Creating the Extraordinary Student Experience : Office of Student Life

Hayes Abstract Evaluation

Below is an explanation of how each of the abstracts should be judged. Because not all judges may be judging all abstracts in one area, the system will take care of normalizing scores across all judges in each area.

 

Abstract Evaluation

Please evaluate the abstracts on the following criteria using this scale:

1               2              3                  4               5              6                  7

Poor                                         Average                                       Superior

 

Below is a description of each judging category:

1.     PURPOSE

Criteria

•      Is the problem/objective/hypothesis clearly stated?

•      Are the research goals clear?

•      Is the main argument established?

2.     DESIGN/METHODS

Criteria

•      Does the theoretical and/or methodological perspective seem appropriate?

•      Do the procedures of inquiry seem adequate to support the study’s objective?

•      Are the instruments/sources/materials appropriate to this inquiry?

•      How does the performance/visual arts exhibition showcase the artists technical skill?

3.     RESULTS/CONCLUSIONS

Criteria

•      Are the results clearly stated?

•      Does the interpretation seem clear and justifiable?

•      Do the conclusions seem valid and/or realistic?

4.     SIGNIFICANCE

Criteria

•      Does this research hold theoretical significance in its field?

•      Does this research have heuristic value in its field?

•      Does this research offer practical applications?

•      Is this study/research work a scholarly and/or artistic contribution to its field?

5.     WORTHY OF PRESENTATION

Based on the abstract, is the research worthy of paper submission and oral presentation at the Forum? Please answer Yes or No.

6.     VETO

Please only select to veto if you think the abstract is of unacceptable quality and should not be presented regardless of form (oral or poster presentation)