1. Project review (1) Composition of the review committee 1. The evaluation committee includes preliminary evaluation members and final evaluation committee. The review committee is composed of experts in relevant fields hired by the competition organizer. The list of members of the review committee will not be announced to the public. 2． The evaluation committee shall consist of one director and several team leaders. The director fully presides over the work of the review committee, and the team leader is responsible for the review work of this review team. 3. The review committee has a core review committee, which is responsible for coordinating and handling important issues; the core review committee is composed of the director and team leader. 4. The review committee is divided into a number of review groups based on the number of entries and the distribution of disciplines (categories). The leader of each group is specifically responsible for the review work of the group. 5. Requirements for hiring judges: Professors or associate professors (or equivalent professional titles) who are familiar with the subject being judged and have certain academic attainments; are enthusiastic about the judging work of the competition, are in good health, and are capable of heavy judging work; and are fair-minded. Priority will be given to hiring academicians as directors of the review committee. 6． The evaluation committee has a secretariat with 1 secretary-general, 1-2 deputy secretaries-general, and several staff members. Responsible for the organization, services, data processing, technical support, etc. of the review committee. (2) Evaluation principles 1. Review whether the project complies with the "Three Self" principles (own topic selection, own design and research, own production and writing) and the "Three Natures" principle (scientificness, novelty, and practicality). 2． In addition to following the evaluation criteria for individual projects listed above, group projects also include a review of the team's work to determine whether the final result is the result of the joint efforts of all team members. 3. When entries involve the following content, certification materials from relevant departments must be provided, otherwise they will not be reviewed: (1) Medical and health care products, clinical use appraisal issued by relevant medical research departments at or above the provincial level. (2) New varieties of animals and plants must be certified as new varieties cultivated and discovered by agricultural science departments at or above the provincial level. (3) For nationally protected animals and plants, a certificate issued by the forestry department at or above the provincial level certifies that the project did not cause damage to animals or plants during the research process. 4. The review implements avoidance system and confidentiality system. The judges will not participate in the evaluation of the works of students tutored by me or related to me. Before the final review results are released, all personnel involved in the review work shall not disclose the review status and results in any form to anyone other than the organizing committee. 5. Adhere to scientific evaluation standards, rigorous evaluation procedures, and quantified evaluation results to avoid the influence of personal subjective factors of the judges and ensure that the evaluation results are scientific and fair. 6． The review committee formulates the review work rules to carry out its work in accordance with the review rules. The review committee has the right to interpret the review work rules. The evaluation results will take effect after being signed by the director of the evaluation committee and all judges. The review committee is responsible for the review results and has the final right of interpretation. (3) Evaluation procedures 1. Preliminary evaluation: The preliminary evaluation committee will review the application materials and review the scientific nature and project quality of the project based on the evaluation principles. (1) For the middle school group, 80 projects will be shortlisted for the final evaluation based on high school individual projects, high school group projects, junior high school individual projects, and junior high school group projects. (2) All the shortlisted projects of the middle school group will go to the finals site to participate in the final evaluation and determine the first, second and third prizes. (3) For the primary school group, 80 projects will be selected according to primary school individual projects and primary school collective projects, and half of the projects will be selected as third prizes from the shortlisted projects. They will no longer go to the site to participate in the final evaluation, and the other half of the projects will be Participate in the final evaluation on site in the finals to determine the first and second prizes. 2. Final evaluation: (1) Final evaluation of the project: It is a comprehensive evaluation process, including four contents: review of materials, closed questioning, skills test, and quality evaluation. (2) The total score of the four components of the final evaluation is 100 points, and the weights are: 30 points for review of materials, 60 points for closed questioning, 5 points for quality assessment, and 5 points for skills test.

