The innovative ideas and use of scientific methodology are the primary basis of a good project but one has to prove his/her communication skills also to make others listen and understand his/her findings.

1. Evaluation Criteria

1. Originality of idea and concept: A unique or novel project idea which attempts to answer a specific question (a hypothesis driven by curiosity to understand any concept related to focal theme). The idea should not be an exact replication of model projects as printed in the Activity Guide Book. A proper explanation of origin of the idea may be enquired by the evaluator(s).
2. Relevance of the project to the theme: This section focuses on how the project is relevant and linked to the focal theme/sub-theme.
3. Scientific understanding of the issue: Refers to the extent of knowledge (scientific area, basic principles and concepts etc.) the child scientist has in relation to the project idea.
4. Data collection: Systematic collection of information (qualitative and/or quantitative) using relevant tools and methods – experimental data, interviews, surveys (socio-economic/ecological), case studies etc. Sample size should be statistically relevant and sufficient to support the issues under study.
5. Analysis: This includes tabulation, categorization/classification, and simple statistics as applicable to the study.
6. Experimentation/validation: Conducting of experiments/field study and validation applying simple methods of science. Experiment need not be very sophisticated but could be simple, self-developed and inexpensive too. Adequate importance should be given to the rigour of the process.
7. Interpretation and problem solving attempt: To what extent the group has addressed the proposed hypothesis and objectives through the project.
8. Team work: It refers to work division, cooperation and sharing between and beyond the group.
9. Background correction: In this case the background of the children is verified like geographical ocation of their school, village, town etc. in relation to infrastructure, information and other input related facilities available with them. The logic is that children from difficult geographical situation must get some weightage in comparison to the children from advantageous geographical location. Non-school going children and children with disabilities also qualify for the weightage under this criterion.
10. Report and presentation: Written Report and Oral Presentation are to be evaluated separately. Reports are to be evaluated considering clarity of the objectives, design of methodology, experimental or survey design, systematic presentation of data, tabulation of data, graphical representation and the clarity with which the study has been documented and explained. A Log Book (actually a daily diary) is mandatory and should be authenticated with the signature of the guide on a regular basis. The cover page of the Report and Log Book should carry the title of the project, names of the child scientists, the district and the state, in English/Hindi. Oral presentation would be evaluated on the basis of the interaction with the evaluators, presentation of charts/posters, log book and any other supporting material.
11. Follow up action plan (only for State level): The child scientists should try to find out scientific solution to the identified problem. Has the group conveyed the message to the community? How was it communicated? Will effort continue to involve more people till the problem is solved? Was any action plan suggested? Credit shall be given for similar efforts.

2. Evaluators

1. As the participating children are budding scientists from the age group of 10 to 17 years with limited access to knowledge centres and from different socio-economic backgrounds, they need to be assessed with care. Having understood their limitations, capabilities and capacities, the evaluators must provide them with constructive inputs, positive feed-back and encouragement so that they feel enriched. Evaluators should give suggestions for improvement/refinement of the project or any additional works that they may carry out.
2. Evaluators need to appreciate and value the efforts, innovativeness and confidence of the participating child scientists and ensure that their unbiased assessment will work as a guiding light for future endeavours of the child scientists and each one feels intellectually rich and more confident.
3. Evaluators should evaluate the projects on the basis of subject matter and scientific content and not influenced by the gadgetry or models used or oratory skills of the participants. They should avoid unwarranted comments and comparing the works of the child scientists with those carried out by senior researchers.
4. Evaluators should avoid creating any distraction to the child scientists while presentation is going on. They should not consider it as a test of what the participating child does not know, rather, they make efforts to know what the child scientist know about the subject area as he/she is dealing with. Decision of the evaluators are final & no complaints will be entertained.

Criteria for Evaluators

1. The first priority for evaluators will be their expertise and experience in subjects related to Focal Theme and /or Sub Themes having authoritative and field based knowledge so that they are fully capable of assessing projects. It would be ideal if the pool of evaluators is enriched by inducting Ex- Child Scientists working in the field of academia who are involved in academia or pursuing research/ post-graduation in Science, Technology, Engineering or subject relating to the Focal theme.
2. Ideally, the evaluators should have prior exposure to the Children’s Science Congress or otherwise would have worked Child-centric projects and having exposure to working with children.
3. Evaluators should not be members of any state academic or organizing committee for that particular year.
4. Parents of children participating in CSC in the ensuing year cannot act as an evaluator at any level.
5. Guides of projects participating in CSC, also, cannot act as Evaluator in that particular year.