- Site Feedback
- IDEA Sites
- Digital Freedoms
- International Justice
- 2012 Presidential Debates Guide
- Asia Youth Forum
- Big Apple Cogers
- Debate Changing Europe
- Debate in the Neighborhood
- Debating and Producing Media
- Debating the Future of Youth in Africa and Europe
- Dialogue without borders
- Digital Debating Blog
- Free Speech Debate
- Global Youth Forum
- Global Debate and Public Policy Challenge
- International Public Policy Forum
- Online Mentoring
- Securing Liberty Series
- Youth and Sports Mega-Events
- League of Young Voters
Evaluation Criteria for Task One: The Policy Memorandum
Each policy memorandum will be double graded according to the evaluation criteria below. The Organiser will establish the minimum score required to continue to round two of the Challenge after the evaluation of all submissions is completed. Up to 200 participants can continue to the next stage. See the Rules and Challenge Tasks for details. If you have questions regarding the Evaluation Criteria, please send an email to email@example.com.
You will not be penalised if you are not a native English speaker. Judges will use the evaluation criteria below to assess each student’s contribution, which focuses on the ability to develop analysis and use evidence to support arguments, not language ability.
Evaluation criteria for the first task (“policy memorandum”)
Evidence-based analysis and argumentation
The different elements within the criteria are important for you to keep in mind. You will be graded based on how well you meet the elements which will collectively determine your overall grade for each criterion.
We provide general pointers below to make the judging process clearer. Please note, however, that judges will use their qualitative judgment in determining the exact score of your submissions. Judges will provide written feedback on your memos, explaining the given score for each criterion, what they see as the strengths of your paper, and provide brief feedback for improvement.
“Evidence-based analysis and argumentation” (maximum 40 points)
If you base your memorandum solely on your opinion and do not use any evidence to support your claims, your score is likely to remain below 10 points. Similarly, if you fail to define the problem based on one of the four scenarios and do not consider any alternative policies in your policy memo, the judges cannot give you a score beyond 20 points for this criterion. To achieve more than 30 points, you will need to demonstrate innovative thinking, consider all relevant stakeholders when discussing the impact of your policy, and make sure that your argumentation is easy to follow -- meaning you pull together the logic of your argument together in making your case.
“Recommendations” (maximum 20 points)
At minimum your recommendations should address the problem highlighted in the policy memo. If your recommendations are generic or fall outside the realistic domain of competence of the government you are addressing, your score is likely to remain below 10 points. To achieve a higher score, make sure to recommend policies which can feasibly be adopted by your addressee.
“Structure” (maximum 20 points)
If your memo lacks one of the structural elements (title, problem definition, contrasting of counterarguments, discussion of impact, and policy recommendations) and you do not offer a short summary at the end, your score is likely to remain below 10 points. Excellent structure means that you know how to balance the length of the aforementioned structural elements.
“Citation” (maximum 20 points)
If you do not use APA embedded citation style or your sources are not reliable (e.g. from disreputable sources) your score is likely to remain below 10 points. Hence, make sure your citations refer to reliable sources and that you use the APA embedded citation style. Please visit the Writing Guidelines for more information on how to use APA embedded citation.
|Evaluation Criteria Matrix Task One.doc||47 KB|
|Evaluation Criteria Matrix Task One.pdf||288.26 KB|