Part III: What will the judge ask me?

Some judges will be judging their first science fair, while others will have judged several fairs at
varying levels. Nevertheless there are many common questions and, the more you have thought
about them, the better your interview experience will be.

20 Questions you should expect include:

 Where did you get this idea?

 How did you come up with this title?
 What research did you do?
 What was your hypothesis?
 Why did you think that would happen?
 What were your independent and dependent variables?
 What was your control?
 What did you measure and how?
 How did you calculate that result?
 Why did you choose that amount, (or measurement, or piece of equipment, etc.)?
 How did you replicate the experiment?
 What does that graph tell you?
 How variable were your results and what might explain the variability?
 What did you base that conclusion on?
 Why/How are your findings important?
 Who might want to know this information?
 What would be the next experiment you would do?
 What was the hardest part (or most fun, or most exciting, or most surprising, etc.)?
 Who helped you?
 If you had to do it all over again, is there anything you would do differently?

1. Where did you get this idea?

This is my favorite question, because more and more students are not learning how to design
their own projects. With the plethora of websites for science fair project ideas, many kids simply
get a detailed procedure from a website and follow the directions like a recipe in a cookbook.
Although these projects should get full academic credit, they typically will not win the fair
because they lack creativity.

Good answer: Even if you got the idea from a website or book, highlight all the creative aspects
of the project’s development. Describe changes you made and what makes your project unique.

Bad answer: My sister did it last year and won!

Advertisement

1. What would you do differently next time?

This type of question evaluates your knowledge of experimental design and ability to solve
problems.

Good answer: Recognize that all projects have limitations and you could always have done better
if you had more time, more resources, and/or better equipment. In addition, most experiments
would benefit from more replication.

Bad answer: Nothing, it was perfect.

Advertisement

1. What would you do next?

With this type of question, the judge is evaluating your intellectual curiosity and knowledge of
the scientific process.

Good answer: Realize all science is built on existing science and propose the next logical
experiment. Look at the results you obtained and think about new questions. Perhaps you would
measure a different, but related dependent variable or evaluate a new independent variable.

Bad answer: Nothing, it’s not required next year

Advertisement

1. Who helped you?

This one sounds like a trick question because you were supposed to do your own project – right?
Keep in mind that no scientist works in isolation and even if they did we wouldn’t know about
them because they wouldn’t communicate their results.

Good answer: Acknowledge your teachers, mentors, experts, parents, friends, and anyone else
that gave you advice, equipment, or assistance including helping find the idea to practicing for
your interview.

Bad answer: My mom finished my backboard while I did my history report.

Advertisement

1. Are your findings significant?

This one is a trick question! In everyday language people use “significant” to mean “meaningful”
or “substantial”, but to a scientist the term “significant” specifically means you conducted a
statistical evaluation of your data and found mathematical support for or against your hypothesis.
At the elementary school levels, this is well beyond the grade levels. So, unless you can explain
underlying assumptions, type I and type II errors, and p-values, you should not use the term
“significant”. The judge is testing your knowledge of this term.
BUT if the judge asks “Are your findings important?” Then they want to know if you can link
your project results to the bigger picture because scientists are generally not as good as they
should be at communicating the importance of their work.

Good answer: Identify the groups of people (farmers, engineers, managers, law makers, etc.) that
might benefit from whatever question you tried to answer and describe why they might need to
know this information.

Bad answer: Nope.

 How did you come up with the idea for this project?
 How long did it take you to build the apparatus?
 How did you build the apparatus? How does it work?
 How much time (or many days) did it take to run the experiments (grow the plants or
collect each data point)?
 How many times did you run the experiment with a different set of parameters?
 Did you try something else that didn't work?
 Can you explain to me how your project relates to (some scientific principle)?
 Do you think there is an application in industry for this knowledge (technique)?
 Were there any books that helped you do your analysis?
 When did you start this project? Or how much of the work did you do this year?
 What is the next experiment to do if you want to continue this study?
 Judges' Decision-making Criteria
 No two judges will approach your science project from the same perspective. They come
from different personal and professional backgrounds, they might or might not have
judged at this type of competition before, and they might be more or less informed about
your topic. Having said that, all of the judges will be trying to determine the same general
thing: your ability to independently conduct and communicate original, meaningful
science or engineering research. Table 1 lists the seven factors judges usually use to make
their judging decisions. The weight awarded to each factor varies depending on both the
specific science competition and on the individual judge.

