AEP Awards: Judging

AEP Awards Judging

Because of the number of entries, the level of competition, and the awards judging process, even being named an AEP Awards Finalist is no small feat. Last year we implemented new judging criteria more closely aligned with AEP's definition of quality educational content.

Judging Process

This year we've strengthened the definition and criteria of our three-tiered judging process:

Round One - Educator Review: Educator judges from AEP’s National Educator Review Panel evaluate all submissions, assigned by subject area and age/grade level expertise. The job of the teachers on the panel is to review the entire range of products and determine which entrants will move on to the second round. Having products judged first and foremost by educators is critically important because they know best which products will succeed or fail directly in the classroom.

Round Two - Professional Review: Industry judges receive the narrowed field for the second round of judging. These evaluators take an in-depth look at the remaining products with overall quality as their highest consideration. The field narrows even further here, as industry judges identify the products that will contend for the most in-depth consideration and evaluation by the final round of judges.
Round Three - Certification: Certification judges, an elite group comprised of high-level educators and industry professionals, are tasked with doing a comprehensive assessment of the final entries. Having a smaller number to review allows these judges to embed themselves in a product, taking the time necessary to critically evaluate all aspects of a submission and best determine which entry deserves the title of overall winner in each category.

Selecting Judges
Judges are selected from a pool of educational publishing professionals (writers, editors, designers, educators, product developers, and marketing directors), who have themselves received accolades for their work. If you are interested in being an AEP Awards judge, please contact Linda Swank at 302-295-8351.

Prior to reviewing the entries, judges are asked to read and adopt the following pledge:

Judge’s Pledge

To disregard the size, reputation or one’s relationship with a company in evaluating entries.
To review an entry through the eyes of the intended audience without regard to the packaging, political context, or PR materials.
To think broadly and with an open mind about all materials and what they can be for education.
To be respectful of the group decision-making process and to state one’s opinion without undermining the need for consensus.
To recuse oneself from the judging to avoid an unfair or inequitable evaluation.