Please find below the
Finalist Evaluation
Judges'' comments
Judge 1:
I was greatly disappointed that the authors did not see fit to improve the proposal. The ideas is a good one and makes use of an already well-developed structure (the MIT club system). With the support of the MITAA this idea could be an excellent source of participation by MIT alumni in their local community just as we support our local communities in the STEM area. I find it difficult to give this proposal a good rating since issues from round one were not addressed but I think the original idea is one of the best.
Judge 2:
This does not meet the goal of harnessing the power of MIT alumni. In recent years Alumni engagement with MIT has moved away from being geographically based and towards being based on affinity and interests. Currently only 5% of alumni are members of MIT clubs. If you add alumni that attend club events but are not members, you are still at only 10% of the alumni body.
Also, I don't see the value of distributing the $5000 to each club. That is not a significant sum to many clubs, and doesn't address any specific barrier to action.
The statement that "The worldwide clubs will recognize the most impactful result" is ambiguous, as there is no current mechanism for getting this kind of judgement from the clubs.
Semi-Finalist Evaluation
Judges'' ratings
| • | Novelty: | |
| • | Feasibility: | |
| • | Impact: | |
| • | Presentation: |
Judges'' comments
Judge 1:
Challenging MIT Clubs in a contest is not unheard of but usually takes the form of raising money for something or getting new members. A contest involving programming is a new idea to me.
The MITAA should be able to host the contest and contact all the clubs with instructions. The downside is whether or not clubs would be interested in doing this. You might want to sweeten the pot - $3000 for the execution of the project/event and $2000 for the club fund or at least some kind of bragging rights. It would be nice if everyone was totally motivated by service to others but that is not the case. You need to include a "what's in it for me".
A year is a short time for communicating the contest; developing the proposals; reviewing the proposals; executing the effort; getting ready for a de-briefing. Also you might have only participating clubs review and offer feedback. MIT clubs tend to be tetchy about being criticized by non-contributors.
The idea is not without challenges but worth pursuing.
Judge 2:
I like this idea! Very straightforward and easy to implement. Are there any incentives that might encourage participation? Would you include some examples of innovative ideas to get teams thinking? It seems like #5 could turn into quite a long webcast.
0comments
Share conversation:
Share via:
No comments have been posted.
