Bierman Rising Scholarship Judging Rubric – ABA Beyond the Individual (May 2026)
All applications are reviewed by a panel of Bierman clinicians and organizational leaders. To ensure fairness, all papers are de-identified before review.
This scholarship is merit-based. There are no “right” answers — reviewers are looking for authenticity, conceptual grounding in ABA, and a clear, systems-level perspective.
How essays are evaluated
Each essay is scored across four weighted criteria for a total of 100 points. Each criterion is scored independently on a 0–25 scale using six levels: Not Present (0), Minimal (5), Developing (10), Proficient (15), Strong (20), and Exemplary (25).
Reviewers do not average across the descriptors — they award the single score that best matches the overall quality of that criterion, and record a brief rationale.
Scoring rubric
1) Systems Observation & Contextual Insight — 25 points
Prompt part 1: Reflect on a system (school, clinic, or workplace) that could benefit from ABA-based change.
What we’re looking for: a clearly identified system, described with enough context that a reader can picture the environment, along with a thoughtful explanation of why it stood out through a behavioral lens.
High-scoring responses describe the system vividly and analytically, identifying environmental or organizational variables at play (antecedents, consequences, systemic patterns) rather than just describing what happened. Lower-scoring responses tend to name a system generically (“a school,” “a clinic”) without specific context or behavioral framing.
2) Behavior-Analytic Concept Knowledge & Application — 25 points
Prompt part 2: Identify one behavior-analytic concept and explain how it could improve outcomes in the chosen system.
What we’re looking for: a correctly named, accurately defined concept that is meaningfully applied to the system — with a clear explanation of both why this concept fits the problem and how it would concretely function within that environment.
High-scoring responses articulate systems-level application: how the concept would create change beyond individual behavior, affecting teams, classrooms, organizations, or culture. Reasoning is precise and may reference research, the BACB ethics code, or behavior-analytic competencies. Lower-scoring responses use lay terms (e.g., “rewards,” “punishment”) without accurate terminology, or name a concept without connecting it meaningfully to the system.
3) Vision for Larger-Scale Impact & Professional Growth — 25 points
Prompt part 3: Describe how you hope to use your skills to create larger-scale impact, connected to training and career goals.
What we’re looking for: a specific, professionally mature vision that ties current training and career goals to a clear understanding of how ABA principles scale beyond the individual learner.
High-scoring responses integrate the system, the concept, and the vision into a coherent, forward-looking statement — the candidate demonstrates self-awareness and a grounded understanding of what systems-level change in ABA actually requires. Lower-scoring responses rely on broad statements about “helping people” or “making a difference” without a specific or systems-level framing.
4) Writing Quality, Authenticity & Depth of Reflection — 25 points
Evaluates clarity, organization, authentic voice, and genuine engagement with the prompt across the full essay.
What we’re looking for: clear, well-organized writing with an authentic personal voice, appropriate length (1,000–1,500 words), and reflection that goes beyond the obvious or expected.
High-scoring responses are polished and memorable — the reader can clearly picture who this candidate is and why they belong in this field. Lower-scoring responses are generic, formulaic, significantly outside the word range, or show little evidence of genuine engagement with the prompt.
Note: Per the AI use policy, essays suspected of being AI-generated are not scored and are flagged for disqualification.
Score summary
| Criterion | Max Points |
|---|---|
| Systems Observation & Contextual Insight | 25 |
| Behavior-Analytic Concept Knowledge & Application | 25 |
| Vision for Larger-Scale Impact & Professional Growth | 25 |
| Writing Quality, Authenticity & Depth of Reflection | 25 |
| Total Score | 100 |
Important notes for applicants
- De-identified review: judges do not see your name when scoring.
- Original work: your submission must be your own. Cite collaborators or sources as appropriate (see Terms & Conditions).
- Clarity over jargon: write plainly. Accuracy and thoughtfulness matter more than advanced terminology.
- Stay within the prompt: Round 2 centers on “ABA Beyond the Individual.”