|
|
High Points
|
Medium Points
|
Low Points
|
|
|
Abstract
|
Abstract is brief and concisely describes the purpose, methods, results and conclusions. Abstract does not include cited references. Abstract is no longer than one page. Arrangement makes the purpose, procedure, results and conclusions clear.
|
Abstract describes the purpose, methods, results and conclusions. Abstract does not include cited references. Abstract is longer than one page. Arrangement makes the purpose, procedure, results and conclusions vague.
|
Abstract poorly describes the purpose, methods, results and conclusions. Abstract includes cited references. Abstract is longer than one page. Arrangement makes the purpose, procedure, results and conclusions unclear.
|
x 1
|
|
Introduction
|
Introduction answers the question “Why was the work done?” It clearly states the problem that justifies conducting the research, the purpose of the research, its impact on agriculture, the findings of earlier work, and the general approach and objectives.
|
Introduction answers the question “Why was the work done?” It vaguely states the problem that justifies conducting the research, the purpose of the research, its impact on agriculture, the findings of earlier work, and the general approach and objectives.
|
Introduction does not answer the question “Why was the work done?” It does not state the problem that justifies conducting the research, the purpose of the research, its impact on agriculture, the findings of earlier work, and the general approach and objectives.
|
x 1
|
|
Literature
Review
|
The literature review details what information currently exists concerning the research project. The information includes materials used in the research and material cited such as articles about similar studies, similar research methods, history of the research area and other items that support the current knowledge base for the topic and how the project might complement existing information.
|
The literature review poorly details what information currently exists concerning the research project. The information may or may not include materials used in the research. Some materials cited include articles about similar studies, similar research methods and history of the research area. How the project might complement existing information is not clear.
|
The literature review does not detail what information currently exists concerning the research project. There is no information included or it
does not reference materials used in the research. No information cited such as articles about similar studies, similar research methods or history of the research area. How the project might complement existing information is not clear.
|
x 1
|
|
Materials and
Methods
|
Clearly written to enable others to replicate the study and results. Section is written in third person, encompasses all materials required, states the hypothesis/research questions and explains the study design. If used, the statistical procedures are included. A narration of the steps taken to complete the experiment is included.
|
Not written clearly to enable others to replicate the study and results. Section may or may not be written in third person, encompasses all materials required, states the hypothesis/research questions and explains the study design. The statistical procedures are included but are unclear. A narration of the steps taken to complete the experiment is included.
|
Written poorly so others cannot replicate the study and results. Section is not written in third person, does not encompass all materials required for the research and hypothesis/research questions are not stated. The statistical procedures are not included. Steps taken to complete the experiment are listed.
|
x 1
|
|
Results
|
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.
|
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.
|
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
|
|
Discussion and
Conclusions
|
Brief recap of the results is included and shows how they were the foundation of the study. Sound reasoning is shown that conclusions are based on results, incorporates previous literature and relates directly to the hypothesis. Discussion refers to or references facts and figures in results section and provides recommendations for practice, future research and the impact on the agriculture industry.
|
Brief recap of the results is included and shows how they were the foundation of the study. Unsound reasoning is shown that conclusions are based on results, vaguely incorporates previous literature and partially relates to the hypothesis. Discussion refers to or references facts and figures in results section and provides recommendations for practice, future research and the impact on the agriculture industry.
|
No recap of the results is included or poorly shows how they were the
foundation for the study. Conclusions are not based on results, previous literature not included and do not relate directly to the hypothesis. Discussion poorly refers to or references facts and figures in the results section and does not provide recommendations for practice, future research and does not illustrate the impact on the agriculture industry.
|
x 1
|
|
Acknowledgements
|
Detailed list or paragraph is
included acknowledging
anyone who assisted with
any aspect of the project
and how they helped.
|
A list or paragraph is
included acknowledging
anyone who assisted with
any aspect of the project.
|
A list or paragraph is not
included acknowledging
anyone who assisted with
any aspect of the project
and how they helped.
|
x 1
|
|
References
|
References contain
significant, published and
relevant sources.
|
References listed are
somewhat significant,
published and relevant
sources.
|
References listed are not
significant, published and
relevant sources.
|
x 1
|
|
APA Style/
Spelling
|
APA citation style writing is
used throughout the report. No spelling or grammar
errors are present.
|
APA citation style writing is
used. Minor spelling or
grammar errors are present.
|
APA citation style writing
is not used. Excessive
spelling or grammar
errors are present.
|
x 1
|
|
Primary Pathway Indicator - A1
|
High Points
|
Mid Points
|
Low Points
|
|
|
Relevance to Project - Indicator A1
|
The selected indicator clearly applies to the projects detailed in the application.
|
Selected indicator vaguely applies to the projects detailed in the application.
|
The selected indicator does not apply to the projects detailed in the application.
