CNF Annual Meeting Poster Presenter Information

Poster Instructions & Guidelines

  • DIMENSIONS: 
    • 42W x 36H inches or 36W x 42H
       
  • ALL POSTERS MUST INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING:
    • CNF Acknowledgement: This work was performed in part at the Cornell NanoScale Facility, an NNCI member supported by NSF Grant NNCI-2025233.
    • CNF logo available HERE
    • Poster title, your full name, email, Principal Investigator, department, and university spelled out LARGE and BOLD at the top of your poster.
  •  TIMELINE
    • Print your poster the week before the meeting to ensure IT staff will be available to assist you if needed.
    • An email will be sent the week before the meeting to all poster presenters with their poster number. 
    • Day of the meeting, poster set up begins at 4:00 p.m. When you arrive in the Duffield Hall Atrium, find your poster number and then pin your poster up with the top left corner lined up directly under the bottom left corner of your poster number card.
      • Like this:
        Poster Placement

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • JUDGING CRITERIA
    • First Impression:
      • How difficult is it to read the poster?
      • How are color schemes used, are they easy on the eye?
      • How crowded is the poster?
      • Is there a good flow of information (logical, layout of information)?
      • Does the poster stimulate interest and discussion?
    • Layout:
      • Is the poster visually pleasing or just a jumble?
      • How easy is it to follow the sequence of the research via the poster?
    • Readability:
      • Is font size or style easily readable?
      • How much text does the poster contain?
      • Are there many grammar or spelling mistakes?
    • Title:
      • How specific/adequate/long/short is the title?
    • Identification:
      • Can the author(s) be easily identified?
      • Is contact information available (ie. Department/University/Email)
    • Aims and Objectives:
      • Are the aims and objectives of the research clearly stated?
    • Methods:
      • How detailed, appropriate, original are the methods and is there enough explanation?
    • Results:
      • How clear and well labelled are graphs and figures?
      • How complex are graphs?
      • How well are the results presented?
    • Conclusions:
      • Are any conclusions presented and if so do they reflect the aims and are they supported by the data?
      • Is there a memorable “take-home” message?
    • Scientific Content:
      • Was the research put into broader context/ justification for research?
      • Was the content suitable for experts and non-experts alike?
      • Was there sufficient scientific explanation?
    • Student:
      • How much do the student’s explanations demonstrate knowledge / ownership / enthusiasm for their work?