Republic of the Philippines

Department of Education
Region IV-A (CALABARZON)
Schools Division Office of Cavite Province
District of the City of Carmona
ANGELO L. LOYOLA SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL

Faculty of Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics

PROPOSAL/OUTLINE RESEARCH EVALUATION TOOL

Proposed
Research Title:

(___) Life Science

(___) Physical Science
Category: (___) Mathematics and Computational Science
(___) Robotics and Intelligent Machine
(___) Innovation Expo
Group: (___) Team 1 (___) Team 2 (___) Team 3 (___) Team 4
Date of
Presentation:

Role Name of Research Member Rating on Oral Presentation

Lead: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Co-Lead 1: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Co-Lead 2: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Member: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Member: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Member: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Member: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Member: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Member: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Member: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Member: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Member: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Member: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Member: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Member: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Member: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Member: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Member: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Member: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Member: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
 Criteria Points
Originality and Innovation (20 points)
1. Does the project show originality and innovation in terms of:
a. the proposed approach to solving the problem?
b. the research design?
c. the research methodology?
d. the construction or design of new or improved equipment?
2. Does the research project consider an issue, problem, or gap that previous
research projects do not address?
3. Does the project transform an idea or solution into a creative, unique, and
major improvement in current technology, processes, products,
techniques, or designs?
Technical / Scientific Merit (20 points)
1. Is the problem stated explicitly and concisely?
2. Is the approach to solve the problem supported by relevant, critical, and
logically related literature (scientific basis, theoretical framework, or
mathematical theory)?
3. Does the finalist or team cite a sufficient number of credible related
literatures to provide a solid understanding and prerequisite information
for readers to better understand the research project?
4. Does the finalist or team recognize the project's limitations?
5. Is the analysis of background information conducted with depth?
or Engineering Goals (20 points)
1. Does the project have a clear objective?
2. Is the objective relevant to the potential user's needs?
3. Is the solution workable? Is it acceptable to the potential user? Is it
economically feasible?
4. Can the solution be utilized successfully in the design or construction of
an end product?
5. Is the solution a significant improvement over previous alternatives or
applications?
6. Is the solution tested for performance under standardized protocols?
Community Connection and Impact (20 points)
1. Does the project address a relevant research issue (e.g., food safety, water
conservation, cybersecurity, traffic/road congestion, health, disaster
mitigation, agriculture, and the environment)?
2. Does the student clearly define the extent to which the research project
can potentially benefit and meet the needs of society?
3. Does the proposed solution provide value, effectiveness, and efficiency to
its target sector?
Excellence of Method (20 points)
1. Are the research methods supported by relevant and credible related
literature?
2. Is there an efficient, thorough, valid, and reliable procedural plan to attain
the research objectives?
3. Are the variables clearly identified and defined?
4. If controls are necessary, does the student recognize their need and plan
to use them correctly? For extraneous variables, does the student identify
methods to monitor and keep these variables constant?
5. Are the critical elements (e.g., treatment, techniques, protocols,
replications, trials) of the research design and methods appropriately
developed?
6. Does the project specifically and clearly explain what and how
quantitative and qualitative data will be collected?
 7. Does the project recognize ethical or safety issues and have adequate
plans to manage risks?
8. Does the project include appropriate protocols/procedures for waste
disposal and data analysis?
9. Is the proposed timeline or work plan appropriate, achievable, practical,
and feasible?
Presentation (20)
1. How clearly and concisely does the finalist or team discuss their project
and explain the rationale and procedures? Watch out for memorized
speeches that reflect little understanding of the principles.
2. Does the written material reflect the finalist’s or team’s understanding of
the research proposal?
3. Are the important phases of the project presented in an orderly manner?
4. How clearly is the rationale presented?
5. How clearly are the research methods presented?
6. Does the student use presentation resources as a guide?
7. Is the presentation professional in the use of colors, fonts, and graphics?
8. Does the student speak clearly, maintain eye contact, and use appropriate
scientific language?
9. Does the student provide clear, detailed, and accurate answers to the
questions given?
Total Points:

Notes and Observation:

___________________________________________
Signature Over Printed Name of the Panelist