The Judging Panel shall grade the candidates by the scoring them based on the criteria predetermined in the evaluation rating table. As a guide to rating scores marks are given as follows:
Excellent (5) Candidate provides a thorough response to the question. Candidate demonstrates a thorough understanding of the issues at hand that is more to substantially more than what is expected. Response is well thought-out and well presented. Overall, candidate’s response is complete, addresses all aspects of the question and does not require probing.
Above average – Average (4 – 3) Candidate provides an acceptable response to the question. Candidate’s understanding of the issues at hand is equal to or slightly less than what is expected. The response may not be as complete or thorough as the excellent candidate’s response. Overall, candidate’s response is complete, addresses the question and any probing required is minimal.
Below Average – Poor (2 – 1) Candidate fails to provide an acceptable response to the question. Candidate’s response does not convey the level of experience/expertise than what is expected. Candidate’s response may be vague or incomplete. Overall, candidate fails to provide experience/expertise demonstrative of the requirements of what is expected.