Adjudication Criteria
This is the criteria for the 2010 Innovation Awards. Watch for the Call for submissions for the 2011 Awards to come.
Submission Name: ___________________________
Contact: ___________________________________
Institution Name: ___________________________
Basic Criteria
1. The submission is put forward by a BC public post-secondary institution and the lead nominee is employed by a BC public post-secondary institution.
Yes ___ No ___
2. The submission has been initiated, implemented, or completed prior to the nomination deadline date.
Yes ____ No____
3. The Nominee’s project has been in progress during the last 12 months.
Yes ___ No ___
4. All nomination materials, including support materials, received by September 25, 2009.
Yes ___ No ___
5. The review indicates that there is some indication of measurable impact.
Yes ___ No ___
6. There is some evidence the submission has improved teaching and learning or educational services at the nominee’s institution and/or beyond (could be improvement(s) in effectiveness, retention, productivity, efficiency, increased access for students, etc).
Yes ___ No ___
7. Nomination has met ALL basic criteria and is acceptable for judging.
Yes ___ No ___
Selection Rubric
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
| Efforts are unfocussed, sporadic; limited observation of measurable results other than participation. | Effort is significant but not outstanding; some observation of measurable results. | Genuine effort; clear attempt to excel; documented measurable results. | Extra effort; stands out from other projects; impressive measurable results. | Outstanding effort; outstanding measurable results. |
Evaluation
1. Evidence of an innovative, creative and sophisticated use of technology as a tool to transform education and/or learning.
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2. Level of initiative and leadership: – time, resources, etc.
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
3. Evidence that the work of this project (use of technology, collaboration/sharing, leaderships, support, etc.) led to positive measurable impact
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
4. Evidence that project has positively impacted multiple stakeholders.
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
5. Goals were clear in the rationale for the project
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
6. **Evidence of a measurable impact on student learning, engagement and/or retention.
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
7. Evidence of effectiveness, efficiency and sustainability within the classroom (broadly defined) or system.
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
8. **Scalability – the project has the potential to grow and benefit a system or an entire educational sector (school, college, university, board, province, etc.).
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
**Tie Breakers
Overall Score (Tally Points for each Criterion): ________________
Ranking:______________________________
Judge: _________________________ Date: _____________________