A CLARIFICATION OF THE ENVIROTHON JUDGING SHEET

In order to get more consistent judging the following guidelines have been prepared.   In general the point values can be interpreted as follows (see a more detailed analysis for each category below):
0-Not at all.
1-Major misconceptions and gaps; ineffective, inadequate, inappropriate.
2-Some misconceptions and flaws; minimally effective, somewhat appropriate.
3-Complete and accurate; effective, adequate and appropriate.
4-Complete, very detailed, logical, ideas well supported and well organized; highly effective, all details appropriate.
5-Profound, in-depth, done in an insightful manner; extremely effective, points to a most effective strategy.


AN EXPANSION OF EACH SECTION OF THE JUDGING SHEET:

PART I: PREPARATION AND PRESENTATION OF THE PLAN (30 POINTS MAX)

A.  How well did the presentation address or identify:

  1. The interrelationship between the environment, natural resources, and different natural resource management strategies?
    0-Not at all
    1-Major flaws or misconceptions in the interrelationships
    2-Identified most of the key interrelationships but had some misconceptions or gaps
    3-Identified key interrelationships appropriately and adequately, along with appropriate management strategies.
    4-Presents major and minor interrelationships and management strategies in a clear and effective manner with supporting evidence.
    5-Addresses all interrelationships and develops a most effective combination of management  strategies in a logical, insightful and well defended manner addressing all aspects of the problem.
  2. All the different players/interest groups affected by the problem?
    0-No players identified
    1-Only one or two players identified with major flaws in their interests or who is affected.
    2-Most of the players and their interests presented with some misconceptions or gaps.
    3-All the major players identified appropriately with their viewpoints accurately expressed.
    4-Major and minor players identified and their interests are accurately expressed in a well organized manner.
    5-Very comprehensive analysis of the players and their needs and interests,done in a well organized and insightful manner clearly conveying the complexity of the issue. Done in a clear and very logical presentation.

The judging criteria for section 3-5 is similar.  Use the following criteria for these sections:  3-5.  How well did the presentation address or identify (3-The major natural resources areas (aquatics, forestry, soils, wildlife), 4-current issues, 5-the specific environmental problem (the oral problem))?

0-None at all
1-Many of the issues involved are not covered or major misconceptions in addressing these issues.
2-All main issues (where appropriate) are addressed but there are misconceptions or gaps in how they are addressed.
3-All key issues (where appropriate) are addressed in an adequate manner.
4-Major and minor issues affected (where appropriate) are addressed in a detailed and  appropriate and logical manner with support information.
5-All major and minor issues affected (where appropriate) are addressed in a multidisciplinary manner.  The analysis is profound, in-depth, done in an insightful manner.  All issues addressed are done utilizing the most effective strategies.

B.     Were references and resources cited in the team presentation?

0-None cited
1-Only one or two sources are cited or citations are inappropriate for their use.
2-Several resources cited however there are gaps in the citations
3-Four or five resources cited and used appropriately.
4-Adequate resources cited from several different viewpoints supporting the major points of the presentation
5-All points supported with citations from many different viewpoints.  Citations and resources used shows in-depth research and a desire to investigate all major areas of concern. Citations listed in an organized fashion.


PART II APPLICATION OF DATA (30 POINT MAXIMUM)

The format of the judging in section A-D is very similar.  For sections A-D judges can use the following criteria: (A-political, B-ecological/environmental, C-economic, D-social and cultural issues.)  A-D. The team demonstrated a solid understanding of (A-political, B-ecological/environmental, C-economic, D-social and cultural) issue(s) related to the problem.
    0-No (A-political, B-ecological/environmental, C-economic, D-social and cultural issues) issues 
    considered.
    1-Only a few considerations are mentioned or their understanding of the issues has major flaws.
    2-Most of the major considerations are presented and addressed, however there are some
    misconceptions or gaps in the presentation.
    3-All the major considerations are identified and addressed in an appropriate manner.
    4-A detailed presentation of the considerations is given in a well supported and organized
    manner.  A high level of understanding is also exhibited in the question and answer period.
    5-The analysis of the issues is very complete, in-depth.  These issues are presented in well
    thought-out and insightful manner which shows a complete understanding of the considerations
    and how they should be addressed. A high level of understanding is also exhibited in the          
    questions and answer period.

E.  The team presented ONE viable solution to the problem addressing the resource issue.
    0-No plan presented.
    1-The plan has major flaws and is inadequate or inappropriate.

    2-The plan presented has numerous minor flaws with gaps in the topics it addresses.

    3-The plan addresses all the key concerns and provides a reasonable solution to the problem.

