lightly, or display
boredom toward projects they personally consider unimportant.
Always give credit to the finalist for completing a challenging task
and/or for their success in previous competitions.
Second Caucus: Determining the
Awards
Following the interviews with the
exhibitors, a second caucus is held to determine final placing of the
exhibitors within each category. The students' preliminary placing
together with their performance during the interview should be taken
into consideration for the final evaluation of their exhibits.
The total number of regular awards made
in each category must be limited to six. There will be a first, a
second, and a third place award, with up to three honorable mentions.
Once final results have been determined, all judges except the
committee chairpersons are free to leave.
Judge's Comment Form
Several Judge's
Comments Forms are included in each Judge's Packet. A comment form must
be completed for each exhibit judged. These forms are based largely on
the judging criteria scores which are produced during the morning
judging session. These forms should be filled out at the end of the
Second Caucus.
Unless you wish to
provide personal guidance subsequent to the science fair, you should not
sign the form. Give the completed forms to your chairperson who will
turn them in to Science Fair personnel. They will be given to the
exhibitors following the fair. The purpose of the forms is to provide a
means by which science fair judges can influence the preparation of
future exhibits. These comments should, therefore, be made in a spirit
of constructive suggestions and encouragement.
All results are CONFIDENTIAL
until announced at the Awards Ceremonies. Judges may not inform student
exhibitors of final decisions made for any award. Please be discreet
when discussing winners or making critical comments as students or adult
sponsors might overhear.
DUTIES OF
THE COMMITTEE CHAIRPERSON
As a Committee Chairperson, you have
several additional important responsibilities. You may or may not be
assigned exhibits to judge, depending on judge to project ratio.
Please make sure you read and understand the judging procedures above,
in addition, the following information will help you complete your
duties as assigned.
Initial
Briefing
-
Take a roll call of the members of your
judging committee, and reassign the exhibits of any no-show judges.
-
Review the judging procedures,
especially with new judges.
-
Remind all judges that they are not to
break for lunch until after
the second caucus.
-
Make sure that all exhibits are
judged by three judges. There will be a small form at all exhibits
helping us ensure that all projects are interviewed. All judges who interview a student must
initial on the form provided at each project.
Each category will be assigned a student
helper. Discuss the judging procedures with the committee's
student helper. The helper will use the
Master Tally Sheet located in
your packet. The numbers of exhibits to be judged have been printed on
these sheets. Make sure that they all are correct. Give the sheets to
your helper, and inform him or her of responsibilities with regard to
these sheets:
-
After initial judging, each judge will
hand their completed Judging Form
to the helper, who will record the judge's number and ratings on the
Tally Sheet. It is important that the helper double check the
exhibit number. The helper will retain the Judging Forms. As the
initial judging for each exhibit is completed, the helper should
begin calculation of scores.
-
When the initial judging is complete,
and before the helper leaves the Exhibit Hall, check with the
helper to be sure that every
exhibit has been judged by three judges. If any exhibit has been
overlooked, it may be necessary for you, the chairperson, to judge
the exhibit.
Determining
the Category Awards
After you have determined that all of the
exhibits in your category have been judged, take the Tally Sheets and
the Judging Forms from the helpers and complete or check the
calculations of the scores for each exhibit. This simply involves
totaling the three ratings for each category and adding up the totals.
A perfect score would be 300. Generally the student helpers can finish
the calculations by the time the initial judging is finished.
-
During the first caucus, make sure that
the judges understand that they are to interview
all of the students whose
exhibits they judged earlier in the morning.
It is extremely important that every
exhibitor be interviewed by at least three judges. If the
judges interview every exhibitor whose exhibit they judged earlier,
each exhibitor will be interviewed by at least three judges. Also,
discuss the top exhibits and encourage your committee members to
interview as many of the top exhibitors as possible.
-
During the second caucus after the
interviews, poll the committee for the selection of winners in your
category. As a first step, a paper ballot may be taken from each
member of your committee, including the chairperson, listing each
individual's first, second, and third choice. The results of the
paper ballot may be tabulated on a chalkboard to form a basis for
open discussion, leading to the determination of the final awards.
-
Note that the total number of category
awards is limited to six.
See the section under Second
Caucus: Determining the Awards
for details.
-
During the second caucus, please
require your judges to
complete Comment Forms for each exhibit they judged.
-
In addition to judging for the regular
awards in your category, your committee may be asked to judge one or
more special awards. If so, the criteria for the award(s) will be
found in your packet.
-
Bring your final results to the 2nd
Floor of the Joseph A. Fidel Student Center as soon as judging is
complete. Also, turn in all Tally Sheets, Judging Forms, Judge's
Questionnaires, and Comment Forms at that time.
Determining
the Overall Winners
At 12:50
p.m., after
your category results have been submitted, the four groups of
chairpersons, Junior Life Sciences, Junior Physical Sciences, Senior
Life Sciences, and Senior Physical Sciences, will caucus for the purpose
of determining the overall winners.
Both Junior and Senior Division Chairpersons will meet in Cramer Hall.