Factors judges
What the judges are trying to Examples of questions a judge might
use to make
determine ask during an interview
decisions
Why did you choose this topic and how
Creativity /
Is this work novel? did you settle on your approach to the
originality
problem?
Scientific
Did the student understand the Can you walk me through how and why
thought /
scientific/engineering method and you decided on this
engineering
apply it appropriately? experimental/engineering design?
process
Background How does your approach to the question
Does the student understand what
information / differ from people's previous
was done previously in the field?
thoroughness approaches?
 Factors judges
What the judges are trying to Examples of questions a judge might
use to make
determine ask during an interview
decisions
What was the most surprising
Skill / Who designed and carried out the experimental/engineering challenge you
independence bulk of the work? faced during this science project? How
did you overcome it?
What were your goals with this science
Is the completed work sufficient to
Thoroughness project and how would you evaluate
move the field forward?
where you are in respect to those goals?
Can the student clearly and easily
discuss all aspects of his or her
project? During an interview, judges If your tests had shown XYZ instead,
Clarity
might want to make sure that a what would you have done? Why?
student can think and speak well
when thrown a curve.
Was each member of the team fully The great thing about working together
Teamwork (only involved? Does each member, is the synergy between people. What
applicable for regardless of his or her specific would you say was the most important
team projects) experimental role, understand all skill or idea each of you had during the
aspects of the science project? course of this science project?
 Table 1. The seven factors listed are usually the most important criteria for success at a
top science competition.

How to be a Good Science Fair Judge

Being a judge for the California State Science Fair is hard, but it's worth the effort. You are
making a memorable impact on the lives of some very talented young people. For some students,
you are the first professional they have ever met who does a science or engineering job for a
living. Part of your job at the Science Fair is to be an ambassador for your profession. Some
students' perceptions of you could influence their career choices. It is a good idea when you
approach a student to introduce yourself and describe your background.

Conveying Fairness
As a judge, it is most important for you to show the students that you are both fair and knowledgeable.
Your fairness is indicated by a few simple actions:

 You spend about the same amount of time with each student
 You listen to the student's explanation of the project
  The questions you ask are intended to find out more about the project and how it was done --
not to embarrass or intimidate the student

This sounds simple, but can be challenging to implement.

Asking Questions
Your best tool in judging is your ability to ask questions. Be sensitive to what the student knows. You can
always ask questions that the student can answer, and keep a conversation going for ten minutes. There
are some questions all students should be able to answer, including variations on:

 How did you come up with the idea for this project?
 What did you learn from your background search?
 How long did it take you to build the apparatus?
 How did you build the apparatus?
 How much time (many days) did it take to run the experiments (grow the plants) (collect each
data point)?
 How many times did you run the experiment with each configuration?
 How many experiment runs are represented by each data point on the chart?
 Did you take all data (run the experiment) under the same conditions, e.g., at the same
temperature (time of day) (lighting conditions)?
 How does your apparatus (equipment) (instrument) work?
 What do you mean by (terminology or jargon used by the student)?
 Do you think there is an application in industry for this knowledge (technique)?
 Were there any books that helped you do your analysis (build your apparatus)?
 When did you start this project? or, How much of the work did you do this year? (some students
bring last year's winning project back, with only a few enhancements)
 What is the next experiment to do in continuing this study?
 Are there any areas that we not have covered which you feel are important?
 Do you have any questions for me?

(Note: these are only suggestions to keep the dialog going. You may find other questions to be more
useful in specific interviews.)

One type of question to avoid is "Why didn't you do....?" Probing questions are useful to
stimulate the thought processes of the student. A solution or extension to the work presented may
be obvious to you with all of your years of experience, but the student may not understand why
you're asking such a question. If you ask a question of this type, be sure to imply the correct
intent, as in "Could you have done... ?" or "What do you think would have happened if you had
done....?" When phrased this way the question is an invitation for the student to think about the
experiment in a different way, and can turn the question into a positive experience.

