Judges’ Criteria

Gallery

Major Sponsors

What do the judges look for and like?

All entries

A clear and accurate presentation of the ‘story’ of your exhibit: what you did, why you did it, and your results or products.

In a science entry:

The judges will want to see

That it is an investigation: the first stage is to answer the question, “what is happening?” and then, “why is it happening?”
That you understand what is it you are investigating, so you don’t waste time investigating irrelevant things.
That you have done several measurements and experiments.
That your conclusions reflect the nature of your data, for example, if you have done only a few measurements then you shouldn’t say that these tell the full story – show that you understand the tentative nature of your data (the judges know that you don’t usually have the time or resources to carry out hundreds of measurements).
That you have documented all of your work in a logbook as you did it, and that you have the logbook with your exhibit.
That you can evaluate whether more remains to be investigated about your topic.

In a technology entry:

The judges will want to see

That you have developed a product, environment or system: an actual product or accurate modelling (but not a model!) of the development is required.
That its development has been well documented in a logbook, showing what was changed during development and why.
That you have investigated existing versions of your technology and identified the advantages and disadvantages of your approach.
That what you have developed actually works, or would work properly if you had the time and/or resources to develop it further in the way you have specified.
That you have identified relevant aspects such as: durability, reliability, economy, efficiency, ease of use, safety, cost of production, etc.
That you have identified the need or opportunity for what you are developing.