Rubrics for all judges and participants are now available. There is a proper rubric specific to the session you will be attending: one for Science & Research and one for Performing & Visual Arts. Be sure to access the proper rubrics for the specific sessions you will be judging.
The rubric provided for the R&CW Conference is based on our theme and intended outcomes of Become, Share, and Defend. The rubric is not intended to cover all the aspects that you will be judging. Though the rubric lists only general areas, each judge should use his or her knowledge of field specific principles and skills to critique the students' work.
What does it mean to Become, Share, and Defend in the context of the R&CW?
Competence is what students are striving to develop. As a judge, you may use criteria relevant to your discipline to answer the question: What can this student do to further develop the skills of a competent professional in this field?
The students' knowledge is useless as long as it is trapped. Only when the student is able to teach others is she capable of adding value where she serves. Assess students' abilities to teach their craft or show their findings in a way that adds value to those around them.
The R&CW Conference serves as a practice setting where students stand independently and answer according to their own understanding. Assess the students' ability to defend their work.
Honest feedback is the best thing you can offer these students. Explicitly identify and positively reinforce what was done well. Constructive feedback should be specific and clear, not general or vague. Prioritize your feedback and be descriptive rather than evaluative.
All students who present receive an R&CW participation certificate, but only the authors of the 1st, 2nd and 3rd best works in each session receive an award certificate. Their names will be forwarded to their respective deans and posted on the R&CW website. Scoring should be approached with the same rigor that Elder Oaks expressed when he said, "A teacher who rewards an average performance with a mark of distinction is false to the trust of his or her students."
Number scores should be awarded as follows:
0 - The student does not demonstrate initiative to learn, understand, and apply discipline-specific concepts and skills to the project or work shown.
1 - The student displays sufficient understanding of the project/work shown. The student fails to see deeper implications of the work and could reproduce or design a similar work/project only with significant involvement from a mentor.
2 - The student clearly shows considerable understanding, application, and incorporation of concepts related to the project. The student possesses intellectual autonomy and independence from the mentor. The student could reproduce and/or improve the project/work shown with minimal guidance from the mentor.
3 - The student displays truly outstanding understanding, application, and integration of professional skills, original thinking, skillful use of concepts, and ability to analyze and solve complex problems in the development of the work/project shown. The student could create an entirely new project of similar complexity, or at least extrapolate the project/work shown to completely different contexts and improve on it, without mentor's intellectual assistance.
Reserve the highest marks for those that are truly outstanding. Remember that it is your highest compliment to offer accurate evaluation of students' shortcomings.