2017 Atlanta Public Schools SCIENCE & ENGINEERING FAIR

Name
School
Grade Level
Title of Project
Project Category
Judge Affiliated Organization

JudgingGuidelines

The judgingguidelines arebased onthe IntelISEF criteria. ISEF and GSEFoffera second setof criteria thatmaybeappliedtoprojectsin science, engineering,and mathematicsandcomputerscience. Thejudgingprocessplaces specialemphasisonthestudent’sabilitytodiscusstheprojecteffectivelyduringtheoralinterview,aswellastheproject’sdemonstrationoforiginality,creativity,imagination,discovery,andinventiveness.

Displaysshouldservetwofunctions:1)topresenttheresearchclearlywhenthestudentisnotpresent,and2)toguidethepersonalinterviewtoward an in‐depth discussion. Judgesmay examine the studentnotebook (three‐ringbinder), which should include atleast ISEF Forms 1,1Aand1B,theResearchProposal,anyadditionalforms/permissionsrequiredbythespecificresearchbeingconducted,andoptionalitemssuchasaresearchpaper.

Science Project / Score Range / Rubric Rating / Score / Comments
Research Problem / Unsatisfactory Satisfactory Good Excellent
1-2 3-5 6-8 9-10
• Description of a practical need or problem to be solved
• Definition of criteria for proposed solution
• Explanation of constraints
DesignandMethodology / Unsatisfactory Satisfactory Good Excellent
1-3 4-7 8-11 12-15
  • Exploration of alternatives to answer need or problem
  • Identification of a solution
  • Development of a prototype/model

Execution: Construction & Testing
/ Unsatisfactory Satisfactory Good Excellent
1-5 6-10 11-15 16-20
  • Prototype demonstrates intended design
  • Prototype has been tested in multiple conditions/trials
  • Prototype demonstrates engineering skill and completeness

Creativity / Unsatisfactory Satisfactory Good Excellent
1-5 6-10 11-15 16-20
  • projectdemonstratessignificantcreativity/originality/inventivenessinoneormoreoftheabovecriteria

Presentation
Poster / Unsatisfactory Satisfactory Good Excellent
1-2 3-5 6-8 9-10
  • logicalorganizationofmaterial
  • clarity of graphics and legends
  • supportingdocumentationwellselectedanddisplayed

Interview / Unsatisfactory Satisfactory Good Excellent
1-6 7-12 13-18 19-25
  • clear,concise,thoughtfulresponsestoquestions
  • understandingofbasicsciencerelevanttoproject
  • understandingofinterpretationandlimitationsofresultsandconclusions
  • degreeofindependenceinconductingproject
  • recognitionofpotentialimpactinscience,societyand/oreconomics
  • qualityofideas forfurtherresearch
  • forteamprojects,contributionstoandunderstandingofprojectbyallmembers

Thank you for your time. / JUDGE TOTAL

APS Science Department © 2016