Several years ago, I was curator for an art gallery.  Once a year, we
worked with students at the local arts magnet schools to stage a show of
student works.  Students were involved at all level from jurying to
publicity; installation to receptions.  Four middle school jurors judged
middle school art and four to six high school jurors judged high school
art.  Jurors were prepared through a number of sessions before the actual
judging.  Two museum staff members were also on each jury.

Each juror had a yes or no vote for each artwork.  There was always a
target number of pieces (roughly) for the show.  Usually pieces with four
to six votes automatically got into the show.  Discussion was usually
limited.  For pieces with two to three votes, all jurors would discuss
each work and jurors would have the opportunity to change their votes.
While a sometimes time consuming process, this process seemed to be
highly educational and stimulating.  There were several extremely
difficult pieces that were passed over in the initial cut, then
unanimously added in after discussion.

I should hope that professionals partaking in the jury process could
engage in their discussion at a higher level, but I feel the process has
merit.

Susan Wageman
Grants Coordinator
The Tech Museum of Innovation           [log in to unmask]
145 West San Carlos Street              phone (408) 279-7178
San Jose, CA  95113                     fax (408) 279-7149