PURPOSE: Best presentation of a paper at the CMP Conference. The award would be an annual award.
AWARD: A framed scroll (parchment) that will be presented at the following Annual Conference of the CMP; and notification in the CIM BULLETIN
1. Papers authored by any member of the Selection Committee shall be considered ineligible for the Award.
2. The decision of the Selection Committee shall be final.
3. No restrictions are to be attached to eligibility for the Award with respect to nationality, citizenship, age, sex, or occupation of the presenters.
4. A recipient is only eligible to win the award once in a 3 year period.
5. The main attributes of each presentation that will be evaluated by the Selection Committee are:
a.) Contribution to mineral processing
b.) Quality of visual Aids
c.) Quality of Audio – Speaking Manner
d.) Good use of allotted Time; (penalty for over-runs).
e.) Was the formal paper read or was it used as a reference.
f.) Did the presentation have a logical structure.
g.) Overall impact of the presentation.
a.) Chairman – 1st Vice-Chairman
b.) Chairman – selects 4 members to work on this committee.
c.) For each session of the Annual CMP Conference presentations, the Chairman will request assistance from his committee and/or the CMP membership to do the presentation evaluations. They will be designated “EVALUATOR”.
d.) The “EVALUATOR” will identify the PRESENTER’S NAME PAPER TITLE and PAPER NUMBER, They will use their best judgement to evaluate the series of presentations that they have agreed to attend, The “EVALUATOR” WILL SIGN his/her EVALUATION SHEET and return it to the Chairman.
e.) Selection of the Winner:
* A sum of the “TOTAL MARKS”, from the evaluation sheets for each presentation, will be made. If there is a difference in the number of evaluations of a presentation (not less than 3 evaluations), then a calculated “pro-rated” total for the presentation will be made.
* The “highest scoring” presentation (presenter) will be the winner,
* If a tie should occur, then the committee will give more “point weighting” for selected evaluation attributes so a winner is obtained.