Guiding the Discussion

Sometimes we come across projects in technical areas with which we are intimately familiar, and the
student just didn't get it -- they made some incorrect assumptions, missed a key indicator in the data,
came up with a false conclusion, or didn't look at or understand some common principles. It can be
tempting to share your knowledge about the topic, to help the student appreciate what happened (or
should have happened) in the experiment. Some judges have been observed to enthusiastically
pontificate while a student stood idly listening. Before you do this, please consider that these students
are smart, and the next judge may hear the student parroting back the knowledge you imparted. You
may try with your questions to lead the student toward the right answers, but please don't give the
answers. If you really feel compelled to make explanations, save them until near the end of the judging
time when your knowledge will not be relayed to judges following you. Alternatively, you may give the
student your card and invite future discussion about the project. Remember to be sure that your
discussion meets the following Science Fair objectives to involve the student in discovery:

 Your conversation should resemble a discussion with an esteemed colleague who is having
difficulty with some research -- together, you talk through the situation to mutually arrive at
improved answers;
 The student should be doing most of the talking;
 Coax and/or coach the student into realizing and describing the correct conclusions; it's the
student's project, not yours;
 Encourage the student to conduct more experimentation in order to verify the new conclusions.

Finally, during your panel's meetings, please inform your fellow judges of those students to whom you
have provided analysis or information. This is in fairness to other students who are being judged in your
category and who may not have received the benefit of your knowledge.
Improving Communication
Since you are a judge, most students instinctively think of you as an intimidating figure. The more you
can dispel this image, the more likely you are to help the student be less nervous, and get a better
discussion. Again, simple things can make a difference:

 Make eye contact with the student;

 If the student is short and you are tall, stoop, bend, or squat down to lower your eye level (if
your knees won't allow this, ask to judge the Senior category);
 Tip your head to the side a little to indicate interest (this is a universal nonverbal form of
communication; even your dog does it);
 If you wear glasses, look at the student through them, not over the top of the frames;
 Whenever a student shows a good idea, clear chartsmanship, a clever way to get expensive
results with inexpensive equipment, or anything you can compliment, be sure to use a
compliment;
 Use a tone of voice that indicates interest or inquisitiveness, not scepticism or contempt.

To assure the perception of fairness, you also need to make sure that one student doesn't monopolize
your time. Some have a well-rehearsed pitch that may prevent you from having a chance to interact
with the student. You have to find some way to break the pattern, and again, your tool is questioning.
Politely interrupt with a question, usually in the form of "I'm sorry, I didn't quite catch the relationship
between that adjustment and this result," or even some of the "any student can answer" questions, like
"How many times did you run the experiment with each configuration?" and "How many experiment
runs are represented by each data point?" The idea is not to stop the student from talking, but to get
the student to interrupt the tape recording and think about what is being communicated to you.

Many of these students are exceptionally bright, and it is easy to think -- when facing an
incredibly impressive display and a supremely confident student -- that this student's research is
beyond your knowledge. If a project is really and truly completely outside your experience, you
are still knowledgeable in the area of problem-solving and the scientific method. Concentrate on
these aspects rather than the details of a particular project.

Young people have largely developed their conversation techniques through their interactions
with other young people. They tend to actively converse on topics that they are most
knowledgeable about. When teenagers are faced with a discussion they don't grasp, they
typically lose interest and look bored. If you keep appearing to be interested, no matter what is
said, the student will assume you grasp what's going on. When you ask questions, even the "any
student can answer this" type of questions, the student assumes you have kept up with the
discussion and are maintaining an interest in their work. You may be struggling during the
student's whole pitch to come up with something -- anything -- to ask that doesn't sound
completely ignorant, but the student doesn't know how little of the information makes sense to
you. Keep asking questions until it does make sense. No matter how you handle this situation,
please do not tell the student how little you understand (we don't want a student to tell a parent
that the judges didn't know anything about the topic). Remember, you are not the only judge who
will talk to this student. If something is not completely clear, bring it up in the judging meeting;
judges who are familiar with the applicable science will have sorted it all out.

At the other extreme there are a few projects that are "snow jobs" which make it to the State
Science Fair. Sometimes you can ferret out a "snow job" by simply asking for explanations of
words that the student uses; don't assume the student knows what the technical terms mean. They
may also not know what a piece of equipment does, how it works, or why it was used. Go into
one of these discussions with the attitude that, if the student can't explain it to your satisfaction,
then the student really doesn't understand the science of what's going on. Chances are, if it
doesn't make sense to you, it doesn't make sense. Of course, as with all questions or concerns
that arise, discuss these projects during the judging session; there will probably be others on your
panel with similar reservations.

