|
|
Judging Procedures of the Kenneth R. Wilson Awards
WRITING CATEGORIES
TIER 1
Four panels of three conflict-free* English judges from the B2B writing community will be responsible for assigning scores to entries in 2-3 categories. Their scores will be averaged and will determine a maximum of 10 finalists in each category. A French panel of three conflict-free* judges will be responsible for assigning scores to all French language entries.
Specifically, the judges will be sent the entries and working individually, are instructed to score entries from 0 to 100, using the four (4) KRW judging criteria of writing style, content, overall impact, and leadership. The only stipulations are that all finalists have an average score of 80 or more, and that the number of finalists in each language be proportionate to the number of entries received in that category.
The basic criteria for Written Categories is:
Writing Style: 25 points
Content: 25 points
Overall Impact: 25 points
Leadership: 25 points
The total score for each submission is out of 100. Judges are advised to consider the following guidelines for arriving at final scores:
90+ One of the very best articles of the year: a potential winner in its category
80-89 A worthy finalist, possibly a winner if outstanding from the vantage points of other panellists
70-79 A decent article; possibly a finalist if it has special virtue in the eyes of other panellists
< 70 Not an article worthy of recognition
Judges will be further advised to consider that the length of articles is not the deciding factor; and that topic matter should not influence their decisions, as an "insignificant" topic may be well written and researched while an "important" topic may not be.
Panelists should ask themselves whether the article is thorough and authoritative, but also: Is this new information or insight (or was it when published)? Has the writer made it sufficiently clear and meaningful to the intended audience? How does this article score as journalism? Is the article excellent magazine journalism? Is it likely to engage the interest if the audience described?
If a panellist determines that an article may be entered in the wrong category, he/she should bring this to the attention of the KRW staff to solicit feedback from other panelists. In most cases an article deemed incorrect for the category will simply not be given a high enough score to qualify as a finalist. Articles entered in an incorrect category cannot be moved to another category once the judging process has begun.
All discussions, scoring results and finalist entry names must be kept strictly confidential until the winners are announced at the KRW awards.
TIER 2
The finalists, up to a maximum of 10 in each category, then proceed to the second tier of adjudication, the bilingual jury. At the second level, a common bilingual panel will judge both French and English finalists from each category. Three bilingual judges score each finalist. The goal of the bilingual panels is to integrate the French and English language finalists judged to be at the top of their language groups by the tier one judges.
The bilingual panel’s task is to determine where the English and French entries sit in a combined list. Because these entries have already been determined to be finalists, bilingual judges must make their minimum score for an entry at this level no less than 80% (the minimum score for a finalist). The scores of these three judges are added to the original scores of the French or English judges, to determine the final scores.
Final scores are an aggregate of first-tier scores and second-tier scores. The weighing split is 50/50.
The top score in each category receives the Gold Award. The second-highest score receives the Silver Award. The remaining finalists receive Honourable Mention.
In the case of a numerical tie, the KRW staff may ask a judging panel to convene by teleconference to break a tie for a Gold or Silver award.
VISUAL CATEGORIES
A panel of five people judges all four visual categories. Panel members should include an illustrator, a photographer, two magazine art directors and an editor, at least one of whom is bilingual. They will review and score all entries through an online judging module then meet via a moderated teleconference to determine finalists and winners.
As with written categories there may be up to 10 finalists per category -- with Gold and Silver winners and up to 8 honorable mentions.
While aesthetic considerations will be the main criterion for visual categories, winning entries should also be appropriate to the text they accompany, to the magazine medium and to the intended audience.
The entries are to be evaluated against each other in representing the 'best of the year participating publications.' Gold and Silver winners must be awarded in each category, with additional Honourable Mentions (to a maximum of 8).
Conformity to the latest trends in visual style is not a criterion. The jury is instructed to consciously avoid a faddish sensibility. Aesthetic concerns must be balanced with the practical. The work is not intended to be judged against international standards or work that might find in other ‘markets’.
All discussions, scoring results and finalist entry names must be kept strictly confidential until the winners are announced at the KRW awards.
INTERNET CATEGORIES
A panel of five people judges all three Internet categories. An ideal panel includes at least two web editors and a web creator on both the visual and editorial sides, as well as an art director with experience in digital media. At least one panellist should be bilingual.
Panel members evaluate the submitted entries individually. They may be asked to submit numerical scores in advance of convening by teleconference to determine the finalists and winners. Judges are instructed to evaluate web sites for their overall quality in the category rather than for individual articles or design elements.
As with other categories there may be up to 10 finalists per category, with Gold and Silver winners and up to 8 honourable mentions.
All discussions, scoring results and finalist entry names must be kept strictly confidential until the winners are announced at the KRW awards.
OTHER INFORMATION
Submitting Scores:
Where judges are required to submit numerical scores, all scores are submitted electronically via the KRW’s online judging module. There is no need for judges to submit scores on paper by courier or fax – this eliminates errors and effort to tally the scores. Each judge will have a secure login username and password to access his or her online score card. The online score card will also contain instructions and criteria as references.
The KRW awards will tabulate all results of the scoring and keep this information confidential until the awards are announced. In the case of a numerical tie for a Gold or Silver award, the KRW staff may instruct the judges to convene by teleconference to break the tie.
Timelines:
The judging process for the KRW awards should be approximately seven weeks in length.
First-tier written-category judges should have a minimum of three weeks to evaluate and score all entries.
Second-tier written-category judges should have a minimum of two weeks to evaluate and score entries.
Internet- and Visual-category judges should have approximately four weeks to evaluate their entries before they are asked to finalize their scores/results.
All scores should be finalized no later than April 15, 2010.
Conflict of Interest:
A person shall be considered ineligible to judge in a category in which that person is entered as a writer, handling editor or other contributor. A person who appears on the masthead of a magazine entered in a particular category may not serve as a judge for that category.
If a person is the subject of an article, has a close association with the writer, is a regular contributor to one of the entering publications, or has any other conflict, that person may still be eligible to judge that category but may be asked to abstain from judging the entry for which a conflict of interest exists. In this case, the judge will be asked to enter a ‘C’ in place of a numerical score (and thereby be factored out of the scoring for that particular entry) and not to participate in any teleconference discussion, if applicable, of the piece for which he/she is in conflict.
Transparency:
The Kenneth R. Wilson Awards is committed to a fair and transparent judging process. Please contact us for more information about the judging process.
|
| |
|
|
