The Challenge assembled an esteemed panel of judges, who drew from diverse education and tech backgrounds. Based on their individual expertise, judges recommended five finalists to be selected by ED from the pool of eligible entries. During open submissions, 28 expert review panelists also supported the selection process. Once ED selected a group of finalists, the finalists then attended an Innovator’s Bootcamp, refined their submissions during the Virtual Accelerator phase, and presented their submissions on Demonstration Day (“Demo Day”).

Entries were scored by the judges based on the quality of each entry according to the criteria below. Each of the following selection criteria was assigned up to 5 points during the judging of open submissions in order to select finalists (for a total of up to 20 points for Finalists, and a total of up to 30 points for Winners):

Finalist Selection Criteria

Submissions were scored by the judges based on the quality of each submission according to the criteria below. Each of the following five selection criteria was assigned up to 20 points during the judging of open submissions in order to select finalists (for a total of up to 100 points):

• Learning Outcomes. The extent to which the submission contains (1) clearly defined academic, technical, and employability skill-learning objectives; (2) a comprehensive description of the desired change or improvement in the user’s knowledge and skills; and (3) an efficient mechanism to provide feedback to the user and instructor with respect to progress toward achievement of the learning outcomes.
• Engagement. The extent to which the submission describes an engaging user experience that is on par with commercially available entertainment games.
• Commitment. The extent to which the submission demonstrates an appropriate level of commitment and the ability of the entrant to move from concept to playable prototype within the timeline of the Challenge.
• Implementation Strategy. The extent to which the submission considers the implementation challenges that schools face, such as cost and potential technological constraints, including how to integrate with existing and future technology.
• Scalability and Expansion. The extent to which the submission demonstrates the scalability of the simulation, including its potential to connect with other simulations, as well as set the stage for a more competitive and robust marketplace for educational simulations.

Winner Selection Criteria

• Learning Outcomes. The extent to which the simulation prototype (1) contains clearly defined academic, technical, and employability learning objectives; (2) spurs change or improvement in the user’s knowledge and skills; and (3) provides data to the user and instructor with respect to progress toward achievement of the learning outcomes.
• Engagement – User Experience. The extent to which the simulation prototype demonstrates an engaging user experience on par with commercially available entertainment games.
• Engagement – User Interface. The extent to which the simulation prototype exhibits a thoughtful user interface design on par with commercially available entertainment games.
• Commitment. The extent to which the submission: (1) demonstrates the entrant’s evolution and improvement of the concept; and (2) illustrates the entrant’s ability and intention to improve upon and scale the simulation beyond the Challenge timeframe.
• Implementation Strategy. The extent to which the submission describes a detailed plan for implementation that takes into account potential barriers such as cost and technological constraints, including integration with existing and future technology, and proposes potential solutions to overcome such barriers.
• Long-term Vision. The extent to which the submission: (1) demonstrates a plan for encouraging collaboration among the developer community, including making aspects of the solution available through open source licenses; and (2) provides a vision of how the entrant’s plan will stimulate the broader educational simulation market.

Finalist & Winner Judges

Elizabeth Baron
—
Virtual Reality & Advanced Visualization Technical Specialist,
Ford Motor Company

Nonny de la Peña
—
CEO & Founder
Emblematic Group

Marlon Evans
—
CEO,
GSVLabs

Steve Issacs
—
Video Game Design & Development Teacher,
William Annin Middle School

Reshma Saujani
—
Founder & CEO,
Girls Who Code

Kurt Squire
—
Co-Director;
Games+Learning+Society Center in the Wisconsin Institute for Discovery

Kiki Wolfkill
—
Halo Transmedia & Entertainment Studio Head,
Microsoft's 343 Industries