Surawiwat School Conference

          1. Projects are to be presented as Poster presentations, with each group being evaluated by a panel of three committee members. The presentation time for each committee member shall not exceed 15 minutes, divided into: 1) a project presentation in English not exceeding 10 minutes, and 2) a Q&A session of approximately 5 minutes (in Thai or English at the presenter's discretion). Total time for the presentation and Q&A is approximately 15 minutes per committee member.

          2. Each committee will conduct evaluations separately according to the provided schedule. Each committee will assess approximately 5-7 projects, allocating 15 minutes per project/person.

          3. Required student submissions include: (1) Abstract (2) Display poster for the poster board.

          4. Evaluation emphasizes qualitative assessment, with scoring levels of 4, 3, 2, and 1 for each criterion.

          5. Evaluation criteria comprise two main areas: Area 1 - Overall Science Project, and Area 2 - Media and Presentation, with detailed evaluation points as shown in the table:

Evaluation Criteria	Score (4 3 2 and 1)	Weight (%)
Overall Science Project		50
1. Abstract clarity and comprehensive coverage of key research points.		10
2. Clear research/problem statement and rationale aligned with a topic with well-defined research objectives.		10
3. Research methodology aligned with objectives, adherence to mathematical and scientific principles, and with clear conclusions.		10
4. Valid and suitable research results, and with comprehensive content summary.		10
5. Demonstrate effective critical-thinking during discussion, provide precise responses to questions, and show effective team participation in Q&A.		10
Media and Presentation		50
6. Presentation materials demonstrate scientific accuracy		15
7. Presentation materials effectively communicate and comprehensively cover project content.		15
8. Demonstrate project creativity, innovation or new knowledge contribution, project distinctiveness and appeal.		10
9. Presenter confidence, enthusiasm, appropriate academic language, clear articulation, and receptive to feedback		10
Total Score		100

          6. In cases where fewer than three committee members are present for a project evaluation, scores will be proportionally adjusted by multiplying by 3/2 and rounded accordingly.

          7. There are no predetermined point deduction criteria; deductions are at the discretion of the committee.

          8. Poster Popular Vote Award: All Poster presentations are eligible to participate. Each registered participant is entitled to vote in each of the 6 categories, with one vote per category.

          9. Award criteria are as follows:

                    a : Gold Medal: Scores in the top 75th percentile or higher within the category

                    b : Silver Medal: Scores in the 50th-74th percentile within the category

                    c : Bronze Medal: Scores in the 25th-49th percentile within the category

                    d : Certificate of Participation: Scores below the 25th percentile within the category

          10. The Committee’s ruling is final and definite.

#	4 points	3 points	2 points	1 points
Overall Project Overview
1. Abstract's Alignment with Title and Key Project Elements	Abstract clearly demonstrates the project's key points and aligns well with the title	Abstract demonstrates the project's key points fairly clearly and aligns with the title	Abstract demonstrates the project's key points but is unclear and lacks alignment with the title	Abstract fails to demonstrate the project's key points
2. Coherence between Title, Background, and Research Objectives	Title, background, and research objectives demonstrate strong and clear coherence	Title, background, and research objectives demonstrate moderate coherence	Title, background, and research objectives demonstrate limited coherence	Title, background, and research objectives demonstrate no coherence
3. Research Methodology Accuracy and Data Analysis Appropriateness	Research methodology is appropriate, accurate, aligned with objectives, and clearly presents the project overview	Research methodology is appropriate, accurate, aligned with objectives, and presents a fairly clear project overview	Research methodology is appropriate and accurate but misaligned with project objectives	Research methodology is inappropriate, inaccurate, and misaligned with objectives
4. Research Analysis and Interpretation Accuracy	Research results are accurate and supported by empirical evidence, with reliable source citations and appropriate statistical methodology	Research results are mostly accurate and supported by empirical evidence, with reliable source citations and appropriate statistical methodology	Research results contain some errors, with limited reliable source citations and some statistical methodology errors	Research results contain numerous errors, lack reliable source citations, and show no statistical methodology
5. Question Response Capability	Presenter provides accurate, precise answers with clear explanations	Presenter provides mostly accurate answers with clear explanations	Presenter provides partially accurate answers with unclear explanations	Presenter provides inaccurate answers or none, with unclear explanations
Presentation Media
6. Media Creativity and Accuracy	Media demonstrates creativity, effectively enhances understanding of all content, is easily comprehensible, and uses correct scientific symbols and references	Media shows fair creativity, enhances understanding to some degree, is reasonably comprehensible, and uses correct scientific symbols and references	Media shows limited creativity but adequately supports audience understanding, with some errors in scientific symbols and references	Media lacks creativity, fails to enhance audience understanding, with incorrect scientific symbols and references throughout
7. Presentation Media Format	Content is appropriately sequenced with clear connections between sections	Content is fairly well sequenced with good connections between sections	Content sequencing is difficult to follow, but sections maintain some connection	Content lacks sequence, and sections are disconnected
8. Project Innovation and Creativity	Project is engaging, demonstrates creative initiative, and presents new knowledge or innovation with practical applications	Project is engaging, demonstrates creative initiative, and presents new knowledge or innovation	Project has limited appeal but shows some creative initiative	Project lacks appeal and shows no creative initiative
9. Presenter's Communication Skills	Presents and explains rationale clearly, concisely, and coherently; audience can easily follow and understand all content	Presents and explains rationale fairly clearly and coherently; audience can follow and understand most content	Presents and explains rationale unclearly; audience can follow and partially understand	Presents and explains rationale unclearly; audience cannot follow or understand