Determining the Winners

When you return to your judging panel and deliberate on the projects, you can use a few simple criteria
for selecting the winners:

 The quality of the student's work is what matters, not the amount of work;
 Team projects are judged like other projects -- it is the quality of the work that matters (an
individual project of equal quality to that of a team project may be ranked higher because of the
comparatively greater effort required by the individual);
 A less sophisticated project that the student understands gets higher marks than a more
sophisticated project that is not understood;
 Access to sophisticated lab equipment and endorsements from professionals do not guarantee a
high quality project (Did the student really understand what was going on?);
 It's okay if the student ended up disproving the objective or hypothesis of the experiment.

High marks go to:

 Genuine scientific breakthroughs

  Discovering knowledge not readily available to the student
 Correctly interpreting data
 A clever experimental apparatus
 Repetitions to verify experimental results
 Predicting and/or reducing experimental results with analytical techniques
 In engineering categories, experiments applicable to the "real world"
 Ability to clearly portray and explain the project and its results

Low marks go to:

 Ignoring readily available information (e.g. not doing basic library research)
 An apparatus (e.g. model) not useful for experimentation and data collection
 Improperly using jargon, not understanding terminology, and/or not knowing how equipment or
instrumentation works
 Presenting results that were not derived from experimentation (e.g. literature search)

Although the most obvious reason for your being a judge at the Science Fair is to assist in selection of
the projects that get prizes, the good judge knows that this is an important experience in the life of
every participant. Please do your best to make sure that all of the participants remember the Science
Fair as a positive experience in their lives.

Last updated: Fri Apr 11 21:45:54 PDT 1997

California State Science Fair / How to Be a Good Judge / CalifSF@usc.edu

Here are some questions that judges might ask …

Why/How did you get the idea and choose this project?
What did you learn from your background search?
What do you mean by (terminology or jargon used by the student)?
How many times did you repeat the experiment or test?
How did you account for variation in data?
What help did you receive from adults or internet sites?
What was the most important thing you learned from the project?
If you repeated the project again, what would you do differently?
What problems did you encounter while conducting your project?
Who would be interested in your experimental results or engineering design?

For Science Projects:

What variable did you intentionally change? What variables were hard to control?
How did your results relate to your hypothesis?
Could your data be explained any other way?
For Engineering Projects:

What was the most challenging part of your engineering design?

How did you choose your test criteria?
Is your design practical and cost effective?

Preparation for Judging

 If you can communicate your project well, you maximize your chances of winning.
 Based on your analysis of the judging criteria, determine what you think are the most
important three or four points to make about your project. Insure that you include these
points repeatedly in the materials you prepare.
 Write up a short "speech" (about 2–5 minutes long) summarizing your project. You will
give this speech (from memory) when you first meet the judges.
o Explain how you got the idea, the theory behind your project, how you did the
experiment (explain any relevant terms along the way), your results, and why
your project is important in today's society (how will it help people today?).
o If you can't fit all of this into your presentation, be prepared to discuss each of the
topics separately.
o Expect to be interrupted when you talk to the judges! You will rarely finish your
speech.
o Do not restate your abstract word for word.
 Organize a list of questions you think the judges will ask you and prepare/practice
answers for them. Here are a few common questions:
o Why is this research important? (Who cares if a rocket flies well?)
o What do your graphs represent?
o What does your data tell you?
o How is your experiment/project innovative? Did you design everything yourself,
or did you copy other people's work?
o What are other people doing in your field? How is your project similar/different?
o What problems did you run into while doing your experiment and how did you fix
them?
o What are the three most interesting things you learned when doing this project?
o How much help did you receive from others?
 Make up mini-speeches on important topics in your project and practice talking about
them until they are almost automatic. Be as detailed as you possibly can: you are trying to
impress the judges with your knowledge. This includes:
o Charts, graphs, and data tables you need to explain.
o Problems you ran into and how you solved/attempted to solve them. Judges will
want to understand your logical thought when you were solving these problems.
You will get major bonus points if you were persistent in trying to achieve
excellence from your project.
o Important concepts/equations you studied in your background research (the theory
behind your project).
o Your future study (what would you do to improve your project?).
o Why your project is unique/innovative.
 o How your project is useful.
 Study your background information like you would study for a test. In some ways,
presenting your project is like taking an exam. The better you know your background
information, the better your chances of winning.
o This is the part I usually have trouble with: I would do the research and
understand everything, but then I needed to study it. I would eventually learn and
remember all the facts I should know, but I had to sit myself down and study.
Force yourself to pretend there is a test the next day on all of the information, and
you will be prepared.
 Practice explaining your project in simple terms so anyone can understand it.
o Many students do not know how to explain their projects to the general public. If
you can explain your project in layman's terms, you are one step ahead of
everyone else!
 Practice is crucial. Keep practicing the things listed so you will have no slip-ups during
judging. It's amazing how much more quickly you can make a point if you have practiced
it out loud several times. And, the quicker you make each point, the more of them you
can make. Go over all of your notes, background information, results, and "speeches," for
review. You should know them so well that if someone asks you a question you can
answer in a split second without thinking! Practice! Practice! Practice!
 You should ask a parent, friend, teacher, or mentor, to pretend to be a judge so you
become comfortable in a judging situation. Even non-scientists can be helpful, since you
can still practice explaining your project to them. Ask for feedback afterwards on your
clarity and presentation.
 Videotaping yourself during practice can also be very helpful. Although it can be painful
to watch the video, you will see the mistakes you made and be able to fix them the next
time you speak.

