International Speech & Presentation Competition
EN | KR

Synergy S.P.A.R.K. Tournament

Tournament Format & Rules

Grade Bands

To ensure fair and developmentally appropriate competition,
the SYNERGY S.P.A.R.K. Tournament groups participants based on their current grade level.

However, because academic calendars differ across countries,
the grade level applied at the time of application is defined as follows.

U.S. Schools & International Schools
Status at the time of the competition (Final Round):

  • Students have already completed the academic year and are on summer break following the Spring Term.
  • Students apply based on the grade level they completed at the end of the Spring Term of the competition year.
  • In other words, the grade immediately prior to entering summer vacation is used for placement.

South Korean Schools
Status at the time of the competition:

  • Students are actively enrolled in the academic year and attending classes during the first semester.
  • Students apply based on their current enrolled grade at the time of application.
  • This means the grade they are actually attending in June is used for placement.

This policy is designed to account for:

  • Differences in academic year start and end dates across countries
  • Potential developmental imbalances caused by grade advancement or retention
  • The need to ensure that students competing together have comparable learning experiences and cognitive development

The goal is to ensure that students at a similar stage of thinking and academic development
compete together on the same stage in a fair and meaningful way.

Topic Domain

The SYNERGY S.P.A.R.K. Tournament organizes speech topics into five Topic Domains to encourage students to think and express themselves in diverse ways.

Each domain represents a distinct way in which humans understand the world, create meaning, make judgments, and take action. Topic domains are not merely categories of subject matter; they function as lenses for thinking.

S — Science & Systems

This domain explores how the world works through scientific principles and systems thinking.

Possible topics may include:

  • Scientific concepts and discoveries
  • Technology, engineering, and natural phenomena
  • Social, economic, and environmental systems
  • Cause and effect, structures, and patterns

Speeches in this domain emphasize logical reasoning, evidence-based explanation, and the ability to clearly communicate complex ideas.

This year’s prompt:
?

P — People & Society

This domain examines the relationships between individuals, communities, and social structures.

Possible topics may include:

  • Social issues and communities
  • History, culture, and identity
  • Ethics, fairness, and responsibility
  • Interactions between individuals and society

Speeches in this domain emphasize perspective-taking, ethical reasoning, and the ability to connect personal experience with broader social contexts.

This year’s prompt:
?

A — Arts & Expression

This domain explores how humans creatively express emotion and meaning.

Possible topics may include:

  • Literature, music, visual arts, and performing arts
  • Storytelling and imagination
  • Emotion, symbolism, and aesthetic experience
  • Creativity and self-expression

Speeches in this domain emphasize a distinctive voice, emotional resonance, and the ability to convey meaning beyond factual information.

This year’s prompt:
?

R — Reflection & Growth

This domain focuses on self-understanding, learning, and personal change.

Possible topics may include:

  • Growth through experience
  • Failure, challenge, and resilience
  • Values, choices, and transformation
  • Reflection on learning processes

Speeches in this domain emphasize authentic reflection, metacognitive awareness, and the ability to draw insight from lived experience.

This year’s prompt:
?

K — Knowledge in Action

This domain examines how ideas and knowledge translate into decisions and action.

Possible topics may include:

  • Applying knowledge to solve problems
  • Leadership and responsibility
  • Practical judgment and decision-making
  • Turning ideas into action

Speeches in this domain emphasize sound judgment, responsibility, and the ability to connect thinking with meaningful action.

This year’s prompt:
?

Cross-Domain Competition

The SYNERGY S.P.A.R.K. Tournament operates as a Cross-Domain Competition.
Participants are evaluated on a shared competitive stage, regardless of the S.P.A.R.K. topic domain they choose.
Topic domains do not divide competitors into separate tracks; they simply enable different modes of thinking and expression.
This competition evaluates not what students say, but how they think and how they exercise judgment.

Regardless of topic choice:

  • The same evaluation criteria and competitive conditions apply
  • No topic domain is considered more advantageous or disadvantageous than another

Tournament Format & Schedule

The SYNERGY S.P.A.R.K. Tournament is conducted in three stages.
In each round, participants prepare a speech by selecting one of the five S.P.A.R.K. topic domains.

Cross-Domain Competition

The SYNERGY S.P.A.R.K. Tournament operates as a Cross-Domain Competition.
All participants are evaluated on a single competitive stage, regardless of the S.P.A.R.K. topic domain they choose.

Topic domains serve as directions for thinking and expression, not as separate competitive tracks.
Evaluation focuses on how participants think and exercise judgment, rather than on the subject matter itself.

The same evaluation criteria and competitive conditions apply to all participants,
and no topic domain is considered more advantageous or disadvantageous than another.

