Alaska Airlines Imagine Tomorrow 2018
 

How Judges Score Projects

The projects will be evaluated in two ways. The first is through a numeric rating system as outlined in the following. Winners will be chosen in each of the four challenge topics. Projects will also be nominated for specialty awards.

Numeric Rating System

The criteria below will be used to judge competition entries within each challenge area using the numeric rating system. Competitors, keep these criteria in mind as you develop your project.

Total points possible: 25

Objective: 5 points
Creativity:
 5 points
Inquiry: 5 points
Thoroughness: 
5 points
Presentation: 
5 points

Objective

5 points: The objective was clearly stated and is relevant to the competition challenge in which it was entered. The proposed solution is workable and would be acceptable to the typical user.

4 points: The objective was clearly stated and is relevant to the competition challenge in which it was entered. The proposed solution is workable but may not be acceptable to the typical user.

3 points: The objective was clearly stated and is relevant to the competition challenge in which it was entered. The proposed solution may not be workable.

2 points: The objective was clearly stated and is relevant to the competition challenge in which it was entered. The proposed solution is definitely not workable.

1 point: The objective was clearly stated, but it is not clear why this project was entered in this particular challenge of the competition.

0 points: The objective was unclear. I don’t know what this project is trying to accomplish.

Creativity

5 points: The project shows original thought and incorporates a novel approach to the problem. Techniques and/or ideas are used in ways that I have not seen done or suggested before.

4 points: The project shows original thought and incorporates a novel approach to the problem. It builds on existing techniques that are being discussed as potentially useful for solving the problem.

3 points: The project shows original thought, but attacks the problem from a standpoint that other researchers have already begun investigating. The idea has potential however.

2 points: The project shows original thought, but requires approaches and/or technologies that are simply not practical at this point. The idea has long-term potential however.

1 point: The project simply builds on ideas that others have already advanced. It could make a contribution toward solution of the problem, but a minor one.

0 points: The project is a simple replication of work being done by others. No original thought seems to have gone into the work.

Inquiry

5 points: The project offered a clear and testable question. The procedures were well thought out. The methods for evaluating the question were appropriate. The team recognizes the limitations of their study, and presents ideas for follow-up research.

4 points: The project offered a clear and testable question. The procedures were well thought out. The methods for evaluating the question were appropriate. The team recognizes the limitations of their study, but does not seem to have ideas for follow-up research.

3 points: The project offered a clear and testable question. The procedures were well thought out. The methods for evaluating the question were appropriate. The team does not note any limitations of their study, nor do they seem to have ideas for follow-up research.

2 points: The project offered a clear and testable question. The procedures were well thought out. The methods for evaluating the question can be improved. The team does not note any limitations of their study, nor do they seem to have ideas for follow-up research.

1 point: The project offered a clear and testable question. The procedures were not well thought out. The methods for evaluating the question can be improved. The team does not note any limitations of their study, nor do they seem to have ideas for follow-up research.

0 points: The question driving this project is either unclear or not truly testable.

Thoroughness

5 points: The team demonstrates an understanding of the scientific literature that is appropriate for high school students. They are familiar with different theories that are germane to the problem. The approach they have adopted is broad enough to address all major aspects of the research question. Key references have been cited.

4 points: The team demonstrates an understanding of the scientific literature that is appropriate for high school students. They are familiar with different theories that are germane to the problem. The approach they have adopted is broad enough to address all major aspects of the research question. Some references are cited.

3 points: The team demonstrates an understanding of the scientific literature that is appropriate for high school students. They are familiar with different theories that are germane to the problem. The approach they have adopted is useful for some, but not all, major aspects of the research question. No references to key studies are provided.

2 points: The team demonstrates an understanding of the scientific literature that is appropriate for high school students. They are familiar with different theories that are germane to the problem. The approach they have adopted is insufficient for fully evaluating the research question. No references to key studies are provided.

1 point: They do not seem to be familiar with different theories that are germane to the problem. The approach they have adopted is insufficient for fully evaluating the research question. No references to key studies are provided.

0 points: The team does not understand the scientific literature at a level that one would expect from high school students.

Presentation

A 5-point presentation will contain all of these features:

  • The project display completely covers all aspects of the work.
  • The nature of the problem is clearly explained.
  • The idea and actual work are clearly explained.
  • The students explained their work and answered questions to my satisfaction.
  • Students clearly worked as a team in that they could all answer questions about any part of the project.
  • The visual presentation was appropriate, pleasing to look at, and uncluttered.

One point will be deducted for each feature that, in the judge’s judgment, does not meet these standards.

 

Specialty Awards

Projects can also be considered for various specialty awards that are not challenge specific. Some of these specialty awards include:

  • Innovative
  • Likely to Succeed in the Marketplace
  • Community Impact
  • Global Impact
  • Exceptional Teamwork
  • Inspirational (for a team that may have endured hardships or obstacles on their way to compete)

Judges can nominate as many projects as they choose for any of the specialty awards by checking a box nominating a particular project for a specific specialty award.