Fulvia Cardella of Citoplasma, told us that her projects goal is to "develop measures to help prevent children and teens from using chemical drugs." From the diversity and high quality of the rival projects if nothing else, one thing could be certainŠthe competition would be fierce.

The competition was judged by a jury that was as diverse as the contestants. The jurors were from all different parts of the world and chosen to reflect different skills and sections of new technology and how it's used in education. As stated on their website "The jury will be divided into Work Groups made up of a minimum of 3 jurors each. Each work group will have a leader whose task is to co-ordinate the evaluation process for his/her work group and to act as a point of reference for the members of the work group, leaders of other work groups, and the chairman of the jury." It went on to say " Each working group will judge an estimated number of around 50 projects and each project will be evaluated by the three members of each working group in order to guarantee impartiality." In other words the contest would be completely fair and unbiased.

The project eligible would be judged for how they helped develop the education of young people and children. The site also gave a listing of the points the projects would be judged on:

Developing the use of new technologies by children and young people

Improving the quality, scope and efficiency of education through the use of new technologies, both inside and outside the classroom

Enhancing quality of life, empowerment and participatory opportunities for younger generations

Closing the gap between offer and demand on the job market by introducing new training and recruitment programs

Reducing gender inequalities and ethnic segregation

Improving access for disadvantaged children living in rural areas or suffering from disabilities

Improving international communication and co-operation between young people

Ensuring equal access for all children world-wide and closing the technological gap between the technologically rich and the have-nots

General inspirational and motivational content and practical results

From there they went on to specific criteria in categories like; innovation, user needs, impact on education, and transferability. The diverse group of jurors consisted of: Alphonso Molina, Chairman of the Jury, Prof. of Techonology Strategy, Univ. of Edinburgh (United Kingdom); Laura Balbo, Prof. of Sociology, Univ. of Ferrara (Italy); Azy Barak Prof. of Psychology, Dept. of Psychology and Education, Univ. of Haifa (Isreal); Brian Brown, Winner of the Lifelong Learning Global Bangemann Challenge (New Zealand); Celia Einhorn, International Education technology Consultant, Online Internet Institute (USA); Tatiana Ershova, CEO Institute of the Information Society (Russia); Alvaro Galvis, Director of the Research and Development Laboratory for Educational Uses of Informatics Universidad de los Andes, Santa Fe de Bogota (Colombia); Maruja Guttierez-Diaz, Head of Unit, Multimedia ­ culture, education, training, European Commission; Wayne Hanson, Editor Government Technology Magazine (USA); Sherif Hashem, Director IS Development Office, Ministry of Communications and Information Technology (Egypt); Xing Li, Prof. Electronic Engineering Dept., Tsinghua Univ. (China); Osten Makitalo, Sen. Vice Pres. and Chief Technology Officer ­ Telia Mobile AB (Sweden); Paola Manacorda, Member of the National Telecommunications Authority, Presidency of the Council of Ministers (Italy); Renato Vichi, Head of Communication, ANSA Press Agency (Italy); Wawa A. Ngenge, National Co-ordinator, UNDP ­ Sustainable Development Networking Program (Cameroon); John O'Hara, Founder of the South Bristol Learning Network (United Kingdom); Bernard Percy, Editor in Chief Converge Magazine (USA); Carlos Primo Braga, Program Manager InfoDev, World Bank (USA); Luis Rodriguez-Rosello, Head of Unit IST Program, Education and Training, European Commission; Tiahoga Ruge Scheffer, Pres. of North American Center for Environmental Information and Communication (Mexico); Partha Sarker, Winner of the Global Bangemann Challenge Award 1999 (Bangladesh); Lyndall Shope-Mafole, Minister Plenipotentiary, Communications (South Africa); Wayne Strong, Principal of Strong Consulting Group (Australia); Linnar Viil, Advisor to the Prime Minister of Estonia, Lecturer ar Estonia IT Collefe (Estonia); Fathimath Raniya Waheed, Delegate to the MIT Junior Summit (Maldives); Lauren White, IBM (USA); Monica Zega de Krutli, Teacher, Digital Ambassador Global Survey (Argentina); and Alexender Ziegler-Jons, Technology and Business Development, International Univ. of Bremen (Germany). Judging by the size of the group, their different areas of expertise and the different parts of the world they came from, it definitely could be said that the jury was well qualified for judging the competition. Also, judging by the quality of the other projects their job wasn't going to be easy.

After the jurors were introduced and a small speech was given on the Global Junior Challenge the mayor was introduced. But alas, he was delayed! After a few tense minutes waiting, he arrived with apologies. He began his speech, which basically outlined the principle in participating and how it doesn't matter whether you win or lose. Then the awards began.
.
The categories focused on ages ranging from 10 to 29. In the first category a project called "BabyNET" from Spain won. In the next, "3D Sound Learning Environment for Blind Learners" took the prize. They were from Chile. In the all ages up to 18 category, there was a three-way tie between Junior Journal (International Collaboration) Kidlink (Germany), and Yo.mag.net (Germany).Also in the all ages up to 29 there was another three-way tie. The groups sharing the award were i*earn (Morocco), The WebQuest Page (USA) and Learnforum Deutsch (Germany). Additional awards were also given out. An award for 'helping young people to find a job" was awarded to SITA (Students in Information Technology Applications) from India. There were three special mentions that went to "I eat therefore I am" (Sweden), "Scoula Fuori" (Italy) and "Mentor Girls" (USA). The President of the Republic Award went to "Delirii di Fine Millennio" (Italy) and "Le Avventure di Piera la Lattina" (Italy).

Afterwards there was a dinner held for all of the finalist contestants. The food was excellent and I felt the whole event had good sportsmanship written all over it. It was very different from some of the similar functions I've been to in the USA. It was an excellent example of how to lose gracefully. It showed that the contestants had perspective. I thought of it like this. Everyone that entered the competition was like a train loaded with cargo and we were all in competition with each other to deliver it first. But not because we wanted to get it unloaded first but because someone needed the cargo we were delivering. Some of us delivered before others but in the end it all gets delivered.

Back