National ASF Written Report 2026 - Divisions 1-2 (NON-FUNCTIONAL DEMO)
High Points Medium Points Low Points
Importance
10 9 8 7
The importance includes a one paragraph answer for each question that clearly answers:
Why is the topic important to the agriculture industry?
What problem does the investigation solve for agriculture?
6 5 4
The importance includes a one paragraph answer for each question that vaguely answers:
Why is the topic important to the agriculture industry?
What problem does the investigation solve for agriculture?
3 2 1 0
The importance includes a one paragraph answer for each question that poorly answers:
Why is the topic important to the agriculture industry?
What problem does the investigation solve for agriculture?
x 1
Comments
Comments
Other’s Work
15 14 13 12 11
Clearly details what information currently exists concerning the research project. Reference where the information was found (website, book, article, etc.,) is listed, then a paragraph written by the student researcher(s) clearly describing the reference and information it provided for each publication used.  
10 9 8 7 6 5
Poorly details what information currently exists concerning the research project. Reference where the information was found (website, book, article, etc.,) is listed, then a paragraph written by the student researcher(s) vaguely describes the reference and information it provided for each publication used. 
4 3 2 1 0
Does not detail what information currently exists concerning the research project. Reference where the information was found (website, book, article, etc.,) is listed, then a paragraph written by the student researcher(s) poorly describes or is not included on what the reference says for each publication used. 
x 1
Comments
Comments
Materials and Methods
10 9 8 7
Clearly written to enable others to replicate the study and results. Section is written in first person and encompasses all materials required. If used, the statistical procedures are included. A narration of the steps taken to complete the experiment is included.
6 5 4
Not written clearly to enable others to replicate the study and results. Section may or may not be written in first person and encompasses all materials required. The statistical procedures are included but are unclear. A narration of the steps taken to complete the experiment is included.
3 2 1 0
Written poorly so that others cannot replicate the study and results. Section is not written in first person and does not encompass all materials required. The statistical procedures are not included. Steps taken to complete the experiment are listed.
x 1
Comments
Comments
Hypothesis/ Anticipated Results
5 4
Student researcher(s) clearly state the hypothesis and/or anticipated results.  
3 2
Student researcher(s) vaguely state the hypothesis and/or anticipated results.
1 0
Student researcher(s) do not state or poorly state  the hypothesis and/or anticipated results.   
x 1
Comments
Comments
Results
20 19 18 17 16 15 14
Written results of the project are summarized. Trends and relationships are clearly addressed. No conclusions are made in this section. Data that can stand alone in the form of tables and/or figures are included.
13 12 11 10 9 8 7
Written results of the project are incompletely summarized. Trends and relationships are vague. No conclusions are made in this section. Data that can stand alone in the form of tables and/or figures are sometimes included.
6 5 4 3 2 1 0
Written results of the project are poorly summarized. Trends and relationships are not addressed. Data is not appropriately included as tables and figures.
x 1
Comments
Comments
Discussion
10 9 8 7
The discussion includes clear, detailed answers for each question:
• What do the results of the study mean?
• How are they related to what others found in the “Other’s Work” section?
6 5 4
The discussion includes vague answers for each question:
• What do the results of the study mean?
• How are they related to what others found in the “Other’s Work” section?
3 2 1 0
The discussion poorly answers each question:
• What do the results of the study mean?
• How are they related to what others found in the “Other’s Work” section?
x 1
Comments
Comments
Conclusions
5 4
The conclusion clearly states what should be done and/or changed as a result of the research. Clearly states what the next steps are to continue the research.
3 2
The conclusion vaguely states what should be done and/or changed as a result of the research. The next steps for research are unclear.
1 0
The conclusion poorly states what should be done and/or changed as a result of the research. The next steps for research are not included.
x 1
Comments
Comments
Summary
5 4
The summary is two to three paragraphs describing the study conducted. Describes why the student researcher(s) chose to conduct the study, why the study is important to the agriculture industry, how the study was conducted, what was found by conducting the study and how the results apply within the agriculture industry.  
3 2
The summary is two to three paragraphs vaguely describing the study conducted. Vaguely describes why the student researcher(s) chose to conduct the study, why the study is important to the agriculture industry, how the study was conducted, what was found by conducting the study and how the results apply within the agriculture industry. 
1 0
The summary is two to three paragraphs that poorly describes the study conducted. Why the student researcher(s) chose to conduct the study, why the study is important to the agriculture industry, how the study was conducted, what was found by conducting the study and how the results apply within the agriculture industry is unclear. 
x 1
Comments
Comments
Acknowledgements
3
Detailed list or paragraph is included acknowledging anyone who assisted with any aspect of the project and how they helped.
2 1
A list or paragraph is included acknowledging anyone who assisted with any aspect of the project.
0
A list or paragraph is not included acknowledging anyone who assisted with any aspect of the project and how they helped.
x 1
Comments
Comments
Spelling/ Grammar
2
APA or MLA citation style writing is used throughout the report. Student researcher(s) use complete sentences; no spelling or grammar errors present. 
1
APA or MLA citation style writing is used. Student researcher(s) use complete sentences; minor spelling or grammar errors present. 
0
APA or MLA citation style writing is not used. Student researcher(s) do not use complete sentences; excessive spelling or grammar errors present. 
x 1
Comments
Comments
Primary Pathway Indicator - A1
High Points Mid Points Low Points
Relevance to Project - Indicator A1
0.5
The selected indicator clearly applies to the projects detailed in the application.
0
Selected indicator vaguely applies to the projects detailed in the application.
0

The selected indicator does not apply to the projects detailed in the application.

