March 1:

The entrants must e-mail a PDF version of their papers to the Regional Student Activities Chair (RSAC), Dr. Eric S. Ackerman esa@nova.edu, no later than this date. Please use the subject, IEEE R3 Paper Contest Entry in the header of the e-mail and give complete contact information for both the student and the student branch counselor.

March 15:

Judging of written papers is to be completed by this date. Contestants whose papers are selected to be presented orally will be notified immediately thereafter by the host Counselor or the Regional Student Activities Chair acting for the host Counselor. In order to ensure prompt notification, please include the branch counselor's telephone number in the letter of transmittal.

Conference Time:

Finalists selected must be at SoutheastCon 2006 to present their papers.

2. Eligibility

To be eligible to enter a paper in the competition, the author must be a paid-up student member of IEEE in Region 3 at the time that the entry is submitted. The student must also be an undergraduate the Spring term of the year the paper is presented. Multiple authors are permitted up to a limit of three, all of whom must be undergraduate students and IEEE student members.

Any questions regarding eligibility or deviation from prescribed procedures will be decided upon by the members of the judging team present at the competition.

3. Prizes

The Institute Life Member Fund provides funds to the Region for prizes as follows:

First Place - $ 850.00
Second Place - $ 500.00
Third Place - $ 250.00

In addition to the first, second, and third place prizes, the school represented by the Author of the first place paper will receive a plaque.

4. Written Presentation

The following is a list of the major parts of a suitable paper. It is intended only as a basic guide in establishing the format.

1. Cover page (use the format described in Section 10). The cover page, which contains the author(s) name(s) and the Student Branch affiliation, will be removed before the paper is transmitted to the judges.
2. Title page (names of persons or schools should not appear on this page - see Section 11).
3. Abstract (not more than one page)
4. Introduction
5. Body of paper
6. Conclusions and Recommendations
7. Appendices
8. References/Bibliography

The paper should be typewritten, double-spaced, no smaller than 10 point font on one side of 8-1/2" x 11" paper. Legible photocopies are acceptable. The pages of the paper must be numbered consecutively. The Introduction, Body, Conclusions, Tables, and Diagrams together may not exceed 15 pages while these sections together with the Appendices may not exceed 20 pages. Judges will penalize those who exceed this length. Each copy of the paper submitted for judging must be securely fastened in a suitable folder.

Contestants are strongly encouraged to bring additional copies for distribution at the time of the oral presentation. These additional copies need not be in folders.

5. Oral Presentation

The 10 to 12 highest scoring papers in the written judging will be selected by the RSAC for oral presentation.

Each contestant will have 15 minutes for oral presentation and 5 minutes for a question and answer period. A timekeeper will indicate, by some suitable method, how a contestant's time is progressing and when each of his/her prescribed time periods is completed.

The RSAC will use a random process to determine the order of oral presentation and will endeavor to inform the participating schools of their presentation order prior to the conference.

6. Judges

The basis for the judging is indicated in the following sections. The winners shall be determined from the sum of written and oral scores.

7. Written

There will be three judges of the written papers (See Section 12.2). They will judge each of the papers independently and send their scores to the RSAC.

8. Oral

Three judges of the oral presentations (See Section 12.3) and a timekeeper will be selected by the Host Counselor.

9. Scoring

WRITTEN PRESENTATION (maximum possible score: 56 points)
Originality 1. Originality should be interpreted to give credit for results, investigative procedure, and conclusions that are primarily those of the author. A general guidance from the literature is acceptable. 2. Originality can be evidenced by an unusual, imaginative, or concise treatment of the subject. Both (1) and (2) should be present to a reasonable degree to receive full credit.	12 points
Analytical Treatment The fundamental nature of the subject should be clearly revealed, and the component parts of the topic should be carefully related to yield a unified analysis.	16 points
Interest The paper should be of general engineering or computer science interest and a sound engineering reason for considering the subject should be present.	12 points
Mode of Expression
1. Logical organization of material and clarity of presentation	4 points
2. Concise and coherent expression of thoughts	4 points

3. Effective and judicial use of electrical theory	4 points
4. Adequate introduction and closure. The introduction should properly orient the reader for the main body of the material. The closure should include a summary of the writer's contributions, forecast, or conclusions.	4 points
ORAL PRESENTATION (maximum possible score: 44 points)
Speaking Techniques The contestant should be clear and easy to understand.	12 points
Style Presentation of material should follow a logical course and should stimulate the thinking of the audience.	12 points
Introduction and Conclusion Presentation should begin with a proper introduction. Background of the problem should be made clear before proceeding to the main body of the presentation. Conclusions should be briefly summarized.	5 points
Technical Presentation The speaker should exhibit a clear understanding of the topic, of the important related literature, and of the associated electrical theory. The presentation should be technically sound, and the fundamental nature of the subject should be clearly described.	10 points
Discussion The speaker should display a reasonable knowledge of the subject by answering the questions adequately.	5 points