3MT Judging Criteria

Each competitor will be assessed on the judging criteria listed here. Each criterion is equally weighted and has an emphasis on audience.

Judging Criteria

Each competitor will be assessed on the judging criteria listed below. Each criterion is equally weighted and has an emphasis on audience.

• Comprehension and Content: Did the presentation help the audience understand the research? Was the thesis topic and its significance communicated in language appropriate for an intelligent but non-specialized audience? This criterion is further outlined below:
  • Presentation provided clear background and significance to the research question.
  • Presentation clearly described the research strategy/design and the results/findings of the research.
  • Presentation clearly described the conclusions, outcomes, and impact of the research.
  • The presentation followed a clear and logical sequence.
  • The thesis topic, key results and research significance, and outcomes were communicated in language appropriate to a non-specialized audience.
  • The speaker avoided scientific jargon, explained terminology, and provided adequate background information to illustrate points.
  • The presenter spent adequate time on each element of their presentation – or the presenter elaborated for too long on one aspect.
• Engagement and Communication: Did the oration make the audience want to know more? This criterion is further outlined below:
  • The oration made the audience want to know more.
  • The oration was delivered clearly, and the language was appropriate for a non-specialized audience.
  • The presenter was careful not to trivialize or generalize their research.
  • The PowerPoint slide was well-defined and enhanced the presentation.
  • The presenter conveyed enthusiasm for their research and captured and maintained the audience’s attention.
  • The speaker had sufficient stage presence, eye contact and vocal range; maintained a steady pace, and have a confident stance?

Scoring

• First Place and Runner-Up Awards
  • Adjudicating panel determines the First Place, Runner-up, and Second Runner-up winners.
  • Judges give competitors scores for two categories (detailed above). Scores are tallied for each competitor.
  • Competitors with the top two scores are named First Place and Runner-up.
• People’s Choice Awards
  • An important aspect of the competition is the People’s Choice prize. Following all presentations, the audience is asked to vote on who they thought gave the most convincing 3MT presentation (based on their understanding of the criteria outline above).
  • An important aspect of the competition is the People’s Choice prize. Following all presentations, the audience is asked to vote on who they thought gave the most convincing 3MT presentation (based on their understanding of the criteria outline above). Audience members determine People’s Choice winner.
  • Each member of the audience gets one vote by using an Outlook survey form. A QR code will be printed for easy access.
  • The competitor with the most audience votes is the People’s Choice winner.
  • The People’s Choice winner cannot also win First Place or Runner-Up prize.

Judging Panel

• To provide every entrant with a similar experience, we will be taking the following into consideration when composing the judging panel.
• The panel will include seven judges:
  • two undergraduate/REU students, two senior graduate student, one non-academic staff, one post-doc, and one faculty member.
• The panel will be balanced based on demographic segmentation, academic/professional levels and/or positions, and studied discipline.
• Judges must declare any conflict of interest with presenters while ranking.
• Judges must provide each presenter written feedback. Forms will be provided.