Surawiwat School Conference

          1. The project presentation will be conducted as an oral presentation in a designated room. Each group will be evaluated by three judges. The presentation, delivered in English, must not exceed 15 minutes, divided as follows:
                    1) Project presentation: No more than 10 minutes.
                    2) Question-and-answer session: Approximately 5 minutes. The total time for both the presentation and the Q&A session with the judges will be approximately 15 minutes.

          2. Presenters must upload their project presentation file in PDF format to the central computer at the front of the room between 10:00 AM and 10:30 AM on the presentation day.

          3. Scoring will focus on qualitative assessment, with scores assigned on a scale of 4, 3, 2, and 1 for each criterion.

          4. The evaluation criteria consist of two main areas:
                    1) Scientific Project Overview
                    2) Presentation media and delivery. The detailed criteria for each area are outlined in the table.

Criteria	Scores (4 3 2 and 1)	Percentage (%)
Overall Project Overview		70
1. The research background and significance are clearly identified, and the research objectives are explicitly defined.		10
2. The research process is aligned with the objectives, adheres to principles of mathematics and science, and includes a clear summary of key findings.		15
3. The research findings are accurate and appropriate, with a comprehensive summary of the content.		15
4. Creativity and innovation in the project are demonstrated, with the development of new knowledge or innovations. The work is distinctive and engaging.		10
5. Immediate challenges are effectively addressed, questions are responded to in a clear and focused manner, and active participation of team members in answering questions is demonstrated.		20
Media and Presentation		70
6. The presentation media are accurate and consistent with scientific principles.		10
7. The presentation format is appropriate for the audience and time constraints, engaging, and organized in a clear and logical sequence.		10
8. The presenters demonstrate confidence and enthusiasm, use polite and easily understandable language, enunciate clearly, communicate in an academic manner, and listen attentively to others' opinions.		10
Total scores		100

          5. Award Criteria: Details are as follows:

                    Gold Medal: Projects scoring in percentile 75 or higher in their category.

                    Silver Medal: Projects scoring between percentile 50 and 74 in their category.

                    Bronze Medal: Projects scoring between percentile 25 and 49 in their category.

                    Certificate of Participation: Projects scoring below percentile 24 in their category.

          6. In each project category, the best project presentation is selected for the "The Best Oral Presentation" award.

          7. The judges' decision is final.

#	4 points	3 points	2 points	1 points
Overview of the scientific project
1. The consistency between the title, background, and objectives of the research project.	The title, background, and objectives of the project are clearly consistent with each other.	The title, background, and objectives of the project are generally consistent with each other.	The title, background, and objectives of the project are not fully consistent with each other.	The title, background, and objectives of the project are completely inconsistent with each other.
2. The accuracy of the research procedures according to the principles of research methodology and the appropriateness of the methods used for data analysis.	The research methodology is appropriate, accurate, and aligned with the objectives, providing a clear overview of the project.	The research methodology is appropriate, accurate, and aligned with the objectives, providing a fairly clear overview of the project.	The research methodology is appropriate and accurate, but it is not aligned with the objectives of the project.	The research methodology is inappropriate, inaccurate, and not aligned with the objectives.
3. The appropriateness and accuracy of the research analysis and interpretation of the research results according to academic principles.	The research findings are accurate and supported by empirical evidence, referencing reliable sources, and employing appropriate and correct statistical methodologies.	The research findings are mostly accurate and supported by empirical evidence, referencing reliable sources, and employing appropriate and correct statistical methodologies.	The research findings contain some inaccuracies, with limited references to reliable sources, and some errors in the use of statistical methodologies.	The research findings contain significant inaccuracies, with no references to reliable sources and no use of statistical methodologies.
4. The creativity and innovation in conducting the project, including the creation of new innovations or knowledge.	The project is engaging, demonstrating creativity and innovation, and contributes new knowledge or innovations that can be practically applied.	The project is engaging, demonstrating creativity and innovation, and contributes new knowledge or innovations.	The project is not particularly engaging, but it does demonstrate some creativity and innovation.	The project is unengaging and does not demonstrate creativity or innovation.
5. Responding to questions	The presenter is able to answer questions accurately, address the key issues, and explain the answers clearly.	The presenter is able to answer questions correctly in most cases and explain the answers clearly.	The presenter is able to answer some questions correctly, but the explanations are not very clear.	The presenter is able to answer some questions correctly or not at all, and the explanations are not very clear.
Presentation materials
6. The creativity and accuracy of the presentation materials.	The materials are creative and effectively enhance the understanding of the entire content. The audience can easily comprehend the information presented, with the use of symbols and references that adhere to scientific principles.	The materials demonstrate a certain level of creativity and contribute to the understanding of the entire content to a certain extent. The audience can reasonably comprehend the information presented, with the use of symbols and references that are generally consistent with scientific principles.	The materials are not very creative, but they still contribute reasonably well to the audience's understanding. Some symbols and references used are incorrect according to scientific principles.	The materials lack creativity and do not enhance the audience's understanding. The use of symbols and references is entirely incorrect according to scientific principles.
7. The presentation format	The content is organized in a logical manner, with clear connections between each section that enhance the overall understanding.	The content is organized fairly well, with good connections between each section.	The content is organized in a way that is difficult to follow, but the connections between sections are still maintained.	The content is not organized in a logical sequence, making it difficult to understand, and the sections are not effectively connected.
8. The presentation overall delivery	The presentation is clear, concise, and well-reasoned. It is consistent, and the audience can easily follow and understand the entire content.	The presentation is relatively clear, concise, and well-reasoned. It is consistent, and the audience can mostly follow and understand the content easily.	The presentation is not clearly explained or reasoned, but the audience can still follow the content and grasp it to some extent.	The presentation is not clearly explained or reasoned, and the audience is unable to follow or understand the content.