Criteria for Evaluating Entries
Each entry will be judged by a panel of experts in the field of informal science learning, marketing and communication, art, and education. While art evaluation is not a science, the following rubric should provide a meaningful guide to review the quality of your work prior to submission.
||It is clear which of the three main questions is being addressed in the art.
||It is unclear which of the three questions is being addressed in the art.
||The work appears to not address any of the three questions from the project.
|Creativity & Aesthetic Appeal
||Artwork is pleasing to the observer Use of color, lines, shapes, and mediums is innovative and/or effective.
||Artwork is somewhat pleasing to the observer. Use of color, lines, shapes, and mediums reflects some thought and innovation.
||Artwork is not pleasing to the observer. Little use of the basic tenets of the visual arts.
||Directly incorporates scientific concepts into presentation. Scientific content is consistent with current research.
||Indirectly uses scientific concepts in presentation. Some scientific content is inconsistent with current research.
||No use of scientific content in presentation or if present is erroneous.
|Limited use of Words
||Work contains a reasonable number of words that are clearly readable.
||Work contains either too many words or some words are illegible.
||Work has too many words and is illegible
||Presentation draws the viewer to the art.
||Presentation is somewhat interesting to the viewer.
||Presentation is easily ignored by viewer.
|Clarity of Message
||Communication and intent of art is clear.
||Communication and intent is somewhat clear.
||Communication and intent of art is unclear to the viewer.