1. The evaluation shall be executed by a jury that is put together by professors who have a degree in the area of nature and environment.

2. The jury members will ask the students questions during the exhibition and shall evaluate their answers.

3. Jury members may not evaluate projects that originated from their own organization.

4. The projects will be evaluated on originality, quality of scientific value, scientific theories, clarity, and skill of the students.

The following points will be evaluated:

1. Sustainability of the project.

2. Understanding of the project.

3. Level of using scientific method.

4. Accuracy and detail of the research.

5. Whether experiments are used in the best possible way.

6. A project has to include laboratorial and theoretical work and can not be based on literature or information from internet only.

7. The project may not be devalued or overvalued because they were conducted in a professional laboratory.

Expositions / projects will be evaluated through the following points:

Firstly the jury will check if the project has a clear link with sustainability, e.g. contains the solution of a sustainanbility problem, or is made in a sustainable way, etc. Only projects that meet this requirement will be nominated to participate in INESPO.

1. Originality (20 points)

1.1 Does the project show originality?

1.2 Questions that are asked?

1.3 Approach to solving the problem?

1.4 Analysis of the information?

1.5 Interpretation of the information?

1.6 Use of equipment?

2. Scientific Reasoning (30 points)

2.1 Is the problem explained clearly?

2.2 Is there a procedural plan for obtaining a solution?

2.3 Are the variables clearly recognized and defined?

2.4 If check-ups were necessary, were they appropriately used?

2.5 Does the project meet the original goal?

2.6 How well has the problem been addressed in the project?

2.7 Is the student aware of other approaches or theories concerning the project?

2.8 Has there been enough time spent on the project?

2.9 Is the student acquainted with the scientific literature of appropriate areas in the project?

3 Clarity and Thoroughness (30 points)

3.1 How well does the finalist discuss his/her project? How well does the finalist explain the goal, procedure and conclusions?   

3.2 Is the written material matching the understanding of the research of the finalist and the team?

3.3 Does the student have a Project Data Book?

3.4 Are the important phases of the project presented in an orderly fashion?

3.5 How clear is the presented information?

3.6 How well are the results presented?

3.7 How well does the project banner elucidate the project?

4. Skill / Agility

4.1 Does the student have the necessary skills that are required for receiving information that supports the project?(Ex.: Laboratorial skills? Computational skills? Observation skills? Design skills? Presentation skills?)

· The results are confidential until they are announced at the award ceremony.