These are your Hesburgh Libraries Hackathon judges. Judges are selected from across campus and bring a range of skills and perspectives to the judging process.
Director of Undergraduate Studies
Idzik Computing and Digital Technologies Minor
Data Services Librarian
Navari Family Center for Digital Scholarship
Hesburgh Libraries
Associate Teaching Professor
Applied and Computational Mathematics and Statistics
Software Engineer, AETL
Lucy Family Institute for Data & Society
Director, Civic Innovation Lab
Professor of the Practice,
Computer Science and Engineering
The three main prizes for the Hesburgh Hackathon are awarded to teams who excel in all of the criteria on the judging rubric.
Judges may use their discretion in awarding an additional prize under the category of Honorable Mention. Winners of the first-, second-, and third-place prizes are not eligible for these prizes. These prizes are awarded to teams who may not have excelled in a majority of the criteria of the judging rubric but who may have shown exceptional skill in one criterion.
This year, the student-run club CS For Good is sponsoring a prize for projects that align strongly with their mission.
All winning teams and their projects will be featured in the news section of the Hesburgh Libraries website and the Hesburgh Libraries Hackathon website.
| Prize | Award |
|---|---|
| First Prize | $3,000 |
| Second Prize | $2,000 |
| Third Prize | $1,000 |
| Honorable Mention * | $500 |
| 'CS For Good' prize | $250 |
Code Review for Winning Teams
This year, the winning teams will be asked to schedule a brief in-person meeting after the event to perform a light code review with the chairs of the Hackathon. This is not meant to add an onerous requirement, but to ensure a level playing field for all participants. Teams will be asked to show their code repo and explain how their application was built. Remember that all submitted code (excluding external libraries and packages) must have been written during the hackathon, and that all code complies with our policy on the acceptable use of AI. Contact the event chairs with any questions about these policies.
× Winner Payment Processing
Without exception, cash prizes are split equally by University Accounting among all team members. Please note that awards may be subject to taxation, depending on student status.
For the prizes awarded by the Hackathon judges, each category has a weighted percentage that will be used to calculate the final score for each team.
| Category | Weight | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Innovation | 30% | The project should take a unique, interesting, and creative approach to solving the problem(s) identified by this year's theme. This criterion looks at novel or cutting-edge methods for user interaction, data manipulation and presentation, and use of new technology. |
| Impact | 30% | The proposed solution should have a significant impact in solving technological challenges posed by the theme of that year's hackathon. For example, solutions should aim to significantly improve the way users organize, communicate, schedule, or manage information, resources, or people. |
| Usability | 15% | Usability represents ease-of-use in engaging with content and services. The project should exemplify the highest standards of intuitive and elegant User Experience Design (UX). The project should easily, pleasantly, safely, and elegantly help users. |
| Technical Merit | 15% | The application was technically challenging to construct, requiring strong programming skills from the team. The team made wise choices in selecting conventional but creative components and libraries to construct the app. The complexity and elegance of the back-end matches the front-end. |
| Presentation | 10% | Through the final presentation, the team should clearly communicate the value of the project. The final product presentation should be professional, well-structured, and a meaningful exploration of the final product — not only what it can do but how it will benefit users. |
This prize, sponsored by the CS For Good student club, recognizes and rewards projects that excel in four equally weighted areas: Innovation, Social Impact, Responsible and Ethical Use of Technology, and Strong Design and Scalability. The judging criteria emphasize practical, meaningful solutions that harness technology for the greater good, while demonstrating creative thinking and a commitment to ethical practices. Through this award, the club highlights and promotes the potential for technology to drive positive, lasting change.
| Category | Weight | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Innovation | 25% | The application was technically challenging to construct, requiring strong programming skills from the team. The team made wise choices in selecting conventional but creative components and libraries to construct the app. The complexity and elegance of the back-end matches the front-end. |
| Social Impact | 25% | The project demonstrates a tangible positive contribution to a clearly identified community or cause. It shows strong alignment with the mission of CS for Good by addressing a significant social need in a way that fosters inclusivity and shared ownership. It promises sustained benefits and measurable outcomes, ensuring meaningful and lasting support for those it serves. |
| Responsible and Ethical Use of Technology | 25% | The project prioritizes user privacy, security, and fairness at every stage of the technology’s design and deployment, including things like protecting people’s personal information and respecting their privacy. It promotes trust and accountability by adhering to recognized ethical standards and continually monitoring for potential negative impacts. |
| Well-designed and Scalable | 25% | The project uses new and creative ideas or methods to solve a problem. It stands out from other solutions by tackling challenges in fresh, original ways. It sparks inspiration for the future and pushes boundaries to bring about meaningful change. |
A special word about the use of AI
AI is both a disruptive force and necessary tool in the computing-related field. In this competition, we allow AI usage according to LEVEL FOUR (4) on the chart below. You may use AI to speed your work process, but should not simply ask an AI client to create and then blindly copy and deploy whole swaths of code, let alone an entire app! That practice is both unethical and dangerous and will negate any win awarded to a team discovered of using AI in this way.
You should also carefully cite how and how much AI you used in the project. We suggest putting this in .txt file in your repo.
