Skip to Main Content
It looks like you're using Internet Explorer 11 or older. This website works best with modern browsers such as the latest versions of Chrome, Firefox, Safari, and Edge. If you continue with this browser, you may see unexpected results.

HBLL 2023 College of Life Sciences Undergraduate Poster Competition: Judging Criteria

Poster Competition Judging Criteria

POSTER DESIGN JUDGING CRITERIA

(Score 1 – low, 5 – high in each category)

   Organization

  1. Poster has clearly defined sections with labels, such as hypotheses, objectives, methods, results, and conclusions.
  2. Each sub-heading has no more than one short paragraph. Bullet point paragraphs are acceptable.
  3. Organization is logical with a clear flow of ideas from one heading to the next.
  4. Graphics and other visuals are used to draw the reader to the most important messages of the poster and provide balance to the amount of text.
  5. Posters adhere to the size standard (no more than 50 inches wide by 50 inches tall).

   Appearance

  1. Text font and size are appropriate for the size and format of the poster. Words are easy to read from an appropriate distance (3-5 feet).
  2. Language used in each section is clear, concise, and easy to understand. Poster is free from undefined jargon.
  3. Proper grammar, spelling, and punctuation are used.
  4. Visuals are attractive and of high quality.
  5. Poster is neat and visually appealing.

   Content

  1. Focus is on a well-defined problem.
  2. There is a clear and concise statement of the immediate problem.
  3. No unnecessary visuals are included (visuals do not detract from the main message of the poster).
  4. Visuals contain sufficient information for concise and easy interpretation of crucial information.
  5. The poster stands alone without any verbal explanation.
  6. Conclusions are supported by the results.

 

OPEN HOUSE PRESENTATION JUDGING CRITERIA

(Score 1 – low, 5 – high in each category)

  1. The length of the presentation was appropriate for the audience's level of knowledge (approximately 2 to 3 minutes).
  2. The presentation style was engaging and professional (e.g., presenters were approachable, enthusiastic, etc.).
  3. The presenters described their research at a general academic level (e.g., no undefined jargon, etc.).
  4. The presenters explained the significance of their research (e.g., why their research is important and how it is contributing to their field of study, etc.).
  5. The presenters engaged with the audience and answered questions clearly and thoughtfully.

 

THREE-MINUTE VIDEO JUDGING CRITERIA

(Score 1 – low, 5 – high in each category)

  1. The length of the video presentation was between 2 ½ and 3 minutes (points will be deducted for videos outside of this time range).
  2. The presentation style was engaging and professional (e.g., presenters were approachable, enthusiastic, etc.).
  3. The presenters described their research at a general academic level (e.g., no undefined jargon, etc.).
  4. The presenters explained the significance of their research (e.g., why their research is important and how it is contributing to their field of study, etc.).