21/02/2026
SPECIAL PROJECTS COMMITTEE OFFICIAL STATEMENT ON THE RESULTS OF THE BANNER MAKING COMPETITION INTRAMURALS 2026
The Special Projects Committee formally addresses the concerns raised regarding the results of the Banner Making Competition during Intramurals 2026. As organizers, we uphold the principles of transparency, accountability, and fairness to our constituents, the College of Engineering and Design, the College of Nursing, and the entire student body.
The Banner Making Competition is a separate event and does not contribute to the overall scoring or championship tally of Intramurals 2026; therefore, its results do not affect the rankings of any participating college. Organized by the Silliman University Student Government (SUSG) and the SUSG Special Projects, the competition aims to promote university spirit by strengthening college identity, fostering unity, and celebrating the diversity of each academic unit through creative expression.
In the interest of full transparency, the committee has taken steps to ensure that the process is clearly understood by all concerned parties. Copies of the official judging score sheets were reproduced and presented to representatives of both the College of Nursing and the College of Engineering and Design during the review process to allow verification of the recorded scores.
Before the competition, all judging criteria and scoring allocations were formally presented, reviewed, and approved by representatives of the participating colleges to ensure clarity and fairness. On February 16, 2026, the tabulators requested an in-person meeting to discuss an important concern, which was formally addressed the following day. During the meeting, organizers were informed of a discrepancy discovered during internal verification: one judge unintentionally recorded a score of 20 points under the “Zero Waste” criterion for the College of Engineering and Design, exceeding the maximum allowable score of 15 points.
The error was confirmed to be an honest clerical mistake, which affected the computed totals and initial ranking results. Prior to reassessment, the College of Engineering and Design had a rounded score of 96.00, while the College of Nursing had 96.33. The tabulators clarified that they acted strictly within their mandate under the Memorandum of Agreement, limiting their role to accurately tabulating the scores as written on the official judging sheets, and therefore had no involvement in the discrepancy itself.
The Silliman University Student Government (SUSG) and the Special Projects Committee do not operate under a formal Memorandum of Agreement granting access to judging materials. To maintain confidentiality and prevent any perception of bias, organizers deliberately avoided opening or reviewing the judging sheets during and after the event. This decision, made to protect the integrity of the process and avoid rumors or misuse of scoring documents, also contributed to the discrepancy not being immediately identified.
Due to confidentiality measures, the organizers were unaware of the error after receiving the sealed scoring documents. The discrepancy was only identified during the tabulators’ internal verification the following evening. A formal meeting was then held on February 17, 2026, at 1:00 PM, attended by the panel of judges, SUSG President Grylle Malala, the Special Projects Chairpersons, the Deans of the concerned colleges, team captains, Constituent Governors, and the tabulators. During the meeting, the officially signed score sheets were reviewed to ensure transparency and clarify the recorded scores.
First Reassessment:
The first reassessment took place on Tuesday, February 17, at the office of Sir Piñero at the Athletics Department. During this stage, the judges revisited the banners and discussed the intent and meaning behind their evaluations. The reassessment moved beyond purely numerical computation and focused on interpreting the outputs in relation to the objectives of the competition.
The judges acknowledged that reassessment allows professional discretion, especially when an error influences the numerical outcome.
Second Reassessment:
A second reassessment meeting was conducted through Google Meet from 10:00 PM to 11:00 PM on Wednesday, February 18, to finalize the decision.
During the deliberation, the judges decided that the reassessment would not depend solely on prior numerical totals. Instead, they applied professional judgment, evaluating the banners holistically based on relevance to the theme, creativity, innovative use of materials, and craftsmanship. The “Zero Waste” criterion was no longer treated as decisive, as the focus was on overall artistic quality rather than technical scores.
Third Reassessment and Final Deliberation:
In pursuit of complete fairness and clarity, a third reassessment was conducted on February 19 at 1:10 PM, with all members of the judging panel present. This final meeting aimed to resolve remaining concerns and arrive at a definitive and unified decision regarding the results of the Banner Making Competition.
During the deliberation, the judges thoroughly reexamined both entries and discussed the gap between the original numerical results and their professional artistic evaluation. They emphasized that reassessment in artistic competitions involves subjective judgment, considering expert interpretation alongside scores. The evaluation focused on craftsmanship, creativity, innovative use of materials, and relevance to the theme, with particular weight given to how meaningfully each banner reflected the competition theme. Ultimately, the judges agreed that both colleges met the standards of excellence, and that differences in outcomes resulted from variations in scoring interpretation rather than differences in quality.
Despite the College of Nursing emerging as the leading entry based on the original tabulated scoring, the College of Engineering and Design aligned more closely with the judges' subjective professional preferences during the reassessment. After careful deliberation, the judges collectively concluded that both banners equally met the intended criteria and standards of the competition.
Final Verdict:
The Banner Making Competition shall result in a DRAW, and both the College of Engineering and Design (CED) and the College of Nursing (CON) are declared CHAMPIONS.
The judges affirmed that both colleges satisfied the objectives of the competition and demonstrated excellence in craftsmanship, creativity, innovation, and thematic relevance. The differing results arose solely from differing interpretations in scoring rather than deficiencies in either output.
The Institute of Rehabilitative Sciences (IRS) will be recognized as first-runner up. Other than that, the rankings will remain as is.
The panel further stated that this resolution represents their collective professional judgment and serves as the most equitable outcome under the circumstances.
This decision is final and irrevocable.
The judges also expressed that, given the circumstances and the extensive reassessment process already undertaken, the competition could not remain unresolved; thus, the decision to recognize both colleges as champions was deemed the most just and conclusive resolution.
The Silliman University Student Government (SUSG) Special Projects Committee officially declares the following results for the 2026 Inter-College Banner Making Competition:
CHAMPIONS
- College of Engineering and Design
- College of Nursing
FIRST RUNNER-UP
- Institute of Rehabilitative Sciences
We commend all participating colleges for their creativity, effort, and excellence in expressing their unique identity and spirit through their banners.
The organizers acknowledge the confusion and concerns caused by the situation and express respect for the time, effort, and dedication shown by all participating colleges. While confidentiality measures were intended to protect the integrity of the judging process and prevent bias, the experience highlighted the need to strengthen verification procedures prior to announcing results.
Moving forward, the SUSG Special Projects Committee will implement a Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA) to ensure that any necessary review of judging materials is conducted with professionalism, integrity, and confidentiality. The committee also commits to strengthening verification and validation procedures, establishing clearer review protocols before announcing results, and upholding transparency while safeguarding fairness and accountability. The organizers extend their sincere apology for the oversight and express gratitude to all colleges for their patience and sportsmanship, reaffirming their commitment to serve the student body with integrity and impartiality.
ACCESS FULL DETAILS HERE:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Z3GzgsT3JN8gejhOULgGY6nzyiyOU7dL/view?usp=drivesdk
