Both categories have the same criteria, namely Innovation, Performance and Potential.
Students have to demonstrate:
The open nomination process is just one of the many unique features of the Awards. In each of the 2 categories the judges may choose any number of Winners or Highly Commended.
Judging will be carried out in 2 rounds:
All submissions will be reviewed by an independent panel to identify the finalists.The second and final round is a 10 minute presentation directly to the judges from a central location in Sydney. The second round may be conducted via video conference, if the student is located outside Sydney.
An independent panel of eminent judges will review the presentations and at the end of the judging, each candidate will be given a citation based on collective feedback from the panel.
Each solution is measured against the judging criteria. There is no limit to the number of Awards the judges can recommend each year. Past applicants to the awards can also reapply in 2016, if they are currently studying for their Bachelors, Masters or Doctorate degree. The judging panel is truly independent and committed to finding the best submission, and their decision is final.
The Awards are announced at the CeBIT ICT Celebration Dinner in Sydney on May 3, and candidates are expected to personally attend the presentation if they are selected as winners. The cost of your seat at the ICT Celebration Dinner will be paid by NASSCOM Australia, however your travel and accommodation is at your own expense.
The winners will receive a trophy and a prize of a week long, all expenses paid trip to the offices of one of our member companies in India. All highly commended and finalist candidates will receive a certificate.
The winning student is required to sign the CODE OF CONDUCT before travelling to India.
TERMS & CONDITIONS
* The NASSCOM Innovation Student Awards program is owned and managed NASSCOM Australia. The completed entry form constitutes an acceptance of these Terms and Conditions of Entry, and are binding on this submission. Please keep a copy for your records.
* Once the entry is submitted, the Program Manager will acknowledge receipt within 24 hours of receiving the entry. For any assistance in completing the form, please email firstname.lastname@example.org
* Entries can now be submitted for the 2016 Awards
* The entry form and other material submitted as part of the competition may be used by NASSCOM Australia in ongoing promotion on the www.nasscom.org.au website and in Media Releases to the public.
* The Program Manager will conduct and manage all aspects of the program. The decisions of the Program Manager shall be final and binding on all parties in the event that the Program Manager is required to resolve a dispute. The Program Manager is not required to disclose the actual votes cast by individual judges or the content or outcome of discussions between the judges in reaching their determinations. The Program Manager may appoint or invite observers to witness vote-counting etc. Judges are appointed by invitation of the Program Manager to join the judging panel for the current competition.
* Judges may make any enquiry and requests they see fit in order to establish the quality of a solution under consideration. Applicants are required to provide every assistance to the judges and organisers in provision of information. The judges may recommend as many or few Awards as they deem to be meritorious. The Program Manager is the granting authority and may make further enquiries as to the suitability of a recommendation to receive an Award subject to the consideration of the aims of the program.
* NASSCOM Australia is not under any obligation to provide details for a refusal to accept an entry, failure to be included in the shortlist or final selection, or information received and considered by the judges or the organisers during the competition.
* It is an obligation of all entrants to provide accurate and truthful information. Failure to be accepted, shortlisted or otherwise recognised does not necessarily reflect on the quality of the submitted product, but may reflect on the quality of the documentation or presentation provided and compliance with the published rules or directions of the Program Manager.