Category Award Selection Procedure
Although there are many ways to reach a decision on category award winners, the following two procedures are simple and avoid the issue of disparity in judges' numerical scoring.
After interviews are completed the judge teams, that is, all of the judges that have evaluated a group of projects, meet to decide which are the best 1 or 2 projects in their group.
These projects are then joined with those selected by the other groups of judges for final award judging. Between 6 and 9 projects should be advanced to judging by all of the category judges
Each judge records the selected project numbers on the Award Selection Form.
All judges visit the 6 to 9 selected projects. At this time, a judge shall present each project to the panel for discussion. Not all projects advanced need to be recognized.
Procedure A
After the projects have all been presented, the best of the category shall be chosen by a vote. Revisit each of the projects and, via a show of hands, ask who among the judges feels that this particular project is worthy of 1st place. The project receiving the most votes is the 1st place selection for the category.
The judges shall revisit each of the remaining projects and, via a show of hands, ask who among the judges feels that this particular project is worthy of 2nd place. The project receiving the most votes is the 2nd place selection for the category. Repeat for 3rd place and honorable mention(s). No more than 3 Honorable Mention awards are to be given.
Procedure B
When revisiting is completed, each judge ranks the projects, giving their first choice 1 point, the second 2 points and so on. Discussion is encouraged.
Those scores are added and the Award winner is the project with the lowest score, second place to the next lowest and so on. Co-chair judges shall resolve ties if the selection appears to be at an impasse. No more than 3 Honorable Mention awards are to be given.
2007 Home | Site Map | Privacy Statement | Copyright | Hosted by: Ripple Effects Interactive