The Judging Session

 Always dress up nicely for the judging period—NO JEANS! Everyone will take you
more seriously if you look professional. Coat and tie for men, business suit or
professional-looking dress for women are a must at high-level fairs.
 Make good use of your board. Point to diagrams and graphs when you are discussing
them.
 Always be positive and enthusiastic!
o Show the judges you are interested in your research and they will be more likely
to remember you.
o Do not be negative unless you are emphasizing a frustrating problem you ran into.
Even then you should immediately turn the conversation positive by describing
what you learned.
 Be confident with your answers. Do not mumble and say "Ummmmm...I think maybe
this is happening?" Even if you answer a question incorrectly, at least they will not think
you are a wimp!
 If you have no idea what the judge is asking, or do not know the answer to their question,
it is okay to say "I do not know."
 o You don't want to waste the precious, limited time of the interview on something
that will end up making you look bad. It's better to quickly move on to something
where you can shine.
o Instead, ask them their opinion on the issue, and/or weave in an explanation of the
theory behind your project without looking like you are changing the subject.
o You might also say: "I never thought of that before. I do not know the answer to
your question, but I will think about it. It is very interesting." Then write it down
in a notebook so they know you are serious about remembering it.
o If you do not understand what they are asking you, ask the judge to rephrase their
question or ask them a few questions to force them to be more specific.
 If there is any period of silence, do not sit there and wait for the judge to ask another
question—keep talking!
o Go to your important topic list (the mini-speeches you practiced) and discuss as
many as possible with the judges.
o Emphasize the key points based on the judging criteria.
 Sometimes judges will seem to ask the same question multiple times.
o Do not become impatient with them.
o Remember that this is their first time looking at your project.
 Be serious about all the judges' questions.
o Sometimes a judge will ask a very strange or simple question, they might be
testing to see how much you know.
 Emphasize how you were creative/unique/innovative with your project.
o One of the major criteria on a judges' list is creativity and originality.
 Treat each person who visits you like a judge, even non-scientists.
o They may be a valuable contact who could give you an internship or something
just as good!
 There will almost always be one or two judges who do not seem to like your work—don't
let it panic you. If eight out of ten judges really like you, you still have a good chance of
winning. At almost every competition I had at least one judge who didn't seem to like my
project.
 Always ask for feedback from the judges after the fair. Gather your judges' email
addresses and ask them how you can improve. (If you know their names and employers,
often you can do an Internet search to obtain their email addresses.) In my experience, I
heard back from about half of the judges I emailed. If you move onto the next level, you
should update your project and/or board after receiving feedback. The improvements you
make could determine whether you place in the next fair!
 For more tips, read the following articles by Science Buddies staff scientist and Intel
ISEF 2010 judge Sandra Slutz:
o The Do's and Don'ts of Judging Interviews
o My Firsthand Judging Experience at the 2010 Intel ISEF
The Do's and Don'ts of Judging Interviews
Exactly what happens during judging varies from competition to competition. You should
carefully review the procedures outlined on the website of the competition(s) you're entering.
However, most of the top competitions rely on face-to-face judging interviews in order to make
the final determinations. These interviews usually have a time cap. You might have less than 15
minutes to convey all of the information you want during an interview. In addition to explaining
all the science, you'll want to leave judges with the impression that you were courteous,
confident, comfortable, knowledgeable, enthusiastic, and engaging. Here are some tips for doing
just that:

