Judging
Click here to Return to the Science Centre's MAIN WebPages.
Click HERE to Return to the Main Page.
Welcome


Click HERE to Register as a Participant.
Participant


Click HERE to Register as Audience.
Audience


Click HERE to View Details, Resources, etc.
Details



IMPORTANT
Advice
Panel
Sample

Click HERE to Fill in our Survey.
Survey



PAST
EVENTS


Click HERE to view details of IST2007.
2007


Click HERE to view details of IST2006.
2006


Click HERE to view details of IST2005.
2005
JUDGING

VERY IMPORTANT NOTICE
The IRON SCIENCE TEACHER COMPETITION 2008 has been postponed to 19 November 2008.
All rules and schedules - processes, etc - remain as stated below.
Click to Return to the Top of this Page.
USEFUL ADVICE

Martinez and Haertel (1991) proposed the 3 necessary elements for successful science experiments and demonstrations.
They are:
  1. Cognitive Appeal which refers to a range of situational characteristics that stimulate curiosity (Bruner, 1966) and fantasy (Malone & Lepper, 1987). This form of appeal includes both sensory curiosity (stimulated by auditory and visual variability) and higher-level cognitive curiosity (promoted by unexpected or paradoxical events).
  2. Mastery Appeal which is derived from environments that lend a sense of effectiveness. These motivators refer to a broad range of constructs, models, and theories that explain human motivation by the need for control and the need for competence and self-efficacy.
  3. Social Appeal which refers to the social characteristics of a task or event that engender interest and involvement. Bruner (1966) noted the importance of the social environment when he proposed the phenomenon of reciprocity: the desire to operate jointly with others toward some common objective. Studies done by Roth et al (1997) and Shepardson (1994) on the impact of science demonstrations on student learning highlighted social interaction as one of the contributing factors to successful learning.

Contributed by Dr Charles CHEW, NSSE, NIE

To the Top of this Page
THE PANEL OF JUDGES

Judging the participants is a panel of educationalists who have generously volunteered their time. The organisers thank the following:
  • Associate Professor Christine CHIN Hui Li, NSSE, NIE
  • Dr Joaquin Alfonso FARGAS, Director, Exploratorio, Argentina
  • Dr Andrew GIGER, Science Centre Fellow
In the spirit of the competition and the requisite process of judging, please understand that JUDGES' DECISION IS FINAL.

To the Top of this Page
IST2006 SAMPLE JUDGING SHEET
  • Below is a sample of the judges' scoring sheet used in IST2006.
  • Please note that the criteria, the scoring and the weightages are recommendations.
  • Judges are at liberty to change the criteria, etc, or recommend their own criteria, etc, AS LONG AS THE CHANGES
    • ARE ACCEPTABLE TO THE ORGANISERS AND,
    • UNANIMOUSLY AGREED TO BY THE ENTIRE JUDGING PANEL.
    The changes will then be consistently applied throughout the competition.
  • Please use our online feedback if you wish to contribute any comments, etc.
IRON SCIENCE TEACHER Competition 2006
Contestant
SAMPLE ONLY
Topic
SAMPLE ONLY
The criteria below are guides only. Judges may use all of or parts of these criteria. Judges may also add other criteria that they deem relevant. Please discuss with your fellow judges on any additional criteria before using them. Do write down your comments to help compare notes with your fellow judges during the deliberation session later. The Points-scoring system is suggested but you may use a banding/shortlisting system instead.
Time Limit : 5-minute presentation + 1-minute Q&A.
TOPIC & CONTENTS
Max Points = 25
- Creativity/Ingenuity in choice of Topic
- Secret Ingredient choice to Topic
- Relevance of contents to Topic
- Accuracy of contents &/o research
-
-
Comments:


SCORED
SHOWMANSHIP & NOVELTY
Max Points = 35
- Planning – use of Secret Ingredient
- Resourcefulness / Ingenuity
- Confidence – nerves & flair
- Planning & practice
- Funny & entertaining
- Captivating
Comments:


SCORED
LEARNING & DIDACTIC VALUE
Max Points = 20
- Interesting information to convey
- Educational, pedagogical value
-
- Including / Emphasising Process Skills
-
-
Comments:


SCORED
AUDIENCE & YOUR UNDERSTANDING & RESPONSE
Max Points = 20
- Q&A Enthusiasm/Nerves
- Q&A Accuracy
-
- Audience Engagement/Rapport
-
- Keeping to time limit (5+1) minutes
Comments:


SCORED
Total Score
Max Points = 100
TOTAL SCORED

Click to Return to the Top of this Page.
Copyright © 2008 Science Centre Singapore. All Rights Reserved.
Privacy Statement | Terms of Use