HANDBOOK INFORMATION
Santa Clara Valley Science and Engineering Fair Association


   
HOME          STUDENTS          TEACHERS          JUDGES          VOLUNTEERS
 

********************
2014 Synopsys Championship

March 11-12, 2014
 
San Jose Convention Center

****************** 

Application Postmark
Deadlines

Oct 24, 2013  - all High School projects requiring SRC pre-approval
Jan 9, 2014 - all Middle School projects requiring SRC preapproval
Jan 30, 2014
- Deadline for all completed projects

  Handbook Information
 
Forms
  SRC
  Calendar
  FAQ
  2013 Newsletter 

 
Sponsors & Support
Special Awards
Board of Directors 
Contact Us 
Web Page Index

 

 

  •  

 

Handbook_2014 pdf file For Teachers and Students -  link
Application_2014 pdf file for Teachers and Students -  see FORMS page 
 Parental Approval Form for student teammates  - link

 Please print out these files, and mail the completed Application and Submission Fee to SCVSEFA at their mailing address.  Postmark deadlines can be found on the front page of the Handbook.

Additional handbook information may be accessed
using the following links:

Do I Need Scientific Review Committee Preapproval to Start? see page 4 of the handbook

Which Extra Forms Will I Need?  see page 5 of the handbook

Minimum  Standards for Project Acceptance

Winning Science Projects...Step by Step

Winning Engineering Projects... Step by Step 

Project Display Rules and Helpful Hints for Project Display


 

Roles and Responsibilities of Students and Adults

1) The Student Researcher(s)

The student researcher is responsible for all aspects of the research project including enlisting the aid of any required supervisory adults (Adult Sponsor, Qualified Scientist, etc.), obtaining necessary approvals (SRC, IRB, etc.), following the Rules & Guidelines of the Synopsys Championship, and performing the experimentation, engineering, data analysis, etc.

Scientific fraud and misconduct are not condoned at any level of research or competition. This includes plagiarism, forgery, use or presentation of other researcher’s work as one’s own, and fabrication of data. Fraudulent projects will fail to qualify for competition in the Synopsys Championship and the Intel ISEF. Society for Science & the Public reserves the right to revoke recognition of a project subsequently found to have been fraudulent.

 

2) The Adult Sponsor

An Adult Sponsor may be a teacher, parent, professor, and/or other professional scientist in whose lab the student is working. This individual must have a solid background in science and should have close contact with the student during the course of the project.

The Adult Sponsor is responsible for working with the student to evaluate any possible risks involved in order to ensure the health and safety of the student conducting the research and the humans and/or animals involved in the study. The Adult Sponsor must review the student’s Student Checklist (1A) and Research Plan to certify that that: a) experimentation is within local, state, and Federal laws and Intel ISEF rules; b) forms are completed by other required adults; and c) criteria for the Qualified Scientist adhere to those set forth below.

The Adult Sponsor must be familiar with the regulations that govern potentially dangerous research as they apply to a specific student project. These may include chemical and equipment usage, experimental techniques, research involving human and/or vertebrate animals, and cell cultures, microorganisms, or animal tissues. Regulations must be discussed with the student when completing the Research Plan. Some experiments involve procedures or materials that are regulated by state, federal or non-U.S. national laws. If not thoroughly familiar with the regulations, the Adult Sponsor should help the student enlist the aid of a Qualified Scientist.

The Adult Sponsor is responsible for ensuring the student’s research is eligible for entry in the Synopsys Championship.

 

3) The Qualified Scientist

A Qualified Scientist should have earned a doctoral/professional degree in a scientific discipline that relates to the student’s area of research. A PhD, MD or a master’s degree with additional experience and expertise in the student’s area of research is acceptable when approved by a Scientific Review Committee (SRC). The Qualified Scientist must be thoroughly familiar with local, state, and federal regulations that govern the student’s area of research.

The Qualified Scientist and the Adult Sponsor may be the same person, if that person is qualified as described above. A student may work with a Qualified Scientist in a city, state or country that is not where the student resides. In this case, the student must work locally with a Designated Supervisor (see below) who has been trained in the techniques to be applied by the student.

4) The Designated Supervisor

The Designated Supervisor is an adult who is directly responsible for overseeing student experimentation. The Designated Supervisor need not have an advanced degree, but must be thoroughly familiar with the student’s project, and must be trained in the student’s area of research. The Adult Sponsor may act as the Designated Supervisor.
*************************************************************************************************
 
Championship Judging Criteria
 CRITERIA FOR JUDGING PROJECTS 

 Science

 Experiments 

 Engineering Design
 Projects
 

Scientific Thought   (30 points individual, 25 points team)

  • Was the hypothesis clearly stated?
  • Was the experiment repeated several times?
  • Was the conclusion justified and properly drawn from experimental results?
  • Was sufficient preliminary research performed and applied?

Engineering Goal    (30 points individual, 25 points team)

  • Was the purpose/the engineering design criteria clearly stated?
  • What will be invented/ engineered?
  • Was there evidence of redesign and retest?
  • Were the engineering design criteria tested for each step of redesign?

Creativity    (30 points )

  • Is the project topic unique or the approach original?
  • Has the student used a novel approach for checking the hypothesis?

Creativity      (30 points )

  • Is the project topic unique or the approach original?
  • Has the student used a novel approach to test the engineering design criteria?

Thoroughness   (15 points)

 

  • Was adequate literary/online research conducted?
  • Did the student(s) look at different aspects of the problem – was it well planned?
  • Was there a project notebook?
  • Is the interpretation supported with data?
  • Are procedures and materials thoroughly documented?

Thoroughness   (15 points)

 

  • Was sufficient preliminary research performed and applied?
  • Did the student(s) look at different aspects of the problem – was it well planned?
  • Was there a project notebook?Are there adequate drawings, schematics, or other documentation?
  • Has each of the criteria been well tested?

Skill (15 points individual)

·         Does the student understand the subject?

·         Has the student used good laboratory skills – data gathering and analysis?

·         Did the student acknowledge mentoring or other help?

Skill (15 points individual)

·         Does the student understand the subject?

·         Has the student used good technical skills to arrive at the solution?

·         Did the student acknowledge mentoring or other help?

Clarity (10 points )

 

  • Is the abstract and project board accurate and understandable?
  • Was the oral presentation accurate and understandable?

Clarity (10 points )

 

  • Is the abstract and project board accurate and understandable?
  • Was the oral presentation accurate and understandable?
     

If a student is experimenting with live vertebrates and the animals, their behavior, or their habitat is influenced by humans, the Designated Supervisor must be knowledgeable about the humane care and handling of the animals.



 

 

Return to Home Page