 Make sure your display board (if it's allowed in the competition) conveys information
efficiently. Depending on how the fair is set up, and on judges' individual schedules, judges
might or might not have had time to preview the displays. Regardless, the point of the board is
to convey as much information as quickly as possible. A well-put-together display board is an
advantage, allowing you to get the basic description of your science project across quickly so
that the judges can focus on asking you questions to evaluate what you did and how much you
know.
 Get started immediately. Introduce yourself and ask the judge whether he or she would like you
to start describing your work. If he or she says yes, provide a good overview of your project, but
be prepared to stop and answer questions at any time.
 Don't ignore a question. If you're in the middle of a speech and a judge asks you a question,
immediately switch to trying to answer it. Interviews are time-limited and the judge is trying to
ascertain, within those time constraints, whether or not you meet all seven of the
aforementioned judging criteria.
 Practice what you have to say about your science project. It is very important to relay
information confidently and succinctly, but remember that a judge wants more than just a
canned speech. If a judge asks you a question, he or she wants you to abandon your prepared
speech and have an intelligent (but still succinct!) discussion. If you get too flustered when
you're forced to deviate from your practiced project explanation, the judges will wonder if you
truly understand what you're saying or if you're just repeating someone else's explanations. So
practice an explanation of your science project, and practice being interrupted to answer
questions.
 Practice your tone. Every interview should have a professional but conversational tone.
 Don't let silence reign. If a judge appears to be out of questions, then you should keep the
conversation going and create opportunities to convey how much you know about your science
project. Some things you can do include: pointing out and explaining surprising data points,
talking about what you'd do next with your data, discussing the wider implications of your
research.
 Talk about the process and not just the product. For a judge to evaluate your thought process
and logic, it is important for him or her to understand not only your results, but also how you
got there. Describe how and why you arrived at that particular experimental setup or product
design. If preliminary data encouraged you to re-design your science project, explain how that
evolved.

My Firsthand Judging Experience at the 2010 Intel ISEF

My name is Sandra Slutz, a staff scientist at Science Buddies, and I had the opportunity to be a
Grand Awards judge in the Animal Sciences Division at the 2010 Intel International Science and
Engineering Fair (ISEF). There were 25 of us judging in that particular division. All of us had
PhD's and research experience related in some way to animal sciences, but our current
occupations were pretty diverse, including pure researchers, science educators at all levels
(elementary through graduate school), veterinarians, and researchers at biotechnology
companies. Our goal was to judge and rank the 51 animal science projects into 1st through 4th
place Grand Award winners. The exact number of 1st through 4th Grand Awards for each
division at Intel ISEF changes annually, depending on the number of science projects entered in
the division. In each division, the top 25 percent of projects will take home a Grand Award. This
means that there may be multiple 1st, 2nd, 3rd, or 4th place Grand Awards for each division. The
more science projects in the division, the more Grand Awards, but your odds of winning a Grand
Award are equal in all science divisions, regardless of how many competitors there are.

Intel ISEF competitors have a total of 18 possible interview slots spread throughout the morning
and afternoon of a single day. In our division, each competitor had a total of 5–6 of their
interview slots filled with appointments with Grand Award judges. The Grand Award judges had
approximately 15 of their 18 interview slots filled. (Yes, if you're doing the math, that doesn't
work out quite right, but that is because the Grand Award judges also had team projects to
interview, evaluate, and rank separately for prizes. Starting in 2011, the team projects will be
judged alongside the individual projects and be eligible for the same pool of Grand Awards.)
After receiving our judging schedules, we had approximately 3 hours to preview all 15 of the
display boards for the science projects on our schedule. That isn't a lot of time per project, so you
can see how crucial it is to have a well-organized and easy-to-read display board! For more
advice about creating a strong display board, see the Science Buddies articles about Data
Presentation Tips and Big Display Boards for Top Science Competitions.

