CIC Judging Rubric - 2025/2026 .xlsx

	A	B	C	D
1	2025/2026 CIC Judging Rubric
2	Project Criteria	For challenge participants, the following criteria serve as a baseline for what is expected to qualify for the CIC Student Showcase. Participants can work individually or in groups. The size of the group is unlimited. For strong projects we recommend that they: 1. Be pre-recorded and submitted as a standard video file. (DV, MPEG-4, MP4, MPEG-2, MOV, and M4V are all acceptable formats). - Mandatory 2. Not exceed 4 minutes in length.- Mandatory 3. Display a climate change solution. 4. Be subtitled in English. 5. Not use copyrighted music, graphics or materials that may cause them to be flagged on streaming services. 6. Cite at least three sources in a format chosen by the educator. 7. Contain an opening title containing all participants’' first names, grades, instructor names (if applicable), and school/institution name. 8. Not include their last names on their submissions for privacy reasons. CAVU accepts no responsibility or liability for participants’ failure to adhere to this guideline
3	All CIC 2025/2026 submissions should be judged using the following criteria.
4	Use of Data & Efficacy	8-10 Points	4-7 Points	0-3 Points
5		Student shows a strong understanding of the topic and make a clear connection to climate change.	Student shows a basic understanding of the topic. A connection to climate change is made but is unclear	Students shows a poor understading of the topic. Students do not make a connection between their solution and climate change.
6		Student effectively proposes a climate change adaptation and/or mitigation solution	Student proposes an overly ambitious or inplausable climate change adaptation and/or mitigation solution.	Student proposes an inadequate climate change adaptation and/or mitigation solution and does not provide a defense of their idea's implementability.
7		Student demonstrates an understanding of scientific principles.	Student struggles to acertain scientific principles in their project.	Student does not understand the scientific principles for their project or completely omits them.
8		Project contains relevant data sources that address the project's intent clearly.	Project contains some generally relevant data sources, but leaves some assertions unsupported.	Project contains data sources that do not clearly connect with the project's intent.
9		Project contains proper citations from reliable sources.	Project contains proper citations, but may contain minor errors. Some sources are reliable.	Project does not contain citations or contains inomplete citations. Sources are unreliable.
10	Practicality & Benefit	8-10 Points	4-7 Points	0-3 Points
11		Proposed solution is achievable at suggested scale and scope.	Proposed solution is possible, but perhaps not at the suggested scale and scope.	Proposed solution is not achievable at suggested scale and scope.
12		References and methods are feasible.	References and methods are feasible, but could be difficult to impliment.	References and methods are unfeasible and could not be implemented without significant support.
13		The benefits of the proposed solution are clearly identified.	The benefits of the proposed solution are mentioned and a connection is made to the proposed solution.	The intended benefits of the proposed solution are not made clear.
14		Project is ambitious and innovative.	Project is satisfactory and functional.	Project is uninspired and mundane.
15	Storytelling	8-10 Points	4-7 Points	0-3 Points
16		Project appeals to emotion, logic and/or humor to deliver an effective and engaging message.	Project strives to appeal to emotion, logic and/or humor with some success.	Project either does not appeal to emotion, logic and/or humor or does so with minimal to no success.
17		Project delivers a compelling argument and substantiates its claims.	Project delivers a compelling argument, but has some difficulity substantiating its claims.	Does not deliver a compelling argument and does not substanitate its claims.
18		Project provides a clear and captivating narrative.	Project provides a coherant narrative, but is disorganized in parts and somewhat mundane.	Project does not provide a clear and captivating narritive.
19		Offers creative, out-of-the-box approaches to content delivery.	Offers conventional and established approaches to content delivery.	Does not have clear and coherant content delivery.
20	Organization & Design	8-10 Points	4-7 Points	0-3 Points
21		Regardless of participants' first language or tools at their disposal, video should consist of engaging footage/visuals that are carefully planned, thoughtfully composed and clearly support the overall message.	Regardless of participants' first language or tools at their disposal, the video consists of engaging footage/visuals but lacks careful planning and thoughtful composition. The footage/visuals support the overall message, though not always consistenly or effectively.	Regardless of participants' first language or tools at their disposal, the video does not consist of engaging footage/visuals and shows a lack of careful planning and thoughtful composition. The footage/visuals do not support the overall message.
22		Content is delivered in a clear and logical sequence with audio, and/or subtitles that are easy to follow.	Content and audio are clear, but are somewhat disorganized and/or difficult to undertand.	Content and audio are not clear and not easy to understand.
23		Student exhibits strong communication skills	Student has difficulty communicating , but ultimatly gets the message across successfully.	Student does not communicate effectively.
24		Student does not include or read blocks of text on the screen.	Student Intersperses blocks of text in the presentation.	Student includes blocks of text in the film and reads them off the screen.
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100