1. Maryland History Day 2019 Judging Orientation
District and School Coordinators::
Please use this as a template, tweaking to make it your own. Feel free to swap the photos with ones from your stock. Add your logistical and procedural instructions and adjust other slides as needed.
Please allow 15 minutes for judges to arrive and get settled, up to 15 minutes for your logistical/procedural info, and for the contest orientation. Please do not cut any of this time short. It’s the most valuable time of your day.
Good luck and Happy History Day!

2. Welcome!
Maryland Humanities thanks you for supporting Maryland History Day
This morning we’re going to talk about what the NHD contest is all about and your responsibility as a judge.

3. How the Contest Works Five categories Paper (individual) Website
Performance
Documentary
Exhibit
Individuals or Groups (2-5)
Junior Division (grades 6-8) Senior Division (grades 9-12)
We have a few new folks in the audience, so I want to spend just a minute talking about how the contest works and where our contest today fits into the bigger picture.

4. School District State National
Contest Progression
School District State National
Notice that the arrows get smaller. Most students only experience NHD at their school.
Today, most of the entries you will see will not move onto the next level.
Our goal is to provide all students with a positive and memorable experience that will encourage them to keep learning and reaching ever higher.

5. Annual Theme & Topics Topics: Student choice
Local, national, world history
Historical perspective is key
Students must explain the topic’s relationship to the theme and its significance in history.
Each year, students’ research is framed within a historical theme.
It is big and broad on purpose to give students a lot of leeway. Their task is to justify how their topic fits the annual theme and demonstrates historical significance.
To take a stand, one must take a firm position on an issue. Individuals or groups can take a stand. You can take a stand by force, with words, or with economic power. You can also take a stand by walking away.
What happens when on fails to take a stand?

6. Contest Rules
Follow rules and procedures in the National History Day Contest Rule Book
General rules for all entries
Specific rules for each category

7. Exhibits Size Limit 40 inches wide x 30 inches deep x 6 feet high, OR
30 inches in diameter (for 360° displays)
Word Limit
500 student-composed words
Media no longer than three minutes
Media device must be controllable by judge/viewer
No taped commentary or analysis
Credits
Credits of visual sources required
Explain the process for interviews for exhibits – will the room be open or closed to the public? Will an NHD staffer be letting students into the room or does one of the judges need to go out and get them?
If you’ll have a preview time just for exhibit judges, explain that here as well.
Explain how the room is laid out and hand out maps, as needed.

8. Documentaries Time Limit 10-minute documentary including credits
Speaking
Students announce title and names of participants only
Production
Students narrate, interview, run equipment, produce, edit
End Credits
Required, and should be readable
Interactivity
No judge or audience participation
Should be a documentary, something you might see on PBS or HISTORYR. It should not be simply a performance on videotape.
Students must operate all equipment.
The room will be dark – please stay awake!
One judge on the team should be the timekeeper.

9. Performances Time Limit 10 minutes Introduction
Title and student name(s) only
Costumes
Students: design, fabric choice, etc.
Media
Permitted but must be provided and run by student participants
Must be original – they cannot use something that is already written.
Performers should display stage presence, including clear & audible voices.
Costumes should be appropriate for the topic and not confuse or overpower the performance.
Take into consideration nerves, forgotten lines, and audience applause or laughter when timing the performance.
One judge on the team should be the timekeeper.

10. Research Papers Between 1,500 and 2,500 words Illustrations permitted
Citations required
Explain to these judges that they can revise evaluation forms and rankings, as needed, after the interviews. If you have already launched the final round, make sure the finals judges understand that you may swap out an entry or two if the first-round judges make changes.

11. Websites No more than 1,200 student-composed words
Must be created using NHD Weebly
Process paper and bibliography integrated into the site
Multimedia clips no more than 4 minutes total (audio, video, or both may be used)
Explain to these judges that they can revise evaluation forms and rankings, as needed, after the interviews. If you have already launched the final round, make sure the finals judges understand that you may swap out an entry or two if the first-round judges make changes.

