CCBC-Net Archives
Newbery Committee Responsibilities -Reply
- Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by subject ] [ by author ]
From: Kathleen Horning <horning>
Date: Sat, 05 Aug 1995 16:46:00 -600
Sarah, thanks for commenting on your Newbery Committee experiences. It's great to hear from you! Yes, it certainly is true that a lot of post?cision energy goes into clearing up misconceptions about the award. Thanks for your contributions locally on setting the record straight about "Walk Two Moons." You were right in assuming that the 1995 committee never sat around, pondering the need for a "multicultural" book. (If we had, chances are we'd have chosen something different!) Based on your own experiences on the committee, you know how seriously any Newbery committee takes its charge to award the most distinguished writing of the year and how closely it follows the ALA/ALSC terms throughout the year.
For those who are interested in knowing a little bit more about the actual process, here it is.
(1) After a year of reading, rereading and preparing for discussion, each of the 15 committee members nominates 6 titles (with written statements of support for each one) near the end of the year, prior to the committee's final in-person meetings at ALA Midwinter. These nomination statements are distributed by the chair to every committee member.
(2) At the actual Midwinter meetings, all of the nominated titles are discussed, in addition to every title that has been suggested throughout the year by committee members or ALSC members at large.
(3) After all of the titles under consideration have been thoroughly discussed, the committee votes, using a ranked ballot, to decide which titles will remain on the table for further discussion. Each committee member votes for her or his first, second, and third place choice.
(4) Results of the ballot are tallied as follows:
1st place - 4 points
2nd place - 3 points
3rd place - 2 points A book is proclaimed the winner when it receives at least 8 first place votes and has at least 8 points more than the title in second place. When a book achieves this rare state, it truly demonstrates that the group has reached a consensus. It is very unusual for this to occur on the first ballot simply because it's hard to get 15 opinionated, well-prepared people to agree on one thing without a struggle.
(5) Assuming that no book wins on the first ballot, the committee begins the discussion process all over again, minus the books that got no votes at all (too bad if a book was your fourth place choice and no one else voted for it -- it's off the table!). After the second round of discussion, a second ballot is taken. The same rules apply. Often times a book will reach the desired 8 first place votes, but there will not be an 8 point spread between it and the second-place title.
(6) The process continues on into the night and the following day until one title finally rises to the top and can be declared a winner. After that happens, the committee can then decide whether or not to name 1-5 honor books. These are not runners-up; in all likelihood, they were titles the committee as a whole came to appreciate very much over the course of hours and hours of discussion. Or the committee may choose to take a separate ballot for the honor books (minus the winning title) to see which ones rise to the top. With the process for choosing honor books, the committee has a bit more lee-way than they do with choosing the actual winner.
Once people understand this very complicated voting process, it becomes a little clearer just how impossible it would be to decide a particular author or a particular type of book was going to be chosen. Committee members discuss, discuss, discuss, read aloud passages, listen, consider, discuss, take breaks to reread and reconsider, discuss, listen, question, read aloud, reconsider, and vote. The books truly do rise and fall on their own merits, not on any particular agenda a committee member brings to the meeting.
KT Horning
CCBC, UW-Madison
Received on Sat 05 Aug 1995 05:46:00 PM CDT
Date: Sat, 05 Aug 1995 16:46:00 -600
Sarah, thanks for commenting on your Newbery Committee experiences. It's great to hear from you! Yes, it certainly is true that a lot of post?cision energy goes into clearing up misconceptions about the award. Thanks for your contributions locally on setting the record straight about "Walk Two Moons." You were right in assuming that the 1995 committee never sat around, pondering the need for a "multicultural" book. (If we had, chances are we'd have chosen something different!) Based on your own experiences on the committee, you know how seriously any Newbery committee takes its charge to award the most distinguished writing of the year and how closely it follows the ALA/ALSC terms throughout the year.
For those who are interested in knowing a little bit more about the actual process, here it is.
(1) After a year of reading, rereading and preparing for discussion, each of the 15 committee members nominates 6 titles (with written statements of support for each one) near the end of the year, prior to the committee's final in-person meetings at ALA Midwinter. These nomination statements are distributed by the chair to every committee member.
(2) At the actual Midwinter meetings, all of the nominated titles are discussed, in addition to every title that has been suggested throughout the year by committee members or ALSC members at large.
(3) After all of the titles under consideration have been thoroughly discussed, the committee votes, using a ranked ballot, to decide which titles will remain on the table for further discussion. Each committee member votes for her or his first, second, and third place choice.
(4) Results of the ballot are tallied as follows:
1st place - 4 points
2nd place - 3 points
3rd place - 2 points A book is proclaimed the winner when it receives at least 8 first place votes and has at least 8 points more than the title in second place. When a book achieves this rare state, it truly demonstrates that the group has reached a consensus. It is very unusual for this to occur on the first ballot simply because it's hard to get 15 opinionated, well-prepared people to agree on one thing without a struggle.
(5) Assuming that no book wins on the first ballot, the committee begins the discussion process all over again, minus the books that got no votes at all (too bad if a book was your fourth place choice and no one else voted for it -- it's off the table!). After the second round of discussion, a second ballot is taken. The same rules apply. Often times a book will reach the desired 8 first place votes, but there will not be an 8 point spread between it and the second-place title.
(6) The process continues on into the night and the following day until one title finally rises to the top and can be declared a winner. After that happens, the committee can then decide whether or not to name 1-5 honor books. These are not runners-up; in all likelihood, they were titles the committee as a whole came to appreciate very much over the course of hours and hours of discussion. Or the committee may choose to take a separate ballot for the honor books (minus the winning title) to see which ones rise to the top. With the process for choosing honor books, the committee has a bit more lee-way than they do with choosing the actual winner.
Once people understand this very complicated voting process, it becomes a little clearer just how impossible it would be to decide a particular author or a particular type of book was going to be chosen. Committee members discuss, discuss, discuss, read aloud passages, listen, consider, discuss, take breaks to reread and reconsider, discuss, listen, question, read aloud, reconsider, and vote. The books truly do rise and fall on their own merits, not on any particular agenda a committee member brings to the meeting.
KT Horning
CCBC, UW-Madison
Received on Sat 05 Aug 1995 05:46:00 PM CDT
