2004 Website Award Scoring Sheet


Could someone explain the first two things under Visual Design? - about how the website communicates a visual experience reflective of team identity and FIRST. I don’t quite understand what they are asking for by that.

It’s mostly BS, but I think they want the website to represent your team colors and to have a design appropriate for FIRST (with no inappropriate pictures or content next to the FIRST logo)

They want a judge to be able to look at the website and WOW, this must belong to Team so-and-so. Make it look like a team website. Make it look like a FIRST team website.

So I guess those were just added in to take up the rest of the space in that category.

No, the presence of a team and FIRST on a FIRST Team website is, go figure, a very important part of building the website. Listen, the guideline basically says “Give your website character. Make it different. Distinguish yourselves, and FIRST.” It’s a good guideline for every website. You can tell the difference between Google.com, Yahoo.com, ChiefDelphi.com, ESPN.com, and CNN.com with a quick glance, can’t you? It’s all about character. Just be creative, and stop doubting FIRST.

Does each team need to submit website criteria sheets, or is all the judging done professionally?

Judging for the website award is done through a panel of prestegious (sp?) judges from all across the country via FIRSTawards.org. If your website link was not in the TIMS by a couple fridays ago, your site will not be judged. If it was, then your site can be judged at any time. This is different than last year where all of the judging was done at the regionals by students submitting a form. I’ve seen a list of the judges and I’ll have to say that we’ve got some excellent and prestegious (sp? wow, i used this word twice in a post) web judges.

Good luck teams! :]

Is it possible to get our scoring rubric back? I really would like to know our site’s progress and how to make it better for next year.

If I were FIRST I wouldn’t. Giving them back would encourage teams to start playing to that rubric - which is far from infallible - too much. Next year, it would be more wise to give a general guideline of what the judges want to see, and keep the exact rubric, which can then be more in-depth, secret. Though I applaud FIRST’s efforts to make a better system of judging; 2003 was pretty bad…

I have to admit that 2003 was kinda shady, especially the way that our team won (by passing out ballots with our team number on them). It was nicer having judges make decisions instead of playing a popularity contest with the other teams (we won both 2003 and 2004 in PNW)