Chairpersons should meet with others in
their section (i.e. Junior Physical Sciences, Junior Life Sciences,
Senior Physical Sciences and Senior Life Sciences). The fair director
and/or the fair coordinator will be available to provide any assistance
that may be needed.
Exhibitors will be available at their
exhibits from 1:30-3:30 p.m. for final interviewing of all award
judging.
Please note
that the overall winners of the Senior Division from the State Science
Fair, should be the best exhibits in the State and will represent New
Mexico at the Intel ISEF as such. The fact that a student has already
won a trip to the Intel ISEF in one of the regional fairs does
not exclude him or her from
consideration at the state level. If a regional finalist also wins at
state, an alternate from that region will move up at the regional level
to become a regional finalist. We want
to be sure that the Intel ISEF finalists who represent the state fair
are the best exhibitors in the State.
JUDGING FOR SPECIAL AWARDS
Guiding Principles - Each year,
many professional organizations, representing a
wide variety of scientific disciplines, join NMSEF to become Special
Awards Sponsors. These governmental, industrial and educational
institutions present scholarships, plaques, certificates, subscriptions
to professional journals and books to exhibitors. Special Awards judges
are recruited by the
sponsoring organization to choose the winners of their awards and are
given to exhibits based on each individual awards' own criteria.
Procedures -
-
Early
registration for all judges will begin at 4:00 p.m. on Friday, April
4. Please
note: Judges will not be permitted to enter the Exhibit Hall on
Friday.
-
Registration on
Saturday will be between 7:15 a.m. and 12:00 noon.
-
Please keep in mind
that the only people allowed in the Exhibit Hall during judging will
be judges. If you bring any additional guests, please remind
them that they will not be allowed in the Exhibit Halls except
during Public Viewing.
-
Special Judge packets will include a
list of all exhibits (Catalog of Exhibits) which lists project by
division, category and title, lunch tickets and nametags.
Nametags serve as official identification and are necessary for
access to the Exhibit Hall.
-
Special Awards judges should check all
projects because a category does not always clearly indicate the
type of project. Example: A project involving an organism's reaction
to high acceleration might be found in Medicine & Health Sciences or
Earth & Planetary Science.
-
Please see the
Important Points for All Judges section of this page for
information necessary for all judges.
-
Special Awards
Judges may meet in any of the classrooms in the Mineral Science &
Engineering Complex (MSEC) at any time during their judging should
they need a place to gather that is apart from the exhibit area.
These classrooms are MSEC 101, 103, 105, and 109.
-
No
special judging forms are made
available to Special Awards Judges. They may use whatever system of
tabulation and evaluation that they find convenient. In no case
may Special Awards Judges use
the small Judging Forms, found at the exhibits, for the purpose of
scoring their special awards. Judging Forms are reserved for
category award evaluation only.
-
Special Awards
Judges are not released until their results have been submitted.
Special Awards Judges should report their results to Science Fair
personnel on the Second Floor of the Joseph A. Fidel Student
Center. Science Fair personnel reserve the right to assign
personnel to determine winners whose results have not been submitted
by 4:00 p.m.
-
All results are
CONFIDENTIAL until announced
at the Awards Ceremonies. Judges may not inform student exhibitors
of final decisions made for any award. Please be discreet when
discussing winners or making critical comments as students or adult
sponsors might overhear.
-
Student winners,
addresses, title of project, category, school will be mailed to the
award sponsors following the Fair.
JUDGING
SCHEDULE:
-
8:00 a.m. until
10:30 a.m. student exhibitors will
not
be present at their exhibits and initial judging may be done at this
time.
-
10:30 a.m. until
noon student exhibitors will be present at their exhibits for
interviews.
-
12:00 noon to
1:00 p.m. student exhibitors will
not
be present at their exhibits.
-
1:30 p.m. to 3:30
p.m. student exhibitors will be present at their exhibits for
interviews.
Special award
judges should keep in mind that the afternoon session is less active
therefore providing more time for exhibitor interviews.
All students
exhibitors will be dismissed from judging at 3:30 p.m.
Judging Forms - No special
judging forms are made available to Special Awards Judges. They may use
whatever system of tabulation and evaluation that they find convenient.
In no case
may Special
Awards Judges use the small Judging Forms, found at the exhibits, for
the purpose of scoring their special awards.
Judging Forms are reserved for
category award
evaluation only.
Results - Immediately after judging is complete, Special Awards Judges
should report their results to Science Fair personnel on the Second
Floor of the Joseph A. Fidel Student Center.
Special Awards
Judges are not released until their results have been submitted.
Science Fair personnel reserve the right to assign personnel to
determine winners whose results have not been submitted by 4:00 p.m.
All results are
CONFIDENTIAL
until announced at the Awards
Ceremonies. Judges may not inform student exhibitors of final decisions
made for any award. Please be discreet when discussing winners or
making critical comments as students or adult sponsors might overhear.
Student winners,
addresses, title of project, category, school will be mailed to the
award sponsors following the Fair.
|