Topic Continuity and Change Policy

  • Participants may continue using the same topic from Round 1 in Rounds 2 and 3.
  • At the same time, participants are also permitted to change their topic and prepare a new speech for each round.
  • The decision to maintain or change a topic is entirely at the participant’s discretion, and neither choice has any impact on evaluation or scoring.

Online Preliminary Visibility and Topic Choice Flexibility

The first regional preliminary round is conducted online.
Selected speech videos from advancing participants may be made publicly available through the tournament website or official channels.

This public availability provides participants with the following options:

  • Participants may review other speeches and further develop the same topic for subsequent rounds.
  • Participants may retain their original topic while refining logic, structure, and expression.
  • Participants may also choose to prepare an entirely new topic.

The tournament recognizes these choices as a legitimate part of each participant’s strategic decision-making.

Operational Considerations Based on Preparation Conditions

This tournament is designed with consideration for participants’ real academic environments.

For participants with demanding academic schedules—particularly students attending South Korean schools who prepare for the competition during the academic term—it is permitted to use the same speech prepared for Round 1 in Rounds 2 and 3.

This policy exists to evaluate participants’ thinking and judgment,
not to require the preparation of a new topic for each round.

Round 1: Regional Preliminary Round (Online)

Date: June 6

  • The first round is conducted online.
  • Participants submit their speeches digitally according to the submission guidelines.
  • Regional evaluation is conducted separately for Seoul Region and the New York Region.
  • Advancement to the next round is determined independently within each region.

Round 2: Regional Final Round (In-Person)

Date: July 18

  • Regional Final Rounds are held offline at designated venues in Seoul and New York.
  • Qualified participants from each region compete in person.
  • Judges select finalists from each region to advance to the Final Round.

Final Round: International Final (In-Person)

Date: August 15
Location: New York

  • The Final Round is held in person in New York.
  • Finalists from all regions compete together on a single stage.
  • Winners are determined based on the official judging criteria.

Judging Criteria

S — Synthesis of Ideas (4 items)
👉 “Does the speech move beyond listing isolated facts to form a coherent and integrated line of reasoning?”

1. Recognition of Counter Arguments

Does the speaker clearly present perspectives or counterarguments that differ from their own?

2. Compare & Contrast Perspectives

Are differing perspectives compared and contrasted using clear and meaningful criteria?

3. Judgement Formation

After comparison, does the speaker form a clear position supported by logical reasoning?

4. Reconstructed Conclusion

Is the conclusion more than a simple choice, reflecting a judgment reconstructed through comparison and evaluation?

Subtotal: /40

Y — Your Voice (4 items)
👉 “Are the speaker’s values, experiences, and thinking clearly expressed?”

5. Clarity of Position

Is the speaker’s core stance clear and consistent?

6. Reflection of Personal Judgement

Are the speaker’s own interpretations and judgments explicitly evident?

7. Ownership of Expression

Does the speaker avoid simply repeating borrowed language and maintain ownership of their words?

8. Uniqueness of Thinking

Does the speaker demonstrate an original and independent direction of thinking?

Subtotal: /40

N — Navigating AI Thoughtfully (3 items)
👉 “Has the speaker critically examined and selectively used AI input?”

9. Purposeful Use of AI

Is the reason for using AI clear and not excessive?

10. Application of Human Judgement

Has critical human judgment intervened in the use of AI-generated output?

11. Avoidance of Cognitive Replacement

Does AI support thinking rather than replace it?

Subtotal: /30

E — Effective Communication (3 items)
👉 “Can the audience clearly understand the speaker’s core message?”

12. Structural Clarity

Is the introduction–development–conclusion structure clear?

13. Logical Flow

Do ideas progress naturally and coherently?

14. Clarity of Expression

Is the core message easy to understand?

Subtotal: /30

R — Reflection on Process (2 items)
👉 “Is there evidence that the speaker’s thinking has developed through revision, refinement, and verification?”

15. Evidence of Revision and Development

Are there clear signs that the thinking has been refined and developed?

16. Depth of Reflection

Does the reflection demonstrate depth, rather than remaining surface-level or vague?

Subtotal: /20

G — Growth Mindset (2 items)
👉 “Did the speaker sustain their thinking even at points of difficulty or uncertainty?”

17. Cognitive Challenge

Did the speaker attempt thinking that goes beyond the simple or obvious?

18. Sustained Reasoning

Did the speaker maintain their line of reasoning through challenging arguments?

Subtotal: /20

Y — Your Responsibility (1 item)
👉 “Does the speaker demonstrate responsibility regarding the sources of ideas and information?”

19. Responsibility & Transparency

Is responsibility for sources, and use of assistance clearly demonstrated?

Subtotal: /10

Prizes

?

About the Judges

?