12. Title Page/ Process Paper
SAMPLE TITLE PAGE
Title
Student name(s) Division Category # student-composed words # words in Process Paper
PROCESS PAPER
Required for Performance, Documentary, Exhibit, Website
Explain how students chose topic and category, researched topic, and how topic relates to theme
Read Process Paper before viewing the entry
Website judges should have found the process paper AND annotated bibliography integrated into the site.
Paper judges will not see a process paper; the annotated bib should be attached to the paper.
The process paper should not be a research paper about the topic.
500 words max

13. Annotated Bibliography
Attached to the process paper
How each source was used in producing the project
Divided by primary and secondary sources
Read the annotated bibliography before viewing the entry
Evaluate bibliographies based on the strength of their sources, the breadth of their research, appropriateness to the topic, and a young person’s ability to investigate the sources.
Annotated bibliographies are directly related to the criteria of historical quality - they show the extent and value of a student’s sources. They are critical and must be reviewed.
Thicker does not equate to better. Quality matters more than quantity. Depending on the topic, source availability varies.
Unsure why a student classified a particular source as primary or secondary? ASK THEM.

14. Annotated Bibliography
Adolf Hitler's Authorization for the Euthanasia Program United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, Washington D.C.
This was the order, signed by Adolf Hitler, to begin the “euthanasia” program of the mentally ill and unstable. It represents the type of signed records and orders the Nazis kept, many of which were used as evidence against them in the trial. We use a scan of the document in our documentary when explaining the kind of evidence used in the trial.
Not Annotated
Adolf Hitler's Authorization for the Euthanasia Program United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, Washington D.C.
Evaluate bibliographies based on the strength of their sources, the breadth of their research, appropriateness to the topic, and a young person’s ability to investigate the sources.
Annotated bibliographies are directly related to the criteria of historical quality - they show the extent and value of a student’s sources. They are critical and must be reviewed.
Thicker does not equate to better. Quality matters more than quantity. Depending on the topic, source availability varies.
Unsure why a student classified a particular source as primary or secondary? ASK THEM.

15. Annotated Bibliography
Primary Sources
Witness Accounts
Diaries
Letters
Maps
Newspapers
Photographs/Paintings
Secondary Sources
Current newspapers
Textbooks/Wikipedia
Interview with an expert
Documentaries
Evaluate bibliographies based on the strength of their sources, the breadth of their research, appropriateness to the topic, and a young person’s ability to investigate the sources.
Annotated bibliographies are directly related to the criteria of historical quality - they show the extent and value of a student’s sources. They are critical and must be reviewed.
Thicker does not equate to better. Quality matters more than quantity. Depending on the topic, source availability varies.
Unsure why a student classified a particular source as primary or secondary? ASK THEM.

16. Evaluating Entries: What
Relation to Theme: 20%
Relation is adequately explained
Historical context
Historical significance
Historical Quality: 60%
Accuracy
Thorough research
Primary sources
Balanced presentation
Thoughtful analysis and interpretation
Clarity of Presentation: 20%
Effective and creative
Clear and free of errors/distractions
Use of equipment
The MOST important is historical quality, followed by relation to the theme.
Do NOT get hung up on clarity of presentation errors that can be fixed. Typos, glue smears, improper formatting, etc. can all be corrected before the next level. We’ll talk more about this shortly.
This slide is designed to display in sections. Just hit the space bar or arrow keys to display all of the information.

17. Evaluating Entries: How
Interviews:
Be consistent – greet all students the same way and ask similar questions about each entry.
Be aware of your bias related to particular topics.
Stick to the schedule as much as possible.
Remember that this is their day. Let them teach you and give them the opportunity to explain what they’ve done.
Check body language. No telling!
Respect each student by refraining from looking at your cell phone or other distracting activities.
Elaborate on the second point (bias) by specifically imploring the judges to demonstrate the same degree of interest regardless of the topic. If they have seen the same topic countless times, they must remember that it’s the first time for the students.
“No telling” means they should NOT discuss entries within earshot of anyone except fellow judges and they should always assume that parents, teachers and students are watching and listening.

18. Evaluating Entries: How
Evaluation Forms
Explain your rankings through constructive and positive comments.
Explain how students can improve so they can be more successful next time.
Expect quality, but remember that you are evaluating the work of young students who are just beginning to learn historical research, project development and presentation techniques.
Deliberate together and reach consensus.
These forms should NOT be identical. Instead they should be complementary in tone and range, meaning that one judge shouldn’t check “superior” if the other two check “good.”
The comments must reflect the boxes that are checked. Why is it superior? What needs to be improved? And so on…
The very best, the very worst and every entry in between deserve ample comments. The students have worked literally hundreds of hours for something you will review in 15 minutes. Make it worth it to them!

