Chairs use this rubric to evaluate how well each delegate understands the topic, represents their assigned country, and proposes realistic solutions.
Uses specific, accurate evidence and clearly reflects the assigned country’s real policy priorities.
Explains why the issue matters, what has already been tried, and where current approaches fall short.
Offers realistic, detailed solutions that match the country’s position and could become resolution clauses.
Follows a logical structure, stays focused, and makes the delegate’s argument easy to understand.
Meets all submission requirements and represents original student work with appropriate source credit.
Award-level work: specific, polished, realistic, and clearly grounded in country policy.
Well-researched and organized, with only minor gaps in detail, formatting, or feasibility.
Shows topic understanding but needs stronger country policy, clearer solutions, or better support.
Missing major requirements, lacks country-specific analysis, or contains unclear/unoriginal work.
A strong position paper does not guarantee an award by itself. Chairs also evaluate committee participation, diplomacy, collaboration, speeches, and resolution work during the conference.