On judging day, I found that although the interview sessions were 15 minutes long, I spent only
12–14 minutes at each science project. There were very few breaks between the interviews, so I
needed to conduct the interview, make my assessment, score the project (see the Judging Criteria
section for an involved discussion of the factors used to judge projects), hand in my score, and be
at the next display board before the beginning of the next interview session. Twelve minutes isn't
a lot of time to impress a judge, so you have to be well prepared!

At the end of all the interview sessions, the Intel ISEF competitors took a break while the
division judges conferred. The goal is to start picking out the best projects. The challenging part
for the judges was that we hadn't all seen all the projects. In my case, we each saw approximately
1 out of every 5 science projects. We agreed to create a list where we each named the absolute
best project that we'd judged that day. In the end, we had approximately 10 projects, each of
which was what one or more judges considered the "best." And then the discussions began.
Judges summarized the projects and described why "this one" or "that one" should be the top
award winner. Other judges who had seen the projects added their opinions, either agreeing or
disagreeing. After much back-and-forth debate, we collectively determined which projects
needed additional opinions and sent out groups of judges to the top contenders once the students
had returned from their break. The goal was to conduct either additional interviews, or more
focused interviews if either a technical question or a question about the student's qualifications in
one of the judging criteria (criteria are discussed previously) had arisen.

When the final judging period was over, the judges reconvened and continued to debate the
comparative merits of each science project and selected the top ones. Believe me, with so many
excellent projects it wasn't an easy feat! One thing is very clear, no one project will be every
judge's favorite. But you do want as many judges as possible to be favorably impressed with
your work. And to win top honors, you'll need to "wow" at least one judge who will champion
you when the judges are debating the merits of different finalists.

 How well the students understand the project or experiment. Judges may provide
feedback by asking leading questions.
 How creative the students were and how they dealt with problems that arose. Did they
acknowledge sources used?
 Did the students do the work themselves? Obtaining assistance is acceptable, but the
students are ultimately responsible for their project.
 How the project compares to other projects in similar categories and grades.
 Hardware prototypes need not be brought into the hall for judging; look for photos and
data.
 Software prototypes should be available for demo on a device. For devices that require an
internet connection, students have been asked to provide a mobile hotspot, if possible. Be
sure students provide data which verifies and validates the software results.

 Scientific Thought (10 points) OR Engineering Goal (10 points)

• Was the problem scientifically significant
and the hypothesis clearly stated?
• Did the student(s) look at different aspects
of the problem, and chose a sufficiently
limited project – was it well planned?
• Did the student use appropriate control of
variables?
• Was the conclusion justified and properly
drawn from experimental data?
• Was sufficient literature research performed
and applied?
• Does the student understand what further
research is warranted?
Creativity (10 points)
• Is the project topic unique or the approach original?
• Was the purpose and engineering design
criteria/specifications significant and
clearly stated?
• Was the software or hardware prototype to
be invented/ engineered relevant, workable
and feasible?
• Could the solution be used in design or
construction of some end product or
program?
• Was there evidence of redesign and retest
under conditions of use?
• Did the student consider inventions,
products, software, and applications by
others?
• Does the student understand next steps or
possible future improvements?
 Creativity (10 points)
• Has the student used a novel approach for checking the hypothesis or testing an engineering
design or software? Projects from the internet or other sources are acceptable if clearly
acknowledged but should be scored lower.
• Evidence of student’s contributions: What level of assistance was received for the idea and
execution?
Thoroughness (5 points)
• Are there appropriate replications or repeated testing?
• Are there adequate data, drawings, flowcharts, schematics presented to address the scope?
• Was the project notebook kept during the project? Has all the work been completed in the past
12 months?
• Is the interpretation or performance claims supported with data?
• Are procedures and materials thoroughly documented?
• Were photos of hardware prototypes or a software demo provided?
Skill (5 points)
• Does the student understand the subject?
• Has the student used good laboratory, technical or programing skills?
• Did the student build equipment, design experiments, or program software?
• How much mentoring or other help did the student receive to carry out experiments or testing?
Clarity (3 points)
• Are the abstract, board, and oral communication accurate and understandable?
• Are the data and test results clear?
• Are phases of the project presented in an orderly manner?