(3) The judges will review the materials in advance and understand the basic situation of the project before questioning the participating students during the closed debate. Each judge independently judges, evaluates and gives scores based on the evaluation criteria. Combined with the skills test and quality assessment results, the comprehensive project results are summarized and sorted from high to low to finally determine the project awards. (4) Award-winning proportions in the final evaluation of projects: The winning proportions of projects in the middle school group: 15 first prizes, 35 second prizes, and 50 third prizes; the winning proportions of projects in the primary school group: 30 first prizes, 70 second prizes (the third prize has already been determined during the initial evaluation). (5) Special awards: In addition to the first, second and third prizes for projects set up by the organizer, there are also special awards established by the organizing committee, the organizer, enterprises and institutions, foundations, etc., which will also be awarded from those who participated in the final evaluation. Evaluated in the project. The evaluation of special awards can be made individually by the award-setting unit or entrusted to the competition evaluation committee. The unit that establishes the award may propose selection criteria or additional conditions for special awards, but they cannot conflict with the selection principles of the national competition. 2. Evaluation of outstanding science and technology teachers (1) Composition of the evaluation committee: The organizer of the competition hires experts in relevant fields to form a evaluation committee and selects a team leader to preside over the evaluation work. (2) Review time: Each province recommends science and technology teachers according to quotas, and a review committee is organized to conduct review in June every year. (3) Evaluation basis 1. Designed youth science and technology education activity plan (this article is the main evaluation basis). Focus on the education, innovation, feasibility, demonstration and completeness of the plan. 2. Concepts and level of understanding of youth science and technology activities; 3. Experience and achievements in youth science and technology activities; (4) Evaluation tasks: The evaluation committee will select 10 outstanding science and technology teachers from the science and technology teachers applied by each province based on the evaluation standards. From these 10 outstanding science and technology teachers, 1 Outstanding Science and Technology Teacher of the Year Award and 2 Best Science and Technology Education Program Awards will be selected. Science and technology teachers recommended by provinces that are not shortlisted will receive the Outstanding Science and Technology Teacher Nomination Award. 3. Children’s Science Fiction Painting Review (1) Composition of the review committee 1. Composition of the review committee: The competition organizer hires experts in relevant fields to form a review committee and selects a team leader to preside over the review work. 2. Qualifications for judges: (1) Experts in art and educational science and technology with senior professional titles. (2) Have professional knowledge of children’s science fiction painting. (3) Be enthusiastic about youth science and technology education activities and have certain experience. (2) Evaluation requirements 1. The form of the work can be oil painting, Chinese painting, watercolor painting, gouache painting, pen painting, pencil painting, crayon painting, printmaking, paste painting, computer painting, etc. The style and materials used are not limited; 2. Specifications of the work All works will be 4 in open; 3. Works involving the following conditions will be eliminated: (1) The size of the picture does not meet the regulations; (2) Superstitious content about gods and ghosts; (3) Plagiarism of other people's works; (4) Other non-painting works of art and Crafts; (5) There is more than one author; (6) The author is over 14 years old at the time of application (3) Evaluation criteria 1. Imagination: topic selection, creativity and novelty (50) 2. Scientificity: scientific basis, logical thinking ( 25) 3. Painting level: picture design, color processing, painting skills (25) (4) Evaluation procedures 1. Divide science fiction paintings into the early childhood group, primary school group, and junior high school group according to the age of the author. 2. Eliminate works that do not meet the above principles from the aspects of work content, form, specifications, application procedures, etc. 3. According to the works of the lower kindergarten group, primary school group, and junior high school group, the first, second, and third prizes of the group will be selected respectively (the ratio is 15, 35, 50), and the evaluation form shall be filled in and signed for confirmation. 4. Review of scientific and technological practice activities (1) Composition of the review committee: The competition organizer hires experts in relevant fields to form a review committee and selects a team leader to preside over the review work.

(2) Qualification review: Only scientific and technological practice activities with meaningful topic selection, complete process, clear expression of results, comprehensive summary, complete original materials, and appropriate scale are eligible for further review. (3) Evaluation criteria: Evaluation will be conducted from four perspectives: authenticity, demonstration, education, and completeness. (4) Evaluation procedures 1. Grouping of judges: The judges are divided into several evaluation groups according to the region where the practical activities are located; 2. Qualification determination: The evaluation team is used as a unit to eliminate those who do not meet the evaluation qualifications in the practical activities of this group; 3. Preliminary determination of awards : Select the outstanding practical activities in this group of practical activities that can be shortlisted to participate in the final evaluation display, and determine the first, second and third prizes according to the ratio of 15 first prizes, 35 second prizes and 50 third prizes; submit 4 more Candidate list for the "Top Ten Outstanding Scientific and Technological Practice Activities Award"; 4. Determine the awards: The review committee summarizes the review results of each group; 5. Determine the "Top Ten" list: The review committee finalizes the list based on the "Top Ten" candidate lists submitted by each group List of "Top Ten Outstanding Scientific and Technological Practice Activities Awards". 5. Publicity and Questioning (1) Within three days after the final evaluation of the competition, the list of winners will be publicized on the "National Youth Science and Technology Innovation Competition" website (http://castic.xiaxiaotong.org/). Within one month from the date of release, Public notice period. (2) During the publicity period, the competition organizing committee office is responsible for accepting questions and complaints about the award-winning students. If any unit or individual has any objection to the list of winners, they can submit a signed complaint in writing to the organizing committee office (the complainant’s name, work unit, identification, and contact number must be stated), and state the reasons and factual basis. Complaints beyond the publicity period or anonymous complaints will not be accepted. (3) Those who are found to have committed fraud will be disqualified from winning, and the education department (education committee) or science and technology association of the province (autonomous region, municipality directly under the Central Government) where they are located will be instructed to take back their award certificates and bonuses. 6. Supplementary Provisions (1) These rules are interpreted and revised by the National Youth Science and Technology Activities Leading Group Office. (2) These rules are used together with the rules of the National Youth Science and Technology Innovation Competition.