    4-The plan provided covers the concerns of the problem very completely, and is presented in

a detailed, logical and well organized manner.

    5-The plan provided addresses all the aspects of the problem in an elegant, in-depth manner.

The solution developed is insightful and is very effective, and efficient.


    

F.  Solution in the presentation has potential to be applied or implemented with long term
    sustainability to natural resources.
    0-No solution is provided.
    1-The solution presented is unrealistic or has major misconceptions or flaws.
    2-The solutions presented is somewhat workable but contains some misconceptions or flaws.
    3-The solution presented is workable and presents solutions to short-term and long-term
    problems.  The solution is adequate and accurate.  It covers all the major areas of concerns.
    4-The solution presented is very complete and realistic.  It provides for the long-term
    sustainability of natural resources cost effectively and addresses all concerns.
    5-The solution presented provides an insightful, multidisciplinary approach to the problem.
    All natural resource concerns are dealt with in a manner which allows for short-term concerns 
    and long-term sustainability.  The solution proposed clearly supports how it addresses all the
    concerns by utilizing the most effective alternative.


PART III QUALITY OF THE PRESENTATION (25 POINTS MAXIMUM)

A.  Presentation was well organized with a clear introduction and strong conclusion.
    0-No introduction or conclusion.
    1-Introduction and/or conclusion very hard to follow with very little organization to the
    presentation.
    2-Introduction and/or conclusion are somewhat difficult to follow.  Minimal organization in the
    rest of the presentations.
    3-Clear introduction and strong conclusions.  Adequate organization throughout the 
    presentation.
    4-Clear introduction and strong conclusion.  The presentation has a very logical flow and is
    very well organized.
    5-Excellent organization throughout.  The presentation is very easy to follow and compelling.  
    The organization enhances the understanding to keep one's attention throughout the presentation.

B.  Participants enhanced the presentation (eye contact, gestures, voice inflection, originality,
    exhibited professionalism, etc.).
    0-No attempt to engage the audience-monotone voice, no eye contact, etc.
    1-Very limited presentation skills for a majority of the presenters leading to an ineffective
    presentation.
    2-Several of the presenters have limited presentation skills.
    3-All the presenters do an adequate job of presentations using the skills listed above.
    4-All the presenters utilize good presentations skills leading to an effective presentation.
    5-Extremely effective presentation skills used appropriately in a variety of ways leading to a
    creative and highly effective presentation.

C.  Visual aids were used to make major points and show conclusions. (Visual aids should be
    correct, eye appealing, readable, neat, etc.)
    0-No visuals.
    1-Visuals very unreadable, not neat, or contain major flaws in the information.
    2-Visuals contain minor flaws or do not convey the major points or conclusions properly.
    3-Visuals convey the major points and conclusions in an adequate manner, no spelling errors,
    readable, neat and appealing.
    4-Visuals convey the major points and conclusions (including all the features listed above) in a
    particularly eye-catching manner.
    5-Creative and very effective use of visuals to convey the major points and conclusions.  
    Visuals greatly enhance the presentation and are used in a highly appropriate manner.

D.  Questions were answered logically and concisely by all team members participating.
    0-No questions answered.
    1-Answers contain many major misconceptions or gaps.
    2-Answers contain some misconceptions or flaws.
    3-Answers are accurate and adequate. All the team members are involved in answering the
    questions.
    4-Answers given by all the members are concise and organized in a logical manner.  All the 
    details are appropriate.
    5-Questions are answered in an insightful manner (as well as being logical and concise).  The
    answers show an in-depth understanding of the material.

E.   Appearance of the team was professional and appropriate for the conditions of the presentation.
    0-No attempt was made to give a professional appearance.
    1-Only one or two of the presenters were dressed appropriate with shirts tucked in and no hats
    2-Three or four of the presenters were dressed appropriate with shirts tucked in and no hats.
    3-All the presenters were dressed appropriate with shirts tucked in, however did wear hats.
    4-All the presenters were dressed appropriate with shirts tucked in and no hats.
    5-Extremely appropriate in a variety of ways leading to a highly effective presentation.


PART IV REQUIRED ELEMENTS (15 POINTS)

A.  Add up to five points for team member participation in presentation. (Each team member gets 1 point for equal oral participation in the presentation. (For each team member: 0-no participation, 1/2-limited participation, 2-full participation.)

B.  Add up to ten points if the presentation was accomplished in the allotted time scale and the team made effective use of their time. (2 pt.-less than 1 minute, 4 pts.-2-3 mins., 6 pts.-4-6 mins., 8 pts.-6-7 mins., 10 pts.-8-10 mins.)