(Zero score for entire Indicator)

x 1
Comments
Comments
Relevance of Activity to Indicator - A1
0.5
The described activity is completely and clearly related to the selected indicator.
0
The described activity is vaguely related to the selected indicator.
0

The described activity is not related to the selected indicator.

(Zero score for entire Indicator)

x 1
Comments
Comments
Quality of Description - Indicator A1
If Relevance to Project - A1 or Relevance of Activity to Indicator - A1 is zero, score the entire Indicator - A1 zero.
2
The provided description clearly demonstrates the applicant's performance indicator.
1.75 1.5 1.25 1
The provided description vaguely demonstrates the applicant's performance indicator.
0
The provided description is unclear and/or does not demonstrate the applicant's performance indicator.
x 1
Comments
Comments
Primary Pathway Indicator - A2
High Points Mid Points Low Points
Relevance to Project - Indicator A2
0.5
The selected indicator clearly applies to the projects detailed in the application.
0
Selected indicator vaguely applies to the projects detailed in the application.
0

The selected indicator does not apply to the projects detailed in the application.

(Zero score for entire Indicator)

x 1
Comments
Comments
Relevance of Activity to Indicator - A2
0.5
The described activity is completely and clearly related to the selected indicator.
0
The described activity is vaguely related to the selected indicator.
0

The described activity is not related to the selected indicator.

(Zero score for entire Indicator)

x 1
Comments
Comments
Quality of Description - Indicator A2
If Relevance to Project - A2 or Relevance of Activity to Indicator - A2 is zero, score the entire Indicator - A2 zero.
2
The provided description clearly demonstrates the applicant's performance indicator.
1.75 1.5 1.25 1
The provided description vaguely demonstrates the applicant's performance indicator.
0
The provided description is unclear and/or does not demonstrate the applicant's performance indicator.
x 1
Comments
Comments
Primary Pathway Indicator - A3
High Points Mid Points Low Points
Relevance to Project - Indicator A3
0.5
The selected indicator clearly applies to the projects detailed in the application.
0
Selected indicator vaguely applies to the projects detailed in the application.
0

The selected indicator does not apply to the projects detailed in the application.

(Zero score for entire Indicator)

x 1
Comments
Comments
Relevance of Activity to Indicator - A3
0.5
The described activity is completely and clearly related to the selected indicator.
0
The described activity is vaguely related to the selected indicator.
0

The described activity is not related to the selected indicator.

(Zero score for entire Indicator)

x 1
Comments
Comments
Quality of Description - Indicator A3
If Relevance to Project - A3 or Relevance of Activity to Indicator - A3 is zero, score the entire Indicator - A3 zero.
2
The provided description clearly demonstrates the applicant's performance indicator.
1.75 1.5 1.25 1
The provided description vaguely demonstrates the applicant's performance indicator.
0
The provided description is unclear and/or does not demonstrate the applicant's performance indicator.
x 1
Comments
Comments
Primary Pathway Indicator A4
High Points Mid Points Low Points
Relevance to Project - Indicator A4
0.5
The selected indicator clearly applies to the projects detailed in the application.
0
Selected indicator vaguely applies to the projects detailed in the application.
0

The selected indicator does not apply to the projects detailed in the application.

(Zero score for entire Indicator)

x 1
Comments
Comments
Relevance of Activity to Indicator - A4
0.5
The described activity is completely and clearly related to the selected indicator.
0
The described activity is vaguely related to the selected indicator.
0

The described activity is not related to the selected indicator.

(Zero score for entire Indicator)

x 1
Comments
Comments
Quality of Description - Indicator A4
If Relevance to Project - A4 or Relevance of Activity to Indicator - A4 is zero, score the entire Indicator - A4 zero.
2
The provided description clearly demonstrates the applicant's performance indicator.
1.75 1.5 1.25 1
The provided description vaguely demonstrates the applicant's performance indicator.
0
The provided description is unclear and/or does not demonstrate the applicant's performance indicator.
x 1
Comments
Comments
Primary Pathway Indicator A5
High Points Mid Points Low Points
Relevance to Project - Indicator A5
0.5
The selected indicator clearly applies to the projects detailed in the application.
0
Selected indicator vaguely applies to the projects detailed in the application.
0

The selected indicator does not apply to the projects detailed in the application.

(Zero score for entire Indicator)

x 1
Comments
Comments
Relevance of Activity to Indicator - A5
0.5
The described activity is completely and clearly related to the selected indicator.
0
The described activity is vaguely related to the selected indicator.
0

The described activity is not related to the selected indicator.

(Zero score for entire Indicator)

x 1
Comments
Comments
Quality of Description - Indicator A5
If Relevance to Project - A5 or Relevance of Activity to Indicator - A5 is zero, score the entire Indicator - A5 zero.
2
The provided description clearly demonstrates the applicant's performance indicator.
1.75 1.5 1.25 1
The provided description vaguely demonstrates the applicant's performance indicator.
0
The provided description is unclear and/or does not demonstrate the applicant's performance indicator.
x 1
Comments
Comments
Staff Review
The application needs to be reviewed by the review committee.
Yes
FLAG - please use the yellow comments (right) to describe.
No
NO FLAG - This project follows the guidelines in the Agriscience Fair Handbook.
Comments
Comments