19. Consider using the handout version of this to accompany this slide.
Stress the procedural part of this process. Judges must bring concerns to your attention. As coordinator, YOU have the responsibility of verifying the accuracy of these accusations and notifying the teacher and students of the decision.
Feel free to substitute “NHD staff” with your name.
Please do not use the word “disqualification” in reference to anything other than the three violations that lead to disqualification. This is confusing to students, teachers and parents. Disqualified means removal from the competition.

20. Judging Teams Teams of three The captain’s role
Your team’s goal: achieve consensus
The captain is responsible for guiding the team in accomplishing the necessary tasks.
You can add that “Captain” does not equal “commander.” This person is an experienced judge who guides the others on the team. He/she does not have greater power.
If a team cannot reach consensus, they should ask your advice.
At this point or before, ask your judges to look at their schedule of entries and to alert you immediately if they recognize any of the students. Remember that their schedules should list student names but never school names. If someone has a conflict, it’s better to fix it now. Simply swap this judge with someone on another team.
If you have categories large enough that you have created multiple first-round teams and a final round, explain this process now.

21. The Interview GREET READ VIEW QUESTION DISCUSS
The purpose of the interview is to clarify any questions or concerns you have and to provide interaction between the professional and student.
Please spend the same amount of time talking with each entry and try to ask the same questions of each.
Do not tell students what their evaluations are, or who the winners are.
Ask questions of substance regarding the topic:
Why did you choose this topic?
How did you begin the research process?
What was your most important source and why?
This slide is designed to display in sections. Just hit the space bar or arrow keys to display all of the information.
“DISCUSS” is a different color because judges should be VERY careful before discussing entries in the judging room. They need to stay on schedule AND everyone will be trying to listen to them and watching their body language. Unless they have complete privacy and the luxury of time, it’s best to make notes and hold discussion for when they return to judging HQ.

22. The Paperwork Evaluation Forms
Remember, the students will receive these comment sheets
Provide thorough constructive comments that students can use to improve upon their work
Consensus forms are highly recommended as a quick and efficient way to get the top entries that are advancing to the next round. But even if you don’t have categories with first-round teams and finals, these forms are still helpful as a place where judges are specifically listing the winners only. All three judges should sign and print their names at the bottom.
The ranking forms should be pre-printed with all of the entries that a team evaluates. The judge captain handwrites the rank order beside each entry. All three judges should sign and print their names at the bottom.
Evaluation forms – covered elsewhere.
Feedback surveys are a great way for your judges to evaluate their experience at your contest.
This slide is designed to display in sections. Just hit the space bar or arrow keys to display all of the information.
Be sure to tell them where, when, and how to turn these in. And don’t forget to color-code them.
See the Affiliate Coordinators’ Manual – Judging Module for examples of these forms.

23. Unacceptable Evaluation Form Example
Problems:
These comments tell the student nothing about what he did well or how he might improve. They are just flattery.
Please don’t provide actual rankings or tell students they deserve an award. Even if an entry places first in the first-round, it may come in lower in the finals. These comments will be very confusing and potentially harmful!
The judge clearly thinks this entry is superior. But why? What is so well done? And, is it flawless? There’s always room for growth.
This empty space could be filled with comments.
2 ninutes max!

24. Unacceptable Evaluation Form Example # 2
Problems:
Each of these comments is negative but could be rephrased in the positive.
If you suspect a rules violation, please verify. Don’t guess!
You may have seen this topic a dozen times, but it’s new to this student and he/she deserves your objective feedback.
Some students live far from a library and many quality websites contain reliable material.
The checkboxes indicate this entry ranks somewhere in the middle of those in the judge’s group, but the comments say NOTHING about what the student did well. What was so “excellent?” The student may conclude that the judge rated the whole project poorly because it wasn’t “pretty” and the topic was not favored.
2 minutes
More comments
are needed here.

25. Better Example #1 Reasons:
The comments are positive and criticisms are phrased constructively.
Specific criticisms are backed up with examples.
The comments support the checkmarks.
Better still?:
More could have been said about why the interviews and sources were so impressive.
This judge could have written more, particularly about the topic’s relationship to the theme.
Another positive comment or two would be appreciated.
2 minutes

26. Better Example #2 Reasons:
The comments are positive and criticisms are phrased constructively.
Specific criticisms are backed up with examples. This reads like an action plan for improvement.
The comments support the checkmarks.
The comments end on a positive note and thanking the student for participating is kind and thoughtful.
2 minutes

27. The Comment Sandwich Positive comment Constructive comments
2 minutes
Start and finish your comments with something purely positive. Place your constructive feedback in the middle. Students will find this to be a tasty combination.

28. Questions?

29. Thank you!