(Zero score for entire Indicator)
|
x 1
|
|
Relevance of Activity to Indicator - A1
|
The described activity is completely and
clearly related to the selected indicator.
|
The described activity is vaguely related to the selected indicator.
|
The described activity is not related to the selected indicator.
(Zero score for entire Indicator)
|
x 1
|
|
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.
|
The provided description clearly demonstrates the applicant's performance indicator.
|
The provided description vaguely demonstrates the applicant's performance indicator.
|
The provided description is unclear and/or does not
demonstrate the applicant's performance indicator.
|
x 1
|
|
Primary Pathway Indicator - A2
|
High Points
|
Mid Points
|
Low Points
|
|
|
Relevance to Project - Indicator A2
|
The selected indicator clearly applies to the projects detailed in the application.
|
Selected indicator vaguely applies to the projects detailed in the application.
|
The selected indicator does not apply to the projects detailed in the application.
(Zero score for entire Indicator)
|
x 1
|
|
Relevance of Activity to Indicator - A2
|
The described activity is completely and clearly related to the selected indicator.
|
The described activity is vaguely related to the selected indicator.
|
The described activity is not related to the selected indicator.
(Zero score for entire Indicator)
|
x 1
|
|
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.
|
The provided description clearly demonstrates the applicant's performance indicator.
|
The provided description vaguely demonstrates the applicant's performance indicator.
|
The provided description is unclear and/or does not demonstrate the applicant's performance indicator.
|
x 1
|
|
Primary Pathway Indicator - A3
|
High Points
|
Mid Points
|
Low Points
|
|
|
Relevance to Project - Indicator A3
|
The selected indicator clearly applies to the projects detailed in the application.
|
Selected indicator vaguely applies to the projects detailed in the application.
|
The selected indicator does not apply to the projects detailed in the application.
(Zero score for entire Indicator)
|
x 1
|
|
Relevance of Activity to Indicator - A3
|
The described activity is completely and clearly related to the selected indicator.
|
The described activity is vaguely related to the selected indicator.
|
The described activity is not related to the selected indicator.
(Zero score for entire Indicator)
|
x 1
|
|
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.
|
The provided description clearly demonstrates the applicant's performance indicator.
|
The provided description vaguely demonstrates the applicant's performance indicator.
|
The provided description is unclear and/or does not demonstrate the applicant's performance indicator.
|
x 1
|
|
Primary Pathway Indicator A4
|
High Points
|
Mid Points
|
Low Points
|
|
|
Relevance to Project - Indicator A4
|
The selected indicator clearly applies to the projects detailed in the application.
|
Selected indicator vaguely applies to the projects detailed in the application.
|
The selected indicator does not apply to the projects detailed in the application.
(Zero score for entire Indicator)
|
x 1
|
|
Relevance of Activity to Indicator - A4
|
The described activity is completely and clearly related to the selected indicator.
|
The described activity is vaguely related to the selected indicator.
|
The described activity is not related to the selected indicator.
(Zero score for entire Indicator)
|
x 1
|
|
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.
|
The provided description clearly demonstrates the applicant's performance indicator.
|
The provided description vaguely demonstrates the applicant's performance indicator.
|
The provided description is unclear and/or does not demonstrate the applicant's performance indicator.
|
x 1
|
|
Primary Pathway Indicator A5
|
High Points
|
Mid Points
|
Low Points
|
|
|
Relevance to Project - Indicator A5
|
The selected indicator clearly applies to the projects detailed in the application.
|
Selected indicator vaguely applies to the projects detailed in the application.
|
The selected indicator does not apply to the projects detailed in the application.
(Zero score for entire Indicator)
|
x 1
|
|
Relevance of Activity to Indicator - A5
|
The described activity is completely and clearly related to the selected indicator.
|
The described activity is vaguely related to the selected indicator.
|
The described activity is not related to the selected indicator.
(Zero score for entire Indicator)
|
x 1
|
|
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.
|
The provided description clearly demonstrates the applicant's performance indicator.
|
The provided description vaguely demonstrates the applicant's performance indicator.
|
The provided description is unclear and/or does not demonstrate the applicant's performance indicator.
|
x 1
|
|
Staff Review
|
|
|
|
|
|
The application needs to be reviewed by the review committee.
|
FLAG - please use the yellow comments (right) to describe.
|
|
NO FLAG - This project follows the guidelines in the Agriscience Fair Handbook.
|
|