COMMITTEE REVIEW

Scholarship committee scoring and blind review.

Use your own scoring criteria, keep committee evaluations separate, and give administrators the context behind each recommendation.

Request information

RUBRIC DESIGN

Define what a strong application looks like.

Add descriptions for each criterion, choose point limits and percentages, and adjust the rubric to reflect your scholarship priorities.

Editable criteria, descriptions, and maximum scores
Custom criterion weights
Separate scores, recommendations, and private notes
Applicant sorting by average committee score

REVIEWER ACCESS

Assign a focused workload.

Assign reviewers by scholarship and adjust individual applicant assignments when needed. Standard and blind review expose different information; administrators keep full access.

Scholarship-specific assignments
Configured reviewable text answers; direct identity fields hidden in blind review
Assigned recommendation records; uploaded files available in standard review
Presidents and administrators can score when assigned as reviewers

DECISION AUTHORITY

Keep recommendations separate from awards.

Individual evaluations remain distinct. Administrators compare reviews, move applicants to finalists, and make recipient selections.

Review completion and individual committee evaluations
Finalists grouped by scholarship
Recipient selection from the Finalists section
Award amounts recorded by authorized administrators

ILLUSTRATIVE RUBRIC EXAMPLE

Make the weighting understandable to the committee.

Suppose academic preparation carries 50% of the score, service 30%, and the essay 20%. With each criterion scored out of 100, scores of 90, 80, and 70 produce a weighted total of 83. This is an example, not a preset rubric; your organization chooses the criteria and weights.

Describe the evidence reviewers should use for each criterion
Calibrate the rubric using a sample application before scoring begins
Compare average committee scores alongside individual evaluations
Keep eligibility checks and final recipient decisions separate from the numerical ranking

A FEW MORE DETAILS

Before you get started

What does blind review hide?

Blind reviewers receive a limited application view with direct identity fields and uploaded files withheld. Administrators can hide identifying custom answers. Visible essays and recommendation text may still name or describe a student, so preview the reviewer view before review begins. Blind review is not automatic anonymization of written content.

Does the highest score automatically win?

No. Average scores help comparison; administrators make explicit finalist and recipient decisions based on eligibility, reviews, and available awards.

How should a scholarship committee use average scores?

Use them to prioritize a final review, not to replace judgment. Read individual evaluations, check eligibility and scholarship-specific requirements, and consider available recipient slots. A reviewer recommendation does not automatically award the scholarship or start winner closeout.