|
Judging
Beacon Judges
DAA Screening Judges
DAA Final Judges
Sample Evaluation Form
(pdf)
AEP's CEO Charlene Gaynor at Austin D.
Baltz Elementary School in Elsmere, DE
Donated Awards Materials Help Raise Awareness
About Supplementals' Role
in Struggling Schools
Read the story
|
Reaching the final four in the AEP Awards is no small feat. Entries
are first reviewed by screening judges, who narrow the field followed
by the final judging certifying committee who review and certify
finalists and winners in all categories.
Within each awards program, it is important to note the difference
in how the judges consider the materials.
Distinguished Achievement Awards
All products submitted undergo a rigorous two-tier judging
process by highly qualified individuals who are experts in their
respective areas. Products that are selected by the initial screening
judge will go to final judging where a panel of certifying judges
will review and certify finalists and winners. At the end of the
process, all entrants may ask to receive the judges feedback for
use in self-evaluating their products.
Print & Electronic Categories will be judged on the “technical
merits” that the committee feels identify a high quality
product. For example, entries in all Periodical/Editorial categories
will be judged on:
- Quality of writing, e.g. appropriate for audience, clear, tight,
lively, and consistent
- Educational value
- Originality/Creativity
- Audience interest
Categories that include whole products will be considered for
creativity, originality of product, educational value, content
vs. medium, and ease of use.
Instructional Materials will first be judged in a school and classroom
setting. All products submitted as instructional materials must
include a teacher guide for use in the classroom.
For all categories where entries appear as a web site: the entry
must be available online at the web site at the time of the judging.
Entries that are available as electronic files (e.g. pdf's) must
be available online for downloading at a URL specified at the time
of entry.
For categories delivered via email, the product must be emailed
to awards@AEPweb.org
At the judges’ discretion, an exceptional piece may be elevated
for Golden Lamp consideration. To ensure that your product is judged
for a Golden Lamp award, you must enter that competition separately.
Golden Lamp
In addition to encompassing content and design that transcends the best in
its category, Golden Lamp pieces are critiqued on their fulfillment of their
educational mission. To ensure that your product is judged as a Golden Lamp,
you must enter this program separately from the Distinguished Achievement
Awards.
Beacon Awards
All qualifying entries are sent to our national panel of screening judges.
Experts in graphics, marketing, and education sales critique the entries
based on creative artwork, attention-grabbing content, and overall marketing
objectives. Selected entries are sent to the final judging certifying committee,
where the finalists and winners are reviewed and certified, and Gold Beacon
are chosen.
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. Each year, the pool
of judges grows and changes, according to interest and availability. The
judges are given a period to review entries that apply to their designated
area of expertise. They are provided with specific evaluation criteria and
guidelines that have been developed and are updated each year by an advisory
committee.
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.
Questions? Check our FAQ
page , call our hotline at 856-241-2784, or email awards@AEPweb.org. |
